The sentiment of partnership behind the Indo-US nuclear deal needs to be applauded, but the wisdom of using nuclear energy co-operation as the symbol of strengthened ties between the two great democracies is questionable.
It is important that people/members who oppose the deal offer alternatives and make it categorically clear that the opposition is to the specifics of the 123 agreement, and not improved bilateral relations between India and the United States.
Increased energy capacity for India must be a crucial goal. However, emphasis should be on energy security
through energy independence. This deal is lacking on the energy sufficiency front as it the expenditure it incurs will take away from much needed investment in developing alternate technologies that will deliver us the aspired independence from foreign fuel. India must strive for a non-carbon, non-nuclear economy by the middle of the century. Studies to achieve such a state at a reasonable cost have been made for other countries and must be done for India as well.
The argument that this deal will usher in new trade and thus should be accepted is weak. If trade is the goal then policymakers should sign a meaningful trade deal.