11-01-2005, 03:06 AM
<b>Congress angered over talks with India </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->WASHINGTON Senior Republicans in the U.S. Congress are angry with the Bush administration for proceeding with a deal to help India build civilian nuclear power plants without involving Congress so far, especially given that Congress will have to change one or more laws to make the deal viable.
...............
Republican aides said several members of Congress were outraged.
...................Â
R. Nicholas Burns, the U.S. under secretary of state for political affairs, is negotiating the deal with India. In an interview, he said he had taken pains in recent days to explain to senior members of Congress that, <b>on a recent trip to India, all he did was explain to the Indians their specific obligations and try to work out a timetable for fulfilling them.</b>
..................
<b>"There may be a myriad of laws that have some relevance," </b>said Andy Fisher, spokesman for Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
Burns said he would tell Congress that the administration would propose legislation next year to address all the problems raised by the agreement with India.
Even with the concerns, some in Congress have offered conditional support for the nuclear-power deal, part of a larger "strategic partnership" agreement signed by Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India in July.
"India has, in effect, agreed to an international commitment not to test"Â <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo--> nuclear weapons again, said Representative Tom Lantos, of California, the senior Democrat on the International Relations Committee.
Still, administration officials acknowledge they may face an uphill battle convincing Congress. If that proves true, <b>India may find that it is the biggest loser in the debate over Iran's nuclear program.</b>
Shortly after India voted in a Sept. 24 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in favor of referring Iran to the UN Security Council because of its nuclear program, <b>Iranian officials threatened to cancel a $21 billion deal to build a natural-gas pipeline to India</b>.
..................
<b>Bush administration officials, who had opposed the Iran-India pipeline deal, countered that if Iran did cancel it, the U.S. offer to help India build nuclear power plants would fill that energy gap. But the support needed from Congress is far from certain.</b>
......................
"We're not talking about a perfect world here," Burns said. "We can continue to isolate India and have no impact. Or, we can do what we're doing: engage India, work to bring it into compliance with international nonproliferation standards and know that all the civilian facilities are inspected." That, he said, "is a good deal for the U.S."
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...............
Republican aides said several members of Congress were outraged.
...................Â
R. Nicholas Burns, the U.S. under secretary of state for political affairs, is negotiating the deal with India. In an interview, he said he had taken pains in recent days to explain to senior members of Congress that, <b>on a recent trip to India, all he did was explain to the Indians their specific obligations and try to work out a timetable for fulfilling them.</b>
..................
<b>"There may be a myriad of laws that have some relevance," </b>said Andy Fisher, spokesman for Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
Burns said he would tell Congress that the administration would propose legislation next year to address all the problems raised by the agreement with India.
Even with the concerns, some in Congress have offered conditional support for the nuclear-power deal, part of a larger "strategic partnership" agreement signed by Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India in July.
"India has, in effect, agreed to an international commitment not to test"Â <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo--> nuclear weapons again, said Representative Tom Lantos, of California, the senior Democrat on the International Relations Committee.
Still, administration officials acknowledge they may face an uphill battle convincing Congress. If that proves true, <b>India may find that it is the biggest loser in the debate over Iran's nuclear program.</b>
Shortly after India voted in a Sept. 24 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in favor of referring Iran to the UN Security Council because of its nuclear program, <b>Iranian officials threatened to cancel a $21 billion deal to build a natural-gas pipeline to India</b>.
..................
<b>Bush administration officials, who had opposed the Iran-India pipeline deal, countered that if Iran did cancel it, the U.S. offer to help India build nuclear power plants would fill that energy gap. But the support needed from Congress is far from certain.</b>
......................
"We're not talking about a perfect world here," Burns said. "We can continue to isolate India and have no impact. Or, we can do what we're doing: engage India, work to bring it into compliance with international nonproliferation standards and know that all the civilian facilities are inspected." That, he said, "is a good deal for the U.S."
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->