| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Rice demands business for US |
| 2008-09-08 |
| India has assured the US that it would protect the interests of American companies and not strike bilateral trade deals with other members of the Nuclear Suppliers' Group until the US Congress approves the 123 Agreement. The assurance came in the wake of apprehension expressed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that other NSG members might corner the bulk of nuclear contracts should the 123 Agreement not get through the current Congress. Rice's statement also reflects concern in the Bush Administration that the ratification of the 123 Agreement many not be a smooth process. External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said that India would "actually enter" into the trade with supplying countries through bilateral agreements after the ``ratification (of the 123 agreement) of the US Congress.'' The promptness with which India acceded to the US demand on nuclear commerce adds substance to the charges made by the BJP and the Left that the 123 Agreement suited the American interest and that India was being turned into a big nuclear bazaar . Mukherjee stated that "approval by the board of governors of IAEA for the India-specific safeguards agreement and the NSG waiver are the passports to enter into international nuclear trade". He said the US Congress requires two documents - the India-specific safeguards agreement approved by the IAEA board of governors and amendment to NSG guidelines by providing waiver to India after which they can ratify the 123 Agreement. India would be able to enter bilateral agreements with other countries after these procedures are completed, the Minister said. Earlier, Rice said the US had "talked to the Indian Government about not disadvantaging American companies and I think they recognise and appreciate American leadership on this issue. But obviously, the best thing would be to get it through Congress". Terming the waiver granted to India by the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) a "huge step" in bilateral ties, Rice also complimented the role played by the Indian Government at the NSG meeting in Vienna. "It is an important step forward. I have to say that India showed a lot of leadership," she said. "We got lot of help from the Indian Government to make this possible, but also from a number of delegations who worked very closely with us. And I think that it is a really very big step forward for the non-proliferation framework," she was quoted as saying by transcript released by the State Department. Rice said there was widespread support for the India-US nuclear deal in the environmental community. ``Even within some of the opposition I think you find support for this," she said, noting, "India has a lot at stake in this agreement." "I don't think that Indians would have sought this agreement if they did not see that their principal goal now... their principal incentive is to seek peaceful uses of nuclear materials, to be able to build civil nuclear facilities and to do that with the best technology from around the world," Rice said. "And so, once it is done - and I do want to emphasise we still have to go back to Congress - I think you will see that there is really a basis for a very different kind of relationship for India with the rest of the world on these issues," she said. Asked why the administration was pressing for quick passage for implementing the 123 Agreement when a similar agreement had been languishing in the US Congress for months, Rice said the two were different as Russia was already a member of the non-proliferation regime. "I think they're different, for one very important reason," Rice said. As Russia is already a member of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the NSG, that agreement "will eventually improve the prospects for US cooperation with Russia on nuclear issues and nuclear technology". "But the India deal is a landmark," she said. "It's no secret that India has been outside the non-proliferation regime for the entire history of its programme. So, in that sense, it is more significant, from the point of view of the historic nature of the agreement," Rice said. |
| Posted by:john frum |