What left really wants....from People democracy, Oct 2004 edition,
[quote]NUCLEAR ARMS ISSUE
YET another important issue is that of Indian and Pakistani nukes, and so far this has been out of the purview of any worthwhile discussion. However, in an interview to the NBC News and CNN, General Musharraf reportedly said he did not rule out the possibility of India and Pakistan jointly announcing a decision to dismantle their nuclear arsenals. However, he was of the view that “this has to be initiated by India.â€
India Nuclear News & Discussion - 07 Aug 2007
Testing is a non-issue. But the right to test is not. And that has been kept out of the agreement.
India has the right to test when it wants. And the others have the right to not appreciate that. By adding the clauses about the circumustances that led to the test the 123 agreement goes beyond Hyde which wants automatic sanctions a la CTBT. And thats a good thing.
Just consider when will India need to test? Only when there are security issues that threaten its vital existence. This is like a warning shot across the bows. If US feels that would destablize the balance of power then it has the incentive ensure such a threat to vital existence does not occur. And if it still happens then the clauses will come into effect. So its Hyde lite in that aspect. And the up-down vote ensures that there can be no riders to the 123 agreement.
The first use occured in a different era and different circumustances. Now that Cold War is over the threshold is vey high for the use morotarum to break down. To worry about that threshold breakdown and stay forever in the hut is not right for past and future generations of Indians. And if it breaksdown India wont be found wanting with its existing designs.
To me the testing issue is a big factor.
India has the right to test when it wants. And the others have the right to not appreciate that. By adding the clauses about the circumustances that led to the test the 123 agreement goes beyond Hyde which wants automatic sanctions a la CTBT. And thats a good thing.
Just consider when will India need to test? Only when there are security issues that threaten its vital existence. This is like a warning shot across the bows. If US feels that would destablize the balance of power then it has the incentive ensure such a threat to vital existence does not occur. And if it still happens then the clauses will come into effect. So its Hyde lite in that aspect. And the up-down vote ensures that there can be no riders to the 123 agreement.
The first use occured in a different era and different circumustances. Now that Cold War is over the threshold is vey high for the use morotarum to break down. To worry about that threshold breakdown and stay forever in the hut is not right for past and future generations of Indians. And if it breaksdown India wont be found wanting with its existing designs.
To me the testing issue is a big factor.
I am all for the deal but EITHER we should first have megaton bombs tested many times, ICBMs etc [IMO, this remains the goal as the credible minimum deterrent] which should make anybody shit in their undies OR UPA enacts a law which counters Hyde [to follow the goal]. But problem is none seems to be happening.
Moreover, this is not the deal we had in mind when we signed J18 or did we? Leave alone other objections, does this deal ensures "full civilian nuclear co-operation" ?
I am willing to trade my IP for electricity and that should be it. No other restrictions regarding testing, foreign policy or shut down of reactors either in 123 or Hyde. Period.
-NK
PS: Those who want denuclearize sub-continent without denuclearizing PRC can go to hell.
Moreover, this is not the deal we had in mind when we signed J18 or did we? Leave alone other objections, does this deal ensures "full civilian nuclear co-operation" ?
I am willing to trade my IP for electricity and that should be it. No other restrictions regarding testing, foreign policy or shut down of reactors either in 123 or Hyde. Period.
-NK
PS: Those who want denuclearize sub-continent without denuclearizing PRC can go to hell.
Last edited by nkumar on 08 Aug 2007 00:55, edited 1 time in total.
ramanagaru:
Yes, you're right regarding the testing issue. But, my main crib regarding the whole 123 agreement is this: while every commitment made by GoI is iron clad, e.g. perpetaul safeguards, none of the USG commitments are enforceable and are dependent completely on the goodwill of the existing US administration. For every enforceable promise made by us, all we get is negotations and discussions.
Take the fuel supply assurances. It says US will sit down with like-minded countries to help India acquire fuel. What kind of treaty language is this? Why are country names like Britain, Russia and France part of the treaty, when the countries are not? What if they show the middle finger to us?
This is my biggest concern.
Yes, you're right regarding the testing issue. But, my main crib regarding the whole 123 agreement is this: while every commitment made by GoI is iron clad, e.g. perpetaul safeguards, none of the USG commitments are enforceable and are dependent completely on the goodwill of the existing US administration. For every enforceable promise made by us, all we get is negotations and discussions.
Take the fuel supply assurances. It says US will sit down with like-minded countries to help India acquire fuel. What kind of treaty language is this? Why are country names like Britain, Russia and France part of the treaty, when the countries are not? What if they show the middle finger to us?
This is my biggest concern.
Very valid point, that is not enforceable. That sentence may have been inserted to signify that US will not object too vigoursly if other countries continue supplying fuel in case India tests again. But it's not ironclad.Sarma wrote:ramanagaru:
Yes, you're right regarding the testing issue. But, my main crib regarding the whole 123 agreement is this: while every commitment made by GoI is iron clad, e.g. perpetaul safeguards, none of the USG commitments are enforceable and are dependent completely on the goodwill of the existing US administration. For every enforceable promise made by us, all we get is negotations and discussions.
Take the fuel supply assurances. It says US will sit down with like-minded countries to help India acquire fuel. What kind of treaty language is this? Why are country names like Britain, Russia and France part of the treaty, when the countries are not? What if they show the middle finger to us?
This is my biggest concern.
-
enqyoobOLD
- BRFite
- Posts: 690
- Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
- Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain
nkumar:
A "credible" nuclear deterrent is one which has weapons, and which has, more importantly, the delivery systems to deliver them effectively and with very little warning. This is credible only if it is in the hands of a nation that is also so strong in their economy and infrastructure, that they can ride out the effects of, say, 5 cities getting wiped out.
Of course there is another type of "credibility" - one or two nukes in the hands of a completely unstable, wacko dictator.
India already has the weapons for the former. 10 is all it takes. India has 100+, and in the next 10 years, that number may reach 250. Enough.
What is far more important is a widely distributed infrastructure and economy, which will be able to absorb 6 weeks of heavy bombing, or 1 year of naval blockades, and not have famine or food riots. So you need to be thinking of getting there. And you can't get there without sources of power.
Nuke plants are only the beginning - it takes power to generate power. It takes power to build the production lines to convert sand into solar cells, and generate solar power, for instance. So it's NOT an either-or choice of building nuke plants to become American slaves. In fact, I would say that in 40 years, India should become energy-independent by having 80 to 90% needs met by renewable energy.
The other issue is delivery systems. You don't need nukes to make ppl "**** in their undies" if you need to scare them. Space assets can do it. Hypersonic craft can do it. Submarine-launched precision SLCMs can do it.
All these can be deployed (meaning you can use them) at a far lower war threshold than nuclear weapons, so they are a lot more scary as deterrents.
You need $$$ and technololgy and infrastructure and expert ppl to develop these. If you don't have that, but have 126 luxury FA-18 1970s-design jets which contain chips that can be shut off from Langley, VA, you don't have independence. If you have 1000 MiG-47s but can't build the turbine blades for their engines, you don't have independence.
It takes power to build industry, and educate people, and give them opportunities. So those of us who are accused of being "pro-Deal" are just pro-India, except we can think a bit further than "We Need to Test Megaton Nukes".
Think Ukraine. Think North Korea. Does it make you wanna "go" in ur undies? If so, good luck, invest in PeptoBismol big time. If not, consider why anyone else would be impressed by a poverty-stricken India, whose citizens are treated like Pakis are treated today, but doing nookulear tests in the Rajasthan desert where the villagers don't have electricity.
A "credible" nuclear deterrent is one which has weapons, and which has, more importantly, the delivery systems to deliver them effectively and with very little warning. This is credible only if it is in the hands of a nation that is also so strong in their economy and infrastructure, that they can ride out the effects of, say, 5 cities getting wiped out.
Of course there is another type of "credibility" - one or two nukes in the hands of a completely unstable, wacko dictator.
India already has the weapons for the former. 10 is all it takes. India has 100+, and in the next 10 years, that number may reach 250. Enough.
What is far more important is a widely distributed infrastructure and economy, which will be able to absorb 6 weeks of heavy bombing, or 1 year of naval blockades, and not have famine or food riots. So you need to be thinking of getting there. And you can't get there without sources of power.
Nuke plants are only the beginning - it takes power to generate power. It takes power to build the production lines to convert sand into solar cells, and generate solar power, for instance. So it's NOT an either-or choice of building nuke plants to become American slaves. In fact, I would say that in 40 years, India should become energy-independent by having 80 to 90% needs met by renewable energy.
The other issue is delivery systems. You don't need nukes to make ppl "**** in their undies" if you need to scare them. Space assets can do it. Hypersonic craft can do it. Submarine-launched precision SLCMs can do it.
All these can be deployed (meaning you can use them) at a far lower war threshold than nuclear weapons, so they are a lot more scary as deterrents.
You need $$$ and technololgy and infrastructure and expert ppl to develop these. If you don't have that, but have 126 luxury FA-18 1970s-design jets which contain chips that can be shut off from Langley, VA, you don't have independence. If you have 1000 MiG-47s but can't build the turbine blades for their engines, you don't have independence.
It takes power to build industry, and educate people, and give them opportunities. So those of us who are accused of being "pro-Deal" are just pro-India, except we can think a bit further than "We Need to Test Megaton Nukes".
Think Ukraine. Think North Korea. Does it make you wanna "go" in ur undies? If so, good luck, invest in PeptoBismol big time. If not, consider why anyone else would be impressed by a poverty-stricken India, whose citizens are treated like Pakis are treated today, but doing nookulear tests in the Rajasthan desert where the villagers don't have electricity.
-
Mort Walker
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
- Location: The rings around Uranus.
From US Congressman Ed Markey's web site:
July 25, 2007 - U.S.-INDIA NUCLEAR COOPERATION MUST ABIDE BY U.S. LAW
Those 23 in the US House of Representatives are:
Edward J. Markey
Howard Berman
Brad Sherman
Ellen Tauscher
Dan Burton
Henry Waxman
Jane Harman
Jeff Fortenberry
Adam Schiff
Rick Larsen
James Langevin
Mark Udall
Barbara Lee
Michael Capuano
James McGovern
Rush Holt
Doris Matsui
Raul Grijalva
Peter Defazio
Chaka Fattah
Rosa DeLauro
Lynn Woolsey
Sam Farr
July 25, 2007 - U.S.-INDIA NUCLEAR COOPERATION MUST ABIDE BY U.S. LAW
Those 23 in the US House of Representatives are:
Edward J. Markey
Howard Berman
Brad Sherman
Ellen Tauscher
Dan Burton
Henry Waxman
Jane Harman
Jeff Fortenberry
Adam Schiff
Rick Larsen
James Langevin
Mark Udall
Barbara Lee
Michael Capuano
James McGovern
Rush Holt
Doris Matsui
Raul Grijalva
Peter Defazio
Chaka Fattah
Rosa DeLauro
Lynn Woolsey
Sam Farr
Nuclear testing:-
We don't need another test.. and as Ramana says we don't need it written in document as well. Simple language. We shall build a de-rated 300KT weapon at 80% efficiency using super computers, and we don't need to re test for delivering 300KT first shot on NFU notice. We can send 10x300KT such weapons for single strike against us. The nuclear delivery mechanisms is very important (A4 or S1 with MIRV) & ABM shields both at boost phase and as well as deterring at mid course for maximum effect. These are all massive investment or brilliant plans that we need to work on.
Civilian reactors:-
Furthermore, from a civilian perspective to get there, we need this deal such that the words may not affect our NSG supplies and it should not be driving at like how America treats china (buy westinghouse, then take this $5 billion zero interest.. is like actually like a legal bribing).
Ensure, we can get to vision 2020 using BARC reactors and that satisfies our 3 stage plan.
America:-
Can sell and bid for reactor or technology like how they are allowed for RFPing for MRCA deal. It could be russian VVER or french Areva that may take the order due or better product and pricing.. that is devoid of any scam, legal bribing, or corruption.
The point is if BARC team along with our private sector does not get involved in building reactors, then there is no point signing this deal with Unkil.
America is benefited from NPA angle. They get all future civilian reactors and the current 14-17 reactors into IAEA regime.
They may get to outsource nuclear technology and product related cheap labor resource from India.
etc.. that is all fine.
We need to look at this deal, if there is anything that would be hindering our domesticated plans for civilian nuclear power generation.
N-test and military CREing issues needs are also important watch that our GoI does'nt accept something blindly without any detailed introspection, especially when a deal is drafted at 30K feet level.
There is nothing wrong in BJP asking for JPC. What left & its counterparts (Amma) is saying is cr@p.
We have to list all fears and address them one by one.
We don't need another test.. and as Ramana says we don't need it written in document as well. Simple language. We shall build a de-rated 300KT weapon at 80% efficiency using super computers, and we don't need to re test for delivering 300KT first shot on NFU notice. We can send 10x300KT such weapons for single strike against us. The nuclear delivery mechanisms is very important (A4 or S1 with MIRV) & ABM shields both at boost phase and as well as deterring at mid course for maximum effect. These are all massive investment or brilliant plans that we need to work on.
Civilian reactors:-
Furthermore, from a civilian perspective to get there, we need this deal such that the words may not affect our NSG supplies and it should not be driving at like how America treats china (buy westinghouse, then take this $5 billion zero interest.. is like actually like a legal bribing).
Ensure, we can get to vision 2020 using BARC reactors and that satisfies our 3 stage plan.
America:-
Can sell and bid for reactor or technology like how they are allowed for RFPing for MRCA deal. It could be russian VVER or french Areva that may take the order due or better product and pricing.. that is devoid of any scam, legal bribing, or corruption.
The point is if BARC team along with our private sector does not get involved in building reactors, then there is no point signing this deal with Unkil.
America is benefited from NPA angle. They get all future civilian reactors and the current 14-17 reactors into IAEA regime.
They may get to outsource nuclear technology and product related cheap labor resource from India.
etc.. that is all fine.
We need to look at this deal, if there is anything that would be hindering our domesticated plans for civilian nuclear power generation.
N-test and military CREing issues needs are also important watch that our GoI does'nt accept something blindly without any detailed introspection, especially when a deal is drafted at 30K feet level.
There is nothing wrong in BJP asking for JPC. What left & its counterparts (Amma) is saying is cr@p.
We have to list all fears and address them one by one.
This is a gross distortion of what BK is trying to articulate. He never said we need to test mega ton nukes to the exclusion of all else, just that he was pointing out that signiging up to this deal will be at the exclusion of testing megaton nukes.So those of us who are accused of being "pro-Deal" are just pro-India, except we can think a bit further than "We Need to Test Megaton Nukes".
Think Ukraine. Think North Korea. Does it make you wanna "go" in ur undies? If so, good luck, invest in PeptoBismol big time. If not, consider why anyone else would be impressed by a poverty-stricken India, whose citizens are treated like Pakis are treated today, but doing nookulear tests in the Rajasthan desert where the villagers don't have electricity.
lets attack the hyde now:-
Tight surveillance
The Hyde Act makes it obligatory for the US administration to submit to the US Congress comprehensive annual reports on a wide range of subjects meant to keep India under tight surveillance. A sampler:
1. An analysis as to whether imported uranium has affected the rate of production in India of nuclear explosive devices;
2. An estimate of --
(i) the amount of uranium mined and milled in India during the previous year;
(ii) the amount of such uranium that has likely been used or allocated for the production of nuclear explosive devices; and
(iii) the rate of production in India of --
(a) fissile material for nuclear explosive devices; and
(b) nuclear explosive devices;
3. An analysis of whether US civil nuclear cooperation with India is in any way assisting India's nuclear weapons programme, including through --
(i) the use of any US equipment, technology, or nuclear material by India in an unsafeguarded nuclear facility or nuclear-weapons related complex;
(ii) the replication and subsequent use of any US technology by India in an unsafeguarded nuclear facility or unsafeguarded nuclear weapons-related complex, or for any activity related to the research, development, testing, or manufacture of nuclear explosive devices; and
(iii) the provision of nuclear fuel in such a manner as to facilitate the increased production by India of highly enriched uranium or plutonium in unsafeguarded nuclear facilities;
http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=9165
K.P. Nayar writes in the Telegraph
[quote]
KEEP IT BILATERAL
- Not lecturing the US on Pakistan has been good for India
Diplomacy - K.P. Nayar
Around the same time that negotiations for a 123 Agreement to take forward the Indo-US nuclear deal were entering their final lap, Lieutenant General Gary North, the air force commander in the United States of America’s central air command, arrived in Pakistan on a mission that was as sensitive for Islamabad as the nuclear deal was for New Delhi.
General North flew into Sargodha, a Pakistani air force base, on one of two F-16 planes that the Bush administration was giving the PAF after several years of wrangling between Islamabad and Washington, involving three successive US presidents. The planes touched down in Sargodha after an eight-hour flight and were ceremonially received by George W. Bush’s new envoy in Islamabad, Anne Patterson, and other US officials, after which they were handed over to PAF’s Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed. The chief of Pakistan’s air staff made it a point to underline the fact that the new fleet of F-16s that his air force was acquiring were virtual gifts to General Pervez Musharraf from the Pentagon. “These are exceptionally used aircraft and are being given to us at very nominal prices,â€
[quote]
KEEP IT BILATERAL
- Not lecturing the US on Pakistan has been good for India
Diplomacy - K.P. Nayar
Around the same time that negotiations for a 123 Agreement to take forward the Indo-US nuclear deal were entering their final lap, Lieutenant General Gary North, the air force commander in the United States of America’s central air command, arrived in Pakistan on a mission that was as sensitive for Islamabad as the nuclear deal was for New Delhi.
General North flew into Sargodha, a Pakistani air force base, on one of two F-16 planes that the Bush administration was giving the PAF after several years of wrangling between Islamabad and Washington, involving three successive US presidents. The planes touched down in Sargodha after an eight-hour flight and were ceremonially received by George W. Bush’s new envoy in Islamabad, Anne Patterson, and other US officials, after which they were handed over to PAF’s Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed. The chief of Pakistan’s air staff made it a point to underline the fact that the new fleet of F-16s that his air force was acquiring were virtual gifts to General Pervez Musharraf from the Pentagon. “These are exceptionally used aircraft and are being given to us at very nominal prices,â€
India has lived with a some trillion dollar underground economy all these decades.bala wrote:People opposing the 123 deal have to answer the following questions (at the minimum):
1) How do you add roughly 200, 000 MW over the next 10 years growing at GDP rates of 10%. Money, fuel and environment should be considered.
2) How do you manage/contain a rising China whose political/economic clout is increasingly threatening India's rise.
People for the 123 deal have to answer the following questions:
1) How does India grow its economy independent of US influences and conduct an independent foreign policy taking into careful consideration long term outlook
2) How does one deal with the US-Pak-Saudi Axis while courting US
Tap that.
Plenty of inefficiencies in India to think about an outsider that can help.
BTW, who Pak? Saudis, the same that were willing to spend $20 billion on
EFs and now the US wants to sell the same?
'How can India...?' Indian middle-class will be the largest in teh world. Tap that.
-
Mort Walker
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 10042
- Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
- Location: The rings around Uranus.
The only issue is number 3. The rest is being done already - its no big deal and we're only fooling ourselves if you think this sort of work isn't done on a regular basis. POTUS can put whatever spin he/she wants to on this and present it to Congress. The key is not get GE & Westinghouse upset.SaiK wrote:lets attack the hyde now:-
Tight surveillance
The Hyde Act makes it obligatory for the US administration to submit to the US Congress comprehensive annual reports on a wide range of subjects meant to keep India under tight surveillance. A sampler:
1. An analysis as to whether imported uranium has affected the rate of production in India of nuclear explosive devices;
2. An estimate of --
(i) the amount of uranium mined and milled in India during the previous year;
(ii) the amount of such uranium that has likely been used or allocated for the production of nuclear explosive devices; and
(iii) the rate of production in India of --
(a) fissile material for nuclear explosive devices; and
(b) nuclear explosive devices;
3. An analysis of whether US civil nuclear cooperation with India is in any way assisting India's nuclear weapons programme, including through --
(i) the use of any US equipment, technology, or nuclear material by India in an unsafeguarded nuclear facility or nuclear-weapons related complex;
(ii) the replication and subsequent use of any US technology by India in an unsafeguarded nuclear facility or unsafeguarded nuclear weapons-related complex, or for any activity related to the research, development, testing, or manufacture of nuclear explosive devices; and
(iii) the provision of nuclear fuel in such a manner as to facilitate the increased production by India of highly enriched uranium or plutonium in unsafeguarded nuclear facilities;
http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=9165
If its everything inside IAEA monitored special reprocessing and well documented facilities, then how in the world they can table anything to support 3?
I am not sure I read that there is a clear separation of Indian Fuel supplied into IAEA monitored facility, and how that can be taken back to military use? I guess, this is where there is a hole that needs to be plugged.
If thorium from kerala or TN goes inside IAEA monitored facility, it can never come back as U233 or other isotopes for military requirements. The nay sayers needs to agree to this fact (lefties - i am confident of them supporting the manio pretty soon).
I am not sure I read that there is a clear separation of Indian Fuel supplied into IAEA monitored facility, and how that can be taken back to military use? I guess, this is where there is a hole that needs to be plugged.
If thorium from kerala or TN goes inside IAEA monitored facility, it can never come back as U233 or other isotopes for military requirements. The nay sayers needs to agree to this fact (lefties - i am confident of them supporting the manio pretty soon).
Edward J. Markey, D, MAMort Walker wrote:From US Congressman Ed Markey's web site:
July 25, 2007 - U.S.-INDIA NUCLEAR COOPERATION MUST ABIDE BY U.S. LAW
Those 23 in the US House of Representatives are:
Edward J. Markey
Howard Berman
Brad Sherman
Ellen Tauscher
Dan Burton
Henry Waxman
Jane Harman
Jeff Fortenberry
Adam Schiff
Rick Larsen
James Langevin
Mark Udall
Barbara Lee
Michael Capuano
James McGovern
Rush Holt
Doris Matsui
Raul Grijalva
Peter Defazio
Chaka Fattah
Rosa DeLauro
Lynn Woolsey
Sam Farr
Howard Berman, D, CA
Brad Sherman, D, CA
Ellen Tauscher, D, CA
Dan Burton, R, IN
Henry Waxman, D, CA
Jane Harman, D, CA
Jeff Fortenberry, R, LO
Adam Schiff, D, CA
Rick Larsen, D, WA
James Langevin, D, RI
Mark Udall, D, AZ
Barbara Lee, D, CA
Michael Capuano, D, MA
James McGovern, D, MA
Rush Holt, D, NJ
Doris Matsui, D, AZ
Raul Grijalva, D, AZ
Peter Defazio, D, OR
Chaka Fattah, D, PA
Rosa DeLauro, D, CT
Lynn Woolsey, D, CA
Sam Farr, D, CA
Note the following:
1. Almost everyone appealing is a democrat. Although Dems do have the majority, I think this is just political shenanigans against the republicans on how they short circuit the process and circumvent the legislature and the constitution. This will be used in the primaries and the general election.
2. Nearly half the people appealing are from California. (Ofcourse, CA does hold a proportionally higher number of seats). The huge Indian community in CA will need to flex its muscles and write to their respective congressmen to change their anti-India stance. Or their party risks loosing the Indian vote.
Left although in the ruling side is playing opposition marginalizing the real opposition. That has been the game plan of UPA since beginning. Nothing new here. When push come to shove, buttons will be pushed from the US, and they fall in line.ldev wrote:I think the commies are bargaining very hard for their pound of flesh. Ofcourse their comrade masters in Beijing will have told them to vote against this deal. But the commies also know that if this should result in another election, they may never have the kind of leverage they have today in GOI where with 43 seats and about 5% of the vote, they hold a virtual veto over the ruling party.
But one way or another I believe the UPA will get the votes necessary. See how they pulled off Pratiba Patil's election as President. Whom did they coopt?Now who would have thunk that would happen?
Their noise is good so critics can push for JPC on this issue. Most of the countries have Standing Committees to discuss and sort out these issues so public can chew on pros and cons of the issues. India democracy needs maturity and right processes to make decisions on critical issues. Current situation of secrecy in political process and concentration of power in couple of individuals is dangerous to the country.
Last edited by ShyamSP on 08 Aug 2007 03:11, edited 1 time in total.
The congress can mandate anything... they pay for silly reports that claim the PSLV is being modified into an ICBM called Surya... so now they will get annual reports by some CIA analyst on what he thinks is the Indian arsenal size... the Chai wallah outside the BARC gate will probably have a more accurate estimate...
They can also pass a law ordering me to report on Mallika Sherawat's breasts.. and I can dutifully file such reports monthly... sadly they will be no more accurate than the CIA analyst...
They can also pass a law ordering me to report on Mallika Sherawat's breasts.. and I can dutifully file such reports monthly... sadly they will be no more accurate than the CIA analyst...
This should explain most of India's foreign policy and its trade ties with the rest of the world in the last 60 yearsramana wrote:
The change advocated by Sen was the logical extension of an earlier initiative by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government to eliminate Pakistan’s overarching shadow from every aspect of Indian foreign policy. It used to be said until the National Democratic Alliance government came into office in 1998 that India has no bilateral relations, only trilateral ones: India’s relations with another country depended on the state of that country’s ties with Pakistan. The Vajpayee government tried to delink Pakistan from India’s external affairs, but was only moderately successful because attitudes in South Block were not easy to transform.
Not do fast. Unlike other Indian strategists, policy makers or analysts Bharat Karnad is educated in USA (IIRC Santa Barbara, California) and having rubbed shoulders (with domination) his gora colleagues that later took the helm in White House when Ronald Regan took office. The president's staff thus would not ague with B Karnad, having been beaten to submission umpteen times before.enqyoob wrote:The central tent-pole of Karnad's tent is the assertion:This is an unsupported assertion, reflective of a complete lack of ability to think outside what was true 30 years ago. Not to mention, a dangerous level of detachment from reality.the decisive quality of the premier great power attribute in the modern age, namely, a versatile thermonuclear arsenal,
The point I am raising is that Bharat Karnad is the only one who is very familiar with American psyche/mind and understand what drives them, how they think, what will makes them cow down and what does it take to do business with Americans and to take down Goliath America. He is also one who knows first hand that Americans are no god, they are just as good as any Indian. A trait seen only by expatriate Indians in USA, and often expounded by BRFites on this forum.
So the way Bideshi Oracle Operator technocrats assess/knows compatriot technocrat Amrikan, the polity sociologist B Karnad knows of polity sociologist Americans that run POTU/Kangress and Foggy Bottom.
And yes only a well proven process to validate full yield thermonuclear weapon will awaken ordinary foggy bottom to India that means business. B Karnard OTOH is more concerned of having tested (proven capability) full yield thermonuclear to ensure China has no shred of doubt what Indian thermonuclear weapons will do to all its cities if they provoke India to war. Thus he carefully used the word "design" in
bulk of the Indian “boosted fissionâ€
the case of trigger-happy test v/s testing against vitiating environment for security purposes. agreed.
but i need more clarifications from the worst case scenarios.. i need to re-read re-read again..
folks?
[quote] Insulating India’s reactors from fuel disruption reality check
Siddharth Varadarajan
In the tussle between test and text, what will be decisive is the political resolve to defend the sovereign rights enshrined inthe 123 agreement.
Running like a ‘sacred thread’ through the length of the nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States, India’s right to run its reactors without interruption and take “corrective measuresâ€
but i need more clarifications from the worst case scenarios.. i need to re-read re-read again..
folks?
[quote] Insulating India’s reactors from fuel disruption reality check
Siddharth Varadarajan
In the tussle between test and text, what will be decisive is the political resolve to defend the sovereign rights enshrined inthe 123 agreement.
Running like a ‘sacred thread’ through the length of the nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States, India’s right to run its reactors without interruption and take “corrective measuresâ€
Well, nice guys finish last. We've done everything transparently, honestly and by the book -- and suffered for it.
Israel/SouthAfrica tested clandestinely, but we didn't. Pakistan and China proliferated, but we didn't. Even US "pollinated", but we didn't.
So I ask you, what good has our self-restraint done us, if the best it could get for us was this 123 "deal" (half-deal?)
Nice guys finish last. You can't be a goodie-2-shoes if you want to survive in this world. Others have passed us by cheating, leaving us behind. When you're the only goodie-2-shoes in a world of ruthless people, you only advertise yourself as a sucker.
If we had done the right thing and behaved like the others, we'd be much ahead by now. Pokhran-2 involved a lot of hoodwinking -- BJP leaders made lots of fake assurances to Washington, and we hid our test site preparations. And boy did it work well for us!
Just imagine where we'd be right now if we hadn't done that. Just imagine we'd had a Congress govt in power at the time instead -- we wouldn't have had any further N-testing at all, and we'd be up sh*t's creek today.
History has amply shown us that it pays to have a certain amount of selfish deftness, and we've ignored the obvious reality being waved in our faces. So this is why we have inadequate leverage today, and this barely-palatable 123 deal.
Israel/SouthAfrica tested clandestinely, but we didn't. Pakistan and China proliferated, but we didn't. Even US "pollinated", but we didn't.
So I ask you, what good has our self-restraint done us, if the best it could get for us was this 123 "deal" (half-deal?)
Nice guys finish last. You can't be a goodie-2-shoes if you want to survive in this world. Others have passed us by cheating, leaving us behind. When you're the only goodie-2-shoes in a world of ruthless people, you only advertise yourself as a sucker.
If we had done the right thing and behaved like the others, we'd be much ahead by now. Pokhran-2 involved a lot of hoodwinking -- BJP leaders made lots of fake assurances to Washington, and we hid our test site preparations. And boy did it work well for us!
Just imagine where we'd be right now if we hadn't done that. Just imagine we'd had a Congress govt in power at the time instead -- we wouldn't have had any further N-testing at all, and we'd be up sh*t's creek today.
History has amply shown us that it pays to have a certain amount of selfish deftness, and we've ignored the obvious reality being waved in our faces. So this is why we have inadequate leverage today, and this barely-palatable 123 deal.
x-post from indo-unkil thread.
Nandu wrote:PM Manmohan Singh accepts Bush's invitation to Crawford, TX ranch.
http://in.news.yahoo.com/070807/251/6j5qs.html
-
enqyoobOLD
- BRFite
- Posts: 690
- Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
- Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain
OK, Arun, I see that he has a technically correct point. However, the idea of testing nukes today, or in the very near future, is ludicrous. It would utterly destroy India's burgeoning economic growth, at a time when the rate is amazingly high. It would be equivalent of the effect of 9/11 on the Internet Boom.
Now the question to be asked is whether this deal especially kills India's plans for testing. That's a dog-in-the-manger argument, isn't it? Like
That and 2 rupees might buy a paper cup of coffee.
No Indian government, not in 2007 and not in 2010, is going to conduct a nuclear test, unless the security situation deteriorates to the brink of war against China (not against TSP, because they are nuke-nude). The idea that a live demonstration is either necessary or sufficient to get the Chinese to then back down, is also quite unsupported.
On the other hand, a serious American investment in India is a far greater deterrent for China. Consider:
a) NO US investment in India. China threatens war with India. US sits around scratching its musharraf, because JC Penney and Sam Walton don't like the idea of China nationalizing their investments. US would rather protect its investment in China than do anything to stop Chinese takeover of South Asia.
b) $375B worth of American-funded nuke plants and gazillion other business interests coming up in India. China threatens war with India. Mr. GE and Mr. Westinghouse call the WHOTUS. Now US is far more interested in stopping China, and JC Penney may be told to take a hike.
China can do the calculation, so Case (b) is a far greater deterrent.
Also, in WW2 the US gamed this idea of live demonstrations to impress the Japanese Emperor. They decided it would not work - which is why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the "live demos".
Sorry, Arun, Karnad is still way off base. So what if he spent time looking at the twerps in Foggy Bottom and has been trained in Cold War / Tom Clancy mindsets? MMS and Co. are far more out-of-the-box thinkers than that, and clearly they are better at getting deals.
Summary: Karnad may be SHOUTING for live nuke tests, but the GOI is not about to do anything that crazy, and that's true for the foreseeable future, 123, or no 123. So blaming this on the 123 is not honest.
The nuke deal still says:
This is a heck of a better deal than any GOI has been able to dream of in the past 40 years. We are not silly.
I think ppl here have forgotten how lucky India is to have come through the 1998 events. First, it was such a timely thing - made all the difference in Kargil less than a year later.
Secondly, if would REALLY have destroyed India's economy - if not for the Pakis. Remember the anxiety following May 12, 1998? And the wild celebrations when we heard that the stupid Pakis had also tested? Why were we so relieved, happy?
Now the question to be asked is whether this deal especially kills India's plans for testing. That's a dog-in-the-manger argument, isn't it? Like
I was JUST going to test, when you guys went and that stupid deal
That and 2 rupees might buy a paper cup of coffee.
No Indian government, not in 2007 and not in 2010, is going to conduct a nuclear test, unless the security situation deteriorates to the brink of war against China (not against TSP, because they are nuke-nude). The idea that a live demonstration is either necessary or sufficient to get the Chinese to then back down, is also quite unsupported.
On the other hand, a serious American investment in India is a far greater deterrent for China. Consider:
a) NO US investment in India. China threatens war with India. US sits around scratching its musharraf, because JC Penney and Sam Walton don't like the idea of China nationalizing their investments. US would rather protect its investment in China than do anything to stop Chinese takeover of South Asia.
b) $375B worth of American-funded nuke plants and gazillion other business interests coming up in India. China threatens war with India. Mr. GE and Mr. Westinghouse call the WHOTUS. Now US is far more interested in stopping China, and JC Penney may be told to take a hike.
China can do the calculation, so Case (b) is a far greater deterrent.
Also, in WW2 the US gamed this idea of live demonstrations to impress the Japanese Emperor. They decided it would not work - which is why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the "live demos".
Sorry, Arun, Karnad is still way off base. So what if he spent time looking at the twerps in Foggy Bottom and has been trained in Cold War / Tom Clancy mindsets? MMS and Co. are far more out-of-the-box thinkers than that, and clearly they are better at getting deals.
Summary: Karnad may be SHOUTING for live nuke tests, but the GOI is not about to do anything that crazy, and that's true for the foreseeable future, 123, or no 123. So blaming this on the 123 is not honest.
The nuke deal still says:
We will sell civilian power reactors to u, if u promise not to divert the fuel, no ifs and buts about that. But this also means that you can use all ur indigenous fuel for your unmentionable purposes, and we don't want to know about that, wink-wink, and u can scare the Chicoms all u want, as long as u don't do anything silly.
This is a heck of a better deal than any GOI has been able to dream of in the past 40 years. We are not silly.
I think ppl here have forgotten how lucky India is to have come through the 1998 events. First, it was such a timely thing - made all the difference in Kargil less than a year later.
Secondly, if would REALLY have destroyed India's economy - if not for the Pakis. Remember the anxiety following May 12, 1998? And the wild celebrations when we heard that the stupid Pakis had also tested? Why were we so relieved, happy?
If you're going to sell us on the deal, please don't do it on the basis of MMS's "brilliance" and out-of-the-litterbox thinking. MMS is no great negotiator or strategist, that's for sure.
Only Nixon can go to China, and that's surely not Manmohan.
I'd trust a BJP-done deal more than a CongressParty deal, just like Americans would trust a Nixon deal with China over a Carter deal with them.
Only Nixon can go to China, and that's surely not Manmohan.
I'd trust a BJP-done deal more than a CongressParty deal, just like Americans would trust a Nixon deal with China over a Carter deal with them.
In "Insulating India’s reactors from fuel disruption reality check", Siddharth Varadarajan does a fine job explaining the hurdles of nuke material return. The US President of the Day will have a tough time invoking Hyde and asking for return on nuke material, that was my reading of the 123 and Siddharth explains very well why this could be next to impossible if India chooses to test.
The negotiating team of US-India are pretty smart to understand the nuances and they have boxed in Hyde on all corners (thorough hiding I would say) and effectively deep-sixed the NPT Ayatollahs add in clauses. On paper it looks like the US president has preserved the rights due to Hyde but in practice it is a whole other game. Whew, so much for scenarios.
Which brings up the point: Aren't the Hyde Act folks hiding under mythical scenarios.
PS.
The negotiating team of US-India are pretty smart to understand the nuances and they have boxed in Hyde on all corners (thorough hiding I would say) and effectively deep-sixed the NPT Ayatollahs add in clauses. On paper it looks like the US president has preserved the rights due to Hyde but in practice it is a whole other game. Whew, so much for scenarios.
Which brings up the point: Aren't the Hyde Act folks hiding under mythical scenarios.
PS.
In retrospect the China deal with Nixon was not so good IMO for the US.Nixon deal with China
-
enqyoobOLD
- BRFite
- Posts: 690
- Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
- Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain
CRamS:
Doesn't India's "pussilanimous response" also show that no amount of nuclear tests do a damn thing to fight terrorism? The US has tested some 1300+ times, and still I have to take my shoes off and put toothpaste and shaving cream in checked baggage because they are terrified of the Pakis. Seems like 3 live "tests" in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi would solve the terrorism problem very permanently, but they can't do it, can they? So much for your argument...
Please try to avoid wasting time with zero-watt posts. As for the probability of Pakistan's nukes being gone, that is based on careful analysis of evidence. The fact that you are too lazy or dishonest or both, to go read and consider that evidence, is no reason for me to be impressed at your brilliantly authoritative one-liners.
Doesn't India's "pussilanimous response" also show that no amount of nuclear tests do a damn thing to fight terrorism? The US has tested some 1300+ times, and still I have to take my shoes off and put toothpaste and shaving cream in checked baggage because they are terrified of the Pakis. Seems like 3 live "tests" in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi would solve the terrorism problem very permanently, but they can't do it, can they? So much for your argument...
Please try to avoid wasting time with zero-watt posts. As for the probability of Pakistan's nukes being gone, that is based on careful analysis of evidence. The fact that you are too lazy or dishonest or both, to go read and consider that evidence, is no reason for me to be impressed at your brilliantly authoritative one-liners.
Come to think of it, all China may need to do to torpedo the deal is create a situation on the Tibet/India border with a serious casualty count, IRBMs are used and a lot of loud drum beating and sabre rattling is done by China. We better make sure that such an adventure cripples them permanently in return too, perhaps by warming up the Tibetan freedom struggle and torpedoing the Olympics etc.enqyoob wrote:
No Indian government, not in 2007 and not in 2010, is going to conduct a nuclear test, unless the security situation deteriorates to the brink of war against China
Well, China is hell bent on torpedoing the US-India Nuke deal, they have fired the first salvo and unleashed their pet dogs CPI & Morons to protest.
Left plans major protests against joint naval exercise
Raising a banner of protest against India hosting a multi-nation naval exercise featuring the US, the Left parties on Tuesday announced that they would hold rallies along the entire East coast to mark their opposition. Led by CPI(M) General Secretary, Prakash Karat, and his CPI counterpart, A B Bardhan, will be set off from Chennai and Kolkata on September 4 to conclude at port city, Vishakapatanam in Andhra Pradesh, five days later to coincide with the six-day naval exercise.
Karat said India's decision to host the exercise was a attempt to align New Delhi with the US, Japan and Australia tri-lateral security cooperation.
Left plans major protests against joint naval exercise
Raising a banner of protest against India hosting a multi-nation naval exercise featuring the US, the Left parties on Tuesday announced that they would hold rallies along the entire East coast to mark their opposition. Led by CPI(M) General Secretary, Prakash Karat, and his CPI counterpart, A B Bardhan, will be set off from Chennai and Kolkata on September 4 to conclude at port city, Vishakapatanam in Andhra Pradesh, five days later to coincide with the six-day naval exercise.
Karat said India's decision to host the exercise was a attempt to align New Delhi with the US, Japan and Australia tri-lateral security cooperation.
-
enqyoobOLD
- BRFite
- Posts: 690
- Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
- Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain
China is also re-starting trouble on the border. It is in their interests to start a "nookulear flashpoint in South Asia" to scare off investment in India. However, there may be a backlash and the commies in India would suffer. And why should China upset the present sweet situation where the govt of India is 40% in the hands of China anyway?
But if investment grows in India, China loses, and instabilities will start appearing, from Uighiristan to Shanghai. It's about time for a nice Red Cultural Revolution.
But if investment grows in India, China loses, and instabilities will start appearing, from Uighiristan to Shanghai. It's about time for a nice Red Cultural Revolution.
He has never blamed it on the 123, he just stated that 123 has made it worse.So blaming this on the 123 is not honest.
Why? Why such lack of confidence? Did someone gift it? Granted it is tied, but that tie has two ends.It would utterly destroy India's burgeoning economic growth, at a time when the rate is amazingly high.
Just this PM they were stating, on NPR, that Indians (among others) were some 66% of the doctoral program and should be granted visas and allowed to stick around!! There will be plenty more such things in the future. No need to give any more.
Though not the best, 123 is fine (I have one big beef with it - it has fragmented India for good I feel. MMS needs to take care of that right away.). Tellis, Burns and Rice can shout as much as they want about the Hyde Act in the corridors of SD. No more of it in news prints, etc.
GoI should have more self respect.
I agree that testing is not needed from a eco-political perspective. But to be treated in the future as a P-6 technically India needs to square away with certainty. It is a technical issue, not a political one or an economic one - from an Indian PoV.
Will it or can it have a political ramification - yes, it will. Will it have an economic ramification, it will. Can India deal with these two? It better do. Just suggesting that India is a NWS is of no use.
IF the US is serious, they will defang China.
From the Siddharth Vardarajan article posted above:
The bolded sentence i.e. Posession is more than nine-tenths of the law, is something which all the naysayers have been studiously ignoring. The only reason that the US wanted iron clad undertakings from India and in return promised "consultations"in the text of the 123 agreement is very simple. Because India will be already in posession of what it wants i.e the fuel. Now ofcourse if the naysayers believe that any Gormand of India at any time will be so weak that it will quake in its chappals and hand over everything on notice of first demand, well then, the naysayers better feed the Gormand some steroids to bulk up the Gormand's muscles.Under a worst-case scenario where the U.S. ignores its obligation to ensure the continuous operation of Indian reactors, presumably citing the Hyde Act, India would be under no obligation to entertain an American request for the return of nuclear items. If a U.S.-supplied fuel stockpile exists on Indian territory, India could continue using that fuel if not doing so means disrupting the operation of its reactors. Possession is more than nine-tenths of the law. However, the Indian Government of the day must be prepared to uphold its sovereign rights, even if it means incurring the wrath of the U.S. The best agreement in the world is worthless if the men who must implement it turn out to have weak knees.
There is reason for such post. A extreme position of nation interest is the best way to start a deal and negotiate to a compromise. But current govt did not start from an extreme position of national interest.Sanjay M wrote:If you're going to sell us on the deal, please don't do it on the basis of MMS's "brilliance" and out-of-the-litterbox thinking. MMS is no great negotiator or strategist, that's for sure.
Only Nixon can go to China, and that's surely not Manmohan.
I'd trust a BJP-done deal more than a CongressParty deal, just like Americans would trust a Nixon deal with China over a Carter deal with them.
What are you guys smoking? P-5 to expand to P-6 and the UN security council seat like right now on a platter? Is that your expectation? With an economy which in dollar terms is not even the top 10 in the world right now? Canada, Spain, Italy have larger economies today. Let the Indian economy in dollar terms overtake Japan and be behind only the US and China. That plus India's nuclear status will make a difference.Acharya wrote:There is reason for such post. A extreme position of nation interest is the best way to start a deal and negotiate to a compromise. But current govt did not start from an extreme position of national interest.Sanjay M wrote:If you're going to sell us on the deal, please don't do it on the basis of MMS's "brilliance" and out-of-the-litterbox thinking. MMS is no great negotiator or strategist, that's for sure.
Only Nixon can go to China, and that's surely not Manmohan.
I'd trust a BJP-done deal more than a CongressParty deal, just like Americans would trust a Nixon deal with China over a Carter deal with them.
Without a war to decide the victors who then create their own ruling architecture as was done by the current P-5 after WW2, it takes overwhelming demonstrated superiority in all areas especially military and economic to get to the top via the negotiating table.
This agreement at least gets India the fuel that it is short off, without giving away in any critical area including further testing. IMO a good half way house. To climb the rest of the way, India has its work cut out for itself beginning inhouse.
Can India produce another 100,000MW of electricity from domestic coal? Sure, just clean up the labour laws in the country, tame the trade unions and the mafia in the nationalzed coal fields, dissolve the present structure of the nationalized coal industry, fire most of the management because most of them are on the take. And to make generation of power worthwhile, stop giving it to farmers for free and stop power theft. Which political party in India can do it? NDA, UPA, anyone else?
Because if you cannot fix the coal mess outlined above or come up with an alternative workable solution, what the UPA government has negotiated via the 123 agreement is the next best thing.
-
Raju
What are you guys smoking? P-5 to expand to P-6 and the UN security council seat like right now on a platter? Is that your expectation? With an economy which in dollar terms is not even the top 10 in the world right now? Canada, Spain, Italy have larger economies today. Let the Indian economy in dollar terms overtake Japan and be behind only the US and China. That plus India's nuclear status will make a difference.ldev wrote:There is reason for such post. A extreme position of nation interest is the best way to start a deal and negotiate to a compromise. But current govt did not start from an extreme position of national interest.
[/quote]
By PPP we are the fourth largest economy. Not good enough for ya ?
dollar terms means having a large export component. It is a good thing that our economy is not structured on high export led growth.
P-6 and UNSC seat are a must right now. Otherwise we should be in a position to disrupt the global energy cartel by innovating technologies that have hitherto been suppressed in order to promote oil cartel.
Let TSP conduct terror attacks on mainland USA the way they slaughter our people, and then if US response is also bear hugs to Mush MMS style, I'll buy your theory that US is as terrified of the Pakis as India. Right now, US asks TSP to jump, and TSP asks how high. If there is any reason for US to go easy on TSP, its not because they are scared, but its my opinion which many will agree with, that US needs TSP to cage the Indian elephant in a 'South Asia' box.enqyoob wrote:CRamS:
Doesn't India's "pussilanimous response" also show that no amount of nuclear tests do a damn thing to fight terrorism? The US has tested some 1300+ times, and still I have to take my shoes off and put toothpaste and shaving cream in checked baggage because they are terrified of the Pakis. Seems like 3 live "tests" in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi would solve the terrorism problem very permanently, but they can't do it, can they? So much for your argument...
I am sorry to waste your time, but simple solution for that is don't bother reading them. But I assure you, there are many others who consider my posts several dBm wattage higher. Thank you very much for the insult.Please try to avoid wasting time with zero-watt posts. As for the probability of Pakistan's nukes being gone, that is based on careful analysis of evidence. The fact that you are too lazy or dishonest or both, to go read and consider that evidence, is no reason for me to be impressed at your brilliantly authoritative one-liners.
As for your nuke nude theory, sure its plausible, but unless there is a huge conspiracy of silence on the part of US to hide this fact, for what reason I don't know, but almost everybody else in the world who matter, do consider TSP a nuke power; whether its begged, borrowed or stolen, is another matter.
PPP means nothing when it comes to projection of your economic clout outside your borders. Dollar/euro/yen valuations are those that matter when you are jostling with other nations for power in this world. In dollar terms need not mean a large export component. This is OT for this thread but what India has via its large and innovative population is the ability to make a market for itself within its own borders. Never been thought of that way strategically by any of the politicos in India. But the economy has to be large in dollar/euro terms. That is what will get India clout on the economic front. The first step has to be full convertibility of the rupee and the creation of a rupee zone. That is the way to superpowerdom. Not the way things are right now.Raju wrote:By PPP we are the fourth largest economy. Not good enough for ya ?
dollar terms means having a large export component. It is a good thing that our economy is not structured on high export led growth.
P-6 and UNSC seat are a must right now. Otherwise we should be in a position to disrupt the global energy cartel by innovating technologies that have hitherto been suppressed in order to promote oil cartel.
As for p-5 and UN security council, no amount of demand, cajoling, threatening or pouting is going to get India that right now. So if people are set on that, they may as well go into a corner and sulk for the next decade or more while the rest of India gets its act together and becomes a true economic superpower but preserving and if necessary expanding its nuclear deterrent commensurate with its growing economic clout.
-
Raju
that is globalist agenda. East asian 'tiger' currencies were fully convertible when they crashed. Chinese and Indian currencies did not crash then because they were non-convertible.ldev wrote:The first step has to be full convertibility of the rupee and the creation of a rupee zone. That is the way to superpowerdom. Not the way things are right now.