Blog Mela

Bush visits India

India and US signed a landmark nuclear deal during Bush's visit to India. This deal will provide India access to the nuclear fuel in return for allowing international inspections of its civilian nuclear reactors:

- Under a July 2005 deal, agreed in principle between India and the United States, New Delhi would commit itself to certain non-proliferation standards including allowing international inspections of its civilian nuclear plants.

In return, it would gain access to U.S. civilian nuclear technology, including fuel and reactors denied for 30 years. India's military facilities would not be subject to inspections under the deal.

- The agreement hinges on India separating its nuclear facilities into civilian and military components.

However, some people choose to oppose the deal and Bush's visit to India:

About the visit of Bill Clinton, circa 2000, there is no need to say much. The gala event is so recent as to be relatively fresh in people’s minds. Blessed with charisma and a gift of the gab, Clinton — whose principal policy aim for this part of the world, was to “cap, reduce and eliminate” Indian nuclear capability — captivated his hosts. There were no demonstrations against him. On the contrary, after his address to a joint session of two Houses, MPs — cutting across party lines — made a spectacle of themselves by falling over each other to shake hands with him.

Bush — who is being accommodative towards this country over the nuclear issue and has made friendlier pronouncements on India than any other American president — can only envy Bill. Paradoxically, Dubya is not liked by a fairly large section of Indians. Iraq has something to do with this. So have the threats to Iran. Much more damaging, however, have been TV images of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.

So, Bill Clinton, who opposed India's nuclear capability was great. While Bush, who signed the nuclear deal against so much opposition and without pushing India to sign the NPT, is bad!

Did the Left protest against Bill Clinton during his visit to India? They protested alright, but not over Clinton's opposition to India's nuclear programme. But when Bush came calling, the Left protested his visit precisely because of the nuclear deal:

Left parties said on Friday that they would hold protests across the country over a landmark deal on nuclear technology during Bush's visit to India next month.

But the real reason may be India's vote against Iran at the IAEA:

Earlier, the Left parties had urged the government not to vote against Iran in the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog meet, but analysts say India voted under pressure for the deal.

The deal although announced with great fanfare has run into criticism from nuclear experts and some members of the U.S. Congress who say it undermines global non-proliferation goals.

Left parties are strongly opposed to New Delhi supporting the West, as it did last September when the IAEA declared Iran had failed to comply with its international obligations.

Karat, agitated over the US attitude on deal, said they would take up the issue in the forthcoming session of Parliament and urge New Delhi not to vote against Iran in next month’s IAEA meeting.

Why do the Left even pretend that they are for India's interests?


Chamed Ahlabi

F**K the Communists !!


I think this argument misses part of the point. The situation now is vastly different from when Clinton visited (what with 911, the Iraq war, the Musharaff ascension to power). At that time too, the indian bomb explosions were in the very near past. It would have been hard to impossible for Clinton to strike a nuclear deal with India at that point (especially given that Congress was Republican dominated at that point). At that time also, Pakistan was not important to the US (Clinton severely scolded it on his visit there), so there were no military deals with Pakistan (and consequently no sweetners needed to placate India).

That is why the Clinton and Bush agenda was different. Clinton has a great deal of personal charm as well, which helps a lot.

However, you are correct in that the Left's differing reactions are largely based on matters external to India, that do not impact it.

The CPI in India used to take its marching orders from Moscow. [ In fairness though, the CIA undoubtedly had plenty of assets in India as well during the cold war]


I've been reading The Mitrokhin Archive, and it makes a pretty convincing case that the Communist Party in the US took it's orders from Moscow until quite recently.

I wonder if a similar situation exists in India.


You are absolutely right on the communists.

The comments to this entry are closed.