India-U.S. Nuclear Deal Waits on Safeguards Plan

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The United States government is waiting for India to produce a “credible, defensible” plan for separating military and civilian nuclear facilities before pressing forward with a potential nuclear technology transfer deal, a State Department official said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 3).

“We expect and have indicated to the government of India’s that India’s separation of its civil and military nuclear infrastructure must be conducted in a credible and transparent manner. It must be defensible from a nonproliferation standpoint,” Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Nuclear Nonproliferation Andrew Semmel said during the Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference.

“Many of our international partners have indicated that they view this as a necessary precondition and that they will not be able to support civil nuclear cooperation with India otherwise,” he said.

U.S. President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced the planned deal on July 18.

Semmel called “complex” the prospective timing of India’s movement to place civilian nuclear facilities under international safeguards, in relation to White House efforts to change U.S. law to allow nuclear trade with India and to amend Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) rules barring trade with countries lacking comprehensive safeguards. The proposed deal does not require India to eliminate its military nuclear program and place all facilities under international safeguards.

“India understands that the NSG and the U.S. Congress are waiting for it to present a credible, defensible and transparent plan for separating civilian and military facilities,” he said. “We expect that India would do this.”

“We intend to work with India over the coming weeks and months to develop with India a plan acceptable to the international community,” Semmel said.

House International Relations Committee staff member David Fite, speaking on a panel with Semmel on the India agreement, said the administration still has not begun formal consultations with Congress on the potential deal.

“Consultation hasn’t actually formally begun. Communication is beginning to improve slightly,” he said.

The July 18 agreement was “declared without any congressional consultation at all. They didn’t ask us what we thought about what was presented and we still don’t know entirely what the administration intends to do with this,” he said.

Fite, a staffer from the minority Democrats, many of whom appear to support the deal, said Congress does yet not know what sorts of legislative changes the administration is considering that would allow U.S. nuclear technology transfers to India to occur.

“It would be a good idea for the administration to seek our input before it commits to a particular option. The administration unfortunately has had a tendency on major issues to decide what it wants to do, send it up to Congress and basically invite us to meet it on the floor,” he said.

Last week, Undersecretary of State Robert Joseph told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that more intensive consultations with Congress would begin soon.

Fite said Congress was “stunned” to see recent administration predictions the deal could be finalized by February. “I think if we get it done by the end of this Congress, we will be proceeding at warp speed.”

Fite said Congress might seek to attach conditions to the deal beyond those negotiated by the White House and the Indian government. Some analysts have suggested, for instance, India be required to end production of weapon-grade fissile material.

“I believe so long as the Indians make a credible effort to separate civil and military facilities and place them under nonvoluntary safeguards and live up to all the other obligations that they have put in, then I think the agreement will pass Congress,” he said.

“The question is in what form. And the second question is how long will it last?” he said.

Any move by New Delhi to reverse its International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors vote finding Iran noncompliant with international nuclear safeguards — as recently suggested by a former Indian official — could kill congressional support for the deal, Fite said.

“If India is not supportive of the United States and Europeans on Iran nonproliferation policy, the agreement’s going to have a very difficult time in the Congress,” he said. 

Joseph said last week that any conditions added by Congress or other Nuclear Suppliers Group members could kill the deal.

“We would urge both Congress and our international partners to avoid the temptation to renegotiate the deal,” he said.  “Based on our interaction with the Indian government, we believe such additional conditions would likely prove to be deal breakers.”

Fite said he believes Bush could bypass Congress and simply waive legal restrictions on transfers to countries lacking full-scope nuclear safeguards of all facilities.

Bush could make “certifications that to prevent such exports from going to India would be seriously prejudicial to the achievement of U.S. nonproliferation objectives,” he said.

“He does, I think, have the authority to do this,” Fite said, but added there is doubt the administration could meet the legal standard of “seriously prejudicial.”

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.