“Frankly, I do not think that we could have secured any better safeguards for our interests,” Saran, a former foreign secretary, said while delivering a lecture on ‘India and the Nuclear Domain’ at the India International Centre here.

Saran, who is currently engaged in talks with the Nuclear Suppliers Group countries to seek exceptions for India from its guidelines, said India’s bigger objective was to adjust the multilateral nuclear regime in its favour.

Asked whether a test by India would evoke reaction from NSG, Saran said: “You have not compromised on your legal right to test...but to believe that while you retain the right to test, you can get a guarantee or an assurance from the Nuclear Suppliers Group to carry out a test without any reaction or consequences would be politically naïve,” he said. “This is because 43 out of the 45 members of the NSG have signed and ratified the CTBT, which means they have given up their right to test”.

“Our objective is not merely to seek the US as a partner. Our objective is to enable India to have a wide choice of partners in pursuing nuclear commerce and high technology trade. But we cannot attain this objective without the US taking the lead on our behalf,” he said.

“Whatever be the reservations that have been expressed about our relations with the US, no other friendly country, member of the NSG has the necessary standing to lead the process of opening up the existing multilateral regime to accommodate India,” he said.

“The US is in a unique position precisely because it initiated these restrictive regimes in the first place, and also because it remains the pre-eminent source of new sensitive technologies,” he added.

Defence analyst K Subrahmanyam said the nuclear deal was not an either-or-choice for India.

C Uday Bhaskar stressed the need for “public activism” on making the leaders and the political class aware of the benefits of the nuclear deal.