RSS Feeds Feeds: Articles | Issues
Articles About TAP Subscribe Donate
TAPPED  |  Beat the Press

Remember Me
Forgot your password?

The symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.


 



The group blog of The American Prospect

WHY BOTHER NEGOTIATING? In an effort to do... well, something, the administration has essentially written a blank check for the Indian nuclear weapons program.

The agreement — also known as the ‘123 agreement’ — grants India “prior consent” to reprocess spent fuel produced by U.S.-supplied equipment and fuel, a key requirement for the Indian side, though the specific arrangements will be worked out subsequently within a finite time period.

The agreement reiterates the fuel-supply assurances provided in the March 2006 separation plan and commits the U.S. to the “continuous operation” of any reactor it sells to India. Officials also say the irksome issue of fallback safeguards and the ‘right of return’ — as mandated by the U.S. Atomic Energy Act — of American-supplied material in the event of cessation of cooperation have also been satisfactorily resolved.

Moreover, 123 includes a specific clause that the purpose of the agreement is not to hinder anything India does with its strategic programme or to affect unsafeguarded or military nuclear facilities.

I'm all for a close U.S. relationship with India; it is, after all, the world's largest democracy. But such a complete disregard on the part of the U.S. for non-proliferation concerns really does hurt efforts at arms control around the world, and increase the chances that new nuclear states will arise. We're moving rapidly from the non-proliferation regime that managed nuclear weapons development from the 1960s (and managed it rather well, all things considered), to a regime that is governed, essentially, by the interests of the United States. Countries we like get blank checks, while those we don't get dire threats. Since international institutions depend on mutual consent and a belief in long-term gains, this kind of behavior doesn't improve global stability. Moreover, even "benevolent" U.S. hegemony depends on the belief by most that such hegemony is basically a good thing; to the extent that it's arbitrary and self-interested, the project is self-defeating.

Via ArmsControlWonk.

-- Robert Farley



COMMENTS

It's no surprise that the Bush administration is as incompetent in matters of diplomacy as it is in matters of war.

I don't recall the NPT preventing India in the 1970's from conducting nuclear tests. Further, the NPT was successful in rolling back, e.g., South Africa and Brazil, but certainly neither of those countries had/has the same security situation as India. I mean, Pakistan and China . . . that's a rough neighborhood.

I mean, Pakistan and China . . . that's a rough neighborhood.

From Iran's perspective, then, you can add India and Israel. Tougher neighborhood.

Iran has negotiated an immensely large pipeline project with India. So, not so much.

Nonetheless, Iran is surrounded by nuclear powers, and in two of the cardinal directions, West and South, confront countries unfriendly to the point of hostility. Do not forget Russia to their North, filthy with nukes. And especially do not forget those two carrier groups parked right off of Iran's coast, bristling with nuclear warheads. 's funny how the Bush admin plays so inequitably with South Asian nuclear powers.

Maybe Iran is insecure. But it also is ruled by a group of religious fanatics. It questions the very existence of the state of Israel. God knows what it would do if it ever laid hands on a couple of nukes.

India is a mature, secular democracy and a rising world power. It has never proliferated its nuclear technology outside. On the other hand, it has two bad neighbors, China and Pakistan which have proliferated.

Letting China go scot-free to possess nuclear weapons and threaten us as well as Taiwan, but not let India legitimatize its smaller arsenal ain't a good idea.

Bush may be incompetent, but this deal is a good one!

India and Israel as Iran's neighbors, are you kidding? India has no borders with Iran, there are two rather big countries in between. Also, Iran does not see India as a security threat (and neither does India Iran).

Post a comment


Search TAPPED for:

Archives

About TAPPED

TAPPED, the Prospect's award-winning group blog, is a link-intensive collection of musings, ramblings, opinions and other assorted writing on the political developments of the day. See a list of our contributors.

| RSS | Twitter


Renew your print subscription or e-subscription.
Get an e-subscription for $14.95.
Give the gift of political insight. Send The American Prospect to a friend.
Change your email address or street address.
YES! I want to receive The American Prospect
— the essential source for progressive ideas.
Explore The American Prospect's award-winning investigative journalism and provocative essays in a free trial issue. Continue receiving The American Prospect at only $19.95 for a one-year subscription - a savings of 60% off the newsstand price!
First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP     
Email

Should you decide not to continue receiving the magazine after the initial free issue, simply write "cancel" on the invoice and you will not be billed.

© 2009 by The American Prospect, Inc.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permissions and Reprints