Wilson Delivers Speech on Status of U.S.-India Relations

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Emily Lawrimore
202-225-2452 (W)
202-468-3258 (C)

July 10, 2006

Wilson Delivers Speech on Status of U.S.-India Relations

Today, Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) was the keynote speaker at a panel event hosted by the Heritage Foundation regarding the status of U.S.-India relations. He made the following remarks:

“On July 18, 2005, I was honored to stand on the South Lawn of the White House with hundreds of Indian Americans during the historic welcoming ceremony for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his official state visit. Prime Minister Singh eloquently expressed that the American people and the people of India have much in common. He noted that ’we share a common commitment to democracy, freedom, human rights, pluralism and rule of law. We face common challenges that threaten our way of life and values that both our countries hold dear.’

“On that same day, President Bush and Prime Minister Singh issued a joint statement, which outlined a dramatic, bold initiative to truly cement a strategic partnership between the U.S. and India. The relevant part of that statement read:

President Bush conveyed his appreciation to the Prime Minister over India’s strong commitment to preventing WMD proliferation and stated that as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states. The President told the Prime Minister that he will work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India as it realizes its goals of promoting nuclear power and achieving energy security. The President would also seek agreement from Congress to adjust U.S. laws and policies, and the United States will work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India.

“This bold move would set in motion a series of events that now leaves Congress on the verge of passing legislation to fulfill President Bush’s promise made early in 2005 to ’help India become a major world power in the twenty-first century.’

“After President Bush’s announcement that the U.S. wanted to provide nuclear fuel and technology to India within the context of full civilian nuclear cooperation, hearings were held in the House International Relations Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee throughout the fall of 2005 and into the spring of 2006.

“While some were opposed to the agreement, I supported it for several reasons. India has had nuclear weapons for nearly thirty years, and it is simply unrealistic to expect they would voluntarily disarm and sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which would be the only way for them to receive civilian nuclear technology.

“While India did not sign the NPT, it followed the spirit of the agreement by carefully protecting its nuclear technology and amassed a stellar record of non-proliferation during the past three decades.

"As President Bush noted on July 18, 2005, ’since enacting economic reforms in the early ’90s, India has become an emerging economic power.’ India’s rising economic growth has placed enormous strains on its domestic energy production. More nuclear power will enable India to consistently meets its energy needs, burn less fossil fuels, and allow India to maximize its economic potential.

“Lastly, this agreement brings India’s civilian nuclear sector under international inspection through the IAEA. Two-thirds of India’s civilian reactors will come under safeguards.

“There are some who have criticized the deal in both India and the U.S. Some in the non-proliferation community believe we are weakening non-proliferation with this agreement. I disagree. We must make a distinction between countries that signed the NPT such as North Korea and Iran and then subsequently failed to uphold their commitment to the NPT, as compared to India, which has followed the spirit of the NPT although it was not a signatory.

“There are some in India who believe the agreement cedes too much authority over India’s nuclear programs to the international community. I disagree. Existing laws ensure civilian technology is not used by India for its nuclear weapons program. Further, India maintains its autonomy while a majority of its civilian reactors comes under international inspection.

“To the critics of the agreement, I believe that Secretary Rice and the Indian negotiators came up with the right balance to move U.S.-India relations to the next level with this agreement.

“Recently, the House International Relations Committee successfully marked-up H.R. 5682 by a bipartisan vote of 37-5. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee marked-up Chairman Lugar’s bill by a vote of 16-2. In both committees, amendments were introduced to weaken the agreement, but were defeated by wide, bipartisan margins.

“The House bill clearly spells out steps the Administration must make to certify India is meeting its obligations under the agreement. It provides for detailed reporting requirements to Congress, allowing us to have oversight of progress being made under the agreement.

“The main provisions of the bill provide for Presidential authority to waive portions of Sections 123, 128 and 129 of the Atomic Energy Act, which is necessary for the U.S. to provide India with civilian nuclear technology. India must support the Fissile Material Production Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) and prevent the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technology to other nations. India must approve a credible plan to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group must amend its guidelines to allow nuclear exports to India. While the President could ask for yearly waivers from Congress, making a permanent change to U.S. law signifies to India, just how much importance President Bush and Republicans in Congress place on transforming U.S.-India ties to one of a global partnership.

“In April 2005, when President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Indian External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh, Secretary Rice stated, ’It is important that the U.S.-India relationship continues to grow as we recognize the growing importance of India as a global factor.’ I believe this comprehensive bill will implement this vision President Bush has for U.S.-India ties.

“The March 2nd, 2006, editorial in the Post and Courier of Charleston, South Carolina, noted after President Bush’s successful visit to India, “The embrace of India, after decades of strained relations, follows a five-year personal courtship by President Bush. It ranks as one of the president’s most important diplomatic achievements.”

“To conclude, I support the U.S.-India civilian nuclear agreement and will do everything possible to ensure its passage in Congress.”

###