MR. SPEAKER : Please conclude.SHRI ARIF MOHAMMAD KHAN (BAHRAICH): Kindly permit me to speak, Sir.
¨ÉèÆ VɱnùÒ ½þÒ EòxÉE±ÉÚb÷ Eò°üÆMÉÉ* BEò ´ªÉ´ÉºlÉÉ xÉä <ºÉ nùä¶É EòÉä Eò¨ÉVÉÉä®ú Eò®úEòä ®úJÉÉ ½þè* +MÉ®ú nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ EòÉä JÉiÉ®úÉ ½þè iÉÉä <ºÉ ´ªÉ´ÉºlÉÉ ºÉä ½þè* +MÉ®ú <ºÉ nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ EòÉä EòÉä<Ç JÉiÉ®úÉ ½þè iÉÉä =xÉ +ÉxnùÉä±ÉxÉÉäÆ ºÉä ½þè VÉÉä Ê´ÉPÉ]õxÉEòÉ®úÒ |É´ÞÉÊiiÉ Eòä ºÉÉlÉ Ê¨É±ÉEò®ú ¨ÉÆÊnù®ú ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä Eòä xÉÉ¨É {É®ú, Eò½þÒÆ ÊEòºÉÒ +Éè®ú xÉÉ¨É {É®ú <ºÉ nùä¶É ¨ÉäÆ +ÉxnùÉä±ÉxÉ SɱÉÉiÉä ½þèÆ*
uÉ®úÉ VÉÉ®úÒ
¸ÉÒ +ÉÊ®ú¢ò ¨ÉÉä½þ¨¨Énù JÉÉxÉ
cd
¨ÉèÆ +É{ÉEòä ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä ºÉ®úEòÉ®ú ºÉä VÉÉxÉxÉÉ SÉɽþÚÆMÉÉ ÊEò =ºÉ +Ænù°üxÉÒ Ê´ÉPÉ]õxÉ EòÉä ®úÉäEòxÉä Eòä ʱÉB, =ºÉ Eò¨ÉWÉÉä®úÒ EòÉä nùÚ®ú Eò®úxÉä Eòä ʱÉB <ºÉ ºÉ®úEòÉ®ú xÉä EªÉÉ Eònù¨É =`öÉB ½þèÆ? ¨ÉèÆ +É{ÉEòä ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä BEò ºÉÖZÉÉ´É nùäxÉÉ SÉɽþÚÆMÉÉ* MÞɽþ ¨ÉÆjÉÒ VÉÒ EòÒ ®úlÉ-ªÉÉjÉÉBÆ ÊxÉEòɱÉxÉä ¨ÉäÆ ¤É½þÖiÉ nùIÉiÉÉ ½þè* +É{É vªÉÉxÉ Eò®úäÆ iÉÉä +ªÉÉävªÉÉ EòÒ ®úlÉ-ªÉÉjÉÉ ÊxÉEòɱÉxÉÉ EòÉèxÉ ºÉÉ ¦ÉÉ®úÒ EòÉ¨É lÉÉ, ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ¨ÉÉxɺɮúÉä´É®ú iÉEò ®úlÉ-ªÉÉjÉÉ ±ÉäEò®ú SɱÉäÆ iÉÉä ¨ÉèÆ =xÉEòä ºÉÉlÉ ®úlÉ {É®ú ¤Éè`öÚÆMÉÉ* +MÉ®ú +É{É Ê½þ¨¨ÉiÉ xɽþÒÆ Eò®úiÉä iÉÉä +É{ÉEòä ¤ÉMÉ±É ¨ÉäÆ VÉÉä¶ÉÒ VÉÒ ¤Éè`öä ½þèÆ, ´É½þ Eò¨É ºÉä Eò¨É ZÉÆb÷É ¡ò½þ®úÉxÉä SɱÉäÆ* +ÉÊJÉ®úEòÉ®ú ¨ÉÉxɺɮúÉä´É®ú <ºÉ nùä¶É Eòä {ÉÊ´ÉjÉiÉ¨É ºlɱÉÉäÆ ¨ÉäÆ ºÉä BEò ½þè* nùä¶É Eòä Eò¤WÉä ¨ÉäÆ ½þè* EòɪÉnùä ¨ÉäÆ ¤ÉÉiÉ ªÉ½þ ½þè ÊEò ¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ +Éb÷´ÉÉhÉÒ VÉÒ EòÉä SɱÉxÉÉ SÉÉʽþB*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ Ê´ÉVÉªÉ MÉÉäªÉ±É (SÉÉÆnùxÉÒ SÉÉèEò): EªÉÉ ªÉä xªÉÚE±ÉҪɮú <¶ªÉÚ {É®ú ¤ÉÉä±É ®ú½þä ½þèÆ? ...
(´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
MR. SPEAKER: Please conclude.
SHRI ARIF MOHAMMAD KHAN (BAHRAICH): Sir, if they do not disturb me, I will conclude in five minutes. ... (
´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ ®úÉVÉ´ÉÒ®ú ʺÉƽþ (+ÉƴɱÉÉ): +É{É Ê´É¹ÉªÉ {É®ú ¤ÉÉäʱɪÉä*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ +ÉÊ®ú¡ò ¨ÉÉä½þ¨¨Énù JÉÉÆ (¤É½þ®úÉ<SÉ) : +vªÉIÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ, <x½þäÆ ¤ÉºÉ <iÉxÉÉ ¤ÉiÉÉ nùÒÊVÉB ÊEò ºÉnùxÉ EòÉ ºÉÆSÉɱÉxÉ ®úÉVÉ´ÉÒ®ú ʺÉƽþ xɽþÒÆ Eò®ú ®ú½þä ½þèÆ, ªÉ½þ +É{ÉEòÒ ÊWɨ¨ÉänùÉ®úÒ ½þè* ... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ ÊnùxɶÉÉ {É]õä±É (JÉäc÷É) : ªÉä +É{ÉEòÉä ªÉÉnù Ênù±ÉÉ ®ú½þä ½þèÆ VÉÉä +É{ÉxÉä ´ÉɪÉnùÉ ÊEòªÉÉ lÉÉ nùä¶É EòÒ VÉxÉiÉÉ ºÉä, ´É½þ iÉÉä {ÉÚ®úÉ Eò®ú ±ÉÒÊVÉB*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat.
¸ÉÒ +ÉÊ®ú¡ò ¨ÉÉä½þ¨¨Énù JÉÉÆ (¤É½þ®úÉ<SÉ) : ¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ +vªÉIÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ, ½þ¨ÉÉ®úä ºÉÉlÉÒ ºÉ¨ÉZÉiÉä ½þèÆ ÊEò ¶ÉɪÉnù nùä¶É EòÉä SɱÉÉxÉä EòÉ ¨ÉɨɱÉÉ ¦ÉÒ BäºÉä ½þè VÉèºÉä ÊEò +É{É ÊEòºÉÒ ºÉÚ¤Éä ¨ÉäÆ JÉÉEòÒ ÊxÉEò®ú {ɽþxÉÉEò®ú {É®úäb÷ Eò®úÉ nùÒÊVÉB* nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ Eòä ¨ÉɨɱÉä {É®ú VÉ¤É ½þ¨É SÉSÉÉÇ Eò®úäÆMÉä, iÉÉä ½þ¨ÉÉ®úä ºÉ¨ÉÉVÉ Eòä +Ænù®ú VÉÉä Eò¨ÉWÉÉäÊ®úªÉÉÆ ´ªÉÉ{iÉ ½þèÆ, =xÉ {É®ú vªÉÉxÉ nùäxÉÉ {Éc÷äMÉÉ ÊEò EòÉèxÉ ºÉÒ BäºÉÒ SÉÒVÉäÆ ½þèÆ VÉÉä ½þ¨ÉÉ®úä ºÉ¨ÉÉVÉ EòÉä Eò¨ÉWÉÉä®ú ¤ÉxÉÉiÉÒ ½þèÆ, EòÉèxÉ ºÉÒ SÉÒVÉäÆ BäºÉÒ ½þèÆ VÉÉä ½þ¨ÉäÆ ¨ÉWɤÉÚiÉ ¤ÉxÉxÉä ºÉä ®úÉäEòiÉÒ ½þèÆ*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
MR. SPEAKER: Please wind up.
SHRI ARIF MOHAMMAD KHAN (BAHRAICH): I will just take two minutes and I will conclude with it.
¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ ¤É®úxÉɱÉÉ ºÉɽþ¤É xÉä ¤É½þÖiÉ nùnùÇ Eòä ºÉÉlÉ {ÉÆVÉÉ¤É EòÒ PÉ]õxÉÉ+ÉäÆ EòÉ ÊWÉFò ÊEòªÉÉ* ¨ÉèÆ +É{ÉEòä ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä ¤É®úxÉɱÉÉ ºÉɽþ¤É ºÉä ºÉ´ÉÉ±É Eò®úiÉÉ ½þÚÆ ÊEò +MÉ®ú 1984 EòÒ EòÖUô PÉ]õxÉÉBÆ ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ Eòä Ênù±ÉÉäÆ ¨ÉäÆ <iÉxÉÒ ¤Éc÷Ò nù®úÉ®ú {ÉènùÉ Eò®ú ºÉEòiÉÒ ½þèÆ, VÉÉä ºÉ½þÒ lÉÉ, iÉÉä ¨ÉÖZÉä ¤ÉiÉÉ<B EªÉÉ <ºÉ nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ Eòä´É±É {É®ú¨ÉÉhÉÖ ¤É¨É ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä ºÉä ºÉÖÊxÉʶSÉiÉ ½þÉäMÉÒ?
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
|ÉÉä. |Éä¨É ʺÉƽþ SÉxnùÚ¨ÉÉVÉ®úÉ ({ÉÊ]õªÉɱÉÉ) : 1984 Eòä ¤ÉÉ®úä ¨ÉäÆ +É{ÉxÉä ¤ÉÉä±ÉÉ ½þè ÊEò ´É½þ ºÉ½þÒ lÉÉ =ºÉEòÉä WÉ®úÉ BäEºÉ{±ÉäxÉ Eò®ú nùäÆ* VÉÉä Eòi±Éä-+É¨É ½þÖ+É lÉÉ +Éè®ú ½þWÉÉ®úÉäÆ ±ÉÉäMÉ ¨ÉÉ®úä MÉB lÉä
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ +ÉÊ®ú¡ò ¨ÉÉä½þ¨¨Énù JÉÉÆ (¤É½þ®úÉ<SÉ) : ¨ÉèÆ iÉÉä +É{ÉEòÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ EòÉä +Éè®ú +É{ÉEòÒ ¦ÉÉ´ÉxÉÉ EòÉä ºÉ½þÒ Eò½þ ®ú½þÉ lÉÉ*
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
¸ÉÒ¨Éx, ¨ÉÖZÉä +{ÉxÉÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ JÉi¨É Eò®úxÉä nùäÆ, ¨ÉèÆxÉä |ÉÉèÊ¨ÉºÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½þè ÊEò ¨ÉèÆ nùÉä ʨÉxÉ]õ ¨ÉäÆ EòxÉE±ÉÚb÷ Eò®ú ®ú½þÉ ½þÚÆ*
SÉÚÆÊEò ¤É®úxÉɱÉÉ ºÉɽþ¤É ¦ÉÒ <ºÉ ºÉ®úEòÉ®ú Eòä BEò ¨É½þi´É{ÉÚhÉÇ +ÆMÉ ½þèÆ, =xɺÉä ¨Éä®úÉ ÊxÉ´ÉänùxÉ +Éè®ú +xÉÖ®úÉävÉ ½þè ÊEò WÉ®úÉ =xÉEòä Ênù±É EòÒ ½þɱÉiÉ {É®ú ¦ÉÒ MÉÉè®ú Eò®úäÆ ÊEò VɽþÉÆ ¦ÉÉ®úiÉÒªÉ VÉxÉiÉÉ {ÉÉ]õÒÇ Eòä ¤Éc÷ä-¤Éc÷ä xÉäiÉÉ ºÉɨÉxÉä JÉc÷ä ½þÖB lÉä +Éè®ú BEò <¤ÉÉnùiÉMÉɽþ EòÉä +ªÉÉävªÉÉ ¨ÉäÆ {ɱÉEò ZÉ{ÉEòiÉä ÊMÉ®úÉEò®ú iɽþºÉ-xɽþºÉ Eò®ú ÊnùªÉÉ MɪÉÉ
... (´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ)
=ºÉEòä ¤ÉÉ®úä ¨ÉäÆ ¨Éä®úÉ Eò½þxÉÉ ÊºÉ¡òÇ ªÉ½þ ½þè ÊEò +ÉVÉ EòÒ iÉÉ®úÒJÉ ¨ÉäÆ ¦ÉÒ ¨É®ú½þ¨É ±ÉMÉÉxÉä EòÉ EòÉä<Ç EòÉ¨É Eò®ú ÊnùªÉÉ VÉÉB iÉÉä ¶ÉɪÉnù <ºÉ nùä¶É ¨ÉäÆ VÉÉä +Ænù®ú EòÉ ¤ÉÆ]õ´ÉÉ®úÉ ½þè ´É½þ JÉi¨É ½þÉä VÉÉB*
¸ÉÒ +ÉÊ®ú¡ò ¨ÉÉè½þ¨¨Énù JÉÉxÉ VÉÉ®úÒ ´ÉèºÉä ¦ÉÒ xÉ ¦ÉÒ JÉi¨É ½þÉä iÉÉä ¦ÉÒ +MÉ®ú <ºÉ nùä¶É EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ EòÉä JÉiÉ®úÉ ½þÉäMÉÉ iÉÉä ¨ÉÖZÉä {ÉÚ®úÉ Ê´É¶´ÉÉºÉ ½þè ÊEò <ºÉ nùä¶É EòÉ BEò-BEò +Énù¨ÉÒ, ºÉÉ®úä nùä¶É´ÉɺÉÒ BEò ´ªÉÊEiÉ ¤ÉxÉEò®ú JÉc÷ä ½þÉä VÉɪÉäÆMÉä +Éè®ú =ºÉ JÉiÉ®úä EòÉ EòɨɪÉɤÉÒ ºÉä ¨ÉÖEòɤɱÉÉ Eò®úäÆMÉä* vÉxªÉ´ÉÉnù*
(<ÊiÉ)
SHRI PRAKASH YASHWANT AMBEDKAR (AKOLA): Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would not like to go into the post mortem of the explosion. But, I think, we have to look at a situation which is going to develop after the explosions have taken place both in India and Pakistan. What worries me is the situation that we faced in some parts of the country, basically in the North-Eastern States. We have made China a target. We have also made Pakistan a target. We have said that there is an internal and external security problem with us. I think, this explanation given by the Prime Minister is unsuitable and unconvinceable. Even last time, when they were in power for 13 days, they had made efforts to go in for nuclear explosions. Had they been in power for two more days, I think, we would have had an explosion during that period itself. Whatever has been projected today as a security angle, I think, does not have any relevance. But the basic relevance, which I come to, is a theory that is being followed by the RSS.
If you look at a map published in 1950, there was an agreement between Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and the then RSS President that they will be released on the 26 January, 1950. Everybody was released. A book was released at that time. Even the map of the world was published in that book. In that book, the name of Pakistan was missing. The border of India was shown to be touching Afghanistan.
May I know from the Prime Minister about it? Everybody has said that when he was in China in 1979, he made efforts to normalise the relations. Yes, he made the efforts. But at the same time, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee had to leave China because China had declared a war on some other country. May I know from the hon. Prime Minister that when you are looking at China or when you are looking at Pakistan, why are you making China a target? Is it a sort of personal revenge? If that is so, then, I have my own doubts as to what we are going to achieve. The whole international scenario is going to change now. As soon as India has exploded and Pakistan has also exploded, there are nations in the world which are going to the same path. A new situation which is going to arise again, the NPT and even the CTBT will have no relevance as such in that situation. How do we look at the things?
Then, I would like to know from the Prime Minister that Pakistan has already declared that it is an Islamic bomb and we know from the reports that have emanated not only today but also for the last many years that the Gulf countries have been making an effort to develop a nuclear weapon in that part of the country. After the trend of the cold war, new theories have been circulated. The theories that have been circulated are that if there is a world war, it might be one on an issue of water or it might be on an issue of civilisation.
Sir, the opening speaker from the ruling side, Shri Jagmohan referred to civilization. I do not know what he means by civilization in this country. It is because we have many civilizations in this country and many things of civilizations.
What is the thinking of the RSS? I do not know whether they are thinking in terms of a Muslim civilization war or a Hindu civilization war. This is a point on which I would like to seek a clarification from the hon. Prime Minister.
Sir, the information that I have been getting is very disturbing. I would like to know categorically from the hon. Prime Minister whether the Government is planning for a war some times in the month of June or July. If that is so, then let me point out that today the situation in the North-Eastern region is such that the petroleum products which are to be stocked for a period of four months - because one cannot go to the North-Eastern region during the rainy season - have not even reached the North-Eastern region. If the Government is thinking in terms of any adventurous theory then let me point out that - from the other side, the country which has been identified as the first enemy by your Government - the things would go to the waters that we have created; it would go to the ponds that we have created.
The Government have never got culturally united with the people of the North-Eastern States. The Government have neglected the region. The Government have left out a tiger. Only, time will tell whether it is going to have teeth or it is not going to have teeth. It is because, along the borders we are surrounded by unfriendly countries.
Sir, I would like to submit that the Government have started one thing as a nation and we have to be with the Government. We cannot speak in a different voice. But let me also request the hon. Prime Minister that irrespective of whatever internal differences that we have in this country, please show political statesmanship and try to settle them at a political level and then speak in one voice.
(ends)
SHRI G.M. BANATWALLA (PONNANI): Sir, the Prime Minister was kind enough to invite me to meet him earlier. At that time, I had given him our statement. Today, I have only one or two more points to add to it.
Sir, Pakistan has detonated its nuclear devices. The entire world failed to dissuade Pakistan from doing so. This is a dangerous situation. I only hope that it does not lead to any race for nuclear weapons. Happily, our Prime Minister has said in his own statement and I quote:
"We do not intend to engage in arms race".
Sir, I want to empahsise that this clear statement deserves due consideration and respect from the entire world including China and Pakistan. Perhaps, we have still to convince the world, including Pakistan and China, that we do not want any war. We are committed to global peace.
Yes, we had our own nuclear tests. We congratulate the scientists and all others for the successful completion of those tests and for bringing glory to the nation. We also congratulate the Government for having given the green signal, the `go ahead' to the scientists to bring this glory to our nation. But it must be understood that the goal of our nuclear policy is to be able to prevail upon the nuclear powers to correct their flawed thinking with respect to having a non-nuclear world.
That remains and that has always been the nuclear policy that we have followed.
The Prime Minister has put forward several proposals for the world and even for Pakistan. Pakistan has also proposed negotiations and talks. It is for the Prime Minister to react to it.
I would be failing in my duty if I do not take strong exceptions to and express my deep indignation at the total and utter mishandling of the post-Pokhran-II scenario. Time does not permit me to go into the details with respect to them but then it was shocking to find in the post-Pokhran-II scenario, the Government speaking with different voices. Somebody pointed out unnecessarily at China and other pointed out unnecessarily at Pakistan when the goals of our nuclear policy, as I have stated earlier, are for a global peace through nuclear control. It was sought to politicize and even communalise the achievement through talks about a temple at Pokhran. I do not want to go into the details of that. There were attempts to pat on the back, have party celebrations for political exploitation of the glorious achievement of our scientists and ignoring the contributions of the successive Governments since Independence. It is a fact. Pokhran-II would not have been possible without Pokhran-I. Pokhran-II would not have been possible without the nuclear policies successively followed by all the Governments since the Independence. Shocking it was that intoxicated with the achievement, even responsible Ministers of the Government indulge into reckless and provocative statements. One Minister even challenged Pakistan to select the venue, day, time and everything for the fourth war. He used a language that may suit a professional wrestler but not a responsible politician or a Minister of a country that claims to be now a nuclear power.
Sir, I must submit that I am afraid that the Pakistan's nuclear tests are a reaction to the utter mishandling of the post-Pokhran-II scenario and the Government is speaking in different languages, in different voices.
I would now conclude with only one point. The hon. Prime Minister has stressed upon a policy of consensus. Beautifully the Prime Minister has said and I quote: "It is vital to maintain the consensus as we approach the next millennium". It is a beautiful language, well put and well expressed sentiments. I must appreciate and welcome these sentiments. But then, Sir, has the policy of consensus really been pursued? That is the question. I do not know. You can enlighten me whether the offer about moratorium on further explosions which closes our nuclear options, was based on any consensus or not? I do not know. Yesterday, the Prime Minister even said, "we will have to review this offer of moratorium on our further nuclear tests".
I do not know whether there was any consensus. I must, therefore, emphasise that when we state that we follow a policy of consensus, we must really be true both to our words and to our actions and not have a unilateral closure of options that may be available.
There is the question of sanctions, I do not want to say much, from some of the protesting nuclear powers. I only want to say that we need not panic. The situation is there. But if any situation of any type whatsoever is forced upon the country, Insha Allah!, the country and its people will stand firm with determination, with faith and with iron unity - let there be no mistake about that. That is with respect to any situation - economic situation is also there. But let us know, if you have any blueprint of any strategy that needs to be followed and our cooperation will always be there.
But then, I conclude by saying that really a policy of consensus should be followed and it is only through this policy that the country will be able to stand united and will be able to face any challenge that may come before us.
Thank you.
(ends)
SHRI PRAMOTHES MUKHERJEE (BERHAMPORE) (WB): Thank you, Sir, for the opportunity given to me to express our view on the Prime Minister's suo motu statement on the nuclear tests in Pokhran range.
This is a very important debate which is initiated by our senior-most leader Shri Indrajit Gupta as mover of the Motion on Prime Minister's statement in respect of nuclear tests in Pokhran range. Sir, I have heard many valuable speeches on the topic and I shall be very brief on my legs to express my views on this topic in such a grave situation.
Before I enter into the depths of the national security calculus, I should express my thanks and gratitude; I should express my warm greetings and ovation and congratulations to the Indian scientists and engineers who have successfully conducted the nuclear tests in Pokhran range. I express my congratulations specially to Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Dr. Santhanam, Dr. Chidambaram and other scientists. It is really an endowment to the nation by Indian scientists and engineers.
Whether there was any threat from Pakistan or from China is a lost question today when Pakistan had successfully conducted nuclear tests in Baluch hilly region. The area of tension, the area of conflict, has been increased after the nuclear tests in Pokhran which is followed by the nuclear tests in Baluch hilly region. This is a preparation not for proxy war, but war directly. The whole Indo-Pak subcontinent has been turned into a war zone and the preparation for war material is going on. This is not good for the mankind living in this subcontinent.
I was listening yesterday, to the speech made by our hon. Home Minister Shri L.K. Advani. That was a very eloquent speech just to rouse the patriotism in defence of national sublimity or in the name of national security question.
We are united. We stand for the defence of India's national sovereignty and security. Definitely, we are united.
I wish to remind a very simple proposition. Emotion is good, but the reason is better. The patriotism is good, love for the country is good, but love for peace, love for world peace and love for the mankind is better.
With your kind permission, I wish to refer to an incident: What is the message of Pokhran issue today? The message of nuclear tests in Pokhran region is very simple. India is now a nuclear weapon State. The hon. Prime Minister I have the highest regards for him - has claimed that India can now enter into the Nuclear Club as the sixth member. Today, Pakistan can also claim that they can enter into the Nuclear Club as the seventh member. This is the arms race. This is the arms competition which is going on.
With your kind permission, I quote from our famous poet, Annada Shankar Roy, a famous name in Bengali literature, a great personality and a great poet of Calcutta. He has termed the Nuclear Club as a Suicide Club and that has published in many papers. There was a Suicide Club in France. In France, Lords and Aristocrats joined such a Suicide Club to commit suicide in a hilarious laughter and that was their bliss. Today, the nuclear weapon States joined the Nuclear Club to commit suicide in hilarious laughter in respect of their peoples.
Sir, to prepare for the nuclear tests or to join the nuclear club does not add to the glory of the Indian tradition and culture. It is a complete departure from the principles of non-alignment, from the principle of nuclear disarmament. It is a complete departure. It is our opinion.
MR. SPEAKER: Please conclude.
SHRI PRAMOTHES MUKHERJEE (BERHAMPORE) (WB): It is the opinion of many eminent persons that nuclear weapon alone cannot save the country from the crisis. What does the fall of the Soviet Russia indicate? That was a mighty State; that was a powerful nuclear weapon State. Why does it fall? Why does it disintegrate in spite of having so many nuclear weapons in its arsenal? This disintegration of Soviet Russia indicates that the people of Russia have no sympathy for the nuclear policy of the Government of Russia. What is the chief component of the national security calculus? Can a man be secure with a revolver? A man goes to sleep with the revolver beneath the pillow. Does it indicate the best structure of that man? A man sleeping in the kingdom of fire arms with only a revolver beneath the pillow is not the security given to him. It is my opinion and I express my opinion that the national security is impossible without the economic security of the people.
[NEXT PAGE]
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
