Analysis
Report by Vincent Dowd
July 21, 2008
…“Currently nuclear energy accounts for about 3 percent of India’s total energy output. It may increase to about 15 to 20 to perhaps even 25 percent in the coming two decades”…
…“If India’s burning less coal and using more nuclear fuel then it is unlikely to release as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, or other greenhouse gases. Third is India’s been under three decades of what they see as technology denial, on the civil nuclear side, but also in terms of other high technologies, dual, what they call dual use technologies, so space would be one aspect of it. The fourth would be economic. This in some ways opens the high-tech and civil nuclear energy market. And the fifth would be strategic and this is mostly symbolic. The U.S. is saying we’re willing to turn a leaf on three years of mutual acrimony concerning nuclear issues”…
…“The other pocket of opposition has come from the right, hawks who believe that this will compromise India’s ability to test its nuclear weapons in the future if the circumstances require that. They have more of a point, but the costs of a test will always be high. They were in 1998 when India did test last. It underwent several years of sanctions. The BJP which is in opposition now and is opposing the deal, did a lot to get this deal started between 2001 and 2004 when they were in power, so in many ways this is political opportunism at play”…
…“The U.S. and the nonproliferation movement would ideally like all 22 reactors to be under safeguards. The Indians would ideally like zero. So, I mean, I think 14 out of 22 represents a halfway point. I mean, it’s a deal in the classic sense of the word. Both sides are meeting roughly halfway”…