PREVIOUS PAGE

SK/3a/3.00

DR. K. KASTURIRANGAN (CONTD.): They always made it mandatory for the US President to report to the Congress. This has been done when ISRO was under sanctions. The President of the United States, through the National Aeronautics and Space Administrator, used to report every year what they have cooperated with China, what they have cooperated with India. But, what is significant to note is, not even a piece of paper went from India about this part of it. So, there is no question of rebinding ourselves with any agreement that exchanged between the President of the United States in his attempt to get this Bill through with the US Congress. I don't think that we should exercise beyond a point. And, I am sure, we know how to guard ourselves in terms of information, even when we discussed the Right to Information Act with regard to this kind of details. I am sure about that.

The final thing that I would like to say is this. Has the US shifted really the goalposts? A little analysis and sharing this assessment with all of you here. The commitment of the US President as reflected in the July 15 Joint Statement was that 'the President would seek agreement from Congress to adjust US laws and policies and the US will work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India including but not limited to expeditious consideration of fuel supplies for safeguarded nuclear reactors at Tarapur. In the meantime, the US will encourage its partners to also consider this request expeditiously. India has expressed its interests in ITER, that is, the International Thermo Nuclear Energy Research Project, and the willingness to contribute.

(The Vice-Chairman, Shri Dinesh Trivedi in the Chair)

The US will consult its partners considering India's participation. The US will consult other participants in the Generation IV International forum, the new type of reactors, with a view towards India's inclusion'. Now, what has happened? The US is amending its Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to make an exception for India. By repealing Section 128 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the US recognises India as a de facto nuclear weapons state. The US has also exempted India from all actions that India undertook prior to 18th July. The US has also enabled discussions with IAEA and NSG to facilitate India's participation, I am sure the Prime Minister would update us on what is the level of these discussions. And finally, India has recently become a full member of ITER. So, this is where it stands. From all these available documents, this is the kind of an assessment that, at least, I get for the overall status of this. What does it mean? It means that the deal, the present level of processing that is happening in the United States and also the discussions that are taking place here, there are no major things which one should worry about except what would happen in the future, depending on the way in which certain things have been mentioned here, which essentially means we have to be continuously alert. The concern certainly of this august House reflects that part of what would happen in the future, and if there are any such situations, that would develop by either at Senate or in joining of the two parts of the Act with the Senate and the Congress and, ultimately, of course, the type of waiver that the President is endowed with. On this part of it, certainly one can make use of this kind of concerns. At this present juncture, I should say it has gone off well. I think, it has been dealt with well. And, it is my view that at this particular point one should not be unduly concerned about the various issues. That is agreed. But, it does not mean that we should not tread a cautious path as we reach that particular deal. And knowing, of course, the Government, the Parliamentary system as well as atomic energy establishment, I have no doubt that we will overlook certain things which will be detrimental to the economy and independence of this country. After all, all of us work for our lifetime in this country, for this country and by people who are Indians. So, there is no question that there will be any kind of amiss on this. If there is any amiss likely to happen, I am sure, the Parliament will be alert. And if necessary the way in which the Government can facilitate the Parliament being alert in an effective way, I think, it will fulfil the concerns that have been expressed here. And, I am sure, that this sentiment also would help our Prime Minister to carry forward in his further dealing with the United States. Thank you, Sir. (Ends)

(Followed by mcm/3b)


-SK/MCM-YSR/3.05/3B

פݾֵ֕ (ָӛ) : ֳ֬ , ֟ ֲ 18 և ִ ֮ ֟, 29 և ֤ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֲ ׾ָ ֮ ִ ֯ ִ ִ ׸ִ ׸ִ֠ ֟ߕ ׮ פ ו֮ ֕ ֯ ֟ ָ ׾ ֯ ֟ ָ ׾ ֮֮ פ ֋ ֕ ֟ ߲-߲ ֮֟ ֲָ ִ֬ ֟ ָ-ָ և և և 29 և Ϭ֮ ӡ ֵ֮ 18 և ֤ և ִ פ ֵ ִ֮ և ִ֮ և ߓ ָ ִ ֻ ֳ֬ , ֲ ֕ ֯ ִ֮ ֮ ׻֋ ֛ ֮ ן ֮ և ֵ֮ ֟ , ֕ ָ ִ֮ և ָָ ָ ֟ ו ָ ִ֣Ԯ ֯ ָָ ֻ , ֕ ֯ ִ֮ , ֕ ֯ ִ֮ ׾ ֛ ָ ֟ ֯ ִ ֮ ָ ֌ ֯ ֮ ϵ , ֲ ֟ ֯ ִ ֋ ֟ , ֟ ו ֟ ֠ ֛ ֳ֌ ֯ , ֟ ִ֮ ϵ ֋, ָ ֟ 녠 ֤ ֲ ֮ ֟ ֲ ֤ ֟ ֤ ֳ֬ , ָ ו ִϳ ֤֕ ו֮ ֮ ָ߲ ֮ ֤߲ ß֮ ׌ ׮ֵ ׿ָ ָ ֮ ֟ , ֕ ִ ׻ֵ ָ ֆ , ו֮ ֆ ֲ ָ ָ ׾֤ ן ָ , ָ ׌ֆ ׻ ָ օ ִ֓ ֕ ִ ו ָ ֨ ֲ כ ־ ֻ ָ-ָ ִ ׻ֵ ֵ, ֳ֬ , ֤ ִִ ָ , ֿ־ӟ ֮ ֮֮ ִ ִ ׻ֵ, ߟִָ ִ ׻ֵօ ו ִֵ֠ ֮ ֮ ֟׮ֳԸ þ֟ӡ ׾֤ ן ָ ן ָ ִֵ ָ ٣ ֻ֟ ߅ ײָ ֤ ָ߲ ߓ , ׸ ֟ ױ ָ ֮ ֻ , ֟ ߅ ֻ, ֟ ׻֋ ֮ ֤֕ ֛և ׮ֵ ֵ֤ ָ ß֮ ֤֕ ֤֕ ֱ ֮ ״֟ , ׻ ׮ֵ ִִ ׻֋ ִ֕־֤ ֱֻ ֛ ߠ ֮ , ִ , ֲ ׻֋ ״ֻ ֛և ֛ꅠ ֕ ֟ ? -ָ ֣ ָ פ ֤ ֲ ֮֮ ִ ־ֲ ֵ֤ ִ֤ߕ , օ ֲ פ ֯ Ӛ Ӛ ֮ ߔ ӿ , ו ֟ ו , Ϭ֮ ӡ ֟ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ׸ , ׸ ֤ , ׻֋ וִָ , וִָ ֮ ֟ , ™ן ֟ , וִָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֮֮ ִ , ֵ֮ ו ˬ , ֵ֮ ֤õ , ֮ ִ , ׻ ֵ֮ ׾֤ ӡ ߕ և Ͽ֮ , ׾֤ ӡ ׯ֙ ָߵ ִ׬֟ ׯ֙ ִ׬֟ , ֮֮ ִ , ֤ ִֵ ֻ ֱ և

"Let me be clear: We do not support India joining the Non-proliferation Treaty as a nuclear weapon state. Rather, the goal of our initiative is to include India, for the first time ever, in the global non-proliferation regime."

(3C ָ ֿ:)

GS-VKK/3C/3.10

פݾֵ֕ (֟) : ? և ֮ ֟ ה , Ӥ֕ ֯ ? , Ͽ֮ ׾֤ ӡ, ו֮ וִ , ִ ֵ , ֕ ָ , ֟ ָ ֮ ? ֮֯ ָ-ָ , ֮ ׿ֿ ֤ ׸껵֮ ֵ ׿ֿ ֟ ־֮ , ֮ ֲ ״ֻ ׿ֿ ִ ֲ ־֮ , ֯ ֟ ֯ ָ ֯ ָ ׾ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ָ ׾ ֯ ָ ָ ׾ , ׾ ß־ ָ ֤ ֵ ֟օ ֯ ֮֜ , וִ ִϳ ֮֓ ֣֯ ֮֯ ™ן ־֮ ߅ ֯ ׌ ֮֜ , וִ ֯ ß֮ ׌ֵָ ׻ , כ ׻ ֮, ֵ֤ ֤ ֮֜ ֟ ָ ֮ ? ֮ ֟ ߅ ֮֕ן , ָ ֮ , ֯ ֮ -ָ ן ׾ , , ו֮ ֮ ָ ׌ֵָ ׻ , ָ߲ , ָ , ׸ ָ ׾֤ ן ׌ֵָ ׻ ֵֻօ ָ߲ ֵֻ, ֮֬-׾߮ ־֕ ֵֻ ֻ֟-ֻ֟, ֿ־ӟ ֮ , ֵ ֮ ֟ ֕ ֛ ? ׮ֵ ֱ ׌ֵָ ™ ֛ , ׻ ֮ ֟׮ֳԸ ִ ָ ֛ , ו ו ָ 97-98 ֤ ׮ 97-98 ֤ ׸ִ ָ֬ ָ ֮ ׌ֵָ ׻ ׮ֵ þ֟ӡ ֵ - ָ ߓ ֛ ֲ ׮ ָ ִ ֯ߙ ָ ß֟ , ָ , ׾ָ ֢ , ִ ו , ׸ ֮ ׮֟ ׮ ָ օ ָָ , ו ָָ 0 ֳ ãׯ֟ օ ֕ ֯ߙ ָ ß֟ ֟, ӛ- ׌ֵָ ߻ ֯ߙ ָ ß֟ , ָ ׻֋ ֤ օ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֯ ָ ֟ ָ ? ֟ ֯ ֟ ו֮ ֟ , ׾ָ , ׻ þ׳ִ֮ ׻֋ ןֵ , ֯ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֟ ֟ ָ֮ , ֯ ֮ ֯ әߕ ֟ ֟ ֟ , ֯ סֵ ָ ֟ ׾ֳ ׻֋ ֤ פ ֟ ׸ ֱֻ ֟ ֟ , ֟ ֲ ׾֮֕ ָ ֟ , ß֮ ֟ ? ן ן , ֯ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֤ ־Գ״ ֢ , ׻֋ ֤ ִ֬ ß־ ֮ , ָ ֯ þָ , ֟ ׸ ֣-֣, ֯ ֟ ׸ ֜߅ ֯ ֻ , ֯ ִֵ ׾֯ , ֯ ָ ־ӟ , ָ ֻ ָ ֛ߋ ָָ ֮ , ֤õ ֟, ֤ ִ֬ , ָ ׸껵֮ ֮ ֮ ָ -߮ פ ֻ֟ ߅ ֟ , ֯ ֯ ֱֻ , ֯ ֯ ֯ ָ ָ ß־ ֵ, ֟ , ֺ ߅ ָ ִ֯ӣ , ָ ״֡ ֯ ׌ ֜ ֯ , , ָ֙ , ֯ ׌ ֜ ִֵ ֵ ֲ ֟ þָ ׻ֵ, ֛ߋ ָָ þָ ׻ֵ, ׌ ֛ , ׌ ֛ ֨ӟ - ֨ӟ ֛ ֮ , ֯ ָ , ֤ ִ֬ ß־ , ֯ ֵ֟ ֜, ֙ ִֵ ֟ ׸ , ִ , ߮ ֻ , ָ և؛ օ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֯ ֟ ָ ֮֟ ׸ ™ן ӓ ָ ָ , ֵ ֟ , ֟ ֯ ׾ָ ֯ ָ (3 ָ ָ)

SC/3.15/3D

פݾֵ֕ (֟) : ֟ ָ Ϭִ֮ӡ ֱ ֻ ָ ׌ֵָ ָ - ֛ ֳ֬ , ֟ ָ ™ן ָ™ן ֟ ֲ ׾֤ ӡֵֻ - ӡֵֻ ִ ֟ օ ׌ ֱ ָ Ϭִ֮ӡ ֻ ֻ ֮֟ ߕ ָ ֟ , ֻ , ײ ? ֻ 31 ֮־ָ פ פ ֵ 31 ֮־ָ ָ ָָ ָ ׸ ™ן ֵ֟ ֋ ׸ ™ן ֟֋օ ֮ ׻֋ ڴ֤ ? ו ӡ ֟ , ו ֵ ֟ ָ, Ϭִ֮ӡ ָ ָ , Ϭִ֮ӡ ֮֕ ׌ ״ֻ ָ ߕ , ו֮ ָ ô֟ , ָ ֟ ׸ , ָ ָ ֵ , ֱ ֟ , ׌ ֟ Ϭִ֮ӡ , ֯ ֟ ׸ ֤ ָ ֟ , ֻ ֟ ֲ ֮֯ ִ , ֲ ֯ ֣ ֯ ָ֙ ָ , ֵ֮օ ֕ ָ֙ ׾֤ ӡ ֻ ֋, ֮ ֻ ל ߅ ֯ Ϭִ֮ӡ , ־ӟ ֿ־ӟ ֮ ׾֤ ӡ , , ֋, ֮ ֻ ָָ ֮ ֻ ߜ þָ ߅ ָ ֯ ֮ ֯ ֯ ֮֜ , ֮ ֻ ל ֜߅ ֤֕ ֱ ֮-߮ ׻֋ ݻֻև֮ ׻֋ ׮ֵ ֋ ߲ ֋ ָ-ָ Ը֮ ו , ֲ ֮ Ը֮ ו օ Ը֮ ָ ָ ֤õ ֋ ו ֮ ֮ ڴ֤ օ Ը֮ ָ פ ֮ ß , ߜ--ߜ ָ ß ֟ ֤ ֋ ֮ ֟ ֟ Ӭ ֛ ֟ Ӭ ִ ֲ ֱֻ ֤֕ ֛և ָ ֤֕ ֛և ֟ Ӭ ֱֻ Ӥ֮ օ ? ִֵ ֮ ׾̮֕ օ ִֵ ֮ ߱ 15-20 פ ֲָ ָ ֟ , Ӭ ֲ ִ֟ Ӭ ֛֮ ִ օ ֮֟ ָ ֤֕ ֛և ֛ , ׾ ٕ֟ ֺ ִ ֲ ֲָָ ָ ֲ Ӭ ֱֻ Ӥ֮ ָ , ֤֕ ֛և ֤ ָ - Ӭ ִ ߅ ֕, Ը֮ ָ ֲ ֤õ ֟ ֋ ׸ ֮ Ը֮ ֱֻ ֛օ ֟ ?

֮ ֻ ӛ : օ

פݾֵ֕ : ָ օ ֱ ֮ Ը֮ ָ פ ֮ ..(־֮֬).. ִ ..(־֮֬)..

֮ ֻ ӛ : ֓ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֬ ( פ ס־) : פ ־ֻ ..(־֮֬)..

֮ ֻ ӛ : ׸ ֡ ׸ ָ ׿ ן ָ ִϳ ָ օ ֻ֟ ֟ ֻ֟ ֟ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֬ ( פ ס־) : פݾֵ֕ , ֯ ֻ ֋..(־֮֬)..

֮ ֻ ӛ : ִ ֮֯ ׻ֵ ֯ ڴ֤ , ֻ֟ ֟ ָ..(־֮֬).. ֟ ևԅ..(־֮֬)..

פݾֵ֕ : ֳ֬ , 1978 ֮ օ ׸ ׾ ֵ - ֲ ָָ ִ֣ , ָ և Ϭִ֮ӡ ֮ ֋ ׸ ֟ ֠ ָ ן ֵ ֵ ֵ֮ ֵ ׸ ß ָ ֵ ׾ֵ֟ ӑ ֱֻ , ׮Ù ֱֻ ׻֋ ִֵ ֻ֟߮ ™ן ֙ ֵ֤ ֋ ָ ֯ߙ ָ ß֟ ֻ ֋ ߤ ֣ ֙ ß֮ ֋ פ ֤ ׸ ™ן ß֮ ֵ օ

(3 ָ ֿ:)

MP/3E/3.20

פݾֵ֕ (֟) : ֲ ߴ֟ Ӭ ׮֌֮ episode ֵ, ֤ ׸ ™ן ß֮ ֵօ Ӳ ֤ ֙ ߤ ß֮ ֋ ֟ ָ և ֮ ִ , ߮ פ ־֕, ו ָ ׸ ֮ ߤ , ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ׮Ù ׾ָ , ֤ ֵ , ֟ ֟ ߴ֟ ָ ... ָ ß֟ ֟ , ָ ֯ ֓ ׻֋ ָ - ֕ ִ ׻ֵ ֟ ־ ֻ ִ , ־ ֻ ִ ͅ ߴ֟ Ӭ ִ , ߴ֟ Ӭ emergency օ .....(־֮֬)....

ֵָ : ֕߾֮ ִ ִ

ֳ֬: ֯ ך

פݾֵ֕ : ߴ֟ Ӭ emergency , ֲ , ֤ פևԅ 1971 ֛և ִֵ ֲ ׸ և , ׯϵָ֮ ӿ ֲ ֯֠ ֟ , ֤ ֙? ֲ ߴ֟ Ӭ ׸ և ָ Ù ß֮ ֋ , ָ ׻֋ ֕ ו֋ ׸וֵ ß ל ׮֌֮ ִֵ , , ֟ ֮ ִֵ ָ ֓ ֋߅ ָ ߴ֟ Ӭ ß֮ ָ߲ ֺ , ֯ ־ ֮ ֋ , ־ ֟ ֋ ָ ֯ ß ׮ֻ, ֿӳ־ ӟ פ ֋ ֮ ִֵ ֮ פ , ֮ פ , ֕ ֕ և, וִ 挻ߵָ և , ָ ׮ ֮ ָ ֵ , ֕ ָ ֺ և? ߟִָ ײֻ - ֚ ֻ 2.5 ָ ֮֯ 挻ߵָ ֕ ֮ ֻ פ 挻ߵָ և ָ ֕ ׌ ֯ ֵ ֋, ֮ ֻ ? 8 ָ ߲ ֻ ֲ ָ ׮ , 2020 ָ ָ ֻ ֲ ״ֻ, ֤ ֤ 15 20 ָ ־ ߴ֟ ֛? ֿ־ӟ ֮ ֟ , ו ӳ߸ ׻ֵօ ֲ separation , ׾׻ֵ֮ ״׻֙ , ֮֟ ֳ֬ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ֵ֟, ֲָ ִ֬ ׮ ֵ֟ , ָ֬ ָ ֮ ֳ 2 ָ ֵ ֓ ֻ ו 40 ײ׻ֵ֮ , 40 ײ׻ֵ֮ .. ָ ֓ ֮ ֮ ֕ ֮֮ ָ ! ָ ӛָ , alternative source of energy , ָ ֮ ֕, ֜ , Ӥ֕ ׻֋ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֲ ֯ ֤ ֮ ׻֋ ֛ , ֯ ֟ ָ ï™ ï™ ָ ֟ ֵ , ֮֯ , ֯ ֵ֮ ָ ֣ , ֮֯ ָ ׸ ߓ ִ , ֲָָ ָ ֵ֤, -ָ ״ֻ, ֯ ו ָ ײֻ , ִ ֟ ִ ֵ ֯ ו ִ , ִ ָ ָ ֵ ï ֋ - ״ ֕ ï, ֻ , ֵ ָ ״׮Ù ָ ״ ֕ ݵ ꅠ .....(־֮֬)....

֮ ֻ ӛ : ֿ־ӟ ֲ ֓ ֮֯ ֿ־ӟ ֲ þֵ ߮ ֮ ֮ , ֿ־ӟ ֲ ֟ ֯ ? .....(־֮֬)....

.. ׻ֵ : ֲ ֻ ....ֲ ֻ ...(־֮֬)...

֮ ֻ ӛ֠ : ֲ ֻ ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ ( פ ס־): ֋, ֓ ӳ߸ , ֯ ֮ ֟ .....(־֮֬).... ״Ù , ߕ....ߕ....Let me handle .... (־֮֬)...פݾֵ֕ , ׻֋ ....(־֮֬)....

. ִ ӛָ : ָ, ֙ ֟ ״֮֙ և , ֟ ״֮֙ ә ֕ ߅ ֙ ָ ״֮֙ և , ֮ , ֟և .....(־֮֬)....

ֳ֬: פݾֵ֕ , ֯ ֟ ו֋ ֯ ִֵ ֟ ...(־֮֬)...

. ִ ӛָ : ָ ֙ ֟ ״֮֙ և , ә ֕և և ָ ״֮֙ ִֵ 15 ״֮֙ ֋ ֮ ? ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ : פݾֵ֕ , ֯ conclude ו֋ ֋, ֓ ӳ߸ environment ֯ ....(־֮֬)... ֯ ׸Ù ....(־֮֬)...

. ִ ӛָ : ָ ֙ ֟ ״֮֙ և , ֮֯ ״֮֙ ֟ ֵօ ֙ ָ ״֮֙ ִֵ Ӧ ״֮֙ ֋ ! ...(־֮֬)... (3 / ָ )

ASC-RG/3F/3.25

ֳ֬ ( פ ס־) : ֯ ׸Ù .....(־֮֬) ֯ ׸Ù ֮ ֟ ו֋ ...(־֮֬)...פݾֵ֕ ߅ ..(־֮֬)..

.. ׻ֵ : ֯ ? ...(־֮֬)..

. ִ ӛָ : ֵ ....(־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ : פݾֵ֕ , ֯ ו֋ ...(־֮֬)...

.. ׻ֵ : ֯ ֟ ֵօ ....(־֮֬)..

. ִ ӛָ : ִ֟ ....(־֮֬).. פݾֵ֕ ֟ ו֋, ӳ߸ ֓ ֯ ׾֮֟ ֯ ֮ ֋Ӆ ...(־֮֬)..

פݾֵ֕ : ӛָ , ָ ֯ ֮ ...(־֮֬)

ֳ֬ : ӛָ , ֯ ֮ ߕ ..(־֮֬)..

. ִ ӛָ : , ֙ 7 ״֮֙ և , ߠ 7 ״֮֙ ә ֕߅..(־֮֬)... ֯ ֙ 4 ״֮֙ և ֯ 15 ״֮֙ ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ : ӛָ , և ׸֛ .....(־֮֬)...

פݾֵ֕ : ׻֋ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֲ ֮ ֟ , ָ ֟ ־ֲ ֠ פ ֤ ״ֻ - ָ ϵ ָ ϵ ֤ ָ ֵ֮ ֟, Ϭ֮ ӡ ׌ ֜֟օ ׻֋ ִ , ݵ ִ ֵ, ֳ֬ ӛָ ֮ ָ , ...(ִֵ ә).. (־֮֬)...

ֳ֬ : Nothing is going on record...(Interruptions)

.. ׻ֵ : *

. ִ ӛָ : *

ֳ֬ ( פ ס־) : ӛָ , ӛָ , ..(־֮֬) ֮ ..(־֮֬) ֋, ֛ ....(־֮֬)..ӛָ , ..(־֮֬). ׻ֵ , ..(־֮֬). ׻ֵ , ..(־֮֬)..֯ ߕ և ...(־֮֬).. ֯ ߕ և ....(־֮֬). ֯ ߕ և ..(־֮֬).. ӳֻ ..(־֮֬).. ӛָ , ...(־֮֬).. ӛָ . ...(־֮֬).. ӛָ , ֯ ׾֮֟ ֓ ֻ ...(־֮֬) ֯ ֮ ׻֋ פݾֵ֕ , ֲ ֟ ...(־֮֬).. ߕ, ߕ ӛָ ߅ ֵ , ...(־֮֬).. ִֵ ֯ ֮ և פݾֵ֕ ֯ ִֵ ֟ ֵ , ֮ ֟ ו֋ ߕ

פݾֵ֕ : , ׻֋ ֮ ֟ ִ֯ ִׯ ״ֵ֮ ױ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֟ օ Ϭ֮ ӡ , . ֳ, . .. , . . ָ. ׮־֮ .. ָ ִִ ֮-֮ ָ ׻ ֲ , ߿֮ ָ ֯ 韾 ֯ Ϭ֮ ӡ , 韾 ֳ ִ ִ ֤ ןš ٕ֟ ֲ ֤ ָ ֵ . ֮ ֤ ֟֟ ָ ߲֟ , 1974 ״ֵ֮ ָ ִ , ֲ ߴ֟ פ Ӭ Ϭִ֮ס֟ ֻ ָ ֤ ױ 韾 օ ֟֟ ִֵ ֮ ֵ , ׻֋ ֮ ָ ߅ ֕ ֯ ֮ ֕ ָ ß ָ , ֜ ֕ ֮ ָ ֛ ו֮ ־ ֻ, פ Ӭ ִ ֤ , ֮ ו֮ ֤ ָ

__________________________

* Not recorded.

֛ , ֤ ֮ ϵ ָ ֮ ֯ ֕ פ ֤ ִ֬ ־ִן ß־ ֋ ß־ ֯ ָ ו֮֟ ִֵ ֮ , ֯ , ׾ָ օ þָ ֋ ֟ ָ, ֨ӟ ָ ֲ ֲ ֣ ֮ ֟ ִ֯ (ִ֯)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI): Shri C. Ramachandraiah. I just want to tell you this. I have seen that time was not curtailed by anybody here. I would only request you to discipline yourself, and within the time allotted, please conclude. As per the time allotted, you have six minutes. I will not disturb you because it is an important debate going on. But you kindly discipline yourself.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH (ANDHRA PRADESH): Sir, as far as the time-frame is concerned, on this subject, the goal posts have already been changed.

Sir, this subject is too esoteric to anybody other than the nuclear scientists, journalists or scientists. But, to my utter surprise, this particular subject has drawn the attention of the entire nation.

(Continued by 3G)

TDB/3G/3.30

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH (CONTD.): And I am happy that everybody is now talking about it, even outside the Parliament, outside the intellectual forums. Sir, we have been in isolation of nuclear sector for five decades. Why have we chosen this time, at this juncture, to break this? I want to know whether the country's interest is being protected, or, it is detrimental to the interest of the nation. Sir, an impartial analysis has been made by certain persons. As far as my analysis goes, Sir, it seems to be a unilateral, not even bilateral. What are the reasons that have been adduced for justifying this Deal? Energy security. So very well articulated by Mr. Yechury about various options that the country has got to meet the energy requirements. About the technologies that are available, we have got solar energy, we have got biomass, we have got wind energy, apart from thermal and hydro energy. And, I don't think a cost analysis has been made. A lot of investment is needed to have the reactors, to own the reactors. A lot of fixed investment is needed for that. Ultimately, when compared to the cost of production that is being incurred to generate nuclear power, it is not at all an academically viable proposal. This is my opinion. That is one aspect of it.

` Sir, the second aspect is, to what extent this will cater to our requirements? For everything, we are depending upon the articles that we read in the newspapers because we are not privy to the decisions, and decisions of the Government are not accessible to us. The generation of power from nuclear sector has got a long gestation period. So, that is energy aspect. My opinion is, unless extraordinary benefits are being derived by the nation from this Deal, extending the reason that the energy security can be ensured is not a justifiable reason. In my opinion, it is not at all a justifiable reason.

Sir, the solution lies within the country. We can solve this problem. As eminent Members have participated in the debate, I have read so many articles in the newspapers, that too from that particular sector of the eminent scientists who are responsible for keeping our head high among the comity of nations for building up the nuclear technology in this country, which state that we are not short of technology in this country. We do not need any technology, at this juncture because we are very rich in preparing uranium, which, of course, may be short. But, can you adduce the reason that for strategic purpose, we need the raw material? I don't think so because we are committed for disarmament in the long run, and we are committed to a minimum nuclear credible deterrence, for which, I have read in an article that 100 warheads will be sufficient, and for which, we require half-a-tonne of uranium. So, if such is the case, what are the factors that coerce the nation to enter into this Deal, which has become so controversial? There are so many apprehensions. After passing the Bill by the Congress, the sum and substances of the apprehensions that have been entertained, Sir, that this Deal will severely limit our sovereignty in the matters of nuclear, foreign and energy policy, our freedom to conduct nuclear research and development and the ability to sustain a credible nuclear deterrent which we have committed. (Contd. by kgg/3h)

kgg/3h/3.35

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH (contd.): We are not going to manufacture more weapons. We do not need more weapons in our arsenal. Having more nuclear weapons does not provide any nation the strength. The qualities that are required by a nation to have strength are different, which we are trying to continuously erode. We are continuously trying to erode those. So, what factors have compelled the Government to strike this deal? Of course, the Prime Minister has gone on record, and is trying to allay the apprehensions of the people. But, as a layman who is novice to this sector, my apprehensions may be untenable. But, how about the apprehensions that have been entertained by the eminent scientists in that particular sector? How do you thrash them aside? And, the provisions that have been incorporated, which we feel apprehended, which are detrimental to the interests of this country, cannot be thrown into a dustbin. We cannot extend the reason that these are all customary practices that are being adopted in formulating the legislation of the United States of America. You bind the nation in the process. You are binding the nation for generations. It is not a momentary decision that you are taking. So, you have to ponder over this. If it were an investment decision, we can discuss. This is a decision where you are privy to the information; you are accessing the information which nobody else can have, as Mr. Digvijay Singh has pointed out. So, you are the best judge of the circumstances as to which ones are in the interest of the nation.So, I appeal to the Prime Minister to ponder over it; to go by your conscience, to look into seriously to what extent this deal is desirable and whether it is in the interest of the nation or not.

Sir, we do not need the policing of the United States which they have been doing. We know the role the United States has played in Iraq. We know the partisan role that has been played by it as far as Iran is concerned. Of course, we have given an impression to the outside world that we are subjugating ourselves to the dictates of the United States by voting against Iran. So, these all constitute the background. I cannot quote because of the constraint of time. The sum and substance of this, Sir, is that clear objectives have been laid. One of the objectives is to take our help and cooperation to contain Iran. Sir, will it be good in formulating a foreign policy? Can we associate with a super power to contain the development of a nation, to formulate the foreign policy of an independent country? So, why are we trying to divert ourselves? What are the advantages we are going to get?

We do not need the help of the United States as far as the technology is concerned. As scientists are saying, we are not that poor in results also. A uranium project is being set up in my own district. The Government could locate these in so many areas. And, the technology is very sound in India. But, in spite of all these things...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI): Sorry, I did not want to disturb you but I have to. You know, you have exceeded your time, at least, by five minutes. Kindly conclude.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Sir, the hon. Prime Minister has gone on record saying in Rajya Sabha, "Our nuclear programme is unique. It encompasses the complete range of activities that characterise an advanced nuclear power, including generation of electricity, advanced research and development, and our strategic programme. Our scientists have mastered the complete nuclear fuel cycle." This, I can infer the meaning that our scientific community has perfected the technology of 'the full circle'. When such is the case, what is the extra advantage we are going to derive by getting the technology? (contd. by kls/3j)

KLS/3J-3.40

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH (CONTD): Sir, the most dangerous provision, which I have seen, is the character certificate by the President of the United States whether we are following the nuclear programme as dictated by them by virtue of this deal and, he will submit his report to the Congress and the Congress has got power to annul this deal. It will have a very dangerous effect on our nuclear programme I am telling. Basing on this, we will proceed with our nuclear programme and we will be investing billions of rupees. Assuming that if we fail to implement on one pretext or the other and if they stop this deal, what will be the economic impact on this country and what will be future? (Time-bell)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI): Constraints.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: I request the Chair to be fair to me. ...(Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI): The Prime Minister has also to go. ...(Interruptions)... I am trying to be more than fair and that is my problem.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Sir, my priority order has been changed.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please, if you could conclude in just one minute. ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Sir, the President of America will issue the certificate to us and the Congress has got power to annul this. Why are we trying to make the United States to enter into our shoes? What are the advantages? It is a billion dollar question to which I am unable to get answer. Sir, my request is that, do not make India a client of the United States of America. If there are any strategic interests of the nation being served, you come out to the nation and take it into confidence. If it is a geo-political warranted decision or if it is an economically warranted decision, Parliament has got every right to know. Mr. Yechury has rightly pointed out the structural deficiency in the Constitution itself. How can a decision be taken for entering into an international agreement with other countries without this supreme body being aware of it? Parliament has got every right to know it; Parliament has got every right to review it. Parliament should have a right to ratify or reject it. If that is not prevailing in the existing provisions of the Constitution, I appeal to the entire House to change the Constitution itself. ...(Interruptions)... The future of the country cannot be kept in the hands of a particular individual. ...(Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Ramachandraiah.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: I have not seen any merits in this deal; I have not seen any advantage to the nation except refurbishing the sagging image of Mr. Bush who has become unpopular. He has become very unpopular. It is being done to refurbish his sagging image. He has tried to use us as ...(Interruptions)... We have been used as scapegoat. ...(Interruptions)... Let us not become sacrificial goat.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI): Please conclude. ...(Interruptions)... Thank you.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: That was not the treatment meted out to other Members. ...(Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: You had six minutes and you have already spoken for 14 minutes. ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Sir, you compare 4 minutes with the time that has been allotted to other Members. ...(Interruptions)... If the Members do not want to hear me, I will sit down. ...(Interruptions)...Sir, in two minutes, I will conclude. ...(Interruptions)... in-controvertible evidence is available if you go through the documents; and that evidence is clearly available that it will be detrimental to the interests of this nation, which this House will not allow. This should not be allowed. Sir, what is happening in the WTO? (Contd by 3K)

-KLS-SSS/3K/3.45

(MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN in the chair)

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH (CONTD.): This is the structural defect. I am not pointing out a mistake that you have done it. Sir, I tell you, just by bashing NDA you cannot justify yourself. You can't point out the omissions that have been committed by NDA and justify your irregularities or your actions which are detrimental to the country's interest. No longer you can bash the NDA Government (Time-bell), which has been there for two and a half years.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ramachandraiah, kindly conclude. You have taken more than the time allotted to you.

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Your actions are to the advantage of the country, to the welfare of the people. As Members of Parliament, we have got every right to review. That right cannot be taken by anybody just because you are sitting in the Treasury Bench. Sir, my appeal to the Government, Sir, and to the hon. Prime Minister is, I am not individually accusing anybody. It is not the time to accuse or indulge in sycophancy which I am not accustomed. But let us be fair, have a frank discussion with the scientists. Let them be taken into confidence. Let there be an exhaustive discussion. You can say that the end product is yet to come. But the end product seems to be dangerous and end product once it comes, you will be so pressurised, Sir, honestly, I am telling you, you will be so pressurised that you will be acquiesced, you will accept it. Let it not be imposed on this nation, Sir, it will be highly detrimental, anti-national. My request is to kindly ponder over and this House should not accept this deal, Sir, and we totally oppose this. (Ends)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Shri Arun Shourie.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: Sir, I wrote a letter to the Chairman saying that as a Foreign Minister of India when the Nuclear Agreement was announced in Washington D.C. on 18th July.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Natwar Singhji, I have called Mr. Arun Shourie. Your name is not there.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: He has agreed to yield...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: How can he agree?

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: No, no, wait a minute.

SHRI DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I have called you, Mr. Arun Shourieji.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: I have not received a reply.

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE: Just one small point, Sir.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: His party has not given the time. His name has not been given.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: I am sorry. I am very sorry, Sir.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Natwar Singhji, you are a senior Member. I...

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: That is why I am appealing to you. I was the Foreign Minister of India when this was signed. I have a right to speak.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: No, about that you can talk with the Chairman.

֤ߵ ֵ ӡֵֻ ֕ ӡ ( ֓) : ָ, ֵә ָ ֯ ֕ ֳ 276, ׻Ù ï , ...(־֮֬)... ֤ ׮ִֵ ָָֆ ֻ֟ ...(־֮֬)... ֤ ֙ ...(־֮֬)... , ׮Ե ...(־֮֬)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRAMAN: No, it is very clear. I have given the ruling. Your party has not given your name. That is the convention we are following. Kindly take it up with the Chairman. Mr. Arun Shourie.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: I am merely pointing out to you...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: No, no, please...

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: I have not received a reply from the Chairman.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: That you can discuss with the Chairman.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: Discuss when?

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Now, Mr. Arun Shourie, are you going to speak.

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE: Let him...(Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: No, no, I have not allowed him. You please...(Interruptions)...

THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION (SHRI JASWANT SINGH): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, the hon. Member is asserting a right as a former Minister for External Affairs of the country who he says had something to do or quite a great deal to do when this July 18th Agreement was arrived at. He wants to say something. We wish to hear him. He has a right to speak in the House. Do not deny him. (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: No, no, we are following certain procedures. Please, let us not take it as a...(Interruptions)...As on today, he belongs to a political party. The convention we are following is that political parties give the names and the Chair is going by that convention. If he wants to deviate the rules let him contact the Chairman and then take a decision. (Interruptions) I am sorry, I will not be able to...(Interruptions)...Mr. Jothi, ...(Interruptions)...you need not...(Interruptions)...It is the decision of the Chair. (Interruptions) No, no, you are not to direct the Chair. You have said, 'let him speak'. We have to follow certain rules. I have said, 'no.'

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: My party has suspended me. I have a right to speak. (Interruptions)

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: Sir, he is a suspended Member. (Interruptions)

SHRI SHAHID SIDDIQUI: Conventions are not holy scriptures.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Shahid Siddiqui, no, no, (Interruptions) please, I cannot allow.

ֵָ : , ...(־֮֬)... ӡ ־ֻ ...(־֮֬)...

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: He was...(Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You have not been permitted. (Interruptions)

(Contd. By NBR/3L)

-SSS/NBR-KLG/3L/3.50

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You have not been permitted...(Interruptions).. Nothing goes record...(Interruptions)...Nothing goes on record

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: *

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: *

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Chair has not called you ...(Interruptions)...I will not allow you...(Interruptions)...I will not allow you to speak...(Interruptions)...

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: *

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, will you not complete one round before you go back to the BJP?...(Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: We will do that. I have called Mr. Arun Shourie ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE (UTTAR PRADESH): Sir, actually, this is one of the issues which will decide the fate of the country for the next fifty years. And, the House should certainly get to know by first person -- after all, only two persons were negotiating with the President Bush, the hon. Prime Minister and the then hon. Foreign Minister -- and if the House in its wisdom does not get to even hear the first person accounts of these two persons, it is being deprived of a very important information. And, I appeal to you and I also appeal to the Prime Minister -- not about this particular thing -- that we have seen debates...

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, I have a point to make.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: No, no, Mr. Narayanasamy. I have called him...(Interruptions)...

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE: Sir, I am not on that point...(Interruptions)...I am only on the question of time. We have seen in this very House -- I have been here for seven years and you have been here for longer -- that on many issues, which were not as grave as the issue that is being

-----------------------------

* Not recorded.

discussed by the House, the debate was extended indefinitely and the Prime Minister and the other Ministers replied the next day. I remember even sometimes that the reply is much later.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Arun Shourie, the question is not about the time...(Interruptions)...Please give an opportunity to the Chair to speak...(Interruptions)...It is not the question of time; it is the question of conventions that we are following...(Interruptions)...Then, he should request the Chairman. Only the Chairman can decide...(Interruptions)...

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: *

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE: Sir, I am not on Mr. Natwar Singh ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: *

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You will get the reply...(Interruptions)...

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: *

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: *

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ramachandraiah, why are you getting up?...(Interruptions)...Each party has its own support...(Interruptions)...Let us not have a debate on this...(Interruptions)...It is for the party to decide...(Interruptions)...

SHRI N. JOTHI: *

MR. DTPUTY CHAIRMAN: It is for the party to decide ...(Interruptions)...Don't interfere in the internal matters of other parties...(Interruptions)...It is not for you to decide...(Interruptions)... Which speaker has to speak is the decision of the party concerned. It is not your concern...(Interruptions)...

SHRI C. RAMACHANDRAIAH: *

-----------------------------

* Not recorded.

 

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: You are going. That is why I have to interfere. Otherwise, why should I interfere? Please come to the point. Let us not waste the time.

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE: Sir, it is one of the most important issues that this House has had the opportunity to discuss. I am and everybody here is for cooperation with all countries, including the United States. But, as the hon. Prime Minister has emphasized, as everybody has emphasized, and Digvijay was just now saying that we are for cooperation of an independent and strong India with other countries. I will seek your permission to point out that what has, actually, been done by this agreement is closed the options of India and will, ultimately, if it goes through, you will see that India will be consigned to accepting the umbrella of the United States for protection even in this region. You will please permit me to elaborate on how this is being done. All of us, who have studied strategic matters, have seen that in regard to nuclear weapons, especially in regard to India, the USA has had four objectives. The first one is that one way or the other to get India to abide by the NPT even if you cannot make it sign. And one of the architects of this agreement, an Indian, who is now an advisor on National Security Affairs to the US President and has testified to the Congress, he told the US Congress, Mr. Ashley Telles, that, actually, this time India is accepting conditions which are more harmonious than the NPT. (CONTD. BY "3M")

NBR-USY/3M/3.55

SHRI ARUN SHOURIE (CONTD.): The second point, which they have had, was that India must be made to accept safeguards as a non-nuclear weapon State. Condoleeza Rice was quoted. I will give you three other remarks of this kind in which they were absolutely candid in this regard. But the third objective of the US, you keep quoting Shri Jaswant Singh and Stuart Talbot, has been that India must abide by the CTBT conditions. Even though the CTBT is not ratified and even though the US Senate has itself thrown out the CTBT, India must be made to sign those more onerously in the sense that the CTBT, as you know, Sir, so well, and I remember Mr. Pranab Mukherjee was raising this point here, and I was there; I answered him by reading the CTBT clause. The CTBT has a supreme national interest exit clause. Now, as I will show you, in this agreement, and what is being read into it, there is no exit clause at all. The fourth thing was that the US had aimed at what the Bill specifically uses these words -- to halt, to roll back, and eventually eliminate. These are the three expressions: 'halt', 'roll back', and 'eventually eliminate' the nuclear capability of a country, like India. Now, these objectives are being achieved by this Bill. I will come to the legislative process of the USA, on which my pretty dear and close friend, Shri Anand Sharma, dwelt so much. The operational consequence of the difference in the legislative process of the US and ours is the opposite. That's why the US House so overwhelmingly voted for the Bill because it overwhelmingly supports their objectives. And, you will see, Sir, Mr. Anand was saying that there is an elaborate legislative process. The other day, when Mr. Yashwant Sinha had put a question to the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister also said, "It is just a step and we shall see what the final outcome will be". The House passes, the Senate passes a Bill; then, there is a Reconciliation Committee; then, there is an agreement, this one, two, three.... Now, you will see what happens. Actually it is the opposite. If it were the Indian Parliament, the Executive can enter into an international treaty and we can only discuss it. But in the American legislative process, it is the opposite. The Senate is the final authority on international treaties. The big example, as you remember, is: One of the Presidents of the US, Mr. Wilson, was also the architect of the League of Nations, and the Senate threw out that treaty. Now, in the CTBT the United States Executive was far advanced in those discussions and the US Senate threw it out. So, to tell us that actually what is happening now is only a stage, and there will be a final thing which will be different from the things that are coming up, is to give us sleeping pills, because actually speaking what will happen is that the US Administration will also be bound by it, it cannot but do anything than what has been sanctioned by the US Congress, in particular, by the US Senate. (Interruptions) Just a second, Mr. Anand. (Interruptions) Sir, because of the shortage of time, I will only take up two points which the Prime Minister has been emphasising. (Interruptions) in this matter again. The first has been the question of parity. You keep citing the agreement of July, 18. The July, 18, Agreement is a statement of intact. Anything can be read into it. There is not a person in this House who could have seen that one of the only two reactors, which we have, which produce weapons Plutonium, that is, the Cyrus, which has recently been renovated, and which the US itself has said to their Congressional Committees that it is not conclusively proved at all that India has violated any treaty in regard to the Cyrus. We have agreed to close down that within four years. That was supplying, I pronounce it openly because scientists have said it, one-third of the weapons-grade Plutonium that India would be using for its nuclear arsenal. (Contd. by 3n -- VP)

 

PREVIOUS PAGE