Pakistan News Service

Thursday Dec 13, 2018, Rabi-al-thani 4, 1440 Hijri

Indo-US Nuclear Deal

03 January, 2006

By Zafar Nawaz Jaspal

  Related News  
Indian PM fails to strike nuclear deal in Russia
India far behind Pakistan, China in nuclear technology: Experts
  Related Articles  
India: Toxic Hotspot of Uranium & Nuclear Wastes
By Zaheerul Hassan
Democratic India lost control over Army Chief
By Zaheerul Hassan
  More on this View All

The Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran visited Washington on December 21-22, 2005. The primary objective of the visit was to expedite the implementation of agreements and understandings contained in the July 18, 2005 Joint Statement issued following the discussions held between the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush. The Indians earnest desire is to implement Indo-US Civil Nuclear deal. In July, President Bush agreed to assist India with the development of nuclear energy, but the United States Congress is insisting that India demonstrate there should be complete separation between energy and military activities because India is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Richard Lugar, chairman of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee stated, "I would urge the Indian side to think in maximalist terms and include as many facilities as possible within the scope of the civilian declaration."

During Mr. Saran visit, the Bush Administration’s high ups gave impression that without the prior settlement of the issue regarding the separation of nuclear facilities, i.e. division between civilian and military facilities, the civil nuclear energy cooperation between India and United States would not be feasible. The Bush Administration desires to cooperate with India in the nuclear field, but it could not ignore opposition of the anti-nuclear proliferation lobby within or outside the United States. Simultaneously it`s obvious that it believes that militarily and economically strong India would serve their strategic pursuits in Asia in the future. Especially, it could balance China, which is assumed by the majority of American strategists as a future strategic competitor. Though the Chinese and Americans have developed strong economic ties in the recent years, yet they have divergent views over the future of Taiwan. Precisely, both states disagree on number of political and strategic issues. Therefore, the Washington is assisting New Delhi to achieve a status of global power in the current international politics. Therefore, the American’s chalked out a new framework for assisting Indians in high technology, including defense, space exploration, satellite navigation, and full civilian nuclear energy cooperation.

The July 2005 summit between the US President George Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Washington provided a roadmap for the transformation of bilateral strategic ties. On October 17, 2005 the United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and India`s Minister of State for Science and Technology Kapil Sibal, signed an umbrella science and technology agreement to boost cooperation in areas ranging from health to space technology. The purpose of the agreement was to strengthen the science and technology capabilities of the United States and India, to expand relations between the extensive scientific and technological communities of both countries, and to promote technological and scientific cooperation in areas of mutual benefit. Prior to it, in June 2004, the United States licensed Boeing`s satellite systems to the Indian Space Research Organization to build a communication satellite.

On July 18, 2005 Bush Administration announced civil nuclear cooperation with India. In simple terms it agreed to lift a ban on civilian nuclear technology sales to nuclear-armed India, despite its refusal to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty or give up its nuclear arms. This cooperation would effectively grant India highly sought-after access to sensitive nuclear technology only accorded to states in full compliance with global nonproliferation standards. It would also treat India in much the same way as the five original nuclear-weapon states by exempting it from meaningful international nuclear inspections. It is a virtual endorsement of India’s nuclear weapons status. To be precise, this would enable India to obtain enriched uranium to fuel its nuclear reactors; acquire nuclear reactors from the international market; and participate in international nuclear research and development. Importantly, the implementation of the civil nuclear energy cooperation deal requires Congress to adjust United States laws and policies. According to the reports the Senate Foreign Relations Committee indicated that it would judge the efficacy of the Indian separation plan in terms of three criteria` compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency
safeguards, non-assistance to India`s nuclear weapons program, and transparency.

Under the Bush-Manmohan pact, India agreed to separate its civilian and military facilities in return for full civilian nuclear energy cooperation from the United States. In this context, instead of "perpetual" safeguards arrangements between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that will signal finality to civilian separation, New Delhi is interested in concluding a ``voluntary`` safeguards arrangement with the IAEA that could allow Delhi to pull nuclear facilities out of the civilian list in the future and put them back to military use. Whereas, the Congress desired that the separation plan must ensure, and the safeguards must confirm, that Indo-US civil nuclear cooperation does not in any way assist India in manufacturing nuclear weapons. Whether the perpetual safeguards arrangement would be able to prevent the Indians from using nuclear material from the declared civilian nuclear facilities for the military usage? It`s a debatable question. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee criterion contains many loopholes. It is not an alternative to comprehensive safeguards.
Moreover, the India’s past record reveals that it would violate the agreement. For example, the 40-megawatt Canadian supplied Cirus reactor located North of Mumbai was proof of an apparent diversion. Hence, it would be difficult to resolve the issues such as Cirus, which was intended for peaceful use, but was diverted for military purposes.

The Indo-US nuclear deal would have serious ramifications for the nuclear non-proliferation regime and South Asian security. Democratic Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts argued, "The administration`s move to launch nuclear cooperation with India has grave security implications for South Asia and the entire world." This deal would assist India in increasing its nuclear weapons. It would acquire nuclear fuel from the United States for civilian use, thus freeing up its
own stocks for more weapons.


Reader Comments:

Candu reactor tragedy

The outcome of India Pakistan Iran
Turkey Israel korea and others candu
Or NUKE Reactors for peaceful purpose
electricity requisite will end up in tragedy.
Behind these are latest President ahmeddinejad's
Tehran Tube-subway ” mayor” tag with
Tataristan tube Opening.Then there is this Canadian
British tube builder amid Oil-gas greed
Invasion diversion pumping saanp meter .Bush
India Russia move and Wva coal fired
electricity mine explosion give hint to
The day of tragedy coming in heavy
populated hindu Muslim Chinese central asian
region with 3 billion people at risk of exposing
themselves to radiation.The Day of Judgement
can be estimated by criss cross activities
of bush blair nuke radiation involvement
with common nudist Nuke Candu Canada.

M.B.Zakaria, United Arab Emirates - 03 January, 2006

Is this a Poem??

Is this a poem??

AS, Pakistan - 05 January, 2006

India - USA nuke axis dilemma

Nuclear energy theory of light anti God origin came after
1857 India Gadr with hurriedly assembled Darwin 1859
(buried in Westminster) theory, 1903 Lord Kelvin leading
to Rutherford radio active And nuke shattering of British
Raj via 1945 Hirosshima-nagasaki.This evolved into Israel
India Pakistan independence '47-'48.Iran govt Govern with
mixture of democracy theology with One judge each from
civil law religion law Presiding in court case. Unable to
understand,Definition of universe, god, light while worshipping
Jewish David Goliath Bethseba boxed in God or wahabiism ,
pharaoh palkiism(palki is boxed in God wrong belief).Ism is
what is your name,they reply I belong to wahabiism ,
Judaism,Hinduism,Buddhism Sikhism ,palky is travel mode
with out without handle to carry someone enclosed.The
hostility began When west was unable to cope sophisticated
Iran system in Canadian Iranian Ms Kazemi photographer
case. Bush Rice with their Theoretical photogenic
Darwin –Space Hubble Venture is simply flying high.
I hate their incompetent space and god conclusion leading
to Iran crisis.Peace will come with education.Can USA
President Bush save A Sharon or himself from dying
with the help of Human USA NASA scientists.As a lab
worker myself doing little bit nuclear plant or water work
30 yrs ago,my advice to distinguished foreign ulema
Nasa and nuke light specialist is to learn fundamental of
Light religion,universe, God.Mina itself speaks the trapped
world trapped oil based Economy .Like M.B.Zakaria my
concern is what eu /usa/UN will do to take possession of
Iran oil like they did it to grab Iraq oil .NUKE(their own)
and 100 yrs of efforts of theirs seem going waste.India USA
nuke axis blackmail is pathetic.

benz m Ispahani, India - 13 January, 2006

Disguized need for Weapons

Nuclear proliferation was known but was ignored for reasons. The proliferator country got a pat on the back. Iran desire to go nuclear is based the fact what Iranians see in Iraq. But nuclear weapons in the hands of agressive and arrogant leaders can threaten the whole world.

Om P. Dhiman, United Kingdom - 03 February, 2006

mush is Bush's puppet 100%

pakistan got a definite NO reply in answer to pakistan's request for nuclear energy cooperation similar to India's when Bush was in pakistan.can any pakistani frankly tell why such a stern refusal for such energy cooperation?. because the whole world and especially USA knows that pakistan is simply acting as if it is fighting and helping the US to fight terrorism when pakistan is known terrorist state with isi helping to train them in every way the US knows this fact hence sharp refusal for nuclear energy cooperation similar to India's.mush is simply used by the US BUT IN ANY COOPERATION , THEIR PRIORTY IS ALWAYS INDIA FOR MAJOR DEALS.sorry mush, you failed in Kargil and failed your state with USA.WHAT A FAILURE FOR mush leadership at the hands of the Americans.Time to change the leadership and the government ASAP.HURRY UP BEFORE ITS TOO LATE.LEARN FROM INDIA AND GO 100% DEMOCRACY FOR YOUR COUNTRY'S FUTURE AND ITS CITIZENS.PROTEST STATE TERRORISM BEFORE YOU ARE ENGULFED IN IT.

ramasi, United Kingdom - 10 August, 2006

 What do you think about the story ? Leave your comments!

Heading (Optional)
Your Comments: *

Your Name:*
E-mail (Optional):
City (Optional):
Country (Optional):
Field marked(*) are mandatory.
Note. The PakTribune will publish as many comments as possible but cannot guarantee publication of all. PakTribune keeps its rights reserved to edit the comments for reasons of clarity, brevity and morality. The external links like http:// https:// etc... are not allowed for the time being to be posted inside comments to discourage spammers.

  Speak Out View All
Military Courts
Imran - Qadri long march
Candid Corner
Exclusive by
Lt. Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)
Pakistan itself a victim of state-sponsored terrorism: Qamar Bajwa
Should You Try Napping During the Workday?
Suggested Sites