VZCZCXRO4492
OO RUEHAST RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHNE #0558/01 0530852
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 220852Z FEB 08
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0556
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNNSG/NUCLEAR SUPPLIERS GROUP COLLECTIVE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 1410
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 6058

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000558 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PARM TSPL KNNP ETTC ENRG TRGY IN
SUBJECT: SENATORS' NUCLEAR DEADLINE BRINGS (MOSTLY) 
POSITIVE REACTION 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The setting of a June deadline by Senators 
Kerry, Biden and Hagel during their February 20 visit to 
Delhi has sparked a tepid reaction from the Congress Party 
and, strangely, the Communists, while media supporters have 
used the opportunity to remind the Indian government of its 
responsibility to complete the nuclear deal.  The Congress 
Party and the Left both dismissed the importance of the 
deadline and asserted that India would act based on its own 
needs.  Strategic observers, however, two of whom attended 
the Ambassador's lunch in honor of the Senators, publicly 
cited the deadline as evidence that the Indian government 
must complete the IAEA safeguards agreement now.  End Summary. 
 
Senators Set July Deadline 
- - - 
 
¶2. (SBU) Senators John Kerry, Joe Biden and Chuck Hagel made 
front-page news when they set a June deadline for the 
submission of the 123 Agreement to the U.S. Congress during 
their February 20 visit to Delhi.  During the press 
conference, Senator Biden stated that "if we do not have the 
deal back before us clearly prior to the month of July, it's 
going to be very difficult, just not on the merits, but very 
difficult in terms of the mechanics of the way our system 
functions to ratify the deal."  Responding later to a 
question from the Reuters correspondent, Senator Biden 
elaborated that "although it is only a 'single vote' we have 
to take," if the U.S. Congress does not receive it by the 
August recess, "it will get caught up in our appropriations 
fights."  When Senator Hagel interjected that June would also 
be difficult, Senator Biden reiterated that "if it's not done 
by the end of July, before we leave on the recess, there is 
no prospect."  Senator Biden clarified that the U.S. Congress 
had an "even chance" of approving the 123 Agreement if it 
receives the Agreement by early June. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Senator Biden also made clear that a future 
president would not entertain the current arrangement.  "If 
in fact we do not have the deal in time to act upon it, it is 
highly unlikely -- highly unlikely -- the next President will 
be able to present the same deal.  It will be renegotiated," 
he maintained.  "The Democrats feel very strongly that we 
have to re-elevate the whole issue of nuclear 
non-proliferation, of arms controls agreements, of nuclear 
test ban treaties," he underlined.  But, he reasoned, "India 
should be at the table when those discussions take place." 
 
Congress and Left Parties Dismiss the Deadline 
- - - 
 
¶4. (SBU) Both the Congress Party and Communists asserted that 
India would decide for itself when to proceed with the 
nuclear initiative.  Congress media department chairman M. 
Veerappa Moily responded that "the Congress has reiterated 
time and again that the deal will be on our terms."  He 
dismissed the Senators' bottom-line.  "This deadline business 
has always been there.  We should not be too concerned about 
deadlines," he insisted.  Moily reminded that the Congress 
Party has pledged to stick with its coalition.  "We should be 
more concerned about addressing our allies and people's 
concern."  The February 21 Telegraph quoted another Congress 
Party source, who indicated that the Congress remained split 
between those who wanted to sacrifice the government for the 
deal and those who saw little to gain from jettisoning the 
Left.  This source divulged that the UPA government would 
allow the initiative to proceed "on its own momentum without 
anyone getting pro-active," and clarified that this strategy 
did not mean a "quiet burial" for the nuclear deal. 
Regarding the IAEA safeguards agreement, he said that "our 
friends from Bengal and Kerala (i.e. the Communists) will 
have to accept what we come back with." 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Communists issued a strangely muted reaction to 
the press conference.  Communist Party of India (Marxist) 
(CPM) general secretary Prakash Karat responded, "From the 
American viewpoint, the Senators were correct, but this is 
not going to change or influence our own course of action. 
We will work according to what suits us best."  Communist 
Party of India (CPI) national secretary D. Raja also told the 
Pioneer that the CPI would not allow the UPA government to 
"yield to U.S. pressure." 
 
 
NEW DELHI 00000558  002 OF 002 
 
 
Media Echoes the Senators' Call 
- - - 
 
¶6. (SBU) The English-language news media built on the 
senators' remarks to urge the Indian government to push the 
initiative forward.  Ambassador G. Parthasarthy wrote in the 
February 22 Times of India that "any objective analyst will 
note that under no circumstances will we get a better deal 
from any U.S. administration in the foreseeable future, 
especially if the Democrats occupy the White House."  He 
challenged the Communists to oppose Chinese missile transfers 
to Pakistan and incursions into Bhutan as much as they oppose 
"improving Indo-U.S. relations or to an end to global nuclear 
sanctions against India, initiated by the Americans."  An 
Indian Express February 22 editorial stated its concern about 
the July deadline and concluded that "it would be unfortunate 
if the agreement were to fall through because of political 
reasons than due to any technical ones, as both countries 
have staked so much political capital on it."  (Note: Both 
Parthasarthy and Indian Express publisher Shekhar Gupta 
attended the February 20 lunch with the senators hosted by 
Ambassador Mulford.  End Note.)  Even the vehemently 
anti-U.S. Asian Age published a February 22 opinion piece by 
former Union Minister Arun Nehru, who argued that "the 
U.S.-India nuclear deal would have taken us to new levels of 
cooperation.  I think what we are witnessing now is merely a 
pause, and sensible elements on both sides will find an 
acceptable solution." 
 
Will the GOI Move Quickly? 
- - - 
 
¶7. (SBU) MEA Joint Secretary (Americas) Gaitri Kumar told 
PolCouns that she believed the press conference would help 
clarify the timeline issues as well as settle whether a 
future president would carry on the same initiative. 
However, G. Balachandran, a senior fellow at the Institute 
for Diplomacy and Strategic Analyses (IDSA), believed that 
the senators plea would fall on deaf ears.  Balachandran 
contended that the Indian government would deliver the 123 
Agreement to the U.S. Congress as late as November 2008. 
When poloff pointed out that this runs the risk of starting 
over in the next administration, Balachandran responded that 
when India moves forward on its Russian and French 
agreements, the Indian government will count on U.S. business 
to pressure the U.S. Congress and new president to approve 
the same agreement quickly and without conditions. 
 
Comment: Senators' Remarks Help, But the GOI Will Continue on 
Own Terms 
- - - 
 
¶8. (SBU) As the Prime Minister and National Security Advisor 
made clear in their conversations with the Senators, the 
Indian government remains intent to complete the nuclear 
initiative and keep the coalition intact.  The upcoming 
budget session of Parliament, which begins February 25, will 
provide yet another opportunity for opponents to attack the 
nuclear initiative.  The Congress Party may hope that the 
Left softens its anti-nuclear rhetoric in order to pass a 
people-friendly budget.  In any case, the Senators' comments 
help refute the oft-heard assertion, particularly made by the 
Left, that India should wait until after the current 
administration to conclude the initiative. 
MULFORD