03-31-2006, 09:53 PM
<!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> Nuke deal: Saran speaks tough in Washington
- Maya Mirchandani
Friday, March 31, 2006 (Washington DC):
Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran has said the Indo-US relations would suffer if the nuclear deal did not go through.
Saran was addressing American lawmakers and conservative think tanks in Washington on Thursday.
His remarks came just a day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said it was for the United States to take the nuclear deal forward.
"If this does not go through, it does not mean that everything else will fall by the wayside. But we should also recognise that for good reason or bad, there is an intense focus on this agreement," Saran said.
"Whether we like it or not this has become very symbolic of what we want to do with the Indo-US relationship. Therefore, if this deal does not go through there will be some falling back in terms of the expectations and enthusiasm that has been created," he added.
Countering criticism
The proposed agreement has generated intense criticism among several quarters in Washington, and its fate now rests with the American lawmakers.
Critics of the deal have indicated that it would free India's resources to pursue a weapons programme.
"There have been comments that our separation plan leaves open the possibility of a massive increase in our nuclear weapons program," Saran said.
"I would like to remind all of you of our record of responsibility, restraint, and I would even say idealism in this regard. We were reluctant to exercise our nuclear weapon option to begin with. Having felt compelled to do so we remain committed to a credible minimum deterrent".
Saran further pointed out that there was no reason why India would change its stand of restraint, that could not be disputed even by the critics.
Hot debate
As the countdown to a possible vote in the US Congress begins, the deal has become one of the most hotly debated issues in the corridors of Capitol Hill.
Saran met a few Congressmen in Washington, most of whom have already pledged their support for the deal.
The real challenge now is to get the opponents to give the Indian argument a fair hearing.
"This is a major new proposal and there are varied views concerning its desirability," said Tom Lantos, Democrat Minority Leader, House International Relations Committee.
"I am confident that when all the facts are known and the issue is put in its global geo-strategic framework, we shall succeed," he added.
Lantos also said while he could not set a time frame for the deal to get cleared, he was optimistic that it would finally go through.
Scathing comments
On Wednesday, former US president Jimmy Carter had written a scathing comment in the Washington Post about the nuclear agreement.
Carter had suggested that the bill introduced in the US Congress would send wrong signals to countries like Iran and North Korea and open a Pandora's box of proliferation, despite being India-specific.
Well-known non-proliferationist Michael Krepon also sent out an email newsletter, titled The US-India nuclear deal: Another wrong turn in the war on terror.
In the newsletter, he said, "As currently structured, the nuclear deal accelerates a geo-strategic partnership with India as well as the demise of the NPT. No friend of India in the US Congress or elsewhere should be faced with this stark choice".
Clear signals
President George W Bush is now hoping to push the measure through a Republican-controlled Congress.
The moves come in an election year when lawmakers have already rebelled against him on several issues.
Meanwhile, the Indian Foreign Secretary message in the US was unambiguous â India cannot be a partner of the US in a changing global order, and a target at the same time.
It is being hoped that the message is heard clearly by the American lawmakers, in whose hands the fate of the deal now rests.
While it is true that the bilateral relationship has progressed on many fronts, many fear that a vote against the nuke deal at this critical juncture could seriously impact equations between the two countries.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> Nuke deal: Saran speaks tough in Washington- Maya Mirchandani
Friday, March 31, 2006 (Washington DC):
Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran has said the Indo-US relations would suffer if the nuclear deal did not go through.
Saran was addressing American lawmakers and conservative think tanks in Washington on Thursday.
His remarks came just a day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said it was for the United States to take the nuclear deal forward.
"If this does not go through, it does not mean that everything else will fall by the wayside. But we should also recognise that for good reason or bad, there is an intense focus on this agreement," Saran said.
"Whether we like it or not this has become very symbolic of what we want to do with the Indo-US relationship. Therefore, if this deal does not go through there will be some falling back in terms of the expectations and enthusiasm that has been created," he added.
Countering criticism
The proposed agreement has generated intense criticism among several quarters in Washington, and its fate now rests with the American lawmakers.
Critics of the deal have indicated that it would free India's resources to pursue a weapons programme.
"There have been comments that our separation plan leaves open the possibility of a massive increase in our nuclear weapons program," Saran said.
"I would like to remind all of you of our record of responsibility, restraint, and I would even say idealism in this regard. We were reluctant to exercise our nuclear weapon option to begin with. Having felt compelled to do so we remain committed to a credible minimum deterrent".
Saran further pointed out that there was no reason why India would change its stand of restraint, that could not be disputed even by the critics.
Hot debate
As the countdown to a possible vote in the US Congress begins, the deal has become one of the most hotly debated issues in the corridors of Capitol Hill.
Saran met a few Congressmen in Washington, most of whom have already pledged their support for the deal.
The real challenge now is to get the opponents to give the Indian argument a fair hearing.
"This is a major new proposal and there are varied views concerning its desirability," said Tom Lantos, Democrat Minority Leader, House International Relations Committee.
"I am confident that when all the facts are known and the issue is put in its global geo-strategic framework, we shall succeed," he added.
Lantos also said while he could not set a time frame for the deal to get cleared, he was optimistic that it would finally go through.
Scathing comments
On Wednesday, former US president Jimmy Carter had written a scathing comment in the Washington Post about the nuclear agreement.
Carter had suggested that the bill introduced in the US Congress would send wrong signals to countries like Iran and North Korea and open a Pandora's box of proliferation, despite being India-specific.
Well-known non-proliferationist Michael Krepon also sent out an email newsletter, titled The US-India nuclear deal: Another wrong turn in the war on terror.
In the newsletter, he said, "As currently structured, the nuclear deal accelerates a geo-strategic partnership with India as well as the demise of the NPT. No friend of India in the US Congress or elsewhere should be faced with this stark choice".
Clear signals
President George W Bush is now hoping to push the measure through a Republican-controlled Congress.
The moves come in an election year when lawmakers have already rebelled against him on several issues.
Meanwhile, the Indian Foreign Secretary message in the US was unambiguous â India cannot be a partner of the US in a changing global order, and a target at the same time.
It is being hoped that the message is heard clearly by the American lawmakers, in whose hands the fate of the deal now rests.
While it is true that the bilateral relationship has progressed on many fronts, many fear that a vote against the nuke deal at this critical juncture could seriously impact equations between the two countries.