A new ally: the nuclear deal cements our relationship with India.(SOUTH ASIA)

JOE WILSON, a Republican congressman from South Carolina, is a former co-chairman of the House India Caucus and a strong supporter of President Bush's nuclear deal with India. But he says that he was "really very pessimistic about this when it first came at the International Relations Committee." He had good reason to be.

The deal opens India's civilian nuclear facilities to inspection and formally binds India to continue its previously voluntary practice of not transferring nuclear technology to other countries. India would also drop some trade restrictions on American exports. In return, the U.S. would lift its ban on selling nuclear technology to India. It's that last part of the deal that requires congressional approval.

Bush and Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh announced the deal on March 2. News stories about the deal's prospects in Congress included phrases such as "tough sell," "bruising fight," and "political headache." Influential Democrats came out against the deal, or voiced skepticism. Jimmy Carter, speaking for the party's dovish wing, called the deal "just one more step in opening a Pandora's box of nuclear proliferation." Ed Markey, a smart and hard-working liberal Democrat from Massachusetts, vowed to lead the opposition in the House. Former representative Lee Hamilton and former senator Sam Nunn, considered foreign-policy heavyweights by moderate and conservative Democrats, wanted Congress to modify the deal substantially if not reject it outright.

The New York Times editorialized against a "very bad nuclear deal." Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote in opposition. Hans Blix, the former U.N. weapons inspector, said that the deal "risks fueling an arms race in Asia." Richard Lugar and Henry Hyde, respectively the chairmen of the Senate and House foreign-policy committees, were said to be lukewarm about the deal. They agreed to help enable it only as a favor to the administration. Even John Bolton, Bush's own ambassador to the U.N. and formerly his point man on nuclear proliferation at the State Department, was widely rumored to think the administration should have driven a harder bargain with India.

Tom Lantos, the ranking Democrat on the House committee and a longtime friend of India, generally supported the deal. But in mid-May, even he was sounding defeatist. He said that action should be delayed, because there wasn't enough time to build support in Congress this year.

Yet in late June, the House committee voted 37-5 in favor of the deal and the Senate committee voted 16-2 for it. If the congressional schedule permits, a bill should reach President Bush's desk in the next few weeks. And the deal's supporters have suffered no bruises.

What happened? In part, the deal's success reflects the fact that it had influential supporters as well as opponents. William Cohen, the former Republican senator and Clinton defense secretary, supports it. So does Mohamed ElBaradei, Blix's successor. In part, the success is a testament to the growing influence of Indian-American organizations and their allies. The U.S.-India Political Action Committee and the United States-India Business Council have both lobbied for the deal. So have companies with interests in India, such as Boeing, GE, and J.P. Morgan.