N-deal’s first global trust vote today

IAEA sources said the safeguards text is likely to be approved by consensus but in the highly unlikely event of a vote, Pakistan may well abstain. IAEA decisions are usually taken by consensus except when the Iran’s controversial nuclear programme came up for vote.

Sources said the crucial meeting will see statements delivered by the Indian and US Ambassadors to the IAEA as well as by the nuclear watchdog’s Director General Mohammed ElBaradei.

Pushing for approval of the safeguards text, the US declared yesterday that the pact was a net gain for global non-proliferation. The pact would place India’s declared civilian nuclear energy plants —14 of 22 existing or planned reactors — under regular IAEA surveillance. US Ambassador to the IAEA Gregory L Schulte said the pact was sound.

“Board members have had ample time to study the agreement and ask questions of India and the IAEA inspectorate,” Shulte said. “The agreement is a sound one, based on the IAEA”s approved safeguards system,” he said, adding that “Friday will constitute a major step forward in the wider effort to erase differences” between India and the world.

Once the safeguards pact is cleared, India must win an unprecedented waiver from the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The NSG meeting is expected to be held here around August 21.

Atomic Energy Commission Chief Anil Kakodkar and other top nuclear officials are here for negotiations on the safeguards agreement and an Additional Protocol to be cleared by the IAEA and to convince NSG members to give New Delhi a “clean” waiver for implementation of the Indo-US nuclear deal.

ENS adds: The safeguards agreement has come under fresh attack, this time from an advocacy group which has urged the Board of Governors not to approve the agreement in its present form. In a letter circulated to the Board members 48 hours before the text comes up for approval, the Arms Control Organisation has asked members to clarify provisions relating to the termination of the safeguards agreement, specifically whether they allow India to unilaterally withdraw its nuclear material and facilities from safeguards.

“Indian officials have suggested that India could terminate IAEA safeguards if fuel supplies are cut off and/or take other unspecified ‘corrective actions’ even if suppliers suspend or terminate nuclear exports to India because New Delhi renews nuclear testing,” the letter said.

“IAEA Board members should reject such an interpretation, which is inconsistent with the articles of the agreement that specify the grounds for terminating or suspending safeguards,” it said.

Though the organisation does not have any official sanction, sources said the idea was to put pressure on the IAEA secretariat and extract a statement saying unilateral withdrawal was indeed not possible.

“It is absolutely essential that the IAEA Board members obtain an official clarification of the legal effect of the agreement and that the Government of India publicly agrees to the terms and conditions under which safeguards on nuclear material and nuclear facilities subject to the agreement may be terminated, before the Board takes a decision,” the letter said.

The organisation also said it was important that India explained what “corrective actions” it envisaged to take in case of disruption of fuel supplies. “If India takes the position that such corrective measures may involve the termination of the safeguards agreement or the application safeguards to certain facilities, IAEA Board members should reject this interpretation and move to strike the “corrective measures” reference,” it said.