Read fine print before you pop the bubbly: Scientists
Scientists have advised the govt not to rush in for celebrations, and instead wait and watch to see whether all its concerns are addressed in the reconciled legislation.
By TNN |
NEW DELHI: Scientists here on Friday termed as the adoption of Indo-US nuclear deal bill by the US Senate an important step but advised New Delhi not to rush in for celebrations, and instead wait and watch to see whether all its concerns are addressed in the reconciled legislation.
“The Indo-US nuclear deal is an important step in the entire process of getting on with the deal but is not the end of the process,” cautioned M R Srinivasan, former Atomic Energy Commission chief and currently a member of the Commission
“Today’s process has shown a strong bipartisan support in the cooperation regime with India in nuclear matters. But we have to wait and see if both House and Senate in its joint session in December would take up all the concerns expressed by India through various diplomatic channels,” Mr Srinivasan told news agencies.
“Even in the bilateral agreement ‘123’, we have to see the language of the American lawyers,” he added.
Former Barc director A N Prasad, who was part of IAEA inspection group on Iraq, said in Bangalore that though the “Passage of the Bill was expected.. with so many objectionable points in the current form, the bill is not acceptable to India and requires lot of reconciliation and sanitation.”
Former Atomic Energy Commission chairman P K Iyengar said: “They may have had little amendments in the bill but it does not mean it will favour India in all respects and before the finalisation, one must see the language used by Americans. Even in the 123 bilateral agreement, we have to see the language of the American lawyers.”
Mr Prasad hoped that when Congress returns on December 4 from its Thanksgiving Day break and before the lame-duck session ends two weeks later, ”We will come to know whether Americans will take note of our concerns and how subsequently we can work together.”
Former director of Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Placid Rodrigues , also insisted that the language of the bill cleared by the Senate would have to be scrutinised before a proper judgement could be made.
Listing the objectionable points in the bill, especially on supply of uranium, Mr Prasad recalled how US president George Bush had committed to India to provide a fail-safe methodology for uninterrupted fuel supply. In the current form, the Bill created a handto-mouth situation with regard to stockpiling of uranium for the lifetime of a reactor, Mr Prasad said, adding that this would not be acceptable to India.
“The Indo-US nuclear deal is an important step in the entire process of getting on with the deal but is not the end of the process,” cautioned M R Srinivasan, former Atomic Energy Commission chief and currently a member of the Commission
“Today’s process has shown a strong bipartisan support in the cooperation regime with India in nuclear matters. But we have to wait and see if both House and Senate in its joint session in December would take up all the concerns expressed by India through various diplomatic channels,” Mr Srinivasan told news agencies.
“Even in the bilateral agreement ‘123’, we have to see the language of the American lawyers,” he added.
Former Barc director A N Prasad, who was part of IAEA inspection group on Iraq, said in Bangalore that though the “Passage of the Bill was expected.. with so many objectionable points in the current form, the bill is not acceptable to India and requires lot of reconciliation and sanitation.”
Former Atomic Energy Commission chairman P K Iyengar said: “They may have had little amendments in the bill but it does not mean it will favour India in all respects and before the finalisation, one must see the language used by Americans. Even in the 123 bilateral agreement, we have to see the language of the American lawyers.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr Prasad hoped that when Congress returns on December 4 from its Thanksgiving Day break and before the lame-duck session ends two weeks later, ”We will come to know whether Americans will take note of our concerns and how subsequently we can work together.”
Former director of Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Placid Rodrigues , also insisted that the language of the bill cleared by the Senate would have to be scrutinised before a proper judgement could be made.
Listing the objectionable points in the bill, especially on supply of uranium, Mr Prasad recalled how US president George Bush had committed to India to provide a fail-safe methodology for uninterrupted fuel supply. In the current form, the Bill created a handto-mouth situation with regard to stockpiling of uranium for the lifetime of a reactor, Mr Prasad said, adding that this would not be acceptable to India.
In his remarks, Mr Iyengar said India should maintain a vigil even if the Indo-US nuclear Bill has been passed by the Senate. “It should not allow anything that would push it to a corner,” he cautioned.
“This may be a gain of the US and (a move) to put India under the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and Fissile Material Cut off Treaty (FMCT). It is up to the Indian government to ensure that there would be mutual gain out of the agreement rather than US insisting on untenable clauses such as CTBT and FMCT in the future,” Mr Iyengar said.
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
