"Linking The Indo-US Deal With Iran Will Be Completely Counter-Productive"
India's ambassador to the USA with experience as secretary to the Atomic Energy Commission of India who played a crucial role in stitching up the 123 Agreement on the deal...
Ronen Sen, India's ambassador to the United States, is an old hand at conducting intense negotiations, having earlier represented the country in Mexico, Russia, Germany and Britain. But it was his experience as secretary to the Atomic Energy Commission of India that served him well over two years and two days of difficult negotiations with the US over a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement. Sen's role in stitching up the deal was crucial. Days before the text of the 123 Agreement was made public, the Indian ambassador sat down with Ashish Kumar Sen in an exclusive face-to-face interaction. Excerpts:
Is the US committed to ensuring an uninterrupted supply of fuel to India?
Will the US work with other allies to ensure continued fuel supply if it cuts off its own supply?
If the right to return is exercised, are there any provisions for compensation to India?
Is India's dedicated reprocessing facility only for US-origin fuel?
Will the safeguards at this dedicated facility be any different from those we've agreed to for other civilian nuclear facilities?
What were some of the challenges while negotiating this deal?
How will India react to such pressure on Iran on which there are such strong bipartisan concerns in the US?
Were any scenarios discussed under which the US president would waive its right to return, say, if the Chinese or the Pakistanis tested a nuclear device and India made a case for testing? Would India face less consequences then?
What does the 123 Agreement spell out?
But does it curtail India's right to conduct a nuclear test?
Details of this deal have been negotiated in public. Is this unprecedented?
This is a historic agreement for the US-India relationship, but how do you explain the criticism?
Published At:
Tags