'PM provoked Left by calling Atal Bhishm'

THE DEAL MAKER: The PM is the Government as far as the nuclear deal is concerned, says Bardhan.

          

Other stories in the section:

Nuclear family UNPA tells PM to explain N-deal

Amar Singh did not rule out an alliance with Congress after the UNPA meeting.

• Railway official throws boy off train for Rs 50

Featured Blog

Geetika Pokhriyal

The Big O of America

Featured Slideshows

How determined is the Left to oppose the Indo-US nuclear deal? Karan Thapar explores that key issue with the General Secretary of the Communist Party of India, A B Bardhan.

Karan Thapar: Mr Bardhan, in your letter to the Prime Minister of India on Friday – ‘If the Government goes ahead with the nuclear deal, we will be left with no other option than to withdraw support to the Government’ – do you mean that or is it just bluster?

A B Bardhan: We mean it. We don’t indulge in bluff and bluster, you see. I don’t think that is good politics. And the Prime Minister knows it. In that letter I have said, ‘You are fully aware of our stand and even then you are going on.’

Karan Thapar: I’ll take up the question whether it is bluff or bluster in a moment’s time. But first of all, this is a marked shift in the Left’s position. In November, you gave the Government permission to go to the IAEA on condition that they consult you after the negotiations before even initialing them. But now, before they can even do that, you changed your mind and said, ‘Don’t go forward at all!’

A B Bardhan: They no longer talk about that. They’re going ahead. They call Atal Behari Vajpayee ‘Bhishm Pitamah’. You see, it is a deliberate attempt to get him on this side, to make it a bi-partisan issue. He is appealing to him, ‘you support the deal.’

Karan Thapar: You’re saying that the Prime Minister’s actions provoked you to change your mind?

A B Bardhan: Provoked, yes. Number one, his statements – I mentioned it – and secondly, a whole series of high US officials are coming here and everyone goes on pressurising, black-mailing – “you won’t get a better deal”, “this is the time”, “time is of the essence”, “hurry up!” and all that sort of things. What does this mean?

Karan Thapar: So now your decision is you no longer care about what sort of safeguards the Government has negotiated. You’re determined to stop the deal willy-nilly.

A B Bardhan: Anyway, that was our stand even earlier. But anyway, what the safeguards agreement is, what they have negotiated, they have just now informed us on the 17th that they will tell us about it. Whether they will show the text they have arrived at, or just give us a resumé of what talks took place, I do not know. So, let us see, on the 17th we will meet.

Karan Thapar: But the point is it is no longer “let us see”. You see, you are not now saying, “We’ll see the text”, or “We’ll find out about the negotiations and then judge and determine our next step”; you’ve already decided you don’t want this deal.

A B Bardhan: No, that we’ve decided long back because…

Karan Thapar: So then what was the point of going to the IAEA if you had already decided you’re not going to let the deal happen? Why embarrass India, why embarrass the Government by going to the IAEA?

A B Bardhan: There is no embarrassment. In fact, the Government said, “If you don’t even allow us to go to the IAEA, the world will think ‘what sort of a Government is this?’”

Karan Thapar: But now, after letting them go to the IAEA, the world will say that even more because now the Government has got an acceptable safeguard, backing out at this stage is embarrassing for India.

A B Bardhan: Tell me one thing, why did it take so much of time?

Karan Thapar: Because they wanted the best deal. Because negotiations take time.

A B Bardhan: Deal and the negotiation took place long back. I am talking of safeguards.

Karan Thapar: Absolutely. They wanted the best negotiations for the safeguards, it took them a little time. Now they’ve achieved the result they are happy with, you are embarrassing them.

A B Bardhan: No, no, the result is that they are trying to get in the IAEA safeguards certain things which they did not get in the deal. And I think it’s trying to do something by the wrong way. We had told them that IAEA is only a monitoring agency.

Karan Thapar: Let’s accept that what you’re saying is correct that they’re trying to get through the IAEA what they haven’t got through the deal. The Government will dispute that but let’s, for argument’s sake, accept it. If they’d succeeded, they should be applauded. Why are you, instead, using that as a ground for negating everything?