The U.S.-India Nuclear Agreement -- The Debate

The historic nuclear energy agreement between the US and India is subject of much debate and discussion. The Indian Parliament is now considering the agreement, and debating the merits and challenges.

While the agreement is worthy of support and ratification, the concerns raised largely by the left political parties are legitimate.

The benefits of the agreement are evident. First, this nuclear agreement is part of the larger strategic alliance between the U.S. and India. The two countries now cooperate on a variety of strategic issues including joint military exercises, exchange of vital intelligence information, and agricultural and technological innovation.

Second, India is a natural partner of the U.S. India is and will be reliable strategic partner in fight against terrorism and in the spread of democratic and human values across the globe. A recent study by Foreign Policy has affirmed that India is the only democratic, robust, stable and reliable partner in Asia. Such a partner – India – is desperate for new energy sources (e.g. cleaner and more efficient nuclear energy) beyond its poor-quality coal and expensive imported oil. By helping India meet its energy needs, the US helps a friend in need.

Third, this agreement also opens new opportunities for the U.S. businesses. India is likely to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in building over 100 or so additional nuclear reactors. Add to this, the infrastructure (building airports, bridges, roads) development and military and aircraft procurement that are likely to require over one trillion dollars. The U.S. firms will now be able to participate as a full partner in these opportunities.

However, there is skepticism in some quarters about the agreement. And the skepticism stems from two or three quarters.

First, the loudest criticism comes from the left parties in India. Their concern is over the Hyde Amendment which requires the President to advise the Congress every year that India was not diverting nuclear technology and material for weaponry. While it is very true that President George Bush has high respect for India’s integrity and trust. However, what the political landscape would be in 10 or 20 years is anyone guess – it is not clear that a nation’s future can be so tenuously linked to certification by an individual.

Look at what happened to Pakistan. The then President Bush in 1990 failed to certify Pakistan’s intentions regarding its nuclear ambitions, and the Pressler amendment called for economic and military sanctions which reverberated till recently.

India cannot become vulnerable to such vagaries, however small the odds of them may be. So the insistence of the left parties on a more deliberate approach is most prudent. But the agreement is overall beneficial to India, and after careful consideration approval and acceptance appears to be the reasonable course.