Vir Sanghvi in The nuclear fundamentalists (Counterpoint, October 21) raised a pertinent question: What’s more important to India, the deal or democracy? But he sidelined the fundamental purpose of democracy which is not just the process of filling Parliament with ministers but the way to promote welfare through the channel of elected ministers. As is well-known, India will have to depend on nuclear energy in the long-term if it has to sustain its growth in the future. So, why bother about short-term political instability and the issue of fresh elections? Democracy must not be confused with politics. Democracy needs commitment, not the convenience of a few political leaders.
Vir Sanghvi had advocated in his columns that the deal should go through. So I don't understand why he now calls it useless. To my mind, the deal actually never mattered to individual Indians though it may be of significance to India
as a nation.
Hurting the Nation
Karan Thapar’s Then watchdog, now poodle (Sunday Sentiments, October 21) captured the true political status of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the context of the Indo-US nuclear agreement.
His U-turn under pressure from the Left shows three things: first, he had to eat humble pie. Second, for him political power comes before nuclear power and he has brought disgrace to the nation’s credibility at the international level. If India loses the nuclear deal, it is only due to the political ambition of the Congress leaders. The Prime Minister has been thwarted not by the Left but by himself.
Subhash C Shukla,
I admire HT’s policy of giving opposing views on the nuclear deal. While Karan Thapar is unhappy about the PM’s decision to hold back on the deal, Vir Sanghvi's views were that it was a wise decision. Thank you for providing us with information on both sides of the issue. This gives us a framework for formulating our own independent standpoint on issues so crucial to the development of our country and our survival itself.
Confessions of a 'Dangerous Mind' (Grey Matter, Focus, October 21) is a well timed article as a follow-up to the recent verdict against ACP SS Rathi and his team. However, active policing will take a beating as police officers may now hesitate to take action against a dreaded criminal unless absolutely sure. Had the policemen acted out of vengeance, rather than on wrong information, they they deserve severe punishment.
But I have a question. Why is no one taking the junior policemen to task for merely obeying their senior’s orders? The anger of the public and that of the victims’ family is natural, but we should remember that it was the negligence (not murder) by policemen that led to loss of precious lives.