India should get a better deal
The failure to get the nod from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in Vienna for the Indo-US nuclear agreement has not made India and the US governments worried that this “historic deal” will not go through. Too much has been at stake to see this deal at its present situation and there is still an opportunity to get the needed approval.
In India, the pull out by the Left parties from the United Progressive Alliance last July has threatened the survival of the Congress-led government in New Delhi. Arguing that the nuclear deal with the US is bad for India, it shook the four year long alliance. However, with the leadership quality shown by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and full support from his Congress party and its allies, the UPA government survived the no confidence motion.
PM Singh succeeded in convincing his fellow legislators that the deal is good and very important for India’s future. He argued that India’s insatiable needs for clean energy to support its ever growing economic development can be fulfilled through this deal. Furthermore, Indian nuclear technology, the peaceful nuclear technology, will become more advanced with the possibility of transfer of knowledge and technology.
The UPA won the majority of support to continue its term in office until next summer.
In the US, the Bush administration has been working relentlessly to convince the Congress that the nuclear deal with India is good for both sides. Apart from inching in on a strategic objective of balancing power equation in Asia, the Bush administration believes that the deal will bring billions of fortunes for America’s companies. With the superior nuclear technology at hand, the US will be able to benefit more than it can expect. Besides, this deal will become a legacy for President Bush once he leaves the office later this year.
The journey for this deal has, however, not finished yet. It needs the stamps and endorsement from the IAEA and the NSG before any of those above benefits could be achieved.
In the first week of August 2008, the IAEA gave its endorsement to India’s safeguards pact. It was a relief for both parties since one hurdle has been passed successfully. But the last and final hurdle still needs to be dealt with: the NSG.
The NSG consists of 45 countries which has great concern with reducing nuclear proliferation by controlling the export and re-transfer of materials that may be applicable to nuclear weapon development and by improving safeguards and protection on existing materials. Thus having studied the Indo-US nuclear deal document submitted by India and the US, the NSG met last month and decided to reject it.
They insisted on the maintenance of the status quo.
The concerns by the NSG are on issues related to the existing nuclear testing moratorium, no export of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) technology, and conforming to nonproliferation agreements like the IAEA Additional Protocol and Missile Technology Control Regime.
However, the NSG still gave the deal a lifeline. They asked the two governments to revise the document and on 4 – 5 September 2008 they will re-convene and discuss the revised format of the Indo-US nuclear deal document.
India’s current status as a non-signatory to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is another stumbling block for this agreement to get formal approval from the NSG. India, along with Pakistan, North Korea and Israel, are nuclear capable countries that do not sign the NPT. Exemption to India would deteriorate the status of the NPT.
It is up to the Indo-US team to come up with a better format of the document which shall satisfy the NSG.
In my opinion, even though critics of this deal argue that the deal is bad for the future of NPT and the balance of power in the international system, the deal should go through and the NSG should have no objection to this deal.
NPT is discriminatory and India’s history in dealing with nuclear technology, its strict adherence to the principle of no first use for its nuclear arsenal, its vibrant democracy in which the military is under the firm control of the civilian government and its insatiable need for clean energy to support its growing economy should make enough reasons for India to deserve a better deal.
Rejection to the deal is a perpetuation of discriminatory approach to nuclear technology and the rejection to establishment of equality in the international system.
In India, the pull out by the Left parties from the United Progressive Alliance last July has threatened the survival of the Congress-led government in New Delhi. Arguing that the nuclear deal with the US is bad for India, it shook the four year long alliance. However, with the leadership quality shown by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and full support from his Congress party and its allies, the UPA government survived the no confidence motion.
PM Singh succeeded in convincing his fellow legislators that the deal is good and very important for India’s future. He argued that India’s insatiable needs for clean energy to support its ever growing economic development can be fulfilled through this deal. Furthermore, Indian nuclear technology, the peaceful nuclear technology, will become more advanced with the possibility of transfer of knowledge and technology.
The UPA won the majority of support to continue its term in office until next summer.
In the US, the Bush administration has been working relentlessly to convince the Congress that the nuclear deal with India is good for both sides. Apart from inching in on a strategic objective of balancing power equation in Asia, the Bush administration believes that the deal will bring billions of fortunes for America’s companies. With the superior nuclear technology at hand, the US will be able to benefit more than it can expect. Besides, this deal will become a legacy for President Bush once he leaves the office later this year.
The journey for this deal has, however, not finished yet. It needs the stamps and endorsement from the IAEA and the NSG before any of those above benefits could be achieved.
In the first week of August 2008, the IAEA gave its endorsement to India’s safeguards pact. It was a relief for both parties since one hurdle has been passed successfully. But the last and final hurdle still needs to be dealt with: the NSG.
The NSG consists of 45 countries which has great concern with reducing nuclear proliferation by controlling the export and re-transfer of materials that may be applicable to nuclear weapon development and by improving safeguards and protection on existing materials. Thus having studied the Indo-US nuclear deal document submitted by India and the US, the NSG met last month and decided to reject it.
They insisted on the maintenance of the status quo.
The concerns by the NSG are on issues related to the existing nuclear testing moratorium, no export of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) technology, and conforming to nonproliferation agreements like the IAEA Additional Protocol and Missile Technology Control Regime.
However, the NSG still gave the deal a lifeline. They asked the two governments to revise the document and on 4 – 5 September 2008 they will re-convene and discuss the revised format of the Indo-US nuclear deal document.
India’s current status as a non-signatory to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is another stumbling block for this agreement to get formal approval from the NSG. India, along with Pakistan, North Korea and Israel, are nuclear capable countries that do not sign the NPT. Exemption to India would deteriorate the status of the NPT.
It is up to the Indo-US team to come up with a better format of the document which shall satisfy the NSG.
In my opinion, even though critics of this deal argue that the deal is bad for the future of NPT and the balance of power in the international system, the deal should go through and the NSG should have no objection to this deal.
NPT is discriminatory and India’s history in dealing with nuclear technology, its strict adherence to the principle of no first use for its nuclear arsenal, its vibrant democracy in which the military is under the firm control of the civilian government and its insatiable need for clean energy to support its growing economy should make enough reasons for India to deserve a better deal.
Rejection to the deal is a perpetuation of discriminatory approach to nuclear technology and the rejection to establishment of equality in the international system.
blog by Mas Qisa'i at 8:53:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home for More Stories