[/COLOR]
What's with this Pakistani obsession with a nuclear deal? Seems like a severe case of the "me too" syndrome. No Pakistani, leader or otherwise has ever articulated clearly why they think they need a nuclear deal except to say ' India has been given one, so we should be offered it too". I don't recall any Pakistani ask for this deal before the U.S. concluded it with India. If generating electrical power was the main concern then surely it stands to reason that such a requirement existed even before India signed the deal. Pakistan's argument has been full of petulance like a child wanting something just because someone else has it.
The reasons for obtaining NSG waivers are related to energy requirements, solidifying Nuclear State status as well as ensuring that Pakistan is not at a disadvantage with respect to India in terms of Indian using its NSG waiver to fuel its power reactors while utilizing its own fuel for weapons purposes.
There is a reason Pakistan has been blocking progress at the UN disarmament conference.
In terms of utilizing nuclear power for energy purposes, the requirement did indeed exist before India signed the nuclear deal, which is why Pakistan signed agreements with China on developing the Chasma nuclear complex before India signed the nuclear deal, and has been interested in expanding that complex from 3 to 6, and explore 1000 MW reactors to meet growing energy demand. The problem arises from the fact that China became part of the NSG after it signed the Chasma nuclear deals with Pakistan, so now China too is legally bound to follow NSG guidelines for any nuclear deals made after it joined the NSG.
This means that for Pakistan to implement is plans for utilizing nuclear power plants to alleviate parts of its power shortfall (plans conceived long before India obtained the nuclear deal) it must also obtain an NSG waiver.
The 'me too' mantra/rant is rather typical of Indians looking to belittle Pakistan instead of trying to understand (perhaps deliberately ignoring) the reasons behind the necessity for a NSG waiver for Pakistan, and is, needless to say, an inaccurate assessment.
As for why it took so long to approach the idea of a waiver - US sanctions and then the AQ Khan network scandal. Had it been merely an issue of sanctions Pakistan could have approached the NSG sooner for a waiver. However, the AQ Khan scandal meant that Pakistan had a lot of work to do in terms of dismantling the network and putting in place sophisticated safeguards to secure its nuclear infrastructure, and it took a long time before those systems and processes were in place, and even longer to convince the world of their strength (which could be argued to be an ongoing process).
That said, the Indo-US nuclear deal was not a sure shot either. India was lucky that it found a partner in Bush looking to enhance the Indo-US relationship and turn it into a strategic one. Most analysts were of the opinion that had India dragged negotiations for a few months and the democrats had taken power, the US legislature would not have approved the Indo-US nuclear deal given the strong anti-proliferation sentiment on the left. The approval of the deal provided Pakistan with the opportunity to start making its case on similar lines, now that it had made progress on nuclear safeguards.
Pakistan seriously needs to be clear if they actually need such a deal and can start firstly by saying goodbye to the Iranian pipeline.
Actually the US is offering to subsidize the construction of power infrastructure from the CAR's to Afghanistan and Pakistan (about 1000 MW) in exchange for Pakistan dropping the IP Pipeline.
Be prepared to put existing plants under international safeguards.
The Chasma nuclear complex and KANNUP are under IAEA safeguards.
Sort out the financial implications of such a deal which are going to be huge. Building nuclear plants is not going to be cheap and the suppliers will only be interested if as they say 'you show them the money'. India is planning to invest $100 billion on new nuclear plants which was one of the primary reasons for getting such a deal.
As mentioned above, Pakistan has already signed deals with China for help in constructing the Chashma complex (3 plants of 300 MW each), so the financial implications are well know given that we have already financed nuclear power plants. But continued purchase of Chinese technology is now contingent upon an NSG waiver similar to that obtained by India.
Pakistan also needs to come up with a plan of how they would manage to get such a deal through the IAEA And the Nuclear Suppliers Group. What can you offer them for their co-operation? You cannot just go there claiming that you somehow feel entitled to such a deal and therefore should be given one. India was able to swing the votes because of the strength of its economy, the promise of future deals and by waving (discreetly) a very big stick of severe economic consequences to countries that were holding out (NZ, Ireland, Canada, Sweden). What's your big stick? Threatening by holding a gun to one's own head has its limitations as a negotiating ploy.
India held no stick here - the only stick that mattered was that of the US. You flatter yourself that India was able to browbeat the smaller countries into giving India concessions, it was a US show the entire way. Had India that sort of clout, the Australians would not be still refusing to sell you Uranium.
But, yes, we do expect the NSG to issue a waiver to Pakistan based on the merits of Pakistan's case and the safeguards put in place, and not because of any 'stick' Pakistan has to wave, since I do not recall 'stick waving' as being a part of the NSG charter or what have you. So long as the safeguards are in place to the satisfaction of the NSG, double standards and discrimination should not be expected.
India also had George Bush who went out of his way and did some serious muscle flexing especially with China to get India the deal. Do you actually see Obama staying up all night like Bush did ? On behalf of Pakistan? What is Pakistan going to offer in return?
We have already sacrificed a lot in the WoT, and cooperation continues to increase. And what could be offered is potential nuclear trade, perhaps not as large as a billion people economy, but trade nonetheless. And if issues other than safeguards come into play, then lets admit that the process is discriminatory and applies double standards.
Finally, no one will risk a nuclear deal on a nation where terrorists have a free run. The idea of protecting some militants solely because they are not fighting the Pakistani state as of now has run its course. Sooner or later Pakistan has to make a decision. Whether it wants to join the international community as a proud responsible country which is willing to play by the book or whether it wants continue what it is doing now i.e. to run with the hares and hunt with the hounds.
An NSG waiver does not bind the NSG states into selling Pakistan technology, it merely frees the States into doing so. Pakistan already has an extensive nuclear infrastructure (both peaceful and weapons related) that is has managed to secure quite well despite the terrorist threat (which by the way is much diminished from last year). Pakistan has managed the purchase of nuclear power plants from China without issue and put them under IAEA safeguards, and given the tight economy, would likely go that route again were it given an NSG waiver, given favorable costs and familiarity with technology.
Most of the issues related to security and safeguards mentioned by you are issues of concern that Pakistan will have to address to the satisfaction of the NSG member states, but to do that there needs to be a dialog between the NSG and Pakistan and the initiation of a process that results in an NSG waiver for Pakistan. Anything other than that is double standards and discrimination.
