PM draws line: Iran’s rights vs India’s security

Without making any direct reference to Pakistan or the A Q Khan network, the Prime Minister made it clear that their suspected role in Iran’s clandestine nuclear programme was of particular concern to India.

Citing the IAEA Director General’s report, Singh said there remain ‘‘many unresolved questions on key issues,’’ including the use of centrifuges imported from third countries, and designs relating to fabrication of metallic hemispheres.

“Hon’ble Members are aware,” the PM went on to say, “that the source of such clandestine proliferation of sensitive technologies lies in our own neighbourhood, details of which have emerged from successive IAEA reports. This august House will agree that India cannot afford to turn a blind eye to security implications of such proliferation activities.’’

The Prime Minister’s suo motu statement sought to strike a balance between India’s ‘‘traditionally close and friendly relations’’ with Iran and India’s concern over its nuclear proliferation.

At the same time, the Prime Minister repeatedly stressed the importance he ascribed to cooperation with Iran, the importance of India’s fraternal ties, “respect and admiration” for Iranians that ‘‘go back several millenia,’’ adding that ‘‘ we have every intention of ensuring that no shadow is cast on these bonds.’’

In this context, he reiterated India’s commitment to the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline adding a cautionary note: “The economics of this project is currently under professional investigation by internationally reputed consultants.’’

Defining the relationship with Iran as one that spans both “bilateral and multilateral” aspects, he gave a detailed background of Iran’s nuclear programme and India’s position on it.

Certainly, Iran, as a signatory to the NPT, Singh said, “has the legal right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear energy consistent with its international commitments and obligations.” But it is incumbent upon Iran, he said, “to exercise these rights in the context of safeguards that it has voluntarily accepted upon its nuclear programme under the IAEA.’’ Following questions raised by the IAEA, in November 2004, Iran agreed with the EU-3 (France, Germany and UK) to voluntarily suspend all enrichment and reprocessing activities until questions relating to its past nuclear activities were clarified. ‘‘However, since August last year, Iran has renewed production of uranium hexafluoride and thereafter, has resumed uranium enrichment.’’

After expressing concern over Iran’s suspected proliferation activities, the PM said India’s approach ‘‘has been consistently in favour of promoting all efforts to find a solution, based on acceptable mutual compromises, in which Iran’s interests and the concerns of the international community would be addressed. We have consistently worked to promote a consensus in the IAEA towards this end.’’

It was only on two occasions—in September and earlier this month—that the IAEA resolution had not been a consensus one and a vote was necessary. ‘‘Despite that, in the latest vote this month, the Resolution not only had the support of all P-5 countries, including Russia and China, but also of important NAM and developing countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Ghana, Singapore, Yemen and Sri Lanka.’’ The listing of nations that voted against Iran was clearly aimed at refuting the Left’s rhetoric that India had abandoned its non-aligned principles under US pressure and to make the point that India had in fact acted in consonance with a much wider international consensus.

Stressing the need for ‘‘continued diplomatic efforts’’ to resolve the issue, the Prime Minister said, ‘‘I would like to reiterate our unshakable conviction that such a sensitive issue, which concerns the rights and international obligations of a sovereign nation and a proud people can only be addressed through calm, reasoned diplomacy and the willingness on all sides to eschew confrontation and seek acceptable compromise solutions.’’

That is why, India was ‘‘deeply concerned by escalating rhetoric and growing tensions and the possibility of a confrontation over this issue’’—particularly since tensions in the region ‘‘where our vital political, economic and security interests are involved affects us directly.’’ The region, he added, hosts 3.5 million Indian citizens ‘‘whose welfare is a major concern of my government.’’

Calling upon all concerned ‘‘to exercise restraint, demonstrate flexibility and continue with dialogue,’’ to reach an amicable solution, the Prime Minister said India would draw upon ‘‘our friendly relations with all the key countries involved’’ to support these diplomatic efforts in the months to come.