India's Hindu nationalists slam U.S. nuclear deal (reject, evolve)

[celina]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070804/...a_nuclear_dc_4

By Y.P. Rajesh Sat Aug 4, 9:43 AM ET



NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India's opposition Hindu nationalists rejected a landmark nuclear cooperation agreement between New Delhi and Washington on Saturday, saying it was an assault on the country's nuclear sovereignty.
They demanded Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government set up a parliamentary panel 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 U.S. 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 on 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 nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), among the chief critics of the deal in India along with the communists who shore up the ruling coalition, said 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 U.S.," 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 of 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 on Friday.
Although the agreement did not explicitly mention India being penalized if it conducted a nuclear test, American laws governing it mandate punitive action and this meant India could not test once it signed 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.

[Pariah]

Manmohan Singh is making a mistake, in my opinion.
America tells every country in the world to provide international checks, as well as curtail military nuclear power, but it continues to do the same. India is an honest country. Without signing the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), India has never provided arms to other countries, let alone those headed by Islamic fundamentalists.

Of course, one option is to sign the deal and perform research behind closed-doors. Plus, the treaty does not specifically restrict testing.

India needs to realize that "peacefulness" and Gandhian maneuvers do not work in the real world - to ruin proper militarization now is to screw up in the future, where more devastating conflicts beyond Iraq probably lie.

NOTE: (Made a mistake - the deal is actually in favor of India, which is why U.S. officials don't agree with it as much as India does)

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapc...ear/index.html

Originally Posted by CNN

The U.S. Congress must also review the deal. Many lawmakers and non-proliferation experts have voiced concern about what they see as U.S. concessions to New Delhi. In particular, the United States has agreed to ensure continued delivery of nuclear fuel to India even if it tests a nuclear weapon and the United States suspends cooperation, as required by law. U.S. officials said that a further Indian nuclear test is unlikely, although the Indian government has maintained its right to test nuclear weapons and the deal does not place India's considerable nuclear weapons arsenal under international monitoring.

Non-proliferation experts have said the United States' willingness to allow India to reprocess nuclear fuel it provides to New Delhi is inconsistent with its drive in the international community to stop Iran from doing so. Unlike New Delhi, Tehran is a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

"I can assure you that the United State is not going to suggest a similar deal with any other country in the world. We have always felt of India as an exception," Burns said. "We've made the argument that India has not proliferated its nuclear technology. That India, in effect, outside the system, has played by the rules and the system would be strengthened by bringing it in.

"But we are not anticipating in any way, shape or form a similar deal for any other country."

It is saddening, however, that India did not develop its own technology. In the future, I hope it does continue to do so.