SFI pamphlet dated 30th Aug '07

30-08-07

INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL: COMPROMISING OUR SOVEREIGNTY TO SERVE US INTERESTS

Friends,

The National Common Minimum Programme sets out the basic tenet of the foreign policy of the UPA Government in the following terms: “The UPA government will pursue an independent foreign policy keeping in mind its past traditions. This policy will seek to promote multipolarity in world relations and oppose all attempts at unilateralism.” There is no mention of any strategic relations or partnership with the US. However, the UPA Government has tried, since its inception, to circumvent and breach this important provision of the NCMP and continue with the NDA Government’s policy of deepening India’s strategic ties with the US and become its subordinate ally. However, within a month all these formulations were forgotten and series of strategic tie up with the US was achieved:

INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL AND INDIA'S STRATEGIC TIES WITH THE US:

● On June 28, 2005, just prior to Bush-Manmohan Agreement of July 18, 2005, New Framework for India-US Defence Relationship was signed. In this Agreement, it is stated, U.S.-India defence relationship derives from a common belief in freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, and seeks to advance shared security interests. Considering that the Iraq invasion was justified by the US as bringing democracy to West Asia, a reference to a shared belief in democracy and rule of law cannot be acceptable to the Indian people.

● The Bush-Manmohan agreement was followed immediately by India’s vote against Iran in the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA). Senator Lugar in his opening remarks in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee had noted, approvingly, “We have already seen strategic benefits from our improving relationship with India. India’s votes at the IAEA on the Iran issue last September and this past February demonstrate that New Delhi is able and willing to adjust its traditional foreign policies and play a constructive role on international issues.” Manmohan Singh’s oft-repeated claims that India’s foreign policy would not change due to this Deal, is not borne out by his Governments’ record, especially when the US officials are busy selling the agreement to the US Congress on the strategic value of India aligning with the US.

● Currently, the Manmohan Singh Government is negotiating a Logistics and Service Agreement. This would virtually reduce India to an American ally in Asia. It essentially allows refueling and complete access to Indian facilities for all US ships and aircraft. The US navy can bomb Iraq and Iran and then come to India’s ports for rest, recreation and refueling, before going back for another round of hostilities. Step by step, from a vote against Iran, we are now to become hosts to the US navy in its military misadventures in West Asia and elsewhere. More importantly, as far as the 123 agreement is concerned, the Hyde Act categorically demands India to fall in line with US as explained below:

HYDE ACT AND INDIA'S INDEPENDENT FOREIGN POLICY:

The Hyde Act is an enabling legislation that allows the US Congress to consider an agreement for civilian nuclear co-operation under the section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act. The Hyde Act said very clearly that India’s foreign policy needed to be congruent to the US; it had to work in tandem with the US on isolating Iran. It demanded that India join the illegal PSI regime. It also restricted India’s access to technology to fuel and import of reactors. It denied access to technology for the fuel cycle – enrichment or reprocessing – and also for heavy water. It also made clear that in the event the Deal was canceled, the fuel supplies from the US would not only stop but the US would work with other suppliers to stop their supplies to India too. This is a major issue as earlier also, the US had stopped supplies to Tarapur reactors. If we put in a substantial nuclear program using imported reactors, this would mean our power program could be held hostage to the US’s continued goodwill.

All these tie ups with the US and the Hyde Act provision of the 123 agreement, seriously compromises our sovereignty and independent foreign policy. Should we allow our sovereignty be compromised by acting as junior partners of the greatest war machine and imperialist power that the world has ever seen? It is in this context that the Indo-US nuclear deal is not a narrow issue of the Left. It is about struggling to ensure that the sovereignty of our country is protected.

Today, it is the Left forces, who are spearheading the struggle against US domination of our country and the tendency within ruling classes to act as junior partners of imperialism. It is shameful that when the Left is engaged in a heated struggle against US imperialism, the 'infantile' ultras of AISA in the most sectarian manner is attacking the Left, only strengthening the hands of the right wing slander. Their political bankruptcy gets reflected by the fact that instead of mobilizing opinion against the deal, they are more interested in parroting the slanders of the media against the Left. This is a manifestation of their frustration, since the CPI(M-L) is irrelevant as far as the future of this deal is concerned. With regard to their point about voting out this government, let us remind our friends in AISA that the RSS Chief KS Sudarsan has said the same thing in a latest editorial in Organizer. So it is quite obvious whose politics they are serving by taking this position. We appeal to the student community to stand united against the Indo-US nuclear deal and in defence of our sovereignty and rally behind the Left.

Sd/- Rajiv Kumar Ranjan, Secretary, SFI-JNU; Sd/- Roshan, President, SFI-JNU

Comrade Karat's Interview on Nuclear Deal in Frontline

OUR STRUGGLE AGAINST US IMPERIALISM LONG LIVE!!

JNUSU-SSS Public Meeting on 31st Aug

ATTEND IN LARGE NUMBERS!!

VENUE SHIFTED TO ROOM NO. 203, SIS

JNUSU Notice on Lyngdoh Committee

28-08-07

Friends,

The HRD Ministry as well as the UGC have sent letters to the JNU Administration urging it to implement the recommendations of the Lyngdoh commission with regard to conduct of the JNUSU elections. The Administration in turn has forwarded the letter to the JNUSU President for a response on behalf of the JNUSU. While the formal response of the JNUSU has to await a consultative process within the student community, certain points should be mentioned at the outset.

• Immediately after the constitution of the Lyngdoh Committee, the JNUSU President who was the Vice-President at that time met the Committee and expressed our views there. In front of the committee the JNUSU opined that the election process in JNU is a unique process where the entire JNUSU as well as the JNUSU Election Committee derives its strength and legitimacy from the student community and not the Administration through a continuous democratic process of debates and discussions. We urged upon the Lyngdoh Committee to consider the JNUSU election process as a model for the entire country. The history of student movement in JNU bears witness to the fact that the JNUSU elections are devoid of the use of money and muscle power which has become a menace in most of the universities of the country.
• In this light, we believe that the JNUSU election process guided by the JNUSU Constitution has no provision for any interference of the JNU Administration. Therefore, the question of any such intervention in our university does not arise.
• It is to the credit of the consciousness of the student community in JNU that any organization using muscle power or money power are democratically rejected by the students, which has ensured that this menace does not infect our campus. The Lyngdoh Committee or the Supreme Court’s concern regarding this becomes irrelevant in the case of our university.
• As per the recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee, there is an age limit for students’ to contest elections, which is 28 years for research students. JNU is a campus where majority of the students are research scholars. Hence any imposition of age limit will only exclude a large section of the student community from the democratic process of elections in our university. The committee also proposes 75% minimum attendance to be eligible to contest elections. In our university where no attendance record is officially maintained, with a majority of students being research scholars, this recommendation too is irrelevant in the case of JNU.
• The Lyngdoh committee also recommends that candidates will have only one opportunity to contest the elections for office-bearers. This will completely restrict the democratic rights of candidates to contest for the four office-bearers post one at a time.
• The Committee also recommends that students against whom disciplinary action have been taken by the University authorities cannot contest elections. In the last semester itself we witnessed how the JNU Administration took completely unjustified disciplinary actions against student activists. This recommendation in a sense gives the Administration the opportunity to settle political scores with union leaders.

The JNUSU Elections is one of the defining features of our University which gives our university a unique place in student movement of our country. As has been mentioned earlier, without any recommendation of any committee, the JNU student community showed utmost maturity to contest the election in the most democratic and peaceful manner, never giving any opportunity to either the Administration or the police to interfere in the election process. We are confident that this year too, the JNU students will conduct the elections in the most democratic manner, keeping up to the democratic ethos of our campus leaving no scope for the Administration or any other external agency to intervene. In this light we believe that the JNUSU Election should be conducted according to the JNUSU Constitution. The JNUSU will be shortly starting a broader discussion on this issue. The copies of the letter sent to us by the Government as well as the JNU Administration will be available in the JNUSU office from tomorrow to enable all the organizations and concerned individuals to know all the issues involved and frame their positions vis-à-vis this issue.

Sd/- Dhananjay, President, JNUSU; Jyotsna, Jt.Secy, JNUSU.

Release of Nicholas Burn's Statements in US Senate on Nuke Deal

DOWN WITH THE IMPERIALIST GAMEPLAN OF US!!

OPPOSE THE OPERTATIONALISATION OF THE 123 NUCLEAR AGREEMENT!!

UNITE AGAINST UPA's ABJECT SURRENDER BEFORE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!!

SFI release on Caste Violence in Gohana

DOWN WITH CASTE VIOLENCE!!

PUNISH THE PERPETRATORS ON AN IMMEDIATE BASIS!!

OUR STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE LONG LIVE!!

JNUSU Pamphlet dated 27th Aug '07

Date: 27/08/07

Friends,

Research is of paramount importance in any country especially in the Third World, whereby it ensures that the intellectual self-reliance of the country is maintained. Financial Assistance is an integral part in this whole process wherein research scholars are able to sustain their activities without any worries for the want of monetary support. However, due to the impact of the neo-liberal economic policies, the government had started its retreat from the higher education sector which also resulted in hikes in fees. It is a success of the student movement of JNU under the leadership of JNUSU that in spite of the attack of neo-liberal policies, a low fee structure is maintained in our university. However, in order to take this struggle forward to ensure quality research in the university, the JNUSU raised the issue of financial assistance and fought a historic agitation in 2006. As a result of this struggle the administration was compelled to ensure that the amount of MCM for the BA/MA students was increased to Rs. 1000 and for M.Phil/Ph/.D to Rs. 1500. The administration promised to raise the amount for BA/MA and also raise the annual income cap in due course of time. However, they refused to adhere to this promise and after a 12 day indefinite hunger strike of in last July, the administration was pressurized to raise the amount for BA/MA students also to Rs. 1500 along with raising the income cap to Rs. 1 lakh, thereby bringing to a logical conclusion the long struggle waged by the JNUSU in the enhancement of scholarships for students.

This historic agitation under the leadership of JNUSU had a tremendous impact in the policy making in the education sector, where the JNUSU demonstrated at the UGC office demanding that all M.Phil/Ph.D students in all central universities be provided scholarships to pursue their research. The UGC has already announced this scholarship. After the agitation last month, the JNU administration was forced to principally agree that in the face of the relative autonomy granted to all universities, the cut-off date for the fellowships be fixed from July 2005. However, even days after the agitation, the fellowships have not been disbursed to the students. Moreover, the MCM for the M.Phil/PhD students have been stopped I view of this scholarship leading to financial distress for the students. The JNUSU President today has submitted a letter to the VC demanding immediate disbursal of scholarships to the students, failing which the Administration will have to face demonstrative actions. We appeal to the student community in the coming days to rally behind the JNUSU in pressurizing the administration to act upon this genuine issue.

With regard to the Rajiv Gandhi Fellowships for SC/ST students, the students are required to submit a progress report of their research work in the centre office through their supervisors at the earliest. This has to be done so that the university can send the utilization certificate for the fellowship to the UGC, which is required for the disbursal of the second installment of the Fellowships.

Sd/- Dhananjay, President, JNUSU.

Sd/- Jyotsna, Jt. Secy, JNUSU.