Obstacle Race for India

There is no clue yet on whether India will get a waiver at the forthcoming meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.

By Rashmi Saksena

Visiting US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher decided to call off a date with senior Indian journalists in New Delhi at the very last minute. The invitation, issued a week ahead of the August 27 lunch, was recalled on the eve of the luncheon meeting. The official explanation handed out for the sudden cancellation was ‘scheduling problems’. But sources disclosed that the real reason was apprehension that Boucher may say something which if misinterpreted could adversely impact NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) discussions on a waiver for India on the Indo-US nuclear deal at its next session to be held on September 4-5 in Vienna.

It is not only Washington which stands committed to working with New Delhi in getting an exemption from NSG for India to enable it to buy fuel and technology for its civilian nuclear programme, that is playing it safe during the run-up to the crucial Vienna meeting. Even countries like Austria and New Zealand as well as others known to have taken a hard line against the waiver at the August 21-22 NSG closed door session, have clamped down on making statements on the subject. The meeting failed to come up with a consensus on permitting India to source nuclear supplies from NSG members.

When contacted by CURRENT, officials representing these countries in New Delhi refused to speak on why they opposed the exemption India was seeking and what sort of changes in the draft that came up for discussion in the last session would satisfy them. A spokesperson at the New Zealand High Commission candidly stated that none other than their Minister for Disarmament back home was authorised to comment on the matter at this juncture. No one wants any ‘verbal accidents’ when “the finer points are being negotiated”, pointed out a source in the Indian foreign office.

It is evident that NSG discussions on India’s waiver are at a most delicate stage when each word has to be weighed. While India is confident the waiver will not be blocked at the forthcoming NSG session, it is sure that the 45-member body*, that aims to prevent nuclear exports for commercial and peaceful purposes from being used to make nuclear weapons, will suggest conditions for India to adhere to if it wishes member countries to restart civilian nuclear commerce with it.

Understandably, New Delhi is keeping the focus on the modifications that NSG is expected to ask for and the language used. “The modifications should be optic and not substantial. Only then will they be acceptable,” disclosed a senior source in South Block. “Each word will be compared to the July 2005 joint statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President George W Bush.”

The Congress-led Manmohan Singh Government as well as the Congress itself has ample reason to be concerned about how the modifications and conditions suggested by NSG at its coming session will be perceived at home. “Perceptions matter a great deal. If we are perceived as giving in too much we will be accused of a sell-out. On the other hand, if we are perceived as successfully sticking to our declared bottomline, we can tout it as a diplomatic triumph. India’s increased political clout in the world and its economic growth makes other countries recognise it as a rising power. It can be converted into an asset to work to our advantage in the next national elections,” disclosed a senior Congress leader and strategist.

The Manmohan Singh government, which has already paid a political price over the Indo-US nuclear deal by breaking with its Left coalition partner and instead working out a more precarious arrangement to retain the Treasury bench, is looking to project the expected NSG waiver as an important achievement when its performance is reviewed by the domestic voter. It is not only India that is concerned with the fallout of the language and changes expected to be incorporated during the coming NSG session in the draft that came up for discussion at its earlier meeting. The countries that had earlier taken a hard line on granting an exemption to India, but have now for strategic and commercial reasons scaled down their opposition, too are being careful with words.

“It is all about getting the wording right while rewriting the NSG guidelines that would make it possible for India to procure nuclear materials, equipment and technology. While an exception is made in the case of India, it should not look like a complete give-in. Countries which have opposed the waiver should be able to take back home something which they can sell to their people. It is the ultimate diplomatic game,” said a veteran diplomat on promise of anonymity.

This becomes very relevant in the case of New Zealand and Austria two major opponents in the NSG to India’s waiver. New Zealand has a history of taking a hard line on the nuclear issue. It talked tough when France used South Pacific as a testing ground for its nuclear tests. It banned US warships from coming to New Zealand ports if they did not declare that they were not carrying nuclear weapons. New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark (Labour Party) has made it evident through her Foreign Minister that India should agree to a ban on further nuclear tests if NSG guidelines have to be modified to give it a waiver.

While New Zealand has concentrated on a ban on further testing by India, Austria has spoken about a ban on transfer of ENR (enrichment and reprocessing) technology, materials and equipment to India. For New Delhi this is more worrisome than a ban on further testing. Without ENR technology, materials and equipment India will not be able to scale up its nuclear civilian programme.

Sources in the Congress accept that while a ban on further testing is less of a concern for the programme than denial of ENR technology, it remains politically crucial. “Acceptance of a ban will not go down well with our people and the opposition parties will call it a sell-out.” In this context, India would like to see non-binding guidelines coming from the NSG and its members left with the option of dealing with India on a bilateral basis.

Parleys pre-NSG sessions and even before the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) meeting  with countries taking a tough stand vis-a-vis waiver for India have made it clear that economic and trade considerations are a factor which have led them to soften their stand. India is learnt to have made it clear to countries like Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Ireland and others who have investment and financial interests here that if they continue to block New Delhi at the NSG sessions there will be economic and political repercussions.

At the same time, Japan and China are learnt to have decided not to oppose India for strategic reasons. China fears that going against India will just further drive New Delhi closer to the US. Japan would like to keep India as a strategic partner and a counterweight to China. Australia, Canada and Brazil, while expressing concern, have reportedly assured India that they will not stand in its way.