The US-India nuclear agreement leads to greater regulation of India's nuclear program, not less, because it brings the civilian program under strict scrutiny -- something that today is not the case. The IAEA will have oversight, and India agrees to keep its military and civilian programs strictly separated.

Over time that encourages India to become more responsible, not less so.

What Markey and Tauscher want is for India to give up its nuclear weapons -- that's what India would have to do be in compliance with the second 'suggestion' they make, since the amount of fissible material India currently possesses is insufficient for India to meet its identified security needs. To be clear: as long as Pakistan and China are around, India will NEVER give up nuclear weapons. Indeed, Markey and Tauscher want India to do first what no other declared nuclear power has done.

It will NOT happen.

So the Bush agreement gets us a fair ways down the road to better control of the nuclear situation on the subcontinent. India agrees to regulation of the civilian side, something we don't have now, and in return gets access to fissible material for its civilian program, which it needs to have electrical power over the next fifty years. It's a smart deal and the Nuclear Suppliers Group should endorse it.