Indian-U.S. Nuclear Deal Meets Spirit of Nuclear Nonproliferation Laws, Administration Says

A senior Bush administration official last week defended the recently completed U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal and expressed hope that Congress would approve the arrangement by the end of this year (see GSN, Aug. 3).

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns led the U.S. negotiating team that produced the text officially released last week.  The agreement allows New Delhi to purchase U.S. nuclear materials and technology in exchange for placing India’s civilian nuclear sector under international monitoring.  With the deal pending last year, the Congress approved a bill to exempt India from most U.S. nuclear nonproliferation rules, including those that have required Washington’s nuclear trade partners to have joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and to have all their nuclear facilities under international safeguards.

In an interview with the Council on Foreign Relations, Burns explained why the Bush administration was ready to provide the exemption to India.

The agreement “speaks to the modern-day needs of the Nonproliferation Treaty as well as what we need to do to strengthen it in the years ahead.  You’ve got this anomalous situation where you’ve got countries inside the NPT, like Iran, cheating.  And you’ve got countries outside the NPT, including the soon-to-be largest country in the world, India, not cheating but following the rules of the NPT,” he said.

”To strengthen the nonproliferation system for the future, it just makes every bit of sense to bring India into it and to do that in such a way that doesn’t strengthen its military arsenal, but does allow it to move forward to modern nuclear-plant construction with the latest technology,” Burns added.

“It finally straightens out this situation we’ve had where India has been on the outside for 35 years.  It allows them to put 14 of their 22 power reactors under safeguards and all future breeder reactors (a reactor that produces energy as well as new fuel),” he said.  “And within 25 years, I think 90 to 95 percent of their entire establishment will be fully safeguarded.  So the choice is:  Should we isolate India for the next 35 years, or bring it in partially now and nearly totally in the future?  I think that’s an easy choice for us to make strategically.”

Burns also denied some critics’ claims that the deal skirts the intent of the congressionally approved exemption for India.  The exemption, signed into law by President George W. Bush in December, requires the United States to cut off nuclear supplies if India tests a nuclear weapon.  The text of the recent agreement, however, contains language that critics have said promises U.S. aid in finding alternative nuclear suppliers for India if U.S. supplies are ended.

“If … disruption of fuel supplies to India occurs, the United States and India would jointly convene a group of friendly supplier countries to include countries such as Russia, France and the United Kingdom to pursue such measures as would restore fuel supply to India,” the agreement says.

Burns denied that the language circumvents the spirit of the U.S. law.

“That’s absolutely false,” he said.  “I negotiated the agreement and we preserved intact the responsibility of the president under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 that if India or any other country conducts a nuclear test, the president — he or she at that time in the future — will have the right to ask for the return of the nuclear fuel or nuclear technologies that have been transferred by American firms.”

Burns said that the administration could formally submit the deal for congressional approval “by November or December” if India can reach a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency by then.  New Delhi must also persuade the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group to alter its nuclear trade guidelines that currently deny nuclear exports to non-NPT nations lacking safeguards over all their nuclear facilities.

Burns said the IAEA safeguards agreement could be completed “in the next 30 to 35 days” (Robert McMahon, The Capital Interview, Council on Foreign Relations, Aug. 3).

Back to top
About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines © Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.