Why the Nuke Deal May Not Be Called Off
.....
NEW DELHI: If the devil lies in detail, a revealing comment by the Bush administration to US Congress shows Washington does not expect the "worst-case" clauses of the Indo-US nuclear deal to be tested as it simply does not think India will test a nuclear device any time soon.
.....
The 26-page response to questions raised by the Congress, now posted on the US foreign affairs committee website, present a stark picture of the likely consequences if India conducts a nuclear test. But even as it outlines the possibility of the nuclear deal being called off, it provides a hint as to why this may not happen.
.....
On whether US was bound to assist India in sourcing fuel even if the pact is terminated, the state department has explained how and why commitments on supplies will operate. It has said ceasing cooperation would be a "serious step" needing consideration of circumstances which include a nuclear "detonation" or violation of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.
.....
It then points to why US feels such a situation would be a remote possibility with the state department noting, "Moreover, such circumstances (testing) would likely be inconsistent with the political underpinnings of the US-India initiative upon which the commitments (on fuel guarantees) in article 5.6 were based."
.....
The reference to "political underpinnings" clearly reflects the US assessment that the Manmohan Singh government was unlikely to test. Further, it indicates that this is the impression that US negotiators walked away with after discussions with Indian emissaries when the 123 pact was finalised. The expectation is that the serious reason for "disruption" in supplies — a nuclear test — was not very likely.
.....
The government defence rests on the argument that fuel assurances were never intended to cover the eventuality of testing. A senior pro-deal minister said fuel assurances were clearly defined. "No one will give a green signal to testing," he said, arguing that the 123 provisions do not guillotine US-India cooperation. There was a year-long window for negotiation over why the deal had to be called off.
.....
Pointing out concessions were made for India despite it not being an NPT or CTBT signatory, the minister said the 123 pact included references to a "changed security environment" which would also be considered when termination of the agreement. This is seen to refer to the possibility of either China or Pakistan conducting a nuclear test in the future. Apart from this, US had not promised transfer of dual use items, reprocessing and enrichment technology at any stage.
.....
The defence of the deal lies in the argument that it has always been known that cooperation can end if India tests. But it is also now clear that the several paragraphs in article 14 of the 123 agreement which include both nations taking into account "potential negative consequences of termination of ongoing contracts and projects" do not protect India from the deal being called off immediately. In the light of US "perspective" on the deal, several references in the 123 pact seem aimed at allowing India to claim it has retained the right to test.