Balance Hyde with Indian law ============================
Insofar as the text of an agreement can protect one side when the other is bent on reneging on its commitments, Article 16.4 of the Indian 123 and the Vienna Convention give New Delhi as much legal cover as Article 2.1 of the Chinese 123 gives Beijing. Of course, India would get more effective protection by building a strategic fuel reserve on its territory. There is, however, the issue of the U.S. %u201Cright of return%u201D of exported material in the event of termination of cooperation and the fear that this strategic reserve may not be fully immunised from returnability.
Though Article 14 of the 123 provides effective protection for India, the Government should consider the merit of adding a further layer of insurance under domestic statute just to be doubly sure. Specifically, Parliament could enact an amendment to the Atomic Energy Act of 1962 as well as a change in the Special Chemicals, Organisms, Materials, Equipment and Technologies (SCOMET) guidelines making it illegal for nuclear material or equipment to be transferred out of the country if the transfer would disrupt the continuous operation of our power reactors or pose an environmental or security risk. Similarly, the AEA could be amended to make it illegal to import into India any reactor under a commercial contract that does not explicitly provide for the reprocessing of spent fuel.
In other words, rather than seeing the Left%u2019s call for P
RE:RE:Balance Hyde with Indian law
by Satish G on Aug 22, 2007 09:27 PM Permalink
In other words, rather than seeing the Left%u2019s call for Parliament to play a role in validating the nuclear deal as something adversarial, the Prime Minister should realise the legislature is very much an instrument of modern diplomacy. By amending its domestic statute, India can effectively balance the provisions of the Hyde Act. If the U.S. insists in the future that internal law trumps the 123 agreement and uses that to build a case for demanding the return of material even when the strict conditions of Article 14 have not been met, India would be bound by its own internal law not to oblige Washington.
All of this, of course, begs the question of India%u2019s capacity to hold its own internationally. Washington%u2019s aim is to build a strategic relationship in which India can act as an outsourcer of U.S. hegemony in Asia. But there is a dialectic here as well. The U.S. created the NSG after the 1974 nuclear test to isolate Delhi from all high technology trade; but today, in order to allow itself to enjoy the strategic and economic benefits of nuclear commerce with India, it must perforce open the door for everyone else as well. What Washington intends to be a chain that will tie New Delhi down could very well turn into its opposite.
Unfortunately, the Manmohan Singh government%u2019s lack of confidence in the country%u2019s negotiating strength has led it to make vital concessions over the past two years. Even today, many decisions of enormous foreign policy sig
RE:RE:RE:Balance Hyde with Indian law
by Satish G on Aug 22, 2007 09:28 PM Permalink
Even today, many decisions of enormous foreign policy significance are taken casually, without due application of mind. Next month%u2019s Quadrilateral Power naval exercise (with an embedded Singaporean ship thrown in as cover) is one example. In this respect, it is perhaps more crucial that the Government be urged not to operationalise the June 2005 Indo-U.S. Defence Framework Agreement rather than the nuclear initiative.
Deal or no deal, there will always be pressure on the foreign policy front. In a country like India with sharply polarised class interests, compromising decisions can be taken even without external pressure. India%u2019s ability to withstand external and internal pressures will depend crucially on the configuration of political forces within the country at any given moment in time. The balance of forces today favours an independent foreign policy. There is no reason why this should change tomorrow.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Balance Hyde with Indian law
by Satish G on Aug 22, 2007 09:30 PM Permalink
All my postings above are copy and paste from Siddharth Varadarajan article "Deal breather, not deal breaker" on www.hindu.com [Monday, Aug 20, 2007]
