INDIAN PARLIAMENT BEGINS WITH NUCLEAR BANG

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000606 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/26/2018 TAGS: PREL PARM TSPL KNNP ETTC ENRG TRGY IN SUBJECT: INDIAN PARLIAMENT BEGINS WITH NUCLEAR BANG Classified By: Political Counselor Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B and D) ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Building on the unexpected extension of Ambassador Ronen Sen's tenure in the U.S., President Patil's expression of hope for the completion of the nuclear deal during her first address to Parliament February 25 has injected life back into the civil nuclear cooperation initiative. While the Left reiterated its intention to block nuclear progress, the Congress Party, bolstered by the start of the fifth round of IAEA talks, repeated its support. The March 20-April 7 break during this Parliament budget session could present an opportunity for the UPA government to provoke the Left by submitting the safeguards agreement to the IAEA Board of Governors. Such a rupture would set the stage for general elections in the fall or early 2009. We lay odds at 50-50 that the Congress Party High Command will seize this opportunity. End Summary. President's Nuclear Molehill Becomes a Mountain - - - ¶2. (SBU) Opening the budget session February 25, Indian President Pratibha Patil delivered her first address to Parliament. After promoting the government's efforts to promote agricultural, industrial, health and technological development for the bulk of her speech, Patil turned her attention to foreign policy. She first reviewed India's "enhanced" partnership with China, and then, in paragraph 59, focused on the U.S. "Our relations with the U.S have improved in the past few years, and now span a wide spectrum including high technology, space, agriculture, education and trade and other linkages. It is our hope that civil nuclear cooperation with the USA and other friendly countries will become possible," she stated. She next turned to India's "time-tested friendship" with Russia. ¶3. (SBU) Despite the perfunctory and brief mention of the nuclear issue towards the end of a lengthy speech, the Left immediately reacted. "There is no change in our position -- that is, do not proceed to operationalize the deal," Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPM) leader Sitaram Yechury challenged. CPM cohort M.K. Pandhe made clear that "the government will have to suffer if they breach the commitment of not going ahead with the India-U.S. nuclear deal." Communist Party of India (CPI) national secretary D. Raja remarked that the Left Front expected to debate the nuclear initiative again during the current Parliament session. T.J. Chandrachoodan, general secretary of the hard-line RSP party, which forms part of the Left Front, offered that "there is no sense in continuing to support the government." In his response to the Left, Congress Party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi reinforced the President's message after her speech. "We emphatically stand for the deal...no amount of statements from either side will change our position," he stressed. ¶4. (SBU) In its coverage of the President's speech, the press highlighted the nuclear allusion as consistent with the related reports of the beginning of the fifth round of IAEA talks and the extension of Ronen Sen as Ambassador to the U.S. The February 26 Economic Times featured the headline, "N-deal is on, says Prez address..." while the Times of India offered "Government hopeful on nuclear deal." The Pioneer saw the President's speech as provocative, which spawned the headline, "UPA-Left rift widens over nuclear deal." Only the February 26 Telegraph downplayed the remarks as a "passing reference," and quoted an unnamed CPM source who dismissed the significance of the speech as "only an expression of hope." IAEA Talks Enter Fifth Round - - - ¶5. (C) As proof that the Indian government intends to make progress on the initiative, Prime Minister's Office Director Virendar Paul confirmed to poloff that an Indian team, again led by Department of Atomic Energy Strategic Planning Group Director Ravi B. Grover, arrived in Vienna February 25. When asked if he expected a safeguards agreement to emerge at the end of the week, Paul hedged, "let's wait and see how it goes." The February 26 Times of India with a Vienna byline referred to sources who claimed that "Indian negotiators and IAEA are also keeping the agency's Board of Governors updated on the progress of the consultations so that it would be NEW DELHI 00000606 002 OF 002 easier when it officially comes for discussion during the Board meeting on March 3." The sources further clarified that "India may or may not come up for the official discussion." Comment: Congress Party Brings the Nuclear Ball Back Into Play - - - ¶6. (C) As insignificant as the President's nuclear shout-out might seem in the context of her wide-ranging speech, the fact that she chose to mention the controversial issue, which many had dismissed as dead, in the Indian equivalent of the State of the Union speech, reveals the UPA government's wish to keep the nuclear initiative alive and in the public eye in order to build pressure on the Left. Coming on the heels of the July deadline set by Senators Kerry, Biden and Hagel and at the beginning of IAEA talks, her words take on an added significance regarding the timeline. With Ambassador Sen's extension widely interpreted as a sign that the pro-deal forces in the Indian government now have the upper hand, the President's association with the nuclear initiative adds one more prominent Congress Party leader to the list of supporters. Budget Session Presents Opportunity for Nuclear Push - - - ¶7. (C) By re-igniting nuclear debate after letting the flames die down, the Congress Party may be preparing for a decisive confrontation with the Left during the March 20-April 7 break in the budget session. The government could submit the safeguards agreement to the IAEA Board for approval, triggering the Left to withdraw from the government when the Parliament returns April 7. Under this scenario, the Communists would call for a no-confidence vote only after supporting, or abstaining from, a vote on the budget, since no political party wants to be seen as obstructing the enactment of pro-poor measures. General elections would then occur earlier than May 2009, although delimitation (the periodic exercise of redrawing parliamentary districts) could mean that calling the elections will be a slow process -- as much as ten months -- while the Election Commission draws the new districts. ¶8. (C) This scenario would help the Congress Party attract votes from the largely pro-U.S. middle-class, who tend to lean towards the opposition BJP, while drawing a clear line between the Congress Party and the Communists, who will compete against each other for votes. But the move also requires the Congress Party to find its backbone, which it lost many months ago. Because of the courage that such an aggressive challenge demands, we put the odds at 50-50 that the Congress Party will finally get the guts to go through with the deal. MULFORD