The Indo-US nuclear deal of 2005 opened new vistas for New Delhi and even led to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver in its favour to trade in nuclear materials and technology with a dozen states. China is the latest suitor of the Indian nuclear dame but does not favour the Indian membership bid for the NSG that would allow it to develop relations at will. This queer development may seem an obvious next step, a surprise and a problem at the same time. It is particularly problematic for those states, which provided opportunities for India but have not benefited from nuclear trade — a vague notion of strategic interests offers some solace in lieu of the anticipated billions of dollars in profit that have not yet started flowing.
Reportedly, Chinese officials have communicated their willingness to offer India civilian nuclear cooperation under India’s current liability law that holds suppliers liable in case of any nuclear accident. Irrespective of this prospective China-India deal coming through, it creates an interesting dilemma for the US. The prospect of a nuclear deal with China provides Narendra Modi a bargaining chip in his dealings with the US and the latter’s leverage would be further eroded.
If the popular perception that India got an American nuclear deal in barter to become a counterweight to China was true, it would be able to cleverly use one suitor’s bid to gain profit from other. Some consider the Indo-US nuclear deal a stillbirth because the prospect of the American nuclear industry’s growth in India does not exist at the moment. The US government cannot afford to pay for Indian liability antics, while China and others can. Owing to the immense power he enjoys, Modi may be able to steamroll the liability law and make an exception for the US like it did in getting India the NSG waiver. Now the US is in indecent haste to get India into the NSG. This is one unique inter-state relationship in which a superpower has entered from the position of disadvantage. It remains to be seen if India blinks on the liability law or if the US continues to reinforce a failure and feed the Frankenstein.
The favours extended to India are irreversible in nature and the US would need some face-saver even if it is symbolic in nature. Even if the US were to reverse the deal with India, other beneficiaries of the deal would not give away the pie. Once the prospects of a nuclear deal were discussed in the Australian parliament in 2012, the driving argument was that even if Australia would not supply uranium to India, states like Kazakhstan or Canada would. The American nuclear trade dilemma with India is that it let the cow in to feed, but others are milking it. Since economic interests are driving the cooperation, it may be naive to assume that the supplier states would give any weight to the voluntary commitments they have given under the ‘informal’ export control regimes.
Japan is the only country that, despite its willingness, has not been able to conclude a nuclear deal with India because New Delhi is unwilling to undertake any obligations related to nuclear tests, which is a red line for Tokyo. It seems that the Japanese are more suave in understanding that beauty is skin-deep indeed. The several ‘indecent’ Indian nuclear deals reiterate that there is no civility in international relations, but Japan has so far proved the maxim wrong.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 3rd, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (48)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1734780406-0/Untitled-(11)1734780406-0-165x106.webp "article")
1734778885-0/Untitled-(10)1734778885-0-165x106.webp "article")
1734776708-0/Untitled-(8)1734776708-0-165x106.webp "article")
1734782942-0/Untitled-design-(24)1734782942-0-270x192.webp "watch ukrainian drones target high rise in russia s kazan")
1734770488-0/Untitled-design-(3)1734770488-0-270x192.webp "saudi doctor detained after car attack on germany christmas market")
1734242367-0/Copy-of-Untitled-(4)1734242367-0-270x192.webp "us scraps 10m bounty for syria s new leader ahmed al sharaa after productive talks")
1734587529-0/Express-Tribune-(1)1734587529-0-270x192.webp "pakistan to host another icc event")
@Adam: ...right wing elements in your country'..how do you know which is my country? You just assumed!..There you have it. Hindutva hindu waxing poetic and giving history lessons simply based on assumption. See, in this dogfight, hindustan,...er.. Bharat is the local schoolyard bully. So a hindu may find it hard to believe a non Pak standing up for the Pakistanis.
@Feroz: It does not matter what local population thinks about India, what matters is what Nations and businesses think about the business opportunities and ability to make profit. Your shallow attempt to link those two did not help the point you were trying to raise. Moreover focus on your rating than worrying about India.. Not for anyone else's sake but your own... It might do you guys some good.
@Motiwala: Your imagery and metaphors make no sense. India may have Hindutva, but at least it springs from a desire to recapture the spirit of the proud (and peaceful) ancient and indigenous Indian Civilization. Quite different from what the right-wing elements in your country have been doing since 1947. Marginalizing minorities (including Islamic ones). Manufacturing history out of whole cloth and eviscerating any mention of the original inhabitants of the Indus Valley and their Indigenous religion (Maybe that explains the "pure" in your nation's name.) Guess where the Hindutva crowd learnt extremist and violent tactics from? "Dance of the seven veils"? An allusion more appropriate for a people which claims the beginning of history with the arrival of Arabs in Sindh. You are the ones who have the need for new sugar daddies so desperately search for sponsors as the old ones cotton to your double games and desert you (for example, the US which has wasted $50 billion and gotten nothing but hostility and militancy in return.)
All I can tell from this article is that pakistanis don't know the definition of 'proliferation'.
HINT: Ask AQ Khan.
Author and most of the commentators have missed a very important point here. India is one of the two or three countries in the world who have already developed the prototype Fast Breeder reactor based upon the Thorium fuel cycle. India has massive amount of Thorium. Its just matter of time that India will not only construct its own FBRs, but will be supplying to other countries also. India is not going to put all its eggs in American basket. India will balance its strategic imports from many countries.
@Sam Gross:
"Indian nuclear ambitions have become threat to the international nuclear community,"
Pakistan doesn't make the whole "international nuclear community". Only Pakistanis are seeing a threat. No other nation has expressed any concerns about Indian nuclear program. Actually, the entire "international nuclear community" approved the special status of India and the NSG waivers.
So, please don't falsely conflate Pakistan's views as those of the entire international community.
@Sam Gross: It's a nit, but China, Pakistan and Israel (in addition to the US and Russia) have more. If Iran continues on its path, it will open up the nuclear option for many unstable oil-and-extremist rich Middle Easter states. That's when the world oughter be afraid, be very afraid. We are locked into a deadly mine is bigger than yours game. That is what happens when macho cultures are enabled.
Indian civil nuclear liability law is the headache of profitable nuclear producers and the NSG aims to secure the nuclear weapons program not uses it. If India has enough Uranium that could be easily used in civil use, nuclear states must not go for the deal, where they have to provide India nuclear fuel. Indian nuclear program’s security and safety record is not satisfactory, besides it will use the exploited Uranium from the mines for weapons program.
Indian nuclear ambitions have become threat to the international nuclear community, main objective that the US president wants to achieve is the “Nuclear zero” but nuclear proliferation done in regards by signing the deal with India is evident. India now is closing the gap towards become the 3rd state to have largest stockpile of nuclear warheads. Now, the main challenge to the international community is to secure the global peace from the possibility of nuclear terrorism as Indian illicit trade networks can make the nuclear capable missiles easily available.
@Sonia: Unfortunately, such pacts with the devil are commonplace in modern life. Here's the dilemma: Should we increase reliance on fossil fuels for electricity generation that will irreparably harm our climate or search for less polluting sources (nuclear, hydro, tidal, solar, wind, etc.)? Should we decamp and scale back our claims on our planet and share what we have equitably (and without the stark inequities in wealth and spending we see today)? Reducing our population, an option at 1947 is no longer a short-term option as, despite falling birth rates, populations will continue to rise until the end of the century before falling. (WWIII as solution to a quick reduction of population is not going to be an option with 7.3 billion people today expected to peak at 9-10 billion). On the other hand, we can all go back to living as we were before the Industrial Revolution - without any modern conveniences - say the 7th Century AD. That ain't gonna happen despite the endeavors a certain group of people. Ultimately, both poor overpopulated countries and the over-consuming rich countries have contributed to the problems of unsustainable living of today and the real ecological threats to our planet. We are screwed!
@Riaz Haq:
Who did India proliferate to, could you educate us? NSG was created because of Indian tests. The third world country, dreaming big was always a "OMG" moment for the West.
At the same time please be honest enough to spell out why Pakistan deserves such a deal when it has by its own admission been responsible for proliferation.
You do understand the meaning of proliferation, don't you?
India did violate the confidence of the Canadians. The Canadians are vehement supporters of India Nuclear Deal and were the first to accept India's right to get a waiver in NSG and IAEA(even Pakistan didn't oppose, thereby helping India).
Please google the meaning of the word proliferation, or if you still want to stick with what you said, enlighten us whom did India proliferate to.
@Sonia: Necessity is mother of all invention. There may exist many ways in which both supplier's interest and liabilities can be met. Till such solution is "invented", easy choice of removing liability clause, a low hanging fruit, is a recipe for disaster. That may take few years to come, but one should have great patience. Indian energy demand, the market and the liability clause all may eventually force the nuclear industry and the scientific community to arrive at a safe solution, so far not tried. Certainly, there will be some premium on meeting "liability" clause, which may drive the nuclear energy cost upwards. Frankly, you have made an "indecent" proposal!
@Alann: Perhaps you should get deeper into mechanics of international trade before commenting.
Trade deficit does not impede investments. In fact, as per Macroeconomics 101, FDI investments are needed if a country runs trade deficits to drive GDP. And investment in power/energy - nuclear, oil/gas, coal and solar - are to be financed and run external energy firms.
What Modi/India need to do it is reforms like he executed in Gujarat - to ensure efficient distribution, billing and collection. The supply is done thru SPV vehicles, with BOT terms - and the energy firms take care of all the investments. Yes, the government also need to provide some financial gaurantees - itself or in conjunction with a foreign government - as these are long gestration projects, and also assure raw material supplies. Both of these are being taken care of by Modi government.
In 10 years, at least half the states, in not all states, will achieve 24X7 electricity. Just wait and watch
@Suresh: India has set itself on a path of doubling its nuclear power output. This is deeply troubling, for India's nuclear supplies almost entirely dependent on imports from manufacturers who refuse liability for any malfunction. So how should India's energy demands be met?
@Sanjay Sharma: Indian elites are allowing themselves to be used in this way in order to legitimize the nation’s status as a nuclear power, but they have failed to consider whether it is necessary for any other reason. Since India has a chronic trade deficit, these very expensive, high technology deals will be financed by debt that the country cannot afford. Nuclear energy should be opposed in India because it is an undemocratic, unsafe, uneconomic, unaccountable expansion of a technology that will bring horrors and great costs on the nation’s most vulnerable people.
The special treatment for India set an apparent dangerous pattern. It signaled to other nations that there was a double standard, and it suggested that if they too defy international agreements to not develop nuclear weapons, they merely need to endure rogue status until pragmatic considerations force other nations to legitimize their nuclear power status.
US should not accept changes to party policy that weaken the disarmament effort, given the huge importance of continuing to work for a world free of nuclear weapons.
Additionally, whatever economic benefits the U.S. hasn’t obtained from India’s nuclear industry pale in comparison to the enormous profits U.S. defense companies have reaped from sales to India. Despite India’s reservations about becoming too dependent on American military hardware, over the last seven years U.S.
@Feroz: A joke of the century "India will never be a nuclear proliferator". India was the first proliferator of the region and she dishonestly acquired its nuclear weapons by breaching agreements with Canada and the US in the early 70s. India’s record on the “non-proliferation” of weapons is extremely poor – their testing in 1974 sparked an ongoing nuclear arms race with Pakistan (and indeed with China). And ironically the NSG was created after the hilarious (sorry Smiling) Buddha test of 1974 and to stop the such proliferation as India did.
@Riaz Haq: In which world you are living?? West is determined to built India against the rising China.. this is not India's quality that West is giving importance to them... its China's threat. You know what these Western really think about Indians??? here is an instance.
A BBC Poll across 28 countries finds that global perceptions about the US have become more positive, while those of India are more negative. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2010/04_april/19/poll.shtml
@Anjaan: a leading member of India’s Coalition for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament, Kumar Sundaram, visited several Japanese cities in order to speak to the mass media and Japanese citizens about the proposed Japan-India nuclear energy agreement. On July 31, Mr. Sundaram gave a press conference in Tokyo at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan. During his hour at the microphone, he gave a detailed explanation as to why he believes the plans for nuclear energy development in India will lead to disastrous consequences for both India and foreign countries. Please listen to that conference rather then becoming nuclear nationalists.
@Nara Manickam: This is simple, if Pakistan gets the same deal then it will not be the biased and the decision will be "decent nuclear proposal"
@Alann: Point is: West should rethink their role in South Asia and should stop discrimination towards Pakistan....
The Americans signed a nuclear deal with India in 2008 in a hope to sell nuclear power reactors and fuel and resuscitate their ailing nuclear industry that has not sold many reactors lately. While we have no transparency on how much fuel India is buying from the U.S. as a consequence of this illegitimate nuclear deal, it is absolutely clear that selling a reactor to them will remain a wild goose chase. In reaching this deal the U.S. violated all nonproliferation norms and created an exceptional exception for New Delhi in a hope to make big bucks but the aspirations plunged.
npt mo more continues to be, heralded as an important step in the ongoing efforts to reduce or prevent the spread of nuclear weapons specially in India Pakistan case.. one major problem that India has done a deal and contaminated the non proliferation regime like in past she did. because these powers are failed to stop non proliferation to India, Indian nuclear deals reiterate that there is no civility in international relations, but Japan has so far proved the maxim wrong.
Yes it is an interesting dilemma for USA and very aptly depicts US as "Wild Bill, your sheep need grooming" after Indo-Australian deal. It is a fact that Americans cannot afford to pay for Indian liability antics, while China and others can. On the other hand, India is really proud to break the nonproliferation norms. It is more focused to its own national interests while endangering the whole globe with nuclear.
This is the point where we can judge the sole purpose of international politics. This is the way how states vested their national interests. India's quest for nuclear power and its tiltation towards other countries for the sake of making country stuffed with nuclear. The Indo-US nuclear deal, latest Indo-Australia uranium deal have in fact once again given a serious blow to the NPT and non proliferation regime overall. India's quest for nuclear power and its indulging of other major powers in nuclear trade with it is actually giving a green signal to the initiation of arms race in the region where Pakistan and China would obviously not sit idly rather would seek for alternatives.
@Anjaan: If we take this the other way round it means that every country possess the inalienable right of going towards nuclear like India. We are simply crafting justifications against the violations of International non proliferation norms.
@Motiwala: Time to lay off the juice buddy. Place a premium on what's left of your brain. All the best.
The Saffron Lord leads a Hindutva Bharat, [Muslims and other minorities are disenfranchised] A Bharat that is doing a dance of the Seven Veils. Holding a host of nations enthralled by it's practiced choreograph, coquettish, indecent moves. Under the 7th. veil is the old harridan Hindustan. Living under one conqueror after another. Going back thousands of years. The last being the British. And since then, a latest suitor is needed, desperately.
Since politics is a matter of patience, I suspect that within a year and a half Modi will be able to relax Indias domestic liability laws given his majority in legislature. Capitalist states are driven by economic interests rather than "civility" so japan falls into the same league, nothing different.
@Alann: Actually, the writer has accepted the fact that India is unstoppable, this is what I presume. The catch is as to how and when the Japanese nation offers the 'indecent' proposal of supplying the desired technology and material to India and proves the 'maxim' right. China has already shown pragmatism on this count without any baggage on its shoulder. India is in dire need of nuclear technology for power generation for its people.
Designed to confuse. NSG participating governments have given an India-specific waiver to its participation in global nuclear trade despite being a non-signatory to the NPT - this was based on a formal and unliateral pledge from India which included a moratorium on future testing. Apparently our word is good because we are not a global migraine. Next stops are Nuclear Suppliers Group, Wassenaar Arrangement, the Australia Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime memberships. Wait and watch.
There has been absolutely no reports of China offering to build nuclear plants in India. Even if this were true, India would never go for unproven Chinese nuclear plants which are cheap copies of old Westinghouse design.
Besides, why would India go for poor quality Chinese nuclear plants when it can get more Russian reactors? Also, India itself is capable of building smaller reactors and is fast developing larger reactor designs.
As for American companies, there will be modifications of the liability laws to facilitate the participation of western countries in the Indian nuclear market.
@Alann: I thought it was very simple.. Give a similar deal to Pakistan and it becomes a decent proposal..
It is not clear till the end, what is "decent" in a global nuclear trade! The author has not discussed the aftermath of Bhopal gas tragedy, the death and suffering, environmental pollution thus caused by the American company Union Carbide, and how Americans escaped paying compensation citing absence of "liability" clause. If American companies can pay huge compensation in their homeland, they can very well pay the same abroad. The author treats such an Indian stand as some kind of joke ( antics). Moreover, the suppliers liability bill was passed by the parliament as per popular will of the people, not just a bargaining chip to frustrate the Americans. The author may be of the opinion, that the nuclear trade Pakistan did with North Korea is of the "most respectable standards of global nuclear trade!" and should be emulated by the world.
@Alann:
The writer will never answer your question Sir. May I venture to answer instead?
No one should ever strike a deal with India without the approval of Pakistan!
The author has conveniently forgets Khan's European EPISODES and support extend by its 'all weather friend' in nuclear bomb technology against international sanctions.
India like every country must do what is in its interests. The Nuclear Liability Law is absolutely necessary to prevent cases like the Union Carbide Bhopal Gas tragedy, where the US Corporation and its Chairman Warren Anderson escaped Judicial accountability and substantial liability after killing thousands of people. Nuclear trade will take off slowly, who signs the first deal is irrelevant. The world knows that India will never be a nuclear proliferator.
We should be careful in the language we use. Our image is so low in the international arena, we cannot expect using uncivil language and fantasize it will be effective in persuading other countries from striking nuclear deals with India. You have to wonder why even China is on the bandwagon and is wooing India. Also people may retaliate and ask whether hosting Osama bin laden was "decent" for example. And there are other skeletons in our cupboard as well.
Pakistan;s perspective is not given :/
Nuclear testing is India's sovereign rights, which is not negotiable ... sooner or later Japan will accept this, and come around if it is indeed seeking to have a strategic relation with India.
Author is clueless and his bias has closed his judgment. Bhopal gas tragedy and Fukushima accident is reality and any politician not factoring this in the equation is not doing his or her job. In global market majority of components are coming from the same supplier. Westinghouse sells nuclear reactor that is partly made by Toshiba in JAPAN and Westinghouse can not sell the reactor till Japan agrees to a nuclear deal with India. If author wants people to take him seriously than he should not loose objectivity and publish factual information not fairy tale. Better luck next time.
I can understand the writer's frustration. tf Pakistan gets the same deal would the writer have a different opinion. .
Uhh...ok? So whats the point of this article again?