Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

Abject surrender

The editorial, `India's shameful vote against Iran' (Sept. 26), has put it mildly. New Delhi's decision to vote against Teheran's nuclear programme at the IAEA board meeting is nothing but an abject surrender under U.S. pressure. The Left has voiced its protest in no uncertain terms. The Manmohan Singh Government should realise that we have to align with countries such as Iran and China in our own strategic and political interests and not gang up with the West.

Col. (retd.) C.V. Venugopalan,
Palakkad, Kerala

* * *

Congratulations on the forceful editorial. The Government has betrayed the Non-Aligned Movement. Some poor countries of Africa and Latin America, which voted against the resolution, showed more guts. If the current tilt towards the U.S. continues, it would be better for the Left parties and the other allies of the UPA to withdraw support from the Government.

Ramesh H.R.,
Tumkur, Karnataka

* * *

At its present rates of consumption Iran will be an oil importer in 20 years, which vindicates its desire to develop alternative sources of energy including nuclear energy. The NPT, signed by Teheran in 1974, permits it to build facilities involving all aspects of the nuclear cycle, including enrichment, subject to international safeguards. It is sad that India has reversed its famed non-aligned policy and sided with the U.S.

Syed Sultan Mohiddin,
Cuddapah, A.P.

* * *

It is deplorable that the Government has taken such a vital decision without an open discussion. On the other hand, it is heartening that spontaneous condemning voices are being heard from all quarters.

R. Ponnarassi,
Vellore, T.N.

* * *

As you have pointed out, the vote against Iran is the worst kind of double standards a country can adopt. Had India not bowed to Western pressure, this could have been a major coup for India's inclusion in the United Nations Security Council. A golden opportunity has been missed.

F. Merlin Flower,
Chennai

* * *

The switching of sides by India, casting aside a trusted friend like Iran, has exposed the hollowness of its foreign policy. It is following in the footsteps of the U.K., vying for a greater pie in civil nuclear cooperation.

Arijit Rakshit,
New Delhi

* * *

It now turns out that Prime Minister's remarks in July on the India-Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline were a prelude to the stand to be adopted at the IAEA meeting. There is still time to change course when the issue comes up for discussion by the IAEA Board in November.

G. Muthu Venkataraman,
Chennai

* * *

The vote against Iran is obviously to please America. Like China and Russia, India should have abstained from voting.

K.S. Srinivasan,
Chennai

* * *

One can only wonder why India did not abstain from the vote at the meeting when it had problems with the resolution. That would have been the honourable course to adopt. What tangible benefits will accrue from this shift in policy?

P. Sreenivasan,
Chennai

* * *

India has dealt a severe blow to its image among NAM nations. It is also clear that the decision was taken under U.S. pressure.

G. Venkatesh,
Bangalore

* * *

Using its current clout, this was an excellent opportunity for India to show the world that it would not allow another "liberation" to occur. That chance has been missed and I feel betrayed by our leaders.

Sampath Swaminathan,
New York

* * *

India's vote against Iran, if properly understood, gives respectability to the bullying power and intimidatory tactics of the world's "sole superpower." Recall what it did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and later in Vietnam.

M.K.D. Prasada Rao,
Ghaziabad, U.P.

* * *

Whenever an Indian government tries to make changes in its foreign policy in accordance with the current situation, the media and the Opposition criticise it for deviating from its historical position. How can people expect a government to stick with a policy that has no relevance in the present day world? In international politics there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies. We need to change our policies in the best interests of our country.

Lohith M. Jajee,
Bangalore

* * *

Why has a fossil fuel-rich country like Iran shown unnecessary haste in acquiring nuclear energy? If the intention to acquire the technology is for peaceful purposes then why did it go after the A.Q. Khan nuclear black market to acquire centrifuge technology?

Also, is the statement made by Iran at the IAEA meeting that it would provide nuclear technology to all Muslim countries a responsible one?

Ajith K. Gopinathan,
Sharjah, U.A.E.

* * *

A country's foreign policy is decided by its perception of its permanent interests.

It is futile to cling to outmoded shibboleths such as non-alignment and raise a huge cry as if the Manmohan Singh Government has pulled India down from a high moral pedestal.

How many of these NAM countries came to India's assistance (even expression of sympathy would have helped) during the three wars Pakistan waged against us? More specifically, has Iran taken a clear position on our case in Kashmir?

S.V. Raghavan,
Chennai

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

The dispiriting parallelism
Indian Airlines set to take off at last
The unravelling of India's Persian puzzle
Belkhed: the riots & wrongs of caste
Riding out the pain of costly oil
Abject surrender
End the controversy
On the coverage

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu