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?