This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 007333 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT PASS TO NRC 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ENRG TRGY KNNP PREL ETTC TSPL CVIS FR IN NSSP
SUBJECT:  VISA DENIALS THREATEN CREDIBILITY OF NSSP, OPEN 
DOORS TO FRENCH AND OTHERS 
 
Reference:  NEW DELHI 6833 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary:  A visit to India's premier atomic energy 
establishments by Alain Bugat, Chairman of the French Atomic 
Energy Commission, suggests that France is willing to engage 
in discussions with India on nuclear matters to a degree 
that is inconceivable within the current NSSP framework. 
The visa denial of Baldev Raj ironically made it possible 
for Raj to host Bugat at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic 
Research (IGCAR) in a very high profile visit.  The three to 
four week delay required by the Mantis Security Advisory 
Opinion (SAO) process, together with an apparent increase in 
technology transfer related visa denials, gives heart to 
critics in India's scientific establishment who claim the 
NSSP is void of content.  Mission recommends Washington 
establish a process that allows all stakeholders to review 
recommended Mantis SAO denials.  End summary. 
 
Director IGCAR Deemed "Inadmissible" to Travel to the US 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) On November 5, 2004 Dr. Baldev Raj (DOB 09 April 
1947), distinguished Scientist and Director of IGCAR, which 
PM Singh has just visited in conjunction with the 
inauguration of the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (Ref.), 
was categorized through the SAO Mantis process as 
"inadmissible" under Section 212a3A(i)(II). 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Dr. Raj was to represent IGCAR at the Eighth 
Information Exchange Meeting on Actinide and Fission Product 
Partitioning and Transmutations that took place in Las 
Vegas, Nevada on November 9 to 11, 2004.  This information 
exchange meeting was the eighth in a series that began in 
¶1990.  According to the organizers, the meeting was an open 
scientific meeting and not subject to any CFR810 controls 
for export of information. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Dr. Raj had been quite insistent about obtaining 
information on the status of his visa.  Requests, however, 
ceased about two weeks prior to Raj's proposed travel.  On 
November 5, Dr. Raj's office told SciCouns that Dr. Raj was 
traveling and would not be back in the office until November 
¶8. 
 
Chairman Atomic Energy Commission France Visits IGCAR 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Dr. Raj's silence did not last long.  Mission 
found out that Alain Bugat, Chairman of the Atomic Energy 
Commission of France, had visited the Atomic Energy 
Commission's Kalpakkam site, 60 kilometers from Chennai, on 
November 9.   Kalpakkam hosts the IGCAR, which is the 
headquarters for the Indian Fast Breeder Reactor program, 
the Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS) and the Nuclear De- 
salination Demonstration Plant.  At Kalpakkam, in addition 
to discussions with Raj, Bugat met T.S. Rajendran, Director 
of MAPS and Prabhat Kumar, the Director of the Prototype 
Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR). 
 
Renewal of Indo-French Nuclear Links 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶6.  (SBU) In an interview with T.S. Subramanayan, a reliable 
reporter for "The Hindu," Chairman Bugat said that one of 
the purposes of this visit to India "is to renew our links 
for cooperation in the field of fast nuclear reactors" and 
to forge cooperation at the R&D level in scientific topics, 
such as fundamental physics, live sciences, reactor safety 
in thermal reactors and fast breeder reactors.  Bugat ducked 
the question on whether France was prepared to sell India 
Pressurized Light Water Reactors (PLWRs) without insisting 
that India sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) 
or implement full scope safeguards as demanded by the 
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).  Bugat's response was that 
this was the topic on which he could not speak, as "we are 
not diplomats.  We're technicians, physicists and managers. 
So what I want to say is that cooperation between India and 
France is perfectly respectful of all international 
agreements that India and France have signed." 
 
Are India and France Ready to Hop Into The Sack? 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) During his visit, Bugat was reminded that Betram 
Goldschmidt, the late pioneer of the French nuclear program, 
had remarked in 1992 at Kovalan, near Chennai, that "France 
and India were prepared to flirt with each other but not 
really go to bed" in nuclear matters.  Bugat was asked 
whether the time was now ripe for the two countries to "go 
to bed" in nuclear matters, especially light water reactors. 
The Hindu quotes Bugat as saying, "I cannot say.  We can go 
to bed if diplomats and politicians come to a new round of 
agreements.  There are certain ways in which nuclear science 
R&D is closer to political affairs than industrial affairs 
but we will not decide in the place of politicians."  Bugat 
concluded by saying that France appreciates the fact that 
India's nuclear energy program is "comprehensive and 
coherent" as it includes nuclear power reactors, research 
reactors and nuclear applications in other fields.  Bugat 
also said he appreciates that India has not been involved in 
any nuclear controversies concluding that, in his 
assessment, only India, France and Japan have comprehensive 
nuclear programs (to include breeding, reprocessing and a 
closed nuclear fuel cycle). 
 
Bugat Visits the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶8.  (SBU) During his trip, on November 10, Chairman Bugat 
visited BARC at Trombay holding discussions with Dr. Anil 
Kakodkar, Chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission, 
Dr. S. Banerjee, Director of BARC, and Dr. R. B. Grover, the 
Director of Strategic Planning for the Department of Atomic 
Energy. 
 
The Visa Mantis SAO Program 
--------------------------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU) The three to four week wait required to obtain 
Mantis SAO response for executives in Indian nuclear and 
space organizations together with the fact that approvals 
often come at the last minute or too late for Indian 
travelers to accomplish their missions in the United States 
is having an adverse impact on our relations with the Indian 
scientific community.  Specific examples are the visas for 
Kasturirangan KRISHNASWAMY (DOB 24 October 1940) and for 
Prem Shanker GOEL (DOB 20 April 1947) who were granted 
approval to travel to the U.S. on the very same day they 
planned to hold a meeting at Boeing Satellite System 
Divisions, and the visa for Sridhara Murthi Kuppam RAMAIYER 
(DOB 7 September 1950) which was approved on the day when 
traveler was already supposed to be in the United States. 
 
¶10. (SBU) There have been cases when travelers proposing to 
attend open meetings in the U.S. related to nuclear power 
were found "inadmissible."  In particular, Atal Kumar GUPTA 
(DOB 27 AUG 1953), the Technical Service Superintendent in 
charge of Engineering Support at the Kakrapar Atomic Power 
Station and Pramod Kumar SHARDA (DOB 7 JAN 1951), the Chief 
Superintendent at the Rajasthan Atomic Power Plant were 
supposed to attend peer review training at the World 
Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) in Atlanta in 
preparation for an annual WANO experts visit to nuclear 
power stations in India.  The goal of such visits is to 
promote nuclear power station operational safety.  Gupta and 
Sharda were categorized as "inadmissible" under Section 
212a3A(i)(II) on 8 October 2004. 
 
¶11. (SBU) As WANO training in nuclear safety is not subject 
to CFR810 controls for export of information, and relates to 
a USG policy objective to promote bi-lateral cooperation in 
safe operation of nuclear power plants, prima facie it would 
appear that this denial runs counter to USG policy 
objectives. 
 
The Cupboard is Not Entirely Bare 
--------------------------------- 
¶12.  (SBU) Mission acknowledges and appreciates the 
Department's support in expediting some Mantis SAO 
processing.  We also understand that in some cases the 
problem of delays is due to late applications by Indian 
scientists, a problem we are seeking to address with the 
GOI.  The fast approval for Dr. Prem Shanker GOEL (DOB 20 
April 1947) and Janardhana EDDYA (DOB 1 November 1945) to 
attend a NASA workshop on "Creating New and Sustainable 
Space Exploration" is one example.  Another is the approval 
for Nuclear Power Corporation of India Chairman Shreyans 
Kumar JAIN (DOB 8 May 1948) to attend a WANO conference in 
Atlanta on November 2 and 3, 2004.  In Mission's view, the 
rapid processing of this Mantis SAO is a solid demonstration 
of USG good will in light of the recent determination of 
Section 212a3A(i)(II) inadmissibility for Gupta and Sharda 
above. 
 
Comment:  Giving Ammunition to NSSP Doubters 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶13.  (SBU) It is ironic that Raj held such discussions with 
the Chairman of the French Atomic Energy Commission, at the 
time he was denied access to the United States to 
participate in an open conference which is not subject to 
export controls.  Such denials give ammunition to Indian 
nuclear and space scientists who firmly believe that the 
NSSP is nothing but a sham, and therefore oppose efforts by 
political players like NSA Dixit to move ahead on our export 
control benchmarks and the NSSP process as a whole. 
 
¶14.  (SBU) A high profile case of ineligibility such as the 
Raj case points to the need for an inter-agency process that 
allows the SA bureau and other stakeholders to participate 
in the Mantis SAO process and review any recommended Mantis 
SAO denials before the decision is communicated to post.  It 
is also important that the Embassy fully understand the 
reasons for any denials and has a mechanism to provide 
additional input if a decision appears to impact other 
established policy objectives, such as the NSSP process or 
nuclear safety cooperation. 
 
¶15.  (SBU) We recognize that it will be necessary to deny 
visits, even for high-profile applicants, when serious 
technology transfer concerns exist.  When this happens, we 
need to be in a position to fully understand the reasons for 
the decision and to be able to put it in context for our 
Indian interlocutors.  Mission appreciates Washington 
consideration of this issue. 
 
BLAKE