India-US nuclear deal.

India's Nuclear Deal with USIndia is a developing economy and is being viewed as a key player in world affairs and politics. In this context, one of the major concerns for the Indian state is that of energy security. Patterns and trends in energy consumption have seen a day-night shift and the need of the hour is to address the issue with immediate focus on stabilizing the energy needs and to sustain them for our future generations. The current pattern of production clearly shows our dependence on coal (about 51%) and hydrocarbons (approximately 40%). The twofold problems we face in this aspect are- first, even with the most optimistic predictions, the coal reserves will not last for more than one to one and a half centuries. Secondly, the country is not self sufficient in hydrocarbon resources. In the light of this scenario, the Indo-US nuclear deal seems to come as a great relief for India.
Christened as "Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Act of 2006", the deal ends thirty years of India's nuclear isolation. This is a great step forward in securing India's growing energy needs and to keep us on the path of economic growth. The US President George W. Bush, while signing the act, acknowledged the fact that India needed large amount of energy for its rapidly growing economy. First of all let us examine the provisions of the deal. The first steps in this aspect were the joint declarations of US and India made on July 18,2005 and March 2, 2006. Under these India was first to segregate its civilian and nuclear facilities and put the former under international inspections. In return the US assured, at least in principle, for "full civil nuclear energy cooperation". Other provisions said that India were to voluntarily maintain its unilateral moratorium on testing nuclear weapons and also work with the United States for a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. Apparently the deal seemed to be pro-Indian. However, as Shashi Tharoor pointed out, there is always a give and take relationship in such commitments.
In purview of this I would like to pint out some of the causes of concern for India with respect to the clauses in the act. The major damper to the act is that it does not automatically permit civil nuclear trade but rather lays down the conditions India must satisfy in order to do so. A proposal that the US President has to submit annual reports to the Congress with regards to non-proliferation and commitments was objected to by the Indian Government. The outcome to this appeal was merely a change in the language from "certification" to "assessment". Secondly, one of the biggest loopholes is that India will not be allowed access to enrichment and reprocessing technologies. Thirdly, the deal also does not ensure lifetime fuel guarantee for the reactors. Moreover, it also does not allow the stockpiling of nuclear fuel beyond a certain limit. However, the most disturbing clause for which there has been much hue and cry and for which India's scientist community has been the most vocal is that the act seeks to end all such cooperation if India was to conduct a nuclear weapon test in future. In such a case India would also need to return all equipments received under the deal. Needless to say this would be a huge economic drain. In addition we have concerns over additional safeguard and verification measures other than that from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Much has been debated on the benefits from the bill and there have been speculations that it is a sort of backdoor being used to make India comply the CTBT without actually signing entering into it. These concerns have been put forward to the US and India is waiting for the final ratification of 123 Agreement. Without the appropriate addressing of these issues it would be suicidal for India to enter into the deal.
Of course we do have the silver lining in the form of assurances. Answering to the concerns in the Parliament, Dr. Manmohan Singh acknowledged that difficult negotiations were lying ahead but all care would be taken to protect the country's strategic programme, to protect the autonomy of the country's three stage nuclear programme and safeguarding rights to indigenous research and development. He assured that India would not settle for anything less than "full civil nuclear energy cooperation" including reprocessing the spent fuel. The Prime Minister Dr Singh also assured that Atomic Energy Commission chairman, Anil Kakodkar that he would be kept informed of all developments at all stages. In response, Mr. Kakodkar assured the citizens that the deal would be in India's interests. The Finance Minister also assured that India will not cede the right to conduct nuclear tests but shall stick to the voluntary unilateral moratorium. Finally the US President himself sought to allay some of India's concerns.
Whatever be the final outcome, none can deny the significance of the proceedings so far. First and foremost, it recognizes India as an emerging power to the extent that US laws have been subject to amendment. The rest of the world can no longer ignore India's role in world dynamics. It gives an entire new dimension to Indo-US relationship. It also recognizes India as a safe and responsible nuclear power. In terms of the US gains from the deal, the most significant is of geopolitical nature. US gains the confidence as a rising regional power in South Asia. As Mr. Bush himself pointed out that India and USA are "natural partners" and the "rivalries that once kept the two nations apart are no more".
The road ahead is not a very smooth one, but the beginning so far has been good. First India's concerns need to be addressed. And, secondly the Nuclear Suppliers Group i.e. NSG countries should also have similar confidence on India, so that we can enjoy long-term benefits. Only time will tell where we stand, but the act in itself can be seen as a strategic success for India. God forbid, if things go worse and we do not achieve the intended, we only loose something that we never had.