ON THE OTHER VOTE IN THE SENATE

TRANSITIONS

The Senate passed an important piece of legislation that'll likely pay positive dividends for the country for decades to come.  I'm not talking about the bailout plan that sailed through the august body yesterday, but a Nuclear trade deal with India, that as the Washington Post explains, is a pretty big deal (image source):

"The Senate last night approved a historic agreement that opens up nuclear trade with India for the first time since New Delhi conducted a nuclear test three decades ago, giving the Bush administration a significant foreign policy achievement in its final months.

The bill, which passed 86 to 13, goes to President Bush for his signature, handing the chief executive a rare victory that both advocates and foes say will reverberate for decades. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who conceived of the deal, have pushed hard for it from the earliest weeks of the president's second term."

"...Supporters, moreover, argue that the deal will help India become a responsible world power and will forge ties between two large democracies that have had an antagonistic relationship. With an agreement in hand, India has said it plans to spend $14 billion on reactors and other nuclear equipment next year, though France and Russia are also expected to be key suppliers."

The article does a good job covering the pro and con positions of many on either side of this deal, and there are many reasons why this deal gives pause to many Americans. 

The deal also saw a good deal of political opposition in India, almost derailing the administration of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the process.  As this article from the Times of India illustrates, this deal is viewed as an achievement to be proud of in India:

"Three decades of nuclear apartheid that New Delhi had been subjected to, ended, appropriately enough, on Gandhi Jayanti (day) in India. Ejected from the train of nuclear elites and their submissive groupies following its experimental 1974 nuclear test, and hounded and ostracized since then for its infractions, including the five 1998 tests, India has got back on board, with a helping hand from Uncle Sam.

The final Senate vote on Wednesday that approved the US-India civilian nuclear agreement was a foregone conclusion, as was the thumping 86-13 margin. But what was striking was the across the board support that found even rival presidential candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama, besides a host of heavyweights on both sides of the aisle such as Hillary Clinton, Richard Lugar, and Joe Biden, backing the deal on what was a momentous day for more than one reason..."

"To be sure, the final legislation was not everything that New Delhi -- particularly the critics -- wanted or bargained for. Non-proliferation gurus ensured that there were multiple checks and balances that will dissuade India from nuclear testing (except perhaps in supreme national interest). And the path to acquiring the full range of new technologies will be hard, expensive, and subject to end-use scrutiny at every turn.

In fact, the final legislation is titled "United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act," in recognition of its strong non-proliferation bias. But its strategic heft is implicit in the very conception of the deal, which makes India the only country in the world that has not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and yet gets to keep its nuclear weapons and is permitted to undertake nuclear trade.

In another words -- a de facto nuclear weapons state almost on par with the five de jure nuclear powers."

Ultimately, the deal marks an important transition point in the relation between our two countries, mostly for the positive.  It surely requires trust on both sides, especially in our mutual long-term actions and intentions. 

And seeing this trust at a time when it's currently so scarce globally in the financial side, is especially encouraging.

Comments

[Alex Tolley]

While I'm sure this is a good thing, why is the US dealing with a non-signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty? The consequences, like "pre-emptive war" are significant, as it means other nuclear acquiring states will hold up this deal as an example of not needing to sign on. I fear it will open a new Pandora's Box in this sphere.