US Senate begins hearing Condi Rice on N-deal

United States Senator Richard Lugar (Indiana Republican), who is the chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee and whose endorsement and support in key to Congressional approval of the US-India civilian nuclear agreement, in welcoming Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice appearing before his panel to testify on the deal, declared there is no denying the value of a strategic relationship with India, but laid out a laundry list of concerns the nuclear agreement throws up.

Lugar said, 'The India nuclear deal is one of the most ambitious foreign policy initiatives to come before Congress in many years,' and argued that 'given the complexity and importance of the issue, the Administration must continue to be responsive to this Committee and to the entire Congress.'

The senior lawmaker, who introduced the bill in the Senate on behalf of the Administration to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and provide India with an exclusive exemption to consummate the deal, but has not himself come out yet in favor of the agreement, acknowledged that 'the Committee is cognizant of how valuable a closer relationship with India could be for the United States.'

• Complete coverage: The India-US nuclear tango

'I believe that we will find little argument in Congress with the general premise that the national security and economic future of the United States would be enhanced by a strong and enduring partnership with India,' he said.

'Our nations share common democratic values and the potential of our economic engagement is limitless. The progress made by India in the last decade is one of the world's major success stories. With a well-educated middle class that is larger than the entire US population, India can be an anchor of stability in Asia and an engine of global economic growth.

'Despite this success,' he noted, 'the Indian government recognizes that much of its growing population still lives in poverty. To overcome these conditions, it will need more trade, more scientific and technical cooperation, and most of all, more energy.'

Thus, Lugar explained, 'India's energy needs are expected to double by 2025. The United States has an interest in expanding energy operation with India to develop new technologies, cushion supply disruptions, cut green house gas emissions, and prepare for declining global fossil fuel reserves.'

He said America's 'own energy problems will be exacerbated if we do not forge energy partnerships with India, China, and other nations experiencing rapid economic growth,' and pointed out that this is why he has introduced legislation S2435,

the Energy Diplomacy and Security Act, 'which would encourage international energy dialogues and advance a broad range of energy diplomacy goals.'

But Lugar said 'in pursuing a nuclear relationship with India, we must deal with some fundamental facts.' Enumerating his and his colleagues concerns, he then noted, 'India has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty; it has built and tested nuclear weapons; and it has declared its intention to continue its nuclear weapons programs and the production of fissile material.

'Although the US-India Civilian Nuclear Agreement would move India into a closer relationship with the International Atomic Energy Agency and would put more Indian reactors under safeguards,' he argued that 'it would not prevent India from expanding its nuclear arsenal.'

Lugar declared that consequently, 'If Congress approves this agreement, we will be establishing a new course after decades of  declining any cooperation with India's nuclear program.'

He said 'it was apparent from our earlier briefing that the Bush Administration considered the implications of this agreement on our international nonproliferation posture. After weighing many factors, the President and his team came down on the side of concluding this agreement with the Indian government. They judged that the deal could be implemented without undercutting our nonproliferation advocacy and that its benefits included stronger Indian cooperation with international nonproliferation efforts.'

Lugar said that 'now Congress must undertake its own exhaustive deliberations on this matter, and we must reach our own conclusions. No one should suggest that the answers to our questions are either easy or obvious. What is required is a thorough, bipartisan review of this agreement in the context of nonproliferation goals, global energy requirements, environmental concerns, and our geo-strategic relationship with India.'

Lugar told Rice that notwithstanding all of the briefings — both public and classified — provided by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns — the chief US negotiator of the nuclear deal — and Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph, while encompassing a broad range of topics, 'I believe we have only scratched the surface of this intricate agreement and the national security questions it has raised.'