Despite their confused technical objections to the Indo-US nuclear deal, the main political complaint of the Left parties was that the deal would subordinate Indian foreign policy to Washington’s whims. Dr Singh can now credibly demand that the CPM rethink its criticism of the UPA government’s foreign policy and nuclear diplomacy. To be fair to the Indian left, misperception that the Indo-US nuclear deal was about New Delhi getting into bed with Washington was indeed widespread. Unlike Russia, France and UK, the other three permanent members of the UN Security Council that quickly endorsed the Indo-US nuclear deal announced in July 2005, China made no secret of its political reservations. Dr Singh’s diplomatic team deserves all the credit for reassuring Beijing that India will never be party to the containment of China and signalling New Delhi’s readiness for an expansive partnership with Beijing.

To be sure, China’s proposed nuclear bonhomie with India is subject to its “international commitments”, a reference to the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the safeguards requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Until now, the CPM was either unable or unwilling to see that the Indo-US nuclear deal was in essence about facilitating New Delhi’s cooperation with the entire international community and not just Washington. That cooperation in turn needs an endorsement of the IAEA and the NSG. After China’s support for the Indo-US deal, it is only the CPM that stands between India and its nuclear energy future.