That Other Failed War

Chidanand Rajghatta writes in the Times of India: "In remarks at a brief but elegant White House ceremony on Wednesday while signing the nuclear deal bill into domestic law, and in a separate statement issued thereafter, Bush reiterated the primacy of the bilateral agreement between the two countries, saying the bill was an important enabling legislation that allowed him 'to bring the 123 Agreement into force and to accept on behalf of the United States the obligations contained in the Agreement.'

"The 123 Agreement provides a wider latitude to India's nuclear program and cooperation with Washington than constrictive US laws, including the new legislation."

Bush "overruled the non-proliferation hardliners in acceding to India's rights for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel -- which critics fear will enable New Delhi to build more weapons. And he stood by the fuel assurance commitments which critics had tried to kill.

"Both assurances appeared to run contrary to pledges made by the administration to U.S lawmakers who codified the constrictive measures, but Bush maintained in his statement that 'the legislation does not change the terms of the 123 Agreement as I submitted it to the Congress' and that the 'Agreement is consistent with the Atomic Energy Act and other elements of US law.'"

Leonor Tomero, Director of Non-Proliferation at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, argued in a statement: "This deal has gone from bad to worse. From beginning to end, India played hard ball and won. After the administration caved to Indian demands in negotiations for the past three years, dangerously undermining nonproliferation and disregarding Congress, it again sided with India against U.S. security interests and against Congress by trying to disregard the very minimal nonproliferation provisions included in recently-passed congressional legislation.' . . .

"The administration not only failed to protect U.S. interests and heed congressional conditions, but set up a framework that will allow India and other countries, including France and Russia, to reap the benefits of engaging in nuclear trade without any conditions."

Bush in a Nutshell

Roger Cohen writes in his New York Times opinion column that "the unhappy saga of U.S.-Spanish relations reflects bungled American foreign policy. It's one thing to have a disagreement between friends, another to have discord fester through spite. Bush's vengeful streak is worthy of the schoolyard."

Cohen interviewed the Spanish prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.

"One of the first things Zapatero, 48, did upon his election in 2004 was announce the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. His conversation with Bush about this decision was, he said, 'unforgettable.'

"When he told Bush that Spanish forces in Iraq were history, the president replied: 'I'm very disappointed in you.' . . .

"Zapatero tried to explain that he was the leader of a democratic country, and his campaign promise had been getting the troops out. Bush, as the leader of another democratic country, should understand this.

"'But Bush was very cold. He said, "O.K., all right, goodbye." '