The Indo-US nuclear deal has crossed the final hurdle with the US Congress giving its final nod to the 123 agreement which will allow civil nuclear commerce between India and the US. The controversial deal has gone through hard negotiations and uncertainties and faced strong opposition from different quarters in both countries for different reasons. It is a landmark event in the international nuclear regime because for the first time the accepted rules for nuclear co-operation have been rewritten for India, which will now be considered a de facto nuclear power. The IAEA safeguards agreement, the NSG waiver and the 123 agreement were steps towards that. With these enabling measures India can enter into nuclear trade deals with other countries to give a boost to its energy sector.
Inspite of the Congressional approval and the earlier IAEA and NSG actions, there is a strong segment of international opinion that sees India as the gainer from the deal without having to pay anything in return. There are lingering doubts in India too about the usefulness of the agreement and even fears about its implications for India’s strategic nuclear programme, especially after the assurances given by the US administration to Congress that US nuclear co-opearation would be terminated and sanctions could be reimposed if india conducts another nuclear test. The agreement apparently rests on India’s unilateral moratorium on nuclear tests. But much of the opposition within the country is political and the ostensible advantages from the deal outweigh the perceived disadvantages. It would also be wrong to assume that the nuclear deal would make India a strategic ally of the US. It is too big a country to play second fiddle to another. In fact countries like France and Russia might gain more than the US from nuclear trade with India, as these countries have a more advanced nuclear industry and are less inhibited by political baggage than the US.
France has already signed a civilian...