Now for some results

As Jaswant Singh and Strobe Talbott meet for the eighth round of non-proliferation talks, both sides have been at pains once again to dam...

As Jaswant Singh and Strobe Talbott meet for the eighth round of non-proliferation talks, both sides have been at pains once again to dampen expectations of any kind of breakthrough. As they explain it, there are no quick answers to a complex agenda. It is coming to be taken for granted that talking is what heavyweight foreign and security policy experts in both teams will be doing at regular intervals.

The good part of this business is that both are saying they are in it for the long haul. They are committed to a dialogue to resolve differences of perception on nuclear and missile issues. Both are also making an effort to put a positive spin on the process. Harmonisation8217; is the new buzz-word.

This is all very well and the process is certainly important and not least because the process qua process lends a sense of stability to the non-proliferation scenario worldwide.

Even so, it is essential to show more definite progress. The deadline for signing the CTBT is a few months away and US sanctions andblocking of multilateral loans are not doing the Indian economy too much good. In an interview to this newspaper, Jaswant Singh pointed out one of the gains so far. From the fact that the 8220;strident, prescriptive tones of the early days8221; are no longer heard, he says, it is evident there is clearer understanding of India8217;s position. That may well be true.

It is certainly true that hectoring precludes a sober dialogue and it is only through such a dialogue that Washington will learn what it needs to know about the facts of life in this part of the world. At the same time, changes of style 8212; from strident to diplomatic 8212; do not necessarily connote a change of agenda. US spokespersons have said time and again since the talks began that they are getting a better understanding of India8217;s security concerns and do not presume to tell sovereign nations what they should or should not do.

Nevertheless, Washington seeks assurances on Indian nuclear and missile restraint which go beyond the kind of assurances NewDelhi has already given and include a moratorium on nuclear testing, minimum nuclear deterrent and no-first-use policies. Jaswant Singh believes minimum deterrence 8220;is not a physical thing or a fixity in time8221;. It is a concept that alters with the security environment. He sees Washington8217;s concern with numbers of weapons and missiles and fears of an arms race as outmoded Cold War fixations.

If one were to translate this dialogue into ordinary, everyday language, it would mean New Delhi wants flexibility in its nuclear and missile programmes, and rightly so, whereas Washington wants specifics which it will then hope to treat as a cap on the Indian programme.

Story continues below this ad

There are major differences in other areas of the dialogue as well. For example, India cannot and should not accept a moratorium on the production of fissile material in advance of treaty negotiations on a universal freeze and stockpile reductions by the weapons states. Furthermore, evidence of nuclear restraint that India would like to seeelsewhere has not been forthcoming.

All in all, it is going to be a very long haul. Precisely for that reason the process needs to be reinforced by producing some real gains soon.