Nuclear Agreement Latest Victim of Caucusus

Nuclear Agreement – a victim of the events in the Caucasus

Washington postponed signing the agreement due to Russia’s behavior

Yesterday the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned George Bush’s decision to pull from congressional consideration an agreement with Russia for civilian nuclear cooperation. In Washington this move is being linked to “Russia’s conduct” – its actions in the Caucasus and its joint maneuvers with Venezuela.

“We believe that the U.S. President’s decision to withdraw the U.S.-Russia Agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation from Congress is mistaken and politicized,” says a statement by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “We are also perplexed by the timing that was chosen to announce this decision.” According to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it is obvious that the withdrawal of the Agreement from the US Congress will be interpreted as a punishment or sanction against Russia.

Sergey Kirienko, the head of the state corporation “Rosatom,” does not share the Ministry’s harsh opinion. According to Interfax, he considers it to be a forced move. “Under the current circumstances it was almost impossible to reach an agreement,” stated Kirienko. “In a certain sense they have saved the agreement, and the new administration will have a chance to submit it again.”

The civilian nuclear agreement between Russia and the U.S. is an outcome of almost two years of negotiations. It was signed four months ago and was considered by specialists to be a breakthrough in cooperation between the two countries. The document stipulates the exchange of technologies in the field of civilian nuclear usage, a possibility of creating joint ventures, and processing of U.S. produced spent nuclear fuel in Russia.

Some experts estimate that the right to fuel processing could potentially turn into a billion dollar business since the U.S. is the leading supplier of nuclear fuel for world civilian nuclear energy. The signing of such agreements is provided for by a section of the 123rd pact for nuclear energy cooperation, where the necessity of their ratification is stipulated for.

Even though the American administration does not present its decision as a punishment of Russia, unofficially it is being interpreted as such. An expert in U.S.-Russia relations and a former State Department official, Stephen Sestanovich, calls the decision a “de-facto sanction.” At the same time, he thinks that the agreement is “dead in this Congress, but a new administration will have a look.” His colleague Robert J. Einhorn, a specialist on nuclear nonproliferation at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that the agreement is “as much in Washington’s interest as Russia’s” since it facilitates the countries’ cooperation in fighting nuclear proliferation and in keeping nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists. “This is not a big favor we have done for the Russians, and so this is not a great punishment to deny it to them.”

The Deputy Director of the U.S. and Canada Institute, Professor Viktor Kremenuk, believes that the move by the White House was in a way unavoidable and the agreement was doomed to be rejected in Congress given the current circumstances. According to the expert, the current administration is not going to approve it but after the elections in November the new administration will have a chance to re-submit it to Congress. An expert from Nezavisimaya Gazeta stated that the nuclear agreement is very important both for Russia and the U.S. According to him, this is a field where both sides can cooperate on equal terms and for mutual benefit. Besides the purely economic benefit, an agreement can play an important role in strengthening non-proliferation and providing for nuclear security. All of the above gives reason for hope that the new U.S. administration will be able to take effective steps to put the agreement into place.