Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US may offer India-like nuclear deal to Pakistan
The Times of India ^ | 22 March 2009 | The Times of India

Posted on 03/21/2010 1:00:49 PM PDT by James C. Bennett

WASHINGTON: Amid reports of massive 16-20 hour power outages across Pakistan causing public unrest, the Barack Obama administration has indicated it is open to Islamabad's plea for a civilian nuclear deal akin to the US-India agreement, notwithstanding continued disquiet about Pakistan's bonafides on the nuclear front.

The first indication of a possible policy shift by US, which had till now rejected Pakistan's entreaties for a nuclear deal, came in an interview the US ambassador to Islamabad, Anne Patterson, gave to a Pakistani-American journal in which she said the two sides were going to have "working level talks" on the subject during a strategic dialogue on March 24.

Patterson confirmed the claim of her Pakistani counterpart in Washington Hussain Haqqani, which were initially denied, that the two sides had had some initial discussions on the subject. Acknowledging that earlier US "non-proliferation concerns were quite severe", she said attitudes in Washington were changing.

"I think we are beginning to pass those and this is a scenario that we are going to explore," she told a LA-based Pakistani journal.

Another top US official, Af-Pak envoy Richard Holbrooke, was a little more circumspect. "We're going to listen carefully to whatever the Pakistanis say," he replied, when asked about Islamabad's demand for a civilian nuclear deal.

The Pakistani establishment, ahead of a wide-ranging strategic dialogue with US on March 24, has made parity with India, including a civilian nuclear deal, the centerpiece of its ramped-up engagement.

Intimations of a change in US policy came even as new reports emerged about the extent and scope of government-backed Pakistani nuclear proliferation in a book by former weapons inspector and non-proliferation activist David Albright. Successive US administrations, in an effort to absolve Islamabad and save it from embarrassment from past misdemeanors, have suggested that the country's nuclear mastermind A Q Khan acted on his own without permission from the Pakistani government or the military, but this assessment is strongly challenged by the non-proliferation community.

Talk of a nuclear deal with Pakistan also comes on the heels of the country signing a gas pipeline deal with Iran last week even as Washington was bearing down on Tehran.

The idea that Pakistan deserves its own nuclear deal to overcome a trust deficit with the United States was first proposed by Georgetown University academic Christine Fair. "More so than conventional weapons or large sums of cash, a conditions-based civilian nuclear deal may be able to diminish Pakistani fears of US intentions while allowing Washington to leverage these gains for greater Pakistani cooperation on nuclear proliferation and terrorism," Fair argued in a newspaper article earlier this year.

However, aside from Pakistan's proliferation footprints and ties with Iran, there is also the small matter of getting such a nuclear deal past the 44-member Nuclear Suppliers Group, which made an exception for India but might find Pakistan more unpalatable. The US-India deal itself remains to be fully implemented more than five years after it was first conceived.

Some experts also question whether Pakistan has the capacity to buy or absorb any nuclear power reactor given that the country is broke. But then, even signaling a shift in US policy is something that might mollify Pakistan for now. In fact, even Fair's recommendations of a conditional nuclear deal was seen in some Pakistani quarters as a conspiracy to penetrate and neutralize the country's nuclear assets.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: bhonukes; husseinobama; islam; muslim; muslimworld; nuclear; pakistan; proliferation

1 posted on 03/21/2010 1:00:50 PM PDT by James C. Bennett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Background:

The Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement, known also as the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal, refers to a bilateral accord on civil nuclear cooperation between the United States of America and the Republic of India.

The framework for this agreement was a July 18, 2005 joint statement by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and then U.S. President George W. Bush, under which India agreed to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities and place all its civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards and, in exchange, the United States agreed to work toward full civil nuclear cooperation with India.


2 posted on 03/21/2010 1:02:06 PM PDT by James C. Bennett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett
The idea that Pakistan deserves its own nuclear deal to overcome a trust deficit with the United States was first proposed by Georgetown University academic Christine Fair. "More so than conventional weapons or large sums of cash, a conditions-based civilian nuclear deal may be able to diminish Pakistani fears of US intentions while allowing Washington to leverage these gains for greater Pakistani cooperation on nuclear proliferation and terrorism," Fair argued in a newspaper article earlier this year.

Naive beyond desription.

3 posted on 03/21/2010 1:07:01 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

.
What they need is massive amounts of birth control.


4 posted on 03/21/2010 1:07:39 PM PDT by Touch Not the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Touch Not the Cat
What they need is massive amounts of birth population control.


5 posted on 03/21/2010 1:12:17 PM PDT by James C. Bennett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

White House and State Department are utter, utter failures.


6 posted on 03/21/2010 1:14:13 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

This government has lost it’s stupid flaming mind.

I’m not sure there is one single particle of intelligence in the entire White House/Congress/Cabinet, etc. Where are their heads - oh, never mind. I can answer that myself.


7 posted on 03/21/2010 2:22:40 PM PDT by jtill (We thank you, O Lord, that the future is bright, though the present is dark . [J. Coggan])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Great countries, like great people, often set the stage for their own deaths. It’s one of the great ironies.


8 posted on 03/21/2010 2:54:31 PM PDT by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Windmills and solar not good enough for them?


9 posted on 03/21/2010 4:04:08 PM PDT by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson