MUMBAI: Indian experts took utmost care to include several "insulation mechanisms" in the draft agreement to implement the nuclear deal with the US in order to protect security and nuclear commerce interests, official sources have said.
Though the Indo-US civil nuclear cooperation and the draft 123 agreement, which was made public on Friday, is between two "unequal partners", the experts took all possible long-term scenarios into consideration in the interest of the country, said the sources familiar with the negotiations.
Reacting to concerns expressed by some quarters about the pact curtailing India's right to conduct a nuclear test, a source said: "Every article of the draft 123 agreement is carefully worded with many in-built insulation mechanisms to protect India's interest."
Though the deal is for civil nuclear cooperation, India has taken all possible security situations into consideration and article 14 of the agreement clearly states that both India and the US have agreed to carefully consider the circumstances that may lead to termination or cessation of such cooperation, the sources said.
The two sides also agreed to take into account whether the circumstances that may lead to such a termination or cessation resulted from India's serious concern about a changed security environment or were a response to "actions by other states which would impact national security", they said.
Legally, the conditions remain the same whether India conducts a nuclear test now or after signing the deal. But if the testing is done after the signing of the agreement, "there would be an additional economic penalty", the sources said.
Article 14 also points out that if one side seeks the termination of the pact while citing a violation of the agreement as the reason, the US and India will have to consider whether the action was inadvertent or otherwise and whether "the violation could be considered as material", they said.
It is also made explicitly clear in the same article that no violation can be considered as "material" unless it corresponds to the definition of "material violation or breach" in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the sources said.
Moreover, if a party seeks termination while citing a violation of the proposed IAEA safeguards agreement as the reason, a crucial factor will be whether the IAEA's Board of Governors has made a finding of non-compliance, the sources said.
"The Americans also understand this," a source said.
The sources also said there is no mention of any foreign policy prescription in the draft 123 agreement.
With regard to IAEA safeguards, the sources pointed that if the application of these was no longer possible, both the supplier and recipient countries should hold consultations and agree on appropriate verification measures.
