The Heritage Foundation -- the leading conservative think tank in Washington, DC, with close links to the Republican leadership in Congress -- has warned lawmakers against torpedoing the US-India civilian nuclear agreement now that both New Delhi and Washington have finally reached agreement on the so-called 123 Agreement.

In a report titled, 'US Nuclear Agreement with India: An Acceptable Deal for Major Strategic Gain,' the think tank noted that "two years in the making, this deal has tested the strength of the bond between India and the United States as well as the institutional flexibility on both sides necessary to usher in a new era of cooperation on nuclear issues."

It predicted that the 123 Agreement would "greatly strengthen the US strategic position in Asia by solidifying a partnership with a 1 billion-strong, economically booming democracy bordering another -- and less predictable -- rising power: China."

The report said that "Congress should support this historic effort," once the administration submits the agreement for approval by the lawmakers after India's safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group comes to a consensus decision that allows civil nuclear transfers to India.

It acknowledged that "members of Congress who were adamant about denying India reprocessing rights may be reluctant to accept the compromise," whereby India committed to stand up a dedicated, safeguarded reprocessing facility to ensure that US-origin nuclear fuel is not diverted to its weapons programme, but argued that lawmakers "should consider the fact that India's construction of a new reprocessing facility under international safeguards will actually bring India's nuclear program into greater conformity with the international non-proliferation regime."

The report also contended that "Congress should also bear in mind that, after the 123 Agreement is passed, it can guide the subsequent negotiations on the arrangements for reprocessing."

"No doubt US Congressional monitoring of the construction and implementation of the new dedicated reprocessing facility will be necessary to ensure that no corners are cut," it acknowledged, and that "beyond merely ensuring that the fuel is not used for weapons development, Congress will have to take care that less obvious violations of the spirit of the agreement do not occur, including application of US technology to any other facility, whether it is civilian or military."

The report noted that "if India goes against the spirit of the 123 Agreement, Washington will have the right to demand back the plutonium that is stripped out through reprocessing."

This, it said, is a critical element of the agreement to ensure that the US cannot be accused of violating its NPT obligations.;

The report appreciated the Congress' concern, however, about related clauses in the agreement that say the US will help India develop a 'strategic reserve' of nuclear fuel for the entire lifetime of the reactors.

Also, that the US has agreed to 'create conditions' for India's 'assured and full access' to the international fuel market.

It conceded that on the surface, "this language may appear at odds with the non-bonding provisions of the Hyde Act that urge Washington to limit India's access to fuel supplies from other countries in the event of a termination of the bilateral agreement."

However, the report argued that the 123 Agreement language does not violate the Hyde Act "since the fuel access provisions are part of the agreement itself and would terminate along with the agreement if, for example, an Indian nuclear detonation triggered Section 106 of the Hyde Act terminating US-India civil nuclear cooperation."