Leak of Bush Letter on the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal Confirms EIR Warnings: the U.S. Has Unacceptable Conditions

September 4, 2008 (LPAC)--The Bush administration, through a gag order on its written responses to Congressional questions, had sought to keep the Indian public in the dark on the larger implications of the U.S.-India nuclear deal, the 123 Agreement, lest the accord run into rougher weather. But now the Admistration's 26 pages of written answers to congressional queries have been publicly released by U.S. Rep. Howard Berman. In a letter written by the Bush Administration to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, U.S. statements flatly contradict numerous assurances which the Indian government had made to the Lok Sabha (India's lower house of Parliament). As reported by Dr Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, these include:

 

• The U.S. has given no binding fuel-supply assurance to India. PM Manmohan Singh had told the Lok Sabha on August 13, 2007 that 'detailed fuel supply assurances' by the U.S. for `the uninterrupted operation of our nuclear reactors' are 'reflected in full' in the 123 Agreement. But the Bush administration letter states that the U.S. will render help only in situations where 'disruptions in supply to India... result through no fault of its own,' such as a trade war or market disruptions. 'The fuel supply assurances are not, however, meant to insulate India against the consequences of a nuclear explosive test or a violation of nonproliferation commitments,' the letter said.
• No U.S. consent to India's stockpiling of lifetime fuel reserves for safeguarded power reactors. The prime minister had told the Lok Sabha that, 'This Agreement envisages, in consonance with the Separation Plan, U.S. support for an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply for the lifetime of India's reactors.'
• The Bush letter states clearly that civil nuclear cooperation is explicitly conditioned to India not testing ever again. The prime minister told the Lok Sabha as recently as July 22, 2008 that, 'I confirm that there is nothing in these agreements which prevents us from further nuclear tests if warranted by our national security concerns. All that we are committed to is a voluntary moratorium on further testing.'

 

Other conflicts between the Bush letter and the Indian PM's assurances include the right for the U.S. to suspend supplies without consultation, the lack of any tie between perpetual inspection in India and perpetual supply from the U.S., and aspects of technology transfer.