Many commentators have declared President Bush's signing into law of the US-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Co-operation Act as one of the most decisive moments in international politics in recent years. However, opinion on this deal within the country is divided, with a section of the scientific community contending that the US is attempting to cap India's nuclear weapon ambitions, which, in the long run may hamper its strategic interests, while some politicians and analysts view the deal as a win-win situation for India.

• Ajey Lele
• January 18, 2007
• IDSA Comments

Among the foremost security concerns of the US after 9/11 is the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) by terrorists on its territory and their proliferation through inimical states. The global stretch of the predominantly maritime threat and the 'overstretch' of the US Navy have led to the initiation of a series of American initiatives like Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), Container Security Initiative (CSI) and Regional Maritime Security Initiative (RMSI), all aimed at mobilizing global support to secure the US 'homeland'.

• Gurpreet S Khurana
• December 28, 2006
• IDSA Comments

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's seemingly 'inadvertent' admission of his country's nuclear status in an interview broadcast on German television on December 11 at the start of his trip to Berlin once again focussed world attention on the country's nuclear status. It is widely known that Israel has a nuclear arsenal consisting of about 150-200 weapons from the plutonium produced at the Dimona nuclear reactor, situated in the Negev desert near Beer Sheva.

• S. Samuel C. Rajiv
• December 21, 2006
• IDSA Comments

The Prime Minister of UK, Tony Blair, visited Pakistan in the third week of November to participate in the third UK-Pakistan bilateral summit. The UK-Pak joint statement of December 6, 2004 institutionalised such bilateral meets at the highest level, to 're-energise' the 'partnership for peace and prosperity in the 21st century'. As these bilateral summits are of a strategic nature and are being pursued without interruption since 2004, it is useful to analyse the scope and extent of such bilateral engagement.

• Alok Rashmi Mukhopadhyay
• December 01, 2006
• IDSA Comments

Despite the categorical denial by the Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson about a report published by a British newspaper in January 2006, that Islamabad was engaged in talks with China to purchase eight nuclear reactors worth US $7 billion, the Chinese media later disclosed Beijing's plan of signing an agreement to supply six reactors. Speculation in this regard has gained currency now that the two countries are to enter into a nuclear deal during the ongoing visit of Chinese President Hu Jintao to Pakistan.

• Rajesh Kumar Mishra
• November 23, 2006
• IDSA Comments

China's cautious approach to defusing the ongoing North Korean nuclear crisis underscores the dilemmas that exist in its difficult relationship with North Korea on the one hand and its interests with respect to the United States on the other. What worries China more is North Korea's ambition and intention to further continue its nuclear programme. Moreover, China faces a daunting task in tackling the increasing American pressure to intensify actions against North Korea as per the UNSC resolutions.

• Jagannath P. Panda
• October 31, 2006
• IDSA Comments

The Seventh EU-India Summit will be held on October 13th in Helsinki. The annual summits take place alternately in New Delhi and in the capital of the incumbent European Union presidency - at present held by Finland - under the existing framework of EU-India relationship, which was given the shape of a 'strategic partnership' at the EU-India Summit of 2004 in The Hague. The Joint Action Plan (JAP) adopted at the New Delhi Summit in 2005 was a comprehensive programme of EU-India engagement in the coming years.

• Alok Rashmi Mukhopadhyay
• October 10, 2006
• IDSA Comments

The underground nuclear test conducted by North Korea yesterday has established it as the ninth member of the nuclear club. There had been speculation, particularly since the failed test of a long-range missile, that North Korea would move to a nuclear test. It had warned about the impending test, and quite simply had nothing to lose. From a North Korean point of view, it was clear that the failed missile test demonstrated weakness and another missile test in the near term was unlikely to reduce international pressure on the regime.

• Rohit Pattnaik
• October 10, 2006
• IDSA Comments

The speed and relative ease with which the Indo-US nuclear deal raced through the respective committees of Congress and the margin by which it was assented to by the House of Representatives on 27 July, scarcely four months after it was introduced in Congress, created the expectation that the same scenario would play out in the Senate. These hopes have been belied by the failure of the Senate to pass the Bill before it recessed for the mid-term elections.

• Cherian Samuel
• October 05, 2006
• IDSA Comments

On July 27, 2006, the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the bill HR 5682 for United States and India Nuclear Co-operation Promotion Act of 2006. This bill was submitted to the House by its International Relations Committee, after modifying the bill HR 4974 which was referred to the House by the US Administration. The House in an "up-or-down vote" passed this bill by a wide margin, with 359 members voting for and 58 opposing it. A number of amendments seen as killers were defeated on the floor of the House.

• Rajiv Nayan
• August 05, 2006
• IDSA Comments