|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nonproliferation Experts Outline Goals for Potential India-U.S. Nuclear Energy Cooperation By Marina Malenic WASHINGTON — Following U.S. President George W. Bush’s announcement last week of support for nuclear energy cooperation with India — a nuclear-armed state that is not a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty — experts yesterday discussed the nonproliferation goals for any potential India-U.S. deal (see GSN, July 19). The agreement announced by Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh calls for working groups to meet in the coming months to settle the details of any potential nuclear cooperation. India should halt production of fissile material, said Robert Einhorn, senior adviser for the Center for Strategic and International Studies international security program, speaking yesterday during a panel discussion at the American Enterprise Institute. Singh agreed last week to support negotiations toward a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, Einhorn said. New Delhi has long stated its goal of possessing only a “minimum credible nuclear deterrent capability” with no intention to match the size of its nuclear arsenal to those of the declared nuclear powers, he said. Einhorn also called for the working groups to develop security criteria for protection of India’s military nuclear facilities, which New Delhi could then implement independently. He also said the United States should continue to offer more substantive benefits to those countries that are NPT parties in good standing. Any India-U.S. nuclear deal is “unlikely to lead to NPT withdrawals, but it could lead to the feeling that the rules are less binding,” Einhorn said. He added that such a move could make U.S. nonproliferation policy seem “selective and self-serving,” encouraging countries like China and Russia to make decisions similarly based on their self-interests. Finally, Einhorn encouraged the United States to press India to be more active in persuading other countries pursuing nuclear programs, particularly Iran, to abide by international nonproliferation standards. New Delhi must be more helpful to Washington on nonproliferation policy for any nuclear deal to be of benefit to the United States, he said. “India still has one foot in the Nonaligned [Movement] camp and one in the Western camp, and it must decide where it wants to stand,” Einhorn said. Other experts were more pessimistic about the proliferation dangers of conducting nuclear business with India. While Singh last week promised to adhere to the same nonproliferation and security standards as do declared nuclear powers under the NPT, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center Executive Director Henry Sokolski said the Bush administration must hold New Delhi to that promise in preparation for future deals with non-NPT states. “What will the rules be for all ‘India-plus-ones’ is the question you have to settle,” said Sokolski. Sokolski also speculated that U.S. lawmakers, who must amend existing U.S. laws for any nuclear cooperation with India to go forward, would be critical of India’s lack of transparency about its nuclear program. “I think Congress is going to be very sensitive about these things,” Sokolski said. In addition to congressional approval of a U.S. nuclear energy deal with New Delhi, international nuclear cooperation is pending a decision by other members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 44-member consortium of the world’s top nuclear technology exporters. The United Kingdom yesterday became the first such country besides the United States to welcome India’s promises to abide by international nonproliferation standards, the Associated Press reported. “India’s willingness to engage on nuclear nonproliferation with the international community represents a significant step forward,” a British government spokesman said. “On this basis, we are ready to discuss with our international partners the basis for cooperation in civil nuclear matters with India,” he said. U.S. aircraft manufacturer Boeing, meanwhile, announced that it has entered into negotiations to sell Super Hornet F-18 fighter jets to the Indian air force and navy, Asia Pulse reported yesterday. Experts also said last week’s agreement between Bush and Singh seems to have been assembled hastily. An announcement had been expected only in time for Bush’s planned visit to India next year. Thomas Donnelly, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, attributed the Bush administration’s haste to its realization of “the limits of U.S. power.” With “old allies not of much value in securing the world as it is,” the United States must cultivate relationships with rising powers like India, Donnelly said. Einhorn also said that, while nuclear cooperation with New Delhi would be controversial until the details are settled, there was broad agreement among U.S. experts and policy-makers that Indian development should be encouraged. “The strategic case for … facilitating India’s rise to the status of major world power is very strong,” Einhorn said. “In general, it doesn’t make any sense to oppose this deal,” he said.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
