nuclear agreement

INDO-USA NUCLEAR AGREEMENT

Matter Around Us

All matter around us is composed of compounds or mixture of many compounds or mixture of compounds and elements or mixture of elements only. Matter exists in three states i.e. solid or liquid or gas.

Simplest form of matter which can not be further divided into simpler matters by any physical or chemical process is called ELEMENT. So far, 112 elements have been identified. Elements are broadly classified as metals and non-metals.

Smallest particle of an element is termed as ATOM. Atom can not be viewed with naked eye. A microscope of high magnifying power is needed to see an atom. Atoms of some elements have independent existence and some atoms do not have independent existence. But all atoms take part in chemical reaction.

Atoms which do not have independent  existence exist in the form of cluster of atoms. Such a cluster is termed as MOLECULE.

 A molecule may have atoms of same element, or may contain atoms of different elements. A molecule containing atoms of different elements is termed as CMPOUND of those elements.

Atomic Structure

Scientists studied the structure of atom. In 1808, John Dalton put up his Atomic theory. As per DALTON’S ATOMIC THEORY, atom is the smallest particle of an element, and atom can not be further divided into sub-particles.

Lord Rutherford, in 1`911 discovered that an atom has a nucleus. Nucleus is a small region at the centre of the atom.

James Chadwick, in 1932, established that an atom consists of sub-particles i.e. protons, electrons and neutrons.

Bases on the findings, MODERN ATOMIC THEORY  was formulated. Modern atomic theory overrules the Dalton’s atomic theory. It says, ‘Atom is divisible. Atom can be divided into sub-particles i.e. protons, electrons and neutrons.’

PROTON is a positively charged particle present in the nucleus of an atom. Each proton has one unit of positive (+ve) charge.

ELECTRON is a negatively charged particle revolving around nucleus. Each electron possesses one unit of negative (-ve) charge. The path of revolution of electron around the nucleus is termed as shell.

Number of electrons revolving around the nucleus is equal to the number of protons in the nucleus. Thus the charge of the atom is balanced.

NEUTRON  is a combination of one proton and one electron. It is neutral in charge i.e. neutron has no charge. Neutron exists in the nucleus.

ATOMIC NUMBER is the number of protons present in the nucleus. The atomic number also indicates the number of electrons revolving around the nucleus.  Atomic number of an atom is denoted by letter Z.

MASS NUMBER  of an atom is the total number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. It is denoted by the letter A.

Z and A together identify an element.

Z and A of the element Hydrogen are one. It means, hydrogen atom has one proton and one electron and it has no neutron.

Z of the element Uranium is 92 and it’s A is 238. it means uranium atom has 92 protons and (238-92=) 146 neutrons.

Nuclear Fission

Dalton said atom is indivisible.  Modern atomic theory stated atom is divisible and contains nucleus and revolving electrons. Zealous scientists continued their experiments to interrupt the nucleus. They found, when  the nucleus of an atom is interrupted, it gets broken into parts while a huge amount of heat energy is liberated, this heat energy may be utilized in boilers to raise steam which can be used to run the turbines to generate electricity. This process is called nuclear fission which is carried out in the reactors.

 When was nuclear fission technology born?

First experiment to divide the nucleus was successful in 1938 in Berlin, Germany. By the Second World War, many countries undertook quick programs to build nuclear reactors. Some countries produced plutonium. Plutonium was used in ‘Fatman’ nuclear bomb dropped on Nagasaki in Japan in 1942. Making bomb was main motive; side by side they tried to generate electricity.

When was first nuclear power generated?

Only 100 kW (Kilowatt) nuclear power was generated in 1951. Commercial scale nuclear power of 5 MW (Megawatt) was produced and added to the power grid in Russia in 1954.  There were about 400 reactors producing 350 GW (Gigawatt) nuclear power by 2005. Initially, generation of nuclear power increased very fast. It was 1 GW in 1960, 100 GW in 1970, went up to 300 GW in 1980. But, the generation was slowed down to 350 GW in 2005.

Why was generation of nuclear power slowed down?

Construction of nuclear reactors is costly. Secondly, due to the fear of ill-effects if there were accidents in the reactors was also the cause. Problem of disposal of waste coming out of the reactors was another reason. Accident in reactor in ‘Three Mile’ island in America in 1979 and accident in nuclear power plant in Chernobyl in Russia during  1986 created fear  and resulted in stoppage of building new reactors apart from closure of  existing reactors producing 35 GW.

In which country there are more nuclear reactors now? 

There are about 100 reactors in USA generating 20% of their power demand. In France, there are 55 reactors producing 75% demand. In India, 2.5 GW nuclear power was produced in 2005. It was only 3% of the total demand. The demand goes up considerably by 2025. Nuclear power generation in India is very meager, mainly due to shortage of fuel uranium.

What is meant by separation of nuclear reactors?

Energy generated by nuclear fission can either be used for generation of electricity or for making bombs. Reactors engaged in power generation are called CIVIL reactors, and those engaged in production of bombs are called MILITARY reactors.  This classification of reactors is called separation. Uranium is the fuel for both. There is shortage of uranium in India. There are more sources of uranium in Canada, USA, Australia, South Africa etc.

What is NPT?

USA, Russia, UK, France, and China are the permanent members of the Security Council of United Nations. These nations framed a treaty called ‘Nuclear Proliferation Treaty’ (NPT) in July 1968. As per this treaty, the permanent members of Security Council should reduce their stock of nuclear weapons. Also, they should not supply technology to any other countries to produce nuclear weapons. This means to say, other countries other than permanent members should not produce or possess nuclear weapons. However, other countries can produce nuclear power for peaceful purposes. UN insisted upon all other countries of the world to sign NPT.  187 countries have signed. India, Pakistan, Israel and Cuba have not signed NPT.

Why has India not signed NPT?

China on the virtue of its permanent membership in the Security Council is officially allowed to possess nuclear weapons though limited stock. The experience of India with China is bitter, particularly after 1962 war. Moreover, China clandestinely has been equipping Pakistan, another neighbour of India with nuclear weapons. Thus, the intentions of China are quite clear, even to the whole world. NPT does not provide any security to the countries like India. So, India did not like to bind itself by signing NPT and decided to go nuclear for self defense. India did not beg any superpower to clandestinely provide nuclear technology and without any outside help, it developed nuclear bomb and conducted the test successfully in 1974 at Pokhran.  This is known as Pokhran -I.  Then, Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister.

By Pokhran-I, India invited frown of wrath of USA, the big brother of the world. USA established a tightly controlled Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to prevent India from import of nuclear fuel or technology from any country of the world. Though not explicitly expressed the fear by the action of USA, India withheld further tests silently.

Nuclear behavior of India

India is non-signatory of NPT. It conducted a nuclear weapon test. The entire world was watching the further moves of India suspiciously. But India is a piece-loving country. It had freed itself from the clutches of foreign rulers only by non-violent struggle.. Such being the case, why India conducted Pokhran-I ?  Answer is simple. That Pokhran-I was only for self defense and to tell the world that India can not be cowed down to sit idle seeing the clouds of nuclear weapons on its borders. But India’s nuclear behavior has been very much disciplined, better than any signatory of NPT. To prove its policy, India again conducted Pokhran-II in May 1998, when Atal Behari Vajapayee was Prime Minister. After 24 years, India proved again to the world that India favours to equip with nuclear weapon capability for self defense and not with any intension of imperialism. Immediately after Pokhran-II, India declared, ‘India will never be the first user of its nuclear weapons against any country.’

But the big brother, USA did not bother to visualize the concerns of India. The eyes of Bill Clinton, then president of USA became red and commented, ‘By conducting nuclear test, India dug its own grave.’ He ordered to stop supply of uranium to Tarapur nuclear power plant.. India was the target of Global opprobrium. UN Security Council passed resolution No. 1172 of June 1998. It reflected ire of big five who form the core of NSG.

Offing of Indo-USA nuclear agreement

One decade passed after Pokhran-II. Political scenario of the world changed. During 2001, USA suffered terrorist attack on its WTG (World Trade Centre), business center of USA and Pentagon, heart of defense of USA. USA suffered a huge loss of men and material by this attack. USA was really threatened by this attack and the prestige of their country was degraded. India also had to face terrorist attack on its parliament house, if the attack was successful, the democracy of India would have collapsed. But, India had effectively foiled the attack and saved its democracy. A few brave soldiers had to sacrifice their life for the sake of the nation. By this, USA might have realized its limitations. Side by side, USA was noticing that the influence of Russia in South Asia was going down and China growing stronger economically and militarily. USA suspected, China may be a threat to them in future and India only can counter China. While on this, USA might have repented for their actions till then by arming Pakistan militarily and economically and indirectly trying to pulling back India.

USA deemed it necessary to help India to progress fast. Development of India is retarded due to shortage of power. In such a situation, USA felt it is necessary to tide over the shortage of power in India by supplying uranium to enable India to generate sufficient nuclear power. USA has sufficient uranium and can help India.

Indo-USA Nuclear Agreement

The idea of nuclear agreement between India and USA was conceptualized by USA. There may be several reasons like economical, strategical, political and military considerations. On the other hand, India being very hungry for uranium, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh  calculated the benefits of such an agreement to India. He felt, surely there would be no harm to the country. He reciprocated to the proposal favorably. The agreement reflected in the form of joint statement of him with President Bush at the end of Singh’s visit to USA during July 2005.

Energy generated by nuclear fission may be used for generation of electricity or for making bombs. The proposed agreement of US was to supply uranium for production of power in India and not at all for making bombs. ‘Indians reactors engaged in power generation should be identified and their requirement of fuel should be met by US under the supervision of International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA)’ was the essence of the agreement.

Anil Kakodkar was then the chairman of Indian Atomic-Energy Commission (IAC). Also, he was the secretary of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) of govt. of India. He was the senior most official in the country’s nuclear firmament. He was strongly involved in the bilateral nuclear negotiations. In fact, he was the one who prepared framework for civilian nuclear co-operation and laid down in writing for the visit of the Prime Minister during July 2005. He came to know that USA intends to bring in drastic changes in the draft agreement drawn by him. His worry was that the changes suggested by USA are harmful to India. He expressed his concern in an interview to a national daily during February 2006. He stated that there is difference of opinion between India and USA about classification of Indian reactors as civil and military. Kakodkar’s outbursts caused embarrassment to  the government. Former foreign secretary Venkateshwaran etc also aired similar views. The scientists felt the separation of reactors into civil and military segments should be the prerogative of India.

Negotiations on the agreement

During March 2006, President Bush visited India. Then, negotiations were held regarding the rights and obligations of both the countries under the proposed agreement. There were five Indian representatives in the Indian team of negotiation. Foreign secretary, Sham Saran was the leader. Manmohan Singh had advised three directives to the team:

1)      Should not deviate from the joint  statement of  July 2005.

2)      The agreement should not affect the program of nuclear weapons of India

3)      Our scientists should be happy with the agreement

Negotiations started. Nicolas Burn, under secretary, USA was their leader. It was closed-door negotiation.  Exact details of the negotiation were not available. The probable extract of the negotiations were;

   USA- All Indian reactors generating electricity should be under the supervision of

             IAEA.

   India- No. Some reactors in India are engaged in generating electricity as well as     

               engaged in the production of weapons. Hence, all reactors in wholesale

               can not be classified as civil reactors. We have given a list of 14 reactors.

               Only those reactors will be subjected to IAEA supervision.

    USA- All future reactors will be civil reactors and shall be inspected by IAEA.

    India- Let us not discuss about future reactors now. Right of classification of

                Future reactors shall be reserved with India. Present discussions are

                limited to the present reactors only.

    USA - All reactors as per your list given to us shall be permanently under IAEA

                inspection.

     India – If supply of uranium to these reactors is permanent, they shall be

                permanently under IAEA inspection. On any reason, supply should not be

                stopped. If the supply is stopped, India shall have the right to terminate

                the agreement.

     USA – Fast Breeder (FBR) reactor should be under IAEA inspection.

     India – Fast Breeder reactors are not civil reactors. They come under military

                 segment. They are out side IAEA jurisdiction.

To overcome the shortage of uranium, India has made special use of fast breeder reactors which use highly concentrated or enriched fuel to generate more fissile material than they consume. One of the byproduct is plutonium which is the key fissile material at the heart of India’s weapons program.

 Negotiations were tough, but Bush desired that the agreement should be finalized within few hours. The agreement was signed on the same day in the meeting held  in the Hyderabad House in New Delhi.

.

 

Reaction about the agreement in both the countries

For and against opinions were expressed in both the countries.

In India:

Indian Muslims felt that George Bush was against Islam. Congress party feared of loosing Muslim votes.

Scientists in India disliked inspection of Indian reactors.

Left party in India felt hurt. Traditionally, they are against the West,. particularly against USA.Wharever China says or does, it is okay for them. They are angry on George Bush. They call him an invader of Iraq.

Manmohan Singh derived full support of his party for his actions on this agreement.

Bhartiya Janato Party (BJP) appeared to like the agreement internally, but political compulsions forced them to criticize the agreement. They knew that this is only a good thing done by UPA government during the entire term of their rule. But BJP did not like the Congress to make the issue an election weapon.

In USA:

Many doubts were expressed in America like their dealings with Iran and North Korea might turn to be difficult. South Africa, Brazil and some more countries who have signed NPT, might like to possess nuclear weapons. USA may also enter into similar agreement with Pakistan.

Some Americans opined that this agreement was favorable to India and India was able to achieve whatever it wanted.

Finalisation of agreement

The proposed Indo-USA nuclear agreement had still to travel a long way to become operative. USA Congress and Senate had to approve. India had to obtain clearance from IAEA. NSG had to waive off the ban on India allowing importing the nuclear fuel and technology from any country of the world including USA. USA Congress and Senate should accord final approval and finally govt. of both the countries should sign.

After the proposal of the agreement was signed in New Delhi, USA administration initiated action to complete the formalities from its side. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State presented the bill to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) consisting 18 Senators. She was testified before the House of International Relations Committee (HIRC). She did the job very efficiently. The Senators opined,

‘Rice is steel Magnolia.’

USA had to conclude any bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation agreement under section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act.. According to this act, US can not have nuclear cooperation with a country that has not signed NPT. But Hyde act gives US administration the waiver to reach a pact with India which has not signed NPT with a rider that India must work with US to contain Iran’s N-program. India feels, this foreign policy prescription is not binding and the deal will not be struck if India ignores it. Hyde Act was passed when it came before Congress in 2006 with a majority of 359-68 in the House of Representatives and 85-12 in the US Senate.

India initiated action to get the clearance from IAEA. This action invited opposition from CPM. UPA government of Manmohan Sigh was a coalition govt. with the support of CPM. In-spite of it, Singh pursued the matter and secured IAEA clearance. Outraged CPM tabled no-trust motion against  Manmohan Singh in the parliament. Trust vote was scheduled for voting on 22^nd July 2008. As a shrewd politician, Singh had kept in discreet touch with Samajawadi Party leader Amar Singh and Mulayam Singh to support. Stout support of Rahul Gandhi, Congress’s heir apparent jettisoned the Left. Singh expected hair-thin majority in the debate. Even, he had made up his mind that the deal was worth sacrificing the government and had decided that the opportunity should not be missed. He went along with the high risk venture of July 22 trust vote. Even in polities, God helps those whose intensions are good. There were some cross voting from the members of other parties. Finally, Singh won the trust vote with comfortable majority. Singh became king. In this regard, Manmohan Singh proved his statesmanship.

Waiver of Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)

After Pokhran-I Nuclear Suppliers Group of 45 countries was established to prevent India from importing nuclear fuel or technology from any country of the world. NSG embargo had continued. To express its strong determination to acquire nuclear capability for self defense, after 24 years India went for Pokhran-II. The credit should go to Vajpayee for this decision. Further, Vajpayee proved his statesmanship by making voluntary ‘no first user’ declaration to quell the international criticism. Also, India’s impeccable non-proliferation record helped when the proposal went before NSG to waive its embargo. First session of NSG in Vienna was held on august 22-23. About 15 countries and 6 diehard opponents of the deal tabled many amendments to the text of the waiver. A revised text with two amendments was circulated to the members on August 29. In the meanwhile, shocked US spurred a more intensive period of diplomatic activity. NSG convened again on September 4. A grueling diplomatic ordeal triggered the diehard opponents i.e. The Netherlands, Austria, New Zealand Norway, Ireland and Switzerland felt happy. The main issue was ‘testing’. The statement of Foreign Minister of India, Pranab Mukharjee on unilateral moratorium on testing on September 5 convinced NSG members. China which was promising of a constructive role at NSG all along raised a voice of opposition to the proposal at the last moment. China’s attempt to block consensus in the NSG  was most unexpected A  reported phone call from  Bush to Chinese President Hu Jintao is said to have swung China around, at the last minute to back the deal. Dogged determination with which the Bush administration went about to secure NSG waiver and the strong support from Russia, France and Germany are really appreciable. Finally, 34 years of ostracism ended as NSG granted India clean waiver for nuclear trade at the end of a marathon session in Vienna on Friday, September 6, 2006.

After NSG Waiver

Next day, Saturday September 7, Bush called Manmohan Singh on phone to congratulate him. He praised Singh for his strong leadership in ensuing success at Vienna. In turn, Sing thanked Bush for all his cooperation.

India is the only nuclear weapons country to be included in global nuclear commerce without signing either NPT or CTBT (Comprehensives Test Ban Treaty) which is a precondition until then for entering mainstream nuclear trade. NSG’s approval was Manmohan Sigh’s moment. He had clinched a piece of history for salvaging the deal after staving off a huge threat to his government and his political career.

NSG’s waiver is a recognition of India as a strong  emerging  power  with a  stable and disciplined democracy, a growing  market  economy and business  appeal..

In strategic terms, it brings India closer to the developed countries like US, Russia, France, Germany and many other European countries.

NSG approval gives India access to nuclear fissile material and technology with which it can mount a credible nuclear energy program. It will open up hi-tech technologies use by a number of industries like pharmacy, IT, space, defense etc.

The NSG waiver is truly global opportunity. India can open its doors for nuclear trade. It will generate worldwide business worth $40 billion; allow Indian companies to supply components to foreign N-plant makers, offer power generation opportunities to Indian firms and increase nuclear power to 52,000 Megawatts by 2020 from the present 4120 Megawatts.

Imported reactors enhance India’s power generation as a part of India’s 11^th five -year plan (2007-2012). The estimated cost of the project of import of reactors was

Rs 2.4 lakh crore. A total of about 38-40 reactors would be needed, imported 24 each of 1000 Megawatt and indigenous 12 of total 10,000 Megawatts. Western technology is expected to be clubbed with the competitiveness of Indian industry. It gives a chance to Indian companies to collaborate with foreign companies. NPC officials said, “They may form a separate wing for international collaboration.” NTPC, Jindal, L & T, Tata Power and Reliance Power are among the key companies that would have huge business opportunities.

President George W. Bush

It was the President George Bush who conceptualized nuclear agreement with India. The proposal was included in his joint statement with Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India during the latter’s visit to USA during July 2005.

During his visit to India in March 2006, Bush pressurised his negotiating team to conclude the agreement early to be signed by him with India on the same day.

Bush lost no time to finalise the formalities of the agreement from his side. His Secretary, Condoleezza Rice did excellent job to get the clearance from the Senate members of USA.

He managed to get Hyde Act passed by the US House of Representatives with majority of 359-68 and by the US Senate 85-12. in 2006. Hyde Act exempts India from signing NPT to be eligible for civilian nuclear agreement with US.

Bush played an important role to swing China around to back the deal. Gruelling diplomatic ordeal by his administration triggered to convince the diehard opponents of the deal to make them feel happy. Finally, Bush was able to get waiver of NSG to end ostracism and allow India to enter global nuclear trade, by September 2006.

By this time, the presidential term of Bush was nearing end and he would demit from the White House in a few months. But Bush was interested to see the bill of civilian nuclear deal with India was passed by the Congress and signed before the end of his term lest the same might lie catching dust to an uncertain future under new administration. He lost no time to forward the Presidential determination to the Congress to pass the deal. He noted, ‘As India reserves its right for test , USA also reserves its right to suspend supply of nuclear fuel , our guarantee is only a political one and it is not a legal guarantee binding on USA’.

There is a clause for 30 days mandatory wait for any bill. Bush proposed to waive off this clause for the deal. The Congress passed the deal with two third majority. Now the last stage is that Senate has to pass the bill. Two Democratic members tabled killer amendments to the bill. The Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice opined,’ Such killer clauses may scuttle the deal. A nuclear test would result only in ‘most serious consequences including automatic cut-off of US as well as other sanctions.’

On October 1, Wednesday US Senate approved the deal 86-13 majority rejecting the killer amendments tabled by the Democrats. Bush is expected to sign the bill shortly. Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to visit New Delhi to sign the deal with India on Saturday 4^th October 2008.

Signing of the agreement

As scheduled, Condoleezza Rice Srcretary, State, USA visited New Delhi on 4^th October, 2008 to sign the agreement with India. Indian legal experts opined that the agreement should be signed only after the President of USA signed. Also, some concerns of India had to be clarified by USA before the agreement was signed by the governments. The program was postponed. The agreement was the fruit of hard efforts toiled over more than two years, Bush had loboured hard to make it a success. In the anxiety to conclude the agreement and to finish the job at the earliest Bush might have deputed his Secretary to New Delhi before he put his signature. Unfortunately the program was postponed. Bush took the postponement very coolly.

 He did not consider the issue as prestige issue considering USA in the giving end and India in the receiving end.

 President George W Bush signed their Congressional approval of the Indo-USA Nuclear Agreement to make it a law on Wednesday, 9^th October, 2008 at 2.34 pm (0.04 am IST Thursday) in the East Room of the White House. Vice President Dick Cherry, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and US Ambassador to India David Mulford on the USA side and Indian  Ambassador to US, Ronen Sen on Indian side  were among the a select gathering witnessing the signing  ceremony.

Bush delivered a nine minute address while signing. He said, “ The agreement grants  India advance consent to reprocessing which will  be brought into effect upon  conclusion of arrangements ands procedures for a dedicated reprocessing facility. The legislation does not change the fuel assurance commitments that the US government has made to the government of India as recorded in the 123 Agreement.”

In plain words it meant, he overruled the non-proliferation hardliners in acceding to India‘s rights for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel which critics fear would enable New Delhi to build more weapons. And he stood by the fuel assurance commitments which critics had tried to kill. US administration officials said the punitive caveats in the nuclear deal legislation only applied in the event of Indian nuclear testing. Even for that, the 123 Agreement outlined discussion of mitigating circumstances.

New Delhi sent its entire negotiating team led by foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee on a 10,000 mile , 12-hour visit to Washington to ink deal with US .  Condoleezza  Rice and Mukherjee signed the bilateral 123 agreement at an elegant ceremony in Benjamin Franklin Room of the State Department  at 4.16 pm on Friday, October 10, 2008 ( 1.46 am Saturday Indian time)

A couple of riders in the  Congressional approval besides Bush’s controversial message to the legislature that the nuclear fuel supply assurance in 123 agreement were ‘political commitments and legal binding’ had raised concerns in India. These concerns were addressed in a presidential statement asserting that the US enabling law does not change US commitments on nuclear fuel supply assurances and reprocessing of the spent nuclear fuel mentioned in the draft 123 agreement.

Rice commented,” This is truly an occasion and this is unprecedented agreement that makes a one-time exception for India which has not signed NPT, to resume nuclear trade with Washington while retaining its strategic programme. Today is an important day for INDO-US relations. Many thought this day would not come. But doubts have been silenced now. It demonstrates the vast potential partnership between India and US, potential that, frankly has gone unfulfilled for too many decades of mistrust and potential that can be fully realized. It is a diplomatic triumph for both of our nations. The agreement unlocks a new and far broader world of potential for our strategic partnership in the 21^st century, not just on nuclear cooperation but on every area of national endeavors. Now, I believe, there is nothing that we cannot do together. The courage and democratic statesmanship both in New Delhi and Washington are laudable. Mr. Manmohan Singh literally risked his political future for this agreement”

Mukherjee said in his remarks at the ceremony before affixing his signature on the documents, “This is an agreement about civil nuclear cooperation and reflects a careful balance of rights and obligations. The agreement has been passed by the US Congress without any amendment. This provision is now legally binding on both sides, once the agreement enters into force.”

Later at a press conference, Mukherjee said, “We are bound by the agreed text of the 123 agreement, which is negotiated on the basis of the joint statement of President George Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July 2005.” When asked if the deal is opened to interpretation if foreign relations could be on the basis of trust, his reply was, “It is not merely a question of interpretation; it is a question of agreed text.” Mukherjee’s written statement said, “We intend to implement this agreement in good faith and in accordance with the principles of international law, I am confident that the US will also do the same.”

N-deal was signed, sealed and delivered. The Indian team which had arrived from New Delhi in Washington in the afternoon on Friday on this specific mission completed its task in the evening, and left for Delhi in the night on the same day, so brisk and prompt was the program.

A few minor formalities were to be completed to start operating on the deal.

Reactions after concluding the agreement

The US Senate’s green signal to the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal on Thursday evoked a mixed reaction in different circles.

S.K.Jain, managing director, Power Corporation is very jubilant. He hopes to generate 63,000 Megawatt nuclear power as against 4120 Megawatt by 2032.

P.K.Iyengar, former chairman, Atomic Energy Corporation disagreed with Jain calling American approval of the deal as the end of India’s nuclear weapon’s program.

M.R.Srinivasan, member, AEC, felt, “the transfer of reprocessing and enrichment technology should have been a part of the deal. But we can go on indigenously. We expect, F\rance and Russia will not conform to the US position. Any country has the sovereign right to say yes or no. There is no legal bar on testing. In case China tested, we may be obliged to test, but we have to pay a price for it. To  expect a cost free test, it may be an impractical proposition.”

According to Jain, the main foreign vendors are General Electric and Westinghouse of US, Areva of France and Rosatom of Russia. In India, BHEL and NTPC expect lot of business for reactor components.

Political observers analyse that there is more to Indo-USA relations than just the nuclear deal. For over three decades now, two issues clouded India’s relationship with United States. The first has been the American strategic partnership with Pakistan and periodic moves to partner China in isolating India. President Bush recognized that Pakistan is dysfunctional and that country can not serve American interests. He adopted a ‘soft landing’ policy and began to cure India’s concerns on terrorism by banning the groups like Lshkar-e-Taiba and Jaise-e- Mohammed.

The second issue is US efforts ‘to curb, roll back and eliminate’ India’s nuclear weapons program. It was India’s testing Pokhran-II in 1998 and the simultaneous ‘no first user’ declaration that led the US to understand that India was a responsible global player, even with nuclear weapons.

India should not underestimate the challenges ahead. Several Democratic Party members of the US House of Representatives were against the 123 agreement. Some of these have spent a lifetime advocating nuclear and other sanctions against India. Some of them sought to prevent supply of cryogenic engines from Russia for our space program. So, it is prudent for India to be careful; the commercial contracts for nuclear reactors with American companies should be finalized only after issues like reserve stocks of fuel, reprocessing rights are settled. India may have to face challenges on the issues like Fissile Material Cut–off Treaty.. Bush administration supported India’s efforts to improve relations with the neighbours, but Democratic Party administration may be inclined to be somewhat intrusive.

Now the nuclear deal with USA has been finalized; it is time to assess the extent to which India was able to secure its objectives.  We may not be 100 per cent successful and aggregate outcome should be yardstick. As events in NSG confirmed, US negotiated with other suppliers like France and Russia as well. Amendment to NSG guidelines ended nuclear apartheid against India which was possible only with the assistance of US; both France and Russia had expressed their helplessness in bringing about this change. It is up to New Delhi to exploit the competitiveness of nuclear suppliers to secure enrichment and reprocessing technologies.

The separation clause in the nuclear deal with USA and the corresponding safeguards agreement with IAEA is an indicator of recognition of India as a nuclear power.

The US envisages support for building a fuel reserve as a political and not as legal commitment is of little relevance as India presumably unlikely to build the reserve from US sources. Reserve would be created at a time when the entire global market would be open to India.

 Regarding India rejecting its promise of moratorium on testing, India would do so only when provoked by its neighbours and not for fun ant US may react on its assurance of fuel only after discussing with India about the circumstances  leading to test. India has retained its right to react..

Uranium-hungry Indian Reactors

Kaiga Atomic Power Station is situated in Uttara Kannada district of Karnataka. Two pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWR) of 220 MW capacities each started operations in March 2000 and 2007. Due to shortage of uranium, the plant is not running to its capacity, the generation is 130 MW. The plant is expected uranium supply under the deal to run at 100% capacity.

Mysore based Rare Materials Plant (RMP) is R&D plant which was established in 1980s. In this plant, uranium is centrifuged (enriched) and its uses are studied. It is a defense unit. Here, only uranium mined and extracted indigenously is used. RMP is a reactor under military segment. Operations at RMP have been affected due to shortage of uranium as uranium mined for Jodagud (Jharkhand) is diverted to the reactors under civil segment for power generation. After the deal, uranium available from India’s mines can be fully used only by RMP.

The above two examples reflect the situation at all reactors and reveal the sad status of nuclear power generation in India, and retardation of Industrial growth in India affecting overall development of India due to power shortage. The problem was better understood by Bush and suugested the nuclear deal to India. Thanks to Manmohan Singh who readily agreed to the suggestion of the US. He even faced ‘no trust’ tabled by naysayer to the deal.

Energy situation in India

 

India is the fifth largest producer of electricity in the world after China, US, Japan

and Russia. Because of heavy population of India, in terms of per capita, its rank stands at 150. Annual per capita electricity consumption is the key index of development which is in India around 650-700 kWh. This is one forth of the world average. We need to decide what our target should be. 5000 kWh appears to be reasonable target..

To realise the targrt of 5000 kWh per capita power consumption, we need to add a huge quantity of electricity generation to our grids. Whether India can generate that much of power is the subject for our study.

For thermal power generation, our coal reserves can support only for 11 years to generate at the target rate. What next after 11 years?

Hydro potential can provide for 5 % of our targeted power generation.

Renewable energy like wind power can support around 2%

Coming to solar energy we need to earmark around 4.5 million hectares of area to be able to collect enough solar energy to meet our needs. This is roughly a fourth barren uncultivatable land in India. Also, it needs aggressive   development of this technology to make it cost competitive. Further, sun does not shine on 24x7 basis, we need cost-competitive energy storage technologies.

Other option left with us for energy generation is fission energy. A severe energy crisis is likely to hit us, much earlier than it does most of the world.  We should look at nuclear energy in this backdrop.

.

Fear of Nuclear Power Generation

During 1996, explosions rocked nuclear reactor in Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Russia. It was man-made tragedy. According to a report published by World Health Organization (WHO) in 2006, only 47 deaths have occurred till 2004 and thyroid cancer cases have been treated successfully. Only 1% of 4000 cases died from this disease. India had a tragedy in Union Carboid plant in Bhopal when 3500 families suffered. Yet Chernobyl tragedy image remains stronger.

Recently, Japan experienced a strong earthquake causing tsunami which took 13,000 lives with 14,000 missing. This tsunami caused an accident in nuclear power plant in Fukushima, resulting in leak of radiation. Fukushima has had no fatality caused by radiation. Only seventeen workers were exposed to radiation but the public domain will take some time to normalize.. A wave of fear has spread all over the world and agitation going on against nuclear power plants.

Government of India has set up an independent Nuclear Regulatory Authority of India to examine all related issues including safety measures to be taken. GOI also reasserted that there is no stopping of nuclear power plants.

Thorium

Homi Bhaba is considered as father of India’s nuclear power program. He had long term vision of three stage nuclear power generation. In the first stage uranium (U235) is used in the reactors for power generation where plutonium results as waste product. In the second stage, plutonium is used in the Fast Breeder reactors with thorium jackets to produce U233. In the third stage U233 is used for power generation. Though sources of uranium are limited but fortunately India has ten times more reserves of thorium in the monazite beach sands in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Orissa. India has about a third of the world’s known deposits of thorium which can yield 155,502 GWyears of electrical energy which is 14 times wattage India could get from its coal deposits.

Virginia based compony, Thorium Power Ltd, which recognises India’s leadership in the use of thorium in the nuclear fuel cycle for many years, commented,” India is  in the forefront of the world to understand the advantage of using  thorium which is non-poliferative and yield low waste. We can work together. This agreement allows us to move forward.”

Experts fear that availability of sufficient uranium under the agreement may slow down our efforts to use thorium available indigenousy. The chairman AEC assured, the efforts to harness thorium would not be slackened.

Progress Report

George W Bush lost no time to conclude the agreement before he demitted White House. He signed their Confessional approval of Indo-USA Nuclear Agreement to make it a law during October 2008.

 Present President Barack Obama had welcomed the agreement during his election campaign. He was elected as President, completed his term and has been reelected as the President for second term.

Already nearly five years have passed after the nuclear deal became a law in America. The public in India had expected a lot from the agreement. Naturally, they expect a progress report from GOI.. Therefore, a report from GOI clarifying several points is highly solicited.

1)      Has  the ‘reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel’ treaty with USA been concluded?

2)      Whether USA has been supplying  sufficient  Uranium fuel to our 14 civil reactors, a list of which  was  given USA and whether all these reactors are running up to their installed capacity?

3)      Before the deal, the nuclear power generation in India was around 4120 MV only. Now that sufficient uranium must be available under the deal to our civil reactors, what is the present level of nuclear power generation?

4)      In the 11^th five-year plan (2007-2012), India had a project for import of 24 new reactors of 1000 MV each, and to procure 12 indigenous reactors producing total 10,000 MV. The estimated cost of the project was about Rs 2.4 lakh crore. What is the status of the project?

5)      What is the plan for 12^th five-year plan (2012-2017) to boost nuclear power generation?

6)      India should increase per capita power consumption to a targeted figure of 5000 kWh from the present 650-700 kWh. How far has India succeeded?

7)      NSG has allowed India to procure uranium from any source in the world. How far India has been able to establish new world sources apart from USA?

8)      Economic power of India depends on our Agricultural and Industrial development which in turn depends on availability of sufficient power. Main sources of power generation are Thermal power, Hydro power, Solar power, power from renewable sources like wind, and nuclear power. What are the efforts made by GOI to harness all these sources?

9)      The entire world including America respect India only if India remains economically dynamic and militarily strong. The efforts to achieve this status should not be mixed with politics. All political parties should understand this.

10)   UPA government got additional term of rule only because of nuclear deal with USA which was the result of NSG waiver to end ostracism of 34 years.  

11)  If UPA desires additional term of rule it must think of another popular deal like ‘River Garland’ i.e. interlinking of rivers in India. This project has many advantages in spite of a few disadvantages.

To conclude, we must once again thank President Bush for his sincere efforts to make the agreement an American Law. We should not forget Manmohan Singh, our Prime Minister who is a world renowned economist and true nationalist. He had risked even his political career facing ‘no trust motion’ tabled by naysayers.

Indo-USA nuclear agreement can be likened to an agreement between a young man and a young lady for love-marriage. Both should imbibe faith, trust and confidence in each other. Then only their marriage can go successful and they can achieve conjugal felicity. So is Indo-USA nuclear agreement.

There appears to be lot of confusion among public by the contradicting statements of different persons in respect of this agreement. It is suggested GOI should publish a white paper with full details of the agreement for the knowledge of the public.

A periodical progress report on the achievement under the agreement is most appreciable

                                            ******************

                                            Somanath S. Salimath, B.E., D.F.E. (Germany)

                                            Mobile: 94483 88678

                                            E-mail: somanathsalimath @ gmail.com

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

Comments from the readers are welcome by the writer.