¸ÉÒ VÉÉVÉÇ ¡òxÉÉÇxb÷ÒVÉ : ½þ¨ÉxÉä ¸ÉÒ VÉä.BxÉ. nùÒÊIÉiÉ EòÉ xÉÉ¨É ºÉÖxÉÉ* ¨ÉèÆ <ºÉʱÉB =xÉEòÉ =±±ÉäJÉ Eò®ú ®ú½þÉ ½þÚÆ*
ºÉ¦ÉÉ{ÉÊiÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ : +É{É EÞò{ɪÉÉ ºÉÆIÉä{É ¨ÉäÆ ¤ÉÉäʱÉB*
SHRI GEORGE FERNANDES: Sir, I am not entering into any controversy. I am referring to that name because I am trying to connect it.
¨ÉèÆxÉä <ºÉʱÉB =xÉEòÉ xÉÉ¨É Ê±ÉªÉÉ EªÉÉäÆÊEò ¸ÉÒ VÉä.BxÉ. nùÒÊIÉiÉ xÉä +E]õڤɮú Eòä ¨É½þÒxÉä ¨ÉäÆ ¡òÒ±b÷ ¨ÉɶÉÇ±É EòÊ®ú+{{ÉÉ ¨Éè¨ÉÉäÊ®úªÉ±É ±ÉèESÉ®ú ÊnùªÉÉ lÉÉ* ªÉÊnù =xÉEòä ±ÉèESÉ®ú EòÒ |ÉÊiɪÉÉÆ <ºÉ ºÉnùxÉ Eòä ºÉ¦ÉÒ ºÉnùºªÉÉäÆ Eòä ½þÉlÉ ¨ÉäÆ {ɽþÖÆSÉÉ nùÒ VÉÉBÆ iÉÉä =ºÉºÉä ¤Éc÷É ¡òɪÉnùÉ ½þÉäMÉÉ EªÉÉäÆÊEò =ºÉ ¨Éè¨ÉÉäÊ®úªÉ±É ±ÉäESÉ®ú EòÉ ¨ÉÖJªÉ ¨ÉiÉ±É¤É ªÉ½þÒ lÉÉ ÊEò nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ Eòä´É±É ºÉäxÉÉ ¤É±É, ½þÊlɪÉÉ®ú ¤É±É iÉEò ºÉÒʨÉiÉ xɽþÒÆ ½þè, nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ ¨ÉäÆ ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ EòÉ ¶ÉÉÊ¨É±É ½þÉäxÉÉ, ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ EòÉ ½þ®ú ºiÉ®ú {É®ú ºÉäxÉÉ Eòä ºÉÉlÉ, ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ ¤É±É Eòä ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ Eòä ºÉÉlÉ Ê®ú¶iÉÉ ¤ÉxÉÉB ®ú½þxÉÉ +iªÉɴɶªÉEò ½þè* ªÉ½þ =xÉEòÉ Eò½þxÉÉ ½þè +Éè®ú ´É½þ Eò½þxÉÉ ½þ¨É ¦ÉÒ ¨ÉÉxÉiÉä ½þèÆ*
¨ÉèÆxÉä =xÉEòÉ ¦ÉɹÉhÉ +¦ÉÒ-+¦ÉÒ {ÉgøÉ, VÉ¤É ªÉ½þ ºÉÉ®úÉ Ê´É´ÉÉnù ¶ÉÖ°ü ½þÖ+É iÉÉä ½þ¨ÉxÉä <vÉ®ú-=vÉ®ú EòÖUô +Éè®ú {ÉgøxÉä EòÒ EòÉäÊ¶É¶É EòÒ iÉÉä =xÉEòÉ ¦ÉɹÉhÉ ¨Éä®úä ½þÉlÉ ¨ÉäÆ +É MɪÉÉ*
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : I mentioned Shri J.N. Dixit's name in the context of the Joint Working Group, its details and not in the context of quoting him. It was specifically on the Working Group. Some of your statements had thrown, what it had achieved, in the dustbin.
SHRI GEORGE FERNANDES: That is right. I was reminded about him because I have got his lecture here.
+É{ÉEòÉ VÉÉä ´ÉEiÉ´ªÉ lÉÉ, =ºÉä ¨ÉèÆxÉä <ºÉʱÉB VÉÉäc÷É EªÉÉäÆÊEò +É{ÉxÉä V´ÉÉ<Æ]õ ´ÉÊEòÇÆMÉ OÉÖ{É ´ÉMÉè®ú½þ EòÒ VÉÉä ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ Uôäc÷ÒÆ, =ºÉºÉä VÉÖc÷Ò ½þÖ<Ç +xÉäEò ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ =x½þÉäÆxÉä +{ÉxÉä ¦ÉɹÉhÉ ¨ÉäÆ Eò½þÒÆ* ±ÉäÊEòxÉ =xÉEòä ¦ÉɹÉhÉ EòÉ ¨ÉÖJªÉ ±ÉIÉªÉ ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ +Éè®ú ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ ¤É±ÉÉäÆ EòÉ Ê®ú¶iÉÉ, nùںɮúÉ, ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ Eòä ¤ÉÒSÉ ¨ÉäÆ, nùä¶É Eòä ºÉɨÉxÉä ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ Eòä ¨ÉɨɱÉä ¨ÉäÆ VÉÉä SÉÖxÉÉèÊiɪÉÉÆ ½þèÆ, =xÉ SÉÖxÉÉèÊiɪÉÉäÆ EòÉä ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ iÉEò {ɽþÖÆSÉÉxÉÉ +Éè®ú =ºÉEòÒ +ɴɶªÉEòiÉÉ ½þè* ªÉä ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ =x½þÉäÆxÉä ®úJÉÒ ½þèÆ* ¨ÉèÆxÉä <ºÉʱÉB =xÉEòÉ =±±ÉäJÉ ªÉ½þÉÆ {É®ú ÊEòªÉÉ ½þè*
¨ÉèÆ VªÉÉnùÉ ºÉ¨ÉªÉ xɽþÒÆ ±ÉäxÉÉ SÉɽþiÉÉ* VÉÉä ¨ÉÉä]õÒ ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ ¨ÉäÆxÉä Eò½þxÉÒ lÉÒÆ, ´Éä Eò½þÒÆ ½þèÆ* xÉÒÊiÉ-ʴɹɪÉEò ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ |ÉvÉÉxɨÉÆjÉÒ VÉÒ ¤ÉiÉÉBÆMÉä, ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ¨ÉèÆ BEò +ÉÊJÉ®úÒ ´ÉÉEªÉ Eò½þxÉÉ SÉɽþÚÆMÉÉ* |ÉvÉÉxɨÉÆjÉÒ VÉÒ xÉä +{ÉxÉä ´ÉEiÉ´ªÉ ¨ÉäÆ ¸ÉÒ¨ÉiÉÒ <ÆÊnù®úÉ MÉÉÆvÉÒ uÉ®úÉ 5 +|Éè±É, 1968 EòÉä <ºÉÒ ºÉnùxÉ ¨ÉäÆ ½þÖ<Ç xÉÉìxÉ |ÉÉè±ÉÒ¡ò®úä¶ÉxÉ ]ÅÒ]õÒ {É®ú ¤É½þºÉ Eòä nù®ú¨ªÉÉxÉ Eò½þä MÉB BEò ´ÉÉEªÉ EòÉ =±±ÉäJÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½þè* ªÉ½þ {ÉÉÆSÉ xɨ¤É®ú {Éè®úÉOÉÉ¡ò ½þè*
"The Lok Sabha debated the issue, that is whether to sign NPT or not."
On 5th April l968 Prime Minister the late Shrimati Indira Gandhi assured the House: "We shall be guided entirely by self-enlightenment and the considerations of national security."
¨ÉèÆ <ºÉ ºÉnùxÉ EòÉä +Éè®ú nùä¶É EòÉä ªÉ½þÒ Eò½þxÉÉ SÉɽþiÉÉ ½þÚÆ ÊEò VÉ¤É +]õ±É VÉÒ EòÒ ºÉ®úEòÉ®ú xÉä, +]õ±É VÉÒ xÉä ªÉ½þ ÊxÉhÉÇªÉ Ê±ÉªÉÉ, iɤÉ
we were also guided entirely by our self-enlightenment and the considerations of national security and nothing else.
¸ÉÒ ¨ÉnùxÉ ±ÉÉ±É JÉÖ®úÉxÉÉ: ºÉ¦ÉÉ{ÉÊiÉ VÉÒ, VÉèºÉÉ ¨ÉèÆxÉä {ɽþ±Éä ¤ÉiÉɪÉÉ, ´ÉEiÉÉ+ÉäÆ EòÒ VÉÉä ºÉÚSÉÒ ½þè, =ºÉ¨ÉäÆ ½þ¨ÉÉ®úä nùÉä ¡òÉä¨ÉÇ®ú |ÉÉ<¨É ʨÉÊxɺ]õ®ú ¦ÉÒ ½þèÆ, ´Éä ¤ÉÉä±ÉxÉÉ SÉɽþiÉä ½þèÆ* EòÉÆOÉäºÉ Eòä ʨÉjÉ ¦ÉÒ ½þèÆ, ½þ¨ÉÉ®úä ªÉ½þÉÆ ºÉä, B±ÉÉ<WÉ ¨ÉäÆ ºÉä EòÖUô ±ÉÉäMÉ ¤ÉÉä±ÉxÉÉ SÉɽþiÉä ½þèÆ* ʱɺ]õ ±É¨¤ÉÒ ½þè, <ºÉʱÉB ¨Éä®úÉ ÊxÉ´ÉänùxÉ ªÉ½þ ½þè ÊEò BEò PÉÆ]õä Eòä ʱÉB ºÉnùxÉ EòÉ ºÉ¨ÉªÉ ¤ÉgøÉ ÊnùªÉÉ VÉɪÉä*
At the outset, our hearty congratulations to the scientists, engineers and the technologists who have shown their skills and have made the nation proud.
The achievement is the result of an encouragement that has been given to the scientists and the technologists by successive Governments over the decades. What has failed to impress any of us despite what has been said by certain friends on the other side is as to what is the credit that the Government is taking for ? The Government has come into power on the 19th of March and Dr. Abdul Kalam and Dr. Chidambaram both on the 14th of May have said in a Press Conference that they got the clearance on the 11th of April. What great things have been done by this Government within 22 days so that they could claim the credit? Sir, I come to the point.
SHRI VAIKO (SIVAKASI): The decision was taken.
SHRI P. SHIV SHANKER : The decision could be a misadventure also. I will come to that point slightly later.
18.17 hrs (Dr. Laxminarayan Pandey in the Chair)
So far as the substantial part of the scientific work is concerned, this Government can in no way take the credit. They have only taken the decision for the clearance and for that, they would like to have the credit. To me, it appears that so far as the threat perceptions are concerned which have been sought to be made out either in the letter of the Prime Minister to President Clinton or letter to the Heads of the Governments of G-8 countries, that threat perception either from Pakistan or from China does not seem to be either here or there. The situation that prevailed earlier to 19th of March prevailed even on the 11th of April. No new circumstances developed which should force this Government to take the decision and say that there is a threat perception from Pakistan and China. To me, it appears that this is a clear case of bravado approach on the part of the Government leading to misadventure, leading to untold consequences which might affect the socio-political economy of this country. While I will go into the details little later, it appears to me that this decision has been taken to silence the various allies of the Government who had been raising different issues from time to time and secondly, to divert the attention of the people of this country temporarily from the problems that beset them so that the entire nation is diverted towards a euphoria which this Government sought to create on the basis of the tests that have been carried out.
It has already been said that the Governments in the past have not given the clearance. They have referred to 1983 and 1995. I would not like to go into the reasons but certain obvious compelling reasons must have forced the Government of the day to take a decision not to go ahead with the test. Shri Deve Gowda who had written the letter immediately after the test to the Prime Minister has categorically said and I quote:
"I declined to give clearance for demonstrating India's nuclear capability not because of the adverse reaction from the international community but on account of my concern for improving the economic situation."
He was more concerned with the poverty of the people and he was more concerned to raise the standard of living of the people. He thought that it would be a case of misadventure at that time. He did not permit it because it had its own reactions and fallouts.
Where we find fault with the present Government in giving the clearance is firstly the clear lack of perception evolved before the test of the diverse fallouts that are possible in the wake of the test. Secondly, it is the manner in which those in the Government and the sister organisations of the Bharatiya Janata Party have tried to communalise the issue.
Thirdly, the irresponsible utterances on the part of various persons in the Government and outside leading to corrode the atmosphere in the region.
Fourthly, the lack of a substitute policy on the nuclear doctrine which we had been pursuing for a long time and without any substitute policy, a plunge has been taken, creating a chaotic situation which has a tremendous effect on the larger interest of the nation. When the question as to why the clearance was given to the test was posed, two personalities - one to the Political Advisor to the Prime Minister and the other was the first speaker on behalf of the Treasury Benches - they said: `you must first explain as to why you chose to go ahead with the test in 1974'. While certain answers have been given, I would like to make the position absolutely clear as I see it.
In 1971, Pakistan forced war on us. Bangladesh was created. After the creation of Bangladesh, we had gone for the Shimla Agreement. My friend, the first speaker from the Treasury Benches has said that notwithstanding the Shimla Agreement a lot of sabre-rattling was going on on the part of the Pakistani leaders which he himself tried to explain. We had Parliamentary elections. Then we also had Assembly elections in 1972.
At that time, we should not forget that when the war was going on, President Nixon had sent the Seventh Fleet into the Bangladesh waters only to threaten us or to show their power and to see that India gets afraid of that action. Under such circumstances, when the political leaders in Pakistan were taking the stance of sabre-rattling when President Nixon had shown his strength and tried to browbeat us by sending the Seventh Fleet into the Bangladesh waters, it was absolutely necessary and, in that background, we had made our position absolutely clear that the test was for peaceful purposes. Now, forgetting the part of `peaceful purposes', I take their argument that it was a similar test, that is, the one that was conducted on the 11th May as also on the 13th May. Taking that argument as true, in the background of what I have stated -- the manner in which the Pakistani leaders were behaving, as spoken to by the first speaker from the Treasury Benches, and also the manner in which President Nixon tried to show his strength and tried to browbeat our nation -- it was necessary that in self-respect we should show what we were capable of doing, and Shrimati Indira Gandhi asked the scientists to proceed ahead with the preparations for that. When our scientists were ready in 1974, a deliberate test was undertaken so as to show our capability to the entire nation and to tell the big power that tried to browbeat us in 1972 that they need not browbeat us and that we are also a power to be reckoned with.
But such a situation does not prevail now. What is the situation today? On the 11th May and 13th May, there was no such situation. What prevailed in March 1996 and 1997 prevailed on the 11th April also and, therefore, there was nothing new. That is why, I said that it was the indulgence of a bravado spirit or a total misadventure on the part of the Government which might place the nation in great jeopardy economically, socially and politically.
I would like to bring to your kind notice that the Government, in my view, has not taken any review before they came to this conclusion of giving clearance as to the military strategy that has got to be decided. The diplomatic offensive was absent and the economic fall out in any form was never taken into consideration. The United States of America, Germany and the Nordic countries like Denmark, Netherlands, Japan and U.K., have now come forth with sanctions. Yesterday, Russia had condemned the tests; they have been keeping quiet all along, but yesterday they came forth with this statement. What is the fall out of what I call our misadventure? The result of this fall out is that, as Shri Chandra Shekhar rightly pointed out, the value of our rupee has gone down. Already, it has crossed Rs. 41 per dollar. The inflation is rising and it has already crossed the figure of six points.
The exports are dwindling. This year it was said that it is only 2.6 per cent growth as compared to last year. The exports are already dwindling and the GDP growth is the least for the last five years.
Hon. friends must have read this morning in newspapers that the World Bank Agenda of power assistance of one billion dollars which was to be considered yesterday, has been postponed and the newspapers say that the postponement means postponement for ever.
A book has been published possibly under the directions of the Government by the Parliament Library. They have given us this book for reference. The Economic Times , New Delhi dated 15th May, 1998 categorically says that the fall out is not going to be a chicken feed. It is to the tune of 21 billion dollars. The sanctions etc., are going to affect the nation to the tune of 21 billion dollars.
Equally on the question of the sanctions by the United States, they have given a pitiable report. The Economic Times has gone on record to say that it might affect the entire economic system of our nation.
The various companies which are trying to work out their own schemes in this country may totally stop the flow of money.
Along with that, it has also been analysed beautifully in The Economic Times again on 19th May, 1998 that it will not only hit the rupee, but it will affect very badly the inflation and also the interest rates. Those details have been given that The Economic Times of 19th May, 1998 makes the analysis beautifully. (Interruptions) I have already said that. If you have not heard it, please hear me further.
If this is going to be the fall out econmically of the sanctions that have been imposed or that are continuing to be imposed, what happens to the masses of this country? What happens to their lives, the lives of the teeming millions? What happens to the socio-politico-economic lives of the people? It will be badly shattered. It will be tremendously affected. That is why, I said it appears to be a case of total misadventure which has been undertaken in a bravado spirit.
The manner in which this issue of test has been sought to be analysed is rather unfortunate. I have already said that it is more to silence the rumblings in the allies of the Government that this misadventure was undertaken. The BJP's partisan euphoria, as a result of which they unnecessarily try to hijack the credit of the country for the last four decades old programme and the manner in which their Party has tried to take advantage by saying that they celebrate it as a shourya Divas shows that not even their allies were taken into confidence. As Shri Chandra Shekhar has rightly said, the Chief Minister of Rajasthan has gone on record to say that the Pokhran soil would be taken and he would go ahead with a rath yatra and the soil would be deposited in all the principal townships of the country.
Is it not communalising the issue? A national issue is sought to be communalised. It is not only this. What about the VHP, the sister organisation of the BJP? This organisation has said that it will go ahead with a temple called the Shakti Peeth and for the consecration of such a temple, the waters would be carried from different religious places. Has anybody from the Government condemned this? That is where I said that the sister organisations are going ahead in such a manner that it will affect the national interests. This is where the whole thing is sought to be communalised. Shri Singhal, who happens to be a live-wire in the VHP, has gone on record in his Press Conference in Patna which has been extensively quoted and I am quoting it from the report:
The Vishwa Hindu Parishad Chief, Ashok Singhal, has described the recent nuclear tests by India as an emphatic assertion of Hindu pride and favoured constitutional amendment to declare India a Hindu nation."
Did anybody condemn this type of utterances? It has happened more than a week. This is the 24th of May, 1998 newspaper. These things are going on. The issue which is, in fact, a matter of national rejoicing, is being communalised. These are the instances that if you would like to communalise then, what is the fall-out of this? I have already said as to how the economic life is sought to be affected.
Now, the leaders are trying to communalise it. What happens to the other communities? Many a community will sulk back. It will de-energise or disappoint. Even a person like Dr. Abdul Kalam who is the live-wire in this whole testing; one of the greatest scientists we have been able to have. Nobody tries to say even a word about this type of misadventurous expressions which are coming from the sister organisations.
The Prime Minister in his letter to Mr. Clinton has categorically brought out that the threat is from China and Pakistan and has gone on record to say in his letter that the series of tests are limited in number and pose no danger to any country which has no inimical intentions towards India. He was trying to write a letter to Mr. Clinton. Obviously he wanted to give a certificate to the United States of America that we have no problems so far as that country is concerned. Equally, when the Prime Minister has been pleased to write the letter to the Heads of the G-8 countries. There also he said that India was surrounded by countries having nuclear weapons and the threat perception, he refers to, was from Pakistan and China.
I am not surprised about it. I will just read out a paragraph from the statement made by the Prime Minister today.
ºÉ¦ÉÉ{ÉÊiÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ : ¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ Ê¶É´É¶ÉÆEò®ú VÉÒ, ¨ÉèÆ +É{ÉEòÉä ®úÉäEò xɽþÒÆ ®ú½þÉ ½þÚÆ ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ªÉÉnù Ênù±ÉÉ ®ú½þÉ ½þÚÆ ÊEò +É{ÉEòä nù±É Eòä +Éè®ú ¦ÉÒ ºÉnùºªÉ ¤ÉÉä±ÉxÉä ´ÉɱÉä ½þèÆ*
¸ÉÒ {ÉÒ. Ê¶É´É ¶ÉÆEò®ú : ¨ÉèÆ ¤É½þÖiÉ VɱnùÒ +{ÉxÉÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ JÉi¨É Eò°üÆMÉÉ*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
The Prime Minister's statement says that these tests were not directed against any country. On the one side, you say that these tests are not directed against any country, on the other, you letters categorically say that there is threat perception from these countries and, therefore, Government had to proceed with the test. Which statement has to be accepted? The Prime Minister may have to steer the position clear as to what exactly is his intention. Why have they gone for the test?
As I said, if the threat perception was there, then what was there in 1996-97, that remained on the 11th of April, 1998 when Government gave the clearance. There is no deterioration in the situation so as to call for an immediate test. It is there where the explanation is needed. This Government has to explain only a small portion as to why they have taken a decision for the tests and the fall out thereof. Have they taken a clear perception as to what is going to be the fall out? What measures have they taken for the purpose of meeting out the situation economically, communally and socially? There is a social divide by virtue of the fact that it has been sought to be communalised. Then politically also, because of the communalisation of the situation, perceptions change. Therefore, what exact measures are sought to be taken and what exact measures were taken earlier? What was decided upon and how would you like to act upon are the issues that have to be explained to the nation so that the people are satisfied of your intentions being genuine.
[NEXT PAGE]
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
