NEW DELHI, 5 August 2007 — India’s opposition Hindu fundamentalists rejected a landmark nuclear cooperation agreement between New Delhi and Washington yesterday, saying it was an assault on the country’s nuclear sovereignty.
They demanded Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government set up a parliamentary committee to examine the pact and secure Parliament’s approval before signing it, even though it is not required by law.
The agreement, when finally approved by US Congress, will end India’s global nuclear isolation and allow it to buy nuclear fuel and equipment from the United States and eventually other nations to help meet its soaring energy needs.
Details of a bilateral pact that governs the deal were disclosed Friday after it was finalized last month following several rounds of tortuous negotiations over New Delhi’s objections to what it said were new conditions. Critics in both countries have consistently accused their governments of giving away too much to clinch a deal that has been hailed by Washington and New Delhi as a benchmark of their new strategic friendship.
The Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), among the chief critics of the deal in India along with the communists who shore up the ruling coalition, said Manmohan Singh’s government had failed to take into account its concerns.
“No effort was ever made by it to evolve a national consensus on this vital issue of national concern before making commitments to the United States,” a statement from the party said.
“The BJP is of the clear view that this agreement is an assault on our nuclear sovereignty and our foreign policy options. We are, therefore, unable to accept this agreement as finalized.”
Ever since the deal was agreed in principle two years ago, its opponents in India have charged the government with compromising on its nuclear weapons program, mortgaging its right to conduct nuclear tests, and accepting stringent American conditions on civilian nuclear cooperation.
However, after the pact was finalized last month, top government officials said all Indian concerns had been addressed satisfactorily and nuclear scientists and analysts largely seemed to agree after the text was made public.
Although the agreement does not explicitly mention India being penalized if it conducts a nuclear test, American laws governing it mandate punitive action and this means India cannot test once it signs the agreement, the BJP said.
“In other words, we are being forced to accept a bilateral CTBT with more stringent provisions than the multilateral CTBT,” it said, referring to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty which India has refused to sign, saying it is discriminatory.
The United States has said it will act as “India’s shepherd” at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to clear the next hurdle in the way of the deal getting the US Congress’ final approval.
The US will be very active in supporting India in its efforts to convince the 45-nation NSG that it should get the same kind of international treatment in terms of civil nuclear trade as Washington would have just given bilaterally, the key US negotiator Nicholas Burns said Friday.
As an NSG member, Washington may call special meetings of the exclusive club that controls world nuclear trade to present India’s case after it concludes an India-specific safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), hopefully in the next 30 to 35 days.
“In a sense, the US will be acting as India’s shepherd at the NSG,” said Burns, US Undersecretary of State, briefing Indian media. “Once the NSG acts, we’ll formally ask the US Congress to approve the agreement by November-December,” he said hoping the whole process will be completed before the yearend to allow nuclear commerce between the two countries to resume after a gap of 30 years.
However, reprocessing of US supplied fuel — “by far the most contentious issue bedeviling the talks for the last six months” — would have to await the setting up of a new fully safeguarded facility by India, Burns said.
Asked if that meant that the ball was in India’s court insofar as the reprocessing issue was concerned, he said, “No, it’s in both courts.” While India has to build the facility the United States has to get the agreed procedures again approved by Congress.
Asserting that the deal does not violate either in letter or spirit the enabling Hyde Act passed by Congress last December, he was quite hopeful that the US legislature will endorse it again with equally overwhelming majorities.
“That’s absolutely false,” said Burns dismissing suggestions that US assurances to help New Delhi find other sources of fuel even as it delays its own supplies in the event of it conducting a nuclear weapons test would violate the spirit of the Hyde Act.
The agreement preserved intact the responsibility of the president under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 that if India or any other country conducts a nuclear test, he or she will have the right to ask for the return of the nuclear fuel or nuclear technologies that have been transferred by American firms, Burns said.
“If there is a nuclear test, the president will have to decide whether to exercise that right taking into account the circumstances. It’s not automatic, but that right is preserved wholly in the agreement,” he said to take care of the worst case scenario.
“But the reality is that India’s not testing, the reality is that India is living up to its responsibilities and has just passed a law tightening its export control laws,” Burns said.
