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 008254 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV KNNP MNUC PREL ENRG IN NSSP
SUBJECT: INDIA EMPHASIZES SUPPORT FOR NON-PROLIFERATION IN 
LANDMARK JULY 18 DEFENSE 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: In a landmark October 24 speech aimed at an 
elite group of strategic analysts, Foreign Secretary Sham 
Saran forcefully defended the India-US civil nuclear 
framework, offered helpful interventions on NSG and MTCR 
harmonization, and highlighted India's vigorous support for 
the global non-proliferation effort.  Saran also explicitly 
countered arguments that India has sold out to the US. 
Throughout the speech, Saran projected confidence that India 
and the US can sustain a cooperation based on shared 
interests, with India reaping visible benefits in terms of 
technology transfers.  Pressed during the Q and A on the 
separation of civilian and military nuclear facilities, Saran 
emphasized the value of India declaring the maximum number of 
civilian facilities in order to benefit fully from 
international nuclear cooperation.  The majority of questions 
concerned India's September vote on Iran in the IAEA, 
reflecting domestic sensitivities around the issue.  Saran's 
responses, as well as his prepared statement, mark an 
important watershed in the Congress government's attempt to 
advance India's emergence as a global power.  End summary. 
 
Saran Rap: India is Responsible and Consistent 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶2. (SBU) On October 24, Saran spoke to a group convoked by 
the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, an eminent 
local strategic think tank.  He opened by noting the 
"healthy" level of debate surrounding the Next Steps in 
Strategic Partnership (NSSP), the July 18 agreement with the 
US, India's September vote on Iran in the IAEA, and the 
recent deliberations of the NSG.  He then defined the GOI's 
policy as a consistent, principled approach that takes into 
account both India's own national security interests and its 
commitment to a rules-based international system. 
 
¶3. (U) After briefly outlining India's history of engagement 
on non-proliferation issues, he went on to explain how the 
July 18 agreement with the US commits India not to transfer 
reprocessing or enrichment technologies and to supporting 
international efforts to limit their spread.  According to 
Saran, this measure is well within the framework of India's 
obligations under UNSC Resolution 1540.  Saran continued that 
India's own security interests had been seriously undermined 
by clandestine nuclear activities within the region, and, in 
a dig at Pakistan, argued that transparency was key. 
 
Iran and the IAEA 
------------------ 
 
¶4. (U) In addressing India's controversial September 24 vote 
on Iran in the IAEA, he said: "We should avoid a divisive 
vote at the IAEA's next meeting in Vienna," and added that 
India hopes to resolve the Iranian crisis through dialogue. 
Saran observed that "with respect to the Iran nuclear issue, 
we welcome Iran's cooperation with the IAEA in accounting for 
previously undeclared activities, but it is important that 
remaining issues which involve the Pakistan-based A.Q. Khan 
network are satisfactorily clarified as well." 
 
¶5. (U) Turning to India's agenda, Saran stated: "For the 
future, we believe we have the responsibility and capability 
to participate fully and actively in global R and D efforts 
to evolve proliferation-resistant nuclear technologies, which 
enable us to derive the full benefit of nuclear energy, 
minimizing the risk of diversion to military uses."  He added 
his hope that India will become a full partner in the 
International Thermonuclear Energy Research (ITER) project 
and the US-led Generation IV initiative. 
 
Specific Benefits of Sharing Interests With US 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶6. (U) Saran targeted his remarks to detractors who have 
claimed the GOI is blindly allying itself with the US.  He 
pointed out that in the context of India's history, the 
current decisions on non-proliferation reflect continuity. 
Referring to the UPA government's controversial vote on Iran 
at the IAEA BOG in September, he stated that the GOI's 
decision-making in sensitive matters is rooted in self 
interest and good judgment rather than in external 
influences.  Recalling U/S Burns's public comments, Saran 
insisted there was "no linkage" between India's IAEA vote and 
the July 18 framework.  He then added that India must adapt 
to changing global expectations and become "an increasingly 
influential actor on the international stage." 
 
Following the Rules 
-------------------- 
 
¶7. (U) Saran acknowledged that India would have to answer the 
question: "What does the international community gain in 
making an exception to the current regulations for India?" 
He felt the answer lies in one of India's key objectives, 
gaining global recognition as a responsible non-proliferator. 
 He stressed that India's steps, including "enactment of the 
WMD Bill, the upgradation of the national export control 
lists so as to harmonize them with those of the NSG and MTCR, 
the proposed separation of our civilian and military nuclear 
facilities, and the negotiation of an additional protocol in 
the IAEA" have all given the international community greater 
confidence in India's robust and effective export control 
system, thereby making India a more viable destination for 
advanced dual-use technologies.  He cited the example of the 
US already providing more liberal and predictable licensing 
for dual-use technology for Indian industry.  Saran also 
argued tht the completion of the NSSP as beneficial for 
licensing, and he reiterated that 'NSG plus' and 'MTCR plus' 
restrictions had already been abolished.  He indicated that 
India-US space and satellite cooperation had an economic pay 
off for India and also opened the door to a dialogue on 
missile defense. 
 
Separation of Civilian and Strategic Nuclear Facilities 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶8. (U) Saran likened the global non-proliferation regime to a 
tent, and said "Obviously, we cannot be inside the tent if we 
do not measure up to the required norms."  He emphasized the 
July 18 agreement with the US as one that concerns civilian 
nuclear energy cooperation rather than weapons 
non-proliferation and noted that it is legitimate for 
partners to request a distinction between civilian and 
military uses of the nuclear sector.  He refused to be drawn 
out on whether specific facilities would be safeguarded under 
the July 18 framework, averring that the GOI is still 
debating this internally.  Saran addressed comments directly 
to the non-proliferation community and "those who fear an 
effort to keep out some civil facilities" when saying there 
is no point "salting away" certain facilities since India's 
goal is the widest possible civil nuclear cooperation with 
the international community.  He frankly acknowledged the 
potentially high costs of separating nuclear facilities. 
 
Comment: An Emerging Global Power 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) Saran's strong, specific defense of Indo-US 
cooperation is especially welcome in light of media and 
public criticism of the perceived US influence on Indian 
foreign policy.  An October 22 op-ed column in the Asian Age, 
for instance, savaged the GOI for allegedly selling out 
Indian interests.  Nevertheless, Saran very clearly outlined 
the reasons why Indian policies and American interests can 
coincide.  The fact that this ringing endorsement comes on 
the heels of U/S Burns's visit suggests by inference that 
Saran was receptive to the newly elaborated US agenda and 
remains firmly convinced that we can sustain a lasting 
relationship based on shared interests. Saran did not address 
the Proliferation Security Initiative, reminding us that this 
is an issue we must continue to push.  Nevertheless, the 
speech reveals a new level of maturity and confidence in 
India's role as an emerging, responsible global power.  End 
comment. 
MULFORD