President George W. Bush, aiming to boost India as a counterbalance against China’s rise, has moved closer to accepting the world’s largest democracy as a nuclear weapons state and fueled fears he is weakening decades-old prohibitions against atomic arms. Bush accelerated the US embrace of India, after years of estrangement, during his first term. Monday’s decision to permit expansive civilian nuclear cooperation is a further dramatic development.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns called the agreement “the high-water mark of US-India relations since 1947.” The approach was developed by former US ambassador to India Robert Blackwill and a close ally, Ashley Tellis, a South Asia specialist at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.It could, however, provoke a fight with the US Congress, which must amend US laws, and with America’s other nuclear partners, who must tailor international policies to accommodate Bush’s initiative. But Bush’s Republican Party controls Congress and US concerns over China’s growing military and economic might could make support for India irresistible.

The agreement goes farther than many expected. It would remove a ban on civilian nuclear technology sales, allowing India to obtain nuclear fuel and advanced reactors from US and other suppliers.In return, New Delhi would allow international inspections and safeguards on its civilian nuclear program and refrain from further weapons testing and transferring arms technology to other countries. Experts agree these are important advances.

<B>Nuclear ambitions</B>

Still, “selling nuclear materials to India is a dangerous proposition and bad nonproliferation policy,” said Democratic Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, an arms control advocate. Some experts said the deal sends the wrong signal to Russia and China, major arms merchants whom Washington has urged not to sell to India, Iran and other countries, and may prompt other states who surrendered their nuclear ambitions under the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NPT, to reconsider.

It could also complicate efforts to pressure Iran and North Korea into forsaking their nuclear arms ambitions.While improved relations with India are desirable, “it’s unfortunate they picked the nuclear area and the missile/space areas in which to do this because it really erodes certain fundamental principles,” said Leonard Spector of the Monterey Institute’s Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

The belief that the spread of nuclear weapons must be curbed “is being trumped by a view that there are worthy holders of nuclear weapons and unworthy holders and that universal rules are going to be modified in a way that favors those countries considered more worthy,” added Spector, a former Clinton administration official.US officials dismissed comparisons with Iran, saying Tehran had long cheated on its nuclear weapons activities, while India had been open and convinced Washington it wanted to curb proliferation.

<B>Non-proliferation system</B>

George Perkovich, another South Asia expert with Carnegie, said Bush’s initiative could be complicated to implement. “India has been a responsible steward of nuclear technology ...” so if key states in the existing nonproliferation system agree to adapt the rules as Bush recommends, “his should be acceptable,” he told Reuters.

“The problem is, if the United States ... races ahead without obtaining the consent of other key states, then the risk is that the system of nonproliferation rules can begin to collapse,” Perkovich said.Under the 1970 NPT, only the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia may have nuclear weapons. Some 182 other signatories gave them up in return for access to peaceful nuclear energy. India and Pakistan never signed the treaty.

While ties with Pakistan have also vastly improved since Sept. 11, 2001, Washington is much more wary of Islambad’s nuclear activities especially after a former government official, Abdul Qadeer Khan, was discovered running a nuclear black market that sold to Iran, Libya and North Korea.Tellis said the administration realized that India, a democracy offering America a lucrative market, posed no threat but would never give up nuclear arms if China and Pakistan retained them.

<B>Carol GIACOMO</B>

CIVILIAN ATOMIC SECTOR

<B>India says will not spread nuclear technology</B>

■ India upholds nuclear nonproliferation rules and will never spread sensitive technology, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said on Tuesday, a day after the United States promised to help the South Asian power develop its civilian atomic sector. “India’s track record in nuclear nonproliferation is impeccable,” Singh said at a joint session of the US Congress. “We have adhered scrupulously to every rule and canon in this area.” India, which held nuclear weapons tests in competition with rival Pakistan in 1998, has not signed the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. However, it has agreed to accept voluntary commitments to some parts of the nonproliferation regimes.Singh addressed US lawmakers a day after President George W. Bush, in a dramatic reversal of decades-old policy, said he would ask Congress to change US law and work with allies to adjust international rules to allow nuclear trade with India. Washington had barred providing atomic technology to India because of New Delhi’s status as a nuclear power that has refused to sign the NPT, which was designed to halt the spread of nuclear weapons.The policy shift, which underscored Washington’s recognition of India as a rising power and potential counterweight to China, drew sharp criticism from members of Congress. Some vowed to push legislation to block the change. Proliferation experts raised strong concerns that expanding U.S. cooperation with India would undercut US efforts to press Iran and North Korea from halting their nuclear arms ambitions. Iran denies it is trying to build bombs, while North Korea declared itself a nuclear armed power in February.Singh told senators and congressmen India was “fully conscious of the immense responsibilities that come with the possession of advanced technologies, both civilian and strategic.”

“We have never been, and never will be, a source of proliferation of sensitive technologies,” he said.Lawmakers gave a lengthy ovation to Singh, who promised to continue reforms to open India’s economy and to work with the United States in fighting terrorism and promoting democracy.But Democratic Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, who on Monday blasted Bush’s decision as “a dangerous proposition and bad nonproliferation policy,” was working on Tuesday to win backing for an amendment that would block nuclear cooperation with India, his aide said.

Eni Faleomavaega, a Democrat on the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, said the United States should help India meet the energy needs of its one billion people, but the proliferation issues were “complicated.” “My concern is that if we are doing this with India, what does this do for Pakistan,» said the lawmaker from American Samo

<B>Paul ECKERT</B>