BEFORE GETTING the nod from the Senate Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice has said that India will face grave consequences besides several bans that may follow later.
Rice wrote to Senate majority leader Harry Lead saying that Bush administration is willing to pass the bill without any fresh amendments.
Setting aside doubts of a few senators against the reliability of India and the impact of a test after the deal, she has pointed out the affirmation by India to the US in 2005 and the recent reiteration to the international community in September 2008.
It is evident that India has obligations under the deal and indirectly solemnised that it won’t conduct any nuclear test as committed to the international community.
The opposition continuously criticizes the government for not disclosing such a commitment to the domestically and repeatedly keeps saying that it has not lost the right to conduct a nuclear test.
Rice’s visit to India on the October 4 would witness widespread opposition as Left and other parties’ will fiercely oppose the deal on account of subjugating Indian interests to the US.
American interests does not rest with limiting India on nuclear power but to control proliferation of danger to other minor but potential countries such as North Korea, Pakistan and Iran.
Now, Pakistan claims to be allowed to carry out such deal with its long time and reliable ally China. North Korea obviously developed its nuclear and missile technologies with help from Pakistan and China.
The trio could play a vital role in spearheadingnuclear campaign to other aspirants like Iran, Syria and South Africa in a clandestine manner or through a deal transparently.
The deal has paved the way for an argument of fair play by treating all partners equally and claims the right to make such deals with favourite nations.
Therefore, it has opened up a Pandora’s Box instead of containing nuclear proliferation across the globe.
The Indian position on nuclear arms ceased to be relevant after Pakistan and China seriously started to endanger free and fearless sovereignty and existence.
India’s restraint over the nuke option came under further strain following heavy militarization of Pakistan by the US on the eve of USSR’s invasion in Afghanistan. The Jihadi war enabled Pakistan to procure arms beyond its requirement to arm Mujahideen forces that fought against the Soviet Army. Later the same arms were given to Kashmir groups and Sikh terrorists for internal strife in India.
A similar situation seems to be arising once again as 9/11, 2001 WTC attack enabled
Pakistan to accumulate large scale weapons and other aids that is diverted against India. This has become evident from US government agency reports.
Hence, nuclear arms are a counter strategy and India could face dire situations threatening its security.
However, the deal ceases to provide co-operation for civilian use and asks the nation to divide civilian and defence facilities. It will expose major defence installations to rival countries and become prime target of terrorist attacks.
The deal thus endangers Indian security rather than giving energy infrastructures and resources for faster development. By preventing India from further tests it corners the nation from holding a secret weapons programme. It also does not ensure US support if there is any nuclear attacks on the nation by rivals following serious confrontations that may emerge in future.
Through the deal just by increasing power-energy resources up to 5 per cent in the next 10 years India has risked its vital security strategy.
Therefore the real beneficiaries of the deal are US and its best allies Pakistan and China, definitely not India in the existing global political aspirations.