The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement also known as the nuclear deal is the name commonly attributed to a bilateral agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of India under which the United States will provide India access to civilian nuclear technology and fuel in exchange for IAEA-safeguards on India's civilian nuclear reactors.
The Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, also known as the Hyde Act, is the enabling legal framework for the United States for drafting a 123 agreement to operationalise the agreement . However the Hyde act is not binding on India . The 123 agreement requires a separate approval of the United States Congress and Indian cabinet ministers of the exact terms and conditions for bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation. According to the Nuclear Power Corporation of India, the agreement will help India meet its goal of adding 25,000 MW of nuclear power capacity through imports of nuclear reactors and fuel by 2020.
After the terms of the deal were concluded on July 27, 2007, it ran into trouble because of stiff opposition in India from the Communist allies of the ruling United Progressive Alliance. They alleged that the deal would undermine the sovereignty of India's foreign policy and also claimed that the Indian government was hiding certain clauses of the deal, which would harm India's indigenous nuclear program, from the media.[4] On July 9, 2008, the Left Front withdrew support to the government reducing its strength to 276 in the Lok Sabha (The lower house of the parliament). The government survived a confidence vote in the parliament on the 22nd of July by 275-256 votes in the backdrop of defections from both camps to the opposite camps.

Purpose behind the agreement:
The growing energy demands of the Indian and Chinese economies have raised questions on the impact of global energy availability. Further India still harbours aspirations of being recognised as a nuclear power before considering signing the NPT as a nuclear weapons state, which is possible only if the present arbitrary fixed 1967 cut off definition of "nuclear power state" is pushed to 1975. The proposed civil nuclear agreement recognises india's "de facto" status while explicitly not mentioning it anywhere. The Bush Administration has concluded that an Indian shift toward nuclear energy is in the best interest for America to secure its energy needs of coal, crude oil, and natural gas. Moreover, the Bush administration insists that India's strong non-proliferation record and stable democracy further helped justify a nuclear pact with India while not providing Pakistan or others the same. Finally, the U.S. also expects that such a deal could spur India's economic growth and bring in $150 billion in the next decade for nuclear power plants, of which the US wants a share. It is India's stated objective to increase the production of nuclear power generation from its present capacity of 4,000 MWe to 20,000 MWe in the next decade.
Indian and American critics along with nuclear industry representatives and developmental economists have questioned each of the administration's claims. They have noted that U.S. nuclear vendors cannot sell any reactors to India unless and until India caps third party liabilities and or establishes a credible liability pool to protect U.S. firms from being sued in the case of an accident or a terrorist act of sabotage against nuclear plants.
The Respect Developmental economic advising firm of Dalberg, which advises the IMF and the World Bank, moreover, has done its own analysis of the economic value of investing in nuclear power development in India. Their conclusion is that for the next 20 years such investments are likely to be far less valuable economically or environmentally than a variety of other measures to increase and economize electricity production in India. and also to stop or reduce the pollution by traditional usage of natural resources
Since the end of the Cold War, The Pentagon, along with certain U.S. ambassadors such as Robert Blackwill, have requested increased strategic ties with India and a de-hyphenization of Pakistan with India.
Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which would be in charge of inspecting India's civilian reactors has praised the deal as "it would also bring India closer as an important partner in the nonproliferation regime". However, members of the IAEA safeguards staff have made it clear that Indian demands that New Delhi be allowed to determine when Indian reactors might be inspected could undermine the IAEA safeguards system.
While India is self-sufficient in thorium, possessing 25% of the world's known and economically available thorium, it possesses a meagre 1% of the similarly calculated global uranium reserves. Indian support for cooperation with the U.S. centers around the issue of obtaining a steady supply of sufficient energy for the economy to grow.
Indian opposition to the pact centers around the concessions that would need to be made, as well as the likely de-prioritization of research into a thorium fuel-cycle if uranium becomes highly available given the well understood utilization of uranium in a nuclear fuel cycle.

Agreement:
On March 2, 2006 in New Delhi, George W. Bush and Manmohan Singh signed a Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, following an initiation during the July 2005 summit in Washington between the two leaders over civilian nuclear cooperation.
Heavily endorsed by the White House, the agreement is thought to be a major victory to George W. Bush's foreign policy initiative and was described by many lawmakers as a cornerstone of the new strategic partnership between the two countries. The agreement is widely considered to help India fulfill its soaring energy demands and enter the U.S. and India into a strategic partnership. The Pentagon speculates this will help ease global demand for crude oil and natural gas.
On August 3, 2007, both the countries released the full text of the 123

Current Status of agreement
Following the passing of the Act, negotiations on implementing the cooperation through a 'Section 123 Agreement' were concluded on July 27, 2007. For this agreement to be sent to the U.S. Congress, India must have negotiated a safeguards agreement with the IAEA and the Nuclear Suppliers Group must have agreed to modify its export control standards to permit nuclear cooperation with India.
On June 19, 2008, news media reported that Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh threatened to resign his position if the Communists in India continue to oppose the nuclear deal, an opposition that Singh declares as irrational and reactionary.
On July 08, 2008, Prakash Karat announced that the Left Front is withdrawing its support to the government over the decision by the government to go ahead on the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act. The left front had been a staunch advocate of not proceeding with this deal citing national interests.
On July 9, 2008, India formally submitted the safeguards agreement to the IAEA. This development comes after the Prime Minister of India Manmohan Singh returned from the 34th G8 summit meeting in Tokyo where he met with U.S. President George W. Bush. Other world leaders of G8 have also endorsed the agreement, suggesting that it is likely to gain support from the IAEA & NSG. India has also already secured the approval from China which it thought might hold some reservations against the deal. Australia which is a key exporter of Uranium for India after the deal becomes active has also suggested its approval. According to The Hindu sources, External Affairs Minister's Pranab Mukherjee’s earlier statement said “I cannot bind the government if we lose our majority,” implying that United Progressive Alliance government would not put its signature on any deal with IAEA if it lost the majority in either a 'opposition-initiated no-confidence motion' or if failing to muster a vote of confidence in Indian Parliament after being told to prove its majority by the president. Left Front withdrew support to UPA government on same day. The IAEA Board of Governors must now approve the safeguards agreement, and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group must approve a policy allowing nuclear cooperation with India before President Bush can make the necessary certifications and seek final approval by the U.S. Congress.
On the 22nd of July, the ruling UPA coalition government won the trust vote in the parliament primarily with the help of the support of Samajwadi party a few independents and some cross voters to make up the gap created by the Left's exit. The deal may well be on its way smoothly now, atleast from India's side for the time being.

International support
Besides the United States, the deal has got widespread support from several nations including United Kingdom, France, Japan, Russia, and Germany. There are also reports of Australia, China, and Canadasupporting the deal when India asks Nuclear Suppliers Group to exempt it from NPT guidelines. Canada is ready to enter into lucrative deals to export nuclear technology to India, and is awaiting the ratification of the US-India nuclear deal. The international support for the deal is seen as a tacit recognition of India as a nuclear weapon state. Despite heavy protest from the Left Front, the Indian government has approached the IAEA Board of Governors to ratify the deal and the board is scheduled to vote on the matter in August 2008. The deal is expected to be ratified by both IAEA and Nuclear Suppliers Group. Even if the US Congress is not able to pass the deal before presidential elections, observers noted that India can commence nuclear trade with other nations such as France and Russia once it gets the approval from Nuclear Suppliers Group.