A lot of hype has been created over the nuclear agreement between the U.S. and India. Supporters can't stop getting excited about the infinite energy (just an exaggeration) India will get through this agreement, whereas critics are counting the last days of India's independence (another exaggeration). This agreement has created a huge debate and the latest controversy regarding 'suitcase politics' during the July 22 'vote of confidence' in the Indian parliament is an offspring of this debate.
Political parties have made a mess of this issue and there's a need to look at it before jumping to any conclusions. Let's take an unbiased look at each perspective.
PROS: According to Section 123 of the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954, US law permits the US to enter into nuclear collaboration with countries who have declared that they do not posses nuclear weapons, have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, none of which India conforms to.
The Hyde Act (Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006) is a legislative act, passed by the US Congress, which virtually creates an exemption for India with regards to the 123 Agreement (an agreement in compliance with Section 123). Interestingly, Barack Obama included provisions in the Hyde Act to restrict the fuel supplies to reasonable civilian reactor requirements'. This exemption has been granted to India and only to India. Israel, a long time pal of the US, has been lobbying for an agreement on similar lines but the US has, till date, refused to toe the line.
Given the climbing energy requirements by India, and the increasing oil prices, nuclear fuel presents itself as a source of energy which would satiate a large portion of India's energy demands. Moreover, the implementation of this deal will provide India with a much larger global image and will increase India's influence on world affairs.
CONS: One problem with the agreement is that the Hyde Act creates a few constraints on the Indo - U.S. 123 Agreement. The Indian government is stating that the constraints of the Hyde act is not binding on India as it is a U.S. domestic law (The Hyde Act) and as per international law, an international treaty (123 Agreement) can't be supplanted by an internal law.
The other problem lies in certain grey areas of the 123 Agreement. Article 1.m of the agreement states that if any information, which is defined in Articles 2.2(a, c, d, f), 2.3 and 3, and technology can not be shared with the military according to article 1.m. Article 14.1 states that any party can unilaterally revoke the treaty and if the treaty is revoked, whatever has been supplied must be returned (Article 14.4).
The agreement has no clear-cut definition of 'information' nor a demarcation between 'civilian' and 'military' nor a method to verify whether any information has been passed between the civilian nuclear engineers and the military.
Moreover, Article 14.4 does not literally exclude 'spent fuel' from being 'supplied materials' and spent fuel obviously can't be returned. Certain clarifications must be made regarding these Articles.
In retrospect, even though the Congress Party survived the July 22 vote of confidence and the IAEA approval of the agreement, the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must approve a policy allowing cooperation with India before President Bush can make the final changes and get it approved by the U.S. Congress. With the U.S. elections imminent and the deal still hanging in the balance, it's hard to tell whether efforts made by the Bush administration and the Indian Congress Party since 2006 will take any form of fruition.
Political parties have made a mess of this issue and there's a need to look at it before jumping to any conclusions. Let's take an unbiased look at each perspective.
PROS: According to Section 123 of the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954, US law permits the US to enter into nuclear collaboration with countries who have declared that they do not posses nuclear weapons, have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, none of which India conforms to.
The Hyde Act (Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006) is a legislative act, passed by the US Congress, which virtually creates an exemption for India with regards to the 123 Agreement (an agreement in compliance with Section 123). Interestingly, Barack Obama included provisions in the Hyde Act to restrict the fuel supplies to reasonable civilian reactor requirements'. This exemption has been granted to India and only to India. Israel, a long time pal of the US, has been lobbying for an agreement on similar lines but the US has, till date, refused to toe the line.
Given the climbing energy requirements by India, and the increasing oil prices, nuclear fuel presents itself as a source of energy which would satiate a large portion of India's energy demands. Moreover, the implementation of this deal will provide India with a much larger global image and will increase India's influence on world affairs.
CONS: One problem with the agreement is that the Hyde Act creates a few constraints on the Indo - U.S. 123 Agreement. The Indian government is stating that the constraints of the Hyde act is not binding on India as it is a U.S. domestic law (The Hyde Act) and as per international law, an international treaty (123 Agreement) can't be supplanted by an internal law.
The other problem lies in certain grey areas of the 123 Agreement. Article 1.m of the agreement states that if any information, which is defined in Articles 2.2(a, c, d, f), 2.3 and 3, and technology can not be shared with the military according to article 1.m. Article 14.1 states that any party can unilaterally revoke the treaty and if the treaty is revoked, whatever has been supplied must be returned (Article 14.4).
The agreement has no clear-cut definition of 'information' nor a demarcation between 'civilian' and 'military' nor a method to verify whether any information has been passed between the civilian nuclear engineers and the military.
Moreover, Article 14.4 does not literally exclude 'spent fuel' from being 'supplied materials' and spent fuel obviously can't be returned. Certain clarifications must be made regarding these Articles.
In retrospect, even though the Congress Party survived the July 22 vote of confidence and the IAEA approval of the agreement, the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must approve a policy allowing cooperation with India before President Bush can make the final changes and get it approved by the U.S. Congress. With the U.S. elections imminent and the deal still hanging in the balance, it's hard to tell whether efforts made by the Bush administration and the Indian Congress Party since 2006 will take any form of fruition.
No comments:
Post a Comment