07-12-2008, 02:20 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Bondage in perpetuity </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
India set to join nuclear have-nots
But for the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency -- like many other UN watchdog bodies -- leaks like a sieve, we would still have been ignorant of the contents of the draft safeguards agreement submitted by the UPA Government for circulation among IAEA Governors for their approval. The Government of India, it is obvious, is yet to recognise the power of the Internet and realise the importance of transparency at home instead of obsessive secrecy. But even if there had been a tradition of transparent governance -- look at the remarkable way policies are framed in the US -- the Government would have been reluctant to make the draft of the proposed safeguards agreement with the IAEA public. On the contrary, it would have exerted -- as it has done -- to keep it a secret, just as it has been less than forthcoming about the fineprint of the proposed India-US civilian nuclear cooperation agreement ever since it was first mooted on July 18, 2005. Sure, the Prime Minister has on various occasions made statements in Parliament on this issue; in retrospect, on none of these occasions has he been upfront. Doubts and apprehensions raised by parliamentarians were brushed aside as being 'unfounded'; questions asked by scientists were studiedly ignored as being 'irrelevant'. Yet, with the unveiling of the draft safeguards agreement, those 'unfounded' doubts and apprehensions have come true and the 'irrelevant' questions have been answered: The UPA Government has led India into a binding commitment that has little to do with the production of civilian nuclear energy and everything to do with bringing us within the restrictive framework of nuclear non-proliferation. The 'deal' is not about liberating India from the clutches of wayward oil-producing nations and the vagaries of fossil fuel, but binding us to the interests of the non-proliferation lobby and the business interests of the nuclear power industry.
<b>So, while the UPA Government is all set to agree to a safeguards regime, no different from and equally rigorous as that imposed on non-nuclear weapon states, in perpetuity, it has conveniently forgotten the Prime Minister's assurance that the nuclear deal and its attendant agreements would ensure nuclear fuel supply in perpetuity. The 'corrective measures' India can take in the event of disruption in supplies that have been mentioned almost perfunctorily in the preamble to the draft agreement with the IAEA remain unelaborated in the text. If the draft were to be approved and signed by the IAEA Governors, India would continue to remain at the mercy of nuclear fuel suppliers and as vulnerable as it was when supplies to Tarapur were choked on the most specious and untenable grounds. There is nothing in the draft which substantiates the UPA Government's claim, reiterated so often by the Prime Minister, that it would be a 'India specific' safeguards agreement which would set us apart from the non-nuclear weapon states and tacitly accord us a status similar to that enjoyed by the P5. The IAEA divides the world into two halves: The nuclear haves and the nunclear have-nots. With this action of the UPA Government, India is set to be formally placed in the second category, and will be doomed to remain there forever. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pioneer Edit Desk
India set to join nuclear have-nots
But for the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency -- like many other UN watchdog bodies -- leaks like a sieve, we would still have been ignorant of the contents of the draft safeguards agreement submitted by the UPA Government for circulation among IAEA Governors for their approval. The Government of India, it is obvious, is yet to recognise the power of the Internet and realise the importance of transparency at home instead of obsessive secrecy. But even if there had been a tradition of transparent governance -- look at the remarkable way policies are framed in the US -- the Government would have been reluctant to make the draft of the proposed safeguards agreement with the IAEA public. On the contrary, it would have exerted -- as it has done -- to keep it a secret, just as it has been less than forthcoming about the fineprint of the proposed India-US civilian nuclear cooperation agreement ever since it was first mooted on July 18, 2005. Sure, the Prime Minister has on various occasions made statements in Parliament on this issue; in retrospect, on none of these occasions has he been upfront. Doubts and apprehensions raised by parliamentarians were brushed aside as being 'unfounded'; questions asked by scientists were studiedly ignored as being 'irrelevant'. Yet, with the unveiling of the draft safeguards agreement, those 'unfounded' doubts and apprehensions have come true and the 'irrelevant' questions have been answered: The UPA Government has led India into a binding commitment that has little to do with the production of civilian nuclear energy and everything to do with bringing us within the restrictive framework of nuclear non-proliferation. The 'deal' is not about liberating India from the clutches of wayward oil-producing nations and the vagaries of fossil fuel, but binding us to the interests of the non-proliferation lobby and the business interests of the nuclear power industry.
<b>So, while the UPA Government is all set to agree to a safeguards regime, no different from and equally rigorous as that imposed on non-nuclear weapon states, in perpetuity, it has conveniently forgotten the Prime Minister's assurance that the nuclear deal and its attendant agreements would ensure nuclear fuel supply in perpetuity. The 'corrective measures' India can take in the event of disruption in supplies that have been mentioned almost perfunctorily in the preamble to the draft agreement with the IAEA remain unelaborated in the text. If the draft were to be approved and signed by the IAEA Governors, India would continue to remain at the mercy of nuclear fuel suppliers and as vulnerable as it was when supplies to Tarapur were choked on the most specious and untenable grounds. There is nothing in the draft which substantiates the UPA Government's claim, reiterated so often by the Prime Minister, that it would be a 'India specific' safeguards agreement which would set us apart from the non-nuclear weapon states and tacitly accord us a status similar to that enjoyed by the P5. The IAEA divides the world into two halves: The nuclear haves and the nunclear have-nots. With this action of the UPA Government, India is set to be formally placed in the second category, and will be doomed to remain there forever. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->