Prime Minister Manmohan Singh faced a two-pronged attack on Wednesday in the Lok Sabha by the Left and the NDA over the July 18 India-U.S. joint statement. They charged him with compromising the country's independent nuclear policy.

India had been made a junior partner of the U.S. which could "use India" as a "counterbalance" against China.

National Democratic Alliance chairman Atal Bihari Vajpayee led the charge in the structured debate on Dr. Singh's statement on his visit to the U.S. that resulted in the joint statement by Dr. Singh and U.S. President George Bush.

Mr. Vajpayee made it clear that the joint statement regarding trade, agriculture, science and technology posed no problems. The concerns were related to the nuclear policy and to some extent terrorism.

Mr. Vajpayee asked whether the joint statement had in any way compromised the independent nuclear policy.

"Was it possible to separate civilian and military nuclear facilities, as the statement laid down, without hurting India's capability to decide what kind of credible minimum nuclear deterrent it wants? Had India's options been limited? In this world, where terrorism is now a reality, could India be sure when it would need what kind of weapon? Had this joint statement in any way tied India's hands forever?"

Mr. Vajpayee also complained that the joint statement did not recognise India as a nuclear weapons state but only as a "responsible state with advanced nuclear technology." He said that "India's nuclear policy should be based on a national consensus and it could not be a policy of any one party or any one government." From the time of Nehru to now, all governments had ensured that India's nuclear policy remained independent, Mr. Vajpayee emphasised.

On the other hand, the attack from the Left was of a different kind. Rupchand Pal (CPI-M) and Prabodh Panda (CPI) made it clear that their criticism stemmed from a perception that Dr. Singh was "continuing" the "pro-U.S. initiative of the NDA Government" and that this constituted a "deviation from the stated policy of non-alignment."

Mr. Pal said India had been unsuccessful in getting the U.S. support for its bid to get a permanent seat on the Security Council. Mr. Pal wondered whether the joint statement was based on national consensus and the independent foreign policy underscored by the National Common Minimum Programme.

He also wondered whether India had been used by the U.S. as a counterbalance against China.

Pointed references

The speakers from the Left parties made pointed references to the U.S. role in Iraq, to its threats against Iran and its unilateralism and hegemonistic aspirations. While appreciating the Prime Minister's suo motu statement in which he had offered clarifications, Mr. Pal objected to joining hands with the U.S. against terrorism, implying that the U.S. role in this area was dubious.

At the same time, he said that the Left did not sufer from "U.S. phobia," and that "we are not against a just, equitable, balanced relationship with any country."

Janata Dal (United) leader George Fernandes said that if Dr. Singh's clarifications were true, then "we should all support it [the joint statement]," but it was not clear what decisions were taken.

"No country had as yet voluntarily agreed to inspection of all its civilian nuclear facilities as India had [in the July 18 statement]."

The Manmohan Singh Government had made "U.S.A. central to our defence policy," he said.