|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Rice Promotes U.S.-Indian Deal to Lawmakers
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told a Senate panel today that the U.S.-Indian nuclear sharing agreement would not cause new military competition among Asian countries, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 4). “Civil nuclear cooperation with India will not lead to an arms race in South Asia,” Rice said in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. She is expected to appear later today in front of the House International Relations Committee. Rice said India is unlikely to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. “We are simply seeking to address an untenable situation,” she said. “This agreement does bring India into the nonproliferation framework, and does strengthen the regime.” The “path-breaking” agreement “obviously deserves the support of the U.S. Senate,” Rice said. Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) agreed that the deal would place more international safeguards on India, but added the agreement “would not prevent India from expanding its nuclear arsenal.” Ranking committee Democrat Joseph Biden (Del.) said “it comes down to a simple bet we are making, that India appreciates as much as we that the two nations have the potential to be anchors for stability.” He indicated he would support the deal when it comes up for a vote, AP reported. Congressional approval is required for the deal to go through. Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.) said the White House is asking Congress to approve the agreement without telling lawmakers what safeguards would be put in place. The International Atomic Energy Agency would receive the safeguards, but “I don't know they should be substituted for Congress,” he said. Senator George Allan (R-Va.), however, called the deal “a good bet” when considering the benefits to India and the global community. He said India and the United States share democratic values, giving the two a shared sense of security (Barry Schweid, Associated Press I/Yahoo!News, April 5). Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), however, criticized the agreement, AP reported “I do not share the view that closer U.S.-India ties will be a counterweight to China, which seems to be the unstated yet driving force behind this deal,” she said in remarks prepared for the hearing. “This type of thinking is not only outdated and dangerous, it flies in the face of reality.” Boxer said India’s record indicates that it does not desire to become a “hedge” against China. “It is naive to think otherwise,” she said (Barry Schweid, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, April 5). House lawmakers are also expected to grill Rice, USA Today reported. “The intention is to do due diligence, and there are a lot of questions members want answered,” said International Relations Committee Chairman Henry Hyde (R-Ill.). Ranking committee Democrat Tom Lantos (Calif.) said the White House has yet to provide details on how it would work with the nuclear industry in India. Seven proliferation experts sent a letter yesterday to the lead Republicans and Democrats on each committee asking lawmakers to delay action on the agreement until the White House “has specified what further steps it is planning to take” to prevent proliferation. Institute for Science and International Security chief David Albright said he is worried by certain Indian practices. He said that for two decades, an Indian uranium enrichment facility has placed ads in newspapers for sales of nuclear technology. These ads reveal sensitive information, and end-users for the equipment have not been identified. In addition, the State Department in 2004 placed sanctions on Indian scientist Y.S.R. Prasad for proving assistance to Iran’s nuclear program. He is the former chief of the Indian Nuclear Power Corporation and an expert on the extraction of tritium, which can be used in nuclear warheads (Barbara Slavin, USA Today, April 5). Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns acknowledged the deal would be a tough sell to lawmakers, Reuters reported. “Sometimes bold ideas take a little while to be understood or to be accepted,” he said. “But we are very confident we have done the right thing here.” “They can't just be expected to sign off on something without having held hearings, which begin today, and without having been able to get the detailed answers from the American government which they are entitled to have. There is no question that this is controversial,” he added (Reuters I/New York Times, April 5). Lantos said that lawmakers are already discussing changes to the agreement, Reuters reported. “I will urge my colleagues that while we need to be fully aware of all the shortcomings, and we have to do everything in our power to rectify those, that is the wrong prism through which to view the agreement,” he said. He added that Rice “can make an enormous difference in gaining support for the legislation.” Lantos said he expects the deal to pass. However, Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, said amendments might kill the deal. “If too many conditions are added or if the deal starts getting tinkered with, it could unravel very quickly and the overall deal could collapse,” he said. “This would be devastating to the overall trust and partnership.” Lantos said a list of “improvements” has been drafted but would not provide specifics. “I am very strongly in favor of maximum congressional oversight within a realistic framework, but we can't tell our negotiators to go back to the Indians and obtain concessions,” he said, adding that neither side is completely pleased with the deal (Reuters II/New York Times, April 4).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
