India not against US-Pak nuclear deal: Pranab

[A M J]

Lalit K Jha
Saturday, October 11, 2008, (Washington)

Within hours of signing the historic Indo-US civilian nuclear cooperation agreement, India on Friday hinted that it is unlikely to oppose any such agreement, which Pakistan has said would want with China or the US.

"In respect of civil nuclear cooperation between Pakistan and USA, we would like to encourage civil nuclear cooperation and peaceful use of nuclear energy," the External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, told reporters in Washington when he was referred to such a statement coming from Pakistan recently.

"We believe that every country has the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes," Mukherjee said, indicating that India would not have any problem with such a agreement as long as it is for civilian nuclear energy or peaceful purposes.

However, the US so far has maintained that the unique agreement it has entered with India is a onetime exception and it has no plans to enter into similar agreement with Pakistan.

News reports coming from Islamabad said that the Pakistani President, Asif Ali Zardari, during his upcoming trip to Beijing would seek an atomic agreement with China on the lines of the Indo-US nuclear pact. The Pak Prime Minister, Yusuf Gilani, has already issued statement saying that his country would seek similar agreement.

Responding to a question on Indo-Pak relations, Mukherjee reiterated India is determined to build a good relationship with Pakistan. "In fact, we are doing so through the mechanism of compost dialogue and we are addressing the outstanding issues between our two countries."

Referring to the joint statement issued by the two countries after the meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Pak President Zardari in New York last month, Mukherjee said it is really encouraging. He asserted that the Indo-US agreement should not come as any kind of apprehension in Pakistan.

"India's commitment to non-proliferation is second to none and in my (earlier) statement reiterated on continuation of voluntary moratorium which we declared in 1988," Mukherjee said.

 

[Vinod2070]

There is no reason for us to oppose any nuclear deal for Pakistan.

Pakistan needs it as bad as India does, as the energy scarcity is nearly as great in that country.

Its a matter between Pakistan and the IAEA and NSG, India is not a player here. We need not get involved and definitely need not be a spoilsport.

 

[A M J]

There is no reason for us to oppose any nuclear deal for Pakistan.

Pakistan needs it as bad as India does, as the energy scarcity is nearly as great in that country.

Its a matter between Pakistan and the IAEA and NSG, India is not a player here. We need not get involved and definitely need not be a spoilsport.

I posted it here coz i wanted to let them know we are not against it....... otherwise they must have been thinking to the contrary.........................

and to tell them we dont oppose development of others...........

 

[Vinod2070]

Some Pakistani members did comment that the Indian nuclear deal would destabilize the world and so much else along the lines.

Wonder if they would feel the same if they get a similar deal! Or all would be hunky dory then.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Some Pakistani members did comment that the Indian nuclear deal would destabilize the world and so much else along the lines.

Wonder if they would feel the same if they get a similar deal! Or all would be hunky dory then.

The deal with India is already done, so any 'destabilization' that would occur, has been set in motion already.

Therefore Pakistan possibly getting such a deal does not impact the 'destabilization scenario' in anyway.

Mukherjee's statement is nonetheless welcome.

However, given that the US has at this point ruled out any such deal for Pakistan, and would, as in India's case, probably be the final arbiter of such a deal, it was a safe statement to make.

It allows for making all the right noises towards 'normalization and friendship' while knowing that the possibility of what is being supported coming to pass any time soon is extremely low.

 

[Desipride]

Mr. Mukherjee is a seasoned subcontinental politician/diplomat, these are mere placating, empty words.

I would be quite surprised if the Indo-US relations do not sour if such a sweet deal is offered to Pakistan. Further India's at least tacit signal that Pakistan is a proliferater, sabble rattler etc. would be found untrue and cause loss of face if it didn't oppose it whether behind closed doors or overtly.

Though if such a deal were indeed offered to Pakistan with Indian nod then it would be certain that Pakistan is too important to be antagonized, it needs nuclear fuel (and it needs it bad), India is not threatened by Pak (and vice versa) and that Pakistan's proliferation record after the "transgressions" has been super clean.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You should google A Q Khan.

You should learn some reading comprehension and really, really stop trolling around forums.

Ciao.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Mr. Mukherjee is a seasoned subcontinental politician/diplomat, these are mere placating, empty words.

I would be quite surprised if the Indo-US relations do not sour if such a sweet deal is offered to Pakistan. Further India's at least tacit signal that Pakistan is a proliferater, sabble rattler etc. would be found untrue and cause loss of face if it didn't oppose it whether behind closed doors or overtly.

My point exactly - the statement means nothing given that the US has opposed a similar deal at this point, and the US is really the only one with the clout to block or approve the deal.

Though if such a deal were indeed offered to Pakistan with Indian nod then it would be certain that Pakistan is too important to be antagonized, it needs nuclear fuel (and it needs it bad), India is not threatened by Pak (and vice versa) and that Pakistan's proliferation record after the "transgressions" has been super clean.

Pakistan does need nuclear energy, its record after AQ Khan has been spotless, and has in fact tightened up its nuclear exports controls, safeguards and command and control infrastructure and institutions.

Most analysts rank Pakistan's institutional systems and safeguards higher than India's in fact - mostly because of cooperation with the US in developing them, and to allay any global concerns due to the instability in FATA and Afghanistan.

Again, I doubt India will have much say in this process, or its opinion count for much - the US is the big dog here, and as I said elsewhere, what Uncle wants, Uncle gets.

 

[Vinod2070]

Frankly, I think Pakistan may well get the deal in the not too distant future.

India may not be a player in this game, but it not being an active spoiler will help for sure.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Not a good day to be insulting moderators and flaming.

 

[Desipride]

1. AQ Khan episode has permanently blemished Pakistani reputation irresp if on paper or on ground Pak's safeguards are better than the best, who hires an ex-con right?

2. Personally, US's need to seek India's approval would rise, as time passes by, as India's importance/influence increases at the world stage and US's influence stagnates at best. Pakistan the way it is poised right now doesn't appear to become a powerful economic military entity at the global arena.

3. It would be foolish to seek a relationship with India by abandoning Pakistan and then abandoning it to please Paksitan for no apparent reason. Though if the Indian govt remains as spineless as it is now aka not commensurate with the power it ought to command then yes US can engineer this seemingly uphill task with ease.

4. As I said if the situation comes to that or if pros outweigh the cons, then of course US can provide such a deal to Pakistan. Who knows may be India can supply Thorium to Pakistan? but looking at the future Pakistan is sometime away from a deal with USA at least, my 2 annas.

 

[IceCold]

I posted it here coz i wanted to let them know we are not against it....... otherwise they must have been thinking to the contrary.........................

and to tell them we dont oppose development of others...........

Whatever!

Aisi deal ho gi to india chor machai ga na. India knows this isnt going to happen between the US and Pakistan and there isnt a damn thing India could do to stop Pakistan from making one with China. So what Pranab said is all political BS and no Love for Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

1. AQ Khan episode has permanently blemished Pakistani reputation irresp if on paper or on ground Pak's safeguards are better than the best, who hires an ex-con right?

2. Personally, US's need to seek India's approval would rise, as time passes by, as India's importance/influence increases at the world stage and US's influence stagnates at best. Pakistan the way it is poised right now doesn't appear to become a powerful economic military entity at the global arena.

3. It would be foolish to seek a relationship with India by abandoning Pakistan and then abandoning it to please Paksitan for no apparent reason.

4. As I said if the situation comes to that or if pros outweigh the cons, then of course US can provide such a deal to Pakistan. Who knows may be India can supply Thorium to Pakistan? but looking at the future Pakistan is sometime away from a deal with USA at least.

1. Who hires an ex con? How about other ex cons.

Remember that AQ Khans proliferation, both in helping develop Pakistan's nuclear program, and in the aftermath, was done hand in glove with institutions and individuals in the West.

David Albright recently released his own analysis of Indian proliferation, so no one's hands are clean here.

Hypocrisy and double standards?

Sure, you can see those galore - its a world based on interests after all, but thats the point here. Using the 'proliferation' argument, the West should be sanctioning itself and India should never have gotten the deal.

Your points 2, 3 and 4 are interconnected so I'll answer them together. India will not dump the US, it can't afford to. It may make some noises about this and that, but at the end, US dominance, economically and strategically prevails. There is too much global interconnectivity for nations to go around just cutting relationships off. India may make noises here and there, to get some more goodies from the US in exchange for cooperation, but it will not oppose something the US decides to support.

The argument about economic factors is sound however, in that having access to technology is one thing, being able to afford it another.

 

[Vinod2070]

Whatever!

Aisi deal ho gi to india chor machai ga na. India knows this isnt going to happen between the US and Pakistan and there isnt a damn thing India could do to stop Pakistan from making one with China. So what Pranab said is all political BS and no Love for Pakistan.

I don't think that will happen. That is the point of the statement by Pranab Mukharjee.

Its not a question of love or hate for Pakistan. Its not having the intention to do a "phate me taang" for others.

Its just another affirmation that India doesn't want to be Pakistan centric anymore.

 

[jeypore]

1
David Albright recently released his own analysis of Indian proliferation, so no one's hands are clean here.

AM, you must admit that no American administrations (executive or legislative) was willing to listen to David Albright report. Simple case is that he has shown biased towards India proliferation.