India will be keeping its fingers crossed the US decision to oppose the China-Pakistan nuclear deal will carry significant weight when the plan comes before the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) for ratification.
The US had been sending mixed signals since the deal to set up two Chinese power reactors in Pakistan was made public. With the United States needing Chinese support for sanctions against Iran, it had initially only said it was seeking clarification on the deal from China. This came on the back of Pakistan’s own demands during a strategic dialogue with the United States in pursuit of a nuclear deal like the Indo-American one.
But after India expressed concern about the deal, first privately to China and the United States and then publicly, the US toughened its opposition. China, for its part, has maintained that a reactor deal with Pakistan signed before Beijing joined the NSG was effectively the ‘grandfathering’ of the present compact and therefore means the deal needs no NSG approval.
On her most recent visit to Pakistan, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised to work with Islamabad on civilian nuclear energy cooperation. ‘It took years to do it with India,’ Clinton said. ‘But we are committed to pursuing it (for Pakistan) and trying to overcome the obstacles that might stand in the way….’
However, at a US House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing, Vann H. Van Diepen, acting Assistant Secretary of State for international security and non-proliferation, said, ‘By definition, we do not support any activity that goes against the (NSG) guidelines. Based on the facts we are aware of, it would occur to us that this sale (of reactors) would not be allowed to occur without any exemption from the NSG.’
China could disregard the NSG completely if it decides that assisting Pakistan, its all-weather ally, is worth the risk of courting international opprobrium. It might also see defying the US as part of its rise, although it would also make it harder for this rise to be described as ‘peaceful’.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Syed
LOL at Mr Subramanian at his skewed interpretations of US comments. Nowhere did they say they would oppose the deal; in fact they can’t. US needs our help in Afghanistan – the most pressing security situation. Indian efforts are futile. Deal has already been approved by both sides and the world has accepted its necessity. And regarding “although it would also make it harder for this rise to be described as ‘peaceful’” LOLOLOL – So helping Pakistan, a formal ally of both US and China, deal with its energy problems would not be considered peaceful? Keep dreaming and hating on Pakistan.
Reality Check
Syed
In the real world, here is a link from a Pakistani newspaper stating that the US will vote against the deal.
http://www.daily.pk/us-to-vote-against-china-pak-nuclear-deal-at-nuclear-suppliers-group-19220/
LOLing does not prove anything. Regardless of what happens, this was not a skewed interpretation. This was what was said.
Harish C Menon
Mr Syed… Is strawman strategy your all-weather tool?
“…although it would also make it harder for this rise to be described as ‘peaceful’ — This was in reference to a scenario where China ignores the NSG’s opposition (and invokes “international opprobrium”) to its nuke deal with Pakistan.
It was not with reference to “helping” Pakistan.
Where does this touchiness spring from?
Pakistani
Harish, you may want check your hypocrisy at the door.
Where does this “NSG’s opposition” emanate from? India or respected members of the international community? China, as you probably know, is a key member of the NSG(not to mention a world power). India isn’t and won’t be one anytime soon be due to its egregious diversion of ostensibly peaceful nuclear material for nuclear bombs production. Hence, India has no locus standi on the issue.
You mention “international opprobrium”, yes I am fully aware of the widespread “international opprobrium” against the India nuclear deal. To this day, there is a large section of the world including the white angel NSG states such as New Zealand and Switzerland who warn of the dangers of a deal which allows Indian to produce many more bombs, for use no doubt on Pakistan.
Any such opposition to Pakistan is an Indian initiative and a crude attempt at halting Pakistan’s legitimate peaceful aspirations. If India should want to pursue this self-defeating path, surely Pakistan will take appropriate countermeasures.
Harish C Menon
@Pakistani
Seriously… you guys have a major comprehension problem out there… At least read the comments properly before responding, to mitigate such disasters.
My comments are in response to Mr Syed’s. Nowhere have I mentioned anything about India’s nuclear profile or qualified Pakistan’s with any adjective. My comment was purely based on the article alone and I have taken care not to make it judgemental as far as possible.
But now that you insist on roughing it up, let me say this. If you or any “respected” member of the international community can come out with even an iota of evidence for India’s “egregious diversion of ostensibly peaceful nuclear material for nuclear bombs production” I would be the first one to oppose it. In any case, for the records, I thoroughly oppose nuclear power as such — peaceful or otherwise. But what we are discussing here is much more than that.
And dear sir, it is not I who mentioned “international opprobrium”. It is the author of the article, Mr Subramaniam. I assumed readers know the meaning of putting something in double quotes.
And yeah, I don’t see any reason why India should not oppose the fortification of a rogue nation’s ‘peaceful’ nuclear arsenal — particularly when the rogue nation happens to be our juvenile neighbour.
As for how peaceful that nuclear programme is, you will be well advised to fix an appointment with a certain high-profile thief (or terrorist, depending on which decade one refers to — the 70s, when he stole designs or the 80s and 90s when he passed on nuclear info to your fellow rogue states) called A Q Khan, for further information.
wipsEssepay
really?