NDTV Correspondent
Saturday, March 1, 2008 (New Delhi)
The Bhartiya Janata Party has reacted strongly to former US deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott's remarks that the saffron party, which now opposes the Indo-US nuke deal, was ready to settle for much less when in power.
BJP hit back accusing the former American diplomat of being ignorant.
Strobe Talbott is best known in India for conducting a two-year long marathon dialogue with Jaswant Singh after India's nuclear tests at Pokhran in 1998. He is a strong voice in America's small but powerful non-proliferation lobby.
The comment also comes just a few days after L K Advani met the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and told him the BJP opposed the deal because of proposed curbs on India's nuclear automony.
In an interview with Shekhar Gupta, He said that even though there are reservations about the deal, India should not waste any more time in finalising it as a new administration post-November might not be as willing to push it through.
''No, no, no. That's not the case. It's inherently complicated but let me just say this, you are of course pointing out the obvious, that is, that the Clinton administration negotiated with the BJP-led government on the nuclear issue and that knowing what the goals of my Indian interlocutors at work at that time and seeing how those goals compare with the current Indian govt has gotten out of President Bush by way of the civil nuclear deal, I can't understand how is that the BJP could oppose the deal as strongly as it obviously does. I have chance before I leave to get a first hand impression of that,'' said Strobe Talbott.
Shekhar Gupta: Strobe, you have been a journalist of a much higher stature than most of us, so you knew that I wanted the answer out of you.
Strobe Talbott: Well, I also know what the answer, the answer to my own question - politics is politics.
Shekhar Gupta: So, let me rephrase my question, the experience you had dealing with the NDA in terms of what they had set out achieve with you in terms of India's nuclear interest. At that point was the bar set higher than what the nuclear deal shows or was it set lower?
Strobe Talbott: By the US side?
Shekhar Gupta: By the NDA? Would they have settled for less than what this nuclear deal gives India?
Strobe Talbott: This is it, you are asking me what historians call a counter factual questions, what might have been? I think half the Clinton administration, been prepared to offer the BJP led government that we were dealing with, the deal that President Bush was willing to make with Manmohan Singh and company. The Indian side would have gone for it. They also would have been astonished given what they knew about our position on all the issues involved.
What the BJP is opposing now is the curbs to India's nuclear independence. The BJP, during its regime, had not concluded any agreement. Even if it was willing to settle for less than what India is being offered now, BJP would not have allowed that "less" to impinge on India's nuclear independence, as the Congress government appears to be doing so with a "more" agreement.
Saturday, March 1, 2008 (New Delhi)
The Bhartiya Janata Party has reacted strongly to former US deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott's remarks that the saffron party, which now opposes the Indo-US nuke deal, was ready to settle for much less when in power.
BJP hit back accusing the former American diplomat of being ignorant.
Strobe Talbott is best known in India for conducting a two-year long marathon dialogue with Jaswant Singh after India's nuclear tests at Pokhran in 1998. He is a strong voice in America's small but powerful non-proliferation lobby.
The comment also comes just a few days after L K Advani met the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and told him the BJP opposed the deal because of proposed curbs on India's nuclear automony.
In an interview with Shekhar Gupta, He said that even though there are reservations about the deal, India should not waste any more time in finalising it as a new administration post-November might not be as willing to push it through.
''No, no, no. That's not the case. It's inherently complicated but let me just say this, you are of course pointing out the obvious, that is, that the Clinton administration negotiated with the BJP-led government on the nuclear issue and that knowing what the goals of my Indian interlocutors at work at that time and seeing how those goals compare with the current Indian govt has gotten out of President Bush by way of the civil nuclear deal, I can't understand how is that the BJP could oppose the deal as strongly as it obviously does. I have chance before I leave to get a first hand impression of that,'' said Strobe Talbott.
Shekhar Gupta: Strobe, you have been a journalist of a much higher stature than most of us, so you knew that I wanted the answer out of you.
Strobe Talbott: Well, I also know what the answer, the answer to my own question - politics is politics.
Shekhar Gupta: So, let me rephrase my question, the experience you had dealing with the NDA in terms of what they had set out achieve with you in terms of India's nuclear interest. At that point was the bar set higher than what the nuclear deal shows or was it set lower?
Strobe Talbott: By the US side?
Shekhar Gupta: By the NDA? Would they have settled for less than what this nuclear deal gives India?
Strobe Talbott: This is it, you are asking me what historians call a counter factual questions, what might have been? I think half the Clinton administration, been prepared to offer the BJP led government that we were dealing with, the deal that President Bush was willing to make with Manmohan Singh and company. The Indian side would have gone for it. They also would have been astonished given what they knew about our position on all the issues involved.
What the BJP is opposing now is the curbs to India's nuclear independence. The BJP, during its regime, had not concluded any agreement. Even if it was willing to settle for less than what India is being offered now, BJP would not have allowed that "less" to impinge on India's nuclear independence, as the Congress government appears to be doing so with a "more" agreement.
No comments:
Post a Comment