|
Round The World
New
Delhi, 26 June 2008
Indo-US Nuclear Pact
A SIGNED DEAL OR MISSED OPPORTUNITY?
By Monish Tourangbam
(School of International
Studies, JNU)
The past few days have seen a flurry of activities concerning
the Indo-US nuclear deal. After what seemed like a self-enforced reconciliation
to the demise of the deal, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh woke up with renewed
activism.
Just as the postponement of the June 18 UPA-Left
Coordination Committee Meeting to June 25 became public, the Congress and the
Left engaged in intense parleys to rope in allies to their sides. But, the
anxiously awaited rescheduled meeting, which was stormy, just managed to avert
a final showdown. Post-meeting statements only confirm a future meeting.
Even as the official reason given for the postponement of
the June 18th meeting was the External Affairs Minister Pranab
Mukherjee’s preoccupation with the visiting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, there was
very little doubt as to the actual reason behind the deferment.
At least, it was unclear why the scheduling clash was only
discovered at the last minute. Quite clearly, the Congress saw reasons
miniscule for going ahead with the meeting unless there was some shift from
positions that has deadlocked the deal till now. Certainly, it wanted to take
the allies along in an effort to break the impasse with the Left. Despite being
able to get some crucial faces to come forward in support of the deal, no one
seems to be interested in going for early polls. As such, the most popular line
around is, “We support the deal, but not at the expense of the Left’s support.”
Even,
Congress insiders are found wanting their resoluteness to sacrifice the
Government for the sake of the deal, running counter to the vigour of the Prime
Minister. Party strategists feel this is the least opportune time to sell the
deal as a ‘development issue’ when the party has encountered serious reverses
in Karnataka and the issues of inflation, fuel price hike and terrorism are
acutely dampening its image.
Interestingly,
the UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi sees the international oil price hike and its
fallout as reason enough for recognizing the importance of nuclear energy. As
for Mukherjee, a key intermediary in the talks with the Left, it has been a
hectic schedule. He has been attending a number of meetings, in an effort to
take the allies along and keep the communication channel open with the Left at
the same time.
He even
had to delay his Australian tour in the wake of the heated domestic debate.
But, his successive meetings with CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat have
borne little result, with the latter refusing to budge from the position
hitherto maintained.
Karat has
repeatedly refused to reconsider anything to do with the operationalisation of
the 123 Agreement. He has blatantly warned the Government not to go the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors with the
India-Specific Safeguards Agreement Draft.
Mukherjee has been a vocal advocate of the India-US civilian
nuclear deal. Speaking at the 107th annual meeting of the Merchants’
Chambers of Commerce in Kolkata in mid-June, in the presence of West Bengal
Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, also a CPM politburo member, he reiterated
the need for nuclear power resources.
Commenting that the percentage of power generated from
nuclear resources in India
was insignificant compared to developed countries like France and the US, Mukherjee dwelt on the need of
nuclear energy “to meet our future demands and to allay environmental concerns.”
He said that global nuclear power majors like Areva of France have already
evinced an interest in setting up nuclear power plants in India.
It is worthwhile discussing the interest shown by both France and Russia
in nuclear commerce with India.
Both have come out supporting the deal, albeit with caution. The French
Ambassador Jerome Bonnafont, left no doubts that an agreement between India and France on civilian nuclear energy
cooperation could not be signed without the IAEA nod and the Nuclear Suppliers’
Group (NSG) exemption as it violated international law.
His Russian counterpart Vyacheslav Trubnikov said an
India-Russia draft agreement could not be signed as it went against
international laws that Russia
recognized, thus pointing to the aforementioned pre-requisites. Trubnikov’s
comments assume significance in view of the Left’s criticism of India not inking the deal with Russia.
The Left has also criticized the Government’s reluctance to
share the text of the safeguards’ agreement. Well, the main irritant for the
Left is not the particulars of the draft but the fact that it is tied to the
123 Agreement.
So, what difference would it make if the draft were to be
shown? The Left would still stick to “instinctive anti-Americanism” and taking
the agreement to the IAEA minus the 123 Agreement would render it useless. Why
would the IAEA be interested in discussing a piece of paper that has no future?
As for the Opposition, its emphasis on a redrafting of the
deal can mean two things. One, it wants to distance itself from sharing the
blame for blocking the nuclear deal with the Left. Two, it wants to keep open
the prospect of renegotiating the deal in future, by a “BJP Government”—a view
bolstered by its recent electoral performance.
The
nuclear deal has been a potent force in the political scene, receiving prime
time in all forms of Indian media, unlike the US where the same is not true. The
deal lost its steam, the Bush administration nears its last days and the
American media preoccupies itself with the presidential nominees. Despite the
Bush administration’s commitment to support the deal till its very last days,
precisely till January 20 next year, questions remain over the prospect of the
deal, with the run-up to the presidential elections overshadowing everything
else and the US Congress itself going for fresh elections in November.
It is
worthwhile mentioning that Ashley Tellis, one of the key negotiators of the
deal and now a key adviser of the McCain campaign, while talking to media
persons on June 11, said it would be impossible for the US Congress to clear
the deal even if India
went ahead and secured the IAEA safeguards agreement.
In fact, it is a period of transition
all around, with the impending Indian and US elections and moreover, Mohamed El
Baradei, the Director General of IAEA retiring in July. Speculations abound
regarding the future of the deal. As Naresh Kumar, a former Indian envoy to Washington, told Reuters
before the June 18 meeting was postponed, “Whether the next governments of India and the US negotiate it or renegotiate it,
these are things that are in the realm of conjecture.”
When Prime Minister Singh will meet
President Bush on the sidelines of the upcoming G8 Summit in Japan, they
would think as to what they are drinking to: a successful deal or a missed
opportunity? Will the current spurt of activities prove to be the final gasp
for the deal? The answer is anybody’s guess. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
Archives 
