Unless there is a sea change in the US attitude towards India, the talks, to be held sometime in the second half of January, will be a polite reiteration of two countries' well known positions on the NPT and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, they said.

They said that both sides will firmly agree to disagree and decide to continue negotiations that began in the aftermath of India's May nuclear test, which Washington said "endangered regional security" and upset proliferation goals.

Although India has indicated its willingness to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the Non-Proliferation (NPT), Provided its security concerns vis-a-vis China are addressed, the US insists New Delhi roll back its nuclear and missiles programme.With both sides adamantly sticking to their respective positions, several round of talks between key interlocutors have so far failed to yield any results.

The sixth round of talks in Rome last month concluded with both sides agreeing that the talks were "constructive" and would "facilitate further progress in establishing the positive environment both seek."

While the Indian side said there was no change in their position on the CTBT, the United States side, which has been asking India to "speedily and unconditionally" sign it, "described the circumstances that would enable the two countries to transcend difficulties as currently exist."

Analysts cited several reasons why they expected the talks to fail. They said the US is not reconciled to India as a nuclear power. It still defers, due to long habit, to Pakistani claims to be treated as India's equal.

As the sole superpower, the US feels that if India with its independent policies becomes a strong, nuclear and missile armed nuclear power, it willundermine˙the US freedom of action. The US strategy requires, the continued possession of nuclear weapons and the right of first use against any third world country which threatens its interests with weapons of mass destruction.

The Clinton administration, analysts said, has also become a prisoner of its own rhetoric. It has convinced its public that India cannot be allowed to retain nuclear weapons and missiles. A complete-turn-around in the position at this juncture can raise eyebrows.

Despite all evidence to the contrary, the US has given the impression that India will sign the CTBT unconditionally. It is not willing to give India what it wants as quid pro quo, namely access to the US high technology in sensitive areas and equal treatment with China, a non-democratic power, they said.

Moreover, the US sees the BJP government weaker as a result of recent poll reversals. It may be prepared to wait to see whether a government emerges in New Delhi in the not so distant future which is more amenable toits influence.

The US does not buy the argument that on matters of national interest, in a parliamentary form of government, governments change but not policies, accustomed as it is to a presidential system.

Analysts also wondered whether Clinton had the time to rethink his policies on the Indian sub-continent given his domestic preoccupations -- the impeachment process ahead.

They also pointed out that there is no indication whatsoever of any change in the habit ingrained in Americans during cold war to consider sub-continental problems through the Pakistani prism.

The disastrous results of that are evident in the higher profile the US has said it is giving to Kashmir and its refusal to recognise that India needs nuclear weapons, as long as others have them, to defend itself.

Besides, they said, the US does not want Pakistan to possess nuclear weapons because of the perceived threat to key ally Israel from the Islamic world. So it does not want India to be a nuclear weapon power either.

Analystshere have warned Indian interests will not be served if New Delhi keeps the talks a secret. Failure to take the fourth estate into full confidence daily, fully and promptly, gives the US the advantage of leaks.