Salahuddin
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 239
- Reaction score
- 0
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India sought to put on a brave face on Sunday over an unexpected delay in the approval of a landmark nuclear deal with the United States amid nervousness in New Delhi that the controversial pact could slip away.
The deal, which aims to give India access to U.S. civilian nuclear technology for the first time in three decades, had been expected to be approved by the U.S. Senate last week before it adjourned for elections in November.
However, the chamber could not take up the bill due to differences between Republicans and Democrats despite both sides expressing strong support for the deal and pointing fingers at the other for the delay.
"The bill actually enjoys bipartisan support and it is our hope that this will find its way through U.S. domestic legal procedures as soon as possible," said India's new foreign secretary, Shiv Shankar Menon.
"I think our interest in the agreement, in it passing through Congress and our interest in the terms staying as they are, is quite clear," Menon told reporters after taking office.
Privately, some senior Indian officials expressed helplessness about a deal that has faced a storm of opposition in both countries since it was agreed in principle by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July 2005.
The Senate could take up the bill when it returns for a "lame duck" session after the November elections, but other approvals are needed beyond that and they are likely to push the deal's final fate into 2007.
Senate failure to do so would mean the entire approval process must start from scratch and go through a new Senate and a new House of Representatives, despite the House having already voted overwhelmingly in support of the deal.
"SIGNIFICANT SETBACK"
"There is little we can do now but wait," one Indian official told Reuters.
"Whether the bipartisan support is real or whether all the delays were a ploy to camouflage the opposition to the deal by supporters of non-proliferation will be known in the coming months," he said.
The deal, a sign of blossoming energy, commercial and strategic ties between the two countries, aims to overturn three decades of sanctions against New Delhi and supply atomic fuel and equipment to meet its spiraling energy needs.
But the non-proliferation lobby in the United States has slammed it, saying Washington was encouraging atomic proliferation by giving away too much to India, which has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has conducted nuclear tests.
On the other hand, many Indian lawmakers and nuclear scientists are wary that the long-drawn U.S. legislative process could lead to changes in the original deal that would go against India's strategic interests.
U.S. officials have repeatedly tried to allay Indian fears in the face of warnings from the Indian prime minister that any change to the original conditions could destroy the deal.
Analysts said the Senate's failure to approve the bill last week raised questions over the future of the deal.
"This is a significant setback, especially if the balance of power shifts after the elections from the Republicans to the Democrats," said Harsh V. Pant, who teaches defense studies at King's College, London.
He said the Democrats tended to be more cautious on issues of nuclear proliferation and if they recaptured power in Congress it would embolden them to repudiate Bush's foreign policy agenda.
"The U.S.-India deal may just become one of its casualties."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061001/pl_nm/nuclear_india_usa_dc_1
The deal, which aims to give India access to U.S. civilian nuclear technology for the first time in three decades, had been expected to be approved by the U.S. Senate last week before it adjourned for elections in November.
However, the chamber could not take up the bill due to differences between Republicans and Democrats despite both sides expressing strong support for the deal and pointing fingers at the other for the delay.
"The bill actually enjoys bipartisan support and it is our hope that this will find its way through U.S. domestic legal procedures as soon as possible," said India's new foreign secretary, Shiv Shankar Menon.
"I think our interest in the agreement, in it passing through Congress and our interest in the terms staying as they are, is quite clear," Menon told reporters after taking office.
Privately, some senior Indian officials expressed helplessness about a deal that has faced a storm of opposition in both countries since it was agreed in principle by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July 2005.
The Senate could take up the bill when it returns for a "lame duck" session after the November elections, but other approvals are needed beyond that and they are likely to push the deal's final fate into 2007.
Senate failure to do so would mean the entire approval process must start from scratch and go through a new Senate and a new House of Representatives, despite the House having already voted overwhelmingly in support of the deal.
"SIGNIFICANT SETBACK"
"There is little we can do now but wait," one Indian official told Reuters.
"Whether the bipartisan support is real or whether all the delays were a ploy to camouflage the opposition to the deal by supporters of non-proliferation will be known in the coming months," he said.
The deal, a sign of blossoming energy, commercial and strategic ties between the two countries, aims to overturn three decades of sanctions against New Delhi and supply atomic fuel and equipment to meet its spiraling energy needs.
But the non-proliferation lobby in the United States has slammed it, saying Washington was encouraging atomic proliferation by giving away too much to India, which has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has conducted nuclear tests.
On the other hand, many Indian lawmakers and nuclear scientists are wary that the long-drawn U.S. legislative process could lead to changes in the original deal that would go against India's strategic interests.
U.S. officials have repeatedly tried to allay Indian fears in the face of warnings from the Indian prime minister that any change to the original conditions could destroy the deal.
Analysts said the Senate's failure to approve the bill last week raised questions over the future of the deal.
"This is a significant setback, especially if the balance of power shifts after the elections from the Republicans to the Democrats," said Harsh V. Pant, who teaches defense studies at King's College, London.
He said the Democrats tended to be more cautious on issues of nuclear proliferation and if they recaptured power in Congress it would embolden them to repudiate Bush's foreign policy agenda.
"The U.S.-India deal may just become one of its casualties."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061001/pl_nm/nuclear_india_usa_dc_1
