[Mb-civic] Commending the US-India pact - Karl Inderfurth, Walter Anderson - Boston Globe Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

  Commending the US-India pact

By Karl F. Inderfurth and Walter K. Anderson  |  April 23, 2006 |  The 
Boston Globe

A RECENT COVER of The Economist was scathing. Entitled ''George W. Bush 
in Dr. Strangedeal Or: How I learned to stop worrying and love my 
friend's bomb," it depicted the president playing the role of cowboy 
Slim Pickens in the Cold War film classic ''Dr. Strangelove," riding a 
nuclear-tipped missile.

While The Economist cover worked as satire, there is more to commend 
than condemn about the US-India civilian nuclear agreement. Rather than 
being a ''strangedeal," the agreement is actually a ''good deal" for the 
United States and global efforts to curb nuclear nonproliferation.

The nuclear agreement was first unveiled during the July 2005 visit to 
Washington of Prime Minister Manmahon Singh. Bush pledged to seek a 
change in US law that would make India an exception to the restrictions 
placed on civilian nuclear cooperation with countries that have not 
signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. India agreed to separate its 
civilian and military nuclear facilities, place the civilian ones (the 
large majority) under safeguards supervised by the International Atomic 
Energy Agency, and maintain its moratorium on further nuclear tests. 
India's ''Separation Plan" for its civilian and military programs was 
announced during Bush's recent visit to New Delhi.

This dramatic nuclear breakthrough was a necessary step to build the 
close relationship envisaged by many Americans who understand the 
growing strategic importance of India. A strong India is important for 
balance of power purposes in Asia and for providing stability in the 
volatile and strategically important Indian Ocean littoral area.

A cursory look at a map underscores the potential strategic importance 
of India. Jutting down 1,500 miles into the middle of the Indian Ocean, 
India is in a position to safeguard sea lanes that are used to transport 
more than half the world's oil and gas. The navies of the United States 
and India have begun to conduct joint exercises aimed against piracy, 
terrorism, and any other threats to seaborne traffic.

A strong India on its own will take steps to maintain a balance of power 
in Asia and to keep the sea lanes open. These goals do not require a 
military relationship with the United States and certainly not one that 
becomes an anti-Beijing alliance. That would be destabilizing and is not 
necessary. But a strong India is necessary to prevent the overwhelming 
dominance of any one country in Asia.

The US-India nuclear agreement also has a strong economic rationale. By 
2020 India could be the world's fastest-growing economy. To reach its 
economic potential, India must diversify its energy sources. A growing 
and prosperous India economy provides the United States trade and 
investment opportunities.

The agreement also has environmental advantages. Nuclear power is a 
clean energy source; fossil fuel is not. Moving India away from its 
dependence on Mideast oil is a plus for a cleaner global environment.

Finally, the agreement begins a long overdue move to bring India into 
the global nonproliferation regime. This is why Mohamed ElBaradei, the 
head of the International Atomic Energy Agency and recent recipient of 
the Nobel Peace Prize, has welcomed the nuclear agreement, as have 
leaders in Britain, France, Russia, and Australia.

The benefits of India being a global nonproliferation partner are 
already evident. India has aligned its nuclear export rules and 
practices with the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 45-member organization 
that seeks to limit the spread of nuclear weapons technology. India's 
decision twice to support the majority in the IAEA's votes expressing 
concern over Iran's nuclear intentions shows the importance of its 
enhanced nonproliferation posture.

The Bush administration now has the task of persuading Congress that the 
benefits of civilian nuclear cooperation with India outweigh the global 
nonproliferation risks. While there are proliferation pros and cons of 
this agreement, Congress will need to place this debate in a broader 
strategic context. India's emergence as a major global player will, 
according to the National Intelligence Council (the CIA's think tank), 
''transform the geopolitical landscape in the 21st century." It is time 
for the United States to build a lasting strategic relationship with India.

Karl F. Inderfurth is a former assistant secretary of state for South 
Asian affairs in the Clinton administration and is currently a professor 
at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington 
University. Walter K. Andersen is a former senior South Asia analyst at 
the State Department and is associate director of South Asian Studies at 
the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/04/23/commending_the_us_india_pact/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060423/203da4a6/attachment.htm