When the Prime Minister of India commits himself to something publicly, the nation expects him to abide by it. Let us therefore see how Dr Manmohan Singh has fared on the principle of ‘prime ministerial accountability’.
Speaking about the Indo-US nuclear deal in the Lok Sabha on July 29, 2005, the PM had said: “We shall undertake the same responsibilities and obligations as the United States. We expect the same rights and benefits as the US...India will never accept discrimination.” This assurance stands flouted in the draft safeguards agreement between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The draft does not recognise India as a Nuclear Weapons State on par with, and having the same rights and obligations as, the USA, Russia, Britain, France and China. In other words, India, with its strategic autonomy compromised, would have an inferior status in the global nuclear order in perpetuity.
Here is another broken assurance. On July 20, 2005, two days after he and American President George Bush issued a joint statement on the nuclear deal, Dr Singh addressed a press conference in Washington. “Mr Prime Minister,” a reporter asked, “will you seek a parliamentary consensus or approval to the new direction you seem to be taking in foreign policy?” The PM replied, as a prime minister should. “Well, the Parliament in our country is sovereign,” he said. “It goes without saying that we can move forward only on the basis of a broad national consensus.”
Today, can any sane person claim that there is “a broad national consensus” in the country justifying the PM’s decision to go ahead with the deal? The resistance from his erstwhile Left allies and the BJP began as soon as the joint statement was issued. How a manipulative PM betrayed the Left, forcing it to withdraw support to the UPA Government on July 8, is well known. Equally well known is how he violated the public commitment given by his own
