The Hindu Business Line : <I>Nuclear angst </I>

In the apparently imminent India-US nuclear deal, the issues are divided vertically — between the strategists and scientists, the dreamers and doers, those taking pride in scientific advancements and realists who are worried about the scorching pace of energy requirements for a fast growing nation.

Developing major weapon systems were missions impossible for the Defence R&D, even with fewer international supply embargos. How much more difficult would it be for the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), which has to negotiate a thicket of international sanctions imposed by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime, to put up high-capacity power reactors in a time-bound manner.

India's power needs are enormous. It is anybody's guess whether our energy needs will be better secured with oil and gas supplies from the cartels of West Asia or by laying the foundation for a stable civilian nuclear power base. Frustrated with the slow pace, the diplomats and political leaders must have been working hard to persuade the US and others to relax conditions so that India can get on with substantial capacity addition to its nuclear power plants.

The problem for the US is whether India should be treated as a non-member of the NPT, or given nearly the same privileges of a member. This depends on whether the US is able to convince its countrymen that such a step is not likely to increase India's military potential, but will only assist India in its quest for economic progress. A fast developing India is seen as of strategic significance in the light of China's strides.

The NPT has two tenets: States that do not have the bomb should not seek it, and those that have nuclear weapons should seek to get rid of them. It is significant that now the US administration appears inclined to relaxing these rules in favour of India.

On India's part, the hitch to such a deal lies in the obligation for a transparent separation of civilian and military facilities. Central to this is the scientists' insistence that facilities such as fast breeder reactors — which can eventually produce fissile material — should be beyond the purview of international safeguards. To do otherwise would constrain the growth of India's nuclear arsenal and energy independence.

However, strategists feel that the scientists are, as usual, over-optimistic in their ability to estimate the successful outcome of their development efforts. They feel that India should have a diversified resource-base for energy, with an accent on minimising net addition to global warming. The hawks among the scientists feel that the weapon-grade material stockpile that India has may not represent credible nuclear deterrence.

If India ties itself down to the US' current demands, and if the nuclear power situation in the neighbourhood is altered by the addition of stockpiles or nation becoming a nuclear weapon state, the geopolitical map will be altered beyond recognition and India's ability to cope without a strategic defence treaty with the US and other members of the nuclear elite will be jeopardised. Thus, having initiated moves for freeing itself from restriction of supplies from the Nuclear Suppliers Group and accelerating the pace of power generation, India has a tough choice between agreeing to the US while wresting a seat near enough to the high table of NPT members or continue to rely on their entrenched scientific establishment and hope for the best.

R. Sundaram