Page 1 of
2 India fears US nuclear
trap By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - Even as US President George W
Bush signed into law a bill that Congress passed
last week allowing Washington to conduct nuclear
trade with India, sections in India are wondering
whether this country can trust Bush to deliver on
his promises.
They point out that the US
law enabling nuclear trade with India deviates
significantly from commitments that were made by the
Bush
administration to the Indian leadership over the
past year.
The Henry J Hyde United
States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation
Act of 2006 reverses 30 years of US policy that
prevented nuclear cooperation with India, a
non-signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty that carried out its first nuclear test in
1974.
The Hyde Act removes an important
hurdle in the way of India purchasing long-denied
nuclear fuel from the US. It also paves the way
for the US and India to move to the next step on
their way to civilian nuclear cooperation - that
of negotiating and finalizing the bilateral 123
Agreement (123 refers to the relevant section of
the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954).
While
New Delhi and Washington are hailing the US
legislation as marking a new era in India-US
relations, some scientists and analysts in India
are calling on the government to proceed with
caution. They argue that the US legislation, which
provides clear pointers to what the US will insist
on in the 123 Agreement, will not culminate in a
deal that is in India's national interest.
India's nuclear scientists have come out
in sharp criticism of the legislation, claiming
that an agreement that conforms to it is not in
India's interests. A N Prasad, former director of
the Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC), has
argued that the US legislation "is more about
non-proliferation aspects stipulating what India
should do and not do to keep it in line with US
interests, objectives and policies".
Prasad has said the legislation "talks
about congruence [of India's policy] with US
policy on Iran". Although the legislation does not
use the term "rollback" on the nuclear program, it
expects India to accept a "permanent moratorium on
nuclear tests, stop production of fissile
materials for nuclear weapons, cap production of
weapons and eventually eliminate them".
It
expects "India to join R&D [research and
development] with the US on non-proliferation
issues along with various agencies and departments
of the US government totally extraneous to the
civil nuclear-cooperation deal. If this is the
intention with which the deal will be steered, if
not immediately, in course of time India will lose
control of its nuclear future."
Last week,
former scientists associated with India's nuclear
program met with Atomic Energy Commission chairman
Anil Kakodkar to express their misgivings about
the deal. The government has now promised to
involve them in an advisory role during the
negotiations of the 123 Agreement.
Critics
of the way the nuclear deal is moving point to the
many ways in which the US goalposts with regard to
civilian nuclear cooperation with India have
shifted. The US legislation is significantly
different from the commitments Bush made to the
Indian government in a joint statement on July 18
last year and the March 7 Separation Plan.
For instance, while these two commitments
speak of full civil nuclear-energy cooperation,
the US legislation bars India from access to
uranium enrichment, spent-fuel reprocessing and
heavy-water technologies. India will have access
to nuclear fuel and reactors, but not technology
and sensitive material.
Also, while the
two statements envisaged a one-time waiver of US
law to facilitate nuclear cooperation and were
silent on India's nuclear-weapons program, the US
legislation says cooperation is subject to annual
review and renewal, and links this to India's
strategic-military sector. India is not assured of
an uninterrupted supply of fuel for the lifetime
of the reactors in the safeguarded category.
On August 17, Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh assured the Upper House of Parliament that
India would "not agree to any dilution [of the
agreements reached earlier] that would prevent us
from securing the benefits of full civil nuclear
cooperation ... We seek the removal of
restrictions on all aspects of cooperation and
technology transfers pertaining to civil nuclear
energy - ranging from nuclear fuel [and] nuclear
reactors to reprocessing spent fuel, ie, all
aspects of a complete fuel cycle." He clarified
that an annual certification requirement "would
introduce an element of uncertainty regarding
future cooperation and is not acceptable" to
India.
In his statement, Manmohan put his
foot down on the issue of India's policy on Iran
taking into account US concerns. "No legislation
enacted in a foreign country can take away from us
[our sovereign right] ... there is no question of
India being bound by a law passed by a foreign
legislature," he said.
The Indian premier
clearly said that any shift from the agreements
