its not truth.Its twisted facts.Originally Posted by melb4aust
its not truth.Its twisted facts.Originally Posted by melb4aust
Of course for an indian its Twisted Facts....but for the Human Race its the Truth...Originally Posted by Bull
Natwar, Sinha, Digvijay and Yechury push ‘no’ to N-deal
- By Seema Mustafa
New Delhi, July 24: Rajya Sabha members K. Natwar Singh (Congress), Yashwant Sinha (BJP), Digvijay Singh (JD-U) — all three former Union ministers — and Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) have urged the Chairman, Mr Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, to accept a resolution expressing the "sense of the House" that the country should reject the India-US civilian nuclear deal or any such agreement that seeks to constrain India’s development of a self-reliant nuclear programme and compromise its foreign policy.
The issue was taken up by the members, cutting across party lines, at a meeting of the business advisory committee of the Rajya Sabha on Monday. Earlier the members, except Mr Yechury who had a prior commitment, called on Mr Shekhawat at his residence to urge him to allow the introduction of a resolution in the Rajya Sabha rejecting the conditionalities imposed on India. Under the rules, the government has to agree to such a resolution before it can be introduced. At the meeting, the government tried to find a way out by suggesting that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh could give a suo moto statement addressing members’ concerns if they so wanted.
This was not accepted by the members, who pointed out that the Prime Minister had made similar suo moto statements in the past, to no effect. The need now was for a resolution of Parliament, in the same vein as earlier resolutions on Iraq. Mr Digvijay Singh, a former minister of state for external affairs, pointed out that Parliament had adopted resolutions against the Iraq war in 1991 and again in 2003 when the NDA government was in power. He said that then "we were not very keen to agree to a resolution, but when we saw that this was the wish of the majority of members we consented and the resolution was introduced and passed." He said that the members now expected the UPA government to do the same, and respect the will of Parliament.
A resolution of Parliament has to be backed by the government. It can be introduced in either House and, as the members said, once the government knows that this is what the House wants it is really left with little choice but to agree. The proposed resolution on the nuclear deal, as placed before the members of the business advisory committee, refers specifically to the two draft bills cleared by the foreign relations committees of the US Senate and House of Representatives. It takes careful note of the contents of the sense of [the US] Congress, as expressed in the bills, and expresses its disappointment and determination to reject the conditionalities imposed on India by US legislators.
The draft resolution, as framed by the Rajya Sabha MPs, also states that no agreement can be accepted that does not recognise India’s development of a self-reliant nuclear programme and its commitment to an independent foreign policy. The resolution takes exception to the authority proposed to be given to the US President to certify the status of the Indian nuclear programme every year to the US Congress, with the MPs pointing out that this was "synonymous to holding India hostage in perpetuity."
The loud outcry from the nuclear and scientific community in the country after the deal was signed by the Prime Minister and the US President, and more so after the two draft bills were cleared by the US congressional committees, has made Indian parliamentarians stop and think. The NDA approached President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam to place on record its complete rejection of the deal. The CPI(M) placed its strong opposition and reservations on record on the eve of the Parliament session. CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat made it clear that the Left would work with all other political parties to express a "sense of Parliament" that the deal in its present form was not acceptable.
The Congress Party is represented by former external affairs minister Natwar Singh, who is one of the senior Rajya Sabha members supporting the proposed resolution. The government, sources said, was now in a fix as it cannot ignore both the NDA and the CPI(M) simultaneously without serious consequences in Parliament. There is a clear division within the Congress Party as well on this deal, with several MPs having voiced their criticism in off-the-record sessions with journalists.
U.S. is not alone in producing and exporting weapons. Venezuala has just purchased $1billion of russian arms becaue U.S. banned its companies from selling. Preventing exports only harms U.S. producers, employees and govt. (from lost tax receipts).Originally Posted by Jana
That is why U.S. is keen on increasing military exports to India and Pak.
Vande Mataram....!!!:thumbsup:Originally Posted by Samudra
Indian papers say there is still some distance to go
The Indian media has expressed cautious optimism over the proposed nuclear deal with the US after the US House of Representatives voted in its favour.
Thursday's vote approved an agreement to share civilian nuclear technology with India.
The legislation must now be approved by the US Senate before being signed into law by President George W Bush.
The deal offers US nuclear technology to energy-hungry India in exchange for access to ndian civilian reactors.
Critics say the deal will hurt efforts to control nuclear arms, as the Indian government refuses to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"The deal still has some way to go, even after a positive Senate vote "
The Indian Express
The Indian Express was cautiously optimistic about the deal coming through.
"The vote reflects the new bipartisan consensus in the US in favour of a deeper relationship with India and sets the tone for the more demanding debate in the Senate, the upper house of the US Congress," the newspaper said in an editorial headlined "House warming".
The newspaper cautioned the nuclear deal still "has some way to go, even after a positive Senate vote".
"The two houses will reconcile the two versions of the legislation they passed. Only then can the US president sign it into a new law."
The newspaper added: "India has some problems with the language in the Senate version and these have been conveyed to the Bush administration at the highest levels in recent weeks."
'Test of diligence'
"Another victory, deal on the right track," headlined Hindustan Times.
"The impressive passage [of the bill], however, was not without some anxious moments as two of the amendments and a motion to insert an Iranian dimension managed to garner an unexpectedly large chunk of votes," the newspaper reported.
'It's A Deal," headlined The Economic Times.
Energy-hungry India needs nuclear power
The newspaper said the deal was a "test of India's diligence".
"..as the language [of the agreement] keeps shifting, particularly in seemingly minor details, a great deal of diligence will be required in deciding what is consistent with the original agreement and what is not," it said in an editorial.
The newspaper said that what happens to the deal will test the "maturity of the Indian politician class".
"Any international agreement does involve a process of give and take. It is the political community that must decide whether the final bargain is a fair one".
"Full House for nuclear pact," headlined The Times of India.
The newspaper said India has been restrained in welcoming the result of the vote.
"The prime minister's restraint may appear justified because of the unrelenting resistance to the deal" from the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led alliance and the Communists.
The Tribune said the "Americans... know well that India cannot agree to anything that goes to dilute what is contained in the basic document, aimed at opening the doors of international nuclear trade for Delhi".
"Hopefully, the US will respect India's concerns. It should avoid the inclusion of embarrassing clauses which India cannot accept," the newspaper said in an editorial.
The Telegraph said the debate preceding the vote "demonstrated the networking and deals engaged in by the Indian lobbyists here and the Indian American community - with the Indian embassy quietly working in the background - with US lawmakers and political pressure groups." "Observers who watched the debate said it was only second to similar efforts by America's powerful Jewish community."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)