This annotated chronology is based on the data sources that follow each entry. Public sources often provide conflicting information on classified military programs. In some cases we are unable to resolve these discrepancies, in others we have deliberately refrained from doing so to highlight the potential influence of false or misleading information as it appeared over time. In many cases, we are unable to independently verify claims. Hence in reviewing this chronology, readers should take into account the credibility of the sources employed here.

Inclusion in this chronology does not necessarily indicate that a particular development is of direct or indirect proliferation significance. Some entries provide international or domestic context for technological development and national policymaking. Moreover, some entries may refer to developments with positive consequences for nonproliferation.

17 January 1994
Japan's foreign ministry announces that in recent bilateral talks with India, Japan urged India to join the NPT and open up its nuclear facilities for IAEA inspection in order "to improve transparency of its nuclear development plans." Transparency of India's nuclear program is important for Japan since India is one of the largest recipients of its Official Development Assistance (ODA). ODA guidelines require that Japan take into account the receiving country's military expenditure, production, import and export of conventional weapons, missiles and weapons of mass destruction.
—"Japan Urges India to Join NPT, Accept Inspections," Japan Economic Newswire, 17 January 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 14 January 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

24 January 1994
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman R. Chidambaram says that India has voluntarily offered to place the Tarapur 420MW reactors and a fuel reprocessing plant under international inspections in order to "demonstrate to the world that we have no intention of using the reprocessed plutonium for anything other than running the power station." He says India will sign a new agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [Note: See entry for 16 October 1993.]
—Neelam Jain, "India to Sign a New Safeguard Agreement for US-built Atomic Plant," United Press International, 24 January 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 25 January 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

January 1994
Indian and Pakistani foreign secretaries meet to discuss proposals for confidence-building measures and other political issues. Both countries agree to prepare non-papers on an array of subjects including nuclear issues.
—George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 340.

12 February 1994
The Rajasthan Atomic Power Station-1 (RAPS) is shut down for "affecting the repair of its calandria overpressure relief device" which resulted in the leakage of heavy water.
—R. Ramachandran, "Rajasthan Atomic Power Plant to Be Shut Down for Three Years," Economic Times (Mumbai), 22 May 1995.

12 February 1994
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) Chairman A. Gopalakrishnan says India will employ new safety measures to ensure greater safety at its nuclear installations. The measures will include surprise checks and increased surveillance at nuclear sites, and industrial and medical centers where radioactive materials are used. He adds that new nuclear plants will not begin operation "until the plant workers receive intensive training on simulator plants to meet international standards."
—"India to Conduct Surprise Safety Checks at Nuclear Sites," United Press International, 12 February 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 13 February 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

15 February 1994
Responding to the CBS television program 60 Minutes, which charged India with operating "the most unsafe nuclear plants in the world," Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) Chairman A. Gopalakrishnan says the US television network has "deliberately and seriously" distorted the factual information on nuclear safety issues in India. He emphasizes that safety regulatory systems and procedures are "well in place and implemented effectively."
—"Atomic Energy Regulatory Board 'Deeply Disturbed' by 'Distorted' US Programme," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 18 February 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 14 January 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

28 February-2 March 1994
Arms control experts from India, China, Pakistan, and the United States meet in Shanghai at the four-country conference on arms control, and regional and global measures to avert nuclear and missile proliferation in South Asia. The conference is sponsored by the Federation of American Scientists, Center for Policy Research (New Delhi), and Fudan University (Shanghai). The second round of the four-country meeting is planned to be held in New Delhi at the end of 1994. Participants at the conference reach a consensus on the issue of the necessity of a bilateral agreement banning nuclear testing between India and Pakistan. The participants also call for further cuts in the US and Russian nuclear arsenals.
—"Four-Nation Meeting Calls for India-Pakistan Nuke Test Ban," United Press International, 3 March 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 4 March 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

March 1994
The Clinton administration unveils proposals to try and induce India and Pakistan to abide by a regional nuclear arms control regime. The proposal aims at persuading India and Pakistan to end unsafeguarded production of fissile material; head off a regional nuclear arms race by agreeing to abide by a policy of non-deployment of nuclear capable missile systems; and agreeing to attend an international conference to address regional and global arms control and disarmament issues.
—George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 341.

Late March 1994
In the aftermath of a meeting with the US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Robin Raphel, a senior Indian government official says India opposes any agreement to halt production and deployment of nuclear weapons if it is confined to India and Pakistan only. Indian government officials say they would consider India's security threatened if the United States finally delivers the F-16 jet fighters Pakistan purchased in 1990 but has not received to date. The delivery of the F-16s has been proposed in return for Pakistan's acceptance of international inspections of its nuclear installations.
—John F. Burns, "India rejects US Bid for Nuclear Pact with Pakistan," New York Times, 26 March 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 26 March 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

1 April 1994
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman R. Chidambaram says in an interview that India's peaceful nuclear program is more advanced than the nuclear programs of both Pakistan and China. According to Chidambaram, India has developed technical expertise in all stages of the nuclear fuel cycle, including preparation of materials such as uranium, thorium, and zirconium; the reprocessing of spent fuel and the manufacture of related equipment; heavy water and fuel element production; and the construction of nuclear power plants. He adds that because of this technical expertise, India is now in a position to export both research reactors and heavy water, in compliance with international safeguards. Chidambaram also says that India's goal of generating 10,000MW of power by the year 2000 has been compromised due to the scarcity of funds. Referring to the safety issues at India's nuclear power plants, he says that the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) is an independent organization that oversees and regulates all safety-related activities. He says that safety is incorporated into India's nuclear power plants "right from the selection of the site." He adds that the plants operate in conformity with international standards "such as those prescribed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection."
—"Official Discusses Nuclear Energy Use," Hindustan Times (New Delhi), 2 April 1994, p. 2; in FBIS Document FBIS-NES-94-010.

8 April 1994
India's Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) signs a $23 million contract for the sale of 100 tons of heavy water to the Korea Electric Power Company. The heavy water will be shipped in 1997-1998 and will be subject to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.
—"India to Supply Heavy Water to South Korea," Japan Economic Newswire, 8 April 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 8 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; "India Signs Deal with South Korea for Heavy Water Supply," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 11 April 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 10 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

8-10 April 1994
US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott visits India and Pakistan. Addressing a news conference in New Delhi he says that "...nuclear nonproliferation is a major issue which needs to be addressed immediately." At the end of his visit, he notes that there is a "...conceptual basis for [US] objective of first capping, then reducing and eventually eliminating weapons of mass destruction from South Asia. We are optimistic of its success."
—"USA Rules out Pakistan F-16 Sale without Cap on Nuclear Weapons," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 11 April 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 10 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Kathy Gannon, "Rocky Road Ahead for US Plan to Halt Arms Race on Subcontinent," Associated Press, 9 April 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 9 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Raj Chengappa, "Nuclear Dilemma," India Today, 30 April 1994, pp. 46-54.

13 April 1994
Addressing Indian Army commanders, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao says that "any suggestion to restrict India's nuclear option is unacceptable and unrealistic." Rao adds that India favors time bound, universal, and non-discriminatory approach to nuclear disarmament.
—Vijay Joshi, "India Will Go Ahead with Nuclear Options, Says Premier Rao," Associated Press, 13 April 1993; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 13 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Raj Chengappa "Nuclear Dilemma," India Today, 30 April 1994, pp. 46-54; George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 345.

27 April 1994
Indo-US officials meet in London to discuss US nonproliferation initiatives in South Asia. However, US officials end the meeting early after Indian officials backtrack by suggesting that all countries of relevance to the nuclear issue, such as Iran, North Korea, and Libya, be invited to the international conference.
George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 345.

28 April 1994
A spokesperson for India's ruling Congress party tells the press that India does not intend to change its stance on the NPT. He says that the "routine" talks between India and the United States in London (27-28 April) include no secret discussions of the nuclear issue.
—"India Rules out Signing of NPT Treaty," Xinhua General Overseas News Service, 29 April 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 30 April 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

30 April 1994
Indian ambassador to the United States S.S. Ray says the US State Department has denied that the Indo-US talks in London were aimed at "pressuring India on the nuclear issue."
—"India's Envoy Says Reports on British Intelligence Pressure for US Talks 'Bull'," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 2 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 1 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

April 1994
India's former Foreign Secretary Muchkund Dubey says India is going to have its "hands and feet tied" should it accede to the nine-nation conference (the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, France, Japan, Germany, India, and Pakistan), as advocated by the United States. He adds that "the bomb option is the currency of power that is critical to our survival as a strong nation." Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC) director Dr. A.N. Prasad remarks that India now has "a mature program which [it has] built up after heavy investments. It would be a big mistake to fritter it away and lose our advantages."
—Raj Chengappa, "Nuclear Dilemma," India Today, 30 April 1994, pp. 46-54.

April 1994
In an interview to India Today, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman R. Chidambaram says that India was "the only country so far to have conducted [its] first test underground. It was a measure of how confident we were of our design. Everything worked as planned. There was no radiation emitted on the surface. That's how good our bomb was." Answering a question on whether India is still producing nuclear weapons, Chidambaram notes evasively that India has developed "an extraordinary range of know-how and expertise on all aspects of nuclear technology, especially in applications such as power, medicine, and agriculture. There is now nothing India cannot do." Furthermore, Chidambaram notes that India fell short of fulfilling the targets for its nuclear power program due to the "lack of funds." He emphasizes that India has an independent Atomic Energy Regulatory Board to ensure that the safety measures at India's nuclear power plants meet international standards. According to Chidambaram, India's safety record has been "good" with the exception of the accident at Narora in March 1993. Denouncing US nonproliferation initiatives in the region, Chidambaram says, "India has observed the longest moratorium on nuclear bomb explosions. Se we don't have to take lessons on morality from the US or anyone else...we are not in favor of any regional capping effort or having countries broker a deal between India and Pakistan on the nuclear question."
—Raj Chengappa, "Say No to Regional Capping," India Today, 30 April 1994, p. 50; George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 344.

Early May 1994
Scientists at the Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory (Chandigarh) finish work on the non-nuclear assembly mechanism of an air-deliverable nuclear device; the device (without the plutonium core) is transported on board an Indian Air Force (IAF) AN-32 to Kalaikunda, about a 100km from Calcutta. Engineers at the Armament Research & Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune also finish work on the container for the nuclear device. Ground tests are conducted to ensure that the container can withstand stresses of flight. Engineers at ARDE also develop a bomb-release mechanism and "half a dozen safety interlocks." A set of four containers is airlifted to Kalaikunda for final assembly of the air-deliverable nuclear device.
—Raj Chengappa, "Tell Your President, I keep My Word," Weapons of Peace: The Secret Story of India's Quest to be a Nuclear Power (New Delhi: HarperCollins Publishers Limited, 2000), p. 382..

2 May 1994
Parliamentary affairs Minister R.C. Shukla addresses parliament and states that "India will not make any compromise [on the issues of its nuclear and missile programs] under pressure [from the United States]." He adds that Prime Minister Rao will meet US President Bill Clinton on 19 May as scheduled. The Bharatiya Janata Party leader L.K. Advani and the Janata Dal leader George Fernandes urge the government to disclose the outcome of London talks between the United States and India to dissipate doubts that India has succumbed to US pressure on these sensitive issues.
—"India not to Succumb to US Nuclear Pressure," Xinhua General Overseas News Service, 2 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 3 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

3 May 1994
Prime Minister Narasimha Rao assures Rajya Sabha (upper house of parliament) that India will not accept any regional nuclear nonproliferation arrangements. He also rules out abiding by the US-proposed nuclear capping arrangement.
—George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 346.

14-19 May 1994
Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao visits the United States. He meets with US President Bill Clinton to discuss an array of economic and political issues. During the visit, both sides agree that the nuclear issue has to be discussed in a larger multilateral forum, rather than a bilateral one. Rao reiterates that India favors starting with the global agreement on no-first-use of nuclear weapons and gradually proceeding to the ultimate goal of elimination of nuclear weapons and a ban on missile testing and deployment.
—"Indian PM Leaves for US Tour," United Press International, 14 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 15 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; John F. Burns, "India Resists Plan to Curb Nuclear Arms," New York Times, 15 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 15 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; "Rao's Passage to America," Times, 17 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 18 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Rita Beamish, "Clinton Praises 'Closing Working Relationship' with India," Associated Press, 19 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 19 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; John Goshko, "Clinton Moves to Ease Relationship with India," Washington Post, 20 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 19 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Dilip Bobb, "Rao's US Visit: a Quiet Triumph," India Today, 15 June 1994, pp. 26-32.

18 May 1994
Commemorating the 20th anniversary of India's "peaceful nuclear explosion," former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman P.K. Iyengar writes in a newspaper article that "India has now lived for 20 years with no need to explode a device once again. Once the tiger is tamed, there is no fear from the same type of tiger, whether it is in your backyard or your neighbor's."
—"India Observes 20th Nuclear Test Anniversary," United Press International, 19 May 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 3 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

18 May 1994
India tests an air-deliverable nuclear device minus its plutonium core using a Mirage 2000 aircraft at the Balasore test range in Orissa. The telemetry stations at Balasore record the bomb's flight as well as the status of a series of safety locks on the device. The latter include a rotating vane "that indicates to the bomb's on-board control systems that the container is on its way, an altimeter that enables the weapon to explode at a pre-set height above the ground, and a power lock mechanism which activates the high-voltage current needed to trigger the bomb, only after it receives confirmation that all systems are in order." Three bombing trial runs are conducted in a single day and the data collected from the tests indicates that the weapon's technical parameters are in working order. India finally acquires a reliable air-deliverable nuclear weapon.
—Raj Chengappa, "Tell Your President, I Keep My Word," Weapons of Peace: The Secret Story of India's Quest to be a Nuclear Power (New Delhi: HarperCollins Publishers Limited, 2000), pp. 383-384.

Late May 1994
At a working-level meeting in London, India rejects US proposals for a five-party (India, Pakistan, China, the United States, and Russia) denuclearization arrangement for South Asia.
—Thomas W. Lippman, "US Effort to Curb Nuclear Weapons in Peril as India Insists on Limits for China," Washington Post, 7 July 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 3 May 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

Late May 1994
Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao orders Indian nuclear scientists and engineers working on the nuclear weapons project to be discreet. In particular, Rao requests Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman R. Chidambaram not to make any statements on the nuclear issue that might affect India's foreign policy.
—Raj Chengappa, "Tell Your President, I Keep My Work," Weapons of Peace: The Secret Story of India's Quest to be a Nuclear Power (New Delhi: HarperCollins Publishers Limited, 2000), p. 389.

10 June 1994
At the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) executive meeting, party leader L.K. Advani says that India must go nuclear and reject pressure from the United States and the international community. He adds that this is necessary to safeguard India's "integrity, security, and sovereignty." Advani notes that behind the US nonproliferation efforts is "the unstated assumption that India must subcontract its national security to Washington."
—"India to Retain Its Nuclear Option," United Press International, 11 June 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 12 June 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; "India Says it Won't Give up Option to Make Nuclear Weapons," Associated Press, 11 June 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 11 June 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

11 June 1994
Addressing delegates of India's ruling Congress party, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao says that his government does not "want to give up the choice of producing a bomb." He adds that the government has to consider "the developing situation in the world on nuclear disarmament, and then decide future course of action." According to Rao, "first those countries [that] have nuclear weapons should reduce [their stocks] within a time frame. Second, those having nuclear capability should not make one [bomb]." Rao adds that governments should not play with the weapons of mass destruction.
—"India to Retain Its Nuclear Option," United Press International, 11 June 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 12 June 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; "India Says it Won't Give up Option to Make Nuclear Weapons," Associated Press, 11 June 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 11 June 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

1994
The deal reportedly brokered by mid-level diplomats in India's Ministry of External Affairs with the US State Department on proliferation issues ends as the United States begins adopting a tougher stance toward India's nuclear weapons program.
—Bharat Karnad, "Hesitant Nuclear Realpolitik: 1966-To Date," Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy (New Delhi: Macmillan, 2002), pp. 373-374.

1994
Prime Minister Narasimha Rao allegedly authorizes Indian nuclear scientists and engineers to perform maintenance work on the test shafts at the Pokhran test site, and perhaps even emplace nuclear devices in the shafts, to signal India's growing impatience with US nonproliferation policy toward India.
—Bharat Karnad, "Hesitant Nuclear Realpolitik: 1966-To Date," Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy (New Delhi: Macmillan, 2002), p. 374.

1994
Indian Defense Secretary K. Nambiar prepares a note on the eve of the beginning of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) negotiations for the defense minister opposing a treaty that bans underground nuclear tests. However, the note is not presented to the Indian government nor communicated to the foreign ministry formally in charge of negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.

June 1994
India's representative at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva issues a statement supporting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty as an important step in the direction of nuclear disarmament.
— George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 348.

5 July 1994
Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPC) Samir Chatterjee says India is "revising an old proposal from the Soviet Union [to construct two 1,000 VVER reactors in Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu]." According to Chatterjee, the Russian government has offered credit for "services and components for the project." He adds that the reactors would use Russian fuel, which would be supplied under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.
—"India, Russia Nuclear Power Plant Negotiations on Track," Agence France Presse, 5 July 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 11 June 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

10 July 1994
Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPC) Samir Chatterjee says that India's initial target of 10,000MW of nuclear power by 2000 is unattainable due to the lack of governmental funding.
—Madhu Nainan, "Cash Crunch Short-Circuits India's Nuclear Power Program," Agence France Presse, 10 July 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 8 July 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

19 July 1994
Members of India's Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament) discuss the alleged plutonium smuggling to Pakistan from Russia via Germany. They urge the government to raise the issue at international forums and seek to declare Pakistan a terrorist state. Congress member Sribalav Panigrahi says, "the documents seized from Germany clearly proved that Pakistan was involved in smuggling of plutonium." Senior Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) leader Jaswant Singh says the matter cannot be taken lightly.
—"Indian MPs Worried Over Reported Plutonium Smuggling by Pakistan," Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 19 August 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 19 August 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

August 1994
Prime Minister Rao requests that German Chancellor Helmut Kohl provide New Delhi with the details of the plutonium smuggling issue.
—"Hindu Leader Urges India to Manufacture Nuclear Bombs," Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 22 August 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 22 August 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

22 August 1994
India calls on Pakistan to support an agreement against the use of nuclear weapons in South Asia "with sincerity of purpose so that it could form the basis of a comprehensive dialogue." Addressing the Indian Parliament, Minister of State for External Affairs R.L. Bhatia says India's proposal is "a demonstration of its commitment for reducing mistrust and enhancing confidence between the two countries." He adds that Pakistan's response to India's proposal "was regrettably dismissive."
—"India Seeks Anti-Nukes Pledge," United Press International, 22 August 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 23 August 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

23 August 1994
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif declares that "...Pakistan possesses a nuclear bomb....[and] by bringing facts on the record, I have not only pre-empted the Indian aggression against Azad Kashmir and the government's planned rollback, but made it clear to responsible international powers that Pakistan should be treated at par with India in the world community and in the region."
—George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 349.

24 August 1994
Several Indian members of parliament express concern over the announcement made by Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that Islamabad possesses nuclear weapons. An Indian foreign ministry official reassures parliament, "if the safety and security of the nation require deployment of conventional and non-conventional weapons on the border, the government will not hesitate to do so."
—"Indian MPs Express Concern over Pakistan's Nuclear Bomb Claim," Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 24 August 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 24 August 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999), p. 349.

31 August 1994
The Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) leader L.K. Advani says that "India must not compromise on its nuclear programs [and should keep] a strict vigil over the neighboring countries' nuclear programs."
—Ian Stewart, "India Seeks Nuclear Deterrent," United Press International, 31 August 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 1 September 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

19 September 1994
In an interview with Indian Express, former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman M.R. Srinivasan says "...there are responsible persons who know we have the nuclear weapons capability...there are no doubts in my mind about it."
— Cited in, George Perkovich, "American Nonproliferation Initiatives," India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: University of California Press, 1999).

20 September 1994
India signs the International Convention in Nuclear Safety at a ceremony in Vienna.
—Government of India, Department of Atomic Energy Annual Report: 1994-1995, p. 8.1.

25 September 1994
Responding to Canadian reports on the poor condition of India's CANDU reactors (particularly the pressure tubes in reactors' coolant systems), Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPC) S.K. Chatterjee says "there has been no incident involving the pressure tubes." He argues that India has started the replacement of the reactors' aging parts "long ago." Specifically, replacements of coolant channels was initiated two years ago, but the process is expected to take about 30 months to complete, he says. Chatterjee adds that the reactors' pressure tubes are under continuous monitoring and are replaced "whenever necessary."
—Ian Stewart, "Official Says India's Reactors are Safe," United Press International, 25 September 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 26 September 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

26 September 1994
India is elected as the Chairman of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Board of Governors. This represents only the second time in which India has held this honor. The chairmanship is taken over by Dr. R. Chidambaram, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Secretary of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE).
—Government of India, Department of Atomic Energy Annual Report: 1994-1995, p. 8.1.

30 September 1994
Indian Express (Mumbai) reports that the Rajasthan Atomic Power Station (RAPS), one of the oldest CANDU-type reactors in India, is undergoing "safety checks" in the aftermath of recent Canadian reports on the possibility of rupture in the pressure tubes of India's CANDU reactors. According to the newspaper report, RAPS will resume operation "after it meets safety-related requirements." The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) Chairman A. Gopalakrishnan says the Nuclear Power Corporation (NPC) and Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC) are checking the facility's performance. He adds that "no rupture had ever occurred" at India's pressurized heavy water reactors.
—"India Reactor Down for Repairs," United Press International, 30 September 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 1 October 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

3 October 1994
Speaking at the 14th Plenary Meeting of the 49th Session of the UN General Assembly, India's External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee says the time has come to reach agreement on "global, comprehensive, verifiable, and nondiscriminatory" disarmament regime since the Cold War is over and "the previous adversaries have been drawn into a partnership for peace." He adds that the NPT review in April 1995 offers "another opportunity... to refashion the treaty into a real instrument for global disarmament."
—Pranab Mukherjee, Speech at the 14th Plenary Meeting of the 49th Session of the UN General Assembly, 3 October 1994, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, <http://www.meadev.nic.in>.

8 December 1994
Former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman M.R. Srinivasan says that India's Advanced Technology Vehicle (ATV), the project to build a nuclear power submarine, is located in the port city of Visakhapatnam. According to Srinivasan, "the design and development of a nuclear submarine is a joint project of the Department of Atomic Energy, the Defense Research and Development Organization and the Indian Navy. The boat design is the responsibility of DRDO and the Indian Navy. The nuclear power unit design is the responsibility of DAE. For many years now, a joint team from the Bhabha Atomic Research Center and the Navy has been working on the submarine nuclear power unit." Srinivasan says India switched to enriched uranium to fuel its submarine reactor since the reactor has to be "capable of very rapid increase in power level and hence special designs of fuel elements are necessary. The submarine [reactor] has to be extremely compact in size and with minimum weight." Srinivasan adds that the work in the areas of "fuel, control systems, and reactor components" was undertaken. According to Srinivasan, "a land-based prototype facility for testing the reactor has been completed."
—Atul Aneja, "N-Sub Era May Dawn Only After a Decade," Hindu (Chennai), 10 July 1996, <http://www.hinduonline.com>; Ranjan Roy, "Expert Confirms India's Nuclear Submarine Project," Associated Press, 8 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 1 October 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Rahul Bedi, "Race for Nuclear Submarine," South China Monitoring Post, 9 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 1 October 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

22 December 1994
Russian Atomic Energy Minister Viktor Mikhailov says he is convinced Russia will build a nuclear power plant in Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu. He adds that a protocol to the agreement of 1988 "is almost ready." He notes, however, that "certain details" still need to be discussed. For example, India wants Russia "to take upon itself the responsibility of reprocessing nuclear waste of the plant later to be returned to India for burning." Yet he says he sees no obstacles to begin the construction. According to Mikhailov, a timetable for plant construction is already established: it is expected to commence in 1995 and to be completed within eight years. He says that the ways to finance the project have also been determined.
—Gennadi Yeznov, Sergei Karmalito, and Leonid Kotov, "No Obstacle in Russian Help to Build Nuke Plants in India," ITAR-TASS, 22 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 23 December 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

23-24 December 1994
During Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin's visit to India, the two sides sign eight agreements, including an accord on military and technical cooperation until the year 2000. An agreement on the construction of two VVER-1,000 reactors in Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu, is put on hold once again. The two sides describe the talks as "continuing."
—"India, Russia Sign Military, Space, Trade Accords, No Nuclear Accord," AFX News, 23 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 24 December 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>; Pradip Chakravarty, "Russian Prime Minister Begins Visit to India," Agence France Presse, 23 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 24 December 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

26 December 1994
The Indian government denies media reports that workers at the uranium mine in Jaduguda and the population nearby are exposed to radioactive contamination. Government officials say the exposure is "well within the limits stipulated by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board [AERB]." According to a government press release, the AERB continuously monitors the overall impact of Uranium Corporation's operation of the mine in Jaduguda.
—"Reports on Contamination at Uranium Mine Denied," BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 28 December 1994; in Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, 27 December 1994, <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>.

	Updated October 2003