Senator Joseph Biden, the senior most Democrat on the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, whose support for the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement was being hailed by the Bush administration earlier this month following the testimony of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, apparently seems to be having second-thoughts, or in terms of a best-case scenario, serving notice of several caveats he has vis-à-vis the deal.
Complete coverage: The Indo-US nuclear tango
During a hearing of the Committee on April 26, Biden informed the chairman of the panel Senator Richard Lugar: "I and many others, I suspect, are considering amendments that might deal with what I believe to be the shortcomings in this negotiated agreement."
He acknowledged that this did not mean 'primarily demanding assurances from India but assurances from the administration.'
Both India and the Bush administration have said the deal is not inviolable and any conditions or amendments would lead to its unravelling. At the outset, Biden complained bitterly that the administration did not consult with them as it negotiated the July 18 Joint Statement between President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Complete coverage: President Bush in India
"In my view," he said, "it paid little attention to our concerns as it negotiated with India regarding India's plan for separating its civil nuclear facilities from its military ones."
Biden also slammed the administration saying that it had also 'submitted a legislative proposal to them and a decision proposal to the Nuclear Suppliers Group that he would argue were so poorly drafted as to cast doubt on the administration's approach and seriousness of purpose.
"Despite all this, I indicated three weeks ago that I will probably support the agreement at the end of the day. I did so because I agree that the time has come to develop a new relationship between India and the parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty," he acknowledged.
Complete coverage: Dr Singh in Washington
"And I did so also because undoing this deal could do more damage - in terms of our relationship with India - than approving it, with carefully drafted conditions," he added, however reiterating, "We are in a quandary and quite frankly, this is not a treaty that I would have suggested that we negotiate, but the downside and the impact on our strategic relationship with India, I think would be serious damage if we neglected this treaty."
"But the upsides of the treaty are not nearly as positive as I think they could be or should be," he said, asserting that it was incumbent on the administration since 'this deal brought risk,' to minimize those risks.
Biden said so far 'the administration had done a lot more to lobby them than to work with them.' Laying out a series of complaints, he said, "It has yet to share its negotiating record or explain just what it agreed to when it accepted the idea of India-specific safeguards or corrective measures that India may take in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies, or US assurances regarding fuel supply or a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel for India.'
He also said that the administration was yet to share with them the full list of India's civil nuclear facilities - even in classified form. Biden castigated the administration for what he said was its reneging 'on an earlier promise to share drafts of the peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement that it is negotiating with India.
Consequently, he said that while he does believe that 'a new deal for India made sense,' it was not a 'slam dunk' as they said.
Biden also recommended that Lugar schedule follow-up hearings with experts on the Atomic Energy Act to discuss possible amendments to S. 2429 (the legislation to grant a India-specific exemption of the IAEA to envisage the nuclear deal to go forward), and experts on India who could tell us what the consequences of enacting those amendments might be.
N-deal will be passed by June: Blackwill
He also called on Lugar to make clear to the administration that the Senate and the Committee should not be 'taken for granted.' "We expect the administration to answer our questions, to provide us the details on the related agreements that India is negotiating with the United States and with the IAEA, and to work with us to make S.2429 a respectable bill," he said, adding, "Until the administration does that, we simply should not act on its proposed legislation."