Ashley J. Tellis, currently senior associate at the Washington D.C.-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, was one of the architects of the Indo-US nuclear deal in the Bush administration. Tellis, who is now advising Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s campaign, was early this week quoted by UK’s Financial Times as saying that the nuclear deal was dead. In an email interview with The Indian Express, Tellis terms such a judgement “premature” and shares his perspective on why the “deal can never die”.•You have been widely quoted as saying “the deal is dead.” Is it true?Actually, I never said the deal is dead. Paraphrasing what Mark Twain once said, I think rumours of the deal’s death have been widely exaggerated. Edward Luce’s piece in the Financial Times quoted some unnamed Bush Administration officials, who spoke on background, as saying that the deal is dead. In my view, such a judgment is premature.•Could you give me your sense of the prospects for the deal right now?I think the government of India will have to make some hard decisions on the deal soon. Even if it decides to proceed with the next step right away, that is, approach the IAEA board to approve the safeguards agreement, it will be difficult to complete all the remaining steps before the President leaves office if Congress takes the maximum time allowed by the law to finally vote on the 123 agreement. And, as you know, there are several interim steps that must be completed as well, the most important of which is securing NSG consent to treat India as the exception to the current guidelines. •Can all this be done in the remainder of the Bush Administration?It will be difficult, but not impossible. The saving grace is that both President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh are deeply committed to completing the deal. Most Indians clearly recognise that this deal is in their national interest: it gives them renewed access to international nuclear energy cooperation and it removes the debilitating technology denial burdens that have constrained India since 1974. The US Congress, which has been very supportive of the deal, and key international partners of the United States and India are also eager to complete this initiative when New Delhi shows itself ready to move forward. So I am, at least, hopeful that we will be able to complete this landmark initiative.•If the rest of the steps are not completed during the Bush term, will the deal die?I do not think so. Remember, whether the process is completed during the Bush term or not, the US Congress has already removed the critical legislative constraint to initiating civil nuclear cooperation with India. This was done with a bipartisan majority and it will survive both President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. That we have come this far is a tribute to the courage and vision of both these leaders. It is equally a tribute to the US Congress, which despite its initial reservations, opened the doors wide to a new partnership with India. So in the most important—and historic—sense, the deal can never die.•Does India lose then by waiting to complete the deal after President Bush leaves office?Yes, clearly. There are several risks to delaying completion of the remaining steps. To begin with, President Bush and Prime Minister Singh have personal stakes in this agreement because it is uniquely their own. You can be sure that they will expend their full energy to get this done right. Further, we have momentum on our side right now: the IAEA, the US Congress and the NSG are prepared to act quickly. It is simply impossible to foresee what the political circumstances, both domestically and internationally, may be a year or so from now and whether the currently favourable circumstances will continue to hold indefinitely. And, finally, a change of administration, both in the United States and in India, will mean new people coming into government. The loss of institutional memory, and possibly their lack of commitment to the deal, will increase the burdens of getting this done cleanly and expeditiously. Delay, therefore, is dangerous, even if it is not fatal. •What is the cleanest possible exemption, in your opinion, that India can hope for the Bush Administration to push at the NSG in its last year? Will it include a precondition that all cooperation will have to be terminated in case New Delhi were to test again?The Administration has stated clearly and publicly that it will seek a clean exception for India in the NSG. It simply cannot accept any decision that binds the President beyond what the US constitution and existing US law allows. So I expect that we will come out ok in the NSG.•John McCain has spelled out his broad approach on disarmament and non-proliferation. Do you expect him to be more accommodating to India in case he becomes president or would he take a position to not renegotiate what has already been negotiated by the Bush Administration? Do you see him move an amendment to the Hyde Act to address concerns of some sections in India in case he wins the polls? Conversely, do you expect him to add more conditions on India?Senator McCain understands clearly the merit of the civil nuclear agreement with India and India’s importance as a strategic partner of the United States. He prefers that this agreement be concluded expeditiously because the conditions are propitious for its successful conclusion right now. He hopes the government of India will perceive the situation in the same way. Senator McCain will aim to strengthen the US-Indian relationship further—not burden it—and, building on President Bush’s landmark achievement, take it to newer heights.
