The Indo-American Riches

WASHINGTON 

The overwhelming bipartisan support for US-India civilian nuclear cooperationin Congress bodes well for the future of the bilateral relationship as Democratsprepare to take control of Capitol Hill in January.

The 85-12 vote in support of the nuclear bill in the Senate on Thursdayevening echoed similar backing in the House of Representatives, which voted359-68 in favour of its version of the bill in July. Democrats won control ofthe Senate and House in midterm elections on November 7.

Karl Inderfurth, an assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs inPresident Bill Clinton’s administration, calls the Senate vote "a strongaffirmation that both chambers of the US Congress and both parties, Democraticand Republican, are in favour not only of this particular agreement but theongoing positive transformation in US-India relations."

"Another important building block in the solid foundation of thisrelationship has been laid," Mr. Inderfurth, currently director of thegraduate programme in international affairs at George Washington University inWashington, told Outlook soon after the Senate vote.

Sumit Ganguly, the Rabindranath Tagore professor at Indiana University inBloomington, feels "particularly gratified that the bill has passed because itshows that relations with India are now a bipartisan subject."

Prof. Ganguly says much would now depend on what transpires in the conferencecommittee, which will seek to reconcile both House and Senate versions of thebill before sending it to President George W. Bush for his signature. "TheSenate passage of the bill bodes well for the relationship. However, the taskbefore those of us who care deeply about the Indo-US relationship and see thebill as a vital stepping stone is to ensure that non-germane riders andamendments are not slipped in during the reconciliation process," he says.

The Senate approval put the US and India one step closer toward civiliannuclear cooperation. The Nuclear Suppliers Group in Vienna must also approve thedeal. The conference stage is likely to take place in December when the "lame-duck"session of Congress reconvenes after a two-week Thanksgiving break.

"The key question is how hard the administration will push for strippingout elements India doesn't like but which have strong support in the Congress,"points out Robert Einhorn, a former assistant secretary of state fornonproliferation and now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Walter Andersen, associate director of the South Asia studies programme atthe John Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies inWashington, told Outlook that given that the leadership in both partiesis behind the bill, "all of this is likely to happen fast."

Supporters of the deal are hopeful the bills can be reconciled before the "lameduck" session ends. In a statement after the vote, Senate Majority Leader BillFrist had said, "I am confident that we can now work closely with ourcolleagues in the House to get this important measure to the president asswiftly as possible."

Mr. Andersen notes it was significant that "the foreign policy leadershipof both parties strongly backed the bill and beat down the ‘killer’amendments that the nonproliferation lobby was pushing so hard to get."

On Thursday, the senators approved an amendment from Iowa Democratic Sen. TomHarkin that India must fully participate in efforts to dissuade and sanctionIran for its nuclear programme consistent with the United Nations SecurityCouncil resolutions. However, an amendment from California Democratic Sen.Barbara Boxer that India end military cooperation with Iran was defeated 38-59.The United States suspects Iran’s nuclear programme is intended to developnuclear weapons. However, Tehran says its goal is to produce peaceful nuclearenergy. Sources told this correspondent India would ignore lawmakers’ concernsabout Iran "at its own peril."

An amendment from Nevada Republican Sen. John Ensign that sought to ensurethat International Atomic Energy Agency inspection equipment is not used forespionage purposes was taken up for a debate in closed session and laterrejected by a 27-71 vote.

An amendment from Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama that seeks to clarifyUS policy in order to deter nuclear testing by foreign governments was approvedby a voice vote.

A critic of the deal and part of a group of 18 arms control experts who wroteto senators earlier in the week urging them to make certain amendments to thedeal, Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association is not surprised by theSenate vote. But, he points out, "US and Indian negotiators have differencesto overcome with respect to the 123 Agreement for nuclear cooperation and Indianand IAEA officials have not begun formal talks on the safeguards agreement forthe additional facilities schedule to come under the ‘civilian’ list."

The US and India made little progress in what one source described as "tortuous"discussions on the 123 Agreement in New Delhi last week. A "123 Agreement"is the term for a peaceful nuclear cooperation pact with a foreign country underthe conditions outlined in Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act.

Mr. Kimball notes Indian negotiators are pushing for something the IAEA andthe congressional legislation will not allow: India-specific safeguardscontingent on assurance of fuel supply. "In addition, the NSG must agree byconsensus to necessary rule changes and that will not come quickly or easily,"he said.

Also a signatory to the Senate letter, Mr. Einhorn says the Senate hadadopted the bill "but with elements the Indian government has foundobjectionable."

The Senate approval, while not surprising even to critics of the deal, wascriticized in some quarters. A disappointed Michael Krepon, founder of the HenryL. Stimson Center in Washington, told Outlook, "It was a good day forthe profit takers, and a bad day for nonproliferation."

But there are others who praise it. Stephen Cohen of Brookings Institutionsays this now means that the nuclear issue will be seen in its "properperspective - not as the centerpiece of US-Indian relations, but as an importantand manageable issue. It also means that both countries will have to thinkseriously about working together to stabilize Asia's nuclear arms race."

"This is very much in India's interest as well as that of the US," Mr.Cohen told Outlook.

Mr. Andersen points out that as America enters into the early stages of the2008 presidential election campaign "the leadership of both parties has an eyeon the Indo-American money and vote and the Indo-American community looks atthis bill as the litmus test of support."

"In short, those who voted against the bill are likely to see a ratherstrong campaign to stop any money going to them. Interestingly, all thepotential presidential candidates from both parties in both houses of theCongress supported the bill," he said. "What has, however, changed is thatany administration hope of watering down the existing bill so as to address someIndian concerns is virtually nil. However, I think that the bill as is is stilla good basis for the kind of legislation that would lay a firm foundation forthe kind of strategic relationship the US is trying to build with India."

In a statement, Mr. Bush said he looked forward to signing the bill into lawsoon. He said the United States and India enjoy a strategic partnership basedupon common values and "the Senate has acted to further strengthen thisrelationship by passing legislation that will deliver energy, nonproliferation,and trade benefits to the citizens of two great democracies."

"The US-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation agreement will bring India into theinternational nuclear nonproliferation mainstream and will increase thetransparency of India's entire civilian nuclear programme," Mr. Bush said. "AsIndia's economy continues to grow, this partnership will help India meet itsenergy needs without increasing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Itwill also help reduce India's dependence upon imported fossil fuels. Byincreasing India's demand for civil nuclear technology, fuel, and supportservices, this historic agreement creates new business opportunities forAmerican companies and enhances our trade relationship."

Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar, co-chairman of the Senate ForeignRelations Committee and a key architect of the bill, called the agreement the"most important strategic, diplomatic initiative undertaken by President Bush."

The other co-author of the Senate bill, Delaware Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden,called the deal a "major shift" in US-India relations that would, hepredicted, bring stability to South Asia.

North Dakota Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan said he was "very disappointed"by the "troublesome road for the country." He warned the deal repudiateddecades of US policy of "telling the world it's our responsibility and ourmajor goal to stop the spread of nuclear weapons…. It's a horrible mistake."

An amendment from Mr. Dorgan requiring a determination by the president thatIndia has committed to certain basic provisions consistent with United Statesnonproliferation goals was rejected by a voice vote.