Transcripts
Nuke trade deal with India, vital dimension in ‘one of the most important strategic cooperation agreements’ for US
Full interview of Ambassador Blake’s exclusive interview with Lynn Ockersz (published on The Island of October 16)
Q: What are the principal provisions of the US-India nuclear trade agreement?
A: The purpose of the nuclear trade initiative was to open up civilian nuclear trade between our two countries which, as you know, was prohibited for 34 years, because India was a country that had not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and to that extent proved a great source of divisiveness between our countries and was a source of tension. Therefore, President Bush and Secretary Rice thought that given India’s good non-proliferation record, its big energy needs and our growing strategic cooperation, there was a real opportunity to figure out a way to bring India into the non-proliferation regime and make it part of the system while at the same time allowing it to build more reactors, and gain more access to uranium which would help to meet its growing energy needs. This is the grand bargain we were looking for.
Q: Does it follow from this that you will be closely monitoring India’s nuclear programme?
A; It is not so much that US will. An important part of the agreement was that India went to the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), which governs these matters, and they concluded what is called a Safeguards Agreement, under which 14 of India’s 22 nuclear reactors would be subject to international inspection by the IAEA. That was a key part of the agreement as was agreement by the so-called Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, which included all the countries which supported this scheme. So, those were two very key international imprimaturs that helped to persuade the US Congress to support the agreement as well.
Q: Since the US is engaged in a "war on terror’, would not the export of nuclear technology open the possibility of militant organizations acquiring a nuclear weapons capability?
A: I don’t think that would be the case with India. As I said, India has had a strong non-proliferation record, they have resisted attempts by rogue nations to purchase nuclear technology in the past and they have pledged as part of this to maintain strong export control standards. One of the things that was negotiated was that India agree to fulfill and implement standards that are consistent with what is called the Missile Technology Control Regime. So, it has international level export control commands. It has already shown a non-proliferation record.
Q: With the US-India civilian nuclear deal causing some concern in Pakistan, how would the US deal with a Pakistani demand that the US enter into a civilian nuclear trade deal with it too?
A: We really don’t take this with that much concern. There was some initial concern in Pakistan but we and our friends in India have been able to reassure Pakistan that this should not be in any way a threat to them. This is about India acquiring technology to meet its civilian energy needs and not about building more weapons. In fact it is in many ways an opportunity because it would help Pakistan in several ways. If it has nuclear technology India would not have to import as much oil and so its energy security would be enhanced. This is not a threat to Pakistan and I don’t think Pakistan sees it as a threat.
Q: But how would the US handle a request from Pakistan in the future that a similar deal be entered into with it?
A: Pakistan has had a more serious non-proliferation problem. A.Q. Khan, was for many years, a leading proliferator of nuclear technology. It would be up to Pakistan to show that they can build the same kind of strong non-proliferation record that the Indians have.
Q: On the subject of the provisions of the nuclear deal, it was mentioned that the agreement was a dimension of the growing strategic cooperation between the US and India. Could you elaborate on this aspect of the agreement?
A: This deal is really part of the wider cooperation which is taking place between India and the US. When President Bush came into office he had this vision of the world’s largest democracy, which is India, with the world’s oldest democracy, which is the US, working together on the common issues and the common threats which we face in the world today. The President believed right from the beginning that whatever we do we have to do much more with the Indians to pursue our common interests in the world. After Sept.11, the Indians came to realize that we in fact do have many common interests. We began to work together; we had growing military cooperation and growing cooperation of our policy to address some of the regional issues and also some of the global issues. We also worked together on things like agricultural cooperation, education and as we did that some of the concerns that both of our countries had about cooperating with each other began to diminish and people began to recognize the opportunities that we had and this civil nuclear agreement is really the lynch-pin in that. But again it would be a mistake to say that that is the only thing we are working on. We are working on a huge range of issues now and I think this is going to be one of our most important strategic relationships in the world.
Q: Given the considerable poverty in India and for that matter in other parts of South Asia, would not dabbling in the export of nuclear technology, distract governments in this region from pursuing development?
A: Again, I think, one of the key interests of India is to meet its growing energy needs. Right now it derives a very small percentage of its energy and this agreement opens the door to fulfilling that ambition. It also opens the door to much greater trade with the US and other countries. They are going to have to meet their energy needs one way or another and we think nuclear energy is an effective way to do that. And it is also one way to save the environment, since it is more environmentally sensitive. Frankly, as the Indian economy continues to grow at very high levels you will see growing numbers of Indians being lifted out of poverty. In fact that has been the record over the past twenty years. The middle class is now estimated to number a huge market, frankly.
Q: Would it follow that the US would advocate the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes by other South Asian states?
A: I don’t want to make a generalization. Every single case, every single country is different, a lot will depend on what their non-proliferation record has been in the past, whether they are a democracy or not and very many other factors. In very many ways India is a very special case, that allowed us to go forward with this agreement and I hesitate to say that we are prepared to offer the same deal to every other country in the world. It will depend on the individual circumstances.
Q; How would you guard against an arms race in South Asia, in the wake of this deal?
A; Again, I don’t think India is interested in acquiring a lot of nuclear weapons. They understand, as well as we do, that nuclear weapons are expensive to build and to maintain. They are needed as a deterrent against other countries that have nuclear weapons, such as the Chinese. As we have said many times, if the Chinese and the Pakistanis were to go into those agreements, the Indians were going to as well. I don’t think they have large ambitions to acquire more nuclear weapons than other nations that have those.
Q: On the Iranian nuclear issue, is it that Iran does not to submit to the non-proliferation regime?
A: Iran is a leading example of a country that has defied the IAEA, unlike India. Very many countries have serious concerns over Iran acquiring nuclear technology and this was reflected in the UN sanctions which were passed recently. This is indeed a matter of serious concern.