IF one was not
opposed to the nuclear device on the point of
principle, as I am, one would applaud India for
having forced its way through the 34-year-old
nuclear isolation. It has become a nuclear
power, an official member of the exclusive club,
from being a nuclear pariah.
In other words, New Delhi can get nuclear
technology, reactors and fuel from anywhere in
the world. The 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group
(NSG) has not only lifted the ban but has also
allowed India to retain nuclear weapons without
signing the non-proliferation treaty—a right
granted only to a five-member club, the US, the
UK, Russia, France and China.
Yet it has been a victory of sorts. But for
Washington’s full support all the way, New Delhi
could not have obtained the waiver to test.
Unfortunately, India’s enunciations were not
trusted but Uncle Sam’s word was. This makes
still clearer that America holds the key. In
fact, Washington is the founder of the NSG.
However, the manner in which India went about
getting the waiver made one feel small. Foreign
Minister Pranab Mukherjee went on issuing one
clarification after another and Indian top
officials talking to the NSG members till early
hours for three days at Vienna, assuring them
India’s old declaration of “no first use”
amounted to the guarantee required.
New Delhi did not have to do all this. It
amounted to cringing before even a chit of a
country like New Zealand, China’s pawn. India
should have stood its ground and told the NSG
that the unblemished record of non-proliferation
was there for all to see. India’s izzat
(respect) was hawked when the draft was revised
and re-revised half a dozen times to
“accommodate” a petty member’s petty objection.
On the other hand, the big ones did not want a
hick to sit at the same table.
The waiver was reworded to say: “In the event
that one or more Participating Governments (PGs)
consider that circumstances have arisen which
require consultations, (PGs) will meet, and then
act…” to see whether the NSG guidelines had been
followed. This change was made at the urging of
the club members, which did not want to
acknowledge India as a ‘partner’ of the NSG.
It is not yet known what quid pro quo for the US
support is. India’s statement after getting the
waiver was that it would wait till the US
Congress ratified the Indo-US nuclear deal so
that Washington was there in the field when the
orders for reactors were placed. It is strange
that New Delhi should emphasise the immediate
production of nuclear energy and, at the same
time, Mukherjee should be assuring US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice that India would wait
till the US Congress cleared the deal. Suppose
there is a delay, what happens to the reported
offer by Russia to supply four reactors with
1000 KW capacity each even tomorrow?
In fact, America has made its position clear in
a letter leaked by Howard L. Berman, chairman of
House Foreign Affairs Committee. The deal would
not mean transfer of any sensitive technology to
India or uninterrupted fuel supply—a
contradiction of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s
assurances to parliament which could encourage
the NSG countries. The letter also says that the
“US government will not assist India in the
design, construction or operation of sensitive
nuclear technologies.” By insisting that the
letter contains “nothing new,” New Delhi has
implied that it concurs with the damaging US
interpretations.
Australia’s post-waiver statement that it will
not supply fuel to India indicates that America
has many arrows in its quiver. If it is annoyed
in any way with India, not necessarily over the
nuclear deal, all facilities would come to an
end. In fact, Washington’s eyes are fixed on the
strategic alliance with New Delhi. America’s
ambassador to India David Mulford has said even
before the approval of the waiver that India and
the US had already come close to each other in
many strategic fields. Defence Minister A.K.
Anthony’s visit to America, timed after the
waiver, is more than a visit. This is ominous
because it tells upon India’s non-alignment and
the faith of many nations in New Delhi’s
independent policy.
China’s second thoughts were a surprise because
it had assured Manmohan Singh during his visit
to Beijing that it had no objection to India
getting the waiver. It was President Bush who
rang up the Chinese President to withdraw the
objection. America is not doing all this for
selling reactors because after the NSG clearance
India can purchase from any country which is
cheaper. The reactors offered by Russia or
France may prove to be better than the
10-year-old reactors which American businessmen
have in their basement.
True, America wants to use India to counter
China. But if Beijing continues to play a double
game as it did at Vienna, New Delhi, by dint of
circumstances, would be pushed to America’s
side. What does the refrain of Hindi-Chini-Bhai-Bhai
mean when Beijing strikes against New Delhi
whenever an opportunity arises?
It was natural for Beijing to encourage
Islamabad to have a parallel treaty like the
Indo-US deal. Therefore, President Asif Ali
Zardari’s statement that he is visiting China to
have a nuclear deal does not come as a surprise.
What one wishes is that New Delhi and Islamabad
should be talking to each other on such and
other problems because the two are natural
allies.
The negotiations at Vienna should make India
clear that China can never be a friend, much
less an ally. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru
warned the country through a letter he wrote to
chief ministers after China’s attack on India in
1962. “We do not desire to dominate any country,
and we are content to live peacefully with other
countries provided they do not interfere with us
or commit aggression. China, on the other hand,
clearly did not like the idea of such peaceful
existence and wants to have a dominating
position in Asia. We do not want communism to
come here and yet the essential conflict is more
political and geographical than that of
communism, although communism is an important
factor in the background.”
The BJP’s criticism that the Manmohan Singh
government has given a secret understanding not
to hold the test at any time is not convincing.
As former President Abdul Kalam has said India
will not honour any commitment when it comes to
national interest. Presuming there is some
understanding, I cannot imagine any government
honouring any commitment if testing is required
for the country’s security. Not to be the first
user, a welcome unilateral statement, was made
by Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee after
exploding the device. New Delhi should stick to
it in letter and spirit.