Left Flank

Tobias Harris offers not one, but two insightful articles on Japan's Liberal Democrats, and, at the risk of sounding impertinent or opportunistic, I wonder if there's a connection between the LDP's slow death (I'm not quite sure non-subscribers can read this) and its resentment at the Bush administration de-listing of DPRK as a terrorist state.

Firstly, Harris argues that the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is looking terminal.

The factions appear to be giving way to a myriad of study groups, Diet members' leagues, and other ideologically oriented party clubs of differing durability and power, as well as tradition LDP informal groups like the so-called policy tribes (the road tribe, the construction tribe, the agriculture tribe, etc.). The new groups include entities like the Club of 83, composed of reform-oriented Diet members elected by dint of Mr. Koizumi's coattails, and the «True Conservative Policy Research Group,» a group led by Nakagawa Shoichi, chairman of the LDP's Policy Affairs Research Council (PARC) under Mr. Abe and including Mr. Abe and Mr. Aso among its approximately eighty members. It is unclear what sway these new organizations have over their members, if any.

Keep reading → Sphere: Related Content

Before allowing my hatred towards the US Senate dissipate into optimism, I have to report another blundering decision to end a 30-year old ban on nuclear fuel and technology to India, by an 86-13 vote.

Eric Hundman tries to be cheery and point out that the mere existence of such a geopolitically-retarded law doesn't necessitate execution. Right!

This and several other provisions seem to be designed to allow the United States opportunities to prevent or halt technology transfer if circumstances call for it. Such potential loopholes also highlight one particularly important fact: The deal's approval does not necessarily mean the United States will actually sell much civilian nuclear technology to India. It is now legal to do so in most cases, but political, bureaucratic, economic, or diplomatic barriers may nonetheless end up being too problematic to overcome. Indeed, the Bush administration secretly told Congress it would not sell «sensitive» nuclear technologies to India in a letter earlier this month. For those unhappy with this deal, the details of the bill leave America with plenty of wiggle room.

Only, that is, if American lawmakers continue to disregard err...you know, laws. Opponents' angry remarks are just not reassuring enough.
Pakistan lost no time proving why the law drives a stake into the heart of the non-proliferation regime.

Yesterday, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani told reporters, «You don't have to be worried about [the deal]. Pakistan will now be justified to also make a demand for a similar deal as we don't want discrimination.»

Now, about those opponents who argued that an exemption for India would undermine nuclear non-proliferation efforts and encourage an arms race in the region…

Future American administrations' ability to affect South Asian and East Asian relations has already begun to falter.

Powered by ScribeFire.

In the wake of the nuclear crime of the century - Mark Leon Goldberg points out why cutting India slack is especially egregious - New Delhi is starting to whisper the silver-tongued blandishments in the ears of the smaller fish.

Korea as member of the NSG group has been positive toward the India-U.S. deal. However its role in NSG negotiations has not been up to its status as the 11th largest economy in the world.

At best it has been only passive in nature. As a net energy importer country, the India-U.S. deal can go a long way in securing Korea's energy needs in the coming decade. It will also help in strengthening its strategic and economic alliance with India and the U.S.

So it should become active and join India and the U.S. in persuading the NSG members who have expressed some reservations on the deal. South Korea is emerging as a great economic power. It must start acting like one by playing active role in world affairs.

Lucifer himself couldn't do it any better!

Powered by ScribeFire.

New Delhi got its waiver from the NSG.

Yet, all is not well in the Bush administration's nuclear fantasy. It goes beyond the US Congress' vote. India's current government is in scandal over the waiver.

While the deal holds the key to unlocking billions of dollars worth of nuclear business, it is a potential political minefield for India's Congress party, which heads the ruling coalition and survived a parliamentary vote on the pact in July.

The vote was marred by allegations that the government tried to bribe opposition members into either voting in favor or abstaining.

Analysts say the deal will likely be an issue in Indian elections due by May, with opposition parties accusing the government of having signed away India's nuclear sovereignty and independent foreign policy.

And then, there's a trainwreck coming.

* Indian officials believe they have what they seek: the legal commitments at the core of a strategy that will mitigate the consequences of a resumption of testing. (The fuel reserve, access to the international marketplace, etc.)

* NSG members, on the other hand, believe they have a political commitment, however weak, from India to refrain from testing and options to isolate India again in the event that it violates the pledge.

One of the two parties is wrong. I am not eager to find out which.

And, last, there's this tantalizingly gnawing puzzle, how is Beijing involved in all this?

Having failed to use its proxies effectively, China had come out in the open with its opposition to the deal. In a bid to prevent China hijacking the proceedings, US President George Bush wrote a letter to Chinese President Hu Jintao asking Beijing to support the India waiver.

Who will pay the devil if Congress doesn't squash this monster?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Washington bullies the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) into an agreement that demolishes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty...

John Rood, acting U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, said India's gesture had added «positive momentum» to efforts to agree an NSG waiver.

But some in the exclusive nuclear club felt the commitment was not sufficiently binding on New Delhi.

Six NSG nations had been demanding a clause stipulating an automatic cessation of the waiver if India tested another bomb.

After India's statement, the holdout group splintered as Norway, the Netherlands and Switzerland indicated they could accept more limited language, diplomats said.

But Ireland, Austria and New Zealand rejected amended language presented to them individually by U.S. officials on Friday evening as inadequate, several diplomats told Reuters.

They said the meeting broke down when China walked out in support of Ireland, Austria and New Zealand.

«The Americans have bullied them, including with high-level phone calls to their capitals, but they held firm because the U.S. has showed no flexibility on testing,» said one diplomat.

«The (revised text as it stands) gives no clear consequences for India if it tests, only a special meeting if that happens and that does not commit the NSG to take action,» said another.

Decisions by the nuclear export cartel must be unanimous.

...and how does New Delhi consider its commitment?

Asked about the right to conduct nuclear tests, he said, «in terms of consequences, of course, when we decide to do that, we need to factor in possible consequences.»

The top nuclear scientist indicated that there was 'adequate protection' for India's strategic programme in the civil nuclear deal with the US.

«I also knew that this (US State Department letter to the Congress) has been asked to be kept classified. But I did not know that this will be released at this juncture,» Kakodkar said.

«The most important thing is that whatever programme we have started. We should be able to continue operation of these reactors and adequate protection for that purpose has been built into the 123 Agreement,» he said.

Are the Bush administration and New Delhi that dumb?

And, there's a decent backgrounder by Vijay Prashad on the domestic Indian politics of the nukes deal at Counterpunch.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The lonely batter who swats the long ball is an American idyll. It is not how sincere diplomacy works, especially when the Bush administration wants to demolish the non-proliferation regime by escorting India around as its new pet.

«The U.S. will not achieve consensus approval for a text presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, and it will certainly not achieve consensus on the text currently on the table,» said one diplomat, who like others asked for anonymity as NSG deliberations are confidential and politically delicate.

«The U.S. (may) finally have to enter into real negotiations with countries who put forward amendments, rather than negotiate exclusively with India as it has done up to now,» he said.

«We will have to find a way in between (the red lines) of India and concerned states. I'd be surprised if we can do this by Friday,» said another diplomat.

I hope that's snark, and they lock William Burns out. The Bush administration deserves it.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Japan's liberal Asahi Daily knows a threat to the international legal order and nuclear non-proliferation regime when it finds it.

The NPT members have all agreed that technological support for the peaceful use of nuclear energy should not be supplied to nonmembers. Up to now, the United States has also stood by this principle.

Now the United States is treating India differently. Explaining the U.S. government's reasons, the Bush administration said that, for one, India is a democracy. Secondly, India is very unlikely to sell nuclear technology to other countries.

While it is true that India is strategically important, we should not let any incidents occur that will allow any crack in the NPT system. The NPT foundations are shaky enough as it is.

If India becomes an exception, Pakistan is sure to demand similar treatment. North Korea pushed ahead with nuclear testing after claiming it had withdrawn from the NPT. Iran is pursuing a uranium enrichment program despite U.N. sanctions. The U.S. move to finalize its nuclear cooperation pact with India puts a damper on international efforts to stop such actions.

In addressing his parliament, Prime Minister Singh said the deal would not prevent India from conducting nuclear tests in the future. If that is true, it means the deal does not ban the resumption of nuclear tests. Moreover, India did not even pledge to freeze its nuclear weapons stockpile.

If India intends to pursue nuclear power generation for peaceful purposes, it should abandon its nuclear weapons program.

The India-U.S. pact will soon be put to discussion by a 45-nation group of nuclear power providers, including Japan. It needs to be endorsed unanimously in order to actually take effect. Already, some European countries are poised to mount opposition.

The Japanese government should not maintain an ambiguous attitude. It must clearly state its opposition.

Responsible, patient, law-abiding...Japanese.