The BJP has separated the nuclear deal from the ongoing development of strategic relationship between India and US.

While the Congress and the Left are busy working out a face-saving formula for the Indo-US nuclear deal, L.K. Advani has managed to swing the BJP back to its centre-right stand. His interview in Hyderabad ââ‚" where terror struck again ââ‚" to an English newspaper, was a timely course correction to restore the proper perspective of BJP's domestic as well foreign policy.

The blasts in Hyderabad were a reminder to the nation that under the UPA regime terrorists have got the freedom to strike at will. The last three years have seen no fresh prosecution of terrorists despite the attacks at a Bangalore science meet, in Varanasi, Ayodhya, Mumbai and of course Hyderabad. The velvet glove treatment to extremist preachers like Abdul Mahdhani, Parliament attack leader Afzal Guru, stop orders to the security apparatus investigating all these events, have convinced the terrorists that they can strike at will. The government itself harbours leaders who are openly sympathetic to extremist rhetoric. The Left that holds the key to the UPA government's survival is openly in favour of Islamic extremism and has linked the opposition to the nuclear deal to its backing of Islamic extremism from Gaza Strip to Afghanistan.

Advani has shown the government a clear path out of the problems the deal could confront. By amending the Atomic Energy Act the government could secure India's nuclear future and then go ahead with the deal. This amendment would reassure public doubts about some aspects of the deal that could compromise India taking an independent decision in the future. Just as US laws including the Hyde Act protect American interest, India too can proceed with the laws that protect its perceived national interest while the deal stands as it is.

It is significant to note that it was the Congress, and specially its chief who denounced the Atal Behari Vajpayee government in May 1998 when India's nuclear weapons capacity was demonstrated. The other opponent was the Left. And today, Prakash Karat wants India to support Iran in its quest for nuclear brinkmanship. Now Pakistan and Karat's mentor China are back together to oppose India negotiating a separate nuclear agreement with the US. Karat's party and China were on the same side while denouncing India's nuclear test. So how can we not factor this into the Marxists' attitude towards the deal?

The Marxists are playing second fiddle to China in opposing the deal. It is the interest of Communist China that is of main importance to them even today as it was in 1962 when they refused to condemn China for attacking India. The Marxists even today refuse to object to China claiming Arunachal Pradesh as its own territory. Their assumed patriotism ends where China is concerned. Their long history of collaboration with foreign powers, with Soviet Union throughout 20th century, with Britain in 1942, with China in 1962 ââ‚" what do all these reveal?

Two developments have taken place upsetting Congress and Left calculations. One is the studied opposition of the BJP to the deal. That BJP concentrated on the text of the deal and picked enough holes in Dr Manmohan Singh's claims to deflate him. This was different from what the Left was doing: its opposition had to do with America. The Left is still full of the vitriol it borrowed from the Cold War days from its mentors ââ‚" the now-dead Soviets and the Maoist Chinese ââ‚" about "American imperialism."

There is no doubt that BJP's opposition to the deal gave the public the perception that it too had been infected by the Left's anti-American virus. How could the BJP, which when in power invited US President Bill Clinton to India and which started a series of discussions with the Clinton administration for building a new and stronger Indo-American relationship, join the Left chorus against the US?

As the Communists continued to denounce the deal and the BJP and the Left were seen stalling Parliament together, the message that people got was that the main Opposition party was now competing with the Left in anti-US rhetoric. The Left was chanting the mantra that it was against all things American, and the deal was just another attempt by the UPA to take India into US' arms.

The recent visit of a US nuclear warship to Chennai, the proposed joint military exercises with US forces, the talk of purchase of hi-tech arms from the US including fighter squadrons, have all been cited by the Left to draw a demonic picture of the India-US strategic relationship. The Indian vote against Iran at IAEA was another confirmation for the Left of India toeing the US line. The deal fitted into this projection perfectly well.

However, recent history cannot be ignored. Terms of that strategic relationship with the US were discussed when President Clinton was in power in Washington, and the NDA in New Delhi. It was followed up after George W. Bush came to power in the US. However, it must be stated that President Clinton had a taste of the BJP's India-centred approach when Vajpayee as Prime Minister refused his invitation to come to Washington to negotiate a ceasefire with Nawaz Sharif. Finally, Clinton had to advise Sharif to rush back home and get out of the Kargil cauldron.

Yet, Vajpayee did not stop looking for opportunities to normalise the situation. He also sought to develop strategic relationships with China, Japan, Asean etc., and revive ties with Russia. Dr Singh wanted the BJP to see the deal as part of the strategic relationship with the US. The BJP has refused to bite that bullet. The BJP has separated the deal from the ongoing development of strategic relationship between the two countries. Its stand has been that the nuclear deal must stand or fall by itself, and a strategic relationship with the US, which has its own logic in both geopolitics and global economics, should be pursued independently.

In other words, national interest need not be sacrificed even while promoting a much-needed strategic relationship with the US. That message was first given at the beginning of Vajpayee's prime ministership. He gave it within two months of assuming power in 1998, withstanding a lot of international opposition afterwards. He reiterated it in 1999 when he initiated an Indo-US dialogue on strategic relationship. The recent statement by Advani in Hyderabad is a reiteration of a bipartisan approach to foreign policy sans the Communists. It is for Dr Singh to demonstrate that he welcomes this bipartisanship.

Courtesy: Deccan Chronicle, August 31, 2007