Comments from sender:
The ongoing apprehensions and speculations on yesterday's historic sign of INDO-US Nuc. Deal was all but obvious due to the exceptions Bush made specifically for India,breaking 32 year old precedents and as India not an NPT signed country. Fact however....., (for rest part of my comment, vide:)
http://gazebosynd.blogspot.com/2006/12/seattletimescom-bush-signs-legislation.html
=gazebo=
Bush signs legislation permitting nuclear cooperation with India
Full story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003484469_india19.html
By Peter Baker
The Washington Post
WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed legislation Monday permitting civilian nuclear cooperation with India, reversing three decades of nonproliferation policy in the interest of redefining U.S. relations with the world's largest democracy and reshaping the geopolitical balance as China asserts itself in Asia.
Bush, who has made denying nuclear weapons to Iraq, Iran and North Korea a centerpiece of his foreign policy, persuaded Congress to make an exception for India despite the fact that it has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Although critics warn that the deal could spark a regional arms race, Bush called it a landmark moment that finally relegates Cold War-era tensions to the past.
"The United States and India are natural partners," Bush said at a signing ceremony in the East Room attended by lawmakers, diplomats and Indian Americans. "The rivalries that once kept our nations apart are no more -- and today, America and India are united by deeply held values."
The new law marks a rare foreign-policy success for Bush at a time when he has suffered setbacks elsewhere around the world.
Bush legacy
Some top advisers believe a closer relationship with India will be one of Bush's primary legacies and could help build a counterweight to a rising China. The administration made the India deal its top priority to push through a lame-duck Congress.
India tested bombs in 1974 and 1998, and specialists believe it has enough fuel for a half-dozen more. But it is not one of five official nuclear states under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the main instrument governing nuclear weapons.
Neither is its archrival, Pakistan, which set off its own nuclear explosions after India in 1998.
The law Bush signed carves out an exception to the Atomic Energy Act of 1974, which prohibits nuclear trade with countries outside the treaty.
U.S. companies will be allowed to trade in nuclear fuel and to invest and build civilian nuclear plants in India. In exchange, India has agreed to open up its civilian nuclear facilities to international inspection.
But under the deal Bush cut with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during a March visit to New Delhi, India is designating only 14 of its 22 nuclear reactors as civilian. The other eight are considered military and will remain shielded from scrutiny.
Fuel for bombs
Because the deal will allow India to import nuclear fuel for civilian use, critics estimate it could use its own facilities to produce enough fuel for 40 or 50 nuclear bombs per year.
"For the president to say this is good for nonproliferation suggests he's being badly advised," said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. "India only agreed to put half of all its electricity-producing reactors under safeguard and that's troubling."
Critics complained that granting an exception to India would create a dangerous precedent and undermine the administration's efforts to pressure North Korea and Iran to abandon nuclear aspirations.
Like India and Pakistan, North Korea has tested nuclear bombs outside the treaty. Israel's prime minister last week appeared to acknowledge for the first time that his country has nuclear weapons, despite its longstanding policy of public ambiguity about whether it does.
"What's good for India is good for Israel," said Henry D. Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and a former Pentagon official under President George H.W. Bush. "And once you have Israel, can Pakistan be far behind? ... They have pretty much signaled the end to any benefit for following the rules."
Some opponents also questioned India's nonproliferation record. Although New Delhi has not been accused of giving significant nuclear technology to other countries, Indian firms and individuals have provided arms or aid to Iran.
Last year, the U.S. sanctioned two Indian companies for supplying material to Iran's suspected chemical-weapons program and later accused two Indian nuclear scientists of providing Iran with sensitive technology.
Even as Bush was in India sealing the deal in March, two Iranian ships docked at an Indian port for joint military exercises. And the Bush administration this summer sanctioned two Indian firms for selling missile parts to Iran, a decision kept secret until after a House vote on the nuclear deal.
Congress inserted language into the legislation intended to prod the administration to ensure India does not help Iran, then passed the measure by wide margins in the last few weeks.
The agreement still faces three final tests: India must now conclude an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency over inspections. The U.S. must work out a technical agreement with India on nuclear trade. And both countries must persuade the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a consortium of 40 fuel-producing nations, to accept the U.S.-India agreement.
The White House and members of Congress who supported the deal have argued that nuclear power holds a promise of making India less reliant on Middle Eastern oil while easing pressure on world oil prices.
Sanjay Puri, chairman of the U.S. India Political Action Committee, said that some estimates have placed the potential economic value in the United States and India alone at $30 billion, and that it could add 10,000 to 15,000 jobs to the U.S. economy.
In India, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh defended the nuclear deal, rejecting criticism that it went too far in restricting India's ability to produce atomic weapons. L.K. Advani of the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party said India should not accept the U.S. legislation, saying the deal would prevent India from conducting nuclear tests in the future.
Supporters in the U.S. said the U.S.-India agreement would promote economic growth in both countries by easing potential political tensions and encouraging greater trade.
"India is a state that should be at the very center of our foreign policy and our attention," said Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., this month.
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., a senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the pact, in effect, shreds the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"This is a sad day in the history of efforts to halt the spread of nuclear weapons and materials around the world," he said. "The bill that President Bush has signed today may well become the death warrant to the international nuclear nonproliferation regime."
Additional material from The Associated Press, Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times
TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE SEATTLE TIMES PRINT EDITION Call (206) 464-2121 or 1-800-542-0820, or go to
https://read.nwsource.com/subscribe/times/
HOW TO ADVERTISE WITH THE SEATTLE TIMES COMPANY ONLINE For information on advertising in this e-mail newsletter, or other online marketing platforms with The Seattle Times Company, call (206) 464-2361 or e-mail websales@seattletimes.com
TO ADVERTISE IN THE SEATTLE TIMES PRINT EDITION Please go to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/contactus/adsales for information.
For news updates throughout the day, visit http://www.seattletimes.com
Copyright (c) 2005 The Seattle Times Company
Your Life. Your Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment