STAY INFORMED

Contribute

Tell a Friend

DID YOU KNOW?

You can TAKE ACTION to make a more livable world right now! Click here for things you can do to make a difference.

» Find out more

What the Indians are saying about the US-India nuclear deal

Opposition parties in the government, notably the BJP, have raised concerns about the changes made to the deal in the US House of Representatives. The opposition has forged a united front and is calling on PM Singh to uphold his initial July 2005 conditions for the deal to go through. They see India’s sovereignty threatened by the deal.

  • “The scientists have unequivocally stated that the Indo-US nuclear deal in its present form is not in the national interest and their statement confirms the real dangers of the deal, which the BJP and some other parties have been voicing from the beginning."
  • BJP leader and former external affairs minister, Sinha, stated “We can’t remain mere spectators. India can’t bend to the will of the members of the US Congress…Above all, reciprocity and non-discrimination, the highest pillars of the July 2005 agreement, have been turned on their head.”
  • Former foreign minister and BJP member, Natawar Singh, asserts “Condoleezza Rice, in clear words, made the 18th July agreement stand on its head, thus departing from the letter and spirit of the agreement.”
  • A BJP leader, Arun Shourie, dissects the House and Senate bills, claiming that US, with the proposed legislation, intends to “halt, roll back and eventually eliminate the nuclear weapons capability of a country like India…Was it that the Americans hadn’t understood what our Government was telling them? Was it that our Government wasn’t seeing what the Americans were doing in open daylight? Or was it that we, the ordinary folk, were being fed sleeping-pills?”
  • Shourie again takes aim at the proposed changes, “We [India] must always remember that, while we fantasize about ‘parity’, the US- and, from its point of view, quite naturally –aims to acquire, in the form of and ‘allay’, an instrument. An instrument that will do its bidding because it is dependent on the US. Seeking ‘energy security’ by making ourselves dependent on imported reactors and imported uranium is to only further that design. But energy is just a minor instrument. The much more consequential instrument is to have India become dependent for its security- vis a vis China, for instance- on the US nuclear umbrella.”
  • Foreign policy expert G Parthasarathy states, “The legislative provisions proposed by the Senate International Relations Committee and the House of Representatives violate these [India’s unilateral moratorium on tests and independence] understandings…The legislation now proposed states that not only does the US Congress require annual certification of India’s compliance with its views on extraneous issues like relations with Iran…It should be evident that even strenuous efforts by Presi8dent Bush will not lead to unacceptable conditions placed by the US Congress being withdrawn from the final legislation that will emerge from both Houses of the Congress. It is also going to be difficult to conclude a mutually acceptable bilateral Agreement with the US on nuclear cooperation in the face of these ground realities.”

India’s top nuclear scientists have expressed concern since July 2005 and have issued an open letter to Parliament which speaks of their opposition to the nuclear deal. Their concerns include the perpetuity clause restrictions on India’s nuclear option, the nature of IAEA safeguards, a lack of Parliament power in the deal, and an infringement on India’s research and development of nuclear technology. Former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, Dr. A Gopalakrishnan, has repeatedly voiced his anxieties with the deal, which extend to include India’s independent foreign policy.

  • “We find that the Indo-US deal, in the form approved by the US House of Representatives, infringes on our independence for carrying out indigenous research and development (R&D) in nuclear science & technology. Our R&D should not be hampered by external supervision or control, or by the need to satisfy any international body.”
  • “Only shallow thinking will lead us to conclude that just by helping the US to bring in Iran to the UN Security Council, India will be rewarded with the final clearance of the nuclear deal…In short, ditching Iran in November (2005) will not buy India enough brownie points with the US to bag the Indo-US deal in our favor. It will just be the beginning of a long road with many toll posts, at each of which an American arm will be extended to extract one more concession.”
  • “In the first round at the US Congress, members made several disparaging remarks about India and especially about our foreign minister. It is a shame that neither the prime minister nor the external affairs ministry formally expressed their strong objection to these statements nor defended our own minister, for fear of annoying the US.”
  • “There is no wisdom in waiting for the US ‘to complete their legislative process’, because it is high time the US Administration is openly warned that Parliament and the people of India strongly oppose the specific inserts in these bills which go beyond the July 18, 2005 agreement between the two governments.”
  • Former Director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre and a former member of India’s Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. A N Prasad, states “With every passing development, it is becoming obvious that the India-US nuclear cooperation is being steered buy the United States with emphasis on non-proliferation rather than civilian nuclear cooperation contrary to the July 18, 2005 Joint Statement…This is evident from the contents of the Congress Bill HR 5682…and the Bill before the Senate for consideration in September 2006. There are explicit indications in the bills that the US wanted to keep tabs on the Indian nuclear program in general and productions and utilization of fissile material for weapons.”

Prime Minister Singh responded to the opposition in a debate in Parliament. He stated his commitment to the July 2005 agreement, and is determined not to bend to US pressure over proposed changes by Congress. Singh rejected US calls for moratoriums on nuclear testing and the production of fissile materials. He also repudiated the House bill stipulation that the US president review annually whether India is upholding these conditions. The PM stated that India will only accept a deal in the same spirit as the July 2005 declaration.

  • “The deal will not be allowed to compromise our nuclear policy… no matter how powerful a country may be, it can never take away our independent policies.”
  • Says K. Subrahmanyam, a member of the Singh government’s task force on global strategic developments, “The US Congress is not Indian parliament. When they pass the bill, it’s like a Christmas tree. They can put any wish on it...When the US gave the MFN to China, they inserted all sorts of conditionalities like the autonomy of Tibet and the human rights record, but that did not inhibit China from going ahead with it.”
  • Says the PM, “There is no scope for capping of our strategic program. It will be decided by the people, government and Parliament of the country, and not by any outside power…We are not willing to have any treaty or agreement. We are not in favor of a bilateral Comprehensive test Ban Treaty (with the US)…No limits have been put on production of fissile material…The prototype Fast Breeders will be totally kept out of surveillance of any kind…No US inspectors will be roaming about at our nuclear facilities.”

Sources

“US-India N-deal compromising India’s sovereignty: Joshi” Zee News, 8-16-06
http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=315882&sid=NAT

“India not to bow to US on nuclear deal” India eNews, Aug 2006.
http://indiaenews.com/2006-08/18833-india-not-bow-nuclear.htm

“The speech that was not allowed,” The Hindu, 8-20-06
http://www.hindu.com/2006/08/21/stories/2006082104371100.htm

Arun Shourie, “This is about energy, did you say?” The Indian Express, 8-23-06
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/11160._.html

Arun Shourie, “‘Parity’, did you say?”, The Indian Express, 8-24-06
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/11240.html

G. Parthasarathy, “Future of the nuclear deal,” Daily Pioneer, 8-23-06
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?
main_variable=Columnist&file_name=parthasarathy%2Fparthasarathy114.txt&writer=parthasarathy

“Appeal to Parliamentarians on the Indo-US Nuclear Deal”
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/category/south-asia/

Dr. Gopalakrishnan, “Let’s not forsake Iran” rediff news, Oct 2004.
http://www.rediff.com/cms/print.jsp?docpath=/news/2005/oct/04agopal.htm

Dr. Gopalakrishnan, “Let’s not forsake Iran” rediff news, Oct 2004.
http://www.rediff.com/cms/print.jsp?docpath=/news/2005/oct/04agopal.htm

Dr. Gopalakrishnan, “Parliament must assert its role” rediff news, Aug 2006.
http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/aug/16guest.htm

“India should not be considered a pushover,” rediff news, 8-26-06
http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/aug/26prasad.htm

“India: Prime Minister Asserts Nuclear Autonomy and Stands by Deal,” adnkronos international, 8-21-06
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level_English.php?cat=Security&loid=8.0.331618421&par=

Manish Chand, “Some critics still skeptical about n-deal” Daily India, Aug 18 2006.
http://www.dailyindia.com/show/52343.php/Some_critics_still_sceptical_about_n-deal

“India to retain ‘sovereign right’ on N-tests: PM” Daily News & Analysis, Aug 23 2006
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1048948