Lucrative nuclear trade with India, including supplies of reactors, was among the obvious reasons for the Bush administration to think in terms of offering India a special dispensation for full civilian nuclear co-operation. Varying assessments of the massive increase in jobs in the United States on account of the expected trade in equipment were made. 
These projections went a long way in vetting the appetite of the industrial sector in the United States and in aggravating the suspicions in the non-proliferation lobbies. The enthusiasm for the nuclear deal by the US-India Business Council (USIBC), consisting of the big players in India-US trade was attributed to the lure of nuclear trade with India. The USIBC engaged professional lobbyists in Washington to promote the deal on the Hill and elsewhere and there was considerable jubilation in it when the deal was signed. In India too, the presumption was that significant nuclear trade with the US would follow the deal. Although experts knew that the US had no ready reactors to sell, it was believed that the US industry had already begun to fabricate reactors, using old technology to capture the Indian market. The US insistence on strict regulations on nuclear trade and its reluctance to give assurances of perpetuity of supplies were seen as mere ploys to get the best business terms for nuclear trade. The argument was that the US would not sacrifice business opportunities for the sake of non-proliferation objectives. Why should the US work so hard to secure Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver for India merely to facilitate supply of reactors by Russia [ Images ] and France [ Images ] to India? There were whispers in India during the negotiations that we should be Machiavellian in our approach to the United States. Some suggested that India should go along with the US conditions till we obtained the necessary clearances and then not place any orders in the US if the conditions of supply were not favourable to us. The natural reaction of the US side was to extract a Memorandum of Understanding from India that we would seek to secure a significant percentage of our nuclear supplies from the US. It was also insisted on that India should earmark two locations for the installation of US reactors in India. The Obama [ Images ] administration has maintained this position and one of the trophies that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton [ Images ] carried back from India was an assurance on locations for American reactors.
For further details visit as : http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/aug/21/the-us-may-have-no-nuclear-trade-with-india.htm
These projections went a long way in vetting the appetite of the industrial sector in the United States and in aggravating the suspicions in the non-proliferation lobbies. The enthusiasm for the nuclear deal by the US-India Business Council (USIBC), consisting of the big players in India-US trade was attributed to the lure of nuclear trade with India. The USIBC engaged professional lobbyists in Washington to promote the deal on the Hill and elsewhere and there was considerable jubilation in it when the deal was signed. In India too, the presumption was that significant nuclear trade with the US would follow the deal. Although experts knew that the US had no ready reactors to sell, it was believed that the US industry had already begun to fabricate reactors, using old technology to capture the Indian market. The US insistence on strict regulations on nuclear trade and its reluctance to give assurances of perpetuity of supplies were seen as mere ploys to get the best business terms for nuclear trade. The argument was that the US would not sacrifice business opportunities for the sake of non-proliferation objectives. Why should the US work so hard to secure Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver for India merely to facilitate supply of reactors by Russia [ Images ] and France [ Images ] to India? There were whispers in India during the negotiations that we should be Machiavellian in our approach to the United States. Some suggested that India should go along with the US conditions till we obtained the necessary clearances and then not place any orders in the US if the conditions of supply were not favourable to us. The natural reaction of the US side was to extract a Memorandum of Understanding from India that we would seek to secure a significant percentage of our nuclear supplies from the US. It was also insisted on that India should earmark two locations for the installation of US reactors in India. The Obama [ Images ] administration has maintained this position and one of the trophies that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton [ Images ] carried back from India was an assurance on locations for American reactors.For further details visit as : http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/aug/21/the-us-may-have-no-nuclear-trade-with-india.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment