MUMBAI: Defence analysts and nuclear scientists on Sunday expressed concern over the India-United States nuclear deal. They said the Centre still had time to "rethink" it.

At a seminar on "Nuclear India-Technological and strategic relevance," organised by the Forum of Integrated National Security (FINS), they said the Government was not paying sufficient attention to the "pitfalls and weaknesses" in the deal.

Defence analyst Bharat Karnard said: "The kind of things mentioned in the preamble of the deal has all things like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, Iran issue, which we cannot ignore."

P.K. Iyengar, former Atomic Energy Commission Chairman, said: "It is now obvious that in spite of the exemptions to be approved by the U.S. Congress, the American President will have to certify every year, in detail, that he is satisfied with the behaviour and programmes of India in the nuclear field, especially with respect to the augmentation of the nuclear arsenal."

Dangerous proposition

The U.S. President would also be certifying that no benefit was derived by the Indian strategic programme from external assistance — from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group. "This is a very dangerous proposition ... any such certification will be highly subjective and can result in disagreements in the future."

Picture foggy

Mr. Iyengar said the additions to the agreement of July 18, 2005 would, in effect, cap India's strategic programme for a minimum credible deterrent. It had become more and more "unclear" whether India would have an option of accelerating its own well-established nuclear power programme based on Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor. All future fast-breeder reactors producing power would be put under International Atomic Energy Agency "safeguards" and the nature of the safeguard agreement was "not clear."

Lt. Gen D.B. Shekatkar (retd.), FINS convener, said India required a "rethinking" on the deal as integrated national security should be given the highest priority.

NPT is better

Addressing the Forum of Integrated National Security here on Saturday, nuclear scientist Homi Sethna said India would be better off signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which permitted the exit of any signatory nation, rather than the nuclear deal with the United States that would bind the country for "perpetuity."

Mr. Sethna said:

"The NPT may be discriminatory, but we will still be allowed to exit whereas in the India-U.S. deal, India will remain bound in perpetuity.

"Therefore, I prefer the NPT ... to signing the current deal [with the U.S.].

"India is supposed to get only uranium for its nuclear programme to expand. Simply for this, so much compromising ... is uncalled for, Mr. Sethna, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, said."

— PTI

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail