Experts describe 123 deal as key to ''technological freedom''

New Delhi, Aug 24 (UNI) With the nation split down the middle over the debate on the India-US civil nuclear agreement, the Left wants the Government to discuss the controversial deal in Parliament and arrive at a consensus before operationalising it.

''The Left parties want that the deal to be discussed so that all the clarifications are sought... The Government has no right to go ahead with the agreement when the parties supporting it are not in its favour,'' senior CPM leader and former Rajya Sabha member Dipankar Mukherjee stated during a panel discussion on the Nuclear Deal organised by the Indian Women's Press Corps.

''Consensus is the essence of our policy making and as a democracy we should ensure that a majority in Parliament accepts and approves an international agreement,'' he observed.

Countering Mr Mukherjee, former Ambassador to the United Nations Arundhati Ghosh said the agreement, should it come to fruition, would lift restrictions on technology in various fields, including communication, medicine, village development and bio-technology, and fulfill the country's energy needs.

''So far India was denied access to the technology because of sanctions but post this agreement that wall will change... it is a key to unlock the doors to unhindered technological freedom,'' she observed.

The former diplomat said the deal would also help form a strategic balance in ''controlling America''.

''The US is a powerful country and it needs to be controlled.

India, once it gets acceptance on that platform along with France, Germany and Russia can do that,'' he pointed out.

Joining issue with Ms Ghosh was strategic affairs analyst K Subrahmanyam emphasising that India's ''technological apartheid'' should end.

''The agreement will not only be strategic partnership with the US but also with the European Union, Russia and Japan. It will move head in combination with these countries,'' he pointed out.

Regarding the much-talked about Hyde Act which forms part of the agreement, the expert said apprehensions about it should be allayed in ''calm atmosphere''.

''We should take a broad view towards the deal and not think only in terms of the Hyde Act or just one aspect. The discussion on the deal should be wrapped up in few days and not allowed to be dragged on and on,'' he observed.

Emphasising that India's energy needs will be fulfilled despite the 123 agreement, Mr Mukherjee said the energy security of the country was not linked to the deal.

''We did not expect the Government to be so stubborn on the issue. We fail to understand why it is in a tearing hurry on the agreement and is willing to destabilise the government. If the US Congress has discussed the issue then why not us,'' he added.

''In 1998, when the Pokhran nuclear tests were conducted the consensus tradition was broken... The Government should try and convince us now,'' he said.

Mr Mukherjee sought to clarify that the Left was opposing the deal from the time it was floated in 2005.

''We have been raising questions against the deal in Parliament from day one,'' he added.

Opposing the deal and the Hyde Act in particular was fomer Ambassador to Turkey and Uzbekistan M K Bhadrakumar.

UNI