Committee is a total farce

Yashwant Sinha, Former External Affairs Minister. - V. GANESAN

Interview with Yashwant Sinha, BJP leader.

FORMER External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha asserts that anybody who says that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) would bail out the UPA government from the present crisis by helping it go ahead with the nuclear deal is doing a great injustice to the party, especially key anti-nuclear deal campaigners such as himself and Arun Shourie. In spite of such protestations, the BJPs name has come up in political discussions as a potential ally of the United States in formalising the nuclear deal. Frontline met Yashwant Sinha for an interview in the context of the collapse of the talks between the UPA and the Left parties on the deal. Excerpts:

The discussions between the UPA and the Left parties have collapsed, creating a new political situation. How does the BJP view this situation vis--vis the deal as well as from a larger political perspective?

To tell you the truth, this Consultative Committee was a total farce. The position of both sides was well known right from the beginning. The government wanted to go ahead with the deal; the Left parties were against it. From the beginning they could not square the circle. Even then they went through this faade only in order to buy time. And they did succeed in buying time. The collapse has happened at a moment when neither side can push things any further. But it must also be pointed out that the Left stand has been clearly articulated while that of the UPA is not. As far as the perspective of the BJP is concerned, we have been opposing the deal for our own reasons. We did not want to compromise on the legacy and strategic space left by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA [National Democratic Alliance] government in terms of foreign policy and nuclear policy. And we are of the view the 123 Agreement in the present nuclear deal seeks to severely compromise the strategic space created by the NDA government. At the political level, the whole process between the UPA and the Left has emphasised the point that we have been making that this is a disparate coalition, which can pull along only in a situation of paralysis of decision-making. So in a sense, the sooner this paralysis ends it is good for the country. We are heading for elections and we are prepared well to face the elections while the others, including the UPA, are hesitating.

As the principal opposition party, the BJP has raised its voice against the nuclear deal and you personally have been a consistent critic. But still a perception has gained ground that sections of the BJP could fall in line with the principle of the deal and help its passage...

This nuclear deal has divided public opinion like no other issue had, and because the media are part of the public opinion they are also severely divided. A section of the media is not only for the deal but they have been campaigning for it. I would say that the misinformation on the BJP has been created by the section of the media that has been campaigning for the deal. The decision-making process in the BJP is very clear and nobody has taken an individual decision on the nuclear deal. Every word that has been said in the statements of the party has been seen and approved by the topmost leadership. I have been looking for these sections that you are talking about and I have not found them. For me they remain mythical sections of the party. The latest pronouncement on this issue by the party was at the national executive where we said clearly that the deal in its present form is not acceptable and that we would like to renegotiate it, given an opportunity. After the present crisis erupted, both the party president and our prime ministerial candidate stated on record that there is no change in the partys position.

Even as the Lefts differences with the UPA became clear, former BJP president M.Venkaiah Naidus statement about the party not being opposed to a strategic relationship with the U.S. created confusion. When asked specifically whether the BJP would vote against the government if the deal came up for discussion in Parliament, he resorted to rhetoric and asked mediapersons why he should reveal the BJPs strategy.

Opposition to the nuclear deal should not be confused with opposition to the U.S. That is a nuanced position. We have no qualms in stating that when we were in government we started the strategic partnership with the U.S. We would be out of our minds if we were to say that we were not in favour of a strategic partnership with the U.S. But strategic partnership does not mean strategic subservience. The current 123 Agreement is without doubt tantamount to strategic subservience. It will make India subservient to the U.S. and force us to toe their line in terms of foreign policy and nuclear policy.

So do we take it that the BJP would vote against the government if the nuclear deal reaches Parliament either through a Sense of the House motion or some other method and that the BJP would not take recourse to a third option, that is, walking out of the House in the event of voting

Two years ago, we demanded a Sense of the House resolution. We would have had it then if the Left parties had not ditched us. Now if we have a proper Sense of the House resolution, which meets with requirements, why should we run away from it? We said that you couldnt build political consensus in a vacuum, so send the deal for the consideration of a Select Committee of Parliament. Instead of a Select Committee you had the UPA-Left Committee. So, now theres no scope for political consensus. It will be black and white and we shall oppose the deal. I cannot understand the reasoning or logic behind this argument that the BJP would help this government survive. I think those who have been spreading rumours like this are extremely unfair to the BJP in general and to leaders like Arun Shourie and myself, particularly. If there are leaders with this view in the BJP, I am of the opinion that they should come out in the open and not hide behind anonymity.