United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006

UNITED STATES AND INDIA NUCLEAR COOPERATION PROMOTION ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - July 26, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman from California for yielding, for his tremendous leadership in making our country strong and respected throughout the world.

I am pleased to join him in paying tribute to the chairman of the committee, HENRY HYDE. What a wonderful honor that this bill is named for him. He, too, has been a champion to promote a values-based diplomacy for our country. We have all fought many years with him in support of human rights throughout the world. This is probably one of the last bills that will be completed on issues that relate to national security and the respect with which we are held in the world. So appropriately, it is named for Mr. Hyde.

Both Mr. Hyde and Mr. Lantos have presented the House with legislation that is a vast improvement, frankly, over the bill that the President requested earlier this year, and it is a tribute to their leadership that we can all come together on this legislation this evening.

The bill before us establishes a two-step process for the India nuclear agreement. It is a process and legislation, which I support, that allows Congress to reserve final judgment on the agreement until the specifics are known. It requires that before Congress votes on the agreement, India and the International Atomic Energy Agency will have had to establish a process through which IAEA safeguards will be applied forever to India's civilian nuclear facilities, programs and materials.

Therefore, if an agreement is ultimately approved, Congress will retain the ability to monitor it through the required annual reports on U.S. nonproliferation policies in South Asia and on the implementation of the U.S.-India nuclear deal.

This legislation is important because it recognizes that the prospect of greater nuclear cooperation with a nation that has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty raises serious concerns. As one who came to Congress intent on improving international nonproliferation regimes, I appreciate those concerns. One of the most significant, the issue of the production by India of fissile material, is addressed by an amendment to be offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).

The Berman amendment, which I support, conditions the provision of nuclear fuel by the U.S. on a presidential determination that India has halted fissile material production. But even if the Berman amendment is not adopted, I hope that the agreement that will be presented to Congress for approval when negotiations are concluded contains a promise by India to halt the production of fissile material. Such a promise would improve the agreement and go a long way to convincing those who cannot support today's legislation that their concerns have been heard and that the Bush administration and the government of India has sought to respond to them.

The legislation before us clearly endorses the philosophy behind India's nuclear initiative; a judgment that security would be promoted by bringing India into the nuclear nonproliferation mainstream. On balance, I believe that judgment to be correct, and I thank you, Mr. Lantos and Mr. Hyde, for putting that balance here.

Although not bound by the NPT, India has a strong record of supporting nonproliferation goals. They have never ever violated the NPT. India has demonstrated by its actions a commitment to safeguarding nuclear technology. That commitment will be strengthened by India's adherence to the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines and the Missile Technology Control Regime guidelines as required by the nuclear initiative.

A close relationship with the democratic India is critical for the United States. There is a wide range of significant issues on which our shared values and shared interests will enable productive collaboration for the betterment of the world. This legislation reflects the strength of our current relationship with India and our hopes for its future. It is an expression of trust on matters relating to nuclear technology based on 3 decades of experience.

I urge my colleagues to support it. Even though there may be some questions and some amendments which may pass or not prevail today, on balance, I believe this legislation as presented here is worthy of our support.

I hope that the agreement that comes back to us is one that will be without controversy and will again be a reflection of the close bond between India and America. It was but a week ago when we were all gathered here to extend our sympathy to the people and the government of India because of the tragedy at Mumbai. Many of us expressed the love that we have for India and appreciation for the gifts that India has given to America, a vibrant dynamic Indo-American community which has contributed enormously to the economic success of our country and to our competitiveness in the world.

They have also contributed much to us in terms of our own social justice. We owe much to India as the source of nonviolence as a philosophy, espoused and practiced by Mahatma Gandhi. I said last week that when Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. and Coretta Scott King went to India to study nonviolence, they received a gift from India that would serve our country well and be important and fundamental to our own civil rights movement; that nonviolence was a strength that again improved America, and for which we all should be indebted to India and we should never forget.

I also personally join Mr. Lantos, because I know of his history on the subject in expressing appreciation to India for its hospitality to His Holiness the Dalai Lama, a great leader in the world. And I am enormously appreciative of the fact that his, I don't want to call it government in exile, but whatever the term of art is, in Darussalam in India.

The list goes on and on, we can name them over and over, again whether it is again the contributions of the Indo-American community, the philosophy that sprang from India that is so important to us, or the support for human rights. But on target for today is India's commitment, which it has never violated, to support the principles of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which although it is not a party to that treaty, has been a supporter of its principles.

Again, for that reason, I hope that all of our colleagues will vote in support of this legislation so that we can go to the next step and that we can go into the future continuing a long and beneficial relationship with India for us all.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/