Danger zone

Sir ? The editorial, ?No danger to flag? (March 18), appears to contradict the report, ?Nuke test ban via backdoor?, published on the same day. The latter makes it clear that the bill moved in the US Congress to facilitate the nuclear deal between India and the United States of America tries to impose the comprehensive test ban treaty on India through the backdoor, despite Manmohan Singh having taken an undertaking to stop the testing of nuclear weapons as part of the deal. Such a gesture on the part of India undermines its sovereignty and impinges on its freedom to look for its supply of uranium (Russia continues to be a supplier) required for civilian as well as defence purposes.

K.P. Nayar, in ?Payback policy? (March 22), also mentions the difficulties India would face in trying to get the Indo-US nuclear deal cleared by the US Congress and in continuing with it. Nayar hints that India would probably have to bribe US legislators, and that too at a considerable price given the forthcoming presidential elections. Nayar however does not throw light on whether that would also mean India compromising on its sovereignty.

Yours faithfully,
Pijush Banerjee, Calcutta

Sir ? The US Congress?s ratification of the US?s nuclear deal with India would open up windows for greater interaction in trade and nuclear technology between the two countries. Having overcome threats to safety and fears over the disposal of toxic waste, the issue of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is gaining momentum. Nuclear energy could substantially contribute to the decrease in dependence on poor quality coal and import of oil and gas, all of which are contributing factors towards global warming. But there will be problems like financing another 30 to 40 reactors in the next 25 years. Under the broad agreement of collaboration for clean energy with the US, India could also coordinate for the use of hydrogen energy and clean coal technology as the emerging fuel in the 21st century. The last issue should not be overshadowed by the nuke deal.

Yours faithfully,
C.R. Bhattacharjee, Calcutta

Sir ? Uranium-235 occurs in abundance in India, which also has the largest thorium reserves in the world. The only problem for India has been the expense of setting up reactors. The access to cheap fuel thus will partly solve India?s problems.

Yours faithfully,
Srideep Ray, Calcutta

Sir ? For a brief period, the country basked in the euphoria following the signing of the Indo-US deal. The media have also played along. Yet, K.P. Nayar?s ?Payback policy?, shows that there is still no guarantee that the deal will be implemented. The country has heard the prime minister say that India will not compromise on its independence in foreign policy. But one wonders if the deal can be followed through without giving in to the US. There is no denying the fact that anti-India forces within the US Congress will try to sabotage the bill.

Yours faithfully,
Amit V. Sengupta, Calcutta

Sir ? India has earned nothing significant from the Indo-US nuclear deal. The US president has not even promised to support India?s candidature for a permanent seat in the United Nations security council.

Yours faithfully,
Subhash C. Agrawal, Dariba

Sir ? India has been long envied for its exemplary advance in education, science and technology without any significant help from either the US or other foreign powers. Why should it sacrifice its identity now at the behest of carrying through a nuclear deal with the US? The Manmohan Singh government is putting all its eggs in one basket in tying India?s defence needs to the military hardware industry of the US. Will India be able to pursue its own interests any more?

Yours faithfully,
A. Dutta Ahmed, California

Parting shot

Sir ? New Market started its life as New Market, and was later renamed Sir Stuart Hogg Market. Bengalis prefer the latter name, which is fair enough, but they see red at other renamings. They believe tradition should be preserved and we should not give in to the leftist passion of renaming. However, if the renaming is ?sahebi? then there seems to be no problem. I feel sorry for a people that prefers Camac Street to Abanindra Nath Tagore Sarani. Meanwhile, Shakespeare Sarani has been accepted with much enthusiasm. Perhaps a street after General Dyer would also be greeted with as much fervour.

Yours faithfully,
Aroup Chatterjee, London