Indian nuclear deal: Bad
timing by Bush By Kaushik Kapisthalam
Now comes the hard part. President George
W. Bush and India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
proudly announced a new nuclear cooperation deal
on March 2. The announcement capped a successful
state visit by the American president and
symbolized the growing friendship between the two
countries. Now Bush has to sell it to a reluctant
Congress, at a time when his political clout, even
within his own Republican Party, is considerably
diminished.
The Senate Foreign Relations
Committee is set to hold two successive hearings
with key Bush administration officials called
to
testify. First up, Undersecretary of State for
Political Affairs R Nicholas Burns and his
nonproliferation bureau counterpart Robert Joseph.
They will brief the Senate panel in a closed-door
hearing. Soon afterwards, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice will testify in what promises to
be a vigorous open hearing. The House
International Relations Committee (HIRC) is also
slated to have similar hearings in the same
timeframe.
To say that most members of
Congress are unhappy about this deal would be an
understatement. Virtually every member has one
issue or another with the deal. Some key
lawmakers, such as HIRC chairman Henry Hyde, are
unhappy because they feel that the administration
did not consult them when the deal was originally
broached between Washington and New Delhi last
July.
Congressmen are still smarting over
the Dubai ports debacle, which members feel the
Bush administration sprung on them by surprise.
Beyond that, the administration is distracted by
the worsening situation in Iraq, the newly hot
debate over immigration and a host of other
issues, many of which suggest that the Bush
administration has lost its command over policy.
One congressional watcher told Asia Times Online:
"This is absolutely the worst time for the [Bush]
people to try to pull a stunt like this."
Of course, many congressmen have
substantive concerns about the far-reaching deal,
since it turns on their heads many long-standing
and seemingly settled issues concerning nuclear
non-proliferation. In brief, India agreed to
separate its military and civilian nuclear
reactors and allow international inspection of the
civilian facilities. The US agreed to sell India
civilian nuclear fuel, reactor components and
technology even though it is not a party to the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
To put
things into effect Congress has to pass a law
exempting India from key segments of the Atomic
Energy Act. This includes Section 123 that
currently enjoins US nuclear trade with states
that do not accept "full scope" safeguards or
inspections over the entire nuclear program.
Moreover, lawmakers and their staffers are up in
arms over the part where the administration seeks
to have the law "non-exempted", meaning that once
it is passed, Congress has 90 days to convene both
chambers and pass a joint resolution in order to
overturn the law. Congress would prefer an
arrangement by which this deal will have to be
renewed periodically.
A
nonproliferation jihad A group of
nonproliferation experts and former bureaucrats,
derisively referred to in Indian circles as the
"Nuclear Ayatollahs", are likely to throw their
considerable weight against the deal. Informed
Indian sources feel that these nonproliferation
hawks have begun to wage a veritable jihad against
the India-US nuclear deal. For instance, David
Albright, who was a UN weapons inspector in Iraq,
recently issued a study blasting India's nuclear
procurement practices and trashing India's export
control laws and mechanisms. A key allegation in
this paper was that state-owned Indian nuclear
entities have procured material from elements of
the network led by Pakistani proliferator Abdul
Qadeer Khan.
Not surprisingly, Indian
officials reacted angrily to the report, rejecting
its findings as "baseless". India's ambassador to
Washington, Ronen Sen, noted that India cannot be
expected to answer innuendo. A former Indian
nuclear physicist, who wishes to remain unnamed,
pointed out that Albright's report offers no
substance to back up its claims that India's
nuclear procurement entity leaks sensitive
information. Acknowledging that Albright does
provide examples of Indian advertisements that
appear to publish specifications on sensitive
uranium enrichment related components, the expert
averred, "building a centrifuge from those few
blueprints, even assuming they are all accurate,
would be like building a car based on drawings of
gear-boxes, fuel-injection systems, one piston and
dash-board gauges".
When contacted by
AToL, Albright dismissed this criticism as naive
and said, "who knows what specific information a
proliferant state needs to complete a set of
information on centrifuges. For that reason,
classification systems covering centrifuges apply
to all components, their drawings, and
manufacturing instructions."
Another
former Indian official, who also declined to be
named because of the delicate nature of the
diplomacy involved, said that Albright went too
far in tying India to the A Q Khan network. The
official called it a "dirty tricks game" and
claimed that such allegations were aimed at
thwarting Indo-US nuclear rapprochement. Albright
however replied by noting that the trial documents
of accused South African proliferators clearly
indicate that nuclear enrichment-related
components were procured by India.
The
Indian official also claimed that India's
enrichment technology is almost entirely
homegrown. "We have too many local firms lining up
to supply our nuclear program, and we really have
no need to indulge in skullduggery," he said. For
his part, Albright observed that the Indian
official does not actually deny that India
purchased foreign material or used foreign
technology, which is what he said in his report.
Regardless of these conflicting claims, it is
likely that India's nuclear import and export
control processes will be given a thorough look
during the upcoming congressional hearings.
Meanwhile, former US president Jimmy
Carter and retired senator Sam Nunn have also
weighed in strongly against the nuclear deal.
Carter is still influential in some liberal US
circles and on the left-wing of the Democratic
Party. Nunn, also a Democrat, on the other hand is
known as a moderate and has long been considered a
credible voice in favor of nuclear disarmament.
Nunn maintains a close relationship with Senate
Foreign Relations Committee chairman Richard
Lugar, who wields enormous power in the
legislative process. These criticisms indicate a
widespread disapproval of the Indo-US nuclear
deal, observers point out.
All the help
he can get So far, deal opponents have been
in the forefront. Fortunately for the Bush
administration, the powerful business lobby seems
to be all for it. Major suppliers of nuclear power
components such as General Electric and
Westinghouse obviously have a direct stake in the
nuclear deal. The big defense contractors, such as
Boeing and Lockheed Martin, are hoping that a
nuclear deal could pave the way for big defense
and aerospace contracts with India. Naturally,
these firms are all pushing Congress to pass the
deal quickly.
Notwithstanding Prime
Minister Singh's view that it is now up to the US
to implement the deal, Indian government officials
have quietly begun to reach out to lawmakers. A
big congressional delegation is due in New Delhi
soon. Deal opponents like Democrat Senator Edward
Kennedy are slated to be part of the visiting
panel. Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran is
currently in Washington to first thank the few
openly pro-nuke deal legislators while reaching
out to key opponents and fence-sitters.
Saran is sure to get feedback from
Nicholas Burns and Robert Joseph from the
closed-door Senate hearing and listen to the types
of conditions that are being suggested by
senators. Saran is also likely to let
congressional figures know what India's red lines
are and make it clear to lawmakers that rejection
of this deal could jeopardize Indo-US ties. It is
clear now that Congress holds the future of
India-US strategic partnership inside its
labyrinthine chambers.
Kaushik
Kapisthalam is a freelance defense and
strategic affairs analyst based in the United
States. He can be reached at
contact@kapisthalam.com
(Copyright
2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing
.)
