The Bank sent out a notification on Monday night announcing that the items relating to loans for India were being removed from the agenda after the executive directors of several countries called for it. The move was presumably initiated by the Executive Director of the United States following a directive from the Clinton administration and was supported by other countries, including Japan and Canada.

Bank sources said since the World Bank operates on the principle of consensus, it was decided the items would not come up for consideration at all. No one gave reasons for seeking the deferment, but obviously it was because US laws enjoin its Bankrepresentatives to block loans to India.

Two of the loans related to the energy sector -- one $-450 million loan for the Power Grid Corporation of India and the other a $-130 million non-conventional energy project for the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency.

Discussions on two other Bank loans -- $ 275 million to improve the highway network in Haryana and a $-110 million IFC loan to Carraro India Ltd -- which were to come up later this week have also been deferred.

India's Executive Director Surinder Singh, who attended Tuesday's meeting, told The Indian Express the matter may come up before the board again in another ``three-four'' weeks along with several other loans which had been negotiated. ``We just have to wait and see how things develop,'' Singh said.

US Executive Director Jan Piercy directed all queries to the Bank's public affairs office which was still drafting its press release of the board meeting.

Although Bank loans are rarely decided by a vote, India could have forcedthe item on the table. But unsure of whether it commanded the necessary votes or not, India chose not to challenge the consensus.

For a loan to go through formally, a 50 per cent vote -- of those present and voting -- is needed at a meeting of the Bank's board, which comprises 24 members. The US has 17.03 votes and Japan 6.09 votes (vote weightage is against their contribution), but the G-8 countries are still believed to lack sufficient votes to block the loans.

India, too, is uncertain of whether it has sufficient clout to push for a vote or not. ``We have to wait for the position to crystallise. At the moment the US can easily put pressure on other countries to vote against us or to abstain,'' Indian officials siad.

Bank sources said the board was listed to take up loans in the range of $ 2 million for India before the June 30 end of the bank's financial year.

Unless there is a dramatic change in the situation, discussion on all these loans would be deffered.

Meanwhile, United States officialssaid they were still working on guidelines to enforce sanctions under the Glenn Amendment.

The administration has already issued orders suspending issuance of munitions license and suspending OPIC and EXIM bank guarantees to the new commitments.

Under the munitions license suspension, India will stop getting arms and technology transfer for the LCA project.

Asked if the administration would be calibrating the sanctions to squeeze India, a State Department official replied in the negative and said the United States was trying "was trying to develop a consistent set of guidelines to be applied over the time" since the law was being used for the first time.

"We are not looking to whip India. There are genuine problems in defining some of the issues and beyond a point things start getting fuzzy," he said.

Adding further, "For instance there are problems in deciding what constitutes credit and whether there should be retroactivity," the official opined.

EU blasts tests but snubs call forsanctions

BRUSSELS: The EU has condemned India's nuclear tests but calls for the Bloc to follow the US and Japan by imposing sanctions were blocked by France and Germany. In a statement adopted by foreign ministers here, the EU attacked the tests as a ``grave threat to international peace and security and to the global efforts towards non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.'' Reacting to the EU line, India has rejected the demand that it should conform to international regimes or face economic consequences.