_________________________________________________________________________ Washington has opposed the proposed Russian sale of two nuclear power reactors to India, insisting that the deal is in violation of a 1992 agreement to which Moscow is a party.

According to the 1992 agreement among the nuclear suppliers nations, Russia is barred from providing nuclear equipment to India because of its refusal to allow international inspections of its nuclear installations.

Nicholas Burns, State Department spokesman, said on Thursday (6th February) in a daily press- briefing, that if India plans to modernise its nuclear installations, it should subject all its nuclear installations to a "full-scope safeguard," as well as international inspection.

Q. What does the United States know about a Russian deal with India to sell two nuclear reactors, and has the government protested this sale?

Burns: We have certainly raised this issue with the Russian government on a variety of occasions. Let me just take you through the background of this very briefly, but it is quite interesting.

In 1992, the nuclear suppliers group, of which Russia is a member, adopted full­scope safeguards ­ a policy of full­scope safeguards for the supply of nuclear materials and equipment to other countries. Under this policy, the members, including Russia, agreed to require, as a condition for future nuclear supply, arrangements, that the recipient country have in force a full­scope safeguards agreement.

As you know, India has not accepted full­scope safeguards. Therefore, we do not believe the Russian government should proceed with any kind of nuclear assistance to India, including the provision of nuclear power reactors to India. We have raised this issue with the Russian government repeatedly, and we'll continue to raise it with them.

Q. What's your understanding of the status of the deal now? Is it about to come to fruition? Has Russia delivered any of the equipment?

Burns: I'll have to take that question. It's really probably appropriately referred to the Russian and Indian governments. I don't know the exact status of the agreement, but I do know that we're opposed to it.

Q. When was the last time that this was raised with Russian officials?

Burns: Oh, I don't know the last time, but you can be assured we've raised it continually and we'll raise it in the future.

Q. You haven't made any reference to the fact that India hasn't signed the Test Ban Treaty. I wonder whether New Delhi's obvious obstruction in that regard is of any concern as they try to acquire new?

Burns: They really are separate issues. In this sense, we're hoping that India will submit itself, as do most other countries, to the full­scope safeguards. This is on peaceful uses of nuclear power ­ nuclear­power plant technology.

The issue of the test ban, of course, refers to something quite different. We have a well­known position on that which has not changed.

Q. But you wouldn't relate the two. Your opposition to India getting these reactors is in no way tied to their obstruction on the test ban?

Burns: That's right; it's not tied at all. But both issues are important. There are international agreements in place on both issues which we wish India would respect and, in fact, join. I think that's the long­term goal that we have in our relationship with the Indian government.

Q. Nick, now that you have said this is an ongoing issue between Russia and the United States, I am wondering whether you raised this issue with the Indians in the recent past?

Burns: Yes, we have, and quite consistently. The Indian government is well aware of our views.

Meanwhile, India on Sunday (23rd February) test-fired a short-range ballistic missile (Prithvi) which is part of an ambitious program and shrugged off criticism that the move could escalate tension in South Asia.

The Prithvi can carry a half-ton warhead up to 250 km, i.e., it could well cover almost all major cities in Pakistan. Since 1982, it has been tested 16 times and is yet to be fully operational.

The United States has urged India not to deploy the Prithvi, fearing its production could fuel regional hostility and a nuclear arms race in the area.

The AFP reports from Islamabad: a Pakistani foreign office spokesman Wednesday (13th February) said the development and deployment by India of short and medium­range missiles directly affected regional security.

He was commenting on a reported statement by Abdul Kalam, scientific adviser to the Indian defence minister, about India's plans to develop a medium­range surface­to­air missile.

The spokesman said Pakistan had repeatedly drawn attention to security implications of the Indian missile programme.

"It was incumbent upon the international community to impress upon India the desirability of avoiding a new arms race in South Asia," he said.

Previously, Pakistan voiced concern over the test­firing of the surface­to­surface "Prithvi"missile by India.