US - Israeli - Indian relations continue to strenghen

U.S.-India Relations to Grow Closer on Back of Landmark Nuclear Accord
Unprecedented Cooperation in Multiple Areas, from Defense to Science, Further Ties

Long anticipated high-level cooperation between the world’s most powerful democracy and the world’s most populous democracy is coming to fruition. In June, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved the “United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006” in a 16 to 2 vote. The House of Representatives already had overwhelmingly passed one version of the deal in a 359 to 68 vote. The full Senate is expected to vote on it before the October 6 recess.

President George W. Bush with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during the latter’s visit, November 2005.
The historic deal to engage in civil nuclear cooperation was approved on July 18, 2005 by President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The two leaders met again in New Delhi, on March 2, 2006, and announced the completion of the deal.( indian rupee - new shekel - israel india - united states) Under the terms of the agreement, the U.S. will provide India with nuclear fuel and technologies for continuing Indian nuclear development already in place. Additionally, the U.S. will work to adjust American and international laws regarding civil nuclear trade and cooperation to allow India more access to the world nuclear market. Primarily, this would involve the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), and so the NSG must also consent to the deal. In return, India has agreed to separate its civilian and military nuclear programs, and allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect the former. The agreement will place 14 out of a total of 22 Indian nuclear facilities under international scrutiny. India will also continue the unilateral test ban it has followed since 1999 and establish additional safeguards to prevent proliferation.

India first entered the nuclear scene in the 1950s under the Eisenhower Administration’s “Atoms for Peace” program. On May 18, 1974 India conducted its first nuclear test, using enriched plutonium it had developed with technology acquired through the U.S. government’s “Atoms for Peace” program. New Delhi insisted that this was a “peaceful nuclear explosion.” Although there were warnings throughout the 1980s, it was not until 1998 that the international community was shocked into awareness of India’s aspirations for nuclear weapons. “Operation Shakti” began on May 11, 1998 when scientists tested five nuclear bombs over a three-day period. On May 27, 1998 then-Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee stood before his Parliament and announced, “India is now a nuclear weapons state.”

“I’m confident that the relationship between India and the United States is good for the United States of America. I hope it’s good for the people of India, and I know it’s going to be good for laying the foundations of peace in this world of ours,” President Bush declared in India on May 2, 2006. The nuclear deal, President Bush explained in a speech in New Delhi the following day, “will strengthen the security and the economy of both [India and the United States].”

Nuclear Pact Discussed at JINSA Conference
At a September 11 conference sponsored by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the U.S.-India Institute that dealt with security relations between the U.S. and India, Dr. Ashley Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who recently served as a senior State Department adviser to the civil nuclear agreement negotiations with India, described the strategic, diplomatic, economic, energy and environmental benefits of the deal for India. Addressing concerns expressed by one of his co-panelists, Dr. P.K. Iyengar, a former head of India’s Atomic Energy Commission, Tellis explained that the agreement, far from tying India’s hands, is an unprecedented decision by the U.S. to grant India the same status regarding the holding of nuclear weapons as the United Nations Permanent Five accorded for themselves when the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was first codified. In effect, India is to be accepted as a non-threatening nuclear weapons state.

By separating its civilian nuclear plants from its military facilities, India will open up its domestic power-generating industry to much-needed infusions of modern technology. Prof. Sumit Ganguly of Indiana University and Prof. Dinshaw Mistry of the University of Cincinnati described the strategic, diplomatic, economic, energy and environmental benefits of the deal for India in their World Policy Institute article, The Case for the U.S.-India Nuclear Agreement. India is “desperately seeking to modernize its aging nuclear power plants with the hope of addressing its acute energy needs,” they wrote. If India progresses at its current rate of economic growth, its electricity needs could increase annually by as much as 10 percent, Ganguly and Mistry contend.

On the American side too, there are hopes that a nuclear powerful India could serve as a counterweight to China. Brookings Institution scholar Richard A. Falkenrath spoke before the House of Representatives Committee on International Relations, May 11, 2006, encouraging a broader view of the nuclear deal outside of merely a nonproliferation standpoint, but from a national strategy standpoint. As a “multi-ethnic liberal democracy” India can serve as a challenge to the Chinese system, and possibly to Islamic fundamentalism as well, the former National Security Council director for proliferation strategy said.

Many Agreements Cement Washington-New Delhi Ties
At the JINSA conference, Ambassador R.S. Jassal, the Deputy Chief of Mission at the Embassy of India in Washington, detailed a long list of recent agreements inked between Washington and New Delhi in addition to the nuclear deal, the highlight of which is the “New Framework for the U.S.-India Defense Relationship” accords agreed upon this past July. The agreement covers the next 10 years and includes cooperation in defense technology, continued joint and combined exercises and exchanges, expansion of defense trade, increased opportunities for technology transfer, collaboration, co-production and R&D. The primary mechanism to guide defense ties is the Defense Policy Group led by the Indian defence secretary and the U.S. under secretary of defense for policy, currently Eric S. Edelman.

The armed forces have held a number of joint exercises aimed at enhancing interoperability of all the services. An Indian Air Force-U.S. Air Force dissimilar air combat training exercise ‘Cope India 05’ was held in November 2005 at India’s Air Force Station Kalaikunda. Joint exercises involving the navies, armies and Special Forces of the two countries have also been held in the past.

Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee is greeted by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfield on June 28, 2005 at the Pentagon.
During President Bush’s visit to India March 2006, the two countries agreed to the conclusion of a Maritime Cooperation Framework to enhance security in the maritime domain, to prevent piracy and other transnational crimes at sea, carry out search and rescue operations, combat marine pollution, respond to natural disasters, address emergent threats and enhance cooperative capabilities including through logistics support. Both sides are working to finalize a Logistics Support Agreement.

Also codified within the recent past is an historic “Open Skies Agreement” that will lead to greater flights to boost trade, tourism and business. The decision by Air India to purchase 68 Boeing aircraft in a deal valued at $8 billion only sweetens this arrangement.

After a working visit to India in November 2005, Treasury Secretary John Snow and U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman were better able to coordinate with India at the July meeting of the Doha Round of World Trade Organization talks. U.S.-India bilateral trade doubled from 2001 to 2005 to $26.765 billion.

Additionally, Amb. Jassal noted, agreements in the areas of science and technology, energy and space cooperation were recently signed.

Nuke Accord Garners Bi-Partisan Support
Members of Congress from both parties have spoken out in favor of the civil nuclear accord. “While it is important to note that this deal would improve international nuclear security, at the same time, it will expand relations between the U.S. and one of the most important emerging nations in the world,” Chairman of the House International Relations Committee Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), said on July 26, 2006 that the agreement “Éwill enable India to make energy cheaper, cleaner and more accessible. It would create more customers for U.S. firms and, in the end, both countries will benefit.” Congressman Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), the senior Democrat on the same committee, agreed. In response to bill’s passage in the House he said the following: “History will regard what we do today as a tidal shift in relations between India and the United States. This will be known as the day when Congress signaled definitively the end of the Cold War paradigm governing interactions between New Delhi and Washington.”

Economically, India has been riding a huge financial boom over the last several years. Over the past 24 months, annual economic growth in India has reached as high as eight percent. Many are hailing India as a promising source of large financial investments; it has become for the West what China was 15 years ago. In a joint statement by the leaders of the two nations after the March agreement was announced, trade and economic cooperation included in the deal were highlighted as paving the way for the new U.S.-India relationship.

Hand in hand with the financial boom, however, comes the unprecedented demand for energy. Projections by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the agency that provides statistics from the U.S. Department of Energy, predict that total energy consumption in India will more than double in the next 25 years. Currently, more than half of India’s energy is supplied by coal. The EIA estimates that coal consumption in India and China will grow 3.6 billion tons by 2030. India’s Coal Ministry reports that India has significant coal reserves, totaling more than 272 billion tons. The EIA, however, holds the usable amount at 102 billion tons, the fourth largest coal reserves in the world. Coal is not enough to support the economy’s needs and India is increasingly reliant on oil. With only 16 million barrels of oil in total domestic reserves, India is forced to import more than two million barrels a day, according to CIA figures. The EIA also reports that the use of natural gas is rising by nearly six percent each year. India does not have large reserves of natural gas and the EIA estimates that by 2030, India will be forced to import 40 percent of its gas.

Forestalling Indian Reliance on Iran for Energy
In an effort to resolve these energy demands, an unlikely partnership has developed between India and its volatile neighbor, Iran. The two nations have teamed to build a 2,700 km international natural gas pipeline, running from Iran to India through Pakistan. The pipeline would also bring billions of dollars in revenues to Iran and millions to Pakistan from transit fees. In his March 2006 visit to Pakistan, President Bush assured the Pakistani and Indian leadership that he understands the need for the pipeline, but also stated that “our beef with Iran is not the pipeline; our beef with Iran is the fact that they want to develop a nuclear weapon. And I believe a nuclear weapon in the hands of the Iranians would be very dangerous for all of us.” Energy from nuclear power plants, as an alternative fuel source, would distance India from unstable world fuel markets and from reliance upon Iran, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice remarked to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 5, 2006.

The civil nuclear deal must still make its way through the Senate and reach a comprehensive version once all the details are worked out, and as can be expected, arms control advocates and their political allies have been hard a work attacking the accord.

Reactor buildings 3 and 4 at the Tarapur Atomic Power Station near Mumbai, India.
At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on U.S.-India Atomic Energy Cooperation, April 5, 2006, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.) warned that the agreement “rewards a nation for not signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.” She cautioned that this could negatively impact the administration’s policy with regards to Iran and North Korea. Not only would it create a double standard in U.S. policy, but it would also begin an “arms race in the region that would not be in any country’s interest.”

Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, rejected Boxer’s double standard argument. As an open, liberal democracy, Haass said, India does not pose the same threat as other countries. India has a history of working to prevent proliferation and fight terrorism, which Haass attributed to “transparency and the rule of law.” He admitted that North Korea and Iran might use this deal as proof that with time the rest of the world will accept them as nuclear powers as well, so it is up to the United States and its allies to deter them, Haass said.

Pakistan Fearful of Being Left Behind
Pakistani Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Tansim Aslam told the BBC that Pakistan expects a similar deal because they have “a claim... especially because Pakistan is a fossil fuel-deficit country.” During the press conference for his March 4 visit to Pakistan, President Bush, with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf by his side, dashed those hopes saying, “We discussed a civilian nuclear program, and I explained that Pakistan and India are different countries with different needs and different histories. So, as we proceed forward, our strategy will take in effect those well-known differences.” Pakistan has been a declared nuclear weapons state since May 1998, when it conducted six nuclear tests over three days, less than three weeks after India’s tests.

The fear of a Pakistan-India nuclear arms race has only increased, however, since the July 24, 2006 revelation in The Washington Post that the Musharraf government is now constructing a plutonium reactor in Khushab, Pakistan. When the facility is fully operational it will have the capability to produce enough fissile material for as many as 50 bombs a year, the Post reported. Both the Bush and Musharraf administrations insist that this new reactor will be far less powerful than many claim, The Post noted on August 5, 2006.

Apart from some conservatives in the government and scientists associated with the Indian Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) - who believe that India is offering too many concessions, especially concerning the acquisition of uranium fuel from outside the country - the deal is being well received in India, Prof. Ganguly said. Britain, Canada, France and Russia have all indicated that they are working on their own versions of civil nuclear deals with India. While this would expand India’s choices for fuel resources, it would also reduce domestic nuclear research even further, which the scientific community and strong Indian nationalists averse to doing. “If there are opportunities of any international cooperation without impinging our autonomy, without hampering our three-stage programme to have more energy production to meet the country’s needs, the self-reliance and energy independence programme should not get dissolved,” AEC Chairman Anil Kakodkar said on August 4, 2006 referring to an ambitious domestic program to use thorium, of which India has large reserves, in place of uranium, which must be imported. Thorium by itself is not a fissile material like the more commonly used uranium-238 and cannot be used directly to produce nuclear energy. Under the Indian program, thorium blankets in the reactor will absorb so-called slow neutrons to produce fissile U-233.