Bharat Rakshak

After 60 pages, both camps have been reduced to sticking to their own points refusing to even acknowledge the other side being capable of thinking. That is the truth. BR deserved better, but this what it gets.

There is no gain here from further acrimony. Nothing gets added to the body of knowledge. It does take a little bit of thinking through to recognise the real issue. Unfortunately, many here have tried to do it but are held prisoner by their own beliefs and biases. This holds true for both camps.

What is the point of discussing in an endless loop is beyond me, yet page after it continues and slowly but surely the sheer meaningless nature of this "debate" will degenerate to more name calling and venting.

Let us try and look ahead for a change. It is clear that the debate triggered by the revealation by KS has made an impact. The thing that still remains unclear is whether the GOI had backed him to do what he did and is still behind the public "debate" or not? The evidence so far is inconclusive on that score.

The signals emanating from people in the GOI indicate that they are looking to move ahead with a twin track approach

1. To deflect the CTBT and other pressure, GOI wants to pull out and issue call for a time bound verifiable disarmament that is structured with the big guys giving up their arsenal, and opening access to other responsible powers in the nuclear haves (read India, Israel, SA, Brazil?) to technology. In the interim, there will be a freezing of testing across the board and that should be verifiable in the same way to all concerned - whether P5, or trishankus like India and the have nots through a CTBT.

2. If that is not acceptable, then India will do either of the following

a) Sign up to CTBT and other nonsense, but in return ask for a number of things such as UN security council seat with veto power, access to dual use technology across the board, assured investments for a set number of years to compensate for the additional cost to adhere to other agreements such as climate control, seat at the economic high table, access to R&D etc. In short a trading of our strategic options for something more tangible. It also is based on the belief or reading that nuclear disarmament will happen and there is no need for such weapons.

b) State clearly that signing up things like CTBT is not worth it if there is no clear commitment to universal verifiable disarmament that is based on equality. Assert the right to test if the assessment of threat perception by India so demands it or if the arsenal improvements warrant the same. Re-emphasise that as of now India remains committed to the voluntary moratorium in force and throw the ball back to their court. In short, reassertion of our soverign rights as a nation to retain our sovereign options. This would be based on the assessment that global real politik will ensure that no one can pressurise India that is willing to work with them but not at the cost of surrendering its sovereign options. IOW, if push comes to shove India will test and build up its arsenal and not freeze it to the levels it was in 1998.

Now (a) or (b) will be a function of the vision, belief and world view of the leadership in India. There are some here who believe that the national consensus that is there on position (b), which has stood the test of time and been served well by leadership of various parties and personalities, are not about to be compromised by this administration. There are some who believe that the present leadership in its professed statements, vision, past action are willing to settle for a good trade and hence may go for option (a).

I have already indicated where I think GOI is going. So there is no surprise there. I would be more than happy if my reading is proved wrong on that score. For then India will win.

In the meantime, it would be doing ourselves a great favour by desisting from attacking fellow postors. It serves no purpose except for polishing their ego, in their own minds of course.

Pokhran II not fully successful - scientist

JAPAN: MORE CON THAN PRO ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Follow the Japan model.

I think this Japan model nonsense was proposed here sometime ago as a pet theory without sufficient data points.

I think this Japan model was proposed here sometime ago as a theory without sufficient data points.

He (Narasimha Rao) told me that he and his cabinet - especially his highly regarded finance minister Manmohan Singh, the architect of the nations economic reforms - understood that security depended on prosperity. Prosperity, in turn, depended on integration into world markets and close relations with the United States. That objective, he seemed to recognize, would be in jeopardy if India overplayed its nuclear card.

Please tell me - if you look at me, can you tell from my looks that I stole the dinner plates?

It takes a village to conduct a proper riot

The way forward is not more or bigger nukes but less or no nukes

The way forward is not more or bigger nukes but less or no nukes.

There is a debate on right now on CNBC TV 18, where Karan Thapar is talking to BK, R Goplan and one other retired Sikh gentleman (a IFS officer and ambassador whose name eludes me)

They are talking of this very topic.

----------

This thread is not to a good start, I think it is going to be just what the previous thread was, because in reality the older issues have not disappeared, merely ignored, the signs are already there.

There is a debate on right now on CNBC TV 18, where Karan Thapar is talking to BK, R Goplan and one other retired Sikh gentleman (a IFS officer and ambassador whose name eludes me)
They are talking of this very topic.

----------

This thread is not to a good start, I think it is going to be just what the previous thread was, because in reality the older issues have not disappeared, merely ignored, the signs are already there.

ARTICLE I
BASIC OBLIGATIONS
1. Each State Party undertakes not to carry out any
nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear
explosion, and to prohibit and prevent any such nuclear
explosion at any place under its jurisdiction or control.
2. Each State Party undertakes, furthermore, to refrain
from causing, encouraging, or in any way participating in the
carrying out of any nuclear weapon test explosion or any
other nuclear explosion.

Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium,
Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, Finland,
France, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands,
Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Romania, Republic of
Korea, Russian Federation, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of
America, Viet Nam, Zaire.

Now guess which 4 annex 2 states have not signed at all
Tadaaaaaa < music >
India
Pakistan
North Korea
Cuba

Aren't the yehudis in this exalted company?

India's behavior with regard to CTBT is the behavior of a bunch of frauds. Perhaps we should sign.

I am not sure where China got it from. Did the SU give it to the hated Chinese, Communist Unity notwithstanding?

The thermonuke - Test no 6. Where did that come from? Did someone say Los Alamos?
Because the tarrel than mountains fliendship with russian had long ended, and the russians had ditched the chinese effort midway.
China retaliated with its 596 weapon test.

The first Chinese nuclear test was conducted at Lop Nor on 16 October 1964 (CHIC 1). It was a tower shot involving a fission device with a yield of 25 kilotons. Uranium 235 was used as the nuclear fuel, which indicates Beijing's choice of the path of creating high-yield nuclear weapons right away. Of the ten test shots that followed by 29 September 1969, six are believed to have been related to thermonuclear development. The others had as their goals the adaptation of CHIC 1 for bomber delivery and test of a missile warhead (CHIC 4). The third nuclear test was conducted on 9 September 1966 using a Tu-16 bomber. In addition to uranium 235, this nuclear device, with a yield around 100 KT, this time contained lithium 6, which attested to China's readiness to test a thermonuclear explosion. CHIC 6, an airdrop test on 17 June 1967, was the first full-yield, two-stage thermonuclear test.

Do not smoke in bed. The ashes falling on the floor may be your own

India is truely at cross roads on Nuclear high way, looks like our leadership wants to take an exit to nearest Restroom for relief.

When NFU was formulated ( I was the convenor of the National Security Board that drafted it) there were no assumptions on the size of the Pakistani arsenal. The doctrine stands by itself irrespective of the size of the potential enemy’s arsenal. There is a second component of the nuclear doctrine: the credible minimum deterrent. It is that component that may call for some adjustments if the potential enemy’s arsenal were to increase. Even that is not a necessity from the point of view of deterrence, but a question of influencing the perception of the adversary.

1) We cant do things starts and spurts (like Agni go slow in late 80 and early 90s, now not quickly graduating to 8000 Km missile)

2) we cant cut funds and expect miracles from institutions

I think its better to focus in Sulabh and new technology to power flush and recycle as much of its content as possible.