ID :
16625
Fri, 08/22/2008 - 15:44
Auther :
Shortlink :
http://m.oananews.org//node/16625
The shortlink copeid
NSG nod to India-specific waiver unlikely, says critic By Sridhar Krishnaswami
unlikely that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) will approve an India-specific draft waiver to conduct nuclear trade with its members during a two-day meet scheduled to begin ,Thursday a prominent arms-control think-tank opposed to the Indo-USnuclear deal has said.
"The US and India are certainly using strong-arms tactics but reports that a decision on the proposal could occur this week don't appear to match with the reality that many states of the 45-member NSG group still have significant concerns," said Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms ControlAssociation.
The group could even postpone the case for a second or third meeting in September as certain changes would have to bemade to the proposed text to get the NSG nod, Kimball claimed.
"The US, Germany and India are privately acknowledging that a second or third meeting will likely be convened sometime in September on the issue and that changes to the US' August 6 proposed text will be necessary to achieve NSGconsensus," he said in an e-mail update on the Vienna meet.
"Perhaps in recognition of many difficulties the proposal faces in the NSG, Germany has reportedly invited India to present its case and answer questions from NSG countries atthis week's meeting.
"The reports cite unnamed Indian officials as saying they are hesitant to do so. That (is) not surprising since India's participation in the discussion could force its officials to answer some uncomfortable but essential questions about its bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements with the US, France, and Russia, as well as its interpretation of the India-IAEAsafeguards agreement, and other issues," the official said.
Kimball expressed doubt whether the fuel supply assurances referred to in the Indo-US bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement were "legally-binding or only politically binding?" "Also with respect to the safeguards agreement approved by the IAEA on August 1, does India formally recognise that it may not unilaterally terminate the agreement or withdraw facilities or materials from safeguards, even if fuel supplies are interrupted due to New Delhi resuming testing or violating its safeguards agreement? "... has India initiated formal negotiations with the IAEA regarding an Additional Protocol to its safeguardsagreement, or not?" he asked.
The civilian nuclear deal critic has pointed out that a media report in India had spoken about the possibility of New Delhi circulating a paper outlining what it says is its goodnonproliferation record.
"If India does circulate such a document, NSG diplomats should follow up by asking about India's nuclear procurement practices, questioned in a March 2006 report from Institute for Science and International Security. It should also be asked to respond to the calls for Indian nuclear and missile restraint in UN Security Council Resolution 1172 that was issued in June 1998," Kimball said. PTI SK
"The US and India are certainly using strong-arms tactics but reports that a decision on the proposal could occur this week don't appear to match with the reality that many states of the 45-member NSG group still have significant concerns," said Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms ControlAssociation.
The group could even postpone the case for a second or third meeting in September as certain changes would have to bemade to the proposed text to get the NSG nod, Kimball claimed.
"The US, Germany and India are privately acknowledging that a second or third meeting will likely be convened sometime in September on the issue and that changes to the US' August 6 proposed text will be necessary to achieve NSGconsensus," he said in an e-mail update on the Vienna meet.
"Perhaps in recognition of many difficulties the proposal faces in the NSG, Germany has reportedly invited India to present its case and answer questions from NSG countries atthis week's meeting.
"The reports cite unnamed Indian officials as saying they are hesitant to do so. That (is) not surprising since India's participation in the discussion could force its officials to answer some uncomfortable but essential questions about its bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements with the US, France, and Russia, as well as its interpretation of the India-IAEAsafeguards agreement, and other issues," the official said.
Kimball expressed doubt whether the fuel supply assurances referred to in the Indo-US bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement were "legally-binding or only politically binding?" "Also with respect to the safeguards agreement approved by the IAEA on August 1, does India formally recognise that it may not unilaterally terminate the agreement or withdraw facilities or materials from safeguards, even if fuel supplies are interrupted due to New Delhi resuming testing or violating its safeguards agreement? "... has India initiated formal negotiations with the IAEA regarding an Additional Protocol to its safeguardsagreement, or not?" he asked.
The civilian nuclear deal critic has pointed out that a media report in India had spoken about the possibility of New Delhi circulating a paper outlining what it says is its goodnonproliferation record.
"If India does circulate such a document, NSG diplomats should follow up by asking about India's nuclear procurement practices, questioned in a March 2006 report from Institute for Science and International Security. It should also be asked to respond to the calls for Indian nuclear and missile restraint in UN Security Council Resolution 1172 that was issued in June 1998," Kimball said. PTI SK
