There was a scintillating
talk on “Indo-US Civil Nuclear Co-operation Agreement”,
delivered by Shri K Sreedhar Rao, IAS(Retd) & Member,
National Security Advisory Board, Govt. of India at
Bangalore International centre on 22nd June, 2007 at
6 PM. The session was presided over by Shri A P Venkateswaran,
IFS(Retd), Former Foreign Secretary, Govt. of India.
After a brief welcome by the Director of the Centre
Shri Sreedhar Rao delivered his talk. The The text of
the talk is as under:
“ Ever since July, 2005 the issue of Indo-US
Civil Nuclear Co-operation has been in the air and statements,
reports and analysis have been emanating from various
quarters. Mr. Nicolas Burns the US points man has been
burning mid-night oil and on our side the National Security
Advisor Shri. M K Narayanan and a high powered negotiating
team has been burning equally copious quantities of
oil . The Ministry of External Affairs is more involved
now as also the Atomic Energy establishment. Several
eminent Nuclear Scientists have been making statements
some supporting and some opposing. The Leftists see
this whole thing as one more conspiracy hatched by haughty
American imperialists with nefarious designs of subjugating
the poor Indians. The Right speak of failure to safeguard
national interests. A good deal of technical terms are
also bandied about as part of the discourse. The issue
therefore is of considerable interest from a variety
of points of view , has lent itself to impressive demonstration
and exciting debate and I am sure you and many others
would like answers to several questions. I will make
an attempt to list the probable questions that may require
answers.
- Does India need this agreement and if so why?
- Are we compromising the nation’s strategic
interests by entering into this deal
- What benefits are likely to flow if this deal is
ultimately gone through
- Why are the Americans interested in this deal?
In order to understand the fundamental motivation for
India to have initiated this dialogue with the USA a
brief review of the energy scenario in India needs to
be undertaken. Let us remind ourselves that such a dialogue
began during the NDA period. (The Strobe Talbolt Jaswant
Singh dialogue).
There is little doubt that the energy scenario in India
is depressing and is in a mess. The country’s
ambition of achieving double digit growth can remain
a pipe dream if the current situation is allowed to
continue. If the country has to achieve 9% to 10% rate
of growth on a sustained long term basis (which is the
only way to abolish poverty in this country and not
mere slogan mongering), availability of adequate energy
from as many sources as possible is a sinequanon and
the energy sector has to grow at a rate higher than
10% if we are to make-up for the backlog and provide
for the massive growth in demand. Unfortunately, in
every plan this country has failed to achieve the target
set and has not even achieved 50% of the target. (7th
Plan target 30000 MW achieved 20000MW, 9th Plan target
40000 MW achieved 19000 MW, , 10th Plan target 41000
MW likely achievement 23000 MW). On the other hand the
total present capacity for the electricity generation
is 160 Gegawatts (1 Gegawatts is 1000 MW’s), by
2030 the electricity capacity required for the economy
to grow at nearly 10% is 800 Gegawatts i.e. almost 5
times the present capacity. As it is the demand and
supply gap is nearly 40,000 MW’s and is slated
to grow. China is already producing 800 Gegawatts and
is adding 50 Gegawatts or more every 5 years.
You are no doubt aware that energy production is contingent
on supplies of
- Coal
- Hydro carbons ( Petroleum & Gas)
- Hydro Power
- Non conventional sources of energy &
- Nuclear
Each of this unfortunately is beset with problems. Coal
production has not been able to match demand and after
nationalization this sector’s growth has been
inadequate with poor additions to capacity, wrong pricing,
high transportation costs, poor quality coal (high ash
sulphur content, low calorific value), hostage to coal
mafia and most importantly the highly polluting nature
of coal. We have had to resort to imports to run some
of the power plants.
We are dependant to the extent of 70% on imports as
regards petroleum and Gas and this may go up to 90%.
Already reports indicate that even Saudi production
has peeked and with no new worthwhile discoveries and
there is the strong possibility of steady decline in
supplies. Unfortunately, an overwhelming proportion
of the world’s petroleum & gas reserves are
in highly unstable, volatile and conflict prone areas
with seemingly unresolvable and deep seated animosities
(the Middle East, Nigeria etc). If Mahmoud Ahmedinejad
breathes fire which he often does or Iran’s the
supreme leader Ayatollah Khamanei hits out at the American
devil, oil prices jump. Crude Oil prices which are now
around $ 70 are predicted to exceed $100 in the near
future casting a heavy burden on economies such as India
heavily dependent on imported oil and Gas. Natural Gas
and LNG are indexed to the price of oil. Coal and natural
Uranium prices have gone up in the international markets,
in sympathy with oil prices. Our efforts to obtain Gas
through from Iran – the IPI pipeline, Turkmenistan
– the TAP pipeline and from Myanmar via Bangladesh
are all fraught with serious political and security
related concerns and can remain pipe dreams. We may
be heading for a double whammy of declining availability
and rising prices. Like Coal Oil is also highly polluting
and has been contributing to global warming in a big
way.
As to non-conventional energies almost all the technologies
are yet to be economically viable at present and heavily
dependent on subsidies. Recent developments however
in the field of solar energy with the cost of photo
voltaic cells coming down progressively, seem to hold
very substantial promise even in near term though recently
there has been some increase in prices due to shortage
of silicon. Some Bio fuels appear to be promising (Jetropha),
but once again one must strike a note of caution as
any large scale diversion of land can have serious adverse
consequences as regards the food chain. Already because
of heavy subsidies the foolish Americans are diverting
huge tracts of land to grow Maize to be converted to
Bio fuel, even though the cost of production without
subsided is more than the cost of fossil fuels. The
Germans have a legitimate grouse – beer prices
are going up as barley is being taken away for biofuels.
A far better alternative is the Brazilian route of manufacturing
ethanol from sugarcane. We have started this recently
in a small way.
As regards Hydro power the initial capital cost are
very heavy and in India most of the rivers which can
be exploited are in the Himalayas or in the North East.
While efforts to exploit Hydro power has been stepped
up there can be serious problems of transmission over
long distances to centres of consumption and if the
dire prediction on Global Warming come true with the
melting of Himalayan snows and glaciers, hydro energy
generation can run into grave difficulties. Population
pressures deforestation, soil erosion and steep reduction
in output during the dry season are all factors which
affect exploitation of the hydro potential. Co-operation
with countries like Nepal have their own limitations.
With Bhutan however we have had substantial successes.
On top of this attention needs to be drawn to the ills
that plague the electricity sector in the country. Briefly
these are
- Inefficient and corrupt SEB’s overburdened
by disproportionately large and in-disciplined staff
and unlimited political interference.
- T & D losses (over 40%) which refuse to come
down.
- Free power to the farm sector used often to cover
up theft with the connivance of the staff.
- Failure to attract private investment which is scared
away by uncertainties of recovering costs, and lack
of freedom to sell power generated.
- Lack of political will being hostage to electoral
politics. All the talk of power sector reform for the
past ten years have not yielded any tangible results.
You may recall how the Orissa experiment failed and
privatization in New Delhi has not been a success.
All this bring us to the question whether India should
go forward to exploit nuclear energy. France for example
gets nearly 60% of its energy through the nuclear route.
After the “Chernobyl” disaster grave safety
concerns had been raised, but it appears that technological
progress and improved design has to a very large extent,
reduced these concerns though not all together eliminated.
The cost factor is still an issue, but compared to coal
and the fossil fuels as feeds stocks, the nuclear route
is environmentally friendly and in course if time when
nuclear fusion becomes possible, there can be unlimited
supply of energy. The Chinese have recently claimed
that they have made substantial progress in this area.
No doubt India should continue to work towards exploring
all avenues as regards energy generation – solar
energy, wind energy clean coal technologies, Gas hydrate,
better utilization of its Gas finds where there seems
to be substantial progress. (It would appear, as per
some estimates that India may become almost self reliant
with respect to Natural Gas was only marginal imports
by 2010-2011 bur the Directorate of Hydro carbons has
unfortunately heavily discounted these estimates). Recent
developments for using Hydrogen seem to hold a great
deal of promise. We should also pay adequate attention
to energy conservation, technology up-gradation by better
use of super critical boilers with higher thermal efficiency.
We must cut down wasteful and inefficient use of imported
fuels such as diesel, (truck transportation while railways
can be used). Much needed reforms in the electricity
sector – open access systems, realistic pricing
– need to be taken up.
In this scenario the renewed interest in exploiting
Nuclear energy appears to be justified., but as you
are aware after Pokran I in 1974, India became a nuclear
paraiah. We rightly refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty- a highly discriminatory document recognizing
only those who exploded a nuclear weapon by 1968 as
“weapons power” and permanently denying
all others of the right of develop a nuclear weapon,
even in the face of imminent threat, in a dangerous
security environment. Also none of the signatories particularly
the nuclear weapon powers bothered to implement the
most fundamental provision of the NPT which called for
universal nuclear disarmament. After all this is supposed
to be a ”nonproliferation treaty”. It can’t
be NP for others and P for an exclusive club of five.
As of now our entire nuclear energy program suffers
from serious limitations primarily inadequacy of the
basic nuclear fuel namely Uranium and lack of technological
sophistication. Since, we are not signatories of the
NPT and since we became a defacto nuclear weapon power,
we have no access to Uranium from any source and for
the technology to build larger and more sophisticated
nuclear power plants. After decades of sincere and concentrated
efforts nuclear energy does not contribute more than
3% (around 5000 MW) of the total energy generation in
India and our design capabilities enable us to build
nuclear power plants of only around 500 MW and for this
also we take anything up to 10 years. Our indigenous
availability of Uranium is capable of supporting a programme
of only around 100000 MWs but again has become a victim
of environmental lobbies and ill advised agitations
prticulars in the Khasi hills. The Hywenwit Achik liberation
Army and the Khasi Students Union have threatened mayhem
if mining is continues in that area. On top of this
the ore that we have is of poor quality – called
tail end quality compared to Australian or Namibian
ores and this an impact on the cost of generating energy.
Yes we have built nuclear weapons, have the capability
to produce a hydrogen bomb (Pokhra II) and are supposed
to have a credible nuclear deterrence, but for achieving
this deterrence based totally on indigenous efforts
(unlike Pakistan) the country has paid a heavy price.
The country has been naturally anxious to get out of
this uncomfortable situation. After 1998 Pokhran II
efforts were made by the Vajpayee Government to get
the international community particularly the US to review
their stance as regard co-operation in the field of
nuclear energy. The famous Strobe Talbot– Jaswant
Singh dialogue may be recalled. India realizes that
even though we have some 1/3rd of the world’s
thorium reserves, technology is not available to use
this as a nuclear fuel, though work is going on in this
area. Our Scientists tell us that Thorium utilization
is possible only after nearly 30 years and even for
this very substantial quantum of Uranium is required.
If after thirty years of effort some one tells you that
at least another thirty years is required, you know
that the problem is nowhere near solution.
Let us also remember that in the history of nuclear
programmes anywhere in the world no country has truly
self reliance. The Americans built on what the Germans
had started, right from the path breaking discovering
of Einstein. The Russians stole nuclear secrets from
the Americans. The British and French programmes as
well as that of Israel are of American origin and benefited
substantially from American assistance. The Chinese
got substantial assistance from the Russians and every
one knows Pakistan’s programme is entirely based
on Chinese technology and dependent on Chinese assistance
not to mention the thieving and smuggling of material
and technology by AG Khan and his ilk. To a certain
extent the North Korean program has received substantial
support from both China and Pakistan. And there is the
nefarious cooperation among China Pakistan and N Korea
with respect to both weapons and delivery capability.
Even the Iranian programme had received US assistance
during the time of the Shah and the AQ Khan proliferation
network in recent times.
So it’s against this background that the historic
July 18, 2005 – Bush – Manamohan Singh agreement
was concluded. Briefly the elements of this agreement
are as follows:
- The US recognizes India as a responsible State (such
as the US) with advanced nuclear technology and hence,
should be entitled to benefits and advantage available
to such states. India would reciprocally agree that
it would ready to assume responsibilities and practices
and acquire the same benefits and advantages as other
leading countries with advanced nuclear technology such
as the United States”. In other words, India though
not a signatory of NPT is to be recognized as nuclear
weapon State and be able to procure raw material as
well as technology for (let it be clear) only for civil
nuclear energy and not for weapons.
- The agreement commits US to modify its legislative
framework to enable India to purchase raw material and
technology.
- The US also commits to work with friends and allies
i.e. the nuclear supply group of countries who will
conclude separate with India for he same twin purposes.
- In the process India can come out of its long nuclear
isolation. And many a door will be opened both for Uranium
ore and technology.
Similarly India will have to conclude agreements with
International Atomic Energy Agency for the purpose of
inspection / safeguards etc.
So substantial a change in the way the Americans and
others will treat India with regard to nuclear energy
and availability of Uranium and nuclear technology naturally
will demand a price and what is this price? India has
agreed
- That it will separate the existing nuclear establishments
into two categories namely civilian and weapon related
programmes. (14 civilian & 8 weapons related).
- The civilian nuclear establishment will alone be
entitled to utilize the Uranium and technologies that
can become available under the agreement.
- These civilian nuclear establishments will be subject
IAEA safeguards and inspections.
- Any new nuclear establishment will have to be designated
in advance as civilian or military with the consequences
in terms of availability of raw material and technology
as well as safeguards.
- Those declared as military installations (present
eight and any future unit) will not be subject to inspection
or safeguards.
As you are aware this agreement as of now has gone
through the legislative process in the US resulting
ultimately in the “Hyde Act” which has been
signed into law by the American President and received
bipartisan support inspite of some nervousness on our
side. But the “Hyde Act” while containing
the elements mentioned above, favourable to India, since
it has to be in conformity with America’s atomic
energy Act, contains provisions which are considered
by some to be against our interest and about which a
good deal of screaming is going on. Basically these
concerns are
- India cannot test a new nuclear weapon and if it
foolishly does the Indo-US agreement will be terminated.
In other words, the voluntary unilateral moratorium
declared by Vajpayee after Pokhran II is sought to be
converted into a bilateral legally binding permanent
commitment.
- If India does foolishly test it is also expected
to return the equipment and fuel transferred. This again
is in conformity with the US Atomic Energy Act.
- The 3rd sticking point is the right to reprocessing
spent fuel and the technology thereof. The American’s
do not want to give us this technology as the fear is
that such reprocessing can boost the weapons program.
It is through reprocessing that Plutonium is extracted
and India’s weapons programme is basically Plutonium
based. Our fast breeder reactor programme will benefit
by this reprocessing technology. Also for the Thorium
utilization one prototype has been built in Kalpakkam.
(In Tarapur the US neither permitted reprocessing or
took back spent fuel). The Americans are being somewhat
unreasonable in this as such a requirement is not dictated
either by the Hyde Act or the US Atomic Energy Act and
countries like Japan have been permitted reprocessing.
Let it be said also that India is already undertaking
reprocessing though on a fairly small scale.
- The 4th sticking point is denial of fuel to energy
plants which have come into being during the currency
of the agreement, but can be starved due to unilateral
action. The Tarapur experience has been bitter for India
and what India is asking for a “life time assurance
of raw material supplies”.
As of now after the “Hyde Act” dialogue
is on to conclude what is known as the 123 agreement
which is the agreement envisaged under US Atomic Energy
Act and has hence to be in conformity with the Act.
Some statements indicate that some considerable ground
has been covered and Nicholas Burns has been to Delhi.
Some feel that a political decision is required as the
officials have exhausted themselves negotiating. While
the question of return of material, the reprocessing
and life time supplies can it appears be resolved in
a manner which is not entirely un-satisfactory, the
major issue that requires India to take a decision will
be the permanent moratorium on further tests. India
has been arguing that India will have to test if China
or Pakistan conducts a test. Indeed it is the Americans
who are continuing to develop newer and more sophisticated
nuclear weapons ignoring totally the provisions of NPT
and they are in the process of developing “reliable
replacement war heads or RRW” (which are more
robust earth penetrating devices), So if the Americans
test it, this will be considered a direct threat by
the Russians and the Chinese and they will go about
developing matching weapons and delivery system. Hence
a new armes race will be triggered not by any one else
but by the American’s. The American’s have
been indicating that if at all this contingency arises
then America will bail us out by the President exercising
his prerogative of a “waiver”, exempting
us from the lethal consequences of conducting a test.
Let us therefore consider briefly whether the benefit
if India is to derive from this deal is more than adequate
to compensate for the negative points mentioned above.
I have no doubt that we need this deal and the price
to be paid is well within tolerable limits. The advantages
are
- We will get out of nuclear isolation
- Have open access to much needed Uranium and Technology
enabling us to accelerate the nuclear energy program
- Build nuclear power plants at a much faster rates
(France builds 1650 MW’s in 3 years against
India 200 MW’s in 10 years). Carry on our weapons
programmes having been acknowledged as a nuclear weapon
power by the international community
- Derive benefits of the NPT even if we are not signatories
of the NPT
What needs to be understood is that after long period
the Americans want to be our friends having treated
us as Russian stooges for a long time. The Americans
are already supporting us in a number of areas including
Kashmir and correspondingly degrading their relations
with Pakistan. This deal does open up a huge window
of opportunity and in a number of areas such as Science
and Technology, economic, commercial, political and
diplomatic one can look forward to a much better appreciation
of India’s needs by the Americans. Hence, this
agreement needs to be viewed in the wider context of
substantial expansion of Indo-US co-operation in a variety
of areas.
Yes we have been told not to conduct any more tests
and the deal is off if we are foolish enough to conduct
the test, but the Americans point out that look you
your self have declared a unilateral moratorium and
“no first use”. They hint darkly that you
already have a stock pile more than what is required
for a credible deterrence and have under development
adequate delivery capabilities. There is of course provision
of the Presidential waiver, but that will happen only
if there is an extreme event and we continue to be in
the good books of the Americans. I also feel that we
have desisted from testing from 1974 to 1998 while quietly
developing the technologies and have not tested for
the past 10 years. Why can’t we keep quiet for
another 20 years get all the benefits out of this agreement
as quickly as possible and be prepared to throw out
the agreement if testing is so definitely necessary?
Why are the Americans being friendly to us? What do
they have in this? It would appear that Bush administrator
has indeed invested heavily in this deal and Bush himself
regards this as a personal triumph a much needed one
as against so many of his failure. The American foreign
policy establishment does believe that there is great
and growing convergence of interest between India and
the US. Both countries face common threats international
terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism and need to counter.
China’s growing economic and political clout.
The Americans are particularly nervous about China’s
forays into Latin America and Africa and the growth
of left oriented regimes in their own backyard. The
Americans are now regarded as the enemies to be crushed
in the whole of the Islamic World and the relations
with Russia has become prickly with some angry rhetoric
from both sides caused by the American’s intruding
into erstwhile satellites of the ex-USSR (missile defense
etc). The Europeans have shown their inclination to
independent line of foreign policies. The American therefore
see a diminishing circle of friend and reliable allies.
They want new friends and they are prepared to review
long standing positions.”
The interaction that followed the talk was lively.
While complimenting Shri Rao on the clarity of his exposition,
several participants observed that the right for reprocessing
the nuclear fuel after use does not exist in the Agreement
and that several nuclear scientists seem to be opposed
to it. In his response, Shri Rao stated that the right
to reprocess spent fuel may come a little later, as
it did in the case of Japan, and in any case the technology
could be developed indigenously after the validity period
of the Agreement gets over. He also stressed that nuclear
scientists were fully involved at every stage of negotiation
of the Agreement. Some participants referred to the
difference of opinion existing between the engineers
and scientists within the Nuclear Establishment as the
major factor causing a division in this area. Shri Rao
responded to several other points for clarification
raised during the discussion. All in all, it was a high
quality interactive session.
The session concluded with a vote of thanks by the
Director of the Centre.
|