MOHAMMAD SALIM SPOUTS COMMUNIST LINE ON NUCLEAR

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 005059

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/12/2017
TAGS: PREL PARM TSPL KNNP ETTC ENRG TRGY IN
SUBJECT: MOHAMMAD SALIM SPOUTS COMMUNIST LINE ON NUCLEAR
AND NANDIGRAM

REF: KOLKATA 345

Classified By: Political Counselor Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B and D)


1. (C) Summary: Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPM)
Member of Parliament Mohammad Salim justified the violence in
Nandrigram to PolCouns November 20 by claiming that the
Communists drove out violent Maoists and restored law and
order in the area. Now, he asserted, the CPM will prioritize
peace. On the civil nuclear initiative, Salim picked apart
the 123 Agreement and Hyde Act, claiming that they did not
offer full civil nuclear cooperation and would impact India's
foreign policy. He recognized that the Left brought
historical baggage in its consideration of U.S.-India
relations, and urged the U.S. and Indian governments to slow
the process down. PolCouns and Poloff firmly countered
Salim's arguments, but he remained close-minded, refusing to
acknowledge that stalling the deal will hurt India's global
aspirations. End Summary.

Salim Expresses Communist Fear of U.S. Bloc
- - -


2. (C) In a November 20 meeting with PolCouns, Communist
Party of India (Marxist) (CPM) Member of Parliament Mohammad
Salim contended that, while the Left "does not object" to
peaceful nuclear energy and cooperation with the U.S., it
feared the implications for India's foreign policy. "Whether
we should join the U.S. Bloc, that is the apprehension," he
related. Asked by PolCouns which countries comprise the
"U.S. Bloc," Salim answered, "Israel and Palau." While the
Left believed that India and the U.S. could work together,
"we do not want to put ourselves in the U.S. strategic plan
in Asia," he explained. He questioned why the U.S. put
language regarding Iran in the Hyde Act, and held it as proof
that the U.S. intended to strong-arm India. PolCouns
responded that the Hyde Act language on Iran was non-binding,
and noted that the nuclear initiative did not take away
India's right to choose how it interacted internationally.


3. (C) Salim noted that the "integrated media" has
"appreciated the gesture you have shown India," and portrayed
the nuclear initiative as good. Moreover, he recognized that
the urban elite and intellectuals have expressed support for
implementing the initiative. However, he pointed out, those
supporters comprise only 20 percent of India's population,
and the remaining 80 percent have concerns about the closer
relationship with the U.S. He asked why the U.S. and Indian
governments have rushed implementation. "Why are you in such
a hurry?" he asked. Salim expected the Left to deliberate
further over the agreement after the Indian negotiators
return from Vienna.


4. (C) Salim acknowledged that the Left has significant
"anti-U.S. baggage." The "past deception" on Iraq and
Pakistan, and the ongoing effort to prevent Iran from
developing a nuclear program, have made the Communists
suspicious, he noted. PolCouns encouraged Salim to consider
the nuclear initiative as the area where the U.S. and India's
core national interests converge. Salim recounted that India
has counted on its "friendship with third world countries" to
survive the "onslaught" from the industrial world. The
non-aligned countries "share positions on universal
disarmament, nonproliferation, peace and stability," he
underlined.

Nuclear Criticism Regurgitated
- - -


5. (C) Salim related that the internal debate between the
Left and UPA government involved whether the 123 Agreement
and Hyde Act fulfilled all of the Prime Minister's
commitments that he pledged in his August 17, 2006 speech to
Parliament. He stated that the 123 Agreement does provide
"full civil nuclear cooperation," because it restricts trade
in heavy water production technology, sensitive technology,
and reprocessing equipment. Salim also claimed that the 123
Agreement did not contain the promised guarantee of fuel.
Finally, he complained that the 123 Agreement lacked the
arbitration mechanism that the China and Japan agreements
featured. PolCouns and Poloff countered Salim's criticism
point-by-point, but Salim repeatedly moved on to the next
argument when confronted.

NEW DELHI 00005059 002 OF 002



Nandigram Violence Blamed on Maoists
- - -


6. (C) Regarding the spate of CPM-led violence in Nandigram,
West Bengal (reftel),Salim pinned the blame on the Maoists.
He linked the Maoist presence to their prevalence in
adjoining states, and asserted that the Maoists wanted a
seafront location for smuggling. "We wanted peace and
started to flush out the the Maoists from the riverine area,"
he explained. He recalled that since January 2007, when law
and order in the village broke down, Naxalites have
infiltrated the area. He claimed that the Maoists inducted
several villagers and neighboring villages had spotted
seaplanes in the area. Asked about Trinamool Congress leader
Mamata Banerjee's involvement, Salim hinted that from 1999 to
2001 she "had discussions" in border areas of neighboring
states. While Salim refrained from accusing Banerjee of
direct ties to the Maoists, he noted that there "was some
overlap in the membership" of her party and the Maoists. "By
day Congress, by night Maoist," he asserted.


7. (C) Salim saw the Nandigram situation as part of a problem
that reached back to the lack of resolution over land
distribution when India became independent. In this case, he
continued, the government's proposal of establishing a
chemical hub divided the village, and triggered rumors, which
Salim considered particularly dangerous in such an insular
community as Nandigram. An "insider-outsider" mentality
developed, resulting in the expulsion of 3000 villagers by
the Maoist presence, he explained. Fearful of violence, the
police withdrew, he claimed. Isolated from the rest of the
country, the Maoists steadily lost ground, until the most
recent incident when, after a steady withdrawal of its
leadership, the Maoist cadre fled. Salim denied that a
"civil war" had occurred, asserting that "no clash took
place." He assured that "now our priority is peace will be
restored."

Comment: Close-Minded Communists
- - -


8. (C) As a member of the Indo-U.S. Forum of Parliamentarians
and moderate Communist, Salim came off as a politician firmly
entrenched against any opposition. He dutifully recited the
Communist talking points on Nandigram and nuclear without
engaging in a real dialogue. While he claimed to support
strong U.S.-India relations, he remained oblivious to the
benefits that the nuclear initiative might bring. We have
had more thoughtful interactions with others in the Left, but
Salim's comments provide proof of the intractable nature of
their complaints.
MULFORD