The Hindu : National : 123 agreement a satisfactory arrangement, says Kakodkar

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Aug 04, 2007
ePaper

National

National

123 agreement a satisfactory arrangement, says Kakodkar

T.S. Subramanian

M.R. Srinivasan cautions against further erosion of position

Anil Kakodkar

M.R. Srinivasan

CHENNAI: Anil Kakodkar, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), has described the “123” Agreement with the U.S. on nuclear cooperation as “a satisfactory arrangement” which would enable India to receive international civil nuclear cooperation while at the same time, preserving India’s programme relating to strategic areas, its three-stage indigenous nuclear power programme, and research and development.

The text of the agreement was made public on Friday.

M.R. Srinivasan, former Chairman, AEC, called it the best agreement we can enter into at this point of time and this is the way to move forward. “This is the best compromise that can be worked out at this point of time with which we can live.” He, however, quickly added, “Of course, we must be alert and make sure that subsequent steps are not taken to lead us to make further concessions or erode our position.”

The agreement had, “to a larger measure,” broken “the logjam” that led to the isolation of India from international civil nuclear cooperation for the past 30 years and also denial of technology related to reprocessing, enrichment and heavy water production.

Dr. Srinivasan, who is now a Member of the AEC, said the agreement should be looked at in the backdrop of India wanting to generate nuclear power in a big way in the near future. To pursue its three-stage nuclear power programme, India needed access to international technology. It was time to add to substantially to its nuclear power generation, using Fast Breeder Reactors. India needed to make additions to its indigenous nuclear power programme by importing Light Water Reactors (LWRs).

“This agreement will give us that opportunity,” he said.

Asked about the provision in the agreement that “transfers of dual-use items that could be used in enrichment, reprocessing or heavy water production facilities will be subject to the Parties’ respective applicable laws, regulations and licence policies” and whether this meant that transfer of these technologies to India would be subject to a review by the U.S. Congress, Dr. Srinivasan said the U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1954 stood in the way of the U.S. supplying these technologies to other countries.

So the Americans found it difficult to accommodate India’s request at this point of time for the transfer of reprocessing, enrichment and heavy water production technologies to India.

“However, there is a door that can be left open for future negotiations as an amendment to this agreement,” he said.

On whether this amendment would be reviewed by the U.S. Congress, Dr. Srinivasan’s response was, “Yes, certainly at a future point of time.”

What was the guarantee that the review would be favourable, he was asked.

His reply was that these technologies related to dual-use equipment.

“It is our hope that changes will be made and arrangements will come about for other nuclear suppliers [to provide these technologies to India]. We already have these technologies. But when we take up these technologies for larger industrial use [that is, massive generation of nuclear power], we would like to have international equipment and processes. That way, we can look to the future. We have to break the logjam,” the AEC member said.

Asked whether India had broken the logjam through this agreement, he said, “to a larger measure.”

He was asked whether the agreement insinuated the possibility of a nuclear test by India by stating that the Parties “agreed to take into account whether the circumstances that may lead to termination or cessation resulted from a Party’s serious concern about a changed security environment or as a response to similar actions by other States which could impact national security,” Dr. Srinivasan’s reply was this:

“Yes, it is correct. The 123 agreement does not refer to any nuclear test at all. The U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1954 will apply… The U.S. cannot treat India as a nuclear weapon State under the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]. We fall between two categories. This is a special arrangement. So this is a fallback provision and there is some comfort to the Indian side that consultations and conditions will emerge. Our hope is that there will be no further nuclear test by anybody, especially the U.S., China and Pakistan.”

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

National