F. N. YURLOV

Doctor of Historical Sciences Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences

India Keywords:, energy security, nuclear weapons and nuclear energy

"India continues to adhere to the policy of strengthening the role of nuclear energy for economic growth. At the same time, it pays special attention to security issues." This statement was made on June 27, 2013 by the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission of India, R. K. Sinha, at the International Conference on Nuclear Energy in the XXI Century, held in St. Petersburg. He stressed that the reduction of fossil fuel resources, as well as the need to switch to low-carbon energy sources, which is associated with solving the problems of global warming, are forcing the search for alternatives that would meet India's energy needs. In this context, nuclear energy is a very important alternative.

The need for such an alternative is very acute in India, since the lack of its own energy resources negatively affects both the economic situation of the country and the daily life of the population. The problem is further compounded by rising energy prices. In June 2013, the Government of India announced a decision to double the price of gas from April 2014, from $4.2 per million metric British thermal units (mm BTU*).¹ to $8.4**. India's Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid explained that 80% of this fuel is imported. And if domestic oil and gas prices are $4.5 per mm BTU, then India has to pay $13 to buy them abroad.

The announcement of the fuel price hike sparked protests from electricity and fertilizer producers. They said that due to the rise in gas prices, the cost of electricity will increase from Rs 2.93 per kWh to Rs 6.40 per kW / ^h2. Opposition parties also protested against the increase in gas prices. They said that the entire burden of this price increase will fall on the shoulders of ordinary consumers, while large gas corporations will only benefit from it.

In broad terms, energy issues are inherently a global problem. Given the limited non-renewable energy resources, this problem has become one of the most acute, affecting the vital interests of almost all countries, including developing ones. The economies of the latter, including India and China, are largely dependent on energy, especially since the economic development of these countries is much faster than the economies of developed countries, especially in the context of the global crisis.

Today, energy issues are closely linked to politics. This applies primarily to energy resources such as oil and gas. But even more clearly there is a link between civilian nuclear power and the military aspects of the nuclear program. As you know, after the end of the Second World War, it was the nuclear bomb that was first used, and only later, on the basis of the development of nuclear technologies, nuclear power plants were created, where the nuclear installation found its practical application for generating electricity.

Energy security is one of the key issues of Indian domestic and foreign policy. It is inextricably linked to the country's economic growth and pressing social policy issues. According to some estimates, about 400 million Indians are not able to use electricity at all, and another 400 million are not able to use electricity at all. only ³ have limited access to it.

In India's foreign policy, energy issues occupy one of the leading places, since the country's energy needs are largely met by importing oil, liquefied gas and uranium, as well as the export of fuel to the United States.-

* BTU is a unit of energy measurement in the English system of measures. 1 BTU is equal to 252 thermal calories - http://ru.wikipedia. org/wiki/British Thermal Unit.

** As of 14.10.2013, 100 Indian rupees - $1.63 (editor's note).

Table 1

Major energy producers (primary energy) (in quadrillions of BTU)⁵

Table 2

Energy consumption (in quadrillions of BTU) ⁶

Table 3

Oil reserves (billion barrels, 2012) ⁷

Table 4

Natural gas reserves (in trillion cubic feet, 2012) ⁸

Table 5

Coal reserves (billion tons, 2008) ⁹

high-quality coal. India has to take into account its energy dependence on other countries. According to Indian scientist Baladas Ghoshal, India's dependence on oil imports will grow from 76% to 80% from 2012 to 2017, natural gas-from 19% to 28%, and coal-from 19.8% to 22.1%*.

INDIA'S ENERGY SECTOR ON A GLOBAL SCALE

Turning directly to the current problems of energy in India, we will focus on its place in this area, in comparison with other countries (see Table 1). We see that India produces about 5.5 times less energy than China; 5 times less than the United States; 3 times less than Russia; 1.5 times less than Saudi Arabia, and the same as Iran. When comparing energy consumption per capita, these indicators for India look even lower, especially when compared with countries such as the United States, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Australia, etc. Comparative data on energy consumption are of interest (see Table 2). As can be seen, India consumes 3.5 times less energy than the United States and China, slightly less than Russia, and slightly more than Japan. We should also note a significant drop in global energy consumption during the global crisis that began in 2008.

Today, non-renewable (fossil) energy resources (oil, natural gas, coal) in India and some other countries are as follows.

In terms of oil reserves, India can be attributed to countries that do not have sufficient oil resources of their own for economic development (see Table 3).

India is also poor in natural gas resources and is in dire need of its imports (see Table 4).

At the same time, India has a relatively large amount of coal (see Table 5).

However, coal in India is of poor quality, not always suitable for use in steel plants and thermal power plants. Therefore, India imports high-quality coal (including from Australia). In April-December 2012, its imports to India amounted to 100 million tons by FY2016 / 2017. Imports may grow to 185 million tons.¹⁰

Having considered the situation of India with non-renewable energy resources, we turn to nuclear energy. It accounts for 3.7% of all electricity supplies in India. According to this indicator, it ranks 26th out of the 27 countries that most widely use nuclear energy. The 1st place is occupied by France - 77.7% of all electricity supplies. This is followed by: 2nd place-Belgium - 54%; ... 4th -

Ukraine - 47%; ... 8th-Sweden-40%; 9th-South Korea-35%; ... 15th-USA-19%; ... 18th-Japan-18%; ... 21st-Russia-17.6%.

India currently has 20 nuclear reactors, and 7 new ones are under construction, including 2 in Kudankulam (see below). For comparison (existing nuclear reactors + those under construction in other countries): 1) USA-104+1; 2) France-58+1; 3) Japan - 50+2*4) Russia - 33+11; 5) South Korea-23+4; 6) China-16+26; 7) Ukraine-15+2.

The largest number of nuclear reactors under construction is in China, Russia and India. At the same time, in the United States and Canada, they are practically not built. The situation is similar in Europe. In Germany, no nuclear reactors are being built, and the existing 9 reactors are being shut down after the Fukushima disaster in March 2011. We emphasize the fact that new reactors are being built in South Korea, despite its proximity to Japan.

To better understand the role of nuclear power in India, we note that fossil energy sources account for approximately 90% of all its consumption. The rest, except for nuclear power, are hydroelectric power and all renewable types of energy (including biofuels, solar and wind energy).

In India, 68% of all households have access to electricity. Of these, 93% are located in urban areas and 56% in rural areas.¹¹ This means that about half of the country's population is forced to use traditional energy sources for cooking and heating homes.

Until now, in many villages, these sources are dried dung, low-quality coal that is mixed with dung, as well as twigs and dead wood. In Kashmir, for example, kangri is still used for heating in winter - a clay pot with smoldering coal, which under the clothes hangs below the chest on a string from the neck and thus warms the body.

The serious situation with electricity shortages in India was clearly manifested in the summer of 2012, when twice due to extreme overloads in the power grid, electricity was cut off in half of the states. As a result of the measures taken, the situation was quickly brought under control. But the fact remains that India is critically short of electricity to meet the needs of the population and develop the economy at the same pace (7-8% per year). Indeed, in 2012/2013, due to various reasons, including the global crisis, the country's economic growth declined to 5.7%, and in April-June 2013 - to 4.4% ¹².

After the accidents at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant (USA, 1979), Chernobyl (1986), and Fukushima, a number of countries, including India, began to discuss the feasibility of using nuclear energy. At the same time, the challenges of climate change, environmental pollution and rapid growth in electricity demand, especially in China and India, are forcing a new look at nuclear power. Currently, about 60 nuclear reactors with a total capacity of about 60 thousand megawatts (MW) are being built in the world - this is 1/6 of the capacity of all nuclear power plants in the world.

However, the nuclear power industry faces serious challenges: safety, high construction costs (one nuclear power plant reactor can cost $5-10 billion), long construction and commissioning periods, as well as storage and recycling of waste, and separation of civilian nuclear waste from military waste. Many countries, including India, are facing the urgent issue of guaranteed supply of nuclear fuel and solving the problem of nuclear waste.

There is also the problem of obtaining new nuclear technologies for nuclear power plants, including in India. Today, according to Ernest Moniz, a specialist in energy systems and former First Deputy Secretary of Energy of the United States (1997-2001), America, which used to be the main supplier of nuclear technologies and nuclear fuel, is no longer such a country. The main suppliers in this area are France and Russia ¹³.

FROM THE ATOMIC BOMB TO NUCLEAR POWER

Let's briefly outline the path that India has taken from testing a nuclear bomb to nuclear power. This will help us better understand the political ambitions of its leaders, as well as the country's scientific and technological capabilities. In May 1974. India has tested a nuclear device for "peaceful purposes", as announced by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The nuclear explosion was warmly welcomed by the majority of the Indian population. At the same time, the question of its compatibility with the image of a peace-loving state arose. After all, even in the struggle for independence of the country, nonviolence, which Mahatma Gandhi preached, was a powerful weapon.

After Gandhi's death in 1948, independent India began to distance itself from his ideology. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, although a follower of Gandhi, took a different path. He wrote: "I was aware that Indians have huge reserves of energy and abilities, and I wanted to release these reserves and make people feel young and full of life again. India cannot really play a secondary role in the world. It will either be of great importance, or it will not be taken into account at all. " ¹⁴

Indira Gandhi's chief adviser, P. Haksar, recalled Nehru's shock at the American atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. It led him to vigorously urge the world's nations to give up nuclear weapons. At the same time, in February 1948 He wrote to Defense Minister Baldev Singh: "The future belongs to those who produce nuclear power. It is expected that it will become the main source of energy. Of course, the defense industry

* Almost all nuclear power plants in Japan were shut down after the Fukushima-1 accident. Only 2 out of 50 reactors have resumed operation - at the Oi NPP (editor's note).

very interested in it. The possession of atomic energy even has political consequences." In this regard, the Nehru Government stated: "The possible use of atomic energy in military operations is likely to lead to a revolution in our understanding of war and defense. At the moment, we can ignore this factor, except for recognizing the absolute need to develop ways to use atomic energy for both civilian and military purposes. This means conducting scientific research on a large scale. " ¹⁵

In these matters, Nehru relied on the opinion of Indian scientists, especially Homi Bhabhu, who in the 1930s studied in European laboratories under the supervision of Nobel laureates Enrico Fermi, Wolfgang Pauli and Niels Bohr.

In 1953, Nehru regarded the US President's proposal as a "no-deal". Eisenhower proposed "An Atom for Peace" as a ploy designed to prevent the emergence of applicants for the status of a nuclear power. Eisenhower promised to help non-nuclear-weapon States build nuclear power plants, as well as establish a "bank" from which they could obtain fissile materials for their own needs, instead of producing their own fuel.

Nehru was opposed to India abandoning its plans to build an atomic bomb. He believed that India should be able to produce such weapons, but not to use them. Therefore, he called for the creation of the infrastructure necessary for the production of atomic weapons.

At the end of 1955, the Nehru Government decided to cooperate with Canada to build a Cyrus research reactor that would produce plutonium, and thereby begin developing its nuclear weapons capability. At the same time, intelligence reports began to arrive about China's preparations for the creation of an atomic bomb.

In July 1958, Nehru gave permission for a project designed to recycle 20 tons of nuclear fuel annually to produce 10 kg of plutonium-the equivalent of the "stuffing" of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. To this end, construction of a factory began in Trombay, near Bombay, and was scheduled to be commissioned in 1964.

In September 1962, two months before the war with China, Nehru passed a law in Parliament that gave the Government full control over decisions on atomic energy.

A month after the outbreak of war with China, on November 4, 1962, Bhabha sent a secret note to Nehru, which contained proposals for countering China's nuclear plans. Bhabha wrote: "The only way we can respond to the expected explosion of a Chinese nuclear device within the next year and a half is if we have a much broader program for the peaceful use of nuclear energy than they do. Getting plutonium measured in kilograms within a year and a half will clearly demonstrate that we could make atomic weapons if we wanted to, but we are refraining from this step." Nehru agreed to prepare a "peaceful" nuclear explosion ¹⁶. At the same time, work began on the creation of long-range missiles.

At the same time, there were reports that the United States, concerned that China was preparing to detonate an atomic bomb, wanted to help India master nuclear technology. However, Nehru refused this help. On October 16, 1964, China detonated its first atomic bomb at the Lobnor test site. India was the first to break the news to the world.

U.S. documents declassified in 2008 expressed regret that India's non-aligned policy hindered its closer relations with the United States. The political framework for such relations "does not currently exist, and it is unlikely that it will be created in the coming years, if at all." A telegram from the US Ambassador to India, Chester Bowles, dated December 12, 1967, reported that India had not accepted US assurances that they would ensure its security. He wrote that Prime Minister Gandhi asked what was the point of such assurances for India. "If the Americans want to come to our aid in the event of a Chinese attack, they will do so, even if we do not sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). And if they don't want to come to our aid, they won't do it, even if we sign this agreement."¹⁷

In 1968, 62 States, including three nuclear - armed States-the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom-signed the NPT, and it entered into force in March 1970. The two nuclear powers-China and France - did not sign it. India and Pakistan also refused to join the Treaty. By that time, the number of strategic nuclear warheads in the United States was 5,240, and in the USSR-2,220.¹⁸ Thus, even then, such an amount of nuclear weapons was accumulated that could completely destroy life on the planet.

Since the signing of the NPT, India has repeatedly expressed its views on the global nuclear threat and made proposals on nuclear arms control and elimination.

Despite certain changes in its position due to changes in the international situation, India's attitude to nuclear issues has remained unchanged throughout this period. This was evidenced, in particular, by the statement of I. Gandhi in 1982: "Today it has become not only possible, but also quite probable, the total destruction of man on Earth with his historical memory, great achievements and aspirations for the future." Regarding India's refusal to sign the NPT, she stressed that the treaty was discriminatory. It provides an opportunity for countries, regions and regions to-

nuclear-weapon States, build up their stockpiles, but do not allow other States even to experiment for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. According to her, this is a manifestation of inequality and injustice.¹⁹

DE FACTO RECOGNITION OF INDIA AS A NUCLEAR STATE

In the early 2000s. India has been negotiating the peaceful use of nuclear energy with the United States, France and Russia. However, they did not lead to tangible results, since France and Russia were bound by obligations under the Nuclear Supply Group (NSG), which included 45 states. In addition, they did not want it to damage their relations with the United States. Declaring their desire to help India's efforts in this direction, they "advised" to negotiate with Washington on these issues.

As a result, India held several rounds of negotiations with the United States, which resulted in the signing in July 2005 by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President J. R. R. Tolkien. President George W. Bush's Joint Statement on Civil Nuclear Cooperation ²⁰.

Under this statement, India agreed to separate its military and civilian nuclear programs. At the same time, the civilian program fell under the control of the IAEA. India also expressed its readiness to sign the Additional Protocol to the Verification Agreement (1997) and to comply with the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime in its laws on the export control of nuclear materials.

India also announced its moratorium on nuclear testing and its intention to work with the United States on a fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. In turn, the United States pledged to speed up the supply of nuclear fuel for the Tarapura nuclear power plant.

Later, under an agreement between India and the United States dated March 2, 2006, India divided its nuclear facilities into civilian and military ones. According to the agreed plan, by 2014, 14 out of 22 nuclear reactors will be under the control of the IAEA (in 2006, there were only 4 reactors under this control). Thus, 8 reactors that can be considered strategic or military remained outside the IAEA's control.

From 2006 to 2009 Three heavy-water reactors and 2 spent nuclear fuel storage facilities were placed under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Sirius reactor, which produces plutonium, was shut down in 2004. Another Apsara reactor was placed under IAEA control in 201021. For its part, the United States has agreed to assist India in developing strategic fuel reserves for reactors under IAEA control to avoid unforeseen consequences associated with interruptions in fuel supplies.

Serious problems have emerged in the course of the Indian-American negotiations. The United States demanded that Indian nuclear installations be under permanent IAEA control. India agreed to this, although this requirement was not included in the 2005 Joint Statement. At the same time, India insisted on guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel to avoid the situation that previously developed at the Tarapura nuclear power plant. The US ultimately agreed to India's proposal.

The last problem had its own backstory. In May 1964. India and the United States have signed a contract to build two light-water nuclear reactors, each with a capacity of 210 MW, at Tarapura, near Mumbai, Bombay. The reactors were built by General Electric and started generating electricity in 1969.

Even before the construction of this nuclear power plant began, the United States entered into an agreement with India in 1963 to supply fuel for these reactors for 30 years. However, after the Indian nuclear tests in 1974, the United States first began to delay fuel supplies, and then in 1980 completely stopped them. Since 1983, France has agreed to supply fuel for this nuclear power plant until 1993.

Since 1984, both reactors of the nuclear power plant have significantly reduced electricity production. According to available data, China supplied ³⁰ tons of low - enriched uranium to this nuclear power plant in 1994-199522.

Under an agreement between Russia and India (October 2000), Russia supplied 50 tons of low-enriched uranium to the Tarapur nuclear power plant in 2001, which was operational until 2008.However, Russia was unable to continue supplying fuel due to objections from the Nuclear Suppliers Group. These objections were based on the fact that countries that are not signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (including India) are not allowed to receive nuclear technology or fuel.

During US President George W. Bush's visit to India in 2006, an Indian-American nuclear agreement was signed. Following this, on March 14, 2006, Russia announced that it would supply, presumably, another 50 tons of fuel for the Tarapura NPP, which can extend the operation of the NPP until 2012-2013.

The United States considered these actions of Russia premature, since India had yet to implement the treaty on the division of nuclear reactors into civilian (under the control of the IAEA) and strategic (military), in accordance with the US-India agreement. The US State Department has stated that although India needs nuclear fuel, such agreements (i.e. between Russia and India) should build on joint initiatives between the US and India, based on the measures that India should take in the future.²³

Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov explained Russia's actions by saying that they "do not contradict international obligations." And the Indian side said that Russian proposals to supply fuel for the Tarapura nuclear power plant "are not related to our nuclear agreements with the United States,"that they do not violate the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and that Russia informed this Group in advance about fuel supplies. ²⁴

In this regard, the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Anil Kakodkar, provided the following explanation: "We adhere to the principle or philosophy of a closed nuclear fuel cycle. This means that the fuel used in the reactor must undergo a recovery process, and the uranium and plutonium must be reprocessed. Thus, we not only provide cost-effective waste treatment, but also significantly increase the amount of energy that we extract from this amount of uranium... The logic of a closed nuclear fuel cycle is increasingly recognized around the world and, I am sure, will become universal quite quickly."

A. Kakodkar confirmed that India does not intend to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. It refuses to recognize the very terminology of the treaty, according to which there are "nuclear-weapon States" and "non-nuclear-weapon States". The bottom line is that India is a nuclear-armed country. It is also a fact that India's position on non-proliferation is "impeccable". Therefore, any agreement with India must take these realities into account.²⁵

The Indian leadership believed that the main purpose of the civil nuclear cooperation agreements with the United States was to eliminate restrictions in all areas of cooperation and transfer technologies related to civil nuclear energy. India has not agreed to any restriction that would prevent it from providing all the conditions for full civilian nuclear cooperation. At the same time, it stressed that it is a country with advanced nuclear technology, which was recorded in the Indian-American Joint Statement in 2005, which did not classify India as a nuclear-weapon State, but at the same time recognized the presence of such weapons. This meant that India did not fall under the full control of the IAEA, as in the case of non-nuclear Powers that are parties to the NPT. Therefore, there were no restrictions on India's continuing nuclear-related activities. India, according to M. Singh, will in many respects be on a par with the five nuclear-weapon States in these important aspects.²⁶

In addition, the plan to separate civilian nuclear and strategic military facilities provided India with special control conditions from the IAEA, which provided for the continuous supply of fuel for civilian reactors, with the right of India to take necessary measures if such supplies are interrupted.

In December 2006, US President George W. Bush signed the US-India Peaceful Nuclear Energy Cooperation Act. At its core, the law reviewed the implementation of the United States ' nuclear policy, which it had been pursuing for several decades. It allowed India to receive nuclear technology and nuclear fuel for civilian purposes from the United States. And this is despite the fact that India not only did not sign the NPT, but also in 1974 and 1998. conducted tests of such weapons.

"This is an important achievement for the world," Bush said at the signing ceremony. - After 30 years of being outside the [non-proliferation] system India will now carry out its nuclear energy program in accordance with international regulations. As a result, the world will be a safer place." "The United States and India are natural partners, united by deep - rooted values," Bush said. " The rivalry that once divided our countries no longer exists... The American people have come to regard India as a friend. " ²⁷

Under this law, India was required to allow inspections of 14 civilian nuclear facilities in exchange for supplies of nuclear technology and fuel from the United States. Eight military nuclear facilities in India could not be subject to an IAEA inspection. The law stipulated that the United States and India should receive an exception to the rules of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. India was also expected to conclude a corresponding agreement on this issue with the IAEA. After that, the law must be reviewed again by the US Congress.

A number of conditions were put forward in the law, which caused criticism of some of the Indian political elite. By law, the US president must stop exporting nuclear materials to India if it conducts a nuclear weapons test. In addition, the US president must report annually to Congress on how India cooperates with America on curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.

After signing the bill in the United States, Manmohan Singh said it reflected India's emergence on the world stage "as a power to be reckoned with." He also said that the India-US agreement is an important part of India's efforts to meet its rapidly growing energy needs.²⁸

The Indian-American strategic dialogue on energy issues, and especially on nuclear energy, is progressing very actively. This is evidenced, in particular, by the results of the fourth strategic dialogue, which was held in New Delhi on 23-25 June 2013. The meeting was co-chaired by Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid and US Secretary of State John Kerry. A wide range of international issues were discussed (the situation in Afghanistan

and Iran), as well as issues of bilateral relations.

Among the latter, cooperation between the two countries in the field of civil nuclear energy has taken an important place. It was agreed that the construction of 6 nuclear reactors in Gujerat and 6 more in Andhra Pradesh by the American firms Westinghouse and General Electric could be completed by September 2013. An agreement in principle was also reached on the supply of American shale gas to India. India, in turn, has asked the United States to support its accession to the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the IAEA.²⁹

At the meeting in Delhi, the issue of liability in case of possible accidents of nuclear power plants that will be built with American participation was raised. The United States would like to avoid this when concluding an agreement on the construction of nuclear reactors.

Moreover, Indian-American agreements on these and other issues, such as the implementation of economic reforms in India in the field of retail trade, providing for the admission of such American giants as Wal-Mart to the country, as well as in the field of investment policy, are likely to become possible only after the next parliamentary elections in India, which will be held in due in 2014. After them, the balance of power in the country's parliament may change with unpredictable consequences.³⁰

Certain problems in the Indian-American dialogue have arisen over the issue of Iran, which was and remains, despite US sanctions, an oil supplier to India. Shortly before meeting J. R. R. Tolkien. Kerry S. Khurshid, who visited Tehran, confirmed that India highly values relations with Iran and would like to see its intentions after the presidential elections held in June 201331.

Be that as it may, many factors indicate that Indian-American relations, including in the energy sector, are developing very vigorously. Suffice it to say that the total trade turnover of the two countries in 2012 amounted to $108 billion.³²

INDIA AND FRANCE: NUCLEAR ENERGY RELATIONS

In addition to the United States and Russia, France shows the greatest interest in developing cooperation with India in the nuclear energy sector. Back in 1998, it did not object to India's nuclear tests and did not support US sanctions in this regard. The French Government headed by Presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Maduro Sarkozy expressed his readiness to develop relations with India in nuclear energy, as well as in the field of defense. The latter was reflected in the fact that in 2012 India has given preference to the French Rafale combat aircraft over two American, Russian, Swedish and European fighters.

It was about the supply of 126 such vehicles in the amount of $11 billion. However, the implementation of this contract was slowed down for various reasons, including due to the global crisis. In 2013, delivery has not yet started, but negotiations on this topic continued.

A similar situation has developed with the agreement on Indian-French cooperation in the construction of 6 nuclear reactors in Jaitapur (Maharashtra). An agreement on this issue, including the supply of nuclear fuel for the entire life of these reactors, was signed in February 2009 by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. and the French company Areva. After the Fukushima disaster, the two sides continued negotiations in connection with new risks in this area, as well as the law on liability in the event of an accident at a nuclear power plant adopted by India. Additional difficulties also arose due to the fact that some components for French nuclear reactors must be supplied from Japan.

French officials express their readiness to continue broad cooperation with India in the field of civil energy. It seems that the main obstacle to the development of relations between the two countries in this area, as in a number of others, is the economic crisis that has engulfed Europe, including France. Between 2006 and 2012, France dropped from 13th to 26th place among India's trading partners. In 2012, the trade turnover between the two countries amounted to $9 billion, while in 2008 it was planned at the level of $16 billion. French imports and exports accounted for just 1.1% of India's total trade.³³

France's trade and economic relations with China stand in contrast. The volume of trade between these countries reached $53 billion in 2011. (an increase of 17%, compared to 2010). In April 2013, China announced its intention to buy 60 Airbus aircraft from France worth $7.7 billion, as well as sign agreements on the construction of a nuclear fuel recycling plant in China and joint work on uranium mining in Niger.³⁴

RUSSIAN-INDIAN NUCLEAR ENERGY COOPERATION

In 1988, Russia and India signed an agreement to build 2 nuclear reactors with a capacity of 1,000 MW each in Kudankulam, Tamil Nadu. Construction itself began in 2001. In 2002, negotiations were held on the construction of 4 more reactors. But later this issue was, in fact, frozen. Initially, it was assumed that the first reactor at Kudankulam will be launched in December 2009, and the second-in March 2010. Then the deadline was postponed.

In mid-2012, the first reactor was almost ready for launch. However, this did not happen. The reason is the mass protests of local residents, who after the Fukushima accident expressed concerns about possible adverse environmental consequences. It came to the point that Indian Prime Minister M. Singh accused American and Scandinavian non-governmental organizations of fomenting these protests.³⁵

Then the issue of liability in the event of an accident at a nuclear power plant was widely discussed in the Indian press. According to the law adopted by India, this responsibility should lie on the side that built the nuclear power plant, in this case - on Russia. The Prime Minister of India directly put the question-who will pay for a possible accident?

This issue was brought to the level of the country's Supreme Court, which demanded full safety in the operation of this nuclear reactor. At the same time, Indian experts on this issue stated that all over the world, without exception, the operator is responsible for an accident, and not the one who built the nuclear power plant.

There was also a compromise opinion that such responsibility may fall on the reactor builder for up to five years of operation, and in subsequent years it should be borne by the local operator. An example was given of the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was designed and built by the Americans more than 40 years ago. The Japanese had no intention of blaming them for the accident. The fact is that, as a rule, during the operation of a nuclear power plant, the operator makes changes to its operation, which in most cases are not coordinated with the builder.

Another question also arose : why does the application of the law on liability start with Russia? In this case, Russia could demand additional payment for the construction and operation of the nuclear power plant. But all this may complicate the situation with the future construction of nuclear power plants with Russian participation. In any case, the launch of the first reactor of the Kudankulam nuclear power plant was again postponed to July 2013, and the second reactor - to 2014. ³⁶

It should be said that India seeks to build nuclear power plants on its own, since it has considerable scientific and technological resources. This is evidenced, among other things, by the fact that it independently developed and built several heavy-water reactors. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that India will now be able to refuse to cooperate with Russia and other countries in this area.

* * *

The example of India shows that energy security has become a central point of foreign policy not only in this country, but also in many others, both rich and poor in energy resources. It is no coincidence that the "energy foreign policy" is one of the causes of geopolitical confrontation and acute political conflicts in many parts of the world.

¹ The Hindu. 28.06.2013.

² Ibid. 27.06.2013.

^{Mehdudia Sujay.} 3 Sunny Future // The Hindu. 05.05.2013.

^{Ghoshal Baladas.} 4 Energy Security as a Component of India's Foreign Policy // ICCR/RGGU, Moscow, 15 - 16 May, 2013.

⁵ Compiled from: The World Almanac and Book of Facts. New York, 2013, p. 142.

⁶ Ibidem.

⁷ Ibid., p. 144.

⁸ Ibidem.

⁹ Ibid.

¹⁰ Union Budget 2013 - 2014 // The Hindu. 21.03.2013.

¹¹ India. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3) 2005/2006, p. 2.

¹² On India's declining GDP growth, see: The Hindu. 05.09.2013.

^{Moniz Ernest.} 13 Why We Still Need Nuclear Power. Making Clean Energy Safe and Affordable // Foreign Affairs. November/December, 2011, p. 83 - 94.

^{Chengappa Raj.} 14 How India's nuclear weapons were created / / Asia and Africa Today. 2003, No. 5, p. 53.

¹⁵ Ibid., p. 55.

¹⁶ Ibid., p. 58.

¹⁷ Ibid.

¹⁸ Current History. May, 1995, p. 204-205; see also: Financial News. 27.06.1995.

^{Gandhi Indira.} 19 Mir, sotrudnichestvo, non-aligned Movement, Moscow, Progress Publishing House, 1985, pp. 147, 149, 166, 167.

^{Sibal Kanwal.} 20 US-India Nuclear Cooperation // The Indian Express. 27.04.2006.

²¹ Frontline. 23.09.06 - 06.10.06.

²² Ibid., 25.03.06 - 07.04.06.

²³ Ibidem.

²⁴ Ibid.

²⁵ Ibid.

²⁶ The Hindu. 01.10.2006.

²⁷ http://www.washingtonpost.com/2006/12/18/

²⁸ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/

^{Dikshit Sundeep.} 29 India assures U.S. a share of nuclear pie // The Hindu. 24.06.2013.

^{Gupta Pallavi.} 30 India-US: India to hold economic reforms in the field of retail and FDI // The Hindu. 25.06.2013.

³¹ The Hindu. 24.06.2013.

³² Ibid. 25.06.2013.

^{Vaishnav Ajay.} 33 India-France: Deepening Strategic Ties - zeenewsindia.com/21.02.2013; The Hindu. 24.10.2011.

³⁴ France 24. International News, 25.04.2013.

³⁵ Foreign NGO's behind Kudankulam protests: PM // The Hindustan Times. 24.02.2012; Srinivas M. Kudankulam is safe // The Times of India. 14.11.2011.

^{Ramesh M.} 36 What is going in Kudankulam? // The Hindu. 16.06.2013.

Permanent link to this publication: