fbpx
Wikipedia

India–United States Civil Nuclear Agreement

The 123 Agreement signed between the United States of America and the Republic of India is known as the U.S.–India Civil Nuclear Agreement or Indo-US nuclear deal.[1] The framework for this agreement was a July 18, 2005, joint statement by then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and then U.S. President George W. Bush, under which India agreed to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities and to place all its civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards and, in exchange, the United States agreed to work toward full civil nuclear cooperation with India.[2] This U.S.-India deal took more than three years to come to fruition as it had to go through several complex stages, including amendment of U.S. domestic law, especially the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,[3] a civil-military nuclear Separation Plan in India, an India-IAEA safeguards (inspections) agreement and the grant of an exemption for India by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an export-control cartel that had been formed mainly in response to India's first nuclear test in 1974. In its final shape, the deal places under permanent safeguards those nuclear facilities that India has identified as "civil" and permits broad civil nuclear cooperation, while excluding the transfer of "sensitive" equipment and technologies, including civil enrichment and reprocessing items even under IAEA safeguards. On August 18, 2008, the IAEA Board of Governors approved,[4] and on February 2, 2009, India signed an India-specific safeguards agreement with the IAEA.[5] After India brought this agreement into force, inspections began in a phased manner on the 35 civilian nuclear installations India has identified in its Separation Plan.[6] The deal is seen as a watershed in U.S.-India relations and introduces a new aspect to international nonproliferation efforts.[7] On August 1, 2008, the IAEA approved the safeguards agreement with India,[8] after which the United States approached the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to grant a waiver to India to commence civilian nuclear trade.[9] The 48-nation NSG granted the waiver to India on September 6, 2008, allowing it to access civilian nuclear technology and fuel from other countries.[10] The implementation of this waiver made India the only known country with nuclear weapons which is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but is still allowed to carry out nuclear commerce with the rest of the world.[11]

U.S. President George Bush and India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exchange handshakes in New Delhi on March 2, 2006.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill to approve the deal on September 28, 2008.[12] Two days later, India and France inked a similar nuclear pact making France the first country to have such an agreement with India.[13] On October 1, 2008, the U.S. Senate also approved the civilian nuclear agreement allowing India to purchase nuclear fuel and technology from—and sell them to—the United States.[14][15] U.S. president, George W. Bush, signed the legislation on the Indo-US nuclear deal, approved by the U.S. Congress, into law, now called the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non-proliferation Enhancement Act, on October 8, 2008.[16] The agreement was signed by then Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and his counterpart then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on October 10.[17][18]

In 2015, the agreement had still not been fully implemented.[19][20][21]

In 2016, the countries agreed to build 6 US-designed reactors in India. See timeline below.

Overview edit

The Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, also known as the Hyde Act, is the U.S. domestic law that modifies the requirements of Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act to permit nuclear cooperation with India and in particular to negotiate a 123 Agreement to operationalize the 2005 Joint Statement.[22][23] As a domestic U.S. law, the Hyde Act is binding on the United States. The Hyde Act cannot be binding on India's sovereign decisions although it can be construed as prescriptive for future U.S. reactions. As per the Vienna Convention, an international agreement such as the 123 Agreement cannot be superseded by an internal law such as the Hyde Act.[24][25][26]

The 123 agreement defines the terms and conditions for bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation, and requires separate approvals by the U.S. Congress and by Indian cabinet ministers. The agreement will also help India meet its goal of adding 25,000 MW of nuclear power capacity through imports of nuclear reactors and fuel by 2020.[27]

After the terms of the 123 agreement were concluded on July 27, 2007,[28] it ran into trouble because of stiff opposition in India from the communist allies of the ruling United Progressive Alliance.[29] The government survived a confidence vote in the parliament on July 22, 2008, by 275–256 votes in the backdrop of defections by some parties .[30] The deal also had faced opposition from non-proliferation activists, anti-nuclear organisations, and some states within the Nuclear Suppliers Group.[31][32] In February 2008, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that any agreement would be "consistent with the obligations of the Hyde Act".[33] The bill was signed on October 8, 2008.

Background edit

Parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) have a recognized right of access to peaceful uses of nuclear energy and an obligation to cooperate on civilian nuclear technology. Separately, the Nuclear Suppliers Group has agreed on guidelines for nuclear exports, including reactors and fuel. Those guidelines condition such exports on comprehensive safeguards by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which are designed to verify that nuclear energy is not diverted from peaceful use to weapons programs. Though neither India, Israel, nor Pakistan have signed the NPT, India argues that instead of addressing the central objective of universal and comprehensive non-proliferation, the treaty creates a club of "nuclear haves" and a larger group of "nuclear have-nots" by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967, who alone are free to possess and multiply their nuclear stockpiles.[34] India insists on a comprehensive action plan for a nuclear-free world within a specific time-frame and has also adopted a voluntary "no first use policy".[citation needed]

Led by the U.S., other states have set up an informal group, the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), to control exports of nuclear materials, equipment and technology.[35] Consequently, India was left outside the international nuclear order, which forced India to develop its own resources for each stage of the nuclear fuel cycle and power generation, including next generation reactors such as fast breeder reactors and a thorium breeder reactor[36][37] known as the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor. In addition to impelling India to achieve success in developing these new reactor technologies, the sanctions also provided India with the impetus to continue developing its own nuclear weapons technology with a specific goal of achieving self-sufficiency for all key components for weapons design, testing and production.

Given that India is estimated to possess reserves of about 80,000–112,369 tons of uranium,[38] India has more than enough fissile material to supply its nuclear weapons program, even if it restricted Plutonium production to only 8 of the country's 17 current reactors, and then further restricted Plutonium production to only 1/4 of the fuel core of these reactors.[39] According to the calculations of one of the key advisers to the US Nuclear deal negotiating team, Ashley Tellis:[39]

Operating India's eight unsafeguarded PHWRs in such a [conservative] regime would bequeath New Delhi with some 12,135–13,370 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium, which is sufficient to produce between 2,023–2,228 nuclear weapons over and above those already existing in the Indian arsenal. Although no Indian analyst, let alone a policy maker, has ever advocated any nuclear inventory that even remotely approximates such numbers, this heuristic exercise confirms that New Delhi has the capability to produce a gigantic nuclear arsenal while subsisting well within the lowest estimates of its known uranium reserves.

However, because the amount of nuclear fuel required for the electricity generation sector is far greater than that required to maintain a nuclear weapons program, and since India's estimated reserve of uranium represents only 1% of the world's known uranium reserves, the NSG's uranium export restrictions mainly affected Indian nuclear power generation capacity. Specifically, the NSG sanctions challenge India's long-term plans to expand and fuel its civilian nuclear power generation capacity from its current output of about 4GWe (GigaWatt electricity) to a power output of 20GWe by 2020; assuming the planned expansion used conventional Uranium/Plutonium fueled heavy water and light water nuclear power plants.

Consequently, India's nuclear isolation constrained expansion of its civil nuclear program, but left India relatively immune to foreign reactions to a prospective nuclear test. Partly for this reason, but mainly due to continued unchecked covert nuclear and missile proliferation activities between Pakistan, China[40][41] and North Korea,[42][43] India conducted five more nuclear tests in May 1998 at Pokhran.

India was subject to international sanctions after its May 1998 nuclear tests. However, due to the size of the Indian economy and its relatively large domestic sector, these sanctions had little impact on India, with Indian GDP growth increasing from 4.8% in 1997–1998 (prior to sanctions) to 6.6% (during sanctions) in 1998–1999.[44] Consequently, at the end of 2001, the Bush administration decided to drop all sanctions on India.[45] Although India achieved its strategic objectives from the Pokhran nuclear tests in 1998,[46] it continued to find its civil nuclear program isolated internationally.

Rationale behind the agreement edit

Nuclear non-proliferation edit

The proposed civil nuclear agreement implicitly recognizes India's "de facto" status even without signing the NPT. The Bush administration justifies a nuclear pact with India arguing that it is important in helping to advance the non-proliferation framework[47] by formally recognizing India's strong non-proliferation record even though it has not signed the NPT. The former Under Secretary of State of Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, one of the architects of the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal said "India's trust, its credibility, the fact that it has promised to create a state-of-the-art facility, monitored by the IAEA, to begin a new export control regime in place, because it has not proliferated the nuclear technology, we can't say that about Pakistan." when asked whether the U.S. would offer a nuclear deal with Pakistan on the lines of the Indo-U.S. deal.[48][49] Mohamed ElBaradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which would be in charge of inspecting India's civilian reactors has praised the deal as "it would also bring India closer as an important partner in the nonproliferation regime".[50] The reaction in the U.S. led academic community was mixed. While some authors praised the agreement as bringing India closer to the NPT regime, others argued that it gave India too much leeway in determining which facilities were to be safeguarded and that it effectively rewarded India for continuously refusing to accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.[51]

Economic considerations edit

In India, the proponents of the agreement cite economic considerations as one of the topmost factors in their support of the agreement. For example, Indian scholar Rejaul Karim Laskar argues, "the most important significance of the deal for India (is) related to the contribution it will make in meeting India's energy requirements to sustain high rate of economic growth".[52] Financially, the U.S. also expects that such a deal could spur India's economic growth and bring in $150 billion in the next decade for nuclear power plants, of which the U.S. wants a share.[53] It is India's stated objective to increase the production of nuclear power generation from its present capacity of 4,780 MWe to 20,000 MWe by 2020. India's parliament passed The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages bill on August 25, 2010,[54][55] which allows the operator to sue the supplier in case of an accident due to technical defects in the plant.[56] After the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, issues relating to the safety of operating nuclear power plants, compensation in the event of a radiation-leak accident, disaster clean-up costs, operator responsibility and supplier liability has once again come into the spot-light.

Nuclear technology edit

Dr. Siegfried S. Hecker, PhD., former Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, observed while testifying before a U.S. Senate Committee in 2008 that the United States might benefit from access to Indian nuclear technology: "I found that whereas sanctions slowed progress in nuclear energy, they made India self-sufficient and world leaders in fast reactor technologies. While much of the world's approach to India has been to limit its access to nuclear technology, it may well be that today we limit ourselves by not having access to India's nuclear technology developments. Such technical views should help to advice the diplomatic efforts with India."[57]

Because India's nuclear program was developed mostly indigenously, the country used unique techniques that other countries can learn from.[58]

Strategic edit

Since the end of the Cold War, The Pentagon, along with certain U.S. ambassadors such as Robert Blackwill, has requested increased strategic ties with India and a de-hyphenization of Pakistan with India, i.e. having separate policies toward India and Pakistan rather than just an "India-Pakistan" policy. The United States also sees India as a viable counter-weight to the growing influence of China,[citation needed] and a potential client and job creator.[59]

While India is self-sufficient in thorium, possessing 25% of the world's known and economically viable thorium,[60] it possesses a meager 1% of the similarly calculated global uranium reserves.[61] Indian support for cooperation with the U.S. centers on the issue of obtaining a steady supply of sufficient energy for the economy to grow. Indian opposition to the pact centers on the concessions that would need to be made, as well as the likely de-prioritization of research into a thorium fuel cycle if uranium becomes highly available given the well understood utilization of uranium in a nuclear fuel cycle.

Passing of Agreement edit

On March 2, 2006, in New Delhi, George W. Bush and Manmohan Singh signed a Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, following an initiation during the July 2005 summit in Washington between the two leaders over civilian nuclear cooperation.[62]

Heavily endorsed by the White House, the agreement is thought to be a major victory to George W. Bush's foreign policy initiative and was described by many lawmakers as a cornerstone of the new strategic partnership between the two countries.[63]

On August 3, 2007, both the countries released the full text of the 123 agreement.[64] Nicholas Burns, the chief negotiator of the India-United States nuclear deal, said the U.S. has the right to terminate the deal if India tests a nuclear weapon and that no part of the agreement recognizes India as a nuclear weapons state (which would be contrary to the NPT).[65]

Hyde Act Passage in the U.S. edit

On December 18, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the Hyde Act into law. The Act was passed by an overwhelming 359–68 in the United States House of Representatives on July 26 and by 85–12 in the United States Senate on November 16 in a strong show of bipartisan support.[66][67][68]

The House version (H.R. 5682) and Senate version (S. 3709) of the bill differed due to amendments each had added before approving, but the versions were reconciled with a House vote of 330–59 on December 8 and a Senate voice-vote on December 9 before being passed on to President G.W. Bush for final approval.[69][70] The White House had urged Congress to expedite the reconciliation process during the end-2006 lame duck session, and recommended removing certain amendments which would be deemed deal-killers by India.[71]

In response to the language Congress used in the Act to define U.S. policy toward India, President Bush, stated "Given the Constitution's commitment to the authority of the presidency to conduct the nation's foreign affairs, the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory," going on to cite sections 103 and 104 (d) (2) of the bill. To assure Congress that its work would not be totally discarded, Bush continued by saying that the executive would give "the due weight that comity between the legislative and executive branches should require, to the extent consistent with U.S. foreign policy."[72]

Political opposition in India edit

The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement was met with stiff opposition by some political parties and activists in India. Although many mainstream political parties including the Congress supported the deal along with regional parties like Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and Rashtriya Janata Dal its realization ran into difficulties in the face of stiff political opposition in India. Also, in November 2007, former Indian Military chiefs, bureaucrats and scientists drafted a letter to Members of Parliament expressing their support for the deal.[73] However, opposition and criticism continued at political levels. The Samajwadi Party (SP) which was with the Left Front in opposing the deal changed its stand after discussing with ex-president of India and scientist Dr A. P. J. Abdul Kalam. The SP then supported the government and the deal. The Indian Government survived a vote of confidence by 275–256 after the Left Front withdrew their support to the government over this dispute.[74] Incidentally, results showed ten MPs belonging to the opposing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) cross-voting in the favor of the government.[citation needed]

As details were revealed about serious inconsistencies between what the Indian parliament was told about the deal, and the facts about the agreement that were presented by the Bush administration to the US Congress, opposition grew in India against the deal. In particular, portions of the agreement dealing with guaranteeing India a fuel supply or allowing India to maintain a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel appear to be diametrically opposed to what the Indian parliament was led to expect from the agreement: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement in parliament is totally at variance with the Bush administration's communication to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which says India will not be allowed to stockpile such nuclear fuel stocks as to undercut American leverage to re-impose sanctions. To drive home this point, it says the 123 Agreement is not inconsistent with the Hyde Act's stipulation—the little-known 'Barack Obama Amendment' – that the supply of nuclear fuel should be "commensurate with reasonable operating requirements". The 'strategic reserve' that is crucial to India's nuclear program is, therefore, a non-starter.[75][better source needed]

Furthermore, the agreement, as a result of its compliance with the Hyde Act, contained a direct linkage between shutting down US nuclear trade with India and any potential future Indian nuclear weapons test, a point that was factually inconsistent with explicit reassurances made on this subject by Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, during final parliamentary debate on the nuclear deal. As professor Brahma Chellaney, an expert in strategic affairs and one of the authors of the Indian Nuclear Doctrine,[76] explained:

While the Hyde Act's bar on Indian testing is explicit, the one in the NSG waiver is implicit, yet unmistakable. The NSG waiver is overtly anchored in NSG Guidelines Paragraph 16, which deals with the consequence of "an explosion of a nuclear device". The waiver's Section 3(e) refers to this key paragraph, which allows a supplier to call for a special NSG meeting, and seek termination of cooperation, in the event of a test or any other "violation of a supplier-recipient understanding". The recently leaked Bush administration letter to Congress has cited how this Paragraph 16 rule will effectively bind India to the Hyde Act's conditions on the pain of a U.S.-sponsored cut-off of all multilateral cooperation. India will not be able to escape from the U.S.-set conditions by turning to other suppliers.[77]

Indian parliament vote edit

On July 9, 2008, India formally submitted the safeguards agreement to the IAEA.[78] This development came after the Prime Minister of India Manmohan Singh returned from the 34th G8 summit meeting in Hokkaido, Japan, where he met with U.S. President George W. Bush.[79] On June 19, 2008, news media reported that Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh threatened to resign his position if the Left Front, whose support was crucial for the ruling United Progressive Alliance to prove its majority in the Indian parliament, continued to oppose the nuclear deal and he described their stance as irrational and reactionary.[80] According to The Hindu, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee's earlier statement said "I cannot bind the government if we lose our majority,"[81] implying that United Progressive Alliance government would not put its signature on any deal with IAEA if it lost the majority in either an 'opposition-initiated no-confidence motion' or if failing to muster a vote of confidence in Indian parliament after being told to prove its majority by the president. On July 8, 2008, Prakash Karat announced that the Left Front is withdrawing its support to the government over the decision by the government to go ahead on the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act. The left front had been a staunch advocate of not proceeding with this deal citing national interests.[82]

On July 22, 2008, the UPA faced its first confidence vote in the Lok Sabha after the Communist Party of India (Marxist) led Left Front withdrew support over India approaching the IAEA for Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. The UPA won the confidence vote with 275 votes to the opposition's 256, (10 members abstained from the vote) to record a 19-vote victory.[83][84][85][86]

IAEA approval edit

The IAEA Board of Governors approved the safeguards agreement on August 1, 2008, and the 45-state Nuclear Suppliers Group next had to approve a policy allowing nuclear cooperation with India. U.S. President Bush can then make the necessary certifications and seek final approval by the U.S. Congress.[87] There were objections from Pakistan, Iran, Ireland, Norway, Switzerland, and Austria at the IAEA meeting.[88]

NSG waiver edit

On September 6, 2008, India was granted the waiver at the NSG meeting held in Vienna, Austria. The consensus was arrived at after overcoming misgivings expressed by Austria, Ireland, and New Zealand and is an unprecedented step in giving exemption to a country which has not signed the NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)[89][90] The Indian team who worked on the deal includes Manmohan Singh, Pranab Mukherjee, Shivshankar Menon, Shyam Saran, M. K. Narayanan, Anil Kakodkar, Ravi Grover, and DB Venkatesh Varma.[89]

Versions of U.S. draft exemption edit

In August 2008 U.S. draft exemption would have granted India a waiver based on the "steps that India has taken voluntarily as a contributing partner in the non-proliferation regime".[91] Based on these steps, and without further conditions, the draft waiver would have allowed for the transfer to India of both trigger list and dual-use items (including technology), waiving the full-scope safeguards requirements of the NSG guidelines.[92]

A September 2008 waiver would have recognized additional "steps that India has voluntarily taken."[93] The waiver called for notifying the NSG of bilateral agreements and for regular consultations; however, it also would have waived the full-scope safeguards requirements of the NSG guidelines without further conditions.[92]

The U.S. draft underwent further changes in an effort to make the language more acceptable to the NSG.[94]

Initial support and opposition edit

The deal had initial support from the United States, the United Kingdom,[95] France,[96] Japan,[97] Russia,[98] and Germany.[99][100] After some initial opposition, there were reports of Australia,[101] Switzerland,[102] and Canada[103][104] expressing their support for the deal. Selig S. Harrison, a former South Asia bureau chief of The Washington Post, has said the deal may represent a tacit recognition of India as a nuclear weapon state,[105] while former U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph says the "U.S. State Department made it very clear that we will not recognize India as a nuclear-weapon state".[106]

Norway, Austria, Brazil, and Japan all warned that their support for India at the IAEA did not mean that they would not express reservations at the NSG. New Zealand, which is a member of the NSG but not of the IAEA Board of Governors, cautioned that its support should not be taken for granted.[32] Ireland, which launched the non-proliferation treaty process in 1958 and signed it first in 1968, doubted India's nuclear trade agreement with the U.S.[107] Russia, a potentially large nuclear supplier to India, expressed reservations about transferring enrichment and reprocessing technology to India.[108] China argued the agreement constituted "a major blow to the international non-proliferation regime".[109] New Zealand said it would like to see a few conditions written in to the waiver: the exemption ceasing if India conducts nuclear tests, India signing the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) additional protocol, and placing limits on the scope of the technology that can be given to India and which could relate to nuclear weapons.[110] Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Scandinavian countries proposed similar amendments.[111] The nuclear deal was opposed by former U.S. president Jimmy Carter, who opined that the U.S. would be making "a dangerous deal with India"[112]

After the first NSG meeting in August 2008, diplomats noted that up to 20 of the 45 NSG states tabled conditions similar to the Hyde Act for India's waiver to do business with the NSG.[113] "There were proposals on practically every paragraph," a European diplomat said.[113] A group of seven NSG members suggested including some of the provisions of the U.S. Hyde Act in the final waiver.[114] Daryll Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said the NSG should at a minimum "make clear that nuclear trade with India shall be terminated if it resumes testing for any reason. If India cannot agree to such terms, it suggests that India is not serious about its nuclear test moratorium pledge."[115]

Reactions following the waiver edit

After India was granted the waiver on September 6, the United Kingdom said that the NSG's decision would make a "significant contribution" to global energy and climate security.[116] U.S. National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, "this is a historic achievement that strengthens global non-proliferation principles while assisting India to meet its energy requirements in an environmentally friendly manner. The United States thanks the participating governments in the NSG for their outstanding efforts and cooperation to welcome India into the global non-proliferation community. We especially appreciate the role Germany played as chair to move this process forward."[117] New Zealand praised the NSG consensus and said that it got the best possible deal with India.[118] One of India's strongest allies Russia said in a statement, "We are convinced that the exemption made for India reflects Delhi's impeccable record in the non-proliferation sphere and will guarantee the peaceful uses of nuclear exports to India."[119] Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said that the NSG granted waiver because of "India's rise as a global power" and added, "If such a request was made for another country, I don't think it would have been cleared by the NSG members."[120] During his visit to India in September 2008, Smith said that Australia "understood and respected India's decision not to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty".[121] German Foreign Ministry spokesman Jens Ploetner called India a "special case" and added, "Does this agreement send an approving message to Iran? No, it absolutely does not."[122]

Initially, there were reports of the People's Republic of China analyzing the extent of the opposition against the waiver at the NSG and then revealing its position over the issue.[123] On September 1, 2008, prominent Chinese newspaper People's Daily expressed its strong disapproval of the civilian agreement with India.[124] India's National Security Advisor remarked that one of the major opponents of the waiver was China and said that he would express Indian government's displeasure over the issue.[125] It was also revealed that China had abstained during the final voting process, indicating its non-approval of the nuclear agreement.[126] In a statement, Chinese delegation to the NSG said the group should address the aspirations of other countries too, an implicit reference to Pakistan.[127] There were also unconfirmed reports of India considering the cancellation of a state visit by Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.[128] However, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said the Chinese Foreign Minister will be welcomed "as an honored guest".[129] The Times of India noted that China's stance could have a long-term implication on Sino-Indian relations.[130]

There were some other conflicting reports on China's stance, however. The Hindu reported that though China had expressed its desire to include more stern language in the final draft, they had informed India about their intention to back the agreement.[131] In an interview to the Hindustan Times, Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue said that "China understands India's needs for civil nuclear energy and related international cooperation."[132] Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told India's CNN-IBN, "We didn't do anything to block it [the deal]. We played a constructive role. We also adopted a positive and responsible attitude and a safeguards agreement was reached, so facts speak louder ... than some reports".[133] During a press conference in New Delhi, Yang added, "The policy was set much before that. When consensus was reached, China had already made it clear in a certain way that we have no problem with the [NSG] statement."[134] Highlighting the importance of Sino-Indian relations, Yang remarked, "let us [India and China] work together to move beyond doubts to build a stronger relationship between us."[135]

Indian reactions edit

Indian PM Manmohan Singh visited Washington, D.C., on September 26, 2008, to celebrate the conclusion of the agreement with U.S. President George W. Bush.[136] He also visited France to convey his appreciation for the country's stance.[137] India's External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee expressed his deep appreciation for India's allies in the NSG, especially the United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, Germany, South Africa and Brazil for helping India achieve NSG's consensus on the nuclear deal.[138]

Bharatiya Janata Party's Yashwant Sinha, who also formerly held the post of India's External Affairs Minister, criticized the Indian government's decision to seek NSG's consensus and remarked that "India has walked into the non-proliferation trap set by the U.S., we have given up our right to test nuclear weapons forever, it has been surrendered by the government".[139] However, another prominent member of the same party and India's former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra supported the development at the NSG and said that the waiver granted made "no prohibition" on India to conduct nuclear tests in the future.[140]

A leading advocate of the agreement was India's most eminent strategic affairs analyst K. Subrahmanyam, also known for his long and controversial championing of an Indian nuclear deterrent.[141] He argued that the convergence of strategic interests between the two nations forced such a remarkable gesture from the US, overturning its decades-long stand on non-proliferation, and that it would be unwise on India's part to spurn such an overture.[142] He also argued that not recognizing new geo-political realities would be even more foolhardy on the part of the Indian elite.[143][144]

Former President of India and noted Indian scientist, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, also supported the agreement and remarked that New Delhi may break its "voluntary moratorium" on further nuclear tests in "supreme national interest".[145] However, analyst M K Bhadrakumar demurred. He said that the consensus at NSG was achieved on the "basis" of Pranab Mukherjee's commitment to India's voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing and by doing so, India has entered into a "multilateral commitment" bringing it within "the ambit of the CTBT and NPT".[146]

The NSG consensus was welcomed by several major Indian companies. Major Indian corporations like Videocon Group, Tata Power and Jindal Power saw a US$40 billion nuclear energy market in India in the next 10–15 years.[147] On a more optimistic note, some of India's largest and most well-respected corporations like Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, National Thermal Power Corporation and Larsen & Toubro were eyeing a $100 billion (U.S.) business in this sector over the same time period.[147] According to Hindustan Times, nuclear energy will produce 52,000 MW of electricity in India by 2020.[148]

Other reactions over the issue edit

More than 150 non-proliferation activists and anti-nuclear organizations called for tightening the initial NSG agreement to prevent harming the current global non-proliferation regime.[149] Among the steps called for were:[31]

  • ceasing cooperation if India conducts nuclear tests or withdraws from safeguards
  • supplying only an amount of fuel which is commensurate with ordinary reactor operating requirements
  • expressly prohibiting the transfer of enrichment, reprocessing, and heavy water production items to India
  • opposing any special safeguards exemptions for India
  • conditioning the waiver on India stopping fissile production and legally binding itself not to conduct nuclear tests
  • not allowing India to reprocess nuclear fuel supplied by a member state in a facility that is not under permanent and unconditional IAEA safeguards
  • agreeing that all bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements between an NSG member-state and India explicitly prohibit the replication or use of such technology in any unsafeguarded Indian facilities

The call said that the draft Indian nuclear "deal would be a nonproliferation disaster and a serious setback to the prospects of global nuclear disarmament" and also pushed for all world leaders who are serious about ending the arms race "to stand up and be counted."[31]

Dr. Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, who has taught political science at Tehran University, has argued the agreement will set a new precedent for other states, adding that the agreement represents a diplomatic boon for Tehran.[150] Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, the Iranian Deputy Director General for International and Political Affairs,[151] has complained the agreement may undermine the credibility, integrity and universality of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Pakistan argues the safeguards agreement "threatens to increase the chances of a nuclear arms race in the subcontinent."[152] Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has suggested his country should be considered for such an accord,[153] and Pakistan has also said the same process "should be available as a model for other non-NPT states".[154] On July 19, 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton countered Pakistan statements by saying that Pakistan's checkered history on nuclear proliferation "raises red flags" regarding nuclear cooperation with Pakistan.[155] Israel is citing the Indo-U.S. civil nuclear deal as a precedent to alter Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) rules to construct its first nuclear power plant in the Negev desert, and is also pushing for its own trade exemptions.[156]

Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research, argued that the wording of the U.S. exemption sought to irrevocably tether New Delhi to the nuclear non-proliferation regime. He argued India would be brought under a wider non-proliferation net, with India being tied to compliance with the entire set of NSG rules. India would acquiesce to its unilateral test moratorium being turned into a multilateral legality. He concluded that instead of the "full" civil nuclear cooperation that the original July 18, 2005, deal promised, India's access to civil nuclear enrichment and reprocessing technologies would be restricted through the initial NSG waiver.[157]

Consideration by U.S. Congress edit

The Bush administration told Congress in January 2008 that the United States may cease all cooperation with India if India detonates a nuclear explosive device. The administration further said it was not its intention to assist India in the design, construction, or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies through the transfer of dual-use items.[158] The statements were considered sensitive in India because debate over the agreement in India could have toppled the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The State Department had requested they remain secret even though they were not classified.[159] Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also previously told the House Foreign Affairs Panel in public testimony that any agreement would "have to be completely consistent with the obligations of the Hyde Act".[33] Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher and the Former Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Jeffrey Bergner also said the agreement would be in conformity with the Hyde Act.[160]

Howard Berman, chair of the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned that an NSG waiver "inconsistent" with the 2006 Hyde Act would "jeopardise" the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal in the U.S. Congress.[161] Edward J. Markey, co-chairman of the House Bipartisan Task Force on Non-proliferation, said that there needed to be clear consequences if India broke its commitments or resumed nuclear testing.[162]

Passage in Congress edit

On September 28, 2008, the US House of Representatives voted 298–117 to approve the Indo-US nuclear deal.[163] On October 1, 2008, the US Senate voted 86–13 to approve the Indo-US nuclear deal.[164] The Arms Control Association said the agreement fails to make clear that an Indian nuclear test would prompt the U.S. to cease nuclear trade;[164] however, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that any nuclear test by India would result in the "most serious consequences," including automatic cut-off of U.S. cooperation as well as a number of other sanctions.[165]

After Senate approval, US President George W. Bush said the deal would "strengthen our global nuclear nonproliferation efforts, protect the environment, create jobs, and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner."[166] Then-US presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain, as well as then-vice presidential candidate Joe Biden, voted in support of the bill.[167]

Formal signing of the deal edit

There was speculation the Indo-US deal would be signed on October 4, 2008, when U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in India. The deal was to be inked by Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The two leaders were to sign the deal at 2 pm at the Hyderabad House in New Delhi.[168] But Mr. Mukherjee announced that India would wait for the U.S. president to sign the 123 agreement legislation first into law and address India's concerns on fuel supply guarantees and the legal standing of the 123 agreement in the accompanying signing statement.[169]

Secretary Rice was aware of the Indian decision before she left Washington. But she was very hopeful that the deal would be signed as the U.S. State Department had said that the President's signature was not prerequisite for Rice to ink the deal.[170] Rice had earlier said that there were still a number of administrative details to be worked out even as she insisted that the US would abide by the Hyde Act on the testing issue:

 
Secretary Rice and Indian Minister for External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee after signing the 123 agreement in Washington on October 10, 2008

There are a lot of administrative details that have to be worked out. This (the deal) was only passed in our Congress two days ago. The President is looking forward to signing the bill, sometime, I hope, very soon, because we'll want to use it as an opportunity to thank all of the people who have been involved in this", said Rice.[171]

In Washington, a Senate Democratic aide said that such a delay was not that unusual because legislation needed to be carefully reviewed before being sent to the White House.[172]

US President George W. Bush signed the legislation on the Indo-US nuclear deal into law on October 8.[16] The new law, called the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non-proliferation Enhancement Act, was signed by President Bush at a brief White House function in the presence of the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, Vice-President Dick Cheney and the Indian Ambassador to the U.S. Ronen Sen besides a large gathering of other dignitaries.[173] The final administrative aspect of the deal was completed after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee signed the bilateral instruments of the 123 Agreement in Washington on October 10 paving the way for operationalization of the deal between the two countries.[174][175]

Chronology edit

July 18, 2005: President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh first announce their intention to enter into a nuclear agreement in Washington, D.C.

March 1, 2006: Bush visits India for the first time.

March 3, 2006: Bush and Singh issue a joint statement on their growing strategic partnership, emphasising their agreement on civil nuclear cooperation.

July 26, 2006: The US House of Representatives passes the Henry J Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, which stipulates that Washington will cooperate with New Delhi on nuclear issues and exempt it from signing the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

July 28, 2006: In India, the Left parties demand discussion on the issue in Parliament.

November 16, 2006: The US Senate passes the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation and US Additional Protocol Implementation Act, to "exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 United States exports of nuclear materials, equipment, and technology to India."

December 18, 2006: President Bush signs into law congressional legislation on Indian atomic energy.

July 27, 2007: Negotiations on a bilateral agreement between the United States and India conclude.

Aug 3, 2007: The text of the "Agreement for Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy" (123 Agreement) is released by both governments.

Aug 13, 2007: Prime Minister Singh makes a suo motu statement on the deal in Parliament.

Aug 17, 2007: The CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat says the 'honeymoon (with government) may be over but the marriage can go on'.

Sept 4, 2007: In India, the UPA-Left committee to discuss nuclear deal set up.

Feb 25, 2008: Left parties in India say the ruling party would have to choose between the deal and its government's stability.

March 3–6, 2008: Left parties warn of 'serious consequences' if the nuclear deal is operationalized and set a deadline asking the government to make it clear by March 15 whether it intended to proceed with the nuclear deal or drop it.

March 7–14, 2008: The CPI writes to the Prime Minister, warning of withdrawal of support if government goes ahead with the deal and puts political pressure on the Singh administration not to go with the deal.

April 23, 2008: The Indian government says it will seek the opinions of the House on the 123 Agreement before it is taken up for ratification by the American Congress.

June 17, 2008: External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee meets Prakash Karat, asks the Left to allow the government to go ahead with the IAEA safeguards agreement.

June 30, 2008: The Indian Prime Minister says his government prepared to face Parliament before operationalizing the deal.

July 8, 2008: Left parties in India withdraw support to government.

July 9, 2008: The draft India-specific safeguards accord with the IAEA circulated to IAEA's Board of Governors for approval.

July 10, 2008: Prime Minister Singh calls for a vote of confidence in Parliament.

July 14, 2008: The IAEA says it will meet on August 1 to consider the India-specific safeguards agreement.

July 18, 2008: Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon briefs the IAEA Board of Governors and some NSG countries in Vienna on the safeguards agreement.

July 22, 2008: Government is willing to look at "possible amendments" to the Atomic Energy Act to ensure that the country's strategic autonomy will never be compromised, says Prime Minister Singh.

July 22, 2008: The UPA government led by Manmohan Singh wins trust vote in the Lok Sabha in India.

July 24, 2008: India dismisses warning by Pakistan that the deal will accelerate an atomic arms race in the sub-continent.

July 24, 2008: India launches full blast lobbying among the 45-nation NSG for an exemption for nuclear commerce.

July 25, 2008: IAEA secretariat briefs member states on India-specific safeguards agreement.

Aug 1, 2008: IAEA Board of Governors adopts India- specific safeguards agreement unanimously.

Aug 21–22, 2008: The NSG meet to consider an India waiver ends inconclusively amid reservations by some countries.

Sep 4–6, 2008: The NSG meets for the second time on the issue after the US comes up with a revised draft and grants waiver to India after marathon parleys.

Sept 11, 2008: President Bush sends the text of the 123 Agreement to the US Congress for final approval.

Sept 12, 2008: US remains silent over the controversy in India triggered by President Bush's assertions that nuclear fuel supply assurances to New Delhi under the deal were only political commitments and not legally binding.

Sept 13, 2008: The State Department issues a fact sheet on the nuclear deal saying the initiative will help meet India's growing energy requirements and strengthen the non- proliferation regime by welcoming New Delhi into globally accepted nonproliferation standards and practices.

Sept 18, 2008: The Senate Foreign Relations Committee opens a crucial hearing on the Indo-US nuclear deal.

Sept 19, 2008: America's nuclear fuel supply assurances to India are a "political commitment" and the government cannot "legally compel" US firms to sell a "given product" to New Delhi, top officials tells congressional panel.

Sept 21, 2008: US financial crisis diverts attention from N-deal as both the Bush administration and Congress are bogged down over efforts to rescue bankrupt American banks in the ongoing financial crisis.

Sept 26, 2008: PM Singh and President Bush meet at the White House, but are not able to sign the nuclear deal as Congress had not yet approved it.

Sept 27, 2008: House of Representatives approves the Indo-US nuclear deal. 298 members voted for the bill while 117 voted against.

Oct 1, 2008: Senate approves the Indo-US civil nuclear deal with 86 votes for and 13 against.

Oct 4, 2008: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits Delhi. India and the US unable to ink the nuclear agreement with New Delhi insisting that it would do so only after President Bush signs it into law, citing prior misgivings.

Oct 4, 2008: White House announces that President Bush will sign the legislation on the Indo-US nuclear deal into law on October 8.

Oct 8, 2008: President Bush signs legislation to enact the landmark US-India civilian nuclear agreement.

Oct 10, 2008: The 123 Agreement between India and US is finally operationalized between the two countries after the deal is signed by External Affairs Minister Mukherjee and his counterpart, Secretary of State Rice, in Washington.

Jun 8, 2016: The NPCI and Westinghouse agree to conclude contractual arrangements for 6 reactors by June 2017.[176][177][178][179]

See also edit

Nuclear and energy related
Weapons of mass destruction
Foreign relations

References edit

  1. ^ Sultan, Maria; Mian Behzad Adil (September 2008). (PDF). London: South Asian Strategic Stability Institute. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 18, 2011. Retrieved August 21, 2011.
  2. ^ Office of the Press Secretary (June 18, 2005). "Joint Statement Between President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh". whitehouse.gov. Retrieved August 21, 2011 – via National Archives.
  3. ^ "Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006" (PDF). US Government Publishing Office. January 3, 2006.
  4. ^ "IAEA Board Approves India-Safeguards Agreement". Iaea.org. August 1, 2008.
  5. ^ "India Safeguards Agreement Signed". Iaea.org. February 2, 2009.
  6. ^ Unattributed (July 25, 2008). (PDF). International Atomic Energy Agency. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 8, 2011. Retrieved August 21, 2011.
  7. ^ Bajoria, Jayshree (November 5, 2010). . Council on Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on November 29, 2010. Retrieved November 28, 2010.
  8. ^ "IAEA approves India nuclear inspection deal". International Herald Tribune. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  9. ^ . Outlookindia.com. Archived from the original on September 22, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  10. ^ "Dateline Vienna: Thirty words that saved the day". Siddharth Varadarajan. September 8, 2008. Retrieved October 1, 2012.
  11. ^ . AFP. October 1, 2008. Archived from the original on May 20, 2011. Retrieved October 2, 2008 – via Google.
  12. ^ . The Times of India. September 29, 2008. Archived from the original on October 22, 2012. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  13. ^ "India, France ink nuclear deal, first after NSG waiver". The Indian Express. October 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  14. ^ Rajghatta, Chidanand (October 2, 2008). . The Times of India. Archived from the original on October 22, 2012. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  15. ^ "Senate approves nuclear deal with India". CNN. October 1, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  16. ^ a b "Bush signs bill on N-deal on October 8". United States Office of the Press Secretary. October 8, 2008. Retrieved October 8, 2008.
  17. ^ Done Deal: India, US seal landmark nuclear pact CNN-IBN
  18. ^ "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Indian Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee At the Signing of the U.S.-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement". 2001-2009.state.gov. October 10, 2008.
  19. ^ "India Nuke Deals Still Thorny for US Despite Breakthrough". The New York Times.
  20. ^ "Obama's India Visit: What Can India And The US Do About The Civil Nuclear Deal?". Ibtimes.com. January 21, 2015.
  21. ^ "Breakthrough: India-US end 6-year-old impasse over civil nuclear deal". Firstpost.com. January 26, 2015.
  22. ^ "Recent Legislation: Congress Authorizes the President to Waive Restrictions on Nuclear Exports to India" (PDF). Harvard Law Review. 120: 2020. 2007. Retrieved October 20, 2017.
  23. ^ H.R. 5682, 109th Cong. (2006).
  24. ^ . Archived from the original on July 23, 2008.
  25. ^ "Second day of trust vote". Indiatoday.digitaltoday.in. ITGD Bureau. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  26. ^ . The Times of India. July 22, 2008. Archived from the original on November 6, 2012. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  27. ^ "At G-8, Singh, Bush reaffirm commitment to nuclear deal". Retrieved July 11, 2008.
  28. ^ "India and US confirm nuclear pact". BBC News. July 27, 2007. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  29. ^ Kumara, Kranti (July 3, 2008). "India: Government crisis deepens over US nuclear deal". Wsws.org.
  30. ^ "Indian government survives vote". BBC News. July 22, 2008. Retrieved July 23, 2008.
  31. ^ a b c "Decision Time on the Indian Nuclear Deal: Help Avert a Nonproliferation Disaster" Arms Control Association
  32. ^ a b "U.S.-India Nuclear Energy Deal: What's Next?" September 16, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
  33. ^ a b "Hyde Act will haunt nuclear deal at NSG too" Economic Times of India
  34. ^ . Archived from the original on July 8, 2006. Retrieved June 1, 2006.
  35. ^ "Nuclear Suppliers Group". Fas.org.
  36. ^ "A Thorium Breeder Reactor". Ans.org.
  37. ^ "India unveils 'world's safest nuclear reactor'". Rediff.com.
  38. ^ Tellis, Ashley. "Atoms for War? U.S.-Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India's Nuclear Arsenal" (PDF). p. 18, paragraph 1.
  39. ^ a b Tellis, Ashley. "Atoms for War? U.S.-Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India's Nuclear Arsenal" (PDF). pp. 31–36.
  40. ^ Vergano, Dan (August 29, 2008). "Report says China offered widespread help on nukes". USA Today. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  41. ^ . Archived from the original on December 12, 2008.
  42. ^ "Bermudez, Joseph S. Jr. 1998. A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK". Archived from the original on November 11, 2001.
  43. ^ "Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons Program - 1998: The Year of Testing". nuclearweaponarchive.org.
  44. ^ "Achieving 9% Growth Rate in India: A Growth Paradigm". SSRN 365440. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  45. ^ . Archived from the original on December 12, 2008.
  46. ^ Narlikar, Amrita (2006). "Peculiar chauvinism or strategic calculation? Explaining the negotiating strategy of a rising India". International Affairs. 82: 59–76. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2006.00515.x.
  47. ^ . The Economic Times. India. July 26, 2008. Archived from the original on November 19, 2008. Retrieved August 3, 2008.
  48. ^ "Russia hints at smooth sail for India at IAEA". Ibnlive.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  49. ^ . June 6, 2007. Archived from the original on June 6, 2007. Retrieved September 22, 2018.
  50. ^ VandeHei, Jim; Linzer, Dafna (March 3, 2006). "U.S., India Reach Deal On Nuclear". The Washington Post. Retrieved March 3, 2006.
  51. ^ Müller, Jörn (2009). . Göttingen Journal of International Law. pp. 179–198. Archived from the original on January 17, 2016. Retrieved April 5, 2009.
  52. ^ Laskar, Rejaul Karim (November 20, 2006). "Significance of Indo-US Nuclear Deal". The Assam Tribune.
  53. ^ Linzer, Dafna (July 20, 2005). "Bush Officials Defend India Nuclear Deal". The Washington Post. Retrieved July 20, 2005.
  54. ^ PTI Correspondent (August 26, 2010). . The Times of India. Archived from the original on November 6, 2012.
  55. ^ PTI Correspondent (August 25, 2010). . The Times of India. Archived from the original on September 23, 2011.
  56. ^ India's Nuclear Liability Dilemma November 29, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, by Ashley Tellis, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Interviewed by Jayshree Bajoria, Staff Writer, CFR.org, November 4, 2010.
  57. ^ "The Indo-US nuclear deal – a decade after" (PDF). Currentscience.ac.in. Retrieved September 22, 2018.
  58. ^ Goel, Anish (September 12, 2014). "Nuclear Negotiations, Scientific Literacy, and U.S.-India Relations". Science & Diplomacy. 3 (4).
  59. ^ PTI Correspondent (February 18, 2010). "US wants Indian businesses to create jobs in America". The Times of India.
  60. ^ . World Nuclear Association. Archived from the original on November 7, 2006. Retrieved June 1, 2006.
  61. ^ . Uranium Information Center. Archived from the original on April 27, 2006. Retrieved June 1, 2006.
  62. ^ . USINFO – International Information Programs. Archived from the original on March 6, 2006. Retrieved March 2, 2006.
  63. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. July 28, 2006. Archived from the original on August 21, 2006. Retrieved July 29, 2006.
  64. ^ "U.S. and India Release Text of 123 Agreement". August 3, 2007. Retrieved July 11, 2008.
  65. ^ "US can terminate N-deal if India conducts tests". Rediff.com.
  66. ^ . USINFO – International Information Programs. Archived from the original on January 15, 2008. Retrieved November 17, 2006.
  67. ^ "H.R. 5682: House Vote 411: Jul 26, 2006 (109th Congress)". GovTrack. Retrieved July 26, 2006.
  68. ^ "H.R. 5682: Senate Vote 270: Nov 16, 2006 (109th Congress)". GovTrack. Retrieved November 16, 2006.
  69. ^ . USINFO – International Information Programs. Archived from the original on January 15, 2008. Retrieved December 9, 2006.
  70. ^ "H.R. 5682: House Vote 541: Dec 8, 2006 (109th Congress)". GovTrack. Retrieved December 8, 2006.
  71. ^ . Hindustan Times. Archived from the original on September 30, 2007. Retrieved November 9, 2006.
  72. ^ "Hyde Act not binding, says Bush". CNN-IBN. Retrieved December 19, 2006.
  73. ^ . Archived from the original on February 19, 2008. Retrieved July 11, 2008.
  74. ^ "Indian government survives vote". BBC News. July 22, 2008. Retrieved November 25, 2011.
  75. ^ . The Pioneer. India. Archived from the original on August 9, 2020. Retrieved October 2, 2008.[dead link]
  76. ^ "Brahma Chellaney a strategic affairs expert, is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research. He was one of the authors of the nuclear doctrine submitted to the government for finalisation". rediff.com. Retrieved October 10, 2008.
  77. ^ "Stagecraft and Statecraft: India's retarded nuclear deterrent". Chellaney.spaces.live.com. September 21, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  78. ^ "Text of India-IAEA Safeguards Agreement" (PDF). Isis-online.org.
  79. ^ "India submits draft safeguards pact to IAEA". The Times of India. July 9, 2008. Retrieved July 8, 2008.
  80. ^ "PM wants to quit over nuclear deal". Retrieved July 11, 2008.
  81. ^ Varadarajan, Siddharth (July 9, 2008). . The Hindu. Chennai, India. Archived from the original on July 13, 2008. Retrieved July 8, 2008.
  82. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. July 8, 2008. Archived from the original on August 2, 2008. Retrieved July 11, 2008.
  83. ^ Sengupta, Somini (July 23, 2007). "Indian Government Survives Confidence Vote". The New York Times. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  84. ^ Xinhua
  85. ^ [1][permanent dead link] Kasmir Times
  86. ^ International Business Times
  87. ^ "IAEA board gets India's safeguards agreement". Rediff.com. July 9, 2008. Retrieved July 8, 2008.
  88. ^ . The Times of India. Archived from the original on November 6, 2012.
  89. ^ a b "NSG CLEARS NUCLEAR WAIVER FOR INDIA". CNN-IBN. September 6, 2008. Retrieved September 6, 2008.
  90. ^ . NDTV.com. September 6, 2008. Archived from the original on September 8, 2008. Retrieved September 6, 2008.
  91. ^ "Text of U.S. NSG Proposal on India". Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  92. ^ a b . Archived from the original on September 14, 2008.
  93. ^ Revised Indo-U.S. NSG Draft September 9, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Arms Control Association (September 2008)
  94. ^ [usurped] Khabrein
  95. ^ . The Australian. January 23, 2008. Archived from the original on September 16, 2008. Retrieved July 16, 2008.
  96. ^ . The Times of India. July 15, 2008. Archived from the original on November 6, 2012. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  97. ^ "Japan to recognise India as nuclear state" India Times
  98. ^ . Moscowtimes.ru. February 13, 2008. Archived from the original on September 14, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  99. ^ "Breaking News, World News & Multimedia". Iht.com.
  100. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. October 23, 2007. Archived from the original on June 18, 2008.
  101. ^ RTTNews September 24, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  102. ^ "Switzerland to support India's case at NSG". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. August 17, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  103. ^ "Canada, India exploring ways to co-operate in nuclear energy". Hindustan Times. Press Trust of India. October 10, 2007. Archived from the original on July 18, 2013.
  104. ^ "Canada behind U.S., Britain in wooing India, says expert" Times of India
  105. ^ Harrison, Selig S. (April 23, 2006). "How to Regulate Nuclear Weapons". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  106. ^ Interview With Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph Arms Control Today (May 2006)
  107. ^ "India's N-deal hurdle: Pak warns of arms race". CNN IBN. July 24, 2008. Retrieved July 24, 2008.
  108. ^ "India's NSG battle to focus on nuclear tech" Times of India
  109. ^ Times of India
  110. ^ . National Business Review. NZPA. August 20, 2008. Archived from the original on April 2, 2012. Retrieved November 25, 2011.
  111. ^ "NSG 'will seek clear conditions'" September 20, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Gulf Times
  112. ^ Carter, Jimmy (March 29, 2006). "A Dangerous Deal With India". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  113. ^ a b "Nuclear suppliers propose terms for U.S.-India deal" September 19, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Daily Times
  114. ^ Telegraph
  115. ^ "Nuclear suppliers fail to reach consensus on U.S.-India deal" May 20, 2011, at the Wayback Machine AFP
  116. ^ . September 6, 2008. Archived from the original on September 9, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  117. ^ . News.xinhuanet.com. Archived from the original on January 13, 2009. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  118. ^ . News.xinhuanet.com. Archived from the original on October 5, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  119. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. September 9, 2008. Archived from the original on September 11, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  120. ^ . The Times of India. Archived from the original on September 14, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  121. ^ "India understands uranium stance: Smith – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)". Australia: ABC. September 12, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  122. ^ "Germany Grudgingly Accepts Landmark Nuclear Deal with India". Deutsche Welle. September 9, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  123. ^ . Ndtv.com. Archived from the original on December 10, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  124. ^ "China state paper lashes India-U.S. nuclear deal". In.reuters.com. September 1, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  125. ^ "China was India's secret enemy at Vienna | What NSA says". Ibnlive.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  126. ^ Neelesh Misra, "China says it backs India's N-ambitions" Hindustan Times
  127. ^ "NSG should address aspirations of others too: China". The Indian Express. September 6, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  128. ^ "India runs into the great wall of China at NSG". Ibnlive.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  129. ^ "Will discuss NSG U-turn with China Foreign Min: NSA". Ibnlive.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  130. ^ . The Times of India. September 7, 2008. Archived from the original on September 20, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  131. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. September 7, 2008. Archived from the original on September 9, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  132. ^ . September 6, 2008. Archived from the original on June 18, 2018.
  133. ^ "China denies blocking India's nuclear waiver bid". Uk.reuters.com. September 8, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  134. ^ . Hindustan Times. Archived from the original on December 10, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  135. ^ . The Indian Express. Archived from the original on December 5, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  136. ^ . Thaindian News. Archived from the original on May 24, 2011. Retrieved October 10, 2008.
  137. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. October 1, 2008. Archived from the original on December 5, 2008. Retrieved October 10, 2008.
  138. ^ . Sify. Archived from the original on December 10, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  139. ^ "India nuclear deal rift ends". Gulf Daily News. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  140. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. September 7, 2008. Archived from the original on September 11, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  141. ^ Sengupta, Somini (December 10, 2006). "Interests Drive U.S. to Back a Nuclear India". The New York Times. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
  142. ^ [2][dead link]
  143. ^ Sheela Bhatt "Nuclear deal still on course: K Subrahmanyam" Rediff, October 13, 2007
  144. ^ . July 3, 2009. Archived from the original on July 3, 2009. Retrieved September 22, 2018.
  145. ^ [3][dead link] Hindustan Times
  146. ^ Bhadrakumar, M K. . Atimes.com. Archived from the original on December 16, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  147. ^ a b . Economictimes.indiatimes.com. September 9, 2008. Archived from the original on September 15, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  148. ^ Laxman, Srinivas (September 11, 2008). . The Times of India. Archived from the original on November 6, 2012. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  149. ^ The Hindu
  150. ^ . Atimes.com. Archived from the original on December 4, 2008.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  151. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 19, 2008. Retrieved August 19, 2008.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  152. ^ "India moves a step closer to U.S. nuclear pact"[dead link] Forbes
  153. ^ "India dismisses Pak talk of arms race due to N-deal" Press Trust of India Times of India (July 24, 2008)
  154. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original on September 9, 2008.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  155. ^ "Clinton woos Pakistan on security, aid" August 10, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Reuters, July 19, 2010.
  156. ^ "Now, Israel wants NSG rules changed" September 22, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Hindustan Times
  157. ^ . In.rediff.com. Archived from the original on December 7, 2008. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  158. ^ "Was India misled by America on nuclear deal?" September 10, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Indian Express
  159. ^ "In Secret Letter, Tough U.S. Line on India Nuclear Deal" Washington Post
  160. ^ Department of State: Answers to questions about Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement September 4, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  161. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. August 8, 2008. Archived from the original on August 10, 2008.
  162. ^ "Congressional approval may not be automatic; dissenters speak out" September 10, 2008, at the Wayback Machine Economic Times of India
  163. ^ Times of India
  164. ^ a b "Bush Wins Approval in Congress for Priority India Atomic Accord" Bloomberg
  165. ^ The Hindu
  166. ^ . The Times of India. Archived from the original on January 16, 2009. Retrieved October 2, 2008.
  167. ^ "Rice hails approval of India nuclear deal - CNN.com". Cnn.com.
  168. ^ . Deccan Harald. February 14, 2018. Archived from the original on December 6, 2008.
  169. ^ "Condoleezza Rice leaves without inking deal". Economic Times. India. October 5, 2008.
  170. ^ , The Times of India, October 5, 2008, archived from the original on January 10, 2014
  171. ^ . NDTV.com. Archived from the original on December 10, 2008.
  172. ^ "Rice in India, may not sign nuclear deal". Reuters. October 4, 2008.
  173. ^ . The Hindu. Chennai, India. October 10, 2008. Archived from the original on October 12, 2008. Retrieved October 13, 2008.
  174. ^ Gollust, David (October 10, 2008). . Voice of America. Archived from the original on July 3, 2009. Retrieved December 24, 2008.
  175. ^ "India, US seal 123 Agreement", Times of India, October 11, 2008
  176. ^ "JOINT STATEMENT: The United States and India: Enduring Global Partner..." whitehouse.gov. June 8, 2016. from the original on January 20, 2017 – via National Archives.
  177. ^ "US-India deal helps pave way for new nuclear in India - World Nuclear News". World-nuclear-news.org.
  178. ^ Lee, Carol E.; Mauldin, William (June 7, 2016). "U.S. Firm to Build Six Nuclear Reactors in India". Wsj.com.
  179. ^ "US-based Westinghouse to build 6 nuclear power plants in India - Time..." Archive.today. September 6, 2016. Archived from the original on September 6, 2016.

External links edit

U.S. Government links
  • U.S. Government Printing Office: The text of the Hyde Act
India Government links
  • (meaindia.nic.in)
IAEA links
    Nuclear Suppliers Group links
    Other links

      india, united, states, civil, nuclear, agreement, article, lead, section, need, rewritten, please, help, improve, lead, read, lead, layout, guide, december, 2021, learn, when, remove, this, template, message, agreement, signed, between, united, states, america. The article s lead section may need to be rewritten Please help improve the lead and read the lead layout guide December 2021 Learn how and when to remove this template message The 123 Agreement signed between the United States of America and the Republic of India is known as the U S India Civil Nuclear Agreement or Indo US nuclear deal 1 The framework for this agreement was a July 18 2005 joint statement by then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and then U S President George W Bush under which India agreed to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities and to place all its civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA safeguards and in exchange the United States agreed to work toward full civil nuclear cooperation with India 2 This U S India deal took more than three years to come to fruition as it had to go through several complex stages including amendment of U S domestic law especially the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 3 a civil military nuclear Separation Plan in India an India IAEA safeguards inspections agreement and the grant of an exemption for India by the Nuclear Suppliers Group an export control cartel that had been formed mainly in response to India s first nuclear test in 1974 In its final shape the deal places under permanent safeguards those nuclear facilities that India has identified as civil and permits broad civil nuclear cooperation while excluding the transfer of sensitive equipment and technologies including civil enrichment and reprocessing items even under IAEA safeguards On August 18 2008 the IAEA Board of Governors approved 4 and on February 2 2009 India signed an India specific safeguards agreement with the IAEA 5 After India brought this agreement into force inspections began in a phased manner on the 35 civilian nuclear installations India has identified in its Separation Plan 6 The deal is seen as a watershed in U S India relations and introduces a new aspect to international nonproliferation efforts 7 On August 1 2008 the IAEA approved the safeguards agreement with India 8 after which the United States approached the Nuclear Suppliers Group NSG to grant a waiver to India to commence civilian nuclear trade 9 The 48 nation NSG granted the waiver to India on September 6 2008 allowing it to access civilian nuclear technology and fuel from other countries 10 The implementation of this waiver made India the only known country with nuclear weapons which is not a party to the Non Proliferation Treaty NPT but is still allowed to carry out nuclear commerce with the rest of the world 11 U S President George Bush and India s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exchange handshakes in New Delhi on March 2 2006 The U S House of Representatives passed the bill to approve the deal on September 28 2008 12 Two days later India and France inked a similar nuclear pact making France the first country to have such an agreement with India 13 On October 1 2008 the U S Senate also approved the civilian nuclear agreement allowing India to purchase nuclear fuel and technology from and sell them to the United States 14 15 U S president George W Bush signed the legislation on the Indo US nuclear deal approved by the U S Congress into law now called the United States India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non proliferation Enhancement Act on October 8 2008 16 The agreement was signed by then Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and his counterpart then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on October 10 17 18 In 2015 the agreement had still not been fully implemented 19 20 21 In 2016 the countries agreed to build 6 US designed reactors in India See timeline below Contents 1 Overview 2 Background 3 Rationale behind the agreement 3 1 Nuclear non proliferation 3 2 Economic considerations 3 3 Nuclear technology 3 4 Strategic 4 Passing of Agreement 5 Hyde Act Passage in the U S 6 Political opposition in India 7 Indian parliament vote 8 IAEA approval 9 NSG waiver 9 1 Versions of U S draft exemption 9 2 Initial support and opposition 9 3 Reactions following the waiver 9 3 1 Indian reactions 9 4 Other reactions over the issue 10 Consideration by U S Congress 10 1 Passage in Congress 11 Formal signing of the deal 12 Chronology 13 See also 14 References 15 External linksOverview editSee also India and weapons of mass destruction The Henry J Hyde United States India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 also known as the Hyde Act is the U S domestic law that modifies the requirements of Section 123 of the U S Atomic Energy Act to permit nuclear cooperation with India and in particular to negotiate a 123 Agreement to operationalize the 2005 Joint Statement 22 23 As a domestic U S law the Hyde Act is binding on the United States The Hyde Act cannot be binding on India s sovereign decisions although it can be construed as prescriptive for future U S reactions As per the Vienna Convention an international agreement such as the 123 Agreement cannot be superseded by an internal law such as the Hyde Act 24 25 26 The 123 agreement defines the terms and conditions for bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation and requires separate approvals by the U S Congress and by Indian cabinet ministers The agreement will also help India meet its goal of adding 25 000 MW of nuclear power capacity through imports of nuclear reactors and fuel by 2020 27 After the terms of the 123 agreement were concluded on July 27 2007 28 it ran into trouble because of stiff opposition in India from the communist allies of the ruling United Progressive Alliance 29 The government survived a confidence vote in the parliament on July 22 2008 by 275 256 votes in the backdrop of defections by some parties 30 The deal also had faced opposition from non proliferation activists anti nuclear organisations and some states within the Nuclear Suppliers Group 31 32 In February 2008 U S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that any agreement would be consistent with the obligations of the Hyde Act 33 The bill was signed on October 8 2008 Background editParties to the Non Proliferation Treaty NPT have a recognized right of access to peaceful uses of nuclear energy and an obligation to cooperate on civilian nuclear technology Separately the Nuclear Suppliers Group has agreed on guidelines for nuclear exports including reactors and fuel Those guidelines condition such exports on comprehensive safeguards by the International Atomic Energy Agency which are designed to verify that nuclear energy is not diverted from peaceful use to weapons programs Though neither India Israel nor Pakistan have signed the NPT India argues that instead of addressing the central objective of universal and comprehensive non proliferation the treaty creates a club of nuclear haves and a larger group of nuclear have nots by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967 who alone are free to possess and multiply their nuclear stockpiles 34 India insists on a comprehensive action plan for a nuclear free world within a specific time frame and has also adopted a voluntary no first use policy citation needed Led by the U S other states have set up an informal group the Nuclear Suppliers Group NSG to control exports of nuclear materials equipment and technology 35 Consequently India was left outside the international nuclear order which forced India to develop its own resources for each stage of the nuclear fuel cycle and power generation including next generation reactors such as fast breeder reactors and a thorium breeder reactor 36 37 known as the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor In addition to impelling India to achieve success in developing these new reactor technologies the sanctions also provided India with the impetus to continue developing its own nuclear weapons technology with a specific goal of achieving self sufficiency for all key components for weapons design testing and production Given that India is estimated to possess reserves of about 80 000 112 369 tons of uranium 38 India has more than enough fissile material to supply its nuclear weapons program even if it restricted Plutonium production to only 8 of the country s 17 current reactors and then further restricted Plutonium production to only 1 4 of the fuel core of these reactors 39 According to the calculations of one of the key advisers to the US Nuclear deal negotiating team Ashley Tellis 39 Operating India s eight unsafeguarded PHWRs in such a conservative regime would bequeath New Delhi with some 12 135 13 370 kilograms of weapons grade plutonium which is sufficient to produce between 2 023 2 228 nuclear weapons over and above those already existing in the Indian arsenal Although no Indian analyst let alone a policy maker has ever advocated any nuclear inventory that even remotely approximates such numbers this heuristic exercise confirms that New Delhi has the capability to produce a gigantic nuclear arsenal while subsisting well within the lowest estimates of its known uranium reserves However because the amount of nuclear fuel required for the electricity generation sector is far greater than that required to maintain a nuclear weapons program and since India s estimated reserve of uranium represents only 1 of the world s known uranium reserves the NSG s uranium export restrictions mainly affected Indian nuclear power generation capacity Specifically the NSG sanctions challenge India s long term plans to expand and fuel its civilian nuclear power generation capacity from its current output of about 4GWe GigaWatt electricity to a power output of 20GWe by 2020 assuming the planned expansion used conventional Uranium Plutonium fueled heavy water and light water nuclear power plants Consequently India s nuclear isolation constrained expansion of its civil nuclear program but left India relatively immune to foreign reactions to a prospective nuclear test Partly for this reason but mainly due to continued unchecked covert nuclear and missile proliferation activities between Pakistan China 40 41 and North Korea 42 43 India conducted five more nuclear tests in May 1998 at Pokhran India was subject to international sanctions after its May 1998 nuclear tests However due to the size of the Indian economy and its relatively large domestic sector these sanctions had little impact on India with Indian GDP growth increasing from 4 8 in 1997 1998 prior to sanctions to 6 6 during sanctions in 1998 1999 44 Consequently at the end of 2001 the Bush administration decided to drop all sanctions on India 45 Although India achieved its strategic objectives from the Pokhran nuclear tests in 1998 46 it continued to find its civil nuclear program isolated internationally Rationale behind the agreement editNuclear non proliferation edit The proposed civil nuclear agreement implicitly recognizes India s de facto status even without signing the NPT The Bush administration justifies a nuclear pact with India arguing that it is important in helping to advance the non proliferation framework 47 by formally recognizing India s strong non proliferation record even though it has not signed the NPT The former Under Secretary of State of Political Affairs Nicholas Burns one of the architects of the Indo U S nuclear deal said India s trust its credibility the fact that it has promised to create a state of the art facility monitored by the IAEA to begin a new export control regime in place because it has not proliferated the nuclear technology we can t say that about Pakistan when asked whether the U S would offer a nuclear deal with Pakistan on the lines of the Indo U S deal 48 49 Mohamed ElBaradei former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency which would be in charge of inspecting India s civilian reactors has praised the deal as it would also bring India closer as an important partner in the nonproliferation regime 50 The reaction in the U S led academic community was mixed While some authors praised the agreement as bringing India closer to the NPT regime others argued that it gave India too much leeway in determining which facilities were to be safeguarded and that it effectively rewarded India for continuously refusing to accede to the Non Proliferation Treaty 51 Economic considerations edit In India the proponents of the agreement cite economic considerations as one of the topmost factors in their support of the agreement For example Indian scholar Rejaul Karim Laskar argues the most important significance of the deal for India is related to the contribution it will make in meeting India s energy requirements to sustain high rate of economic growth 52 Financially the U S also expects that such a deal could spur India s economic growth and bring in 150 billion in the next decade for nuclear power plants of which the U S wants a share 53 It is India s stated objective to increase the production of nuclear power generation from its present capacity of 4 780 MWe to 20 000 MWe by 2020 India s parliament passed The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages bill on August 25 2010 54 55 which allows the operator to sue the supplier in case of an accident due to technical defects in the plant 56 After the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan issues relating to the safety of operating nuclear power plants compensation in the event of a radiation leak accident disaster clean up costs operator responsibility and supplier liability has once again come into the spot light Nuclear technology edit Dr Siegfried S Hecker PhD former Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory observed while testifying before a U S Senate Committee in 2008 that the United States might benefit from access to Indian nuclear technology I found that whereas sanctions slowed progress in nuclear energy they made India self sufficient and world leaders in fast reactor technologies While much of the world s approach to India has been to limit its access to nuclear technology it may well be that today we limit ourselves by not having access to India s nuclear technology developments Such technical views should help to advice the diplomatic efforts with India 57 Because India s nuclear program was developed mostly indigenously the country used unique techniques that other countries can learn from 58 Strategic edit Since the end of the Cold War The Pentagon along with certain U S ambassadors such as Robert Blackwill has requested increased strategic ties with India and a de hyphenization of Pakistan with India i e having separate policies toward India and Pakistan rather than just an India Pakistan policy The United States also sees India as a viable counter weight to the growing influence of China citation needed and a potential client and job creator 59 While India is self sufficient in thorium possessing 25 of the world s known and economically viable thorium 60 it possesses a meager 1 of the similarly calculated global uranium reserves 61 Indian support for cooperation with the U S centers on the issue of obtaining a steady supply of sufficient energy for the economy to grow Indian opposition to the pact centers on the concessions that would need to be made as well as the likely de prioritization of research into a thorium fuel cycle if uranium becomes highly available given the well understood utilization of uranium in a nuclear fuel cycle Passing of Agreement editOn March 2 2006 in New Delhi George W Bush and Manmohan Singh signed a Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement following an initiation during the July 2005 summit in Washington between the two leaders over civilian nuclear cooperation 62 Heavily endorsed by the White House the agreement is thought to be a major victory to George W Bush s foreign policy initiative and was described by many lawmakers as a cornerstone of the new strategic partnership between the two countries 63 On August 3 2007 both the countries released the full text of the 123 agreement 64 Nicholas Burns the chief negotiator of the India United States nuclear deal said the U S has the right to terminate the deal if India tests a nuclear weapon and that no part of the agreement recognizes India as a nuclear weapons state which would be contrary to the NPT 65 Hyde Act Passage in the U S editOn December 18 2006 President George W Bush signed the Hyde Act into law The Act was passed by an overwhelming 359 68 in the United States House of Representatives on July 26 and by 85 12 in the United States Senate on November 16 in a strong show of bipartisan support 66 67 68 The House version H R 5682 and Senate version S 3709 of the bill differed due to amendments each had added before approving but the versions were reconciled with a House vote of 330 59 on December 8 and a Senate voice vote on December 9 before being passed on to President G W Bush for final approval 69 70 The White House had urged Congress to expedite the reconciliation process during the end 2006 lame duck session and recommended removing certain amendments which would be deemed deal killers by India 71 In response to the language Congress used in the Act to define U S policy toward India President Bush stated Given the Constitution s commitment to the authority of the presidency to conduct the nation s foreign affairs the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory going on to cite sections 103 and 104 d 2 of the bill To assure Congress that its work would not be totally discarded Bush continued by saying that the executive would give the due weight that comity between the legislative and executive branches should require to the extent consistent with U S foreign policy 72 Political opposition in India editMain article Opposition to the Indo US civilian agreement in India The Indo US civilian nuclear agreement was met with stiff opposition by some political parties and activists in India Although many mainstream political parties including the Congress supported the deal along with regional parties like Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and Rashtriya Janata Dal its realization ran into difficulties in the face of stiff political opposition in India Also in November 2007 former Indian Military chiefs bureaucrats and scientists drafted a letter to Members of Parliament expressing their support for the deal 73 However opposition and criticism continued at political levels The Samajwadi Party SP which was with the Left Front in opposing the deal changed its stand after discussing with ex president of India and scientist Dr A P J Abdul Kalam The SP then supported the government and the deal The Indian Government survived a vote of confidence by 275 256 after the Left Front withdrew their support to the government over this dispute 74 Incidentally results showed ten MPs belonging to the opposing Bharatiya Janata Party BJP cross voting in the favor of the government citation needed As details were revealed about serious inconsistencies between what the Indian parliament was told about the deal and the facts about the agreement that were presented by the Bush administration to the US Congress opposition grew in India against the deal In particular portions of the agreement dealing with guaranteeing India a fuel supply or allowing India to maintain a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel appear to be diametrically opposed to what the Indian parliament was led to expect from the agreement Prime Minister Manmohan Singh s statement in parliament is totally at variance with the Bush administration s communication to the House Foreign Affairs Committee which says India will not be allowed to stockpile such nuclear fuel stocks as to undercut American leverage to re impose sanctions To drive home this point it says the 123 Agreement is not inconsistent with the Hyde Act s stipulation the little known Barack Obama Amendment that the supply of nuclear fuel should be commensurate with reasonable operating requirements The strategic reserve that is crucial to India s nuclear program is therefore a non starter 75 better source needed Furthermore the agreement as a result of its compliance with the Hyde Act contained a direct linkage between shutting down US nuclear trade with India and any potential future Indian nuclear weapons test a point that was factually inconsistent with explicit reassurances made on this subject by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during final parliamentary debate on the nuclear deal As professor Brahma Chellaney an expert in strategic affairs and one of the authors of the Indian Nuclear Doctrine 76 explained While the Hyde Act s bar on Indian testing is explicit the one in the NSG waiver is implicit yet unmistakable The NSG waiver is overtly anchored in NSG Guidelines Paragraph 16 which deals with the consequence of an explosion of a nuclear device The waiver s Section 3 e refers to this key paragraph which allows a supplier to call for a special NSG meeting and seek termination of cooperation in the event of a test or any other violation of a supplier recipient understanding The recently leaked Bush administration letter to Congress has cited how this Paragraph 16 rule will effectively bind India to the Hyde Act s conditions on the pain of a U S sponsored cut off of all multilateral cooperation India will not be able to escape from the U S set conditions by turning to other suppliers 77 Indian parliament vote editFurther information 2008 Lok Sabha vote of confidence and Notes for Vote scandal On July 9 2008 India formally submitted the safeguards agreement to the IAEA 78 This development came after the Prime Minister of India Manmohan Singh returned from the 34th G8 summit meeting in Hokkaido Japan where he met with U S President George W Bush 79 On June 19 2008 news media reported that Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh threatened to resign his position if the Left Front whose support was crucial for the ruling United Progressive Alliance to prove its majority in the Indian parliament continued to oppose the nuclear deal and he described their stance as irrational and reactionary 80 According to The Hindu External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee s earlier statement said I cannot bind the government if we lose our majority 81 implying that United Progressive Alliance government would not put its signature on any deal with IAEA if it lost the majority in either an opposition initiated no confidence motion or if failing to muster a vote of confidence in Indian parliament after being told to prove its majority by the president On July 8 2008 Prakash Karat announced that the Left Front is withdrawing its support to the government over the decision by the government to go ahead on the United States India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act The left front had been a staunch advocate of not proceeding with this deal citing national interests 82 On July 22 2008 the UPA faced its first confidence vote in the Lok Sabha after the Communist Party of India Marxist led Left Front withdrew support over India approaching the IAEA for Indo U S nuclear deal The UPA won the confidence vote with 275 votes to the opposition s 256 10 members abstained from the vote to record a 19 vote victory 83 84 85 86 IAEA approval editThe IAEA Board of Governors approved the safeguards agreement on August 1 2008 and the 45 state Nuclear Suppliers Group next had to approve a policy allowing nuclear cooperation with India U S President Bush can then make the necessary certifications and seek final approval by the U S Congress 87 There were objections from Pakistan Iran Ireland Norway Switzerland and Austria at the IAEA meeting 88 NSG waiver editOn September 6 2008 India was granted the waiver at the NSG meeting held in Vienna Austria The consensus was arrived at after overcoming misgivings expressed by Austria Ireland and New Zealand and is an unprecedented step in giving exemption to a country which has not signed the NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty CTBT 89 90 The Indian team who worked on the deal includes Manmohan Singh Pranab Mukherjee Shivshankar Menon Shyam Saran M K Narayanan Anil Kakodkar Ravi Grover and DB Venkatesh Varma 89 Versions of U S draft exemption edit In August 2008 U S draft exemption would have granted India a waiver based on the steps that India has taken voluntarily as a contributing partner in the non proliferation regime 91 Based on these steps and without further conditions the draft waiver would have allowed for the transfer to India of both trigger list and dual use items including technology waiving the full scope safeguards requirements of the NSG guidelines 92 A September 2008 waiver would have recognized additional steps that India has voluntarily taken 93 The waiver called for notifying the NSG of bilateral agreements and for regular consultations however it also would have waived the full scope safeguards requirements of the NSG guidelines without further conditions 92 The U S draft underwent further changes in an effort to make the language more acceptable to the NSG 94 Initial support and opposition edit The deal had initial support from the United States the United Kingdom 95 France 96 Japan 97 Russia 98 and Germany 99 100 After some initial opposition there were reports of Australia 101 Switzerland 102 and Canada 103 104 expressing their support for the deal Selig S Harrison a former South Asia bureau chief of The Washington Post has said the deal may represent a tacit recognition of India as a nuclear weapon state 105 while former U S Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph says the U S State Department made it very clear that we will not recognize India as a nuclear weapon state 106 Norway Austria Brazil and Japan all warned that their support for India at the IAEA did not mean that they would not express reservations at the NSG New Zealand which is a member of the NSG but not of the IAEA Board of Governors cautioned that its support should not be taken for granted 32 Ireland which launched the non proliferation treaty process in 1958 and signed it first in 1968 doubted India s nuclear trade agreement with the U S 107 Russia a potentially large nuclear supplier to India expressed reservations about transferring enrichment and reprocessing technology to India 108 China argued the agreement constituted a major blow to the international non proliferation regime 109 New Zealand said it would like to see a few conditions written in to the waiver the exemption ceasing if India conducts nuclear tests India signing the International Atomic Energy Agency s IAEA additional protocol and placing limits on the scope of the technology that can be given to India and which could relate to nuclear weapons 110 Austria Ireland the Netherlands Switzerland and Scandinavian countries proposed similar amendments 111 The nuclear deal was opposed by former U S president Jimmy Carter who opined that the U S would be making a dangerous deal with India 112 After the first NSG meeting in August 2008 diplomats noted that up to 20 of the 45 NSG states tabled conditions similar to the Hyde Act for India s waiver to do business with the NSG 113 There were proposals on practically every paragraph a European diplomat said 113 A group of seven NSG members suggested including some of the provisions of the U S Hyde Act in the final waiver 114 Daryll Kimball executive director of the Washington based Arms Control Association said the NSG should at a minimum make clear that nuclear trade with India shall be terminated if it resumes testing for any reason If India cannot agree to such terms it suggests that India is not serious about its nuclear test moratorium pledge 115 Reactions following the waiver edit After India was granted the waiver on September 6 the United Kingdom said that the NSG s decision would make a significant contribution to global energy and climate security 116 U S National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said this is a historic achievement that strengthens global non proliferation principles while assisting India to meet its energy requirements in an environmentally friendly manner The United States thanks the participating governments in the NSG for their outstanding efforts and cooperation to welcome India into the global non proliferation community We especially appreciate the role Germany played as chair to move this process forward 117 New Zealand praised the NSG consensus and said that it got the best possible deal with India 118 One of India s strongest allies Russia said in a statement We are convinced that the exemption made for India reflects Delhi s impeccable record in the non proliferation sphere and will guarantee the peaceful uses of nuclear exports to India 119 Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said that the NSG granted waiver because of India s rise as a global power and added If such a request was made for another country I don t think it would have been cleared by the NSG members 120 During his visit to India in September 2008 Smith said that Australia understood and respected India s decision not to join the Non Proliferation Treaty 121 German Foreign Ministry spokesman Jens Ploetner called India a special case and added Does this agreement send an approving message to Iran No it absolutely does not 122 Initially there were reports of the People s Republic of China analyzing the extent of the opposition against the waiver at the NSG and then revealing its position over the issue 123 On September 1 2008 prominent Chinese newspaper People s Daily expressed its strong disapproval of the civilian agreement with India 124 India s National Security Advisor remarked that one of the major opponents of the waiver was China and said that he would express Indian government s displeasure over the issue 125 It was also revealed that China had abstained during the final voting process indicating its non approval of the nuclear agreement 126 In a statement Chinese delegation to the NSG said the group should address the aspirations of other countries too an implicit reference to Pakistan 127 There were also unconfirmed reports of India considering the cancellation of a state visit by Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi 128 However External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said the Chinese Foreign Minister will be welcomed as an honored guest 129 The Times of India noted that China s stance could have a long term implication on Sino Indian relations 130 There were some other conflicting reports on China s stance however The Hindu reported that though China had expressed its desire to include more stern language in the final draft they had informed India about their intention to back the agreement 131 In an interview to the Hindustan Times Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue said that China understands India s needs for civil nuclear energy and related international cooperation 132 Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told India s CNN IBN We didn t do anything to block it the deal We played a constructive role We also adopted a positive and responsible attitude and a safeguards agreement was reached so facts speak louder than some reports 133 During a press conference in New Delhi Yang added The policy was set much before that When consensus was reached China had already made it clear in a certain way that we have no problem with the NSG statement 134 Highlighting the importance of Sino Indian relations Yang remarked let us India and China work together to move beyond doubts to build a stronger relationship between us 135 Indian reactions edit Indian PM Manmohan Singh visited Washington D C on September 26 2008 to celebrate the conclusion of the agreement with U S President George W Bush 136 He also visited France to convey his appreciation for the country s stance 137 India s External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee expressed his deep appreciation for India s allies in the NSG especially the United States United Kingdom France Russia Germany South Africa and Brazil for helping India achieve NSG s consensus on the nuclear deal 138 Bharatiya Janata Party s Yashwant Sinha who also formerly held the post of India s External Affairs Minister criticized the Indian government s decision to seek NSG s consensus and remarked that India has walked into the non proliferation trap set by the U S we have given up our right to test nuclear weapons forever it has been surrendered by the government 139 However another prominent member of the same party and India s former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra supported the development at the NSG and said that the waiver granted made no prohibition on India to conduct nuclear tests in the future 140 A leading advocate of the agreement was India s most eminent strategic affairs analyst K Subrahmanyam also known for his long and controversial championing of an Indian nuclear deterrent 141 He argued that the convergence of strategic interests between the two nations forced such a remarkable gesture from the US overturning its decades long stand on non proliferation and that it would be unwise on India s part to spurn such an overture 142 He also argued that not recognizing new geo political realities would be even more foolhardy on the part of the Indian elite 143 144 Former President of India and noted Indian scientist A P J Abdul Kalam also supported the agreement and remarked that New Delhi may break its voluntary moratorium on further nuclear tests in supreme national interest 145 However analyst M K Bhadrakumar demurred He said that the consensus at NSG was achieved on the basis of Pranab Mukherjee s commitment to India s voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing and by doing so India has entered into a multilateral commitment bringing it within the ambit of the CTBT and NPT 146 The NSG consensus was welcomed by several major Indian companies Major Indian corporations like Videocon Group Tata Power and Jindal Power saw a US 40 billion nuclear energy market in India in the next 10 15 years 147 On a more optimistic note some of India s largest and most well respected corporations like Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited National Thermal Power Corporation and Larsen amp Toubro were eyeing a 100 billion U S business in this sector over the same time period 147 According to Hindustan Times nuclear energy will produce 52 000 MW of electricity in India by 2020 148 Other reactions over the issue edit More than 150 non proliferation activists and anti nuclear organizations called for tightening the initial NSG agreement to prevent harming the current global non proliferation regime 149 Among the steps called for were 31 ceasing cooperation if India conducts nuclear tests or withdraws from safeguards supplying only an amount of fuel which is commensurate with ordinary reactor operating requirements expressly prohibiting the transfer of enrichment reprocessing and heavy water production items to India opposing any special safeguards exemptions for India conditioning the waiver on India stopping fissile production and legally binding itself not to conduct nuclear tests not allowing India to reprocess nuclear fuel supplied by a member state in a facility that is not under permanent and unconditional IAEA safeguards agreeing that all bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements between an NSG member state and India explicitly prohibit the replication or use of such technology in any unsafeguarded Indian facilitiesThe call said that the draft Indian nuclear deal would be a nonproliferation disaster and a serious setback to the prospects of global nuclear disarmament and also pushed for all world leaders who are serious about ending the arms race to stand up and be counted 31 Dr Kaveh L Afrasiabi who has taught political science at Tehran University has argued the agreement will set a new precedent for other states adding that the agreement represents a diplomatic boon for Tehran 150 Ali Ashgar Soltanieh the Iranian Deputy Director General for International and Political Affairs 151 has complained the agreement may undermine the credibility integrity and universality of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Pakistan argues the safeguards agreement threatens to increase the chances of a nuclear arms race in the subcontinent 152 Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has suggested his country should be considered for such an accord 153 and Pakistan has also said the same process should be available as a model for other non NPT states 154 On July 19 2010 U S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton countered Pakistan statements by saying that Pakistan s checkered history on nuclear proliferation raises red flags regarding nuclear cooperation with Pakistan 155 Israel is citing the Indo U S civil nuclear deal as a precedent to alter Nuclear Suppliers Group NSG rules to construct its first nuclear power plant in the Negev desert and is also pushing for its own trade exemptions 156 Brahma Chellaney a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi based Centre for Policy Research argued that the wording of the U S exemption sought to irrevocably tether New Delhi to the nuclear non proliferation regime He argued India would be brought under a wider non proliferation net with India being tied to compliance with the entire set of NSG rules India would acquiesce to its unilateral test moratorium being turned into a multilateral legality He concluded that instead of the full civil nuclear cooperation that the original July 18 2005 deal promised India s access to civil nuclear enrichment and reprocessing technologies would be restricted through the initial NSG waiver 157 Consideration by U S Congress editThe Bush administration told Congress in January 2008 that the United States may cease all cooperation with India if India detonates a nuclear explosive device The administration further said it was not its intention to assist India in the design construction or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies through the transfer of dual use items 158 The statements were considered sensitive in India because debate over the agreement in India could have toppled the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh The State Department had requested they remain secret even though they were not classified 159 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also previously told the House Foreign Affairs Panel in public testimony that any agreement would have to be completely consistent with the obligations of the Hyde Act 33 Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher and the Former Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Jeffrey Bergner also said the agreement would be in conformity with the Hyde Act 160 Howard Berman chair of the U S House Foreign Affairs Committee in a letter to U S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned that an NSG waiver inconsistent with the 2006 Hyde Act would jeopardise the Indo U S nuclear deal in the U S Congress 161 Edward J Markey co chairman of the House Bipartisan Task Force on Non proliferation said that there needed to be clear consequences if India broke its commitments or resumed nuclear testing 162 Passage in Congress edit On September 28 2008 the US House of Representatives voted 298 117 to approve the Indo US nuclear deal 163 On October 1 2008 the US Senate voted 86 13 to approve the Indo US nuclear deal 164 The Arms Control Association said the agreement fails to make clear that an Indian nuclear test would prompt the U S to cease nuclear trade 164 however Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that any nuclear test by India would result in the most serious consequences including automatic cut off of U S cooperation as well as a number of other sanctions 165 After Senate approval US President George W Bush said the deal would strengthen our global nuclear nonproliferation efforts protect the environment create jobs and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner 166 Then US presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain as well as then vice presidential candidate Joe Biden voted in support of the bill 167 Formal signing of the deal editThere was speculation the Indo US deal would be signed on October 4 2008 when U S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in India The deal was to be inked by Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and U S Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice The two leaders were to sign the deal at 2 pm at the Hyderabad House in New Delhi 168 But Mr Mukherjee announced that India would wait for the U S president to sign the 123 agreement legislation first into law and address India s concerns on fuel supply guarantees and the legal standing of the 123 agreement in the accompanying signing statement 169 Secretary Rice was aware of the Indian decision before she left Washington But she was very hopeful that the deal would be signed as the U S State Department had said that the President s signature was not prerequisite for Rice to ink the deal 170 Rice had earlier said that there were still a number of administrative details to be worked out even as she insisted that the US would abide by the Hyde Act on the testing issue nbsp Secretary Rice and Indian Minister for External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee after signing the 123 agreement in Washington on October 10 2008There are a lot of administrative details that have to be worked out This the deal was only passed in our Congress two days ago The President is looking forward to signing the bill sometime I hope very soon because we ll want to use it as an opportunity to thank all of the people who have been involved in this said Rice 171 In Washington a Senate Democratic aide said that such a delay was not that unusual because legislation needed to be carefully reviewed before being sent to the White House 172 US President George W Bush signed the legislation on the Indo US nuclear deal into law on October 8 16 The new law called the United States India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non proliferation Enhancement Act was signed by President Bush at a brief White House function in the presence of the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman Vice President Dick Cheney and the Indian Ambassador to the U S Ronen Sen besides a large gathering of other dignitaries 173 The final administrative aspect of the deal was completed after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee signed the bilateral instruments of the 123 Agreement in Washington on October 10 paving the way for operationalization of the deal between the two countries 174 175 Chronology editThis section needs additional citations for verification Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section Unsourced material may be challenged and removed Find sources India United States Civil Nuclear Agreement news newspapers books scholar JSTOR July 2018 Learn how and when to remove this template message July 18 2005 President George W Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh first announce their intention to enter into a nuclear agreement in Washington D C March 1 2006 Bush visits India for the first time March 3 2006 Bush and Singh issue a joint statement on their growing strategic partnership emphasising their agreement on civil nuclear cooperation July 26 2006 The US House of Representatives passes the Henry J Hyde United States India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 which stipulates that Washington will cooperate with New Delhi on nuclear issues and exempt it from signing the Non Proliferation Treaty July 28 2006 In India the Left parties demand discussion on the issue in Parliament November 16 2006 The US Senate passes the United States India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation and US Additional Protocol Implementation Act to exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 United States exports of nuclear materials equipment and technology to India December 18 2006 President Bush signs into law congressional legislation on Indian atomic energy July 27 2007 Negotiations on a bilateral agreement between the United States and India conclude Aug 3 2007 The text of the Agreement for Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy 123 Agreement is released by both governments Aug 13 2007 Prime Minister Singh makes a suo motu statement on the deal in Parliament Aug 17 2007 The CPI M General Secretary Prakash Karat says the honeymoon with government may be over but the marriage can go on Sept 4 2007 In India the UPA Left committee to discuss nuclear deal set up Feb 25 2008 Left parties in India say the ruling party would have to choose between the deal and its government s stability March 3 6 2008 Left parties warn of serious consequences if the nuclear deal is operationalized and set a deadline asking the government to make it clear by March 15 whether it intended to proceed with the nuclear deal or drop it March 7 14 2008 The CPI writes to the Prime Minister warning of withdrawal of support if government goes ahead with the deal and puts political pressure on the Singh administration not to go with the deal April 23 2008 The Indian government says it will seek the opinions of the House on the 123 Agreement before it is taken up for ratification by the American Congress June 17 2008 External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee meets Prakash Karat asks the Left to allow the government to go ahead with the IAEA safeguards agreement June 30 2008 The Indian Prime Minister says his government prepared to face Parliament before operationalizing the deal July 8 2008 Left parties in India withdraw support to government July 9 2008 The draft India specific safeguards accord with the IAEA circulated to IAEA s Board of Governors for approval July 10 2008 Prime Minister Singh calls for a vote of confidence in Parliament July 14 2008 The IAEA says it will meet on August 1 to consider the India specific safeguards agreement July 18 2008 Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon briefs the IAEA Board of Governors and some NSG countries in Vienna on the safeguards agreement July 22 2008 Government is willing to look at possible amendments to the Atomic Energy Act to ensure that the country s strategic autonomy will never be compromised says Prime Minister Singh July 22 2008 The UPA government led by Manmohan Singh wins trust vote in the Lok Sabha in India July 24 2008 India dismisses warning by Pakistan that the deal will accelerate an atomic arms race in the sub continent July 24 2008 India launches full blast lobbying among the 45 nation NSG for an exemption for nuclear commerce July 25 2008 IAEA secretariat briefs member states on India specific safeguards agreement Aug 1 2008 IAEA Board of Governors adopts India specific safeguards agreement unanimously Aug 21 22 2008 The NSG meet to consider an India waiver ends inconclusively amid reservations by some countries Sep 4 6 2008 The NSG meets for the second time on the issue after the US comes up with a revised draft and grants waiver to India after marathon parleys Sept 11 2008 President Bush sends the text of the 123 Agreement to the US Congress for final approval Sept 12 2008 US remains silent over the controversy in India triggered by President Bush s assertions that nuclear fuel supply assurances to New Delhi under the deal were only political commitments and not legally binding Sept 13 2008 The State Department issues a fact sheet on the nuclear deal saying the initiative will help meet India s growing energy requirements and strengthen the non proliferation regime by welcoming New Delhi into globally accepted nonproliferation standards and practices Sept 18 2008 The Senate Foreign Relations Committee opens a crucial hearing on the Indo US nuclear deal Sept 19 2008 America s nuclear fuel supply assurances to India are a political commitment and the government cannot legally compel US firms to sell a given product to New Delhi top officials tells congressional panel Sept 21 2008 US financial crisis diverts attention from N deal as both the Bush administration and Congress are bogged down over efforts to rescue bankrupt American banks in the ongoing financial crisis Sept 26 2008 PM Singh and President Bush meet at the White House but are not able to sign the nuclear deal as Congress had not yet approved it Sept 27 2008 House of Representatives approves the Indo US nuclear deal 298 members voted for the bill while 117 voted against Oct 1 2008 Senate approves the Indo US civil nuclear deal with 86 votes for and 13 against Oct 4 2008 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits Delhi India and the US unable to ink the nuclear agreement with New Delhi insisting that it would do so only after President Bush signs it into law citing prior misgivings Oct 4 2008 White House announces that President Bush will sign the legislation on the Indo US nuclear deal into law on October 8 Oct 8 2008 President Bush signs legislation to enact the landmark US India civilian nuclear agreement Oct 10 2008 The 123 Agreement between India and US is finally operationalized between the two countries after the deal is signed by External Affairs Minister Mukherjee and his counterpart Secretary of State Rice in Washington Jun 8 2016 The NPCI and Westinghouse agree to conclude contractual arrangements for 6 reactors by June 2017 176 177 178 179 See also edit nbsp Energy portal nbsp India portalNuclear and energy relatedEnergy security Energy policy of India India s three stage nuclear power programme Nuclear Liability Act Nuclear power in IndiaWeapons of mass destructionWeapons of mass destruction Nuclear Command Authority India Indian weapons of mass destructionForeign relationsForeign relations of India India United States relationsReferences edit Sultan Maria Mian Behzad Adil September 2008 The Henry J Hyde Act and 123 Agreement An Assessment PDF London South Asian Strategic Stability Institute Archived from the original PDF on September 18 2011 Retrieved August 21 2011 Office of the Press Secretary June 18 2005 Joint Statement Between President George W Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh whitehouse gov Retrieved August 21 2011 via National Archives Henry J Hyde United States India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 PDF US Government Publishing Office January 3 2006 IAEA Board Approves India Safeguards Agreement Iaea org August 1 2008 India Safeguards Agreement Signed Iaea org February 2 2009 Unattributed July 25 2008 Communication dated July 25 2008 received from the Permanent Mission of India concerning a document entitled Implementation of the India United States Joint Statement of July 18 2005 India s Separation Plan INFCIRC 731 PDF International Atomic Energy Agency Archived from the original PDF on September 8 2011 Retrieved August 21 2011 Bajoria Jayshree November 5 2010 The U S India Nuclear Deal Council on Foreign Relations Archived from the original on November 29 2010 Retrieved November 28 2010 IAEA approves India nuclear inspection deal International Herald Tribune Retrieved October 2 2008 outlookindia com wired Outlookindia com Archived from the original on September 22 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Dateline Vienna Thirty words that saved the day Siddharth Varadarajan September 8 2008 Retrieved October 1 2012 India energized by nuclear pacts AFP October 1 2008 Archived from the original on May 20 2011 Retrieved October 2 2008 via Google House of Reps clears N deal France set to sign agreement The Times of India September 29 2008 Archived from the original on October 22 2012 Retrieved October 2 2008 India France ink nuclear deal first after NSG waiver The Indian Express October 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Rajghatta Chidanand October 2 2008 Finally it s done India back on the nuclear train The Times of India Archived from the original on October 22 2012 Retrieved October 2 2008 Senate approves nuclear deal with India CNN October 1 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 a b Bush signs bill on N deal on October 8 United States Office of the Press Secretary October 8 2008 Retrieved October 8 2008 Done Deal India US seal landmark nuclear pact CNN IBN Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Indian Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee At the Signing of the U S India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement 2001 2009 state gov October 10 2008 India Nuke Deals Still Thorny for US Despite Breakthrough The New York Times Obama s India Visit What Can India And The US Do About The Civil Nuclear Deal Ibtimes com January 21 2015 Breakthrough India US end 6 year old impasse over civil nuclear deal Firstpost com January 26 2015 Recent Legislation Congress Authorizes the President to Waive Restrictions on Nuclear Exports to India PDF Harvard Law Review 120 2020 2007 Retrieved October 20 2017 H R 5682 109th Cong 2006 The Indo U S nuclear debate from www gulfnews com Archived from the original on July 23 2008 Second day of trust vote Indiatoday digitaltoday in ITGD Bureau Retrieved October 2 2008 War of words amp world views The Times of India July 22 2008 Archived from the original on November 6 2012 Retrieved October 2 2008 At G 8 Singh Bush reaffirm commitment to nuclear deal Retrieved July 11 2008 India and US confirm nuclear pact BBC News July 27 2007 Retrieved May 5 2010 Kumara Kranti July 3 2008 India Government crisis deepens over US nuclear deal Wsws org Indian government survives vote BBC News July 22 2008 Retrieved July 23 2008 a b c Decision Time on the Indian Nuclear Deal Help Avert a Nonproliferation Disaster Arms Control Association a b U S India Nuclear Energy Deal What s Next Archived September 16 2008 at the Wayback Machine Center for Arms Control and Non Proliferation a b Hyde Act will haunt nuclear deal at NSG too Economic Times of India Embassy of India Nuclear Non proliferation Archived from the original on July 8 2006 Retrieved June 1 2006 Nuclear Suppliers Group Fas org A Thorium Breeder Reactor Ans org India unveils world s safest nuclear reactor Rediff com Tellis Ashley Atoms for War U S Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India s Nuclear Arsenal PDF p 18 paragraph 1 a b Tellis Ashley Atoms for War U S Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India s Nuclear Arsenal PDF pp 31 36 Vergano Dan August 29 2008 Report says China offered widespread help on nukes USA Today Retrieved May 5 2010 Against nuclear apartheid Archived from the original on December 12 2008 Bermudez Joseph S Jr 1998 A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK Archived from the original on November 11 2001 Pakistan s Nuclear Weapons Program 1998 The Year of Testing nuclearweaponarchive org Achieving 9 Growth Rate in India A Growth Paradigm SSRN 365440 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a Missing or empty url help U S Ready to End Sanctions on India to Build an Alliance Archived from the original on December 12 2008 Narlikar Amrita 2006 Peculiar chauvinism or strategic calculation Explaining the negotiating strategy of a rising India International Affairs 82 59 76 doi 10 1111 j 1468 2346 2006 00515 x Condoleezza Rice Paks a proliferation punch The Economic Times India July 26 2008 Archived from the original on November 19 2008 Retrieved August 3 2008 Russia hints at smooth sail for India at IAEA Ibnlive com Retrieved October 2 2008 Internet Archive s Wayback Machine June 6 2007 Archived from the original on June 6 2007 Retrieved September 22 2018 VandeHei Jim Linzer Dafna March 3 2006 U S India Reach Deal On Nuclear The Washington Post Retrieved March 3 2006 Muller Jorn 2009 The Signing of the U S India Agreement Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy Gottingen Journal of International Law pp 179 198 Archived from the original on January 17 2016 Retrieved April 5 2009 Laskar Rejaul Karim November 20 2006 Significance of Indo US Nuclear Deal The Assam Tribune Linzer Dafna July 20 2005 Bush Officials Defend India Nuclear Deal The Washington Post Retrieved July 20 2005 PTI Correspondent August 26 2010 Nuclear liability bill to bring in more investment US media The Times of India Archived from the original on November 6 2012 PTI Correspondent August 25 2010 Lok Sabha passes Nuclear Liability Bill The Times of India Archived from the original on September 23 2011 India s Nuclear Liability Dilemma Archived November 29 2010 at the Wayback Machine by Ashley Tellis Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Interviewed by Jayshree Bajoria Staff Writer CFR org November 4 2010 The Indo US nuclear deal a decade after PDF Currentscience ac in Retrieved September 22 2018 Goel Anish September 12 2014 Nuclear Negotiations Scientific Literacy and U S India Relations Science amp Diplomacy 3 4 PTI Correspondent February 18 2010 US wants Indian businesses to create jobs in America The Times of India Information and Issue Briefs Thorium World Nuclear Association Archived from the original on November 7 2006 Retrieved June 1 2006 UIC Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper No 75 Supply of Uranium Uranium Information Center Archived from the original on April 27 2006 Retrieved June 1 2006 Bush India s Singh Sign Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement USINFO International Information Programs Archived from the original on March 6 2006 Retrieved March 2 2006 U S House votes for nuclear deal The Hindu Chennai India July 28 2006 Archived from the original on August 21 2006 Retrieved July 29 2006 U S and India Release Text of 123 Agreement August 3 2007 Retrieved July 11 2008 US can terminate N deal if India conducts tests Rediff com Bush Welcomes Senate Approval of U S India Nuclear Agreement USINFO International Information Programs Archived from the original on January 15 2008 Retrieved November 17 2006 H R 5682 House Vote 411 Jul 26 2006 109th Congress GovTrack Retrieved July 26 2006 H R 5682 Senate Vote 270 Nov 16 2006 109th Congress GovTrack Retrieved November 16 2006 Congress Passes U S India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Bill USINFO International Information Programs Archived from the original on January 15 2008 Retrieved December 9 2006 H R 5682 House Vote 541 Dec 8 2006 109th Congress GovTrack Retrieved December 8 2006 Nuclear deal with U S made easier for India to digest Hindustan Times Archived from the original on September 30 2007 Retrieved November 9 2006 Hyde Act not binding says Bush CNN IBN Retrieved December 19 2006 The question is can we get a better n deal No amp x2019 Archived from the original on February 19 2008 Retrieved July 11 2008 Indian government survives vote BBC News July 22 2008 Retrieved November 25 2011 The Pioneer gt Columnists The Pioneer India Archived from the original on August 9 2020 Retrieved October 2 2008 dead link Brahma Chellaney a strategic affairs expert is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research He was one of the authors of the nuclear doctrine submitted to the government for finalisation rediff com Retrieved October 10 2008 Stagecraft and Statecraft India s retarded nuclear deterrent Chellaney spaces live com September 21 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Text of India IAEA Safeguards Agreement PDF Isis online org India submits draft safeguards pact to IAEA The Times of India July 9 2008 Retrieved July 8 2008 PM wants to quit over nuclear deal Retrieved July 11 2008 Varadarajan Siddharth July 9 2008 India sends safeguards agreement to IAEA Board The Hindu Chennai India Archived from the original on July 13 2008 Retrieved July 8 2008 Left to withdraw support to UPA govt The Hindu Chennai India July 8 2008 Archived from the original on August 2 2008 Retrieved July 11 2008 Sengupta Somini July 23 2007 Indian Government Survives Confidence Vote The New York Times Retrieved May 5 2010 Indian gov t wins trust vote in parliament Xinhua 1 permanent dead link Kasmir Times Post trust vote victory India Govt to move forward with reforms nuclear deal International Business Times IAEA board gets India s safeguards agreement Rediff com July 9 2008 Retrieved July 8 2008 N deal Getting NSG nod may not be easy The Times of India Archived from the original on November 6 2012 a b NSG CLEARS NUCLEAR WAIVER FOR INDIA CNN IBN September 6 2008 Retrieved September 6 2008 INDIA JOINS NUCLEAR CLUB GETS NSG WAIVER NDTV com September 6 2008 Archived from the original on September 8 2008 Retrieved September 6 2008 Text of U S NSG Proposal on India Carnegie Endowment for International Peace a b NSG Guidelines Archived from the original on September 14 2008 Revised Indo U S NSG Draft Archived September 9 2008 at the Wayback Machine Arms Control Association September 2008 U S plans nuclear rewrite to build NSG consensus usurped Khabrein UK backs India s nuke energy ambitions The Australian January 23 2008 Archived from the original on September 16 2008 Retrieved July 16 2008 France to back India at IAEA meet India The Times of India July 15 2008 Archived from the original on November 6 2012 Retrieved October 2 2008 Japan to recognise India as nuclear state India Times Russia India Close on Nuclear Deal Moscowtimes ru February 13 2008 Archived from the original on September 14 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Breaking News World News amp Multimedia Iht com Germany for end to India s N isolation The Hindu Chennai India October 23 2007 Archived from the original on June 18 2008 RTTNews Archived September 24 2008 at the Wayback Machine Switzerland to support India s case at NSG Economictimes indiatimes com August 17 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Canada India exploring ways to co operate in nuclear energy Hindustan Times Press Trust of India October 10 2007 Archived from the original on July 18 2013 Canada behind U S Britain in wooing India says expert Times of India Harrison Selig S April 23 2006 How to Regulate Nuclear Weapons The Washington Post Retrieved May 5 2010 Interview With Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph Arms Control Today May 2006 India s N deal hurdle Pak warns of arms race CNN IBN July 24 2008 Retrieved July 24 2008 India s NSG battle to focus on nuclear tech Times of India India sees red as China voices n deal concerns Times of India NZ wants conditions written into nuclear agreement National Business Review NZPA August 20 2008 Archived from the original on April 2 2012 Retrieved November 25 2011 NSG will seek clear conditions Archived September 20 2008 at the Wayback Machine Gulf Times Carter Jimmy March 29 2006 A Dangerous Deal With India The Washington Post Retrieved May 5 2010 a b Nuclear suppliers propose terms for U S India deal Archived September 19 2008 at the Wayback Machine Daily Times Vienna blow to nuclear deal Telegraph Nuclear suppliers fail to reach consensus on U S India deal Archived May 20 2011 at the Wayback Machine AFP AFP Britain hails landmark US India nuclear deal September 6 2008 Archived from the original on September 9 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 U S India welcome NSG s agreement to lift nuclear trade embargo on India News xinhuanet com Archived from the original on January 13 2009 Retrieved October 2 2008 New Zealand compromises on India nuclear deal News xinhuanet com Archived from the original on October 5 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Russia welcomes NSG waiver for India The Hindu Chennai India September 9 2008 Archived from the original on September 11 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 India got the waiver because of its rise as global power The Times of India Archived from the original on September 14 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 India understands uranium stance Smith ABC News Australian Broadcasting Corporation Australia ABC September 12 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Germany Grudgingly Accepts Landmark Nuclear Deal with India Deutsche Welle September 9 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 NDTV com China the main spoiler Ndtv com Archived from the original on December 10 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 China state paper lashes India U S nuclear deal In reuters com September 1 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 China was India s secret enemy at Vienna What NSA says Ibnlive com Retrieved October 2 2008 Neelesh Misra China says it backs India s N ambitions Hindustan Times NSG should address aspirations of others too China The Indian Express September 6 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 India runs into the great wall of China at NSG Ibnlive com Retrieved October 2 2008 Will discuss NSG U turn with China Foreign Min NSA Ibnlive com Retrieved October 2 2008 Beijing disappoints The Times of India September 7 2008 Archived from the original on September 20 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Waiver enables member states to provide India full civil nuclear cooperation The Hindu Chennai India September 7 2008 Archived from the original on September 9 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 China says it backs India s N ambitions September 6 2008 Archived from the original on June 18 2018 China denies blocking India s nuclear waiver bid Uk reuters com September 8 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 We decided to back India in NSG before Vienna meeting China Hindustan Times Archived from the original on December 10 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Let s move beyond doubts to build ties China to India The Indian Express Archived from the original on December 5 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Manmohan arrives in Washington to meet Bush Thaindian News Archived from the original on May 24 2011 Retrieved October 10 2008 Manmohan leaves for home winding up 9 day US France visit The Hindu Chennai India October 1 2008 Archived from the original on December 5 2008 Retrieved October 10 2008 India thanks NSG s Big Four for unique waiver Sify Archived from the original on December 10 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 India nuclear deal rift ends Gulf Daily News Retrieved October 2 2008 Advantage India says Brajesh Mishra The Hindu Chennai India September 7 2008 Archived from the original on September 11 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Sengupta Somini December 10 2006 Interests Drive U S to Back a Nuclear India The New York Times Retrieved May 5 2010 2 dead link Sheela Bhatt Nuclear deal still on course K Subrahmanyam Rediff October 13 2007 Stalling nuclear deal will be a historical mistake Politics News By samachaar in July 3 2009 Archived from the original on July 3 2009 Retrieved September 22 2018 3 dead link Hindustan Times Bhadrakumar M K Hindu gods spike Chinese dragon Atimes com Archived from the original on December 16 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint unfit URL link a b India Inc sets eyes on 40 bn nuclear energy market Economictimes indiatimes com September 9 2008 Archived from the original on September 15 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Laxman Srinivas September 11 2008 N trade It s a 40 billion opportunity The Times of India Archived from the original on November 6 2012 Retrieved October 2 2008 Tighten draft waiver for India The Hindu Asia Times Online Middle East News Iraq Iran current affairs Atimes com Archived from the original on December 4 2008 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint unfit URL link Archived copy PDF Archived from the original PDF on August 19 2008 Retrieved August 19 2008 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint archived copy as title link India moves a step closer to U S nuclear pact dead link Forbes India dismisses Pak talk of arms race due to N deal Press Trust of India Times of India July 24 2008 No UN 19 08 India PDF Archived from the original on September 9 2008 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint unfit URL link Clinton woos Pakistan on security aid Archived August 10 2010 at the Wayback Machine Reuters July 19 2010 Now Israel wants NSG rules changed Archived September 22 2008 at the Wayback Machine Hindustan Times Serious implications for India in NSG draft In rediff com Archived from the original on December 7 2008 Retrieved October 2 2008 Was India misled by America on nuclear deal Archived September 10 2008 at the Wayback Machine Indian Express In Secret Letter Tough U S Line on India Nuclear Deal Washington Post Department of State Answers to questions about Indo U S nuclear agreement Archived September 4 2008 at the Wayback Machine N deal will be consistent with US domestic law The Hindu Chennai India August 8 2008 Archived from the original on August 10 2008 Congressional approval may not be automatic dissenters speak out Archived September 10 2008 at the Wayback Machine Economic Times of India US House approves Indo US nuke deal Times of India a b Bush Wins Approval in Congress for Priority India Atomic Accord Bloomberg Nuclear test will have serious consequences The Hindu Bush hails Senate passage of Indo US nuclear deal The Times of India Archived from the original on January 16 2009 Retrieved October 2 2008 Rice hails approval of India nuclear deal CNN com Cnn com N deal faces last minute glitch Deccan Harald February 14 2018 Archived from the original on December 6 2008 Condoleezza Rice leaves without inking deal Economic Times India October 5 2008 Rice is here but deal still not on table The Times of India October 5 2008 archived from the original on January 10 2014 Rice arrives nuclear deal not to be signed today NDTV com Archived from the original on December 10 2008 Rice in India may not sign nuclear deal Reuters October 4 2008 Bush signs India U S nuclear bill into law The Hindu Chennai India October 10 2008 Archived from the original on October 12 2008 Retrieved October 13 2008 Gollust David October 10 2008 US India Sign Civilian Nuclear Accord Voice of America Archived from the original on July 3 2009 Retrieved December 24 2008 India US seal 123 Agreement Times of India October 11 2008 JOINT STATEMENT The United States and India Enduring Global Partner whitehouse gov June 8 2016 Archived from the original on January 20 2017 via National Archives US India deal helps pave way for new nuclear in India World Nuclear News World nuclear news org Lee Carol E Mauldin William June 7 2016 U S Firm to Build Six Nuclear Reactors in India Wsj com US based Westinghouse to build 6 nuclear power plants in India Time Archive today September 6 2016 Archived from the original on September 6 2016 External links editU S Government linksU S Government Printing Office The text of the Hyde Act U S House Foreign Affairs Committee Questions for the Record submitted to Assistant Secretary Bernger by Chairman Tom Lantos U S House Foreign Affairs Committee Documents from the White House related to the U S India civilian nuclear cooperation agreementIndia Government linksIndian Ministry of External Affairs August 2007 Text of the preliminary Indo US nuclear agreement meaindia nic in IAEA linksIAEA Board of Governors Nuclear Verification The Conclusion of Safeguards Agreements and Additional Protocols An Agreement with the Government of India for the Application of Safeguards to Civilian Nuclear Facilities GOV 2008 30 of July 9 2008 Nuclear Suppliers Group linksCopy of Final NSG Agreement of September 6 2008 Nuclear Suppliers Group September 4 6 2008 NSG Public Statement Extraordinary Plenary Meeting Vienna Nuclear Suppliers Group August 21 22 2008 NSG Public Statement Extraordinary Plenary Meeting Vienna Nuclear Suppliers Group November 2007 INFCIRC 254 Rev 9 Part 1 Nuclear Suppliers Group March 2006 INFCIRC 254 Rev 7 Part 2Other linksIndo US nuclear agreement basics Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title India United States Civil Nuclear Agreement amp oldid 1202599993, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

      article

      , read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.