Accepting America146;s nuclear hegemony

Since it8217;s Christmas season, one is reminded of the saying from the Sermon on the Mount: 8220;Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.8221; It implies that the poor and the marginalised who find themselves on the wrong end of unjust power structures are rewarded by a power higher than the superpowers of this world.

Sadly, this is not a good time for Indians to ponder over lofty issues such as the struggle for a 8220;just and equitable world order8221;.

For last week, when Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh hailed the US Congress legislation, called the Hyde Act, as a big step toward concluding the Indo-US nuclear deal, he demonstrated his willingness to accept an unequal relationship with the world8217;s sole, albeit waning, superpower.

Every previous prime minister, since Indira Gandhi, had rejected the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as discriminatory. Now, the deal is all set to allow America to force NPT on India. Bizarrely, its apologists are claiming the deal will end nuclear 8220;apartheid8221; for India. Nelson Mandela must be wondering: Since when has India accepted this narrow, self-serving and corrupt meaning of the term end of apartheid?

He must also be wondering how, for example, can those who imposed an unfair treaty like NPT on the world be congratulated by a self-respecting nation like India, when all that India has been given is an ordinary chair that is permanently placed behind the Five Nuclear Brahmins 8212; the US, Russia, China, Britain and France 8212; who have arrogated, exclusively to themselves, the royal chairs at the global high table?

And he must be wondering, can the land of his guru, Mahatma Gandhi, who always spoke of universal principles, consider the Indo-US deal to be the end of nuclear 8220;apartheid8221; when India alone, of all the remaining 223 8220;pariah8221; countries in the world, has been given some crumbs, that too with controls attached, by the superpower?

I am sorry that, to the lay reader, this short column cannot quite explain how the Hyde Act entraps India into an unequal world order. Many of the issues involved are technical and the media, barring a few newspapers, have not done a good job of educating the public about what is at stake for India and the world.

For a proper comprehension of this subject, discerning readers should take the trouble of reading the excellent articles by Arun Shourie, Prakash Karat one of the rare and happy instances when the BJP and CPM have publicly aired convergent views on an important national issue, Brahma Chellaney and other unbiased experts.

Or, they should refer to the statements issued by a group of eminent nuclear scientists 8212; the likes of Homi Sethna, P.K. Iyengar and other architects of India8217;s self-reliant nuclear programme 8212; who have cautioned the Prime Minister against signing the deal within the coercive framework of the Hyde Act.

Ordinary Indians may not grasp the complexities of the nuclear jargon, but they surely understand the meaning of 8220;freedom8221;, 8220;discrimination8221; and 8220;national pride8221;. Pose the following questions, and they know the right answers:

8226; Do the US and other four officially recognised nuclear weapon states, who have not even lifted their little fingers so far to fulfill their obligation under the NPT to eliminate their huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons, 27,000 warheads at the last count, have any right to preach non-proliferation to India and other countries?

8226; Why hasn8217;t Singh, in his many interactions with President Bush, even once asked what Washington has done 8212; or proposes to do 8212; in discharge of its disarmament duty?

The UPA8217;s Common Minimum Programme specifically mandates Singh8217;s government to 8220;take a leadership role in promoting universal, nuclear disarmament8221;. Far from taking a leadership role, it has accepted America8217;s hegemony in perpetuating a discriminatory order based on five nuclear 8220;haves8221;, who are accountable to none, and the remaining nuclear 8220;have-nots8221;, who must bear all the responsibility for nuclear non-proliferation.

Another question. Should India mortgage its sovereign right to conduct future nuclear tests, even when required for our national defense, for the fear that Washington could terminate all civil nuclear energy cooperation with us? Especially when America accepts no such restriction on its own right to conduct new tests?

Three words capture Washington8217;s objective as far as the nuclear deal is concerned: In return for some tightly controlled and easily reversible nuclear energy cooperation remember Tarapur?, America wants to 8220;cap8221;, 8220;roll-back8221; and ultimately 8220;eliminate8221; India8217;s nuclear weapons capability. The moot question is: Should we allow an Indian government to assist Washington in realising this objective?