India Nuclear News And Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

India should make its willingness to restrict exports of ENR technologies to those countries who do not have them, only if India is allowed to import such technologies from those who have them.

It can't get more simple than this. And next week we can upgrade our relations with Iran.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2206
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by shravan »

OT
Cure for radiation sickness found?

Dramatic discovery by Jewish-American scientists could change world; anti-radiation medication proves effective, safe in tests. Further experiments to be fast tracked, FDA approval possible within 1-2 years
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by putnanja »

France eager on ‘full’ civilian nuclear relationship with India
Prime Minister Mamohan Singh on Friday told the Rajya Sabha that he had raised the issue of India being provided with enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) technologies, with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was “emphatic” about France’s eagerness to enter into a “full” civilian nuclear relationship with India.

Dr. Singh was responding to questions by Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) who wanted to know whether the recent G8 resolution to withhold ENR technologies from countries that had not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty , had confirmed the Left’s fears and ran against Dr. Singh’s assurance of full cooperation under the Indo-U.S. civil nuclear agreement.

Back from visits to France and Egypt, Dr. Singh pointed out that Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee had clarified the issue in Parliament and assured that he would address it at a later date.
...
...
Any move to restrict supply of ENR technologies would throw a spanner in India’s three-stage civil nuclear programme. India wants the right to reprocess spent nuclear fuel to run the second stage of its fast-breeder programme, which could lead on to the third stage, where the country’s abundant thorium could replace uranium as fuel.
...
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Austin »

A question to gurus , if a Naval Reactor is designed to operate with say a Uranium with 30 % enrichment , is that any thing that would prevent using the same reactor with Uranium of say 95 % enrichment or bomb grade type ?
vasu_ray
BRFite
Posts: 550
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by vasu_ray »

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by putnanja »

Reprocessing talks with U.S. to begin next week - Siddharth Varadarajan
...
The talks, which get rolling in Vienna on July 21, are aimed at finalising the “arrangements and procedures” under which the spent fuel generated by U.S.-supplied reactors will be reprocessed. The reprocessing is to be done in the new safeguarded facility India agreed to build in its nuclear cooperation agreement with the U.S, also known as the 123 agreement.

Under the terms of the agreement, Washington will have until July 21, 2010, to reach an understanding with Delhi once the negotiations commence. The one-year deadline was insisted upon by India with the negative experience of Tarapur in mind. Decades after the U.S.-supplied reactor there became operational, India is still waiting for America to make the “joint determination” necessary for the reprocessing of accumulated spent fuel to begin.


...
The problem is that IAEA procedures are themselves changing as the technology for measurement precision evolves. Safeguards on the Rokkasho-Mura plant in Japan, for example, involve the use of expensive monitoring equipment, all of which the U.S. got the Japanese to pay for. All told, the negotiations are expected to be “tough but doable.” One major Indian concern is irreversibility: what the country does not want is a situation where Washington terminates consent on some ground.
...

The declaration will consist of the list of civilian nuclear facilities India will place under safeguards. Officials confirmed that a draft declaration has been prepared and is undergoing internal vetting. When filed, however, the individual facilities listed will only come under IAEA inspection after separate notifications are filed and the concerned facilities added to the safeguards annexe one by one.

Indian officials say the notifications process is still some distance away, since facilities will be placed under safeguards only when lifetime fuel supply arrangements have been tied up for them.

...
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

Nothing new there. Everything is as per the agreement.
enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by enqyoob »

A question to gurus , if a Naval Reactor is designed to operate with say a Uranium with 30 % enrichment , is that any thing that would prevent using the same reactor with Uranium of say 95 % enrichment or bomb grade type ?
Nothing at all. But I would make sure I was more than 50 km away from it when the reactor goes critical - and that I don't look in that direction.

(Also, nothing to prevent downblending the 95% stuff to 30% and using it for much longer that way...).
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

The USN has resisted moving to LEU designs claiming that these would be 3 times the size of their HEU ones. The US has been encouraging the conversion of HEU research reactors to LEU via exotic fuel bundle designs.

Going the other way would mean an increase in neutron flux and power output. One would imagine the thing would have to be operated at lower power settings than with LEU.
But why waste HEU in such a manner if one has an operational LEU design ?
enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by enqyoob »

Very swift shahadat, for one thing..
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Arun_S »

Austin wrote:A question to gurus , if a Naval Reactor is designed to operate with say a Uranium with 30 % enrichment , is that any thing that would prevent using the same reactor with Uranium of say 95 % enrichment or bomb grade type ?
Reactors are designed for a very specific feedstock input enrichment level; they would not operate for lower enrichment then what they are designed for. Certainly they can't be operated with higher enrichment fuel (due to reactor's criticality ratio going up significantly higher and resultant runaway chain reaction), but if one has higher enrichment fuel, they can always be blended down by mixing with natural Uranium to desired level of enrichment.

BTW Fission cross section of Pu and Uranium is about the same. So one can also blend Pu from weapons into fuel rods.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Austin »

Thanks Arun , narayanan

The reason I asked this coz US Naval Nuclear reactor operates at very high enrichment ~ 93 % , the advantage as I understand ( in laymans term ) more power per fuel bundle and lesser fuel rod to be carried which means these reactor operates for ~ 30 years without the need to refuel them through out the submarine life which is about 30 years.

Most likely the Indian submarine Arihant and others( Russia,France ) operate at ~ 25 - 30 % enrichment which translates to less power per fuel rod , needing refueling after 12 to 15 years.

So safety factor is the only reason why one would not operate the reactor at > 90 % Enrichment since there are other advantages for very long life of reactor without refuel ? Is the trade off worth it ?

PS: To refuel it would mean cut the submarine , refuel it , weld it again takes a submarine out of business for ~ 2 years.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

See
http://www.armscontrol.ru/pubs/en/heu-l ... rs-sgs.pdf
for background on conversion of propulsion reactors from one fuel enrichment level to another via creative fuel bundle designs and effect on core lifetime etc

and
http://www.rertr.anl.gov/NatProgram98/Kuperman.pdf
for ayatollah whine about conversion of Russian production reactors from LEU to HEU
Sanatanan
BRFite
Posts: 487
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 09:29

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Sanatanan »

Re Naval Nuclear Submarines and HEU requirement:

In a reactor fuelled with NatU or LEU, there usually is only a small window of opportunity, of the order of 30 to 45 minutes, to restart the reactor after its automatic / manual controls cause a reactor "trip" (almost instantaneous shutdown and into the subcritical state) due to any of the vital reactor parameters exceeding preset safe limits due to any reason / malfunction - for example, loss of core coolant pressure, fuel temperature increasing, reactor coolant pumps suddenly stopping etc. Obviously, in the 'tripped' state, the reactor would not be producing any output power.

Should this window of opportunity to restart be missed, (that is, if the fault that caused the 'trip' could not be rectified within this time), then the reactor can only be restarted (made critical once again and loaded to power level at which it was operating before the 'trip') after about 48 hours has elapsed.

I feel that this situation may not be tolerable in a reactor used in a Naval submarine unless the submarine carries an almost full sized backup energy source for propulsion.

The above limitation in time to restart can be avoided, if the reactor is fuelled with HEU. Other criteria which might affect selection of enrichment levels in a Naval submarine are the desired range (duration of the mission) of the submarine, and desired infrequency of refuelling. These criteria may not be applicable to Nuclear powered merchant ships or even ice-breakers.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Arun_S »

Kakodkar had sounded warning on NPT link to ENR
Siddharth Varadarajan

U.S. effort at NSG would be “breach of trust”

India must take ’concerted action’ to avert new rule

NEW DELHI: The United Progressive Alliance government may insist it is “not concerned” by the recent American move to get the G8 to prohibit the sale of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) items to India pending a similar ban by the Nuclear Suppliers Group. But six months ago, Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar publicly drew attention to the restrictive moves afoot and warned that what Washington was pushing was “contrary to the spirit” of India’s bilateral agreement with the United States.

In his inaugural address to a seminar on Global Nuclear Challenges, organised by the Centre for Air Power Studies on January 10, Dr. Kakodkar spoke of “credible but unofficial information” that the Consultative Group of the NSG was “moving very close to the decision that ENR technologies would be available on the condition that one must have signed the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty].”

He was referring to the NSG draft on ENR transfer rules which emerged from the November 2008 meeting of the nuclear cartel. Barring a few “bracketed” sentences, that draft has the informal approval of the NSG’s 45 members. And it is the unbracketed bulk of the text that the G8 has decided to implement from now on. That text is not public but diplomatic sources told The Hindu the proposed conditions for ENR transfers include NPT adherence. The U.S. also went on record last October to say getting NPT conditionality at the NSG was its top priority.
“Targeted at India”

Contrary to official spin that the new G8 ban (and the NSG ‘clean text’ it implements) is aimed at “rogue states” such as North Korea and Iran or “non-state actors”, Dr. Kakodkar was clear about the aim of the NPT rule: “Obviously, such a condition is directly targeted at India.”

He said this because the current NSG guidelines prohibit nuclear transfers of any kind, including ENR items, to countries outside the NPT. India secured a clean waiver from this guideline in September 2008. If the NSG now adopts a new guideline on ENR transfers specifying NPT membership, India would be the only country affected because Pakistan, Israel and North Korea — the other three outside the treaty — were already banned from receiving any nuclear transfers by the existing catch-all guideline.

India, the AEC chairman had warned, “needs to take concerted action to make sure the NSG does not take that decision. And if the NSG does take that decision, it would be a breach of trust and it would be contrary to the spirit which has been spelt out in the Bilateral Agreement with the U.S.”

The ENR issue was important, Dr. Kakodkar said, not because India was desperate about getting any technology in these areas. “The issue is how the world looks at us.” In particular, India does not want to be singled out as a target for an ENR technology ban, least of all because it has not signed the NPT.

Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, who spoke on the issue in Parliament last week when the ENR controversy erupted, said the G8’s decision could not be equated with the NSG. “We have received a clean waiver from 45 NSG countries… therefore we are not concerned with what resolution or position G8 takes in respect of a particular issue.” He added that individual countries had the right to decide whether to trade or not.

For India, however, what matters is the NSG waiver.

The NSG has not yet taken a final decision. But this still raises the question of why Washington is pushing rules at the NSG which amount to a “breach of trust” and which are “contrary to the spirit” of the Indo-U.S. agreement. And, of course, what “concerted action” New Delhi is planning to prevent its clean waiver from being formally diluted.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

K made that statement six months ago? And MMS/GoI is stating that it does not matter?

MMS intension is to sign NPT without a word.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by arun »

X Posted.

Excerpted, portion of interview of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dealing with the India-US Nuclear Agreement :
Interview With Rajdeep Sardesai of CNN-IBN

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
July 17, 2009

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, the cornerstone of such strategic relationship fashioned by the Bush Administration was the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. Now is the Obama Administration just as committed to taking that deal forward? Because – I ask this because the recent G-8 declaration regarding restrictions on transfer of atomic technology to non-NPT states has led some in India to believe that the Obama Administration is determined to get India to sign the NPT before we move forward.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, of course, we are committed to the civilian nuclear agreement that was signed during the Bush Administration. I hope to have some announcements about the continuing implementation of that agreement when I arrive in India. And I want to discuss with Indian leaders how we can work together for a common purpose of preventing the proliferation of nuclear material and weapons to states and non-state actors who pose a threat to India, to the United States, and to many countries around the world. So of course, there will be a very serious discussion that will begin with my visit, continue through our important strategic dialogue.
But I think we share a common desire to make sure that we don’t have irresponsible states, and especially non-state actors such as terrorist networks, that we both have to be very vigilant against acquiring weapons that we know should not be in their hands.

QUESTION: So are you saying that the clean waiver that India got from the Nuclear Suppliers Group last year will override all else, that you will therefore go ahead with these various nuclear agreements on your trip here, and therefore, the Obama Administration is not making signing the NPT as critical to furthering the strategic relationship?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, what I want to speak with your leaders about is what the possible new approaches to nonproliferation might be – global and regional regimes that would make sense for India, as well as other nations. The Obama Administration is, as are the other G-8 members, as you referenced in the agreement that they put out, very concerned about proliferation.

Now, the United States is very committed to our nuclear agreement with India. But I want to hear from the Indian leaders what they believe would be useful steps that we could mutually pursue that would avoid the concerns that I think we share about such material falling into the wrong hands.

US State Department
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

This is a heavy-duty arm twisting visit by Mrs. Clinton. Which is why she did not visit Pakistan.

Also:

xposting:
Philip J. Crowley, an assistant secretary of state who was specially designated by the administration to brief foreign correspondents here yesterday shortly before Hillary Clinton landed in Mumbai, said the end-use monitoring agreement “is part of the fulfilment of an important initiative that India and the US have signed in the area of nuclear co-operation”.
The US is using the EU agreement to get into Indian nuclear facilities. Simple.

This will override the IAEA mandate too!!!!

For sure.

This agreement is NOT to get to any F-18s or F-16 they sell to India. Or P-8 or C-130Js.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2206
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by shravan »

India, U.S. say agree nuclear sites, defence pact

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India and the United States on Monday said they had agreed on a defence pact that takes a big step toward the sale of sophisticated U.S. arms to India, and on which sites will be reserved for U.S. companies to build two nuclear power plants.

Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced both agreements at a joint press conference at the conclusion of Clinton's first trip to India as Washington's top diplomat.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2206
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by shravan »

X-Posted
India, US sign three agreements

NEW DELHI

India and the United States Monday reaffirmed their commitment to the bilateral civil nuclear deal, with India providing two sites for nuclear parks to be set up by American companies.
.
.
.

Clinton said that she "affirmed the Obama administration's strong commitment to completing all the remaining elements of our civil nuclear deal".

The statement would certainly clear India's apprehension that the statement by the G-8 in Italy that enrichment and nuclear reprocessing technology should not be passed on to non-signatories of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, would pose an obstacle in the implementation of the civil nuclear deal.

"we have just completed a civil nuclear deal. If it done through proper channels and safeguarded, then it is appropriate," she asserted.

Clinton also said that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had told her that sites for two nuclear parks by American companies have been "approved by the government".

"These parks will advance the aims of the US India civil nuclear agreement facilitating billions of dollars in US reactor exports and create jobs in both countries, as well as generate much needed energy for the Indian people," she said.

The US secretary hoped that India will soon implement a civil liability legislation to "enable our US companies to seize these important opportunities".

Earlier, US and India reached three agreements to help pave the way for increased parntership in defence, space and science and technology.

The agreements include one for end-user monitoring, which Clinton, said would lead to "greater defence cooperation". Besides, a technology safeguards agreement to help commercial partnerships in space and a science and technology deal were also finalised.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by arun »

Nuclear related excerpt from the joint press conference held by our External Affairs Minister and the US Secretary of State:
Joint Press Interaction by EAM and US Secretary of State

20/07/2009

Question: ……………….. And Madam Secretary, I wanted to ask you whether it is your Administration’s policy to prevent the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology at the Nuclear Suppliers Group. If so, do not you think that that would undermine the spirit of the nuclear deal?

US Secretary of State: As I understand your question, it was whether we oppose the transfer of processing and enrichment technology, well, clearly we do not. We have just completed a civil nuclear deal with India. So, if it is done within the appropriate channels and carefully safeguarded, as it is in the case of India, then that is appropriate. But we are very much opposed to unauthorized and inappropriate transfers that unfortunately can take place by certain countries or non-state actors doing so. So, there is a right way to do it and there is a very wrong way. We are seeking the advice and suggestions from India about how we can prevent the unauthorized and dangerous transfer of nuclear technology and material which poses a threat to the entire world.

MEA Press Release
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

India-U.S. dialogue to cover FMCT, U.N. reforms
It is also proposed to hold discussions on the Fissile Missile Cut-off Treaty (FMCT), increased cooperation in countering terrorism and reforms in multilateral institutions and groupings.

Talks on reprocessing arrangements will open this month and those on an investment treaty next month.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by putnanja »

Has Clinton really disowned U.S. policy on ENR sales to India?
...
When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked on Monday whether the U.S.-sponsored NSG move undermined the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal, her answer took everyone by surprise. “As I understand [the] question, it was whether we oppose the transfer of processing and enrichment technology, well, clearly we do not,” she said. “We have just completed a civil nuclear deal with India. So if it is done within the appropriate channels and carefully safeguarded, as it is in the case of India, then that is appropriate.”

“Ms. Clinton either misspoke or was badly advised about U.S. policy on the transfer of sensitive ENR technology,” ACA director Daryl Kimball told The Hindu. “The purpose and intent of the G-8 policy — and the pending November 2008 NSG proposal — is indeed to bar ENR technologies to states [like India] that have not signed the NPT …”

At an off-the-record interaction with Indian analysts here on Tuesday, a senior U.S. official initially said “India won’t be affected” by the draft NSG rules. But he added he was on “thin ground” and that Bob Einhorn, Ms. Clinton’s special adviser on non-proliferation, was better placed to clarify U.S. policy.

While Indian officials, who say they still have not seen the NSG draft, suspect Ms. Clinton misspoke, they believe India should hold her to the position. Indian analysts, however, see her remarks as aimed at buying time. “It would have been very inopportune for Clinton to rule out ENR transfers while in Delhi. That would have injected a note of controversy just as the PM was earmarking two sites for U.S.-supplied nuclear reactors to India,” said the former Foreign Secretary, Kanwal Sibal. “The U.S. will continue to obfuscate the issue so that the prospects of the U.S. nuclear industry in India are not hurt. The line would be that we are not ruling out anything and that after the reprocessing negotiations are completed, other issues will be taken up.”
...
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by putnanja »

India, U.S. N-deal sent to U.S. Congress
Washington: As the U.S. reaffirmed its commitment to complete all steps of the civil nuclear deal with India, U.S. President Barack Obama transmitted to the Congress his first report on the landmark accord but the contents were not made public.

The White House while referring to Mr. Obama’s action also said the India-U.S. nuclear deal sealed during the previous Bush Administration opened up new pathways for partnership between the two countries on non-proliferation issues globally.

...

“The report covers the period of October 4, 2008, to June 30, 2009. It provides an update on U.S.-India civil nuclear cooperation and developments that relate to India’s nuclear-related activities,” Mr. Obama wrote to the Chairman and ranking members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. Obama wrote to them: “Classified information associated with these issues has been provided in a separate classified annex.”
...
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

RaviBg wrote:Has Clinton really disowned U.S. policy on ENR sales to India?
The U.S. will continue to obfuscate the issue so that the prospects of the U.S. nuclear industry in India are not hurt. The line would be that we are not ruling out anything and that after the reprocessing negotiations are completed, other issues will be taken up.”
...
I am not sure if she misspoke. IF she did there can be no "reprocessing negotiations to be completed". OR, when these "negotiations" start the US will have to tell India that sign NPT and then ENR. Or, of course, the US can play the "obfuscate" game for a whole year. But then, India will not sign any deals - those two sites will remain empty. Unless of course the US goes back to the Indian PMO. And, the cycle restarts.

Even with Russia and France India will have to use Indian reproc techs to solve the intricate problem.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

My gut feel is that Mrs. Clinton made an executive decision to change the US policy - on the fly.

I am currently basing this on one known fact:

Jul 20, 2009 :: Morning Brief: Clinton finds progress and frustration in India

Although this news outlet reported this on Monday, the below quote IIRC was made either before she landed in India or on the day she landed in India:
The defense agreement -- which is expected to be signed later today -- is known as an "end-use monitoring" agreement and would allow to verify how weapons sold to India is being used, a precaution that could pave the way for new weapons sales by U.S. contractors. Both Boeing and Lockheed are competing to supply India with 126 fighter jets as it modernizes its arsenal. The deal has not yet been finalized, but a U.S. official said it would be a "definite slap in the face" if it is not completed.
So far it seems that the US did not get what they wanted - on this count. (Actually, I am now wondering what did the US get.)

But, my assumption is that she deviated from policies - she landed with - while in India.

Dunno. I could be totally wrong.
ppatil
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 41
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 16:35
Location: unkilstan

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by ppatil »

RaviBg wrote:Has Clinton really disowned U.S. policy on ENR sales to India?
...


At an off-the-record interaction with Indian analysts here on Tuesday, a senior U.S. official initially said “India won’t be affected” by the draft NSG rules. But he added he was on “thin ground” and that Bob Einhorn, Ms. Clinton’s special adviser on non-proliferation, was better placed to clarify U.S. policy.
Here is Bob Einhorn's view on the subject.
A semblance of that principle should be preserved by excluding from permissible cooperation with India equipment, materials, and technology related to enrichment, reprocessing, and other sensitive fuel-cycle facilities. This would permit India to acquire uranium, enriched fuel, and nuclear reactors, but would retain the ban on transfers of those items most closely related to a nuclear weapons program.
Hate to be wet blanket in all these threads, but it is most likely that Clinton misspoke. This article is from 2005.

Should the US Sell Nuclear Technology to India? – Part I

I will go back to my :(( now
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by NRao »

Well, Bob is an old player at this table.

Robert Einhorn
India

Einhorn believes the U.S. must push India to limit its stockpiling of nuclear weapons. To do so, he proposed asking India to agree to limit its production of weapons-grade material, thereby capping its stockpile (and possibly encouraging Pakistan to do the same). In exchange, America would sell civilian nuclear technology to the country. “The five original nuclear powers — U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China — have all stopped producing fissile material for weapons. If we are going to bring India into the club, it should do so as well,” he told the New York Times in October 2007.Friedman, Thomas L., “Letting India in the Club?” New York Times, March 8, 2006 (7)
MOST of yapping is about nuclear weapons.

ENR is NOT about stockpiling for nuclear weapons. IF a IAEA inspected (IIRC, Clinton said "proper channel") is not enough to stop stockpiling then what is?

Now, IF Bob wants India to stop making weapons-grade material (and that is fine if he holds that view), then he has to go after India's non-civilian nuclear program.

Bob had issues with J18 - there is a letter and he signed it too among others.

More l8r.
narmad
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by narmad »

Uranium sale: Oz to stand by its decision unless India signs NPT

Australia on Wednesday said it will stand by its decision of not allowing export of uranium to India unless New Delhi signs Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The previous Conservative party government in Australia had in principle agreed to export uranium but the Labour government has some strong views on the issue
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by vera_k »

End user pact brings India into non-proliferation mainstream

So it's more about non-proliferation than about any arms deals?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Philip »

The aim is as stated aeons ago is to castrate and emasculate India's strategic deterrent.Whatever means can be used to achieve it will be used.We will be bamboozled with offers of N-power and tech,defence deals,aking us a global power,defending us against China,blah,blah,but the end result will be to turn the Indian giant into a lilliput,a neo-imperialist slave to western/US interests.

Cowgirl Clinton's latest statements in Thailand about defending the Gulf against Iran if it goes nuclear,also carries a stement about NoKo assisting Burma with N-tech.For a long time,I've warned about Burma getting its hands on ballistic missiles and nukes from the Sino-Korean combine,which would add anothet major threat to India.That cowgirl Clinton has mentioned this in an ASEAN state,indicates that the US has some definite evdience for the same.
rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 404
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by rohiths »

Does the end user agreement refer only to US Arms?
How can it aid in "nuclear non-proliferation"? :eek: :eek:
I do not seem to get it. Can someone elaborate
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

There would be another EUVA for dual use nuclear items imported from the US. India signed one in 1984. It signed another in 2004. There have been US site visits since the first EUVA.
The TSA in space also has EUM provisions.

INFCIRC/66 governs IAEA inspections in currently safeguarded facilities in India.

The agreed safeguards agreement (INFCIRC/754) and the Additional Protocol will cover future inspections. The Cabinet has not yet ratified the AP. The AP has an annex where the list of safeguarded facilities will be declared.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Sanku »

Gerard wrote:INFCIRC/66 governs IAEA inspections in currently safeguarded facilities in India.

etc....
Sorry didn't understand, can you please explain a little more for folks like us? What is it in context of? How does it in?
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Actual nuclear inspections are done by the IAEA. This is governed by this agreement
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Docume ... rc66r1.pdf

With the nuke agreement/NSG waiver etc, India signed another agreement with the IAEA
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Docume ... irc754.pdf
but the actual specifics of inspections are governed by the Additional Protocol.

Note that this is not what is referred to as "The Additional Protocol" or the "Model Protocol". That is a far more stringent agreement, applicable to NNWS state parties to the NPT. It does not apply to India.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Export Controls: Post-Shipment Verification Provides Limited Assurance That Dual-Use Items Are Being Properly Used
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-357
We identified three key weaknesses in the PSV process that reduce the effectiveness of this important activity. First, PSVs do not confirm compliance with license conditions because U.S. officials frequently do not check license conditions, they often lack the technical training to assess compliance, and end users may not be aware of the license conditions by which they are to abide. Second, some countries of concern, most notably China, limit the U.S. government's access to facilities where dual-use items are shipped, making it difficult to conduct a PSV. Third, PSV results have only a limited impact on future licensing decisions. Companies receiving an unfavorable PSV may receive greater scrutiny in future license applications, but they can still receive an export license. In addition, according to Commerce officials, past PSV results play only a minor role in future Enforcement actions.
2004 article
http://www.hindu.com/2004/10/18/stories ... 281100.htm
India signed an End-Use Verification Agreement (EUVA) with the U.S. in 1984, allowing the U.S. Commerce Department officials to make site visits to verify if dual-use products are being used for the purpose stipulated. A U.S. export attaché was stationed here till 1989.
Indian officials dismiss the idea that an American inspector can pick-up the phone and say, `I'm arriving at the Solid State Physical Laboratory in 15 minutes.' "The Indian system doesn't allow such things," an official said. "There is no walk-in."
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Gerard »

More from the 2004 GAO report on the EUMA inspections
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04357.pdf
In India, for example, a computer shipped to a company in one city had been sent to the company's office in a different city. The agents were thus unable to inspect the entire shipment.
U.S. officials also frequently do not physically inspect the dual-use item subject to the PSV because they conduct the PSV at the company that imported the item rather than the company using the item.
Indian companies we visited were frequently confused about the term "conditions," associating it with the sale of the item as opposed to the conditions imposed by Commerce on the item's use.
India restricts Commerce from conducting PSVs to a limited extent. According to our review of trip reports from India, India denied Commerce access to some facilities and items for PSV checks through 2003; however, U.S. access to Indian facilities improved during 2003. In May 2003, the Indian government allowed PSVs and gave Commerce's special agents access to all the facilities they requested.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India Nuclear News And Discussion

Post by Sanku »

Gerard wrote:According to our review of trip reports from India, India denied Commerce access to some facilities and items for PSV checks through 2003; however, U.S. access to Indian facilities improved during 2003. In May 2003, the Indian government allowed PSVs and gave Commerce's special agents access to all the facilities they requested.
Wonder why? What was special about May 2003?

This perhaps?
He was sworn in as the prime minister on May 22, 2004,
Locked