1. 2.. 3… go.. STOP?.... NOT! ….. PAUSE ….

ONE … JULY 2006 JOINT STATEMENT
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visits the US in July 2005 (from July 18-20, 2005). President Bush reaches an agreement with the Prime Minister to let India secure international help for its civilian nuclear reactors while retaining its nuclear arms. In a joint statement President Bush declared, "As a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states." Indian officials openly admit that the outcome of the Washington visit exceeded their most optimistic hopes ... the White House more than walked the extra mile to give greater substance to the new "global" and "strategic" partnership between in India and US.

"In sum, the Manmohan-Bush nuclear deal is to be understood as a constructive, although clumsily non-transparent, preference exercised by the UPA Government in favour of the civilian nuclear programme." – The Hindu editorial on July 22, 2005.

Several rounds of negotiations follow between the officials of India and the US on how to structure this path-breaking agreement between two great democracies.

TWO ... MARCH 2006 SEPARATION PLAN
President Bush visits New Delhi on March 1, 2006. There was anxiety and high expectation regarding the civil nuclear cooperation. It was expected that an announcement will be made during this visit despite several serious disagreements between the two parties. The main sticking point was how to divide India's nuclear facilities into two parts: civilian nuclear reactors which will come under IAEA safeguards, but will be allowed to access advanced technologies and much needed nuclear fuel from the US and other nuclear suppliers, and military nuclear reactors that will not be under IAEA supervision, but do not receive outside assistance. India stands firm that it can not allow more than 2/3 of reactors to go under civilian category. This leads to a stalemate. Bush intervenes and grants India’s wishes. Bush promises to change the US national law to make an exception to India (which is not a declared nuclear power or a signatory of NPT

THREE … HYDE ACT and 123 AGREEMENT
The United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 (also known as Hyde Act) was passed and signed into law by President Bush on 18th December, 2006. This US domestic law provides the legal framework for a bilateral pact between the US and India for under which the U.S. will provide access to civilian nuclear technology and access to nuclear fuel in exchange for IAEA-safeguards on civilian Indian reactors. The bilateral pact between the US and other countries on nuclear cooperation is known as 123 Agreement with India (based on the section 123 of a previous US law). The opposition parties and many retired nuclear scientists in India raise serious objections to the Hyde Act. The big issues of concern are the potential adverse impact of the act on indigenous fast breeder research, reprocessing of nuclear fuel, right of return of fuel and technology, safeguards in perpetuity, future testing of nuclear device, and India's independent foreign policy. Setting the oppositions’ apprehensions to rest, PM assures the nation by declaring in the Rajya Sabha that no foreign legislation would be allowed to take away the country’s sovereign right to make its own decisions.

GO ... INDIAN CABINET APPROVES 123 AGREEMENT
Indian team headed by National Security Advisor, M K Narayanan drives a hard bargain with the US team and finalizes the 123 agreement. Indian team extracts maximum out in India's favor. In spite of a few restrictive clauses of Hyde Act, the agreement is made consistent with the assurances PM made in the parliament. Atomic Energy Commission’s chairman Anil Kakodkar finds the agreement satisfactory. The cabinet reviews and approves the agreement. The PM meets the alliance partners and opposition leaders and apprises them on the agreement. The opposition does not raise any serious objection to the deal at first. Most of the commentators (even those who were antagonistic to the deal) seemed to agree that top government officials said all Indian concerns had been addressed satisfactorily.

“A sound and honourable 123.” – the Hindu editorial on August 6, 2007.

A poll showed that among the urban Indians the supporters of the Indo-US deal clearly outnumber the opponents by 3 to 1.


STOP? … LEFT PARTNERS SINGAL END OF HONEYMOON
However, the Left Front (with 35+ MPs in 365 member Lok Sabha), who are key to the UPA government's survival, is deeply opposed to the pact. The left leaders scrutinize the text of the123 agreement intensely for days, and fail to find anything objectionable. They say 123 agreement is not the problem. But the Hyde Act is the problem. This act mandates that Washington halt nuclear cooperation if India tests a nuclear weapon. The Left leaders do not like that even though they have vehemently opposed the nuclear tests in 1998 by the previous BJP Government. Also, the Hyde Act has non-binding requirement that India is actively participating to contain Iran for its pursuit to develop nuclear capabilities. The Left Front which do not support India to have nuclear weapons, want India to support Iran's nuclear ambitions. For the India's left, it is partly ideological and partly vote bank politics and they say it is impossible to support an agreement with the US. They advise the Singh's government not to "operationalise" the 123 agreement.

“Put the nuclear deal on hold” – the Hindu editorial on August 20, 2007.


NOT! … LEFT DOES NOT WANT MARRIAGE TO END
The Prime Minister Manmohan Singh mounts a strong defense of the civilian nuclear energy deal with the US, saying it was crucial for the country's prosperity. “When we aim for a 10 per cent growth rate, we must recognize the critical importance of energy security. India’s energy needs, which will grow with the pace of economic development, cannot be met with oil and gas for long.”

Dr. Singh in an interview with Calcutta based newspaper dares the left allies to withdraw their support for the ruling Congress-led coalition if they are unhappy with a landmark Indo-US civilian nuclear deal - "I (have) told them to do whatever they want to do, if they want to withdraw support (for the Congress coalition government), so be it."

CPI’s A. B. Bardhan responds to PM’s dare by declaring that the "honeymoon (between UPA and Left) is over" and the Left would not hesitate to "file divorce papers" if it comes to that.

But the enlightened (Prakash) Karat of CPM jumps quickly to say, “The honeymoon period may be over but the marriage will continue."

PAUSE … GO TO VIENNA, BUT DO NOT NEGOTIATE
“All we are asking from the government is to press the pause button on the deal and properly evaluate all the implications and objections before proceeding further,” a senior CPI(M) leader said.

This is a typical prescription of India’s communists. That is what Jyothi Basu did in West Bengal. He pressed hard the pause button for 20+ years. Budhadeb Bhattacharya is struggling hard to take this historical heavy weight off the pause button for West Bengal to move forward, but is having tremendous hurdles.

India’s Left Front which got 11% of popular vote in the last national elections and has 62 MPs in the current Lok Sabha is enjoying disproportionate and unprecedented power, and using it to “pause” India’s progress.

The right wing BJP, in spite of taking pride in the fact that the process they have started on the civilian nuclear deal with the US has come to fruition, is focused on a narrow political game of dislodging the “unholy” alliance between the left and the Congress to force untimely elections. It does not matter that their party is not ready for elections with new leadership of the party.

The UPNA, formed recently by the three defeated (ex-) chief ministers (Mulayam Singh Yadav, Chandrababu Naidu and Jayalalitha), is clueless about civil nuclear agreement. They just want to extricate their leftist friends from the Congress to form a true Third Front and fight the next elections sooner.

If you read internet blogs, comments and letters to the newspapers, you will find that overwhelming majority of Indians do not agree with the Left’s prescription of “press the pause button” .

AP govt assures help to HIV+ mothers

Uma Sudhir (NDTV.COM)
Monday, August 13, 2007 (Hyderabad)
In the 60th year of independence, it will be freedom from HIV at birth, something that the Andhra Pradesh government is promising every child born to an HIV positive mother.

Expectant mothers are being counselled at a government hospital in Hyderabad to take a HIV test. In case they test positive, they can opt for medicines that can keep their baby healthy.

''I am five months pregnant. After knowing that there are medicines to protect the baby, I feel I must keep the baby, though my mother and husband said I should go for medical termination of pregnancy,'' said Lavanya, an HIV+ patient.

Children account for 5-10 per cent of all HIV infections and 90 per cent get the virus through their mother.

Bold target

In 2005, out of 16 lakh deliveries in Andhra Pradesh, over 8,000 babies were born HIV positive. The government has now set for itself a bold target of 0/7, meaning not a single baby should be born HIV positive by the end of 2007.

''By the end of December, we should be able to get 8000 to 9000 positive mothers, that's 80-90 per cent of positive mothers and every identified positive mother should be followed up till delivery and upto 18 months,'' said Asok Kumar, Project Director, APSACS.

''Knowing that children can be saved, we have now got the confidence and are going to have twins,'' said an HIV+ couple.

A whole new generation born free of the HIV virus is a dream worth working towards.

From Deccan Chronicle, August 11, 2007


HIV+ moms turned away


Hyderabad, Aug. 11: Doctors in many State-run primary health centres and area hospitals are refusing to admit and treat pregnant women who are HIV positive. They use the tactic of “referring” them to tertiary hospitals in cities to escape from the chore of delivering their babies. The AP AIDS Control Society says that out of the 1,800 HIV positive pregnant women who gave birth this year, less than 200 did it in village, mandal and division level hospitals.

Private hospitals are not keen on taking in HIV positive pregnant women either fearing transmission of infection to doctors and paramedical staff. Most HIV positive pregnant women find refuge in the Gandhi Medical College Hospital and Nayapul Maternity Hospital of the city and a handful of district hospitals.
In Gandhi Hospital alone, 182 HIV positive women delivered babies this year. Doctors here administer the Nevirapine drug to prevent the infection passing from mother to child.

“There is open discrimination against such women,” said a health official. “In some instances, they are not even being allowed into hospitals.” The few deliveries that have taken place in PHC’s are attributed to nurse practitioners appointed by the APSACS to help HIV positive pregnant women.

APSACS director K. Ashok Kumar said that there was serious discrimination against such women in PHCs. “We are training PHC staff to deal with such deliveries,” he said. The director added that APSACS was trying to enlighten the doctors of private hospitals too. “We have formed Be Bold doctors clubs where those willing to treat HIV patients can enrol,” he said. “The list will be supplied to all districts and women can approach these doctors. So far 300 doctors have joined.”

Fewer institutionalised deliveries is also hampering the APSACS campaign for zero per cent HIV births by the end of 2007. According to National Family Health Survey statistics, only 69 per cent of births in the State take place in hospitals. Without institutionalised delivery, there will be no HIV testing and no effort to prevent transmission.

“Every year at least 12,000 HIV positive mothers give birth in the State,” said Mr Ashok Kumar. APSACS so far tested 2.9 lakh pregnant women in the State and found that 3,200 of them were HIV positive. Of these, 1,800 delivered babies. There is no proper follow up for the HIV mothers and their kids either. A baby has to be tested after 18 months to ensure that he is not infected. “We have formed 85 outreach groups to follow up such cases,” said the director.