N-deal: Over to the US Congress

The approval, in effect, means changing the relevant Sections of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which were amended in 1978. Sections 123, 128 and 129 prohibit the sale of nuclear technology to any country, which has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which refuses to allow full-scope safeguards under the treaty and which develops new nuclear weapons and carries nuclear tests.

The Bush Administration is understood to have already drafted the new legislation amending the Act. It is expected to be tabled before Congress soon.

A spokesman of the House International Relations Committee Chairman, Henry J. Hyde, told The Indian Express that the hearing schedule on the deal was under discussion with the White House.

When it comes up for hearing before this Committee, and subsequently goes to the Congress for legislative approval, the deal is expected to be put under vigorous scrutiny by US lawmakers.

An indication of this comes from the statement Hyde made after the deal was signed in New Delhi last Thursday. “It is the responsibility of this Committee to thoroughly examine the provisions of this agreement and its potential consequences for the US interests and those of the international community,” he said.

Similar statements are coming from other key American lawmakers too, even though Congress is eventually expected to approve the deal.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said he believes Congress would support the agreement. At the same time Frist said Congress would like to have a detailed briefing from the administration about the deal’s implication for non-proliferation, which is an issue of concern for it.

Senator Joe Biden, a Democrat on Foreign Relations Committee, said the Administration “must show” Congress that the nuclear agreement would make the US more secure, and that it would not cause other countries to question their own commitment to non-proliferation because of perceived US “double standards”.

Biden was quick to point out the statement Under Secretary of State Nicholas R Burns made in India that the agreement would not have an impact on India’s nuclear weapons programme. “Congress must examine the agreement in detail to evaluate its implications for nuclear non-proliferation. The bottom line question is: does this deal make us more secure, or less secure?” Biden said.

Two Congressmen, Democratic Chief Deputy Whip Joseph Crowley and Joe Wilson — two past co-chairs of Congressional caucus on India and Indian Americans — in a letter have urged Congress colleagues to accept the provisions of the Indo-US deal without delay or additional conditionality.

Even opponents of Bush have come forward to support the agreement. Gary Ackerman, Democratic co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and the Indian-Americans and a senior member of the House International Relations Committee, said in a statement: “Although I strongly differ with Bush on a broad range of issues both domestically and internationally, I agree with him on the subject of the US-India nuclear deal. India is worthy of a new era of cooperation with the US on civilian use of nuclear power and the agreement is the right strategic choice,” Ackerman said.

The number of Congressmen opposing the deal is not many. Representative Edward J. Markey is the one who is definitely working on these lines. He is the co-chair of the Bipartisan Task Force on Non-proliferation and senior Democrat on House Energy and Commerce Committee. In December, he introduced a resolution in the Congress opposing the nuclear deal with India and has gone to the extent of terming it as a historic failure.

He fears that other nations might ask for a similar treatment. “The ink on this agreement has barely dried and already Pakistan is asking for the very same special treaty that Bush has carved out for India,” he said.

The Bush Administration has already denied giving similar treatment to Pakistan or any other country. It is working overtime to ensure that nuke-deal and the coming legislation make provision for a one-time India-specific exemption and that it is not considered as a precedent for any other country in the future.