India’s Nukes: A Deal With ‘Difficulties’

When U.S. President George W. Bush signed an accord with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to help India develop its civilian nuclear-power industry last July, he opened a can of worms. India desperately needs more energy, and the country is eager to build more nuclear plants. But India, a nuclear-weapons state, is not a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Now it’s a nuclear linchpin. Washington wants to help India not only in order to advance a budding geostrategic friendship, but to counter the nuclear ambitions of China and Iran. The problem is that Tehran has signed the NPT, technically giving it the right to enrich uranium. Administration critics, including some influential voices in Congress, say this inconsistency is hurting U.S. credibility on the proliferation issue. And New Delhi has been cagey about whether it would support referring Iran’s case to the U.N. Security Council, a question that could come up as soon as this week at an International Atomic Energy Agency meeting in Vienna. U.S. Ambassador David Mulford said last week that if New Delhi didn’t side with the United States on the Iran issue it would face a “devastating” rejection of its civilian nuclear deal by the U.S. Congress. U.S. Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, visiting New Delhi two weeks ago, acknowledged that the U.S.-India nuke deal faces “a number of difficulties.”

Chief among them is figuring out a way to clearly demarcate India’s civilian and military nuclear facilities. Washington will also have to persuade the Nuclear Suppliers Group to change its rules to accommodate India; right now, countries that have not signed the NPT are not allowed to import nuclear fuel. And under the agreement, India has not agreed to limit the amount of fissile material it produces. That worries proliferation opponents, who fear that India may opt to make more bombs and set off an arms race in Asia.

Newsweek