'We were prepared to walk away from the nuclear agreement'

The other day, you argued that one of the problems is that the critics who are vehemently against the deal have no idea what the specifics of the separation plan are. But by the same token, doesn't that mean the Administration hasn't made a persuasive enough argument?

I've been struck by some of the articles that I've read and that most of these people have no idea what's actually in the agreement before they wrote their articles. It's always good to do your homework. It's always good to have a sense of what you are talking about and I think some of the critics are well very informed, some less so. But we have respect for them and in the democratic environment we live in, we'll be happy to take them on and have a good debate about this. Hopefully, a successful one from our perspective.

You have said, including in one of your written answers to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, that if the deal doesn't go through, it's going to have an adverse impact on US-India relations.

 There is no question that the deal is going to strengthen US-India relations. And so, by logic, if for whatever reason the deal doesn't go through, it's going to have an impact - a negative impact on the relationship.

One of the things that you reiterated over and over today (March 16) at your briefing was that this is a lengthy process and that it could take several months. That this is just Round One of a 15-round match…?

It should, it could…This is our process in our system of government. Doesn't move quickly.

But then how do you reconcile this to what you predicted, a sort of May deadline, so that you could go to the Nuclear Suppliers Group?

That's several months away. That's three months.

But are you optimistic that in three months this can be approved? Because, obviously there will be leverage if you go with an approved Congressional legislation in support of the deal to the NSG?

Yes. We hope that we will be able to convince the Congress that they should vote in support of this agreement and we would hope to do that by the NSG meeting in late May. It's not a guarantee. The Congress may want to take more time. And so, we have to be respectful of the Congress process. We will want this to move as quickly as possible, but in our system of government, which may not be fully always understandable to people outside the United States - the separation of powers. The administration made the agreement with India, but Congress has to decide what to do with it. And Congress is a separate branch and Congress has a right to act at its own speed.

How important is it to go with an approved piece of legislation on the deal to the NSG? Is it imperative? Or is it just that it certainly helps in leveraging a consensus?

My sense in the NSG is that countries are going to want to see what the United States has decided - the Congress. That's my sense.

What you are implying is that they (the NSG) would have problems if they find that the US Congress has still not approved it, but the Administration is nonetheless coming to it with such a deal?

Since it's an agreement between India and the United States, they are going to want to see what we've decided to do as a country, and the 'we' here is the Congress.

And if it doesn't happen by May, what happens then? I believe the NSG only meets again in November. Have you then got to wait till that time?

No. One could always call an extraordinary meeting at the NSG. We wouldn't have to wait until November.

And if it does drag on for a few more months past the May deadline, is the Administration willing to do that?

 Well, it's hypothetical. I prefer to think more optimistically.

Also See:
It is all up to the Congress now: Burns
India 'responsible' with nuclear programme: Burns