Indo-US nuclear deal sparks new proposals in Congress

NEW YORK: The Bush administration’s proposed deal to aid India’s civilian nuclear program sparked tough questions on Thursday at a key hearing on the House International Relations Committee with at least two representatives floating their own proposals.

Tom Lantos, ranking democrat on the committee, touched on the US administration’s worst fears by pointing out that the agreement lacked the wide support it needs to move through Congress this year.  He said he “strongly supported” the passage of the nuclear deal but wanted to bridge sharply “polarised views” in Congress by coming out with a “legislative compromise.”

Lantos' draft legislation would assure an expedited up or down vote on the agreement after the negotiations are completed and India's proposed nuclear safeguards are submitted to lawmakers.

“My legislation puts the Congress on record explicitly welcoming the agreement, but Congress would not immediately make all the legislative changes to help the deal’s implementation,” Lantos told the hearing, adding that he would take up his proposal with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice next week.

“We will vote on the bilateral nuclear energy agreement once the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards agreement is finalised. This vote would occur in a month, 6 months or a year from now. Politics is the art of compromise and neither the US administration or India will get all they seek under my compromise,” he added.

The hearing took place against the backdrop of Congressman Howard Berman -- a senior Democrat on the Committee and a member of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans -- circulating a stunning 'Dear Colleague' letter that is ominous for the Indian nuclear deal.

“I put out a “Dear Colleague” letter …I want to concentrate on fissile material. Most experts, liberal and conservative believe this deal will enable India to increase its fissile material for nuclear weapons,” Berman told the hearing.

Berman wants India to renounce its nuclear weapons; “My legislation will establish a set of objective conditions that a non-NPT country must meet to become eligible for civilian nuclear cooperation with the US. Some of these conditions will be difficult to meet.” 

Key architect of the India-US nuclear deal Ashley J Tellis, senior associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, warned that the current agreement was hanging in “very delicate balance.” He said that some of the new proposals had their merits but “some objectives might be unrealistic.”

Before Tellis testified before the House International Relations Committee the proposal got bipartisan support from at least six representatives, including New York Democrat Gary Ackerman, Senior Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe who represents Arizona, Joe Wilson and other members of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans.

Representative Jim Kolbe, the Republican chairman of a House subcommittee that finances foreign programs, testified that ''India developed their nuclear program outside of the NPT and has been an honest broker and ally to the US by adhering to the principles of the agreement,'' Kolbe said in support of the deal.

However, there was a chorus of opposition from leading Democrats Adam Schiff and Diane Watson of California, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Howard Berman.

According to power brokers on Capitol Hill it is nothing but politics. Most Democrats who have raised objections to the deal want stronger relations with India, but won’t hand Bush a foreign policy coup so close to the November elections. Mark India’s longtime friend Hillary Clinton’s deafening silence on the nuclear subject.