A Quick Comment on The Impending Indo-US Nuclear Deal
The last few days have seen emotional outbursts from both sides of the government on the pros and cons of the nuclear deal ranging from impassioned rhetoric for support from the UPA to cries of betrayal of national interest by the Left parties and the Bharatiya Janata Party.
The Economist in its print issue dated 2-8 December 2006 called the deal damaging to a global anti nuclear regime and opposed it on more [logical] grounds that it violated the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and could open the doors to further proliferation fallout from North Korea’s bomb test and Iran’s continuing nuclear defiance.
More recently Dr. Ivan Oelrich of the Federation of American Scientists wrote last week on his blog here that India got what it wanted without any safeguards although I beg to differ with his primarily onesided analysis. I personally believe this deal is good for India because:
1. We will achieve a nuclear fuelled power capacity of 20,000 MW (10% of total power requirement) by 2020, a self professed goal of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India.
2. We generate power that is clean and not environment polluting like the fossil fuelled power plants.
3. We get fuel supplies internationally and we have the right to reprocess the spent uranium.
4. We have not opened up our sites for inspections.
5. We have access to high technology in several areas including defence and space, and
6. We get to keep our weapons (although I am personally opposed to the notion of a (nuclear) arms bearing state as I am completely and unashamedly pacifist in my outlook).
– among the several other doors it opens for us, since our ostracization from the West post the 1974 tests that India conducted.
My simplistic six-point view aside, let’s take a look at why is this deal really important to us and why we, as right minded citizens, should oppose any attempts to scuttle this. I am borrowing from Nandan Desai’s comments here summarily as follows:
“Currently, the average Indian consumes 0.9 barrels of oil, 31.5 cubic meters of natural gas, and 610 kilowatt hours of electricity every year – and these numbers are going up by 4.5% – 5% annually. Add to that 1% annual population growth, and our total energy needs will increase by about 5.5% – 6% a year. This year, we will produce about 90% of our natural gas and 30% of our petroleum domestically, and import the rest. Capacity addition over the last few years has been quite rapid, but not nearly fast enough to keep up with the growth of demand. Judging by current rates of capacity addition, and borrowing some projections from the Energy Information Administration, by 2020 we will have to import 20% of our natural gas, and 80% of our oil; by 2030 those numbers will be around 30% and 90%, respectively.”
Staggering, when you sit back and think about it. Nandan has done excellent groundwork for his article and while I have no wish to parrot it entirely again, I find myself agreeing to the three principal arguments that he has advocated – (a) energy security for now and energy independence in the longer term, (b) a good road to creating power infrastructure to build India and lift it out of its current morass, and (c) last but not least, increases our influence in the global scheme of things coupled with the imposition of greater responsibilities and transparency requirements on us.
One aspect of this deal is a rider, subtle or otherwise, that we work with the United States to contain Iran’s nuclear program. Opponents of this deal claim that it harms India’s sovereign interests. Whilst it bothers me a little that our foreign policy is now being subtly guided by US interests, I see it as a quid-pro-quo and a good one at that. A deal of this propensity requires a fair bit of give-and-take and if the ultimate goal is to work in cooperation to avoid a second nuclear showdown, I believe it to be ok.
And lest I forget, I find the arguments of both the Left parties and the BJP to be completely specious, the former looking out for the interests of their idealogical masters and the latter opposing this deal purely on grounds of jealousy that they did not get to ink the dotted line when they were in power. If we recall, the BJP did try to negotiate a similar deal when they were in power last.
Cheers
S