PREVIOUS HOUR

PK/3B/4.00

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI (CONTD.): Well, that is not going to happen. Let me tell you something very interesting about testing. You are not able to cite -- and I challenge you with utmost respect -- a single clause, a single word, a single phrase, in the 123 Agreement, which stops you from testing; answer: nil. Number two, the 123 Agreement, indeed, curiously does not use the word 'test' for explosion at all. I may be wrong, but I have checked it. The word 'test' or 'explosion' is not used in the entire 123 Agreement. I have already demonstrated that the Hyde Act will not override the 123 Agreement; the 123 Agreement is the last expression of the sovereign will. But, now, assume for a minute, that the Hyde Act has anything to do with the subject. The Hyde Act has two parts. One is, an exemption from the old US law, the Atomic Energy Law, and the Hyde Act exempts you by allowing you to get waivers under the old 1954 law. That exemption remains. The rest of the Hyde Act says and he is right that in section 104 and 106, it says that we do not contemplate testing. Now, in the event of your testing, it is not that the 123 Agreement prohibits it. It is a fact that no country in the world will go out of the way to permit you to test, or, will, affirmatively, acknowledge that you can test. That does not mean that you have lost your sovereign right to test. You had the right in 1998 when you, Mr. Sinha, or, your predecessor made the Statement on the United Nation's floor, you had the right in 1999 when your Prime Minister made the Statement of a unilateral moratorium on testing. Let me tell you a good reason why they did so, and that is the same reason why all Governments like us also adhere to it. The reason is, this whole testing phobia is over emphasized. Most countries, in fact, do not need to test. Because we have done all the tests, we want. Do you know, of the nuclear club of five, Britain and France have no testing sites on their soil at all? They have no testing sites; so, they very rarely test. They have not tested for years. Of the balance three, Russia has the site, but it has signed the CTBT, which means Russia is governed on testing issues by the CTBT. Even of the nuclear club, that leaves only two, the USA and China. These two have signed the CTBT, but not ratified it. There is a view that if you sign a treaty and don't ratify, you are still bound by the spirit of that treaty. So, in actual fact, the whole issue of testing is over emphasized. We have many bombs; I don't know how many. We have many military reactors; we don't need to test. But in the unlikely event that your scientists say that you can't live without testing, you have the absolute sovereign right to test. What will happen if you test? Well, if you test, you may have to go through the procedures prescribed under two very significant clauses of the 123 Agreement which are being ignored by you. The two clauses are: Clause 5.6 and clause 14, which is the right to return clause, and, clause 5.6 which you gave an argument about, I am sorry, does not bear out your argument at all. Clause 5.6 gives you full protection in every possible way about continuous supply. Sir, let me just read some parts of clause 5.6. Clause 5.6 starts by saying, "the US has conveyed its commitment to the reliable supply of fuel." You have read a part of it, there is one whole page of seven clauses which reiterates the commitment to supply. The question you have raised is, if you test and you terminate under 14, what will happen to this right? Remember two things. Under clause 14, you are not required to stop immediately. There is no interruptus, automatically, the moment you test. Clause 14 itself is a significant increase. I want to ask you a question. When Mrs. Gandhi tested in 1974 and when you tested in 1998, did they not immediately impose sanctions? Well, now, under clause 14, you have a more liberalised regime. They can't do that for one year. Under clause 14, for one year, they have to talk to you. So, you have a much more liberalised regime than you ever had on testing for all these decades. Today, under the 123, it specifically says that if you test, both the countries will talk. There will be a one-year notice period and there will be discussions. It is extraordinary that a Party which swears by the testing of Pokhran in 1998, today, says, "we oppose", despite clause 14 of 123 Agreement which puts a one year gap before any action can be taken. You suffered sanctions on day one after you tested in 1998 and so did Mrs. Gandhi in 1974.

(Contd. by 3C/SKC)

3c/4.05/skc

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI (CONTD.): Secondly, and more importantly, you miss the point, the point that 5.6 is specifically not derogated from... (Interruptions) Article 5.6, in fact, does not say that it is subject to Article 14. Remember, Article 5.6 is `uninterrupted continuous fuel supply` and Article 14 is `termination`. Article 5.6 is not subject to Article 14. Article 14 does not override Article 5.6. On the contrary, Article 14 has a very extraordinary and interesting clause which says, even if we terminate, nothing in Article 5.6 shall be affected, which means that if and while you are terminating the Article 5.6 obligation to continue uninterrupted supplies shall not be touched and that is in 14.8: "It is not the purpose of the provisions of this Article", that is, Article 14, "regarding cessation of cooperation and the right of return to derogate from the rights of the parties under Article 5.6". Did you read this, Mr. Sinha? This is a preservation of Article 5.6. And what is Article 5.6? Article 5.6 is that you shall ensure uninterrupted supplies. Well, that is the meaning of `uninterrupted supplies' which this Prime Minister and this Government has got for the first time. Both Articles 14 and 5.6 are unique. Of course, it is not realised, frequently not realised, that even signatories to the NPT...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Please.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: ...even those who are signatories to the NPT can have a test, provided they leave the NPT. This is the normal rule; if you want to do some testing, you cannot have it both ways...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, please.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: ...you cannot have the benefit and continue testing.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Please. Listen to the hon. Member. You can reply when your chance comes. (Interruptions) What is the problem?

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: I can understand why some of my friends are uncomfortable and, therefore, they do not want to listen to it. But facts are sacred; facts don't change. (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please listen. (Interruptions) Please.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Let me now, in this line of facts, come to what I title `The * of the BJP'. The true * is defined as one who ceases to perceive his deception and who changes his stand with sincerity.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Singhvi, how many more minutes do you want?

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Five to seven, Sir. I will grant that sincerity to the BJP which makes you a true * . Why are you true * ? That is because you are the ones who started a strategic phase in three particular areas -- in civil and nuclear, in civil and space, in hitech trade. You then tangoed, for many years, with Mr. Strobe Talbot. Mr. Strobe Talbot...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: What is the problem?

DR. FAROOQ ABDULLAH: Why don't we really test out these bombs and find out what America does? You say that it would take one year for them to impose sanctions, but believe me, before that one year ends, they will start putting pressure on us in every way...(Interruptions)..

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Dr. Abdullah, that is why...(Interruptions)... That is something..(Interruptions)...

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

*Expunged as ordered by the Chair.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN)
: Mr. Jothi, please. Dr. Abdullah, please. You will get the chance to speak. (Interruptions)

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: We shall come to that. Why don't you allow...(Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please, address the Chair.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, can I answer his question by asking a counter question? Why do they not first allow the deal to be signed? We shall cross that bridge when we come to it.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now, please conclude.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Now, you having started the strategic arrangement, Mr. Talbot tangoed for many months and years with the then Foreign Minister and it is very interesting for the then Foreign Minister -- whom I always felt, is conspicuous by his absence, on any such debate on nuclear energy -- Mr. Jaswant Singh, who never participates in these debates, thereby, hangs a tail. It is a very significant omission but he would have much to say about what was discussed, what was not discussed, why is it that the deal did not go through. Well, thereafter, the BJP changes tack and forgets its own statement made on the United Nations floor and today accuses us on testing issues. After your unilateral moratorium, after your unilateral commitment on the CTBT, how on earth, can you ask us questions about testing, with this Prime Minister having extracted a 5.6 and a 14? Is it not utter * ? On the one hand, you are prepared to have a moratorium, on the other, you are asking us questions about testing.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now, please conclude.

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Lastly, on transparency, my friends

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

*Expunged as ordered by the Chair.
from the Left know well that the Prime Minister has made statements on this issue many times; not once, but more than five times, on 29th of July, 27th of February, 7th of March, and so on. The reason they give is that this was made before the passage of the Hyde Act. Well, after the passage of the Hyde Act, more than eight months had passed.

(Contd. by 3d/hk)

MCM-HK/4.10/3d

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI (CONTD.): Of course, we did not say that we will accept it in toto, but we were surprised by the vehemence of their objections when the process ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Please conclude. ..(Interruptions)..

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: Please give me a couple of minutes. ..(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. There is one more speaker. ..(Interruptions)..

DR. ABHISHEK MANU SINGHVI: This agreement is the first time that India has advance reprocessing right; this agreement is the first time where no fall back safeguards are required; this agreement, on all fronts, is good. I submit, Sir, that those who oppose it must keep an open mind and try to move away from the stated positions to support what is a good agreement in the interests of India. Thank you. (Ends)

פݾֵ֕ (ָӛ) : ֳ֬ , ֯ ָ ֮֯ פ ֤ ָ ָ ֮ פօ ֲ-ֲ ֤ ־ֻ ָ ֮ ׻֋ ֛ ֟ ֲ ֮ ֟ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֵָ ֟ ֤ ֲ ֤ ָ ׌ ֵָ ֮ ֟ ֟ ׌֟ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ Ϭ֮ ӡ ו פ ֮ ֤ ֣֯ פ ֟ ׸ ϟ ֲ ׌ ָ ֤ Ӥ ֵָ ֟ ָߵ ֟ - ָ֮ ֟ ׻֋ ׯ֔ ߮ ָ ָ֟ ֤ ֟ ָ ֓ ֓ ֮ ֮ ָ-ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֯ Ϭ֮ ӡ ָ-ָ ִ ו ֟ ׸ ֙, ֤ ֵԤ ֙ ؿ֙ ӱ ִ ָ֤֟ ן օ ֳ֬ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ָ ֟ , ָ ֿ־ӟ ֮ ֟ , ו֮ ָ ָָ ֻ , ׾ ֕ ֮ ֤ Ӥ ֲ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֲ ָ ֙ ׾ ֯ ֤ Ӥ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֤ߵ þ ָ֮ ו פ ֟ ֻ ֙ ֤õ ֤ ã֟ ֤ Ӥ ֮ ß߱ פ օ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֤ ֕ Ϭ֮ ӡ ߻ ֟ ֮ , ֮֟ӡ , ֮֟ӡ , ֟ ָ ָָ ֻ֮ ו ׬ָ ״ֻ ֋ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֯ ֮ ִ֯ӣ ִ֣Ԯ ֯ ִ ֯ ? ֟ ׻֋ ֯ ׮ֵ , ׮ֵ ָ֕ ߓ ָ ֻ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֲ , ָָ ָ ֟ ֋ ָ ָָ ֻ ָ ֟ , ֮֟ӡ ֵ֟ ֲ֕ ߅ ֳ֬ , ֟ , þֵ ֻ֟߮ ׾֤ ӡ ֮֮ߵ ָ֙ ֵ֮ פ ֲָ ߻ ָ ָ֮ ֲ և ֈ ߻ ֕ פ ֵ ֮ 000 ָ ָ֙ ߻ ֮ օ ֟ ׻֋ ָ֙ ֵ֮ כ֮ ֯ ׿֟ ֤ ָָ ֟ ߻ ־Ԯן , ֲ ָ , Ӥ֕ ֵ ֋ ֳ֬ , ָ ײֻ , ֲ ֕ ׾֤ ӡ , ׯ֔ ָָ ֻ֮ ־ ֕ ֣ ׾֤ ӡ ֟ ־ֲ ֋ ֣ ֯ ׾֤ ӡ ו Ϭ֮ ӡ ֯ ָ ׾ ֲ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֵ ֮ ׾֤ ן ָ֮ ֯ ֳ֬ , ֟ ֤ ִ֮ ׻֋ ֮ ޛ-00 挻߆ ߻ ָ ֤ ï™ ָ ֮ ֵ ָ ֟ ָ ִ֣Ԯ ֻ ֟ ֤ Ϭ֮ ӡ ߻ ָָ ָ * ָ ֤֮ (3E ָ ֿ:)

ASC-KSK/4.15/3E

פݾֵ֕ (֟) : ֯ ֯ ߻ ֮ ׻֋ ׮ֵ ӓ ָ , ָ ֯ ָ ן׮׬֟ ? ֲ ֯ ֯ ִ֣Ԯ ֯ , ׮ֵ ֮֟ 挻ߵָ ߻ ? ֳ֬ , ֕ ֮֕ן ãן ָ ֛ և ֟ ߻ ֯ ֯ ™ߵ , ֟֟ , ֛ ֟֟ ٙ ֟ - ߻ ׾ָ , ؓ֟ ָָ ָ ֟ ֤֮ ו֮ ߻ ִ֣Ԯ , ֤֮ , ֤֮ ,

ֻ ß֮ ֤֕ ֛և ֟ 150 ֻ ֮ ֤֕ ֛և ߾֮ ִֵ ֵ֟ ָ ֟ ׸ ֮֓ ׻֋ ׮ֵ ו ֣ ֲֻ , ִ֮ ָ ֮ ֺ ֵ֟ ֵ , ׻֋

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Expunged as ordered by the Chair.

֤֮ ׻֋ ָ ִ֯ӣ ֤֮ , ֯ ׻֋ ֯ ֤֮ ָ ֟֟ ׸ ֣ ֛ ָ ֛ ֲֻ֟ ֙ ֯ ֳ֌ ֯ ֳ֌ ֯ ֳ֌ ? ן, ׾ָ֟, ָ-1 ֮ , ָ-1 ߴ֟ פ Ӭ օ ׮ֵ ִ֮ ֤֕ ֛և ֤֕ ֛և ֤, Ϭ֮ ӡ 0 ־ ֻ ׮ֵ ֤֕ ֲָָ , colonialism ֱֻ , ֛և ֣ ֯ ֮ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֛ ֆ ן ã ֯ 0 ־ ֻ ֟ ֤ , ֯ ™ן ֟ ֤ , ו֮ ׮ֵ ֲ ֛ ӓ, և ֮ Weapons of Mass Destruction , ׻֋ ֛և , ׮ֵ ™ן * ײ֟ ֯ ָ ߮ , , ֟ ™ן ֟ ? ׾֤ ӡ և ֮ ֟ Weapons of Mass Destruction ֯ ֟ ߮ , ߟִָ ֟ ߮ ֯ ָ ָ , ֮ ִ֯ӣ ֵ ָ ָ ֟ ֯ ִ֮ ׻֋ ֮ ֮֮ ִ֓ Ϭ֮ ӡ ? ֟ ׻֋ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֤ ׵֟ ָ ׻֋ ֟ ו ֕ ֛ ָ ֵ ֲ . ִ֮ ׾֢ ӡ ֮ , ֲ ֕ ֛ ֵ ֳ ָ ꌙ ָ ֵ օ ֯ ֟ ׻ֵ ֤ ֳ ָ ꌙ ײ ֕ ꌙ ֻ֟ , ֯ Ӥ֕

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

*Expunged as ordered by the Chair.
? ָ ָ ? ֻ ֵ, ײֻ֕ ָ֮ Ӥ ֵ? ߟִָ ײֻ ֟ , ֜ ֕ ײֻ֕ פ ֛ ִ֟ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֻ ß֮ ָ߲ ֲ , ֲ ׿ֵ ָ߲ ߅ ֟ , ָ ֻ ָ߲ , ֻ֤ ָ߲ ߻ ָ߲ , ָ ٣ ־ָ ߸ ֮ ָ ֯ ִ֓ ֕ ׻֋, ײֻ֕, ֮ ׻֋ , ֻ פ ָ ײָ ָ Ϥ ֲ ֲԤ ß ֮ , ֮ 40 ״׻ֵ֮, ו ו ߟִָ , ָ ֵ, ָ ֯ ָ ֓ , ֱ 80 ָ ־֙ ײֻ֕ ӟִ֕ ֛ ꌙ ֜ ӓ ָ ־֙ ײֻ֕ ֕ ָ , ֻ

(3F/AKG ָ ֿ:)

AKG/3F/4.20

פݾֵ֕ (֟) : ֯ ָ þߛ ײֻ֕ ֮և ֟ ֑־ ָ ֻ ֋, þߛ ײֻ֕ ֟ ֯ þߛ per capita income ֻ , ֤֕ Ϭ֮ ӡ ܾ֮ ratio ֻ ! ֤֕ 5.5 ָ, 6 ָ ָ ״ֻ֟ Ϭ֮ ӡ ܾ֮ 7.5 ָ ָ ֤֕ Ϭ֮ ӡ ܾ֮ ֯ ֮ ָ ? þߛ ֛ , ֯ ָ֮ ?

ֳ֬ , ֯ ֮֮ ... (־֮֬) ... þߛ ֟ ׳ ֮ ֑־ , ׻֋ ו օ ֯ ׻֋ ֯ ֯ ֟ , ֣״ ֵ ֻ ֟ , ߟִָ , ֯ ״ֻ? ֯ ֛ , ֛ߋ ֛ , ָߵ ֮֟ ֙ ֛ ֛ ָָ ֯ ֮ ָ ִֵ ֛ , ֯ ־ֻ , ָ ֟ , ָ֕ ָ ϕ֟ӡ , ֤֕ ֯ ֛ ׬ָ ֤ ֋ ֟ , ֯ ֟ ִ֋ ߛ ֵ co-incident ֙ ֡ ֕ ו ָ ׿ֵ ֤ ָ , , ֯ ̸ Ӥ֕ ו֋ ֲ ֕ , ֯ ו֮֟ ֮֕ן , ו֮֟ ֮֕ן ִ ־ , ֮ ׻֋ ֯ ִ ֛ ֟ ֤ ִ , ֯ ֟ ִ߸ ? ֙ ߕ ֙ ֛ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֋, ֋, օ ׾ֵ֟ ӑ ׌ ֵ , ו֮ ׾ֵ֟ ӑ ָ љ פօ ִֵ ֛ ןָ ֵ ֤ ָ ֤ - ... (־֮֬) ... ֤ ָ , ֲ ָ ֯ ָ , ָ ֿ־ӟ ֮ ָ ָ ָ ֋ ֲֻ֟ ֯ ֳ֌ ֋ ֦ ֋ ֳ֌ ֯ ֦ ֟ , օ ֮ ֺ ֟ ֮ ֻ ןֵ ֛ ֯ ׾֤ ӡ ֻ ָ ֛ ֻ ָָ ߮ ֯ ֚ӛ ־ և ײ֔ ߟִָ ֛ פ֓ï , ֲ פ֓ï ֻ ֻ֟ ֻ ָ ֣ ֻ - ן, ٣, ֮֕ן, ֛, וֵ-׻י, ֻ, ָօ ֕ ߮ ־ և ײ֔ֆ ֚ӛ ֆ 60 ֱ ߸ӕ 6 ߙ ־ և ײ֔ ֋ ָ כ ֮֮ ׻֋ ֟ ֯ ֮ ֺ ׸ ָ , ֮ -֤ ֻ ֙ֆ ָ ̸ ֮ ָ ָ ֋ ָ ֋, ֮ ֺ ֕ ֲ ֲ ׸ ָ ֣ , ֟ ֮֮ ׻֋ ָ 60 ֻ ן כ ־ ֻ, ׮ Ѭ, even ָ, ֙ ֛ ߤ ָ ׸ָ֯ß , ֙ ߤ פ ֋ ָ ֣ ֯ߙ ָ ß֟ , ׮Ù ׾ָ ֲ וִ ֙ ֋, ָ և , ׮Ù ׾ָ , ß֮ ״ּ ִ ֮ և ׻֋ ָ ֣ ָ ֯ߙ ָ ִ օ ׸ָ֯ß Ϭ֮ ӡ ֮ ֟ ָ և ֟ , ߅ ׾ֵ֟ ӑ ָ , ׸ ָ ֻ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֮ ֟ ߅ ֲָ

ֲ ֟ ָ ֆ , ײָ ֕֯ ִ֮ ׻֋ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֋ ֋, ߆ևԆև

(3 ָ ֿ:)

SK-SCH/4.24/3G

פݾֵ֕ (֟): ײ̮֕ ָ֮ ֮֟ ׻֋ , ӕ߯ן ֮֟ ׻֋ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ָ ֤֮ ֟֋ , ӕ߯ן ֤֮ ֟

ֳ֬ , ָ ֻ֟ (ִֵ ә) ֯ ֤ ִֵ , ֯ ֮ ֺ ...(־֮֬)

ֳ֬ (. ..׸֮): ߕ, ׸

פݾֵ֕ : ֲ ֕ , ֕ ֤ ֟ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֵ, ׾ ָ օ

ֳ֬ , ֋ ֟ ֮ ָ ׌ֵָ ׻ ִ ֙ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֣ ָ ™ן ָ֮ ֲ ֕ ׾֤ ӡ , ֿ־ӟ ֮ ׾֤ ӡ , , ֻ , ֻ ֻ ֱ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֻ ֤ ָ ׾ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֕ ֵָ ߮ ׮֋ ̲֕ ֮ ׻֋ ָ ֯ ׸ , ߟִָ ֮ ִ , Ӥ ֮ ִ , (ִֵ ә) ָָ ָ ֯ , ו֋օ ָ , ֮ ֺ ...(־֮֬)

ֳ֬ (. ..׸֮): ߕ, ׸

פݾֵ֕ : ָ, ֳ֬ , ֮ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֟ ִ֓ ϕ֟ס , ִ֓ ߮ ֕ ֤ ֻ , ׾ָ ֛ Ϭ֮ ӡ ִ֓ ָ ֮֟ӡ ׌ ִ ߻ ֻ֟ ֻ ߟִָ ָֻ ׌̙ פ , ֤ ִ֬ ׸, ֤ ׌֟ ֜, ָ ׌ֵָ ߻ ָ ׸ ̲֕ ֲ ֣, ֮ ֟ ִ֯ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. Dr. Maitreyan. ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI AMAR SINGH: Sir, what are you doing? It is my turn ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, no. ...(Interruptions).. Please. ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, Digvijay Singhji has mentioned my name. I would like to respond. I can do so at the end of the debate. What he stated is factual reality.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: You will be given some time. ...(Interruptions).. I will sort it out. In fact, on your agreement ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI AMAR SINGH: No, Sir. ...(Interruptions).. I have not given my time to him. ...(Interruptions)..I have not given my time to him. ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): No, no. That is coming to you. ...(Interruptions).. Let me clarify ...(Interruptions).. Please ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI AMAR SINGH: No, Sir, I will not speak. I am boycotting. ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: There is no problem. ...(Interruptions).. You can speak. ...(Interruptions).. Come on, you speak. ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI SHAHID SIDDIQUI: What is this, Sir?

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: I am not denying you. ...(Interruptions).. I have not denied you. ...(Interruptions).. You have misunderstood me. I have not denied you. ...(Interruptions).. It is not like that. ...(Interruptions)..

SHRI VIRENDRA BHATIA: He tried to adjust Mr. Digvijay Singh. ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Hon. Members, please take your seats. ...(Interruptions).. I was given to understand your chance is given and when his chance comes you will speak. ...(Interruptions).. That is what I thought. ...(Interruptions)..

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, Sir. ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: I agree. ...(Interruptions).. It is agreed. ...(Interruptions).. It is for Mr. Amar Singh to decide. Nobody has to interfere ...(Interruptions).. I only thought like this. If he wants to speak, I am permitting him. ...(Interruptions).. What is the problem? ...(Interruptions).. I thought like that because ...(Interruptions)..

. ִ ӛָ: ָ, ָ ֻ֮ ׸ֻ ׻֋ ...(־֮֬)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): I was not informed ...(Interruptions).. Let me clarify. ...(Interruptions)... Please, don't misunderstand me. ...(Interruptions)..

. ִ ӛָ: ָ ָ ֯ ׸ֻ ָ ׻֋ ...(־֮֬)

ֳ֬: ֳ ״ֻ, ֯ ך ...(־֮֬) , , ֳ ״ֻ, ߕ ֯ ך ...(־֮֬) ֯ ֮ ׮ֵָ ָ , ֯ ך ...(־֮֬) Amar Singhji, please don't Misunderstand. I thought that when you agreed for him to speak, you would speak when his turn comes.

SHRIMATI BRINDA KARAT: No, no, Sir. ...(Interruptions)..

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, no. I agree. ...(Interruptions).. I thought like that. That is all. If it is not so, I have no problem. ...(Interruptions).. But, why do you say 'No'. (Contd. by ysr-3h)

YSR-PSV/3H/4.30

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Why did Brindaji say no? (Interruptions) Amar Singhji can say what he wants to say. (Interruptions) Let Amar Singhji say this. (Interruptions) You don't speak. (Interruptions)

SHRI AMAR SINGH: Comrade Brinda Karat...(Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: I am sorry. I misunderstood it. (Interruptions) Maybe I misunderstood it. (Interruptions) The fact is that you agreed to let him speak and gave your chance. (Interruptions) I thought you would speak when his chance would come. (Interruptions) You can speak now.

ָ (ָ Ϥ): ָ, ݵ ִ֕־֤ ֙ ֤õ ܵ ֤ 16 ܵ ָ ָ ״ֻ֮ ֯ , ֲ ֯ ָ

֤֕ և, ׻֋ ֱ , ֕ ֓ օ ֓ ßָ ָ ֻ-֜ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ, ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ߅ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ָ ָ Ϭ֮ ӡ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֕ , օ ױ ֓ ßָ ֻ֮ 00 , ָ ֱ׸ ֵօ ֤ ...(־֮֬)...

ֻ ֤ : ֯ ֋ ...(־֮֬)...

ָ : ֤ , ׻֋ Ù֙ , ï™ ֮ ֛ ߓ ֵ֟ ֻ , ׯֻ ֲֻ , ׳ ֮ ֑־ ִ ֻ֮ ֲ ֛-֛ ߻ ꌿ֮, , ֲ- ו֮֟ ָ֮ ...(־֮֬)...

׾ ֤ : כ ...(־֮֬)...

ָ : ߴ ָ ֋֮ ָ ֯ ֮ ָ ֻ և ...(־֮֬)...

, ֮֟ , ֟֋, ݵ ֤ߵ ֲ ֕ 韾 ֵ ִ ֟֋ ֵ , ֵ ׾µ ָ , ׌ֵָ ֵ ָ , ׯϙÙ, әÙ Ù ָ , ߟִָ ִ ֵ֮ פ ־ ̸֯ ֿ־֮ ֮ ׾֤ ӡ , ִ Ͽ׮ ־ , ָ ָָ ֻ , 000 같 ֮ٛ ؙ ָ 16 40 ֳ ֳ , ָָ ִ ֟ ׻֋ ָ ָ֮ , Ӥ ָ ָ - ֟ , ֮ ״֟ ׻֋ ָ ָ ִ ֻ֟ , ִ , - ֯ ָ ׾ָ ־֮ ָ Ù ֲֻ ֣ ָ ֟ ...(־֮֬)... , Ӥ

ָ և 123 ߴ ֟ ׳ ֮ ֑־ ָ ֤ , ׸ ֮ ָ ׾ßָ ֵ֟ ׸ ֮ , , 123 ֮ þ֟ , և ֮ -ֻ ֟ ֟ ִֵ ֟ ֤ ָ ֤ ׸ ֓

׻ , ִָ֟ , ןֻ , ָ

ֲֲ , ָ

֮ ֋, ֋, ׮ß֮ ֋-- פ כÙ֮ ֮ , ֤ ֟ ֻ ״ֻ ֕ ָ ֣ ק ׸ פ ׸ ә׻֕ ׸ ֵ֟ ֵ ֮ ָ , ִ ֓և

(3/000 ָ ֿ:)

3J/HMS-RSS/4.35

ָ (֟) : ֮ ׸ , ׸ Ù , Ը֮ ָ և և ֟ ָ פ ׸ ֤--֤ ֮ܵ Ͽ֮ ֻ֟ ֤ ֙ ָ ָ-ָ ָ þֵ֢֟ ָ , ӯ֟ ָ ֮ ־֕ ֟ ִ֮ և , ֱ, ㆻ ֯և, ׾֤ ן, -ә ㆻ ֯և - ֳ ָ ָ ׾־֤ ãן ֤ߵ Ϭ֮ ӡ nuclear cycle in entirety, ִ ײֻ selective ָ ִ regime technology denial Ùߴ ׌ֆ ׸ , ־ , ? ָ֯ ־ ָ ִ֮ Uninterrupted fuel supply ״ֻ , termination օ ׸ ㆻ ֯և ִ, ٴ֮֮ ֣ ֲ ֟ ֋օ , 123 ߴ և - ִ ӟָ ָ ײֻ ִ־ әֻ֮ ״ perpetuity ߴ , ׌ֆ ㆻ ֯և ׻֋ perpetuity ִ ָ

׸ , , - ֵ ֣ ֵ , և Ìָ , ָ ֟ , ִ֕־֤ ןֵ , ܵ ׸ ׸ ָ Ӥ ִ ֻ֮ ֱ , 0 ִ֮ , ָ ֣ ִֻ ָֻ , ָֻ , ߻ ָ ׻֋ , ײֻ ָֻ ָֻ ׻֋ ߻ ָ ֋ ״׻֙ Ù, ߕֻ֮ ָ, ֻ ָև ָ֬ ָ ֮և ֮ ֻ ߻ ߻ ֵ֤ - ׿ֵ ֮֕ן ִ֕־֤ ׸ ֮ ׻֋ , "և " ָ ֲָ ׻֋, և և "ָ " ֋ ָ , ֱ ו֋ ֿ־ӟ ֮ , ֯ ֋ ָ ָ ָ֕, 0և0և0,ױ, ָ ß ״ֻ, , ֬ևԅ ֟ ֬և? , ָ ֳ ߻ ֵ֮ פօ ָ , ׮֋, ֲ ָ ֯ ֟ , ָ ָ ֟ ֯ әֻ֮ כ ïױ ׻֋ ֮ ֕֟ ֟ , ֲ֕ ֵ ֮֯ ֕֟ ֕֟ ֤ ָ ™ߵ ָֻ ֲָ ֮ ָ ¯ϓָ ֻ֮ , ָ ִֻ ׻֋ ֻ֮ ִ֕־֤ ֙ ߻ ֵ߅ ָ ֻ֮ ִ֯ӣ ߻ ֋ ...(־֮֬)...ִ , ײֻ ָ ֮ ׻֋ ߓ פ ֤ߵ ֛ ׻֋ ׮ ֵ ߻ ֋ (3 /֕ ָ ֿ:)

3K/KLG-TMV/4.40

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ֮ פ օ

ָ : ָ פ ֿ ָ ֮ פ ߻ ֲֻ֟ ֕ פ ֯ ָָ ֬և ֿ־ӟ ֮, ָ ָ ־֕ פ ։ և ֟ , ָ ָ֕ ֟ , ߆ևԆևԋ ױ ֟ , -ӣ ִ-ӣ , ..(־֮֬)

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ֬-ӣ

ָ : ֬-ӣ , ִ ֤֕ , ֲ ֕ "״ֻ ָ, ֮ ָ" ֮ þָ ׻֋ ֋ ׸ ׿ֵ֮ ֙ ׻֋, ָ ׻֋ ֱ ӛ- 挻ߵָ ߻ , ָ, ֮, ׻י ָ ׾ ֯ ֮ד֡ ߻ ֡

ֳ֬ , ß֮ ָ ֲֻ ӟ׻֟ ֻ ָ ֲ ָ ֣ ß֮ ׾־֤ , ֕ ׳ ß֮ ߮ ֓ , ֟ ß֮ ָ ֲֻ, ߮ ֟ ֮ , ָ ֱ ֣ ß֮ ָ ָ ӑև ֟ ߅ ӑև ֟ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֛ ֕ ӑև ֋ ֕ ֮ ֵԤ ׸ ֟ևԅ ֤ ֤ߵ Ϭ֮ ӡ , ֲ -8 Ϭ֮ ӡ ױ ֟ ? Ͽ ָ , Ϭ֮ ӡ ï™ ׿ֵ ָ ߴ ׻֋ ֲ ָ 挻ߵָ ֯և , ևԋԋ ִ ֋, ֲ ׿ֵ ߴ , ױ ֟ ָ ָ ? ו ָ ָ ֯ ָ֬ ֮ ֋֕ ևԋԋ , ָ֬ ֮֯ ֮ ָָ֟ ״֡ ֵ֮? ֡ ֤ߵ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֣ ״֡ ָ , ֯ ״֡ "" ӯ֤ ִ ֋ ִ ٙ ֜օ ٙ ֱ ׾ ֵ֟, ֲ Ϭ֮ ӡ ֣ ֋ , ִ ׻֋ ָ , ֟ ִ ? ָ , ֿ־ӟ ֮ ֛ ֤ , ָ , ֮ , ו , ו ָ ֮֮ , ֯ ו ӟ ו֋, ֮֮ ו ָ Ӥ , ִ ?

ֳ֬ , Ը֮ ꌙ ־ֻ , Ը֮ ֤֕ ״ֻ֮ ֋ ؓן֟ , ׸֮ ֋ ָ ֛ ׾ֿ ״֡ ָ ֲ ׻ִֵ ״׮Ù ֤ ׻֋ ׻֟ , ֻӟָ ֛ ׿ףֻ֟ פև Ը֮ ֤֕ ֻ , ־ ֣ , Ը֮ ꌙ ӳ־֟: ׿ףֻ ֋, ֟ ֋օ ֮֯ ֟ ָ ֿ־ӟ ֮ ִ ׻ֵ ָ ִ, Ը֮ ֛ ־ֵ , ָ ־ þֺ ֵօ Ը֮ ꌙ ֟ , ָ, ׮֕ ָ֮ , ָ ־ ֻ Ը֮ ִ ֕ ָ әߕ ׸ և Ը֮ ָ ָ * ׮ֵ֤ , ־֕ ײ֮ և We have decided to punish Iran at the behest of the United States of America. ֮ ָ Ը֮ ֱֻ פօ ִ , ֳ֬ , ֛ ֮ 挻ߵָ , 挻ߵָ ֓ (3/ ָ ֿ.)

aka-vk/3l/4:45

ָ (֟) : ֮֮ nuclear renaissance nuclear bus 30 ֻ ָ ׌ֆ ә ֵ , ָ GE ֮ ָ ׌ֆ ә ׌ֆ ә ָ օ Mile Island disaster ֤ ׯ֔ 30 ֻ ָ ׌ֆ ә ָ 60 ָ ־֙ և ־ָ ִ֟ ßָ ָ ֮ ؾ֛ ״ֻ և ־ָ ִ , ײֻ֕ ֮ -֮ , -֮ ִ ֻ ׻֋ -֮ ָ ׬ ֻ - և ־ָ ؾ֛ ־ָ , և ־ָ ؾ֛ ־ָ 60 ָ ־֙ , ֱ ֣-Ù ֱ , ֯֙ ׻֋ ָ ֻ , ֮ ֮ ֟ ֙ ֟ ָ ֻ Ӭ ֮ և ־ָ ִ , ָ ֮ ׌ , ֣-Ù , ִ ֋օ ָ ֟, ָ ֯ ֮ ָ ֻ ֮ , ״֣ ֮ , ׻׌ֱև ֮ ׌ֆ ֕ ֺ ß , ָ ߴָ ׌ֆ ӛÙ ׻֋, GE ֮ ֵ֤ ׻֋ ִ ׻֋ ָ ׌ֆ ӛÙ ߴָ , , , ׻֕ և ֵ֮ - The nuclear industry in America is sick.

߮ ִ֣Ԯ ֵ֤ ׻֋ ָ ִ֯ӣ ֣ ֋Ӆ ߕ ֤ ֮ ߮ ֮ ֯ ׌ֆ ֮߯ Ù և ֻ ָ ׌ֆ ֮߯ Ù ׌ֆ ׻ֱ֮ ߙ ֙ ߮ ָ ָ әֻ֮ ֻ, ֲ ָ ָ ָ ׮Ե և 123 ߴ օ ߓ , ָ ßָ ֵ֤ ׻֋ ־֕ ߮ ָ ֣ , ߮ ָ ֣ , ָ ָ ֵ֮ ֵ ߮ ָ ֣, ָ ߮ ָ ֣ ָ ִ֣Ԯ , ָ

֟ India specific safeguard , ? ָ Ù ߛ ׸ IAEA ׮ָ֮ ӟֻ , ֲ ָ ָ ׮ ָ ָ Ù ߛ ׸ ׮ֵ ָ ׿ִ ׻֋ ׌ֆ Ù ִ ֛ ִõ , ֲֻ ָ ׻֋ ִõ , ױ ߴ ֋!

և ָ , ׸- ? ß׾ ֻ֮ ? ָָ ײ spent fuel ßֻ ֮ cost effective ? ָ, ֮ WTO, G70, G77, G90 ֮ ãן ײ֛ ߮ ֕߻ ֣ ״ֻ ָ ָ ָ ײ֛ ֱֻ ֛ Ը֮ WTO ӑԸ ֮ ֣ ָ

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Please conclude.

ָ : ߻ ܵ ׮ ֮ 90 ןֿ֟ ָ ׾ֻ ׌ֆ ׸ IAEA ִ֬ ָ׾̮֕ ָׯ֓ օ ֕ ? ֋ ָ ֲ , Ը֮, ׮ß֮, ױ׻ß߮ ״֛ Ù Ӥ ָ ׾֤ ן ֤ և ̤֕ ֋ ׮ ֮ ֮־֤ , ֮־֤ , ׳ ֮ ֑־ ו֮֟ ֵ֮ , և ׯֻ ֲֻ ֵ֮ ..(־֮֬)..

׾֮ ӡ ֣ 飾 ׾֮ ӡ ( ׯֻ ֲֻ) : ֕

ָ : ֯ ֵ֮ ֟ ָ ֯ ֵ֮ ׻֋ ֯ , ֯ ֵ ('3m/nb' ָ ָ)

NB/RG/3M/4.50

ָ (֟) : ֯ ֵ , ֯ , ֯ ֲ ־ֲ Nicholas Burn ֮־֤ Non-Proliferation Deal ָ mainstream ֛

ֳ֬: ֯ ִ֯ ו֋

ָ : ֮ ׻ֵ , Nicholas Burn * , ֲ Hyde Act ֌ ֟ , Condoleezza Rice * , ֲ ָ ׌ֵָ ә, ӛÙ , ָ ֣, UPA ֣ ֓ ֮ deal ֜ sense of House ִ

ӟ -

" ֱ ֮,

֣ ֻ

֤ ,

֤ " (ִ֯)

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

* Expunged as ordered by the Chair.


DR. V. MAITREYAN (TAMIL NADU): Sir, this discussion is supposed to be completed in two-and-a-half hours. But the first five speakers themselves have taken two hours and fifty minutes, and I am the sixth one. I request you to consider the remaining 28 speakers also with the same consideration which you have extended to the first five speakers, or, at least, to me.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): You will conclude in 12 minutes.

DR. V. MAITREYAN: Give me fifteen minutes. ֻ 15 ״֮֙ ׻֋ ֯ ә ֟ ֕և

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Your party has six minutes, and I am giving you 12 minutes. Anyway, you start now.

DR. V. MAITREYAN: Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, I am not like Sitaram Yechuryji, who is an ideologue. I am not like Shri Yashwant Sinha, who has mastered the 123 Agreement on his fingertips. I am not like Abhishek Singhviji, who, because of his legal acumen, tried to make a virtue out of a bad case. And, I can never be like Amar Singhji. I represent the Aam Aadmi, whom the Congress (I) and the UPA Government have forgotten. Today, the Aam Aadmi is worried. He is not bothered about the full-stops and commas of the 123 Agreement. He is not bothered about Section 106 or 104 of the Hyde Act. His concern is whether India will be able to explore a Pokharan - III. He is concerned as to whether the pride of place, which Mrs. Gandhi and Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee gave to India, will become a thing of the past. Aam Aadmi is concerned as to whether the country, which had a pride of place, in the Group of Non-aligned Nations, will today be under the dictates of the U.S. Aam Aadmi is concerned as to whether our country's sovereignty is going to be pledged. So, from that perspective, in the next few minutes, I will be placing my views. And, on behalf of the AIADMK, I oppose this Indo-U.S. nuclear deal with the full strength at my command. Various other parties also have opposed it. The NDA has opposed it. The UNPA has opposed it. The Left Front has opposed it. My party leader and the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Madam Jayalalitha, is a very strong and vocal opponent of the nuclear deal. But I go one step further. I oppose not only this deal but also this debate, which is being held today, under Rule 176 without voting. My comrade friends have been repeatedly saying that political parties must be allowed to express their views in Parliament. All political parties have their stated positions with regard to this nuclear deal. The entire country knows this. In that case, if it is a question of merely the views of political parties, then, the various statements made by the political parties, for and against the deal, can be laid on the Table of the House, and be done away with. Again, it is being repeatedly said, ad nauseum, that the Government should ascertain the sense of the House. How do you do it? Is it on the basis of empty speeches? And how do you ascertain the sense of allies of the UPA? ֛ ה ßִ Parties like DMK have supported the deal in the Cabinet, and they have opposed it outside, much to the embarrassment of the Prime Minister. In fact, he had to admonish them saying that it is the collective decision of the Cabinet...(Interruptions) The entire country knows it...(Interruptions) (Continued by 3N)

3n/4.55/ks

DR. V. MAITREYAN (CONTD.): It is a collective decision of the Cabinet; it is not his baby alone and if the allies want, he is ready to go. The irony is, the allies who opposed the deal outside, have once again supported it in Lok Sabha. What sense can you make out of these things? Again, the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Shri Priyaranjan Dasmunsi, has gone on record to say that discussion on the nuclear deal should not be considered as the sense of the House and that the sense of the House cannot be ascertained on a debate which is held under Rule 176, and that a conclusion cannot be reached on a debate which has not been voted.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): You cannot question the decision of the Chairman.

DR. V. MAITREYAN: Sir, I am putting across my view-point and I am entitled to that. So, the House has been taken for a ride. ֯ ִ֟ , ֳ ו ָ , ֕ֆ, ֤ , ? Even though there is no voting, from the Members it is very clear that a majority in this House is opposed to the Indo-US Nuclear Deal. That is the sense of the House. That being the case, will the hon. Prime Minister, give an assurance to this House that he respects the sense of the House and would therefore, drop the Deal? It is said that international treaties between India and other countries do not need parliamentary ratification and hence, the notices for discussion under Rule 184 in the Lok Sabha and under Rule 168 in the Rajya Sabha are disallowed. That is why, my party leader, Ms. Jayalalitha, as early as in December 2006, had strongly advocated for a constitutional amendment providing for parliamentary ratification of every treaty entered into by the Executive with any other country. And it is not as though the Parliament has never before debated on any international treaty. We have read it in the newspapers: Parliamentary Debates of 1965 mention about voting on a motion by the then Prime Minister, Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri, on agreement between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan relating to cease fire and the restoration of status quo on January 1st, 1965, in the Gujarat-West Pakistan border and the determination of the border in that area. Do you know what the then Speaker of Lok Sabha, Sardar Hukam Singh, had said. He said, "The Executive has every right to negotiate with the other Governments, if it has to administer the country. But, however, if the Parliament does not approve it and if the Government of the day cannot take the Parliament with it, then the Government has to go". But, here, we are told that this House has no competence to vote at the end of the debate. That is why, the AIDMK Party is very clear that the debate has to be necessarily followed by voting.

After the text of the Agreement was released on 1st August, Madam Jayalalitha had suggested that a committee consisting of Members of Parliament, eminent scientists and patriotic citizens should be constituted to examine the various clauses of the Agreement. We, the opposition parties here, demanded a JPC in the last Monsoon Session. The Government outrightly rejected both these demands and, instead, it formed its own UPA-Left Coordination Committee. After five rounds of discussion, the Committee could not come to any consensus. A Government which could not convince six members of the Left Front in the UPA-Left Committee, how can it convince more than 300 Members of Lok Sabha and nearly 130 to 140 Members of the Rajya Sabha who are opposed to this deal? The unmistaken message is that the UPA is very badly isolated as far as the nuclear deal is concerned. ִ֮ ֻ ִ ֋, ִ ֛ The Prime Minister refuses to understand this reality. But the US understood it very well. That is why we saw the unsavoury spectacle of the open-market lobbying by the White House. Concerned at the ineptitude and helplessness of the UPA Government, the US Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, the former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, the US Ambassador to India, David Mulford and others met the senior leaders of the opposition parties. You need not be surprised; if allowed, probably, they might even have addressed the Parliament Session also to sell a US-dictated deal. Such unrelenting US pressure on India and such open interference in our affairs is highly condemnable. (Contd. by 3o/tdb)

 PREVIOUS HOUR