When excitable headline writers and opportunist politicians combine, they are sure to produce a storm in a tea cup. That precisely is what the latest controversy on the impact of a future Indian nuclear test on nuclear cooperation with the US is all about. The echo chamber constructed by the opponents of the nuclear deal in New Delhi and Washington generates more political sound than light. When the 123 agreement was successfully crafted after months of hard negotiations between the UPA government and the Bush administration, it was quite obvious that the political emphasis on a particular aspect in one capital would at once resonate negatively in the other. After Prime Minister Manmohan Singh affirmed India’s “right” to test in his statement to the Parliament on Monday, critics in Washington seized on it to argue that the US has once again “sold out” to India.

Both India and the US are stating facts of law — India has the right to test and the US, the right to react. That the US will have to terminate nuclear cooperation with any country that tests nuclear weapons is part of the US Atomic Energy Act and the Hyde Act, which form the basis for nuclear cooperation with India. A satisfactory resolution of the question of India’s right to test and its consequences was among the key issues that made drafting of the 123 agreement so difficult. The 123 agreement fully defends India’s future security interests by stating explicitly that the political circumstances of India’s testing will be taken into account. It also affirms that if the US does stop supply of nuclear fuel, Indian reactors will be able to operate during their entire life time through the creation of a strategic fuel reserve and finding alternative suppliers.

... contd.