However long the list of India’s civilian nuclear facilities that Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran might hand over to visiting US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns on tomorrow, one plant would definitely not find a place on it: the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS).
As India prepares to finalise its nuclear separation plan in the talks with the US over the next two days, MAPS could emerge as the main source of plutonium for India’s nuclear weapon programme.
Keeping MAPS out of the civilian list would ensure that there is adequate production of weapons-useable plutonium for future security needs.
While the Government has made up its mind that MAPS would not be on the civilian list, it has been debating in recent days the number of power reactors that could go on to the list and eventually under international safeguards. India has eleven unsafeguarded power reactors under operation, including the two at MAPS, and several under construction.
Besides the question of which power reactors should go on to the civilian list, the Government has also been discussing whether they should go under safeguards in one shot or over a period of time as confidence is generated between India and the international community.
Concerns for intellectual property rights have made the Department of Atomic Energy reluctant to put its prototype fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam and other research facilities under the civilian list. India might, however, be prepared to change their designation once the technology is commercially proven.
‘We will take Iran to UNSC’
|
|||||
• US Under Secretary for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns today said his country would ask the IAEA to refer the Iran nuclear programme to the UNSC. |
|||||
The unique history of MAPS, however, makes it very special. Located at Kalpakkam near Chennai, MAPS hosts two reactors that began operations in 1983 and 1985. They were also India’s first indigenously built reactors. The Department of Atomic Energy has recently completed refurbishing these two reactors, which are expected to be around for at least two more decades. When Pakistan surprised India with its clandestine nuclear weapons programme in the late 1970s, MAPS provided the much needed insurance that Delhi would not fall behind Islamabad in the production of critical material for nuclear weapons. Dedicating MAPS, which has a capacity of 340 MW, for military plutonium production should dispel all concerns in India that the nuclear deal with the US would “cap” the size of the nation’s atomic arsenal.
India’s other sources of weapons grade plutonium have been two research reactors at Trombay-Cirus (40MW) which started operating from 1960 and Dhruva (100MW) which came on stream only in 1985. Saran’s talks with Burns this week are the fourth in a series of discussions on implementing the historic nuclear pact signed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W Bush last July in Washington.
Under the pact, the Bush Administration agreed to modify its domestic laws and win international support in favour of full civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India. New Delhi, in turn, promised to separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities and place the former under international safeguards. Saran and Burns hope to arrive at a mutual understanding on the nature of India’s separation plan as well as the contours of the legislation that Bush Administration plans to introduce in the US Congress to facilitate nuclear cooperation with India. An agreement on these issues would help begin the implementation of the July pact barely weeks before President Bush arrives in India in early March. Besides the Bush Administration, Russia and France, which favour nuclear cooperation with India, are also keen to have a credible separation plan from New Delhi that would allow them to join the US in pressing for making a nuclear exception for India.
Meanwhile, the Iranian nuclear defiance of the international system is also expected to figure prominently in the Saran-Burns talks. Burns is likely to seek Indian support at the International Atomic Energy Agency in referring the Iran nuclear dossier to the UN Security Council.