Nuclear deal

So now that the nuclear deal has been passed by the House of Representatives and Condoleeza Rice will be coming to India as soon as Minister of External Affairs, Pranab Mukherjee, is back from conducting puja in his village, can we celebrate India's arrival onto the global power scene? Or should we give voice to grave misgivings about what the deal will do to India's future security scenario?

Any step taken in India these days is progress, and none more so than the nuclear deal, which seems to have occupied policy mindset so overwhelmingly that our government has been unable to focus on anything else since June 2005, including terrorism, homegrown militancy and growing Naxalism, land acquisition, financial sector reforms, etc. etc. So we can now be thrilled that by 2050, as much as 25% of our electricity needs could come from nuclear sources. Of course, this is in a best-case scenario, provided India makes progress on the policy front in implementing visionary announcements, an area where our track record has not exactly been exemplary. More likely, we may be able to achieve something like a 15-20% proportion. Dependence on coal, hydro, and oil is likely to continue. Still, even this proportion will be significant.

Even more significant may be spin-offs accruing from our ascendance to the nuclear technology 'high table'. India is currently deprived, we are told, of technology that may help us in our space programs, missile development, and cutting-edge industries, where we, due to our superior brain-power, have natural advantages. Billions of dollars worth of new opportunities may open up. Excellent.

But say in the next 8-10 years, before our first nuclear power plants start functioning (again best-case scenario), one of our neighbours tests a nuclear device or aims more nuclear warheads at us. What will be our options? We will have already spent several of those billions of dollars on importing the reactors and setting them up. We will already have contracted for regular supplies of material to keep them going. Will we now have to negotiate with 45 NSG members before we can retaliate? Or do we conduct our own nuclear test in the emergency, and then negotiate with 45 nations not to impose sanctions?

Probably, retaliatory tests will not attract sanctions, although there is little clarification available on this. Testing is testing, whether retaliatory or not, and the US government has several times said that testing is not permissible under its laws. But the energy program could get severely undermined if any of the 45 nations is in any way unhappy with our foreign policy decisions.

In the next several weeks, expect euphoria on the deal, lots of billion-dollar contracts being signed, smiles on faces of industry honchos, many more overseas visits by bureaucrats, and a hope that at last we can get our act together on power supply.

In the next several years, expect the floundering of the nuclear deal on practicalities - such as location, corruption, etc. - acceleration of nuclear weapons programs of our neighbours - who practically have us over a barrel now - and much diplomatic negotiation with other countries on our foreign policy direction. On the other hand, being now officially a hand-maiden for the world's greatest power (which may not be so bad), we can run to the US for protection whenever the world bullies us.