This is reply to MSAT and Jayaprakash who responded to my comment below.
1) If separation is "voluntarily", then why did Burns claim on 27th July, 2007 that all "future FBRs" will be under safeguards. So far I have not heard anything from Indian govt. refuting Burns' statement.
2)There is nothing in the 123 which says that India can switch the reactors. If you think otherwise, please copy the "inbuilt" article. Read "Article 14-1" of 123 for further clarification. It says, "India is supposed to maintain the reactors under safeguards as long as they are under India's jurisdiction", which means we can't shift reactors from civilian to military side and vice versa. Moreover, India is NOT recognized as a NWS either in 123 or in Hyde or any joint press statement, if you think otherwise, please produce such a statement.
3) You are wrong. If restrictions are to be lifted, they have to be lifted by NSG but here we are going to IAEA first before getting the NSG approval.
4a) Deal does NOT permit full civilian cooperation. Cooperation only some "aspects" of the fuel cycle will be done. Please read "Article 2d" of 123.
4b) You are assuming a lot of things. What I am saying is this deal does NOT say that sanctions are irreversible.
4c) This is mentioned in Hyde Act. Opposition made hue and cry to which PM made that statement, check out the Lok Sabha site for his exact statement.
