July 28, 2007 (LPAC)--On July 27, after two years and two days of negotiations, Washington and New Delhi announced that they have reached an agreement on the US-India nuclear deal which would enable the U.S., and others, to supply India with nuclear fuel and technologies which were under sanctions for almost 33 years. However, neither the United States nor India has released the text of the agreement. But Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns and the Indian negotiators in New Delhi did tell the press in Washington that the two have sorted out the two sticking points that were holding up the agreement.

The sticking points were: India has to abandon all hopes of carrying out another nuclear test and India cannot reprocess fuel it receives from outside (enriched uranium). India's contention was that China and Pakistan--two neighbors--are enhancing their nuclear weapons capabilities, therefore India cannot sign on dotted lines saying: "no test ever." The second point of contention is that India's thorium program needs plutonium to mutate thorium-232 to fissile uranium 233. Hence, India has to reprocess to obtain plutonium. It seemed, these two sticking points were unsolvable. Two months back Indians came up with a proposal saying that they would set up an exclusive reprocessing facility where all the foreign countries' fuel will be processed under IAEA safeguards for perpetuity. That means, all the plutonium produced will be under the IAEA safeguards "for ever."

There was a total silence on the nuclear test issue, other than a clause which says that the American President retains the right to nullify the agreement, take back all nuclear fuel and nuclear technologies if India violates the agreement in one form or the other. Burns claims the agreement did not violate the US Atomic Power Act as it was reflected in the Congress-approved Hyde Act. However, according to the Hyde Act, India being a non-signatory of the NPT cannot reprocess -- period. From the Indian side the nuclear test issue remains undefined, other than posing a threat that it would jeopardize India's nuclear program dependent on outside forces. Secondly, why any agreement has to be in "perpetuity", and how India will get the plutonium needed for its thorium program? What arrangement has been made on that? No one is answering these questions as of now.

The agreement has to go back to the US Congress and the Indian parliament has made it a point to look at the fine prints before they claim it to be a valid agreement. But under the Indian parliamentary system, the Parliament is not allowed to nullify the agreement. What it does allow is to politically threaten the existence of the Manmohan Singh, or any other, government, if national sovereignty is compromised.