NSG deadlock, some say don’t allow enrichment, reprocessing

New Delhi is, however, learnt to have stood its ground so far insisting that it was not in a position to accept any amendment that would run against what was agreed on July 18, 2005 and then reflected in the Indo-US 123 agreement. With time running out for the Bush Administration, some hard-nosed diplomacy is expected to follow.

“Participating governments exchanged views in a constructive manner, and agreed to meet again in the near future to continue their deliberations,” said the NSG in a public statement after the two-day meeting in Vienna today.

While no country opposed an exemption for India, a few countries like New Zealand, Ireland and Austria argued the need to address non-proliferation issues in a far more specific manner. In particular, countries wanted the US to spell out the consequences in case India was to conduct a nuclear test in the future. Many other countries suggested technical changes like closing the door on transfer of ENR (enrichment and reprocessing) technology.

The other two principal suggestions included setting up a review or monitoring mechanism and prohibiting sale of ENR technology. Several countries challenged the first suggestion, as any such mechanism would deter companies looking to make long-term investments in India’s nuclear sector.

However, there seems to be growing consensus on banning sale of ENR technology. Even the India-US 123 agreement does not allow transfer of such technology. Sources said US may push for this because it had been backing an amendment to the NSG guidelines banning ENR transfers.

Only this year did it change its position and proposed a criteria-based approach largely due to growing pressure from countries like Canada and South Africa that were keen to ENR technology trade. But the first criteria in the new US proposal was that ENR trade will be restricted to NPT countries. This suited Canada as it was in sync with its domestic laws.

... contd.