|
North Korean test – Impact on Indo-US N-deal |
 |
Harjit Singh
There must be a sense of satisfaction among foreign policy makers in South Block that after North Korea conducted a nuclear test, the world did not club Pyongyang with New Delhi. Besides the United States, where a consensus is still to emerge among law makers on the civil nuclear deal with India , both Britain and the European Union conveyed it to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that they see no parallel between the two. Dr. Singh had the advantage of being in London and then in Helsinki for the EU summit when the world was red with rage over the North Korean nuclear test and Iran was smiling on the sidelines saying it could now not be condemned if it too followed North Korea. To the relief of Dr. Singh, Tony Blair said in his presence that there could be no comparison between India and North Korea, adding that whereas a country like India has been very strong on counter-proliferation, North Korea is going in the opposite direction. The nature of Governments – democracy in India and communist dictatorship in North Korea and India’s track record of keeping its nuclear know-how secure from leakage and smuggling too went to India’s advantage.
Dr. Singh’s visit to Helsinki for the Indo-EU summit also saw the host Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen steering clear of any suggestion that there could be any comparison with the Indian programme. There is no comparison with the Indian programme., said Javier Salona, EU’s foreign policy chief, adding that North Korea is a small nation in the Korean peninsula which is hardly stable. India’s case is totally different.
Even the State Department spokesman dismissed comparison between India and North Korea and said the Bush Administration stands by its commitment on the nuclear deal with India despite some difficulties and delays in its ratification by the Senate which were beyond its control.
The North Korean nuclear test also vindicates the Indian stand that Pakistan contributed in a big way to North Korea’s nuclear programme as Pakistan’s disgraced scientist, A.Q. Khan, admitted to having sold nuclear bomb technology to several countries including North Korea.
However, it would not be surprising if India’s glee is short-lived. The test is bound to encourage critics in the US Congress who say India cannot be singled out for lifting of restrictions so long as it does not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT] which India has consistently refused to do although maintaining it would remain committed to the obligations under it without being its signatory. The test by North Korea will give the opponents of the deal the ammunition to fight against it. The Pakistan lobbyists who would not like India to be given a preferential treatment while ignoring Islamabad despite its so-called contribution in the war on terror, would also become more strident in their demand for an equal treatment to the two. Of course, an added disadvantage to Pakistan is the fact that but for the help its tainted nuclear scientist provided to North Korea, Pyongyang would not have been able to go nuclear.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was no doubt upbeat on the issue of nuclear agreement when US President Bush telephoned him the other day to tell him that his Administration remained committed on the issue and that the delay in Congressional approval should not be seen as Washington wavering on the agreement. But President Bush’s own position may be weakened after the November mid-term elections amid fears that the Republicans may lose majority in the House of Representatives at a time when Bush’s own approval rating is going down. This may put a question mark once again on the final seal on the deal. During the debate in the two Congressional committees on foreign relations, the Democrats took a stridently strong stand on the agreement and sought to impose harsh conditions unacceptable to India. In the new dispensation, the agreement may emerge in the final form with new conditions and amendments if the Republicans lose power or are weakened in the House of Representatives. India which has implemented its own part of the agreement and separated the military and civilian nuclear facilities and opened a dialogue with the IAEA to put the civilian facilities under international safeguards, is unlikely to accept a lame duck agreement. Coming under strong criticism for giving away too much on the nuclear issue in return for ‘empty promises’, the Prime Minister has made it clear that there will be no dilution or going back on last year’s joint statement and the country has the option of walking out of the agreement if it is found to be against the interests of the country.
President Putin is coming to India in January as the chief guest at the Republic Day parade and in order to send a strong message to the US, it has been put out that if Washington continues to stick to its hold-on position, India could switch over to its old and time-tested friend.
|
