In 2006, watch this space8230;

The US looked away as China proliferated to Pakistan in the 8217;80s The CIA operative, Richard Barlow, was recalled in 1987 and punished for reporting the completion of Pakistani bomb. Khan was rescued from prosecution by the CIA for the second time in 1986, according to Lubbers. Saddam Hussein, when he was a blue-eyed boy of the West, received equipment and technology for his nuclear weapon project from different Western European firms. Khan8217;s role in Pakistan8217;s weapon project was not that of a scientist but as a procurer of technology, equipment and materials from various European firms.

Obviously the CIA, which had an interest in Khan from 1975-86, should have continued its surveillance of him. Yet he was able to proliferate to Iran in 1987; North Korea, in 1994, and to Libya, in early 2000. US officials who were told by General Aslam Beg about Pakistani compulsions to proliferate to Iran presumably could not succeed in persuading the US administration to act to stop it. China continued its proliferation to Pakistan even after signing the NPT in 1992. The supply of 5,000 ring magnets in 1994 is on record.

The Indian nuclear effort is a natural reaction to nuclear China8217;s Maoist expansionism in the first phase and China-Pakistan proliferation with US blessings, in the second phase. The real problem of nuclear proliferation had its origin in China and European companies located both in nuclear weapon powers and other advanced nuclear powers. Khan8217;s proliferation was as an agent of European firms. The non-proliferation regime was gravely flawed because neither the nuclear weapon powers nor the advanced nuclear powers who were responsible for proliferation could be made accountable and penalised.

Today8217;s world is radically different from the earlier bipolar one. As US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated, 8220;For the first time since the peace of Westphalia in 1648, the prospect of violent conflict between great powers is becoming ever more unthinkable. Major states are increasingly competing in peace, not preparing for war. To advance this remarkable trend the United States is transforming our partnerships with nations such as Japan and Russia, with the European Union and specially with China and India. Together we are building a more lasting and durable form of global stability, a balance of power that favours freedom.8221;

India8217;s exceptionalisation with reference to NPT, now under discussion between the US and India and broadly endorsed by the UK, France, Russia and the IAEA, is part of this process of transcending the doctrines of the past and transforming volatile status quos that no longer serve our interests, in the words of Rice. It is realistic statecraft for a transformed world.

The logic of this strategic partnership has been spelt out both by Rice and US Under-secretary Nicholas Burns. Rice in her interview to the Bloomberg News on May 26, said 8220;In order for the United States to be competitive and to make certain that jobs are here, you have to have an environment in which this is the very best place to do business8230;And the President has talked about dealing not just with our near-term problems but with our long term liabilities; like social security which depressed the capacity of the United States to be over the long term, the very best place to do business. But India is a rising economic influence of power in the international system. It is a natural friend for the United States. I think it is emerging as a potentially very stabilising and positive force in international politics which is why we are spending a lot of time in that relationship.8221;

Under-Secretary Burns said on October 18, in his talk to the Asia Society 8216;8216;India is a rising global power. Within the first quarter of this century, it is likely to be numbered among the world8217;s five largest economies. It will soon be the world8217;s most populous nation and it has a demographic structure that bequeaths it a huge, skilled and youthful workforce8230;India will also be a natural partner to the US as we confront what will be the central security challenge of the coming generation8230;Terrorism, the proliferation of chemical , biological and nuclear technologies, international crime and narcotics, HIV/AIDS climate change 8212; our interests converge on all these issues.8221;

While the US administration looks at India as a partner in economic, technological and security fields, the one-dimensional non-proliferation specialists look at the Indo-US nuclear deal as a concession to be extended to a client state. Crucial strategic considerations are bound to prevail over other subordinate considerations. Over the last 15 years since India started building its arsenal, the build-up both in nuclear warheads and delivery platforms have been very modest, even according to the proliferation specialists. The US administration has concluded that India is a responsible nuclear power and a valuable partner in fields vital to US interests. Therefore the non-proliferation lobby is unlikely to significantly influence either the the US administration or the Congress, which will decide the issue on the basis of US strategic, economic and technological interests.

The writer is the chairman of the national task force on strategic developments