Stonebridge International

In The News

Return to News

Indo-US nuke deal could have been inked in 1999
By Girish Kuber

20 March 2006

MUMBAI: India would have signed a nuclear deal with the US way back in 1999-00, if former president Bill Clinton had his way. "We were engaging India. We tried for two years but couldn't go further," Samuel 'Sandy' Berger, national defense advisor and a close aide of former president Bill Clinton, said in Mumbai.

Mr Berger was a key player in shaping Indo-US relations during the Clinton administration. ET caught up with Mr Berger, who was in Mumbai to participate in the conference on corporate governance organised by Asian Society, and also to launch his firm Stonebridge International's India operations.

Mr Berger's revelation may add a new twist to the ongoing debate on the recently-signed agreement tabled before the US Congress last week. His statement may also explain why the principal opposition party, the BJP, has had a somewhat muted response to the much publicised Indo-US nuclear deal.

"No doubt it's an important agreement that can take care of India's energy needs besides taking it closer to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," Mr Berger noted, when asked to comment on his views on the recently-signed agreement between India and US that, if cleared by the US Congress, will lift a 30-year embargo on India's nuclear operations.

Would the deal have been any different if the 1999-00 version had come into force? "We had raised bar a bit higher," Mr Berger said candidly, suggesting that the Bush administration has given too much leeway to India in the agreement.

When quizzed further, Mr Berger said: "We did push for a similar agreement after India conducted nuclear tests in May 1998 though we wanted strict restrictions on the fissile material in India's possession. Actually we wanted to take India closer to the five nuclear power countries."

He implied that the then NDA regime did not sign the accord since the US had set tough conditions. Though Mr Berger refrained from any negative comments on the present agreement signed by the Bush administration, he did indicate that it is a logical extension to the process initiated by Mr Clinton.

"Let's look forward rather than looking back," Mr Berger said camouflaging a certain degree of unwillingness in discussing the sensitive issue.

"There are some serious issues arising out of the recent pact. Not because of India's position. But now other countries may ask for similar concessions," he said.

Acknowledging India's role as a 'serious and responsible' ally of the US, Mr Berger hoped that "the contentious issues" about the nuclear agreement would be settled soon. He was also optimistic that there will not be "end of dialogue" as the Congress is debating the deal.

Return to In the News

Back to Top^