The proposed Indo-US civil nuclear agreement violates an article of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which prohibits members from assisting or inducing any non-nuclear weapon state to acquire nuclear weapons, a group of non-proliferation experts have claimed.

• US Congressman introduces bill that may scuttle N-deal

In a letter to members of the Congress, the experts also flayed the state department for a "narrow construct" of the NPT and argued that "India may not have to comply with the treaty, but the US, as a signatory to it, has a solemn responsibility not only to discourage proliferation by others, but to refrain from assisting other states' nuclear weapons programme in any way."

"The current proposal would breach this central provision of the treaty," the letter pointed out.

• Indo-US nuke tango

The proposed Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement violates Article One of the NPT and for the State Department to have come to the conclusion that the accord is not a violation of the NPT is not correct as Foggy Bottom "construes the meaning of the NPT so narrowly as to render it meaningless," the specialists said in the letter.

The letter to members of Congress was distributed to participants at a symposium on the United States-India Nuclear Deal at the Arms Control Association.

• Support N-deal

Article One of the NPT, the non-proliferationists have told lawmakers, prohibits members from assisting, encouraging or inducing any non-nuclear weapon state manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices. 

"How would US nuclear aid violate the NPT? Foreign nuclear fuel supplies would free up India's limited domestic nuclear fuel making capacity to produce highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons. By the Indian government's own admission, its military and civil nuclear programmes are "inextricably" linked, so if we assist one, we assist the other," the specialists have told lawmakers.

"Since the proposed deal also accepts the legitimacy of India's nuclear weapons programme, it would effectively encourage India to continue in that direction," the letter said.

"The administration has tried to downplay these points by emphasising the strategic advantages of partnership with India. Administration officials contend that failure to accede to India on the nuclear issues would threaten the whole arrangement," the letter said.

"Yet India's foreign secretary recently acknowledged that the deal may not get by the Congress and this would not affect closer ties with the US. The main point is that our strategic interests dictate that we should not discard our non-proliferation policy and our treaty obligations. To do so would only enfeeble our case against NPT violators," the signatories warned lawmakers.

The letter was signed by several scholars, including Thomas Cochran of the Natural Resource Defense Council Nuclear Programme and Victor Gilinksy a former commissioner of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, among others. 

The symposium was also attended by Robert Einhorn of the CSIS and formerly a senior State Department official during the Clinton administration dealing on non-proliferation matters; Henry Sokolski, a critic of the nuclear deal and with the Non Proliferation Policy Education Centre and others.

The administration, Einhorn contended, wanted the legislation to be reported out of the committee by July 4 and for a vote taken at the end of July, but "that's an optimistic time-frame".