On the issue of nuclear weapon testing: the PM has stated that just as India retains the sovereign right to test, the US retains the sovereign right to react to such action. These two sovereign rights were sought to be reconciled in the language of the 123 Agreement, by instituting a consultative process so that precipitate action is not taken. The problem area, of course is not the issue of testing, but of the continuation of fuel supply to India by the US in that event. Apart from the unlikelihood of India importing fuel from the US, the problem arises in the interpretation of the phrase “disruption of fuel supplies” and the joint convening of a group of friendly countries to “pursue such measures as would restore fuel supply to India”. The US has clearly stated, perhaps for the first time that the “fuel supply assurances are not, however, meant to insulate India against the consequences of a nuclear explosive test or a violation of non-proliferation commitments.” Still, in response to a question on this specific issue, the answer is “ceasing nuclear cooperation with India would be a serious step. The United States would not take such a serious step without careful consideration of the circumstances necessitating such action and the effects and impacts it would entail.”

The two very different points of view have been sought to be brought together in the 123 Agreement itself, though it may hold the seeds of future disagreement between the two parties. If political relations remain good, the likelihood of resolving such problems amicably increase; if political relations deteriorate, and there is no reason why they should, even smaller problems would assume major proportions.

... contd.