The US-India deal if successful in its passage through Congress could lead to an increase in pressure on Israel, an undeclared nuclear power, to bring its programme under the same kind of international scrutiny that India has agreed to.

Marc Perelman writes in the New York-based weekly Forward that critics in and outside Congress argue that making such exceptions for nuclear violators at a time of major concern over Iran’s nuclear ambitions could prove to be a double-edged sword from Israel’s point of view. By granting legitimacy to India’s nuclear arsenal, critics say that the deal will raise complaints of double standards and spark new calls for international scrutiny. Any such debate is likely to bring an unwelcome spotlight onto Israel and to re-energise long-standing calls by Muslim countries for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, Perelman wrote.

Early indications already have surfaced that Israel, which never has acknowledged its nuclear status, could face renewed pressure as new efforts emerge to forge a new and improved nuclear non-proliferation regime.

Earlier this month, as a step toward a nuclear-free Middle East, a United Nations commission on weapons of mass destruction recommended that Israel refrain from manufacturing more nuclear weapons.

The author believes that another possible source of pressure is a draft treaty aimed at banning the production of fissile material, introduced by the United States last month at a UN conference on disarmament in Geneva. The 65-member conference has been deadlocked for years on the proposed ‘Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty’ because of disagreement over whether it should cover existing stocks and include a verification regime.

Israel opposes an intrusive mechanism but developing countries have consistently called for the treaty to include total nuclear disarmament. The American draft would leave existing stockpiles untouched and does not envision inspections, irking Third World countries. However, among actual or presumed nuclear countries outside the non-proliferation regime, such as India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea, the draft is raising concerns about increased international monitoring.

Perelman is of the view that the America-India nuclear deal grants India a special one-time exemption from the global nuclear non-proliferation regime, acknowledging India as a “responsible” nuclear weapons state. In exchange for accepting international inspections of its civilian programme, New Delhi will be able to obtain foreign nuclear technology, including that from the US. Such sales had been banned to both India and Pakistan ever since their 1998 nuclear tests. The March deal effectively recognises India’s status as a nuclear power. No such move is expected with Pakistan, which remains under a cloud because of the Dr AQ Khan. As part of the discussions with India, Washington has asked that New Delhi enact a legal ban on further nuclear testing and pledge adherence to the fissile materials cut-off treaty.

The analyst notes that for the deal to come into effect, Congress must amend the Atomic Energy Act. The administration had hoped to push the changes through this summer, but it got only lukewarm support from senior Congressional Republican leaders. Discussion of the deal is now expected to take place only after the November midterm elections. While the Israeli government has not taken a strong position on the India deal, some of Israel’s supporters in America, including the American Jewish Committee, have urged Congress to ratify it.

The director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, has also endorsed the agreement, calling it a “win-win situation”. Perelman said that some observers believed the agreement weakens the West’s position vis-à-vis Iran.