The problem is not Uranium, it is Uranium to sustain a growing economy. There is a window in which India needs to jump start the Thorium reactors in a commercial environment.
The US is playing hardball only because they know they have India cornered. We see this with France and Russia in terms of ACs.
The problem is that India is not used to playing hardball at all - even with BD. (Why has Iran got away with so much Russian and Chinese support? While India is unable to even get 33% offsets without a fight from any and all countries - forget vendors.)
My feel is that MMS and group gave up on playing hardball long back, but DAE has not. MMS has always thought a great econ will counter anything - it is more strategic that nuclear strategic components. DAE wants to bite the bullet now.
I feel that DAE is right. India can afford to take a risk on the econ front, but with the world's largest middle class there is no contest - US and group will come begging (what is a $100 billion dollars in reactors when compared to buying commercial airlines which cost a lot more than that?). The more time that flies, the better position India is in.
India Nuclear News and Discussion - June 26-2007
It is time for Gary Weiss to stop pressing his viewpoint, whether India wants to press its luck or not.India should stop pressing its luck.
The Indian Defence Minister Anthony said it was routine and Nimitz would dock in Chennai. That is the official stand and it can't get any better. So who's knickers are you talking about Gary, yours?getting its knickers in a twist over a visit by a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.
I am a little suspicious of the choice of the Nimitz to park itself close to Kalpakkam, when the negotiations on the US-India nuclear deal is going nowhere.
Cut the crap this aint about national pride. Reprocessing is about nuclear waste. Do want this to be global nuisance or do want India to do the sane thing and reprocess. The us aint upto the task for reprocessing, they fob it to Japan to do the reprocess. If Japan can do it so can India.issue of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, purely out of national pride
Reprocessing is about breeding fuel - plain and simple. If we are able to breed fuel there is 30% less outflow of our resources which can then be spent on something else - infrastructure, education or even Bollywood.bala wrote:It is time for Gary Weiss to stop pressing his viewpoint, whether India wants to press its luck or not.India should stop pressing its luck.
The Indian Defence Minister Anthony said it was routine and Nimitz would dock in Chennai. That is the official stand and it can't get any better. So who's knickers are you talking about Gary, yours?getting its knickers in a twist over a visit by a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.
I am a little suspicious of the choice of the Nimitz to park itself close to Kalpakkam, when the negotiations on the US-India nuclear deal is going nowhere.
Cut the crap this aint about national pride. Reprocessing is about nuclear waste. Do want this to be global nuisance or do want India to do the sane thing and reprocess. The us aint upto the task for reprocessing, they fob it to Japan to do the reprocess. If Japan can do it so can India.issue of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, purely out of national pride
FYI....More about FBR and 'twin' FBR
http://meaindia.nic.in/opinion/2005/06/07op02.htm
http://meaindia.nic.in/opinion/2005/06/07op02.htm
Work on the 500 MW FBR, costing Rs 3,492 crores, is in full swing at Kalpakkam. "Though the scheduled date of commissioning of this FBR is September 2010, we are confident that the reactor will start supplying power to the southern grid by June 2009 itself," says S.C. Chetal, a veteran mechanical engineer who is one of the pioneers in the design and development of FBR technology.
Here is my rebuttal that I entered in the comments section on the Forbes site.
The agreement reached between President Bush and Manmohan Singh allowed for reprocessing of spent fuel. It is the US that has gone back on its word. The issue has nothing to do with national pride. Reprocessing is important for India's three stage plan for nuclear power generation not national pride. India has offered to build a seperate reprocessing plant monitored by IAEA but the US has turned it down. As for Bush's domestic weakness, the agreement was reached when the Republicans still had a majority in Congress but the Administration did nothing to stop the the non proliferaton ayatollah influenced Congress from adding poison pills that were sure doom this agreement. The US has no one to blame but itself for shifting the goal posts and trying to go back on an agreement with India reached after a lot of hard bargaining and give and take by both sides. India doesnt need to press its luck. It will bide its time and sign when the US finally comes around to its point of view in a few years when its economy is too large to ignore. In the meantime all goodwill towards the US will be lost and any hopes of a strategic partnership will be out of the question.
The agreement reached between President Bush and Manmohan Singh allowed for reprocessing of spent fuel. It is the US that has gone back on its word. The issue has nothing to do with national pride. Reprocessing is important for India's three stage plan for nuclear power generation not national pride. India has offered to build a seperate reprocessing plant monitored by IAEA but the US has turned it down. As for Bush's domestic weakness, the agreement was reached when the Republicans still had a majority in Congress but the Administration did nothing to stop the the non proliferaton ayatollah influenced Congress from adding poison pills that were sure doom this agreement. The US has no one to blame but itself for shifting the goal posts and trying to go back on an agreement with India reached after a lot of hard bargaining and give and take by both sides. India doesnt need to press its luck. It will bide its time and sign when the US finally comes around to its point of view in a few years when its economy is too large to ignore. In the meantime all goodwill towards the US will be lost and any hopes of a strategic partnership will be out of the question.
Here
He really shows his ignorance.Varkala, India - My friends here call me a "son-in-law" of India--I am married to an Indian national--so I hope it's not too serious a breach of etiquette if I engage in a little whining about Mother India. Just call me an in-law with a bone to pick about the family - Gary Weiss.
Should be in book reveiw thread but more appropriae for i shows the linkages of Indian sceintists! Wallace please note.
From Telegraph, 3 July 2007
[quote]
A CAUTION AGAINST BOMBS AND OTHER DEMONS
Bikash Sinha recalls the genius and wisdom of Hans Bethe, the pioneering nuclear physicist, on his birth anniversary
Hans Bethe (left): race against time
I first encountered Hans Bethe (July 2, 1906-March 6, 2005) in the summer of 1969 at the University of Surrey, England. I was doing my PhD in nuclear physics at King’s, London. We all came to Surrey to hear the greatest nuclear physicist of the world at that time. Hans Bethe got his Nobel Prize in 1967. Among other stunning discoveries, the prize citation specifically (as is customary) mentioned the carbon cycle, the engine for energy production in stars.
Hans Bethe was at the zenith of his fame and prestige. On that sunny afternoon at Surrey, his lecture was on “The Structure of the Atomic Nucleusâ€
From Telegraph, 3 July 2007
[quote]
A CAUTION AGAINST BOMBS AND OTHER DEMONS
Bikash Sinha recalls the genius and wisdom of Hans Bethe, the pioneering nuclear physicist, on his birth anniversary
Hans Bethe (left): race against time
I first encountered Hans Bethe (July 2, 1906-March 6, 2005) in the summer of 1969 at the University of Surrey, England. I was doing my PhD in nuclear physics at King’s, London. We all came to Surrey to hear the greatest nuclear physicist of the world at that time. Hans Bethe got his Nobel Prize in 1967. Among other stunning discoveries, the prize citation specifically (as is customary) mentioned the carbon cycle, the engine for energy production in stars.
Hans Bethe was at the zenith of his fame and prestige. On that sunny afternoon at Surrey, his lecture was on “The Structure of the Atomic Nucleusâ€
4.5 billion human (solar) years a brahma day, and supernova happens. it takes another 4.5 billion for another solar system to rise.http://www.boloji.com/hinduism/020.htm The time span of each kalpa is remarkably close to the life span of our star, the sun, at least in terms of billions of years. Upon the death of our sun (supernova), life as we know it, comes to an end. The ancient thinkers seemed to have grasped the enormous and infinite scale of the universe and the only way to measure the scale of time is in terms of light years.
recent findings of penguin bones that dates 70 million years old was the talk in npr, and that used to live in warmer climates [just to think about evolution].
may be we could assimilate that thought into producing a cyclic supernova with equal time space, for our future tokomaks, that goes into a high q fusion cycle, then the heat generated is completed used up, and again do another fusion. let me duck, before alok_n avatar comes with a swatter.
Siddharth Varadarajan against Nimitz's visit (see his rebuttal to Raja Mohan). Per this, the origin of the nuclear deal goes way back to 2001.
http://www.hindu.com/2007/07/05/stories ... 271000.htm
Between the Nimitz and the deep blue sea
[quote]Though Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told reporters the Nimitz did not have nuclear weapons, the ship’s captain has been less forthcoming. Now the Nimitz, in all likelihood, is carrying only conventional wea pons but some analysts have argued that even if the Nimitz were nuclear-armed, it would be hypocritical for Indians to object since India itself possesses nuclear weapons. This argument is ignorant and dishonest.
The Indian nuclear bomb is a necessary evil forced on to the country by the failure of the five big nuclear weapons states to disarm. Many Indians had misgivings about the rationale for the 1998 tests but the bomb cannot be wished away now that it is out in the open. However, the Indian nuclear doctrine does not envisage the first-use of nuclear weapons, nor will the country’s political culture allow them to be used as an instrument of blackmail against non-nuclear weapons states. In contrast, the American nuclear arsenal is based on the principle of first strike. The U.S. has moved beyond the Reagan-Gorbachev understanding that a nuclear war cannot be fought or won. Low-yield nuclear weapons are being designed to make them more “usableâ€
http://www.hindu.com/2007/07/05/stories ... 271000.htm
Between the Nimitz and the deep blue sea
[quote]Though Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told reporters the Nimitz did not have nuclear weapons, the ship’s captain has been less forthcoming. Now the Nimitz, in all likelihood, is carrying only conventional wea pons but some analysts have argued that even if the Nimitz were nuclear-armed, it would be hypocritical for Indians to object since India itself possesses nuclear weapons. This argument is ignorant and dishonest.
The Indian nuclear bomb is a necessary evil forced on to the country by the failure of the five big nuclear weapons states to disarm. Many Indians had misgivings about the rationale for the 1998 tests but the bomb cannot be wished away now that it is out in the open. However, the Indian nuclear doctrine does not envisage the first-use of nuclear weapons, nor will the country’s political culture allow them to be used as an instrument of blackmail against non-nuclear weapons states. In contrast, the American nuclear arsenal is based on the principle of first strike. The U.S. has moved beyond the Reagan-Gorbachev understanding that a nuclear war cannot be fought or won. Low-yield nuclear weapons are being designed to make them more “usableâ€
well..John Snow wrote:Here is hypothesis that has been swirling in my small head.
This Nimitz visit is a way squeeze the balls of MMS (as) Sonia cant offer any directly) policy direction.
If you dont allow this visit We (unkil will berth in Sri Lanka)
I dunno they even counted how many came in? and where they went? etc. But, but... why not an ad hoc visitor card given, as a momento? or an on arrival visa given. the govt could still have this worked out much much earlier.Nimitz sailors needed no clearance in India
There is much more catch here in letting the americans roam in land without any visas.
Our land will see different definitions to "rape of values" if Ameri-Khanization takes on a dharmic proportions. tough time ahead for mms-manio.. all it takes is one spill..,rest our aam junta will handle it.
It would be a big shame for all of us, if we let this further hamper our democratic values.
No Khan is greater than any other human who lives in India, and perhaps given blood to his motherland. take a Kargil soldier. This is going to blow out of proportion pretty soon.
-
Satya_anveshi
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3532
- Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37
N-deal almost final: US
[quote]India and the United States are nearing the end of civil nuclear negotiations as they get ready for another round of talks on a bilateral civil nuclear cooperation pact on July 16, US envoy David C Mulford said here ...
India and the United States are “nearing the endâ€
[quote]India and the United States are nearing the end of civil nuclear negotiations as they get ready for another round of talks on a bilateral civil nuclear cooperation pact on July 16, US envoy David C Mulford said here ...
India and the United States are “nearing the endâ€
Article published in The Deccan Herald is quoted in full below
[quote]
IN PERSPECTIVE
Is the Indo-US N-deal dead?
By Robinder Sachdev
In the future the Indo-US relations will be guided by economic considerations.
Much like the philosophy in the slogan, the King is dead – long live the King, wherein the death of the incumbent king does not mean the end of the monarchy, similarly an inglorious death of the US – India civil nuclear deal will not mean the end of US – India relations.
However, a dead nuclear deal will have an enormous impact on future engagements between both the countries and globally – with the most fundamental aspect being that future relations will be guided more by economics, and less by politics. If the US and India are to have at least a partial political partnership in the 21st century, then the only way ahead is a “middle pathâ€
[quote]
IN PERSPECTIVE
Is the Indo-US N-deal dead?
By Robinder Sachdev
In the future the Indo-US relations will be guided by economic considerations.
Much like the philosophy in the slogan, the King is dead – long live the King, wherein the death of the incumbent king does not mean the end of the monarchy, similarly an inglorious death of the US – India civil nuclear deal will not mean the end of US – India relations.
However, a dead nuclear deal will have an enormous impact on future engagements between both the countries and globally – with the most fundamental aspect being that future relations will be guided more by economics, and less by politics. If the US and India are to have at least a partial political partnership in the 21st century, then the only way ahead is a “middle pathâ€
Some backing - in fact, what he did not say is that MMS backed the Hyde Act.In this last lap of efforts, hopefully we shall not make the mistake made while lobbying for the Hyde Act – where many of us missed the attention required to the details, mostly because we did not have enough resources to analyse the fine print sufficiently.
Now "many of us" - (is actually 'all of us') does "many" include MMS - as Alok_N had speculated? IF true, then MMS should have shot it down right away, instead of taking the opposite stand. I feel it is still not too late to shot the Hyde Act in some form - expose Condi I would say - in a very subtle way before she lands in ND. Or she too can vacation in India.
From the Pioneer. Posting in full.
India to join ITER to boost nuclear fusion tech
PTI | New Delhi
With an aim of boosting its capabilities in nuclear fusion technology, India today decided to join the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project at an estimated cost of Rs 2500 crore.
A meeting of the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh approved the country's participation in the project and decided to set up an empowered Board by the Governing Council of the Institute for Plasma Research for its effective implementation, Information and Broadcasting Minister PR Dasmunsi told reporters here.
"India's joining ITER is a recognition of its scientific and technical capability in fusion energy. Considering India's large energy needs in future, our gaining technological capability in fusion energy will be of considerable long term benefit," Dasmunsi said.
He said India's participation in ITER would allow the country to "leapfrog in terms of our national technological capability in fusion energy".
Some more tidbits on the same article from hindustantimes.com. Look at the enormity of the task at hand.. The sooner our 3-stage, closed-loop cycle takes over, the better. Godspeed!!!
India is the fourth largest electricity producing country in the world but the capita energy consumption is half of China’s and one-fourth of the world average. India aspires to reach at least the global average by 2050, a target that would require her to produce about 1300 Giga Watt of electricity, ten times more than the present value of about 130 GW.
About 80 per cent of the current electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, Hydro accounts for about 15 per cent, renewable energy about 2 per cent and nuclear about 3 per cent. India hopes to progressively reduce its dependence on fossil fuels over the next few decades and raise the contribution of conventional nuclear energy to 20-25 per cent by 2050.
Fusion energy is viewed as an advance nuclear technology in this context that provides an opportunity to countries like India to meet their energy needs without contributing to global warming.
Atleast there is an acknowledgment that mistake was made in not seeing the fine print.NRao wrote:Some backing - in fact, what he did not say is that MMS backed the Hyde Act.In this last lap of efforts, hopefully we shall not make the mistake made while lobbying for the Hyde Act – where many of us missed the attention required to the details, mostly because we did not have enough resources to analyse the fine print sufficiently.
Now "many of us" - (is actually 'all of us') does "many" include MMS - as Alok_N had speculated? IF true, then MMS should have shot it down right away, instead of taking the opposite stand. I feel it is still not too late to shot the Hyde Act in some form - expose Condi I would say - in a very subtle way before she lands in ND. Or she too can vacation in India.
Yeah, true. (First on BR? Dec-Jan time frame?)
However, Sachdev is a non-govt guy. Having said that he did have an article - a few months ago - that talked about Indian Thorium nuclear economics (I am possibly paraphrasing). But in that article he did not talk of the NPA's PoV - nuke bombs. But, I thought that article was a good starting point to frame this deal and get the NPAs out of the picture.
The argument has to be that this is a 'civilian nuclear' deal. IF the US wants to talk of military nuclear stuff - that should and can come later on. Why hose this deal that the US Prez agreed to? IMHO that is.
However, Sachdev is a non-govt guy. Having said that he did have an article - a few months ago - that talked about Indian Thorium nuclear economics (I am possibly paraphrasing). But in that article he did not talk of the NPA's PoV - nuke bombs. But, I thought that article was a good starting point to frame this deal and get the NPAs out of the picture.
The argument has to be that this is a 'civilian nuclear' deal. IF the US wants to talk of military nuclear stuff - that should and can come later on. Why hose this deal that the US Prez agreed to? IMHO that is.
There was enough supporters among the lobby who did not want to read the fine print. This groups is the NRI group which is posted in the India-US thread.
The question is that some wanted it this way to do a CRE on India. They saw that nobody is paying attention to the fine print. They could sqeeze it in.
There was an effort to sideline the opinion of AK and the Indian establishment.
Hence this talk of inoculation.
The next question is if the deal does not go forward can India Test. India should be free to test 50 times.
The question is that some wanted it this way to do a CRE on India. They saw that nobody is paying attention to the fine print. They could sqeeze it in.
There was an effort to sideline the opinion of AK and the Indian establishment.
Hence this talk of inoculation.
The next question is if the deal does not go forward can India Test. India should be free to test 50 times.
This one has been published in Times of India on 6th July 2007.
The expression "inoculate" in yesterday's Deccan Herald Article (posted above in this thread) has now become "immunise". There now seems to be more frenzy in the sellout efforts.
I understand that the objection by US to allow India to reprocess spent fuel, even in a facility that is under safeguards, has something to do with a technical issue namely, inadequate accuracy of the methods availble to determine the fissile material content at various stages of the process. So, even a "dedicated facility" as proposed by MKN may not cut much ice; they may want to post foreigners in India to actually run the facility and make it out of bounds for Indians! I recollect that PM had averred that he will not "let foreigners run around the country" to inspect various nuclear facilities in India. But then, in his view, allowing foreigners to run nuclear facilities in our own home may be quite a different thing.India ready to break 123 logjam
6 Jul 2007, 0350 hrs IST,Indrani Bagchi,TIMES NEWS NETWORK
NEW DELHI: As national security adviser M K Narayanan prepares to take charge of the nuclear brief, India will present more proposals to US to break the deadlock on the 123 agreement when the two sides resume talks in Washington on July 16. Narayanan and foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon will travel with a set of new proposals that will address US’ proliferation and other concerns that has held up agreement on the 123 text.
The new proposals India plans to put on the table will address two fundamental hurdles — reprocessing, and "immunising" India’s strategic fuel reserves from coming under the US’ "right of return" clause that it would invoke should nuclear cooperation stop between the two sides. One of the ideas India is expected to float is a "multinational" strategic reserve. This means India could source its strategic fuel reserves from other countries apart from the US. Therefore, if the US were to cut India loose and take back its fuel, the fuel bank from other countries would cushion the blow for India. This would make it easier for India to live with the "return" clause in the 123 agreement without incurring fundamental losses. It would also make it easier for the US to keep the clause in without too much Indian heartburn.
India is now playing a "proactive" role because it recognises the difficulties the American side faces in terms of returning to the US Congress for a further approval. It’s a big step forward for India, because until recently, the official Indian attitude was, "the Congress is their problem, let them solve it."
But as it’s become painfully clear that a Democrat-dominated Congress is a very different kettle of fish, India too has taken the "creative" route. On Wednesday, US ambassador David Mulford said, "We‘ve made good progress and I think we are nearing the end of the road here. Both sides are committed to getting this done."
The idea here is this: India wants to make it easier for the US to sell the deal to its non-proliferation lobby and Congress without diluting its bottomlines. The top echelons of the government are convinced India would not have such a good opportunity from any future US president for a long time to come. They don’t want to squander this opportunity of finding a real solution to the nuclear issue. Narayanan’s talks with counterpart Stephen Hadley will determine how and when the 123 agreement is signed, while the technical experts will "clean up the text," that is, work out a mutually acceptable language.
The new Indian proposals will follow a proposal made by India to the US in Heiligendamm, which India felt was a forward-looking initiative — to set up a fully safeguarded dedicated reprocessing facility that would reprocess imported spent fuel. This, India felt, would go a long way in addressing US proliferation concerns that prevented them from granting India reprocessing rights.
The US side, particularly president George Bush and Hadley, had responded positively to the Indian proposal, said sources. India is waiting for a formal response on the reprocessing facility proposal. In fact, Indian officials have been working out details of the proposals for the US side, which has asked India to define its proposal more clearly.
The expression "inoculate" in yesterday's Deccan Herald Article (posted above in this thread) has now become "immunise". There now seems to be more frenzy in the sellout efforts.
Last edited by Sanatanan on 06 Jul 2007 08:28, edited 1 time in total.
I have feared and yelled 'sellout' once too often and have been proven wrong on each such occasion (mercifully so).
Shall reserve my doubts for after we know exactly what has been proposed creatively or otherwise, by India.
As long as we don't compromise on reproc rights, don't sign an intrusive FMCO and don't give up our freedom to test, we should be fine, IMVHO.
Shall reserve my doubts for after we know exactly what has been proposed creatively or otherwise, by India.
As long as we don't compromise on reproc rights, don't sign an intrusive FMCO and don't give up our freedom to test, we should be fine, IMVHO.
This is getting to be 1962 and Tashkent rolled into one.India is now playing a "proactive" role because it recognises the difficulties the American side faces in terms of returning to the US Congress for a further approval
"proactive" role - Wow. For what I wonder.
Does'nt all that go against the latest US Law - the Hyde Act?As long as we don't compromise on reproc rights, don't sign an intrusive FMCO and don't give up our freedom to test, we should be fine, IMVHO
-
Satya_anveshi
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3532
- Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37
The main ones are right at the top. Political as well as babu chain. Also...it is not a process in the making. It is already made. Only a govt fall on this issue can spoil their game. And that ain't gonna happen (left are left afterall).ramdas wrote:The whole sequence of events looks very suspicious... the very fact that negotiations over this deal are continuing in spite of its agenda being very clearly revealed is very suspicious. Who and what are the forces that continue tomake an attempt to sell out ?
it is then time to take stock of the damage and whether it is possible for a future government to undo that damage. as far as i understand, once this deal is signed,
1. the presence of extra foreign reactors generating say ,10000MW of electricity will mean that a future govt has to be prepared for a disruption of 10000MW of electric power supply in the event of a nuclear test. How long would it take to correct such a disruption by new coal based thermal plants ? Any govt that is ready to test should ideally have an equivalent MW of thermal power plants on "standby".
2. The other concern is part of J-18 itself - the specific commitment to "cooperate with negotiations to a FMCT". We should never ever join any FMCT in any form. What would be the price to pay if a future dispensation chooses to withdraw from the FMCT in the event of the present one selling out on this front ? Cessation of "international nuclear cooperation" ,i guess. Again, once the thorium cycle kicks in, "international nuclear cooperation" beingstopped might be temporarily painful but not such a big deal in the long run.
3. So , a bold future dispensation may indeed be able to tear this apart . In general, treaties should be stuck to so long as they are in line with national interests. Once their utility is over, our govt should have no hesitation in tearing these apart. The general attitute towards such agreements should be that of Chhatrapati Shivaji towards agreements with Aurangazeb.
1. the presence of extra foreign reactors generating say ,10000MW of electricity will mean that a future govt has to be prepared for a disruption of 10000MW of electric power supply in the event of a nuclear test. How long would it take to correct such a disruption by new coal based thermal plants ? Any govt that is ready to test should ideally have an equivalent MW of thermal power plants on "standby".
2. The other concern is part of J-18 itself - the specific commitment to "cooperate with negotiations to a FMCT". We should never ever join any FMCT in any form. What would be the price to pay if a future dispensation chooses to withdraw from the FMCT in the event of the present one selling out on this front ? Cessation of "international nuclear cooperation" ,i guess. Again, once the thorium cycle kicks in, "international nuclear cooperation" beingstopped might be temporarily painful but not such a big deal in the long run.
3. So , a bold future dispensation may indeed be able to tear this apart . In general, treaties should be stuck to so long as they are in line with national interests. Once their utility is over, our govt should have no hesitation in tearing these apart. The general attitute towards such agreements should be that of Chhatrapati Shivaji towards agreements with Aurangazeb.
This would make sense for a non weapon state like Japan where the diversion of 3-4 kg of fissile material a year would allow the illicit stockpiling of an arsenal.Sanatanan wrote:I understand that the objection by US to allow India to reprocess spent fuel, even in a facility that is under safeguards, has something to do with a technical issue namely, inadequate accuracy of the methods availble to determine the fissile material content at various stages of the process.
It makes absolutely no sense in the case of a weapons state like India which has entire reprocessing plants dedicated to the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.
You can check a nun's virginity, not a whore's.....
Sachdev brings up a very important point - "fine print", as he calls it.
Why in hell did anyone of importance not read it - IF we are to believe him - is beyond me. Granted some did not read it. Well, we can no longer accept that as an excuse. MMS has a national responsibility to rewrite that fine print or walk away. Best way to walk away? MMS should resign, IMHO.
Why in hell did anyone of importance not read it - IF we are to believe him - is beyond me. Granted some did not read it. Well, we can no longer accept that as an excuse. MMS has a national responsibility to rewrite that fine print or walk away. Best way to walk away? MMS should resign, IMHO.
I would rephrase it thus for India's case:It makes absolutely no sense in the case of a weapons state like India which has entire reprocessing plants dedicated to the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.
You can check a nun's virginity, not a whore's.....
Lawhorish behavior best describes chini nuke promiscuity, not Bharat mata's principled stance in this matter.You can check a nun's virginity, not a mother's.....
/Just semantic quibbles, I know. But whaddahell....
Deccan Chronicle, 8 July 2007
Atal questions formation of new task force
New Delhi, July 6: Questioning the constitution of a task force to review the existing policy of India on disarmament, non-proliferation and other security related issues, former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee on Friday said the ostensible purposes of the committee and its timing arouse apprehensions that it would be used to change country’s long-held policies on these issues so that they conform to the Hyde Act, which is to govern the Indo-US nuclear deal.
The task force was constituted with Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh’s approval about a month ago. "If the present government was keen to undertake such an exercise, it would have undertaken it immediately after assuming office or at any date prior to the commencement of negotiations on the nuclear deal with the US.
The setting up of this task force at this juncture is nothing more than a thinly veiled move towards reversing our nuclear related policies with a view to bringing them in conformity with many of the highly objectionable provisions of the Hyde Act and then to pretend that the changes have been undertaken by us autonomously, Mr Vajpayee said here.
Provisions, he said, related to ban on nuclear tests by India and its "working actively" with the US for early conclusion of a "multilateral" Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty (FMCT) will have the greatest adverse impact on national security.
Discuss nuclear deal in Parliament, says Vajpayee
[quote]
Neena Vyas
NEW DELHI: The former Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, has demanded an assurance from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that no bilateral Indo-United States agreement on nuclear cooperation would take place without a thorough discussion in Parliament.
In a two-page statement released here on Friday by two of his former Cabinet colleagues, Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, Mr. Vajpayee has expressed his apprehension that the nuclear deal would be concluded before the end of this year and it would “conformâ€
[quote]
Neena Vyas
NEW DELHI: The former Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, has demanded an assurance from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that no bilateral Indo-United States agreement on nuclear cooperation would take place without a thorough discussion in Parliament.
In a two-page statement released here on Friday by two of his former Cabinet colleagues, Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, Mr. Vajpayee has expressed his apprehension that the nuclear deal would be concluded before the end of this year and it would “conformâ€
Assuming that the US and India agree (whichever way it works out) and an agreement is signed, then how easy (or difficult) is it for either of the signatories to break out of the agreement?
India recognizes that President Bush is now a wilting president with little support from his own ranks - and his domestic poitical situation is now being painted in a dark grey share - Immigration Bill defeat, his (astounding and blatant) pardon of that Libby guy!
Surely, he is beginning to think of his legacy and there is nothing much to show - perplexing how President Bush could possibly imagine that the pardon of Libby would help his cause. Anyways, he could plug a possible Indo-US agreement as an achievement, but time is running out for him. India perhaps can wait, the Bush Presidency can't. So, maybe the interminable rounds of discussions are a way by which India is stalling - either the Bush Presidency yields more than what they may want to...or, President Bush fails to add to a very short legacy-list. If the former happens and the Americans sign a deal which the next Administration regrets (for whatever reason), then what happens? I guess they can pull out - easy for me to say, don't have a clue as to what the international legal ramifications are. After all, it will be a legal agreement.
Thus the question on pulling out from the agreement. Of course, the same question applies with regard to India. Suppose India signs, can the next government pull out? At what political and economic cost?
India recognizes that President Bush is now a wilting president with little support from his own ranks - and his domestic poitical situation is now being painted in a dark grey share - Immigration Bill defeat, his (astounding and blatant) pardon of that Libby guy!
Surely, he is beginning to think of his legacy and there is nothing much to show - perplexing how President Bush could possibly imagine that the pardon of Libby would help his cause. Anyways, he could plug a possible Indo-US agreement as an achievement, but time is running out for him. India perhaps can wait, the Bush Presidency can't. So, maybe the interminable rounds of discussions are a way by which India is stalling - either the Bush Presidency yields more than what they may want to...or, President Bush fails to add to a very short legacy-list. If the former happens and the Americans sign a deal which the next Administration regrets (for whatever reason), then what happens? I guess they can pull out - easy for me to say, don't have a clue as to what the international legal ramifications are. After all, it will be a legal agreement.
Thus the question on pulling out from the agreement. Of course, the same question applies with regard to India. Suppose India signs, can the next government pull out? At what political and economic cost?
-
Satya_anveshi
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3532
- Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37
I don't understand what complaint you have about Bush's legacy. He left a stunning legacy of Iraq invasion. History will not read what we know of Iraq ops today. It will be written in colorful strategic imperative and a bold move. And yes, it will be a glorious victory of US (actually it is).
They, including Bush, have delivered what they could in terms of Hyde. It was misreading or wrong expectation from some in MMS team (note that I don't include him because he always had his work cut out for him- that is to manage controllable levers of India - and deliver on US's objectives) that bought the "natural allies" bonhomie.
They, including Bush, have delivered what they could in terms of Hyde. It was misreading or wrong expectation from some in MMS team (note that I don't include him because he always had his work cut out for him- that is to manage controllable levers of India - and deliver on US's objectives) that bought the "natural allies" bonhomie.
You are talking about history....this is about NOW (or at least the short-term). BTW, I have no complaints or laudatory observations to make about President Bush's 'legacy' (unlike the POV that you appear to hold) but surely that will be one - but only one - consideration that India will have considered at the negotiating table.Satya_anveshi wrote:I don't understand what complaint you have about Bush's legacy. He left a stunning legacy of Iraq invasion. History will not read what we know of Iraq ops today. It will be written in colorful strategic imperative and a bold move. And yes, it will be a glorious victory of US (actually it is).
They, including Bush, have delivered what they could in terms of Hyde. It was misreading or wrong expectation from some in MMS team (note that I don't include him because he always had his work cut out for him- that is to manage controllable levers of India - and deliver on US's objectives) that bought the "natural allies" bonhomie.
And, my question, if you missed it, was about the 'agreement'.
Gentle readers. One should not ignore the statement of the BJP issued in the name of former PM ABV. It is an important and timely reminder that the principal opposition has given to the GOI and through them to the USG that if they strike a deal that does not conform to the solemn assurance made by the PM to the parliament, such a deal will not be honoured should the administration change hands in the future.
Ultimately it boils down to the vision for India. Bewtween - India as purely a passive economic power with a civilizational view that is not in any way a potential threat to the occident
OR
India as powerful pole by itself that reasserts its position as a leader amongst the comity of nations. The present republic would then be an expression of the most powerful Indian national identity in its long history.
Once this is clear, the choices that India makes will be a lot easier. I think there is now a section in the congress that is ruling the party and the government that is willing to settle for something along India as a Japan model. Whether it is due to the Italian born leader or a purely economist POV dicatated professional PM with a distinct lack of vision for a powerful India in a realpolitik dominated world will remain a matter of debate.
Kalam's vision for India is something that has been carefully built over the years by sucessive Indian governments from across the spectrum of Indian polity. ABV's statement and the President's recent statements and speeches have to be seen as a syptom of a debate that is engaging Indian establishment. That they have chosen to publicly air them and the GOI has reacted publicly through Pranab's and Jaishankar's recent statements to assert that there is not going to be any compromise indicates that the debate is still on. This schism in Indian establishment is the halahal vish that has come out during the samudra manthan by US and India.
Could have been avoided. All it needed was statesmanship and the traditional approach of involving stakeholders and maintaining political consensus. When small minded politicking takes over and there is arrogant "we know what is best for India because we are the chosen ones" attitude, it can degenerate to this level.
Thankfully there are enough checks in the Indian system and an increasing awareness of the limits of the deal's benefits to ensure that the GOI is forced not to compromise and do the deal at any cost. I still do believe that the deal is worth pursuing, the public compromise that GOI accepted and assured in the parliament is the best terms from both sides.
It is the USG that has reneged and the pressure should be on them and not on GOI. If they do not deliver India should not do anything more. The USG has tied itself to the Hyde Act. If it was their real intention then they have grossly miscalculated GOI's willingness to do the deal at any cost.
Ultimately it boils down to the vision for India. Bewtween - India as purely a passive economic power with a civilizational view that is not in any way a potential threat to the occident
OR
India as powerful pole by itself that reasserts its position as a leader amongst the comity of nations. The present republic would then be an expression of the most powerful Indian national identity in its long history.
Once this is clear, the choices that India makes will be a lot easier. I think there is now a section in the congress that is ruling the party and the government that is willing to settle for something along India as a Japan model. Whether it is due to the Italian born leader or a purely economist POV dicatated professional PM with a distinct lack of vision for a powerful India in a realpolitik dominated world will remain a matter of debate.
Kalam's vision for India is something that has been carefully built over the years by sucessive Indian governments from across the spectrum of Indian polity. ABV's statement and the President's recent statements and speeches have to be seen as a syptom of a debate that is engaging Indian establishment. That they have chosen to publicly air them and the GOI has reacted publicly through Pranab's and Jaishankar's recent statements to assert that there is not going to be any compromise indicates that the debate is still on. This schism in Indian establishment is the halahal vish that has come out during the samudra manthan by US and India.
Could have been avoided. All it needed was statesmanship and the traditional approach of involving stakeholders and maintaining political consensus. When small minded politicking takes over and there is arrogant "we know what is best for India because we are the chosen ones" attitude, it can degenerate to this level.
Thankfully there are enough checks in the Indian system and an increasing awareness of the limits of the deal's benefits to ensure that the GOI is forced not to compromise and do the deal at any cost. I still do believe that the deal is worth pursuing, the public compromise that GOI accepted and assured in the parliament is the best terms from both sides.
It is the USG that has reneged and the pressure should be on them and not on GOI. If they do not deliver India should not do anything more. The USG has tied itself to the Hyde Act. If it was their real intention then they have grossly miscalculated GOI's willingness to do the deal at any cost.
Interesting commentary.
A request for a few clarifications:
Hard to believe that MMS - an economist - would settle for that model - with India having the worlds biggest economic engine, the largest middle-class.
In fact, for the life of me, I do not understand why India talks in silos. Why is it that they do not link buying Billions of Dollars of commercial jets, middle-class size, etc, etc, etc in the same sentence as civilian nukes, is beyond me. Shooting oneself in the foot I would think. I would think they would use one to help along the other - just makes sense to do so - the one (or only) language or currency that a Western mind understands.
A request for a few clarifications:
(Might help to explain what the 'Japan model' is.)Once this is clear, the choices that India makes will be a lot easier. I think there is now a section in the congress that is ruling the party and the government that is willing to settle for something along India as a Japan model.
Hard to believe that MMS - an economist - would settle for that model - with India having the worlds biggest economic engine, the largest middle-class.
Did Pranabda and Jaishankar represent MMS/Sonia? Also, the contents of those statements does not sit well with the 'Japan model', does it? Or am I missing something?Kalam's vision for India is something that has been carefully built over the years by sucessive Indian governments from across the spectrum of Indian polity. ABV's statement and the President's recent statements and speeches have to be seen as a syptom of a debate that is engaging Indian establishment. That they have chosen to publicly air them and the GOI has reacted publicly through Pranab's and Jaishankar's recent statements to assert that there is not going to be any compromise indicates that the debate is still on. This schism in Indian establishment is the halahal vish that has come out during the samudra manthan by US and India.
Politics being politics, the GOTUS can very easily untie itself. Very easily. It is a matter of political capital - that is all. NPAs have to be bought out. The issue is what is the cost. And, in this case who (GOTUS or GOI or both) is/are going to chip in.It is the USG that has reneged and the pressure should be on them and not on GOI. If they do not deliver India should not do anything more. The USG has tied itself to the Hyde Act. If it was their real intention then they have grossly miscalculated GOI's willingness to do the deal at any cost.
In fact, for the life of me, I do not understand why India talks in silos. Why is it that they do not link buying Billions of Dollars of commercial jets, middle-class size, etc, etc, etc in the same sentence as civilian nukes, is beyond me. Shooting oneself in the foot I would think. I would think they would use one to help along the other - just makes sense to do so - the one (or only) language or currency that a Western mind understands.
NRao: What are you a two year old? Don't you know what propriety is? Don't you know profit is bad and we should not mix matters of princple with commerce? Shhhh, when will these children learn?NRao wrote:In fact, for the life of me, I do not understand why India talks in silos. Why is it that they do not link buying Billions of Dollars of commercial jets, middle-class size, etc, etc, etc in the same sentence as civilian nukes, is beyond me. Shooting oneself in the foot I would think. I would think they would use one to help along the other - just makes sense to do so - the one (or only) language or currency that a Western mind understands.
India gets sub-marine missile power
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india-gets- ... 268-3.html
India gets sub-marine missile power
Vishal Thapar / CNN-IBN
Published on Saturday , July 07, 2007 at 14:26 in Nation section
Tags: Cruise Missile, Sagarika
E-mail this report | Print this reportNew Delhi: India has declared itself capable of launching a nuclear missile from a submarine and has announced that a submarine-based cruise missile Sagarika has been developed and tested successfully.
With the induction of Sagarika, India has completed the triad of India's nuclear weapons delivery systems.
This was made known at a Defence Research and Development Organisation function in New Delhi on Saturday where the team responsible for the development of the Sagarika was felicitated.
Sources say the Sagarika has a range of 1,000 km and has been accepted for induction by the Navy.
The missile is likely to be installed on the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV). ATV is the indigenous nuclear-powered submarine that is expected to be launched next year.
Sagarika has already been tested successfully three times and completes the third leg of the strategic triad giving India the capability to launch missiles from land, air and now from under the sea.
Submarine-based nuclear missile are considered the most reliable for the fact that a submarine travels mostly under the sea and is hence extremely difficult to detect.
India has a no first use doctrine and so it means that the deterrence capability has to be very effective as well as reliable and Sagarika would give the military its most reliable second strike capability.
Though it was know for while that Sagarika was under development but the entire process was a closely guarded secret and so it was a big surprise when Prime Minster Manmohan Singh felicitated the defence scientists involved in the development of the cruise missile in New Delhi on Saturday.
However, the capability will become operational in a couple of years because ATV will be launched next year and then only the missile will be integrated with the nuclear submarine.
India gets sub-marine missile power
Vishal Thapar / CNN-IBN
Published on Saturday , July 07, 2007 at 14:26 in Nation section
Tags: Cruise Missile, Sagarika
E-mail this report | Print this reportNew Delhi: India has declared itself capable of launching a nuclear missile from a submarine and has announced that a submarine-based cruise missile Sagarika has been developed and tested successfully.
With the induction of Sagarika, India has completed the triad of India's nuclear weapons delivery systems.
This was made known at a Defence Research and Development Organisation function in New Delhi on Saturday where the team responsible for the development of the Sagarika was felicitated.
Sources say the Sagarika has a range of 1,000 km and has been accepted for induction by the Navy.
The missile is likely to be installed on the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV). ATV is the indigenous nuclear-powered submarine that is expected to be launched next year.
Sagarika has already been tested successfully three times and completes the third leg of the strategic triad giving India the capability to launch missiles from land, air and now from under the sea.
Submarine-based nuclear missile are considered the most reliable for the fact that a submarine travels mostly under the sea and is hence extremely difficult to detect.
India has a no first use doctrine and so it means that the deterrence capability has to be very effective as well as reliable and Sagarika would give the military its most reliable second strike capability.
Though it was know for while that Sagarika was under development but the entire process was a closely guarded secret and so it was a big surprise when Prime Minster Manmohan Singh felicitated the defence scientists involved in the development of the cruise missile in New Delhi on Saturday.
However, the capability will become operational in a couple of years because ATV will be launched next year and then only the missile will be integrated with the nuclear submarine.