Critics oppose U.S.-India nuclear deal
WASHINGTON --As the House prepares to vote on a plan to share civilian nuclear technology with India, critics are mounting last-ditch efforts to scuttle an accord they say obliterates the global goal of stopping the spread of nuclear weapons.
Lawmakers are trying to attach conditions that, if adopted, could cause the deal to collapse. One possible proposal would require that India halt production of material that could be used to make bombs; another would call for President Bush to certify that India is cooperating to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
India probably would balk at such conditions, and supporters of the plan have vowed to fight any attempts to include in the legislation what they see as deal-breakers.
The plan, which was expected to be voted on Wednesday, would overturn decades of U.S. policy by allowing trade in nuclear fuel and technology with India in return for safeguards and inspections at India's civilian nuclear plants; military plants would be off-limits.
The Bush administration is asking Congress to make an exception for India in U.S. laws that bar nuclear trade with countries that have not submitted to full international inspections. India built its nuclear weapons program outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Supporters say the deal provides crucial energy to a friendly country that has a strong nonproliferation record, and it allows U.S. companies to crack a lucrative market. Critics say it ruins the global nonproliferation treaty and could start a nuclear arms race between India and its rival and neighbor Pakistan.
Speaking Monday night in New Delhi, Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee said: "Our nuclear doctrine affirms that India will not resort to (a) first strike and never use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states. India's nuclear doctrine has a purely defensive orientation."
While the accord has broad support from members of both political parties, lawmakers will soon leave for their summer recess. They return to a crowded legislative agenda and to November elections. The full Senate also must vote on the initiative.
In addition, the deal would have to clear the Nuclear Suppliers Group, an assembly of nations that export nuclear material.
As the House vote nears, several lawmakers sent a letter Monday to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice questioning why the State Department has yet to submit a required semiannual report that details the activities of foreigners deemed to have dealt with Iran or Syria in nuclear trade.
The lawmakers suggested the department was stalling the report until the India deal had cleared Congress. Past reports, they noted, have accused India of proliferation.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said in a statement that it was "staggering that the State Department could be failing to provide Congress with information about illicit transfers of nuclear and chemical weapons-related technology and goods from entities located in the state of India."
State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters Monday that he believed the report would be released shortly. He said "there are no political considerations that are delaying its release" to Congress.
Critics also sought to link the Indian deal to a report by the Institute for Science and International Security that said Islamabad was building a nuclear reactor able to fuel up to 50 atomic bombs a year.
"If either India or Pakistan starts increasing its nuclear arsenal, the other side will respond in kind," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. "The Bush administration's proposed nuclear deal with India is making that much more likely."
