The contention by US President George W Bush that fuel supply assurances are “not legally binding” set off a fresh storm today with the Left parties and BJP targeting the government which asserted that the 123 Agreement will protect Indian interests.
Apparently unhappy with Bush’s observations, India said its civil nuclear cooperation with the US would be “guided” only by the 123 Agreement, which clearly spelt out the respective “rights and obligations” of the two countries. It said the 123 Agreement would be a “legal document” once it became operational.
Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Navtej Sarna said in a statement that the government would ensure that India’s rights were “fully protected” while conducting civil nuclear cooperation with the US.
Bush’s memorandum to the US Congress, while presenting the 123 Agreement for consideration, said the pact recorded certain political commitments concerning reliable nuclear fuel supplies, but did not transform them into legally binding commitments.
Referring to Bush’s memorandum, the CPI(M) and the BJP accused the government of “consistently misleading” the country on the nuclear deal.
Sarna emphasised that the civil nuclear cooperation with the US would be “guided” only by the 123 Agreement in which “rights and obligations” of the two countries were “clearly spelt out in the terms and provisions”. He said “once this (123) inter-governmental agreement enters into force, the agreement would become a legal document in accordance with the well-recognised principles of international law and the Law of Treaties”.
Union Science and Technology Minister Kapil Sibal said: “It is an honourable commitment by President George Bush and the US government and we accept it. It is a political commitment. He did not say he will not honour it. Whether it is legally binding or not, it is another question.”
However, the Opposition was not willing to buy the government's argument.
Senior CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury said Bush was set to demit office in the next few months and the only legal binding the US had was is the Hyde Act which, he claimed, carried no assurances on uninterrupted fuel supplies to India.
CPI(M) Politburo said in a statement that "the covering note of the determination states there are no legally binding assurances on the US for fuel supplies. It also makes clear that the IAEA safeguards are in perpetuity and not as Indian officials claimed”.
Opposition BJP also turned the heat on the government, accusing it of undermining the “nuclear sovereignty” of the country, and demanded a clarification.
