A new NSG draft was in the works and had been sent to Washington for clearance although India made it clear that there was almost no scope to revise the draft in substantive terms.

The Chinese, sources said, objected to what they called was the manner in which matters were being pushed on an issue they said involved the future of the global non-proliferation regime.

Well aware of the stakes in the Indo-US nuclear deal — and the tight Congressional calendar ahead — the “highest levels” in Washington got in touch with their counterparts in Beijing to get China to stay on by including it in the consultative process.

China, which until yesterday was in the background trying to play arbitrator of sorts by suggesting to hold another meeting, seemed to suddenly reveal its hand in the most unexpected manner.

This happened even as US was in consultations with holdout countries like Austria, Ireland and New Zealand on the one hand and India on the other, to work out a resolution.

Among the suggestions from some countries to break the deadlock was to place a provision banning transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology. India has so far maintained it cannot accept a restriction not existing in current NSG guidelines.

Austria and Ireland were, however, keen to introduce language on testing. Austria, in particular, cited domestic concerns.

India and US spent the whole day today slowly chipping away at the opposition with External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee issuing a statement underlining New Delhi’s commitment to global disarmament and strengthening the international non-proliferation regime.

The statement was circulated immediately at the start of the NSG meet this morning soon after it was clear that the Netherlands and Norway had moved away from the club of six holdouts.

The meeting broke up within 90 minutes as countries said they had to consult their respective capitals.

At that point, US Under Secretary of State for Arms Control John Rood emerged from the discussions and welcomed what he called India’s “very significant statement.” It “has generated a positive momentum for the discussions,” he said. “We both are committed to the objective of achieving a consensus and are optimistic that we can achieve this goal.”

The statement, as reported by The Indian Express today, was one of the key proposals on the table to assuage concerns of some holdout countries. Besides reaffirming the Indian position on disarmament, Mukherjee’s statement sought to address key concerns raised by sceptics in the NSG.

“India will not be a source of proliferation of sensitive technologies, including enrichment and reprocessing transfers. We stand for strengthening of the non-proliferation regime. We support international efforts to limit the spread of ENR equipment or technologies to states that do not have them. We will work together with the international community to advance our common objective of non-proliferation,” Mukherjee said.

It’s learnt that based on this statement, countries like Switzerland and New Zealand were willing to reconsider their stand but the opposition from Austria remained strident. Elections are due soon here and the incumbent Social Democratic Party is in coalition with the Greens Party that is vehemently opposed to nuclear energy.

Sources said Austria conveyed that it fears domestic repercussions given the publicity this meeting has had in Vienna. Holding on steadfastly with the Austrians are the Irish who are traditionally strong NPT votaries. Both the countries are insisting some language directly referring to testing in the NSG draft.

From an Indian standpoint, sources said, all efforts were being made to get the exemption past the group today but at some point, the hope is that the majority may weigh down on the last of the few sceptics.

The long 48 hours

•Out of 45 NSG countries, how many were the first to wave the red flag?

Six countries: Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand and Switzerland

•When 39 countries supported the n-deal, why did these 6 hold out?

They have strong non-proliferation lobbies at work at home, and tough domestic laws.

New Zealand and Austria are going to polls.

•Does the determined opposition mean the US and India read the NSG wrong?

It was always known that the NSG would be tough, but the squeezing of the calendar has led to this situation. Originally, the NSG phase was supposed to be spread over 6 weeks.

•What steps did the US take to bring the 'holdouts' on board?

The US was in touch with them at the highest political level. In the NSG, the UK, France and Russia too were trying to convince them.

•Until late on Friday night, who were still holding out? Why?

Austria and Ireland. Austria's ruling coalition includes the Greens (the Leftists).

Ireland is a strong non-proliferation votary. New Zealand was still not open about support but unlikely to hold out if these two countries move out of the way.

•What has been China's role?

The stated position was they won't obstruct. But they have now questioned the need to hurry and today, even threatened to leave the meeting saying they were not being consulted.

•If the NSG talks fail, what happens next?

The NSG calls for another meeting and if that gives a waiver, the US could call a special session of Congress to pass the deal

•Why are US, India so keen on an immediate waiver?

One, the Congressional calender is too tight to allow any breathing space; two, India, US don’t want to leave the fate of the deal in the uncertain hands of the next regime.