Questions About the India Deal, Finally

NYT, October 6
Editorial

The Bush administration and the American business community have been hoping for a swift, rubber-stamp approval of their ill-conceived nuclear trade deal with India. Luckily, some members of Congress, and some American allies, are finally asking questions.

Congress was far too uncritical when it gave preliminary approval to the agreement in December. As a next step, Washington must get a change in rules from the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the main providers of so-called civilian nuclear technology around the world. All nuclear trade with India has been banned since it refused to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and tested nuclear weapons.

Now some members of Congress are beginning to raise doubts about the deal. The proposal introduced in the House this week by Howard Berman, a California Democrat, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, would be a sense of the House resolution. But by highlighting bipartisan concerns, it should bolster skeptics in the suppliers’ group who rightfully fear that the agreement could benefit New Delhi’s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power, while making it even harder to rein in the ambitions of nuclear wannabes, including Iran.

The resolution would urge the administration to answer key questions such as why an implementing agreement, completed in July, seems so at odds with the law Congress approved the previous December. Aiming to keep critics in both capitals off-balance, American and Indian officials have offered conflicting interpretations about whether — as the law demands, but the agreement fudges — the United States would cut off trade and fuel deliveries if the Indians test another nuclear weapon.

The resolution also instructs the administration to ensure that any change in the suppliers’ group rules be consistent with United States law. This would include adopting specific conditions that would require all member states to halt nuclear trade with India if New Delhi tests a weapon. And it would ban member states from transferring equipment that can make nuclear fuel for a reactor or a weapon.

If the suppliers’ group fails to set these conditions, it will be far too easy for New Delhi to do an end-run around Washington and buy technology and fuel from states that are even more eager to make a buck.

President Bush is right when he says that the United States needs to develop strong ties with democratic India. But he erred in making a nuclear deal the centerpiece of that relationship. And he erred by being so eager for a deal that sufficient thought wasn’t given to its implications. Now it’s up to Congress and other countries to try to limit the damage.