WASHINGTON, May 12: The Indo-US nuclear deal lacks the support necessary to pass Congress, says a senior congressman and has offered a compromise to boost its chances of approval.

“One of the most serious obstacles is that many of us in Congress are reluctant to make a final judgment on the US-India nuclear accord without seeing the details of the agreement that has been negotiated,” Congressman Tom Lantos told a congressional hearing on Thursday. He also indicated that it may take up to a year to get congressional approval for the accord President Bush signed during his visit to India in March.

Mr Lantos is the top Democrat on the House International Relations Committee which has to approve the agreement before it goes to the full house. As a key member of the Indian Caucus on the Hill, Mr Lantos also leads the campaign for the deal’s approval.

To allay the concerns of his fellow lawmakers Mr Lantos has proposed legislation that does not require Congress to “immediately make all of the major legislative changes … sought by the administration.”

Instead, he suggests pending congressional action while the Bush administration negotiates the international nuclear safeguards India needs to implement under the deal. But at the same time Congress would be required to put an ‘on record welcome’ so that India is assured that the deal will get through once the negotiations are complete.

The final “vote of Congress would occur whenever the agreement is completed — whether it’s a week from now, six months from now or in a year from now,” said Mr Lantos.

The process would be similar to congressional action on so-called ‘fast track’ trade deals. “This way, the administration will be able to reassure the Indian government that Congress supports the nuclear agreement and is prepared to consider the final accord in an expeditious manner,” he said.

Rep. Lantos said under the terms of his legislation, ‘The Administration would also be required to consult monthly with Congress as the negotiations continue with the Indian government. This provision will ensure that there are no misunderstandings between the Executive and Legislative branches as to what Congress will be asked to accept.”

Explaining why he proposed a compromise formula to save the deal, Mr Lantos said Congress faces a short legislative schedule in 2006, which is an election year. “There is no time to develop the consensus necessary to move this legislation forward in the face of these polarized views,” he said.

Mr Lantos said he will discuss his proposal with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice next week.

But a senior US official said the administration believes it still can win congressional approval of the deal without the delays and “legislative hurdles” Mr Lantos’ proposal would create.

State Department counsellor Philip Zelikow, addressing a forum on the deal at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, said of Mr Lantos’ idea: “Right now, our view is to handle this differently.”

Mr Zelikow said he thinks Congress could approve the deal in this session, but he acknowledged that lawmakers might try to delay the vote or set conditions for its passage.

For the accord to become effective, Congress must amend the Atomic Energy Act, which bans nuclear sales to countries that have not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Mr Lantos put forth his proposal during a debate in the House committee when it became obvious that many lawmakers had serious concerns about the deal. Some argued that if the US offers civilian nuclear technology to India — a country that refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty; it might encourage would-be nuclear weapons states, and possibly spur a nuclear arms race in South Asia.

“I am opposed to the administration’s legislative proposal to grant India a special exemption from our nation’s nuclear non-proliferation laws because it undermines US national security interests,” said Congressman Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat. “It sets a dangerous precedent that will be exploited by our adversaries and rivals, and it seriously weakens Congress’ role in overseeing and approving the terms of nuclear trade.”

The Bush administration, however, disagrees. It says that the deal would strengthen non-proliferation efforts

by putting the majority of India’s nuclear plants under international inspections.

The House International Relations Committee has already held five hearings on the US-India nuclear accord.