1

Global Implications Global Implications of the U.S.-India of the U.S.-India

Nuclear Deal Nuclear Deal

Sheryll PoeSheryll Poe

U.S.-Global Trade PoliticsU.S.-Global Trade Politics

October 30, 2008October 30, 2008

2

Two Democracies: U.S. Two Democracies: U.S. and Indiaand India

In July 2005, President Bush and In July 2005, President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Prime Minister Manmohan Singh issued a joint statement announcing issued a joint statement announcing their intent to negotiate a civil their intent to negotiate a civil nuclear pactnuclear pact

Photo credit: White House

3

The history of India’s The history of India’s nuclear program nuclear program

• 1950: The United States helped India develop 1950: The United States helped India develop nuclear energy under the Atoms for Peace nuclear energy under the Atoms for Peace ProgramProgram

• 1968: India refused to sign the NPT, claiming 1968: India refused to sign the NPT, claiming it was biased. (only 3 countries in the world it was biased. (only 3 countries in the world never signed NPT -- India, Pakistan, and never signed NPT -- India, Pakistan, and Israel. North Korea signed but withdrew later)Israel. North Korea signed but withdrew later)

• 1974: India tested its first nuclear bomb made 1974: India tested its first nuclear bomb made with materials from the Canadian reactor in with materials from the Canadian reactor in Tarapur, which supposed to be used only for Tarapur, which supposed to be used only for civilian purposecivilian purpose

4

What are the terms of What are the terms of the deal? the deal?

• India agrees to separate its civil and military India agrees to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities and place its civil facilities nuclear facilities and place its civil facilities under IAEA safeguards under IAEA safeguards

• The use of technology is only for civilian The use of technology is only for civilian purpose -- to create energy. India cannot use purpose -- to create energy. India cannot use the technology for military purposethe technology for military purpose

• India commits to strengthening the security of India commits to strengthening the security of its nuclear arsenals. its nuclear arsenals.

• The companies from U.S and NSG countries The companies from U.S and NSG countries will be allowed to build nuclear reactors in will be allowed to build nuclear reactors in India and provide nuclear fuel for its civilian India and provide nuclear fuel for its civilian energy program energy program

5

What kind of technology What kind of technology would India receive in would India receive in

return? return?

• India would be eligible to buy nuclear technology India would be eligible to buy nuclear technology from NSG countries including the USA. from NSG countries including the USA.

• Nuclear reactors and fuelNuclear reactors and fuel for making power for for making power for energy hungry Indiaenergy hungry India

• India will become the only country that gets India will become the only country that gets nuclear technology without signing the NPT nuclear technology without signing the NPT

6

Who hated it in India and Who hated it in India and why? why?

• The national Communist PartyThe national Communist Party• The Right wing Bharatiya Janata Party, The Right wing Bharatiya Janata Party,

the country's principal opposition partythe country's principal opposition party• A principal Left wing partyA principal Left wing party

Photo credit: Gurinder Osan, AP

7

What were the objections in What were the objections in the U.S. and NSG?the U.S. and NSG?

• Some American Some American law makers law makers

• Some countries in Some countries in NSG – Austria, NSG – Austria, New Zealand, New Zealand, Ireland and ChinaIreland and China

• The main objection The main objection is proliferation – is proliferation – India refuses to India refuses to sign on to NPTsign on to NPT

“It is outrageous that such a critical vote, one that will forever change the global nonproliferation regime, was taken without the benefit of full Congressional review and oversight, as required by the law. This is a terrible bill that threatens the future of the global nuclear nonproliferation regime.” – – Rep. Edward Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) before the House Markey (D-MA) before the House approval on September 27, 2008.approval on September 27, 2008.

Photo credit: Boston Herald

8

So why do it?So why do it?

• A share of India's plans to A share of India's plans to spend $150 billion in the spend $150 billion in the next decade for nuclear next decade for nuclear power plantspower plants

• A counterweight to ChinaA counterweight to China• A strategic partnership in A strategic partnership in

a dangerous part of the a dangerous part of the worldworld

• Partner in the war against Partner in the war against terrorismterrorism

• In recognition of India’s In recognition of India’s good record on good record on proliferationproliferation

Photo credit: White House

““This agreement sends a signal to the This agreement sends a signal to the world: Nations that follow the path of world: Nations that follow the path of democracy and responsible behavior democracy and responsible behavior will find a friend in the United States will find a friend in the United States of America.”of America.” – – President Bush at President Bush at the October 8, 2008 signing of the the October 8, 2008 signing of the U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement ActEnhancement Act

9

Where the candidates Where the candidates standstand

“ “I voted for the U.S.-India I voted for the U.S.-India nuclear agreement because nuclear agreement because India is a strong democracy India is a strong democracy and a natural strategic partner and a natural strategic partner for the U.S. in the 21st for the U.S. in the 21st century.” – Barrack Obama to century.” – Barrack Obama to

Reuters, July 11, 2008Reuters, July 11, 2008

“ “India has been a responsible India has been a responsible democracy and this agreement democracy and this agreement allows it to become further allows it to become further integrated into the global effort integrated into the global effort to control proliferation of to control proliferation of dangerous technologies.” – dangerous technologies.” – John McCain campaign John McCain campaign statement, October 2, 2008statement, October 2, 2008

Photo credit: candidate sites

10

Outstanding IssuesOutstanding Issues

• Nuclear rivalries – with Pakistan, China, Nuclear rivalries – with Pakistan, China, IranIran

• Other NSG countries – France, Russia -- Other NSG countries – France, Russia -- will sell to India and shut out the U.S.will sell to India and shut out the U.S.

• Undermines the NPT and shows the rules Undermines the NPT and shows the rules can be bent for sales to other non-can be bent for sales to other non-signatoriessignatories

• New Delhi has not ratified an international New Delhi has not ratified an international nuclear accident liability convention known nuclear accident liability convention known as the CSC. as the CSC.

11

What can the U.S. do? What can the U.S. do?

• Work with other NSG members on becoming Work with other NSG members on becoming joint suppliers – France, Russia, even Chinajoint suppliers – France, Russia, even China

• Work with the UN to keep an eye on Pakistan, Work with the UN to keep an eye on Pakistan, IranIran

• Create a new NPT treaty that more accurately Create a new NPT treaty that more accurately reflects the realities of todayreflects the realities of today

• Provide technical assistance to help India Provide technical assistance to help India become a good nuclear partnerbecome a good nuclear partner

• Create a nuclear FTA with other countriesCreate a nuclear FTA with other countries• Create a US watchdog group involving Create a US watchdog group involving

agencies, Congress and non-proliferation agencies, Congress and non-proliferation expertsexperts

12

Final ThoughtFinal Thought

““What message does that send to others What message does that send to others who want to join the nuclear club?”who want to join the nuclear club?”

-- Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.-- Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.

13

SourcesSources• Adams, Jonathan. “International community split over U.S.-India nuclear deal.” Adams, Jonathan. “International community split over U.S.-India nuclear deal.” The Christian Science The Christian Science

MonitorMonitor. August 21, 2008. . August 21, 2008. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0820/p99s01-duts.html• Bajoria, Jayshree; Pan, Esther. “The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal.” Bajoria, Jayshree; Pan, Esther. “The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal.” The Washington PostThe Washington Post. September 4, 2008. . September 4, 2008. • http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090401614.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090401614.html• Denyer, Simon. “Factbox: U.S.-India Nuclear Deal Business Potential.” Reuters. October 2, 2008. Denyer, Simon. “Factbox: U.S.-India Nuclear Deal Business Potential.” Reuters. October 2, 2008.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSSP5726420081002• ““India Civil Nuclear Cooperation: Responding to Critics.” The White House Office of the Press Secretary. India Civil Nuclear Cooperation: Responding to Critics.” The White House Office of the Press Secretary.

March 2006. March 2006. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060308-3.html• Kronstadt, K. Alan. “India U.S. Relations.” Congressional Research Service. Updated August 12, 2008. Kronstadt, K. Alan. “India U.S. Relations.” Congressional Research Service. Updated August 12, 2008. • http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33529_20080812.pdfhttp://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33529_20080812.pdf• Kushner, Adam B. “How India’s New Nuke Deal Might Set Off an Arms Race.” Kushner, Adam B. “How India’s New Nuke Deal Might Set Off an Arms Race.” NewsweekNewsweek. October 20, 2008. . October 20, 2008.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/163590http://www.newsweek.com/id/163590• ““More Than Just the 123 Agreement: The Future of U.S.-Indo Relations.” Congressional hearing of the More Than Just the 123 Agreement: The Future of U.S.-Indo Relations.” Congressional hearing of the

House Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. June 25, 2008. House Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. June 25, 2008. http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing_notice.asp?id=1013http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing_notice.asp?id=1013

• Page, Jeremy. “India parliament launches nuclear debate in vote that could break Government.” Page, Jeremy. “India parliament launches nuclear debate in vote that could break Government.” The India The India Times.Times. July 22, 2008. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4372268.ece July 22, 2008. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4372268.ece

• Perkovich, George. “Faulty Promises: The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal.” Policy Outlook, No. 21. Carnegie Perkovich, George. “Faulty Promises: The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal.” Policy Outlook, No. 21. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. September 2005. Endowment for International Peace. September 2005. http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=17419http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=17419

• Tomero, Leonor. “Why the U.S. India Nuclear Deal is a Bad Deal.” Center for Arms Control and Non-Tomero, Leonor. “Why the U.S. India Nuclear Deal is a Bad Deal.” Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. August 2008. http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/nonproliferation/articles/bad_us_india_deal/Proliferation. August 2008. http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/nonproliferation/articles/bad_us_india_deal/

• ““US business hails $150 bn'opportunity' in N-deal.” US business hails $150 bn'opportunity' in N-deal.” The Economic TimesThe Economic Times. October 2, 2008. . October 2, 2008. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3552004.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3552004.cms