About Me

My photo
Lawyer Practising at Supreme Court of India. Court Experience: Criminal, Civil & PIL (related to Property, Tax, Custom & Duties, MVAC, insurance, I.P.R., Copyrights & Trademarks, Partnerships, Labour Disputes, etc.) Socio-Legal: Child Rights, Mid Day Meal Programme, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, Women Rights, Against Female Foeticide, P.R.Is, Bonded Labour, Child labour, Child marriage, Domestic violence, Legal Literacy, HIV/AIDS, etc. Worked for Legal Aid/Advise/Awareness/Training/Empowerment/Interventions/Training & Sensitisation.

Contact Me

+91 9971049936, +91 9312079439
Email: adv.kamal.kr.pandey@gmail.com

Saturday, May 3, 2008

‘Deal bound by 123 pact, not Hyde Act’

Boucher plays down Casey’s remarks on Iran
Washington: The United States has said that the civilian nuclear initiative with India is bound by the 123 Agreement and not the Hyde Act. It also saw no inconsistency between the two.
“We don’t see any inconsistency between what we were allowed to do and required to do under the Hyde Act, but what binds India and the United States together is the 123 Agreement, not the Act,” Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Richard Boucher said here.
India has been insisting that it was bound only by the bilateral 123 pact and not by the Hyde Act, but certain statements from Washington gave a contradictory view.
“We don’t see any inconsistency between the Hyde Act and the 123 Agreement. The requirements of the U.S. law are on us to meet. The essential function of the Act is to enable a nuclear deal with India, because otherwise under the American law we are prohibited from doing anything with India,” Mr. Boucher said.
“The Hyde Act is what makes it possible for us to sign this deal and conclude the agreement. The agreement binds the U.S. and India once it is fully ratified and finished,” he said.
The nuclear deal with India was not a political issue so far as the Republicans and the Democrats were concerned.
“But what has to be borne in mind is the political calendar in the U.S. in the context of the elections and that the Bush administration is indeed worried about this.”
Iran issue
Hoping to smoothen India’s ruffled feathers over Iran, Mr. Boucher said it was not, in any way, “pointing a finger” at New Delhi, which has to make its “own choices.”
“I don’t think he [State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey] was in any way pointing the finger at India,” he said.
New Delhi had reacted sharply to Mr. Casey’s comments on Monday asking India to tell Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to New Delhi on April 29 that Tehran should meet the requirements of the United Nations Security Council and suspend uranium enrichment activities. India had said it did not need any guidance from the U.S. on the issue.
On Wednesday, India told the U.S. that it was for the IAEA to decide on the nature of Iran’s nuclear programme and not for Washington to take a call on it.
“I do understand that people want to make their own policy and decide their own choices. I don’t think this is that big an issue, that big a disagreement between us,” Mr. Boucher said.
Mr. Boucher said the U.S. would watch Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit to see what comes out of it.
“We do talk to India about Iran, as we talk to them about everything in the region. We’ve actually even proposed we have more systematic exchanges on a variety of areas of the world,” he said. — PTI
Friday, Apr 25, 2008
www.hindu.com

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment