MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.SHRI JAG MOHAN: May I invite your attention to the manifesto of the B.J.P. and what was also included in the National Agenda later on. The B.J.P. rejects the notion of nuclear apartheid and will actively oppose the attempt to impose the hegemonistic nuclear regime. We will not be dictated by anyone in matters of security requirements and in exercise of nuclear option. Now, there are four components of this. It clearly says that we will not allow hegemonistic power cartels to come in and dictate the world. It is not only the security requirement. We have also said that we will give priority to security requirement and we will be judged on the security requirements. No one else can judge what our security requirements will be.
We have also made it very clear that we will pursue this goal `actively'. What does `actively' mean? `Actively' means that we will pursue it with utmost speed. When we found that it is in our national interest, we had, therefore, acted as quickly as we could. There is nothing wrong when we have also said that the initiative will be in our hands. We will not only be reacting to the events, but we will also take the initiative and determine and shape the events at the international level. We will just not play an reactive role. These are the basic issues which we must keep in mind and it is on the basis of this manifesto that B.J.P. has come into power. It was its duty, the BJP's duty, because people have endorsed it and it has also find a mention in the National Agenda which has been endorsed by the ruling party. Therefore, it has the endorsement of the majority of the country.
After the tests, opinion polls have come which overwhelmingly support what has been done.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : Four metropolitan cities.
SHRI JAG MOHAN : I did not interrupt you.
Anyhow, four metropolitan cities are not a small segment. They represent the views of the masses. If there is any other thing that you can mention.
The other point which I would like to make is that Shri Natwar Singh was at very great pains to mention about our security. What was the urgency about it? What new things had developed? I want to ask him whether this has developed all of a sudden. It is a continuous process.
In 1989, whether you are aware that Gen. Zia-ul-Haq had formulated, what was called, the TOPAC. In 1989 you were not prepared. Do you want something like Pearl Harbour to happen or do you want to be guided by the spirit of Munich. We must be prepared. We must be vigilant and that should be our main concern.
It has been asked as to why are we negotiating. On the one hand, we are saying that we are friends with China and so we are negotiating. On the other hand, we say this. In fact, there is no contradiction. It is because your successful negotiation will depend when you are on an equal footing. You cannot successfully negotiate national interest when you are in a position of weakness.
China has conducted 45 tests. It is still in position to conduct laboratory tests. We do not have any grievance or any intentions against China. We only said, "we want to remain prepared. Time, tide and events change suddenly and we must be prepared for all eventualities." That is the basic issue.
Then, what was the greatest advantage of India in security? That was the advantage of strategic depth. If anyone wants to harm us it could do upto a particular depth. We had advantage of depth. That advantage had gone as soon as this Ghauri missile was fired and lot of announcements were made that it could hit Mumbai and it could hit this and all that. All types of statements were made by Pakistan. We are aware of this. So the issue that has to be seen is that this is not something that we have decided to do suddenly. There are valid considerations for it, very strong justifications for it and you cannot say otherwise.
I want to ask Shri Natwar Singh, what was the security threat that India faced in 1974 when Shrimati Gandhi exploded the nuclear device? We all applauded it.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : Can I answer?
SHRI JAG MOHAN : No, you can answer later on. Let me complete. I did not disturb you... (Interruptions)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : You answer.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : Is Shri Jag Mohan yielding?
SHRI JAG MOHAN : No, I am not... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN : He is not yielding.
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : Why should he not? He has put a question, he should listen to the answer.
SHRI JAG MOHAN : I have put a question, but he can answer later... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: You address the Chair.
SHRI JAG MOHAN : Sir, my point is that it will only interrupt my flow. He can answer later. I am not saying that he would not get the opportunity to answer... (Interruptions)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : He is not interested in listening positive answer... (Interruptions)
SHRI JAG MOHAN : We are interested in positive answer, but you may answer later on... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Please stop interrupting him. You please continue, Mr. Jag Mohan.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : Please yield!... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: He does not want to yield. I cannot compel the Member to yield.
... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: So far the debate has been going on well, let us continue it.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : This is not right. This is not the way to conduct a debate... (Interruptions)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : There was no security threat, just as there is no security threat now. The reason was that because in 1968, the NP Treaty had a clause that you could have peaceful nuclear explosions under the aegis of the NPT. Shrimati Indira Gandhi said, `No, we will have our own NPT.' She did that. That was the reason... (Interruptions)
SHRI DIGVIJAY SINGH (BANKA): There was no security reason... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. Members may kindly take their seats. Shri Jag Mohan will reply to that.
... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Please be seated.
... (Interruptions)
¸ÉÒ ÊnùÊM´ÉVÉªÉ ÊºÉƽþ : xɽþÒÆ iÉÉä Ê¡ò®ú =ºÉ ÊnùxÉ EªÉÉ lÉÉ?
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : What is the security threat today?
¨ÉäVÉ®ú VÉxÉ®ú±É ¦ÉÖ´ÉxÉ SÉxpù JÉhb÷Ú®úÒ, B´ÉÒBºÉB¨É : =ºÉ ÊnùxÉ VÉÉVÉÇ ¡òxÉÉÇÆb÷ÒVÉ EòÒ ®úä±É´Éä º]ÅÉ<Eò EòÒ ´ÉVɽþ ºÉä ½þÒ +É{É ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ xÉä BEºÉ{±ÉÉäVÉxÉ ÊEòªÉÉ lÉÉ*... (
Interruptions)
That is why they did so in 1974... (Interruptions)
SHRI JAG MOHAN : Sir, that was the reason, I was not yielding... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Please do not interrupt.
... (Interruptions)
MAJOR GENERAL BHUVAN CHANDRA KHANDURI, AVSM : Shrimati Gandhi wanted to stop him from doing that, that is why it was done at that time... (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: The whole country is watching us, let us not do like this.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI JAG MOHAN (NEW DELHI): Then, Sir, I was saying about Pakistan. Even before the Pokhran-I, that is in 1974, there were reports that Pakistan had been clandestinely trying to acquire nuclear atomic power. Even after 1972, when the Shimla agreement was signed, we magnanimously released all the prisoners and surrendered all advantages just to see that Mr. Bhutto was very liberally treated. What Mr. Bhutto did when he reached there, back in Pakistan? After a few days, he shot a letter to Gen. Tikka Khan. This was reported in his book also. He said: "This is only a temporary measure. Be prepared for a war. Upgrade your weaponry and we will teach them a lesson. We have always taught lessons to these people." That is the spirit against which we are functioning.
Now, when Mr. Aslam Beg, Mr. Nawaz Sharief and Mrs. Benazir Bhutto go on saying all type of things, all that we are saying is that we also want to be prepared. We are not using it. It is a measure of self-defence to remain in preparedness.
Sir, history teaches us. When you are weak, it tends the other fellow to come up. It whets the appetite of those people. If you want to keep some people away, you have to be vigilant and you have to be strong. Otherwise, someone will be tempted to take advantage of your weakness. We should never allow that. It is not an aggressive posture. It is the posture to remain vigilant and learn some lessons from history. As I said, we do not want the spirit of Munich to visit us and we do not want the spirit of Pearl Harbour to visit us.
There is one other justification. How do you upgrade your technology? How do you dovetail the new technology of missile with your explosions? You can do so only when you experiment, only when you actually test and find out whether your calculations are right or wrong. These five tests are the most sophisticated tests meant to integrate, apart from the technology of explosion, the missile technology with the explosive technology. This was absolutely necessary from the point of view of technological upgradation, from the point of view of improvement, from the point of view of strategy and from the point of use which come into being. This was a very important measure and a very timely measure. It has now put India on the map of the world. Now the world cannot take us for granted. Earlier what was being done was that just one-sixth of the human race was being ignored by the nuclear club and we were being dictated. They were saying: "This is good for us and not good for you." What is this? This great civilization and this great culture could be dictated by the nuclear club. Are we living in a democratic world or not? Is it not the violation of the United Nations Charter? It is our assertion against that undemocratic behaviour of this nuclear club or this power cartel. It is an assertion of our self-respect, we are counting advantages and we are counting costs. It will be a great inspiration to the nation and for generations and generations, our young people will draw inspiration from this and it will give self-confidence and courage, a new dynamism, a new drive and a new initiative to this nation. Previously we were just getting cynical, we were incapable of doing anything and anybody can come and turn around us. There is something deeper than that is not visible on the surface. We should not ignore this.
The other point which I want to make in this regard is the issue of giving credit. Our distinguished and a very senior colleague, Shri Indrajit Gupta, mentioned that we have taken the credit, nobody wants to give credit to us. It is the credit that belongs to our scientists and technologists. I agree that the scientists and technologists have their credit.
I give as much credit as anybody else would give. But you cannot deny this fact that for putting this into operation political courage and political commitment was needed. That was not forthcoming from the previous regimes and this credit and this commitment has been demonstrated on May ll and May l3 by our decisions. In fact, I do not say that the political party, our political party alone has contributed. I do not say that the scientists alone contributed. Every streetman has contributed, every village man has contributed because, after all, it is with their taxes that we are financing these projects and we will have to show the credit. I salute all of them. You have to give credit to a political party, I am sure you should not deny this. We are entitled to credit for this momentous decision. The political advantage has come to us. It has to come to us.
Our Prime Minister was very magnanimous and he said that it is a continuous national effort and what has happened is the culmination of that national effort. I entirely agree that this is a culmination of the national effort. But all of us have made a contribution. But the issue is you knew the answer. We knew the answer. But it is only we, who have written the answer on the pages of history. It is we who have written this answer, you did not write and so you should not grudge. Those who have written them will be remembered in the pages of history as those who have written. And even for all this effort, I would put it this way. You have passed the examination. Every political party has passed the examination. Some have passed in third division, someone has passed in second division and some in first division with distinction. I think we can claim that we have passed this examination with distinction. Thus the credit should come to us.
I would like to mention one more fact. It has been reported in the Press and I think there are reasonable grounds to believing it to be true that Shri Narasimha Rao at the time when the CTBT was under discussion or the NPT was under discussion was thinking of exploding the nuclear device. In fact, it has been stated that this file has been on the table of every Prime Minister. That was probably the time when China was exploding it or France was exploding. Before the turn for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty came, India could have exploded. Why did they not do it? Because that level of commitment and level of courage was not forthcoming. That was the time. That was the time and the courage was not forthcoming.
After all, for 24 long years you have neglected this. Obviously our technology remained undeveloped. The technology has been developed now. These decisions apart from the upgradation have also shown courage and demonstrated to the world that they cannot take us for granted.
Now there is another factor. If you test, if you encourage your scientists and engineers they will also sharpen their technology. They will learn from their experience. The technological and scientific base of the society would improve and we can achieve great many things in many other fields and I have with me an article written in The International Herald Tribune by an American. He writes about Dr. Abdul Kalam, our great scientist. He quotes him and says that at one stage Dr. Abdul Kalam was getting so frustrated that he was not getting an opportunity and political approval was not being given to him for testing -- and he was getting so frustrated -- that he wanted to leave the Government and go away and become a Vice-Chancellor of Madras University. That is what you are doing to your scientists and their morale!
And when the morale is down, then the scientific advancement cannot take place; technological advancement cannot take place. They have not given sufficient opportunities for 24 years to scientific and technological talents. That is why they could not prosper. Most of them have gone abroad, have joined IAS or have joined some other private firms. The best talent of this country should have been used for research and development. That has not happened.
There was a plan to create 10,000 m.w. of nuclear power by 1987-88. The provision was made and equipments worth Rs. 500 crore were purchased. They are lying unutilised. But, then, this programme was curtailed under pressure. The financial provision was not made and the poor scientists were told to go and borrow it from the market. There was a suggestion to float bonds by the Nuclear Power Corporation. But who will buy those bonds? They were starving of money. That is how the scientific base, the technological base of the society was damaged.
Now, we have got only a few top and budding scientists. We would have much greater talent if we had given them this opportunity to go on testing and proving and from the sharpening of the mind we would have also reaped many more things.
These are not the only parameters. There are larger parameters with dipper significance of what we have done. This is not only an assertion of our self-respect, of our knowledge, of our competence but also an assertion of the fact that we are willing to give concrete shape to our security requirements. This is a point to the world that they cannot ignore 1,000 million people. But this is not the only parameter; this is not the only significance. Another significance is to tell the world that it is being dominated by the power cartel and we will not accept this domination of the power cartel. This power cartel is now having an advantageous position with regard to every sphere of activity.
Let me quote a Russian intellectual. He says,: "All the issues of international relations; the issue of security; economics; international politics and so on are being dominated by the cartel. These issues are being effectively settled by a Directorate headed by the United States." Even what does Samuel Huntington says about it, I would like to quote:
"The West in effect is using these international institutions, its military power and economic resources to run the world that will maintain Western predominance, protect Western interests and promote Western political and economic values. That at least is the way in which the non-Western sees the new world, and there is a significant element of truth in this view."
What we have said is that we are not allowing this power cartel to continue with its dominance. We want to make the world opinion sensitive to this issue. We have asserted our right that we will not accept an unjust and unfair order.
Our former Prime Minister, who is a distinguished and international expert and also a Urdu Poet, is sitting here. I would remind him what Faiz Ahmed Faiz has said. I quote:
+®úºÉÉ-B-nù½þ®ú EòÒ ZÉֱɺÉÒ ½þÖ<Ç ´ÉÒ®úÉxÉÒ ¨ÉäÆ,
½þ¨ÉEòÉä ®ú½þxÉÉ ½þè iÉÉä ªÉÚÆ ½þÒ ®ú½þxÉÉ ½þè*
+VÉxɤÉÒ ½þÉlÉÉäÆ EòÉ ¤ÉäxÉɨÉMÉ®ú +¨¤ÉÉ®ú ʺÉiɨÉ,
+ÉVÉ ºÉ½þxÉÉ ½þè ½þ¨Éä¶ÉÉ iÉÉä xɽþÒÆ ºÉ½þxÉÉ ½þè*
So, what we want to tell is that all right you have dominated for quite long, but by this self-assertion, we have said that this power cartel is not acceptable to us. That is why, quite a lot of world opinion - maybe incipient world opinion - has really applauded the Indian efforts. It has applauded our efforts. I am sure that this step will revive the Nonalignement Movement. It will give a new strength to these independent people.
Shri Indrajit Gupta was saying that there is no power and water in Delhi and we are exploding bombs. One of the reasons of our poverty is that this international economic system is manipulating the system in such a way that very few resources are left for the poor people. This is happening all over the world. This is not happening in India alone, this is happening in all the developing countries.
I will just give you one statistics. After all the talk of UNDP, Brundtland Commission, Willie Brandt Commission, and various other Commissions were saying that they will give this much aid and they will do this and the poor should be helped. But what was t
the actual result? In 1960, the income disparity between the bottom 20 per cent of the world population and the top 20 per cent of the world population was 30 times. Now, it is 60 times. How is it that these disparities are growing? It is because what was earlier taken away by military domination, what was earlier taken away by selling of manufactured goods at a higher price, what was taken away by things like cheap labour and cheap raw materials is now being taken away by the manipulation of the international system and by the manipulation of price by exchange rates. They are maintaining this domination. Seventy or Eighty per cent of the world resources are cornered by 15 to 20 per cent of the people. When you have got the world's resources, you will have the best technology, you will have the best brains, you will have the best resources and you will go on increasing your strength.
[NEXT PAGE]
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
