US - India Defense & Strategic Affairs

Foreign Policy Article on the deal

2006-07-27T12:11:00.000-05:00

Foreign Policy magazine just came out with a piece that is rather critical of the deal. Think Again: U.S.-India Nuclear Deal, By Thomas Graham Jr., Leonor Tomero, Leonard Weiss

USINPAC - US-India Nuclear Deal Homepage

2006-07-27T11:58:00.000-05:00

Click here to send a letter a your congressman or sign the petition.

USINPAC Press Release on the passing of the Historical US-India Civil Nuclear Deal

2006-07-27T11:16:00.000-05:00

Please click on the the link below.

US Congress okays nuke deal; rejects killer amendments

2006-07-27T11:10:00.000-05:00

[ 27 Jul, 2006 0856hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]

WASHINGTON: The US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed landmark legislation approving the US-India nuclear agreement by a massive 359-68 margin, rejecting several 'killer amendments' on the way.

The House vote was largely bipartisan with backing from both sides of the aisle: 218 Republicans and 141 Democrats supported the deal, and only nine Republicans and 59 Democrats opposed it.

En route to the historic vote, the House rejected at least three 'killer' amendments which supporters said would have scupper the agreement.

An amendment that would have the US audit India's fissile material stock annually was rejected by a 155-268 margin.

Another amendment that would restrict export to uranium to India until the President certified that New Delhi had frozen its fissile material production was rejected 184-241.

When these two amendments were defeated, opponents of the agreement tried to link the deal to India further supporting US in its campaign against Iran.

But that too was defeated 192-235 by supporters who argued that New Delhi had already proved its credentials as a US partner opposed to nuclear proliferation in the Iran context.

About the only significant amendment that was passed without contest was one that enjoins the United States to only support India's civilian nuclear program, and not any nuclear weapons capability enhancement.

At the end of almost five hours of marathon arguments and legislative procedures, the United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006, to be renamed the Hyde Amendment after the lawmaker who engineered it, was passed by a handsome 369-58 margin.

The Act will permit a certifiably nuclear-armed India India to buy reactors and fuel from the international market for the first time in more than 30 years (subject to final approval and international consent), despite the fact it has still not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

It will in effect mark the end of India's nuclear isolation and possibly arrange the global strategic architecture.

''We are at the hinge of history, building a fundamentally new relationship with India... historians will regard this as a tidal shift in ties between the U.S and India when Congress signaled definitively the end of the cold war paradigm,'' Tom Lantos (D-California) co-author of the legislation said while introducing the bill.

Indeed, historians will record many lawmakers who were instrumental in changing what New Delhi always argued was an unfair nuclear apartheid regime, but some legislators were front and center in the rousing debate.

Congressman Frank Pallone (D-New Jersey), Gary Ackerman (D-New York), Joseph Crowley (D- New York), Joe Wilson (R- South Carolina), Ed Royce (R-California) Nancy Pelosi (D- California), Eli Faleomavega (D- American Samoa) and Eliot Engel (D-New York) formed the core team of supporters for the agreement led by Henry Hyde (R-Illinois) and Tom Lantos (D-California). In the end, Republicans weighed in far greater numbers than the Democrats although the support was bipartisan.

Among those who vehemently opposed the agreement under one pretext or the other were Ed Markay (D-Massachusetts), Brad Sherman (D-California) and Howard Berman (D-California).

The House vote is a major step in the long legislative process that also requires a Senate approval and international okay (by the Nuclear Suppliers Group), But in the meantime, supporters of the agreement celebrated the win with gusto.

''The USINDIA FORUM congratulates every one who has provided support for this Bill. We call on members of the Indian American Community and their Organizations through out the country to Stay Focused on getting the legislations passed in similar manner in the US Senate also,'' Ashok Mago, a Dallas-based Indian-American convener of the forum said in a message, which claimed a 94 per cent vote from the Texas Congressional delegation.

The Washington D.C -centric USINPAC was also instrumental in rallying what turned out to be an overall 84 per cent Congressional support for the agreement.

For a safer world

2006-06-21T06:27:00.000-05:00

By William S. Cohen
June 21, 2006

The U.S.-India agreement on civil nuclear cooperation is an important manifestation of the growing strategic partnership between our two great democracies. Unfortunately, with less than 50 legislative days before Congress adjourns to pursue elections, the implementing legislation for this landmark agreement still languishes in committee. Time is running out. If not enacted before the congressional summer recess, the chances for ultimate passage will decrease precipitously.

The 2006 midterm elections promise to be some of the closest and most partisan on record. In such an atmosphere, prospects for getting Congress to concentrate on this needed legislation, even after elections, are dim indeed.

A chief delaying tactics by congressional opponents has been to seize on the argument that U.S. cooperation with India on civil nuclear matters will somehow make the world less safe from the scourge of nuclear terror. The reality is just the opposite. For 32 years, the United States has attempted to punish India for failing to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty with no discernable affect on Indian policy. Today, we have the opportunity to formulate a new policy, one that can secure India's cooperative efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons, strengthen democratic values and global security.

Some congressional opponents insist action in favor of implementation would remove a constraint on India's strategic weapons program. Their argument is that India has so little natural uranium that providing fissile material for civilian purposes will free up uranium for the Indians to make more nuclear weapons than they might otherwise. While simply put, the argument is simply wrong.

As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice correctly noted during her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "[We] do not believe that the absence of uranium is really the constraint on the [Indian] nuclear weapons program." India has more than enough uranium both to support its weapons program and its present civil nuclear power program. India could even significantly expand its weapons program and make modest additions to its nuclear power program with its present uranium supplies.

It takes relatively little uranium to make a nuclear weapon, and India's present nuclear power program is so modest it could be expanded within India's existing supplies. As Dr. Ashley J. Tellis of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace notes in a soon-to-be-published paper, the Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency estimate India's reasonably assured assets of uranium at no less than 40,980 tons. A single 20 kiloton nuclear weapon only requires about 6 kilograms of plutonium, which can be produced using little more than 6 metric tons of uranium in a research reactor. India's entire present nuclear weapons program plus its power program plus its new reactors presently being built would require about 650 tons of uranium per year.

Thus, these Indian assets of uranium alone could continue India's program for more than 60 years, and India has reasonable prospects for even more. India has all the natural uranium it needs to produce as many nuclear weapons as it wishes plus an enhanced version of its present nuclear power for the foreseeable future.

The truth is India, in considering its strategic interest, will act in a manner consistent with its national security, with or without this agreement. It is unlikely to agree to limit its fissile material production unilaterally.

Should the U.S. Congress reject this agreement, it might make India's satisfaction of its growing energy needs more difficult, and force it to rely more on fossil fuels, thereby increasing harmful greenhouse gases. However, with this agreement India will work with the United States and others, in the words of Director General of the IAEA and Nobel Prize winner Mohammed ElBaradei, "to consolidate the nuclear nonproliferation regime, combat nuclear terrorism and strengthen nuclear safety."

For a safer world, Congress should act now.

William S. Cohen is chairman and chief executive officer of the Cohen Group and is a former defense secretary and U.S. senator from Maine.

We Need This Nuclear Pact With India Now

2006-06-18T23:24:00.000-05:00

We Need This Nuclear Pact With India Now

Letters to the Editor
Wall Street Journal
June 12, 2006

My friend Sam Nunn is mistaken in his criticism of the Bush administration's nuclear agreement with India ("Nuclear Pig in a Poke1," editorial page, May 24).

Former Sen. Nunn and I have worked closely together to promote our shared nonproliferation goals, but he is wrong when he argues that Congress should impose additional conditions to the U.S.-India agreement.

First, if we do, we risk derailing an agreement that for the first time brings global transparency to India's entire civilian nuclear program. Right now, India's civilian and military programs remain closed to global scrutiny. Under this agreement, the entire civilian program, 65% of all nuclear activity and eventually 90%, will open to monitoring by the IAEA.

Second, with this agreement we bring India on board as an ally in our nonproliferation efforts in a critical part of the world where Iran and North Korea pose a real menace.

I consider that partnership vital to the future of our nonproliferation regime. We have spent 32 years negotiating with India over terms they will not accept. Without this partnership, we could spend another 30 years negotiating while India's program expands without scrutiny.

As Mohammad ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA and Nobel Prize winner has said, "It would bring India closer as an important partner in the non-proliferation regime. It would be a milestone, timely for ongoing efforts to consolidate the non-proliferation regime, combat nuclear terrorism and strengthen nuclear safety."

I believe this agreement can serve as a catalyst to strengthening an eroding nonproliferation regime, a regime that has brighter prospects with India than without her.

Sen. Pete V. Domenici, (R., N.M.)
Washington

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since its first nuclear explosion in 1974, India has generated an exemplary record of firmly controlling its nuclear materials and warding against proliferation.

In fact, India's record of nonproliferation is far superior to that of China, one of the five recognized nuclear powers. When the U.S. intercepted a shipment of centrifuges from Pakistan's A.Q. Khan destined for Libya, an earlier Chinese design of a nuclear weapon was discovered in the shipment. Apparently, Mr. Khan had thrown in a bonus. The Chinese actively assisted Pakistan in building its nuclear weapon capability. Ironically, China (as also the other four declared nuclear powers) is not subject to inspection of any sort by the IAEA.

Mr. Nunn tries to put India in the same league as North Korea and Iran. The Indo-U.S. nuclear deal has no relevance to the attempts to contain the nuclear ambitions of these two states. North Korea has traded its missile know-how for nuclear technology, at least with Pakistan. It is a paranoid and dangerous state that has a record of selling anything for hard cash. The Iranian state has been actively supporting various Islamist terrorist groups.

Mr. Nunn is being disingenuous in wanting Congress to require India to not produce fissile material henceforth. By signing the nuclear agreement, President Bush accepted the status of India as a de-facto nuclear power. There are no such legal restrictions on the production of fissile material by the five declared nuclear powers, and China has not officially ended production. The other undeclared nuclear powers, Israel and Pakistan, have no such limitations either. The five powers have been producing fissile material for quite a while.

Sardul S. Minhas, Ph.D.
Anaheim Hills, Calif.

Rethinking Nuclear Safeguards

2006-06-18T23:08:00.000-05:00

By Mohamed ElBaradei

Wednesday, June 14, 2006; The Washington Post, Page A23

In regard to nuclear proliferation and arms control, the fundamental problem is clear: Either we begin finding creative, outside-the-box solutions or the international nuclear safeguards regime will become obsolete.

For this reason, I have been calling for new approaches in a number of areas. First, a recommitment to disarmament -- a move away from national security strategies that rely on nuclear weapons, which serve as a constant stimulus for other nations to acquire them. Second, tightened controls on the proliferation-sensitive parts of the nuclear fuel cycle. By bringing multinational control to any operation that enriches uranium or separates plutonium, we can lower the risk of these materials being diverted to weapons. A parallel step would be to create a mechanism to ensure a reliable supply of reactor fuel to bona fide users, including a fuel bank under control of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The third area has been more problematic: how to deal creatively with the three countries that remain outside the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): Pakistan and India, both holders of nuclear arsenals, and Israel, which maintains an official policy of ambiguity but is believed to be nuclear-weapons-capable. However fervently we might wish it, none of these three is likely to give up its nuclear weapons or the nuclear weapons option outside of a global or regional arms control framework. Our traditional strategy -- of treating such states as outsiders -- is no longer a realistic method of bringing these last few countries into the fold.

Which brings us to a current controversy -- the recent agreement between President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh regarding the exchange of nuclear technology between the United States and India.

Some insist that the deal will primarily enable India to divert more uranium to produce more weapons -- that it rewards India for having developed nuclear weapons and legitimizes its status as a nuclear weapons state. By contrast, some in India argue that it will bring the downfall of India's nuclear weapons program, because of new restrictions on moving equipment and expertise between civilian and military facilities.

Clearly, this is a complex issue on which intelligent people can disagree. Ultimately, perhaps, it comes down to a balance of judgment. But to this array of opinions, I would offer the following:

First, under the NPT, there is no such thing as a "legitimate" or "illegitimate" nuclear weapons state. The fact that five states are recognized in the treaty as holders of nuclear weapons was regarded as a matter of transition; the treaty does not in any sense confer permanent status on those states as weapons holders. Moreover, the U.S.-India deal is neutral on this point -- it does not add to or detract from India's nuclear weapons program, nor does it confer any "status," legal or otherwise, on India as a possessor of nuclear weapons. India has never joined the NPT; it has therefore not violated any legal commitment, and it has never encouraged nuclear weapons proliferation.

Also, it is important to consider the implications of denying this exchange of peaceful nuclear technology. As a country with one-sixth of the world's population, India has an enormous appetite for energy -- and the fastest-growing civilian nuclear energy program in the world. With this anticipated growth, it is important that India have access to the safest and most advanced technology.

India clearly enjoys close cooperation with the United States and many other countries in a number of areas of technology and security. It is treated as a valued partner, a trusted contributor to international peace and security. It is difficult to understand the logic that would continue to carve out civil nuclear energy as the single area for noncooperation.

Under the agreement, India commits to following the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an organization of states that regulates access to nuclear material and technology. India would bring its civilian nuclear facilities under international safeguards. India has voiced its support for the conclusion of a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. The strong support of both India and the United States -- as well as all other nuclear weapons states -- is sorely needed to make this treaty a reality.

The U.S.-India agreement is a creative break with the past that, handled properly, will be a first step forward for both India and the international community. India will get safe and modern technology to help lift more than 500 million people from poverty, and it will be part of the international effort to combat nuclear terrorism and rid our world of nuclear weapons.

As we face the future, other strategies must be found to enlist Pakistan and Israel as partners in nuclear arms control and nonproliferation. Whatever form those solutions take, they will need to address not only nuclear weapons but also the much broader range of security concerns facing each country. No one ever said controlling nuclear weapons was going to be easy. It will take courage and tenacity in large doses, a great deal more outside-of-the-box thinking, and a sense of realism. And it will be worth the effort.

The writer is director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. He and the agency won the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize.

No schedule yet for India nuclear deal

2006-06-09T15:54:00.000-05:00

By Roxana Tiron - June 8, 2006

The independent Council on Foreign Relations is urging Congress to endorse a controversial civilian nuclear-power deal between the United States and India as soon as possible.

The council, in a report released Wednesday, recommends that lawmakers in both chambers pass sense-of-Congress resolutions supporting the basic framework and delay final approval until they are assured critical nuclear nonproliferation needs are met.

President Bush announced the nuclear deal during a trip to India in March, but the idea has been in the works since last summer. The agreement would allow India to import U.S. nuclear technology in exchange for opening its civilian nuclear facilities to international inspections. India’s nuclear-weapons program would remain secret.

The administration wants Congress to pass amendments to the 1954 Atomic Energy Act that would give India specific waivers. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would gain access to India’s civilian nuclear program. India would place two-thirds of its reactors and two-thirds of its generating power under permanent safeguards, with international verification.

But changes to the 1954 act are no small task, congressional sources say.

“The Atomic Energy Act is something you do not change lightly,” one aide said, adding, “nonproliferation policy is important.”

The council’s report comes at a time when supporters of the nuclear deal fear that changes in legislation required to implement it could be delayed during a packed pre-election calendar.

If Congress does not approve the deal, “it would damage the bilateral relationship,” the council concluded.

The Bush administration is pushing for congressional approval by the end of July, before the summer recess. But Senate and House consensus may not come until the end of the year, several sources indicated.

Neither the Senate Foreign Relations Committee nor the House International Relations Committee has scheduled any concrete dates to mark up legislation.

According to the US Indian Political Action Committee (USINPAC), the largest Indian-American PAC, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), International Relations chairman, said in a private meeting that he plans to mark up legislation before or on June 21. A congressional aide said that June 21 would be the target but that dates are fluid. The PAC has called approval of the deal its highest priority.

In a press release, USINPAC touted Hyde’s support for the deal: “His support is critical to the successful passage of the deal.”

But a Hyde spokeswoman said Hyde “has serious concerns regarding the proposed civil nuclear agreement.”

“The chairman reiterated his support for the president’s initiative in reaching an agreement with India, however he did tell [the] U.S.-India PAC that he will be working with the administration and Mr. [Tom] Lantos [D-Calif.] to craft a bipartisan piece of legislation that supports the president’s effort to strengthen ties with India,” said Kristi Garlock, Hyde’s committee spokeswoman.

Hyde is in the process of crafting his own bill, she added.

The Speaker of the House, Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), has expressed his full support for the U.S.-India agreement and has committed to bringing it to a resolution, said USINPAC’s chairman, Sanjay Puri, who met with Hastert recently.

“It is an important priority that has support, and we hope and expect to move legislation to the floor before the August recess,” said Kevin Madden, spokesman for House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). But Madden added: “No decisions have been made about when it will be considered on the floor calendar yet.”

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said he is relying on Sen. Richard Lugar, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, “to take care of it in the committee.” Lugar backs the accord but indicated that he may seek to add some conditions.

“I think it is certainly the intent of the president and the Senate for [the legislation] to pass sometime this year,” said Andy Fisher, spokesman for the committee.

But the Senate has a crowded schedule, debating a constitutional ban on gay marriage, a flag-burning amendment and a tax package with wide, bipartisan opposition. The Senate also has to consider the 2007 defense authorization bill, and both the House and the Senate still have to deal with the 2006 emergency supplemental.

“There is a concern that the agenda might cloud this issue out,” Puri said. “Congress has a lot to do, and that is a big concern. The business of the nation needs to go on.”

A few more Democrats than Republicans oppose the deal, a lobbyist working on it said. Even so, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has indicated her support.

While the issue is not expected to become a partisan fight, Democrats are not willing to give Bush “carte blanche,” a congressional aide said.

The administration initially proposed that Congress pre-approve the deal before the United States negotiated it with India, the aide said. Pre-approval would waive parts of the Atomic Energy Act once the president certified that India would make the necessary changes, the aide explained.

“The problem is that the administration’s initial proposal was to enunciate some general principles and for Congress [to] pre-approve [those],” the aide said. After the initial pre-approval, Congress would have a chance to overturn the deal, but only with a two-thirds vote.

“It is complicated procedurally,” the aide said.

The administration is eager to move ahead, the aide said.

“They think some indication of congressional support is going to make a difference in terms of what they are going to do with the Indians,” the aide said. “The Indians have some tough decisions to make, and the idea is that if Congress is going to do something they will be likely to make the changes.”

Fearing that the agreement may not have enough congressional support to alter radically 30 years of U.S. policy to punish India for developing nuclear weapons in the ’70s, Lantos, the ranking member of the House panel, proposed a compromise intended to keep the agreement alive. Congress would commit to approving it under expedited procedures but would only formally change U.S. law after lawmakers review the completed agreement and the IAEA safeguards accord.

Lantos is circulating his proposal in the House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the matter.

USINPAC lobbies prominent US lawmaker to back US-India Nuclear Deal

2006-06-09T15:53:00.000-05:00

Washington, Jun 8: A prominent US lawmaker has backed the US-India nuclear deal and said he is for a stronger relations between the two countries.

The decision of Henry Hyde, the Republican Chairman of the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives, is said to have been made known in a private meeting with the US India Political Action Committee, a USINPAC release said.

The powerful Chair of the House Committee is also reported to have stated that he is "confident the bill will pass and is willing to push it through".

"I am for a stronger US-India relations and I understand that India is in a very dangerous neighbourhood and energy self sufficiency is very important to them," Hyde is reported to have remarked, the release said.

N-deal with India real-world pact: US official

2006-06-01T19:58:00.000-05:00

2006/5/18 14:49:06

Washington: The US-India civil nuclear energy deal is a "real-world agreement" that may not be perfect, but will prove to be a "net gain for non-proliferation", said a top state department official here.

US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher underlined the breathtaking potential of the deal to transform India-US ties across the board.

"If we can do nuclear power, we can do anything together. The advantages of such a relationship for regional stability and for the future of over a billion people are many," he told the Asia-Pacific committee of the House International Relations Panel here Wednesday.

"It will secure their increasing conviction that there is solid support from the US government for long-term civil nuclear cooperation and thereby open the door to cooperation across the board," he stressed.

Boucher's presentation to the panel, titled "The US and South Asia: An expanding agenda", made an appeal to the Congress to clear the deal that can take the "US-India relationship to heights we have never previously achieved".

"I think we'd all be happy if India and Pakistan gave up their nuclear weapons and joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty. (But) It's not going to happen," Boucher said.

"We went into this negotiation knowing the positions that India had taken all along. This is a real-world agreement. We don't claim it's perfect," he said.

He also sought to correct the impression that the US had given away "too much" in the agreement and claimed that the deal provided "a net gain for non-proliferation" as India has already taken a series of steps to bring itself in "alignment with the international non-proliferation regime".

"They have improved their export control systems, brought their standards into alignment with the practices of the Nuclear Suppliers Group already. They have pledged to support negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty.

"They have begun their discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency," he said in response to a question.

--IANS

2006-06-01T19:56:00.000-05:00

International : N-deal with India real-world pact: US official
2006/5/18 14:49:06

Washington: The US-India civil nuclear energy deal is a "real-world agreement" that may not be perfect, but will prove to be a "net gain for non-proliferation", said a top state department official here.

US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher underlined the breathtaking potential of the deal to transform India-US ties across the board.

"If we can do nuclear power, we can do anything together. The advantages of such a relationship for regional stability and for the future of over a billion people are many," he told the Asia-Pacific committee of the House International Relations Panel here Wednesday.

"It will secure their increasing conviction that there is solid support from the US government for long-term civil nuclear cooperation and thereby open the door to cooperation across the board," he stressed.

Boucher's presentation to the panel, titled "The US and South Asia: An expanding agenda", made an appeal to the Congress to clear the deal that can take the "US-India relationship to heights we have never previously achieved".

"I think we'd all be happy if India and Pakistan gave up their nuclear weapons and joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty. (But) It's not going to happen," Boucher said.

"We went into this negotiation knowing the positions that India had taken all along. This is a real-world agreement. We don't claim it's perfect," he said.

He also sought to correct the impression that the US had given away "too much" in the agreement and claimed that the deal provided "a net gain for non-proliferation" as India has already taken a series of steps to bring itself in "alignment with the international non-proliferation regime".

"They have improved their export control systems, brought their standards into alignment with the practices of the Nuclear Suppliers Group already. They have pledged to support negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty.

"They have begun their discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency," he said in response to a question.

--IANS

Energy Geopolitics 2006

2006-06-01T19:47:00.000-05:00

by Richard Heinberg
Published on 25 May 2006 by Museletter / EB. Archived on 25 May 2006.

Please click on the link below for the source.

No new conditions on N-deal: US

2006-06-01T19:46:00.000-05:00

Sridhar Krishnaswami in Washington, DC | May 26, 2006 14:03 IST

Please click on the link below for the original Rediff Article.

India wants US nuclear deal to ensure growth

2006-06-01T19:39:00.000-05:00

REUTERS
Posted online: Friday, May 26, 2006 at 1657 hours IST

TOKYO, MAY 26: Indian Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee urged the US Congress on Friday to approve a US-India accord on nuclear energy cooperation so New Delhi can achieve rapid economic growth.

The nuclear deal struck last July to permit US civil nuclear technology sales to India for the first time in three decades has run into trouble in Washington and New Delhi, as critics on both sides complain their side got too little and the other side got too much.

"I do hope this arrangement will get the ratification of the US Congress, and after that the Nuclear Suppliers Group will recognise and help India to have access to technology, materials and equipment to pursue our peaceful civilian nuclear programme," Mukherjee told reporters in Tokyo.

For the deal to take effect, Congress must change US law and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must alter its rules.

"We require energy to ensure our rapid development," Mukherjee, in Tokyo on a three-day visit, said.

India has been barred from obtaining foreign nuclear technology because it developed and tested nuclear weapons and did not sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The US administration, which considers the accord key to improved ties with the rising Asian power, has met resistance after pushing Congress to change quickly the Atomic Energy Act.

India never signed the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, developing weapons in contravention of international norms.

"Though India is not a signatory to NPT, we have accepted all of the obligations, most of the obligations, under the treaty voluntarily," Mukherjee said.

India also has not had meaningful negotiations with the UN watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, on another key piece of the deal, a system to monitor Indian civil nuclear facilities, experts say.

"We require minimum credible deterrent," Mukherjee said. "We want to achieve minimum credible deterrent to meet our requirement."

US Official: U.S.-India deal to boost trade

2006-06-01T19:34:00.000-05:00

May 30, 2006
By RAJESH MAHAPATRA
AP BUSINESS WRITER

NEW DELHI -- Trade between the United States and India will get a big boost from a civilian nuclear pact between the two countries that should boost U.S high-tech exports and foster trust, a senior U.S. official said Tuesday.

Exports and imports between India and the United States have tripled to $26 billion in the past 10 years, but the trade balance has increasingly tilted in favor of India, leaving the U.S. with a deficit of about $10 billion in 2005.

Experts have long argued that the trade gap can be bridged only if the United States eases curbs on American companies that want to sell high technology products and military hardware to India. That should happen once the civilian nuclear deal, sealed by President Bush during a March visit to India, is cleared by the U.S. Congress.

"The civilian nuclear deal is going to have benefits that will cut across sectors," Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Karan Bhatia told reporters.

Bhatia's comments followed talks with Indian officials about doubling the two-way trade between the counties in the next three years.

Both sides discussed steps to reduce trade barriers and improve protection for patents and copyrights, among other issues, Bhatia said.

They also tried to identify areas where India and the U.S. could sign agreements at a planned meeting in Washington in June.

Tuesday's talks also focussed on how the countries could work together to break the current impasse in global trade negotiations, Bhatia said.

Talks at the World Trade Organization to reach a new global treaty by the end of this year have been stalled because of differences over opening up agricultural trade.

India, Russia to finalise $600 mn fighter deal

2006-05-30T07:10:00.000-05:00

India is expected to finalise a $600 million deal for swapping 18 Su-30K and Su-30MK fighters with the latest version of Su-30MKI during Air Chief Marshal S P Tyagi's week-long visit to Russia beginning today. During his Russia tour, first as an air chief, Tyagi is to hold talks with the Chief of Russian General Staff and other senior defence officials.

He is also scheduled to visit MiG and Sukhoi corporations and Siberian plant of IRKUT corporation, the main supplier of state-of-the-art Su-30MKI multirole fighters, specially designed for IAF. During Irkutsk visit, Tyagi is expected to finalise the $600 million deal for swapping 18 older Su-30K and Su-30MK fighters with the latest version of Su-30MKI.

The air chief is also scheduled to watch demonstration flight of the latest MiG fighter Moscow intends to field against US F-16 in the Indian tender for the acquisition of 126 fighters. Tyagi would be the first senior foreign official to watch the demonstration flight of MiG-29OVT at Zhukovsky airbase near Moscow, Kommersant daily reported.

During his visit to St. Petersburg, the air chief is to visit Aerospace Equipment Corporation and aircraft engine factories Klimov and Krasny Oktyabr involved in Indian deals. Tyagi is visiting the country at the invitation of his Russian counterpart.

After Hawk AJTs for air force, will it be Goshawk for navy?

2006-05-30T07:09:00.001-05:00

The US is offering to the Indian Navy the latest version of its T-45C Goshawk trainer aircraft, the naval version of the British BAe Hawk that the Indian Air Force (IAF) is purchasing.

Boeing, which manufactures the Goshawk in collaboration with BAe Systems, sent a high-level team to India last week to formally offer this aircraft, in addition to the F-18 Super Hornet that it wants to sell to the IAF to meet its multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) requirement of 126 jets.

Chris Chadwick, Boeing's vice president and general manager for global strike systems, said India was wide on the US horizon and that the best of American technology was on offer in view of the newly emerging strategic equations between the two countries.

Cooperation between the two countries could cover the latest equipment for the Indian Army, Indian Navy and the Indian Air Force - as well as space.

India needs trainers for the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov that it is buying from Russia. Ironically, as the Russians could not extend carrier landing training to the Indian Navy, it had to go to the US - and that has provided Washington the opportunity to offer the Goshawk to the Indian Navy.

Thirty-two Indian Navy pilots have been assigned to receive carrier takeoff-and-landing training at the US Navy's Pensacola Naval Air Station, Florida, where all US naval pilots are given initial and advanced training. The Indian pilots are being sent in batches of four, beginning earlier this year.

The US is looking for "interoperability" with the Indian forces for commonality in weapons and systems. It was with this in view that the Pentagon offered to train Indian naval pilots.

New Delhi had to accept the offer as Russia was unable to come up with carrier deck training. Admiral Gorshkov is due for delivery to the Indian Navy in 2008 along with a complement of 16 MiG 29K carrier-based fighters.

Boeing says that as the IAF is buying 66 Hawk advanced jet trainers (AJTs) from Britain, it would be cost-effective for the Indian Navy to go in for the Goshawk as there is a substantial commonality of parts between them. Rolls Royce's Adour engines power both aircraft, and although they are different models, many of their sub-assemblies are common.

Adour engines also power the IAF fleet of Jaguars that are made by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).

The US Navy had selected the Hawk for training its pilots but as deck-based operations need sturdier airframes, the aircraft was suitably modified. The latest model T-45C has digital avionics and its training programme covers classroom instructions to simulators, initial and advanced carrier-based operations. The aircraft can also carry some weapons if required.

Boeing is responsible for the forward fuselage and stabilizers, assembly and systems integration, production test flights and maintenance. BAe produces the wings and the centre and rear fuselage while Rolls Royce makes the engines.

Some 170 Goshawks have been delivered to the US Navy, with 100 more in the pipeline. It is likely to be in operation beyond 2030.

As for the Indian Navy, its pilots have so far received advanced training on Harrier jump jets.

Unlike the AJTs for the IAF, two-thirds of which would be made in India under licence at HAL, the navy's requirement of trainer aircraft should not normally exceed a squadron, or about 20. Thus they are likely to be purchased outright.

The Bush administration is trying to enlist Tokyo's support for its controversial decision to back India's civilian nuclear power development.

2006-05-30T07:09:00.000-05:00

India will sign a defence deal with Russia within a fortnight under which 18 Sukhoi-30K fighter jets it had purchased earlier from Moscow will be exchanged for the latest su-30 MKI multi-role war planes.

A spokesperson of Irkut Corporation, the manufacturer of Sukhoi jets, said the trade-in contract would be signed within a fortnight. However, she declined to reveal the value of the deal.

As per the deal 18 su-30k jets with limited capabilities, supplied in late 1990s to the Indian Air Force (IAF) would be bought back by Russia and the similar number of latest fighters would be shipped into India.

Russian defence expert Konstantin Makiyenko said Irkut will supply 18 Su-30MKI jets specially tailored for the IAF, while older jets received from it will be upgraded for deployment in Belarus along the border with NATO.

In 2004 Russia had completed the supply of 40 Su-30 fighters and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited has already launched the assembling of its latest version under licence for the production of 140 jets.

The Sukhoi license deal provides the full transfer of technology to HAL, including indigenous production of thrust-vectoring engines, a privilege denied to China under a similar deal.

U.S. urges ally Japan to back India nuke pact

2006-05-30T07:08:00.000-05:00

The Bush administration is trying to enlist Tokyo's support for its controversial decision to back India's civilian nuclear power development.

U.S. President George W. Bush will broach the issue with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi at their June 29 summit meeting in Washington, sources said.

Koizumi is among Bush's staunchest allies, but it is not clear how far he will go to express support for the U.S.-India agreement.

Some officials are concerned the deal would further undermine the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). Others say that Japan, as the only nation to have had atomic weapons used against it, should not give its backing.

India has conducted nuclear weapons tests, but it has not signed the NPT.

U.S. officials argue that the nonproliferation structure has been strengthened because India is allowing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect its civilian nuclear facilities. That agreement was a precondition to India's purchase of nuclear technology and fuel from the United States.

However, the U.S.-India deal does not cover inspections of India's military facilities, leading to concerns that nuclear weapons would effectively be placed outside of the international arms control structure.

Japanese government sources said U.S. officials asked for an expression of support soon after the deal was signed on March 2.

Japan has not stated its official position, but government officials are considering issuing a statement of "basic understanding" of the agreement.

Among points in favor of Japan expressing its support are that the deal enables inspections of India's civilian nuclear facilities, thus strengthening the nonproliferation structure. The agreement would boost India's economic growth. Britain and France have already expressed their support.

However, some government officials are concerned about the lack of guarantees that IAEA inspectors will be able to carry out their inspections in India.

In addition, they worry that nuclear technology developed in India's civilian sector could be converted to military purposes.

Some officials think Japan should delay any expression of support until the July Group of Eight meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, which Britain and France will also attend.

Indo-UK Naval exercises underway

2006-05-30T07:06:00.001-05:00

A British nuclear task force is engaging the Indian navy in the biggest naval exercises between the two sides in four decades.

'Konkan 2006' is a sign of just how important India is being seen as a major international military force.

Exercises like these, which were unthinkable till a few years ago, reflect the new strategic equation between India and countries like the UK and the US.

Today, western powers are going out of their way to cultivate India.

Action in Arabian Sea

The cutting edge of the Indian Navy - including the destroyer Mumbai, the frigates Brahmaputra and Ganga and the submarine Shankush - are in the thick of action in the Arabian Sea, taking on powerful and state of the art warships.

“These exercises would not have happened a few years back. It is a sign of the changing times. India and the UK are strategic partners,” said Sir Michael Arthur, British High Commissioner.

Apart from war games, this is a demonstration of Britain's state-of-the-art helicopter EH 101 - one that they are hoping India will buy.

But a greater attraction for India are the British sea harrier jets.

The Indian navy, which already uses the jets, is looking at buying more, and price negotiations are underway.

"The Indian Navy is extremely capable. We don't do this sort of exercise with just anyone, but we are entirely comfortable operating with the Indians," said Bob Cooling, Commander of HMS Illustrious.

Perhaps that sense of comfort is because both countries use common war machines like the sea harriers.

But the exercises, dubbed War At Sea, aren't designed for a comfort zone.

Instead, the war games are testing the fighting skills of the thousands of personnel involved in Konkan 2006.

Indian Army open to source equipment from US

2006-05-30T07:06:00.000-05:00

The Indian Army is open to source military technology and equipment from the United States if they were best in the class, Indian Army Chief J. J. Singh said Saturday.

Asked whether the army would shop for military equipment, including arms from the U.S. in the light of an upswing in the Indo-U.S. relations, Singh said while efforts would be made to source the requirements indigenously, the army would like the equipment to be produced in the country with technology from outside.

"Our first preference is to source indigenously or get the equipment produced within the country by the public or private sector with technology from outside. If nothing can be done, we would like to meet our requirements from outside," Indo-Asian News Service quoted Singh as saying.

We are happy to receive equipment, which is in its best class from any source, including the U.S. But it will have to be a government decision, Singh said after flagging off the newly manufactured bogie flat Arjun tank carrier wagons of military rail at the Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (BEML) facility in Bangalore.

He said the Indian Army would begin field trials of the indigenous main battle tank (MBT) Arjun in a month or two along with its T-72 battle tanks.

Indian navy going ahead with the construction of an additional naval base about 60 km south of Visakhapatnam

2006-05-30T07:04:00.000-05:00

Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Arun Prakash said on Wednesday [24 May] that the navy was going ahead with the construction of an additional naval base about 60 km south of Visakhapatnam.

"The Vizag port is getting crowded and the channel has become narrow. We have acquired roughly 5,000 acres of land with the help of the state government. Negotiations are on with the villagers on their relocation and payment of compensation," Admiral Prakash told mediapersons after presenting gallantry and service medals to naval personnel at the Eastern Command headquarters here.

The additional base will come up some 32 km south of Gangavaram port, where a consortium is building a port. Several naval experts have voiced concern over the threat to security from having a private port so close to the naval base. Now, the Gangavaram port will have the Eastern Command 28 km to the north of it, and the new base 32 km to the south.

The navy, however, has previously told the government that it sees no threat from the Gangavaram port. A senior official of the Indian navy said that new base was still in the conceptual stage. It would have a separate harbour and channel into the sea, the present channel at the Visakhapatnam port being totally choked by cargo and defence ships and submarines. The additional base will have all the operations on par with the existing naval base.

The 5,000 acres will be acquired to the south of the city under Rambilli, Nakkapalli and Yelamanchali mandals of the district. A revenue official said that the state government had already identified the land and the negotiations were on with the villagers on relocation and payment of compensation. Admiral Prakash thanked the state government for allotting 5,000 acres of land for the expansion of the Eastern Command. Admiral Prakash also said that the navy would have two aircraft carriers with escort and support ships and submarines to make it a blue water force by 2015.

"We have submitted all the proposals to the government." Pointing out that the navy had got 17.5 per cent of the total defence budget, he said, "We have already placed the orders with the shipyards and they (aircraft carriers) will be ready by 2015." Admiral Prakash said that during his two-day visit to the Eastern Naval Command, he had reviewed the security situation, assessed the assets and reviewed emerging situations in Sri Lanka.

India shelves ambitious nuclear missile program

2006-05-30T07:03:00.000-05:00

NEW DELHI - Has the Agni III, India's most ambitious nuclear-capable ballistic-missile program, been aborted or merely put in cold storage? Keen to impress the world community of its peaceful intentions in its quest to obtain nuclear fuel and technology from the United States, France, Canada and Australia, it seems that New Delhi has made up its mind to shelve plans for big military-power credentials for now.

The government has decided to cancel the first test-firing of an Indian inter-continental ballistic missile (ICBM), one with a range of 4,000 kilometers (some say up to 6,000km), which is sufficient to reach China and capable of delivering a nuclear payload.

Pressure from the US and others cannot be discounted. The United States has always been very suspicious about India's Agni program, and in 1994 persuaded it to suspend testing of the missile after three test flights. The US-backed Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) seeks to prevent the proliferation of missiles capable of delivering a 500-kilogram payload over distances of 300km and more.

India has been subjected to sanctions since it exploded a nuclear device at Pokhran in 1974 and turned into a full-fledged nuclear-weapons state through a series of underground tests in May 1998. Nor has India (or Pakistan) signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The restrictions have been eased over the past few years, partly because of Washington's strategic shift toward India, the influence of business interests (India's nuclear market is considered to be worth more than US$100 billion), and India's record as a "responsible nation" with a strong democratic traditions. It culminated in the Indo-US nuclear-energy cooperation deal this March.

However, it has also come to light that as part of the March pact (the contents of which were leaked to the media) Washington has been insisting that New Delhi agree to a future moratorium on testing of dual-use (nuclear or conventional warheads) missile technology and the testing another atomic bomb.

India has rejected such a commitment as a back-door entry to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. India has not signed the CTBT, as it feels that the treaty came into existence after those who possessed nuclear weapons had perfected the know-how. But at this delicate time, India is also keen not to annoy the United States and the US-backed 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) scheduled to deliberate on the issue next week in Brazil.

Some experts think that India's restrained approach as a nuclear power puts the country at a geopolitical disadvantage, as any mere symbolic capability is a liability. "For us to start acting as if we're a nuclear-weapons state may have it costs, because someone may end up believing you. And, as I say, if someone believes that you're a threat, then he may be moved to take some preemptive action,'' said analyst Bharat Karnad on CNN-IBN.

However, the thinking in New Delhi is different. The consensus holds that India now has a minimum credible nuclear deterrence in place, and so the Agni III should rest for a while. Given the acute electrical-power situation in the country, it could be a worthwhile tradeoff. In any case, it will not be possible for India to beat China in a nuclear-arms race for a long time.

This week Anil Kakodkar, chairman of India's Atomic Energy Commission, said plans are in place to double the electricity production from nuclear power plants by 2030. "We are trying to realize the target of 20,000 megawatts and scale it up to 40,000MW by 2030, with the possibility of international cooperation," he said.

The importance to the nuclear pact that will make India eligible for supplies of enriched uranium to generate power became apparent in a roundabout way. At a recent event attended by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee, M Natarajan, who is the scientific adviser to the government, said, "We are technically ready for the test-firing of the Agni III missile [since January]. We are awaiting a nod from the government.''

However, New Delhi, mindful of international reactions especially at the upcoming NSG and the ongoing wrangles at the US Congress, which is debating the Indo-US nuclear pact for legislation, has quickly said it has canceled the tests. Mukherjee, who is also a proponent of improved Sino-Indian ties and is slated to visit China this month, said, "As responsible members of the international community, we want to keep our international commitments on non-proliferation. We have no pressure on us, nor are we putting any political pressure. It is just that we have decided to have self-imposed restraint.''

New Delhi has further reiterated that it did not postpone the test-firing of Agni III under US pressure. Such decisions, it said, were based on its assessment of national-security needs. "Decisions concerning the country's strategic program, including the development and testing of different classes of missiles, are based on technical factors and a continuous review and assessment of our overall security environment,'' a Foreign Ministry spokesperson said.

So far, India has developed the 150-300km Prithvi and the 700-800km Agni I missiles, which are aimed at Pakistan and have been inducted into military service. In response, Pakistan has its own arsenal, including the 750km-range Shaheen I and 1,500km Ghauri-I ballistic missiles believed to be derivatives of the Chinese M-9 and North Korean Nodong missiles.

Last year, Pakistan successfully test-fired its first cruise missile. India has its own cruise missile, BrahMos, with a 300km strike range, believed to be similar to the US Tomahawk cruise missile, which was widely used in Iraq and Afghanistan. China's ballistic missiles are, of course, far more advanced and are said to cover most of the world.

Agni II (2,000km-plus, also inducted) and Agni III are seen as nuclear deterrents aimed at China. Agni III is said to be able to deliver a 200-300kg warhead with a high degree of accuracy. The longest-range, surface-to-surface Agni III has reportedly been ready for launch for two years, but the tests have been repeatedly postponed.

India's military capabilities and arsenal are developed by the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO), which works in close coordination with space and nuclear-power institutions. At one level the announcement by Natarajan is seen as a way to deflect criticism of the DRDO as being steeped in red tape, delays and long gestation periods. However, there is no doubt that it is the shadow of Washington and access to nuclear energy that finally tilted the scales against the Agni III.

Boeing bids to sell P8 aircraft to Navy

2006-05-30T07:01:00.000-05:00

After playing hard to get with the Indian Air force, Boeing, the world's largest military aircraft manufacturer, has put up an offer to the Indian Navy.

In the first ever direct military sales offer, the aviation giant has bid to sell eight P8A anti-submarine aircrafts to India.

Boeing has also invited India to jointly manufacture the plane.

Multi-Mission Maritime aircraft or the P8 is a militarised version of the company's commercial jetliner 737. Designed as a maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft, the P8, Boeing says, will dramatically enhance the Indian navy's anti-submarine warfare capabilities.

Boeing says the P8 is crucial for the Indian Navy to effectively defend a coastline that extends more than 7,000 kilometers.

Says Rick Buck, P8 Programme Manager, "It means persistent surveillance and reconnaissance in those waters. You know who's there, you know why there are there, you know what they are doing and you can execute on those if they happen to be hostile targets. This is a significant presence. The reliability of the aircraft means that you can pursue those missions 24/7."

A contract to build more than 100 P8s for the US navy is already in the pipeline for Boeing. A growing strategic Indo-US partnership means that for the first time ever the company has the opportunity to directly sell its technology to a foreign country.

Says Buck, "The aircraft we're developing for the US navy definitely provides us with an advantage in time. We're already under development, we already have flight-test programs established. We'll be able to take advantage of those flight test programs and engineer development to meet the scheduling time frame the Indian navy requires."

Boeing submitted its official bid to build the P8s to the Indian government last month. There are however other contenders in the market including Russia and Boeing's main competitor in the US - Lockheed Martin.

The P8-A is expected to offset the Navy's existing fleet of Ilyushin-38 and Tupolev 142 aircraft.

Indian Army to acquire 'Nishant' by mid-2007

2006-05-30T07:00:00.000-05:00

The first fleet of indigenously-built Unmanned Aerial Vehicle `Nishant', specifically designed for any-time launch and recovery, would be delivered to the Army by mid-2007, Aeronautical Development Establishment Director G Elangovan said today.

ADE conducted its 106th flight trial early this morning and the multi-mission UAV's successful launch and recovery here was watched by officials of the Coast Guard, he said.
"The uniqueness of Nishant is that it has no wheel at the bottom and is ready for launch and recovery from any point", he told reporters here.

Noting that it did not require a runway, he said the Indian Army had placed orders for the UAV with the Bangalore-based ADE and the first fleet would be delivered by middle of next year.
`Nishant' would be the state-of-the-art UAV to be acquired by the Army after `Lakshaya', which is now used as an aerial target system for shooting, Programme Director Natarajan said.
Besides, the UAV would also be used for civilian applications, he said.

With the commissioning of the ninth Indian Coast Guard station at Beypore near here - third in Kerala - full-time surveillance of coastal areas of the state would be complete, Coast Guard officials said.

Coast Guard Director General Prabhakaran Paleri would commission the station at Beypore on Thursday, they said.