Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
member_29429
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby member_29429 » 28 Jun 2016 14:57

By allowing NSG reluctants to look for a criteria for inclusion of non-NPT members, US has allowed them to take out their steam, this will allow US to look at what they think. In the end if a criteria evolves that allows India to get in but not pakistan that would be good for us, if no criteria gets evolved then US can say look we tried to evolve a criteria but no consensus on criteria could be achieved, so lets take india as only exception, either way demand on criteria/process will die it's natural death.
However we will have to gaurd against china trying to evolve a critera that allows both india and pakistan in or a critera that doesn't allows either of them (by harping on NPT signature), that will have to be blocked by US or it's client state.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby RajeshA » 28 Jun 2016 15:11

Trying to come to a consensus on criteria for admission of non-NPT candidates is utterly bulls**t and waste of time. It is not as if there is a huge line of non-NPT candidates waiting to get in, so it is an time-waste exercise.

The only thing that should matter is if the country has a good record on non-proliferation or not, and that is an issue of evaluation based on the country's specific history of acquiring and selling nuclear technologies. The historical record cannot be fitted into some set of criteria. Every country has a different history on this, where every country made different decisions. It will be very difficulty to search for commonality of ethical behavior, as the circumstances for all countries were different.

This idea should be shot down ASAP.

It is an idea to waste time, it is delay tactics.

The Pipsqueak countries should be made to listen to common sense. Their decisions to admit India would be political and they cannot hide behind some bureaucratic screen.

Bhurishrava
BRFite
Posts: 477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Bhurishrava » 28 Jun 2016 15:53

India's nationalists should learn how to behave themselves. Now that they wish their country could be a major power, they should know how major powers play their games.


Just reflects how far Indian govt`s foreign policy is from the nationalist perspective. Dunno of any other perspective that india should have.
IMHO, India should seek good relations with China. Mainly because the two countries are old civilisations and would do well to cooperate in a white christian dominated world.
But if China wants to ally with Pakistan, there is little scope left for India. Together with Hafiz Saeed, this NSG stupidity should not go unanswered. In fact, that is exactly how major powers play their games.

member_23692
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby member_23692 » 28 Jun 2016 17:08

This US Senator, Ed Markey from Massachusetts is one of the most virulently anti India persons in the US. He is obnoxious, hateful, I think a little off his rocker and irrationally against India on every issue, for no apparent reason.

Unlike, someone like me, who is also hugely critical of India on issues of corruption and self pride, etc, but I believe it is all rational and out of affection, not hate.

This Markey guy needs to be singled out and paid serious attention to, by Indian American political groups by financing his opponent/s and brought down electorally.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5933
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby habal » 28 Jun 2016 17:34

Bhurishrava wrote:IMHO, India should seek good relations with China. Mainly because the two countries are old civilisations and would do well to cooperate in a white christian dominated world.


In realpolitik, any semblance of reasonableness is considered as a weakness.

reasonableness is shown by straggling powers, or me too powers, or status quo weak countries, or aspiring countries.

the guys who have power do not show any reasonableness. So when Indians seek 'good relations' with China, they construe it as a position of weakness or genuflection. In China's opinion, why should they be reasonable with India, when they are stronger, have more industry and more military. They dominate all the immidiate variables so India must accomodate to the rising power and bow down before it and not seek reasonableness with China. They want us to walk into any discussion as the weaker party that panders to Chinese world view and Chinese interests.

You can see this even in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. Pakistanis go about being so reasonable on Torkham and Afghans shoot a few mortars into Pakistan as a response. It is now an exact copy of India's reasonableness with Pakistan and Pakistan's belligerance in response.

So my belief is whatever your position in international affairs, never appear to be reasonable.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 28 Jun 2016 17:38

Members' concerns delayed India's NSG chances: Rafael Grossi - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu
Ques: Where does India stand at the end of the Seoul plenary?

Amb. Grossi: The issue has been on the radar and since the last time we spoke, we did receive an application from India, which changed the situation. Before that, everything was hypothetical and everyone wondered what would happen if India or another non-NPT country applied. And then this happened, as you know India wasn’t the only country that applied. So it was clear we would have to address it. Now as chair I launched a special dialogue, which was aimed at trying to assess, which would be the point and issues that need to be addressed by the group. It was a substantive dialogue, done in preparation for the application. Then we received the applications, and I convened a meeting in Vienna to see what Participating Govts would like to say. That was inconclusive, because there was never a plan to take a decision. And then we came to Seoul. Of course I have to respect the confidentiality of the deliberations, but it is clear to all that [a decision on the membership issue was not possible to be taken in Seoul, but there was a decision that the discussions must continue in one way or the other. And hence the decision of the new Chair to ask me in my capacity as Outgoing Chair, because of the channels of communication I have been able to open on this issue with all the main players, to ask me to reach out, and in his words to reach out and see what is possible in the coming months.{China might claim it has not hear about this, but this is the truth from the horse's mouth. I think China is laying the foundations for a procedural hurdle on this initiative by the incoming & outgoing Chairs of the NSG.}

Ques: The Hindu had reported on your appointment as Facilitator to the Chair on this issue. Is your appointment only about India’s application, or about non-NPT members in general? Since Pakistan has applied as well.

Amb. Grossi: It is general. My mandate and exercise is wide, and I have to explore what is possible. At the plenary, many things were said, and I have to go back to each government about their stand, what they discussed and what they will agree too.

Ques: In a public comment the Chinese lead negotiator said that India had never been on the agenda, and that its membership was never discussed specifically….In fact in a statement today, Beijing has questioned your appointment for discussions as well, saying they had no knowledge of any “next steps” to be taken by the NSG, What is your comment?

Amb. Grossi: I will not comment on what the Chinese delegate or Participating government has said on my appointment. What I can say on the discussion is that there was a wide discussion, all elements were considered and Participating governments raised issues they wanted to raise.

Ques: And India was raised? I ask because the Chinese delegate made his public statement right at the NSG conference venue.

Amb. Grossi: Yes it was.

Ques: What about the next step? Can we expect a special plenary by the end of this year to discuss the non-NPT membership question?

Amb. Grossi: Well this is the prerogative of the current chair, but I suppose that there is an intention to continue the discussions we had, as recorded in the NSG statement. My work is part of that discussion. We need to have certain understanding, lest we run into a wall again. That is how I see my job now. I need to assist the Chair to get to any future discussion, soon or not so soon, with a clear understanding and a purpose. The group cannot meet again to discuss general points. What is important after this process, and the decision to bring someone to reach out to members is that the group feels a process is needed, and this is important. No matter how close or far from any individual country’s aspirations any country is, there was a widespread consensus in Seoul that we need to have a process with a serious possibility of making progress. Otherwise we will get into a circular discussion whereby what you will have is repeated frustration. We will have another plenary like this one where countries will get angry, some will say yes, some will say no, and we will reach an impasse.

Ques: You said, we don’t want to run into a wall. India issued a statement, saying One country persistently derailed the discussion on India’s membership. Can you tell us about that?

Amb. Grossi: All I can say on this is that it was clear that consensus was not possible at this time. In my role is to keep all doors open, and to talk and listen to all the members to see whether a consensus is possible. Because otherwise we will just have a repeated negative event, and this will be stressful not just for India, but for the NSG as an organization.

Ques: You said there is consensus for a process to be made for non-NPT members….Also will this process come after or before India’s membership? Was a sequence discussed by members?

Amb. Grossi: What comes now is a determination of all the options. There is a menu and a number of alternatives one could have on membership (for India). With criteria, without criteria, with a decision, or a referendum {This is very important} . I need to ascertain what are the possibilities and see what can be agreed on. So there is no single approach at present, but a lot of work that must be done, but at the moment, what the chair has said is “OK, faced with this situation, lets ask the man who has been handling this debate for two years to separate the bad from the good and the possible from the impossible.”

Ques: In para 3 of the NSG statement there is a commitment to the Non-proliferation Treaty as the cornerstone of the NSG. Does that signify that India may have to be prepared to sign the NPT at some point? How does one get around this?

Amb. Grossi: I think no one can dictate to India what it should do on international agreements. At the same time, the NPT is very important to NSG members. So a reiteration of the NPT point in the public statement is relevant and important. Because it tells us that whatever decision we arrive at would not run counter to the NPT’s mission principles and objectives are. Our exercise is to find what the NSG needs in order to be in a position to accept an application.

Ques: So you’re saying the NSG could accept an application from a non-NPT country like India? Has that decision been taken?

Amb. Grossi: That’s the discussion we are going to have now. Can we accept it or not, and if so how? We came to Seoul thinking that we could take a decision (on India’s membership application) there and then. Some others said that was possible, but there were many questions that had to be answered. But some others felt that there must be a prior and thorough discussion before we decide.

Ques: I know you are bound by confidentiality agreements, but India has said it is disappointed by the outcome. Is there reason to hope?

Amb. Grossi: What I can say is that there are differences in the NSG. Nothing is impossible; in 2008 people would have said the exemption for trade with India was impossible. But then it was done. Certain adaptations could be made. I’m not saying this is the case again. But perhaps it is. The fact that the group has decided to continue the discussions and appoint somebody, that is me, to do this job of discussing possibilities is significant. Otherwise we could have just dropped the ball, called the discussion off, said simply there is no consensus and we all go home. Then we would prepare for another discussion maybe only after a year. But that was not the case, so this is not insignificant.

Ques: So you say it is a positive step for India. In fact a US official was quoted saying India could become a member by the year-end. Is that possible?

Amb. Grossi: All I can say is I will not rule out anything. I will not comment on any country no matter which side they are. There is a spectrum, and the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum which I need to find. Clearly it is very important that the group is saying lets work on this, not saying this is intractable, let's give up. So I need to work on this and I count on everyone’s support.

Ques: Was there a discussion of any sort on Pakistan’s membership?

Amb. Grossi: There was a wide discussion on all issues on the table and all the applications on the table.

Ques: What does India need to do in the next few months?

Amb. Grossi: That is precisely what I need to find out. I will speak to all governments go around with my notebook to find what is acceptable, and then I don’t go back to India, I would go back to the group and then the group will decide how to continue.

Ques: And do you expect to conclude your assignment in the next few months? Reports have spoken of another special plenary in December or thereabouts..

Amb. Grossi: No there is no fixed date for that. There is a lot of speculation about it. There was an idea at the session to fix date, but then the chair decided to ask me to reach out and then come back to the group with conclusions and recommendations. A date and a meeting are easy to fix. What is difficult is to bring content to that meeting, and bring something to the table.

Ques: Finally, if I could ask, the NSG session was held a few days after North Korea’s missile test, and that reflected in the statement of the hosts at the beginning of the session. How much is the concern of the group that if one membership is accepted, than that of other non-NPT members must be accepted as well.

Amb. Grossi: Obviously one has to accept that if we take a non-NPT country, others will claim that right. Well this goes to the heart of the dilemma’ the NSG’s stand on non-proliferation: what are the rules on NPT and how you apply them. And of course it brings some concern.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby RajeshA » 28 Jun 2016 18:19

habal wrote:
Bhurishrava wrote:IMHO, India should seek good relations with China. Mainly because the two countries are old civilisations and would do well to cooperate in a white christian dominated world

You can see this even in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. Pakistanis go about being so reasonable on Torkham and Afghans shoot a few mortars into Pakistan as a response. It is now an exact copy of India's reasonableness with Pakistan and Pakistan's belligerance in response.

So my belief is whatever your position in international affairs, never appear to be reasonable.


That is sound advice!

I say, Indians should stop buying Chinese products completely, and if China squeaks and protests, India should tell China to go and win Indian hearts and minds, and even as it tries to improve its image, especially through concrete action, we increase the propaganda against China, and ask them to do more.

Not only that, Indians the world over, wherever they be in a position of influence should do what they can to stop buying Chinese goods and increase awareness against it using lack of democracy, human rights and environmental consciousness.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Vipul » 28 Jun 2016 18:21

After MTCR, We should quickly become members of Australia Group (Controls for dual-use chemical and biological manufacturing facilities and equipment) and Wassenaar Arrangement (Controls for conventional arms and dual-use Goods and Technologies).
China is not a member of either. They cant do much now if India becomes member of the other 2 groups and get the benefits it entails.

The Chinese rag which published the anti-india piece was in frustration of India now becoming a MTCR member and getting access to high technology items while also effectively holding the veto on china's entry. Chinese frustration and hence their rants will similarly increase when India becomes member of the other two groups.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 28 Jun 2016 18:30

There has been a ban on dual-use items to China for many years now and Russia is their only source.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10470
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gagan » 28 Jun 2016 18:49

The NSG waiver is a one way street right? India can only import civilian nuclear related stuff and that too within a restricted band of allowed materials.
Full membership means India can export too, without restrictions, correct? Unfettered trade.

Until a few years ago, India had more civilian nuclear reactors than China.

If Indian industry is set free, and starts to build mega capacity, India will emerge as a big powerhouse of european like quality, with Indian prices of engineering equipment. This is what China fears - The emergence of a Giant that will be as big as them.
The US is hellbent on undermining China and stopping its poisonous rise.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Vipul » 28 Jun 2016 18:54

SSridhar wrote:There has been a ban on dual-use items to China for many years now and Russia is their only source.


True. The chinese khujli and state of continuous heartburn is because India will now get access to all high-tech and dual use technologies. It wants everything only for itself and does not want a formidable competitor to emerge.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 28 Jun 2016 18:56

Gagan, no one can stop us from exporting our indigenous technologies or products, NSG or no NSG. India can export today if it wants.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 28 Jun 2016 19:21

China wants mutually acceptable solution to issues with India - PTI

On India getting the membership of Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) ahead of China, Hong [Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei] said, "we have noted that some of the multilateral export control regimes have changed in one way or another. With that in mind, China is assessing the effectiveness of the MTCR in safeguarding the international non-proliferation regime."


China is conveying the message that India is a proliferation threat !

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10470
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gagan » 28 Jun 2016 20:09

They are seeking an excuse to Proliferate even more.
I guess more IRBMs for KSA.
Improve guidance and build quality for North Korea, Pakistan and Iran

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10470
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gagan » 28 Jun 2016 20:15

Sridhar-ji
I was thinking more along the lines of 'Make in India' type thing once an NSG waiver is received.

There is a trade angle to the seeking of MTCR, NSG etc, apart from the geopolitical aspect.

Geopolitically, they are all a run up to the holy grail - UNSC permanent member with a veto power, third largest economy and military power status.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10470
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gagan » 28 Jun 2016 20:16

China is very very insecure! China ki REALLY jal rahi hai, these days !!! :mrgreen:

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby RajeshA » 28 Jun 2016 20:45

Gagan wrote:Geopolitically, they are all a run up to the holy grail - UNSC permanent member with a veto power, third largest economy and military power status.


That is something India may get as soon as the next 2-3 years, as Scotland leaves UK.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4888
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby ShauryaT » 28 Jun 2016 20:45

SSridhar wrote:There has been a ban on dual-use items to China for many years now and Russia is their only source.
Correct with Ukraine being another one, but that was part of the Russian domain. With the UK out of the EU, need to watch if they will resume mil tech cooperation with China again. As the geo-political equations change, watch for the UK to make appropriate adjustments as they have done in the banking realm - in opposition to the wishes of the US.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Vipul » 28 Jun 2016 20:50

Gagan wrote:China is very very insecure! China ki REALLY jal rahi hai, these days !!! :mrgreen:


Willy nilly China exposed its standing in the comity of nations.When it comes to making a choice, the combination of US + its allies + India can pretty much leave it alone on all strategic and economic matters.

Chinese frustration is also on realizing the impending Indian role of a Kingmaker in the future US v/s China scenario. Whoever India sides with will prevail.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15608
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby chetak » 28 Jun 2016 21:04

Vipul wrote:After MTCR, We should quickly become members of Australia Group (Controls for dual-use chemical and biological manufacturing facilities and equipment) and Wassenaar Arrangement (Controls for conventional arms and dual-use Goods and Technologies).
China is not a member of either. They cant do much now if India becomes member of the other 2 groups and get the benefits it entails.

The Chinese rag which published the anti-india piece was in frustration of India now becoming a MTCR member and getting access to high technology items while also effectively holding the veto on china's entry. Chinese frustration and hence their rants will similarly increase when India becomes member of the other two groups.


The chinese rag speaks for The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China with plausible deniability.

Don't ever mistake it for anything else.

The press is far too tightly controlled in china for any burka butt like antics and recalcitrant editors are strung together and shot with a single bullet.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3518
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby sanjaykumar » 28 Jun 2016 21:22

^That is evident. Under the western suits, the Chinese are, thankfully, still Mao's little peasants.

member_29328
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby member_29328 » 28 Jun 2016 22:51

rsangram wrote:This US Senator, Ed Markey from Massachusetts....
This Markey guy needs to be singled out and paid serious attention to, by Indian American political groups by financing his opponent/s and brought down electorally.

He is corrupt too.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Ed-Mar ... id/560369/
Democratic Sen. Ed Markey Accused of Using Office to Manipulate Stock
Veteran Democrat Ed Markey, who replaced Secretary of State John Kerry last year as the junior senator from Massachusetts, is being accused of using his position to manipulate stock.....
Gautam

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9088
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby arun » 21 Aug 2016 14:18

X Posted from the “Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)” thread.

I hope that this PR Chinese foot dragging on the issue of India’s membership of the NSG does not stay our hand if PR China’s flouting of the South China Sea arbitral award comes up at the early September G20 summit at Hangzhou, :

Question: Foreign Minister of China was here. NSG issue was raised during the meeting. Does India feel that it has made any progress in bringing China around to its view on this issue?

Official Spokesperson, Shri Vikas Swarup: As I had already mentioned after the meeting that H.E. Mr. Wang Yi had with the External Affairs Minister, the NSG issue was discussed in considerable detail by the two sides.

We once again underlined the importance that we attach to India’s membership in light of our clean energy requirements which were reinforced through the INDC’s in COP21. The Chinese side explained their perspective, but at the end both sides agreed that we must continue discussions so that we can narrow down the areas of divergence. And in this context, the head of Disarmament Affairs of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who was their lead negotiator in Seoul at the time of the NSG Plenary, would be visiting India to meet our Joint Secretary (Disarmament and International Security Affairs) Mr. Amandeep Gill. And we look forward to those discussions and to reaching better understanding with China on this very important issue.


From here:

Transcript of Weekly Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (August 18, 2016)

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 21 Aug 2016 17:12

India, China 'spar' over NSG seat at BRICS meet - ToI
Instead of focusing on sustainable development goals (SDGs), the two-day summit of women parliamentarians from BRICS nations, which began in the city [Jaipur] on Saturday, witnessed a barely concealed war of words between India and China over membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), and digressed into subjects such as combating global terrorism.

The Indian delegates reiterated the country's demand for membership in the elite NSG as China pressed for a broader role in international forums. The strained relationship between the two nations, after China blocked India's entry into NSG recently, was on display at the meeting held at Vidhan Sabha.


During her address on 'Perspectives on implementation of SDGs,' Wen Ma, the head of Chinese delegation and chairperson of the International Judicial Affairs Committee, argued for China's bigger role in international affairs, proportionate to the country's clout in the world.

Her remarks didn't go down well with the Indian side which said that the nation had enough clout and deserved NSG membership.


The two nations have been at loggerheads since India failed to book a seat in NSG. The summit meant to discuss the role of women parliamentarians in achieving SDGs also deviated into discussions on terrorism. A representative from Brazil raised the issue and said that BRICS should work towards countering terrorism. I think it's a brilliant idea and we should all work together," said K Kavitha, MP from Telangana.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 21 Aug 2016 17:41

While our services were down, the following article appeared.

NSG membership: The writing on the great wall - Shyam Saran, The Hindu
The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) meeting in Seoul last week ended with no decision on India’s application to join the group as a full member. This outcome was widely expected ever since China took a public stand against a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) being granted membership, since it felt this would undermine the international non-proliferation regime. It elaborated this position further by suggesting that the NSG thoroughly discuss the subject of membership of non-NPT states so that a set of objective criteria could be agreed upon and that no application was treated as an exceptional case.

Having taken this stance, China tried to prevent any formal discussion on India’s application for membership, saying that the issue of agreed criteria for admitting non-NPT members had to be discussed and agreed upon first. When Chinese objections were overcome and a discussion on India’s application was held eventually, this did not materially change the situation since China and a few other members continued to oppose a decision on the same procedural grounds.

The NSG outcome document is in line with Chinese insistence that what should remain on the agenda is the basis on which non-NPT countries could be considered for membership without undermining the NPT as a cornerstone of the international non-proliferation regime. Therefore, India’s entry into the NSG as a unique and exceptional case may be extremely difficult even if a determined lobbying effort is launched in the coming weeks and months. The only practical possibility would be for India and Pakistan to be admitted together, which China has indicated it would be willing to support. The problem is that most NSG members will have to hold their noses to swallow and digest the Pakistani application, even if India has no objection. China has ensured that India and Pakistan are now joined at the hip as far as entry into the NSG is concerned.

Working around China

In 2008, India was able to get a waiver from the NSG as an exceptional case allowing it to engage in international commerce in civilian nuclear technology and equipment even though, as a nuclear weapon state, it did not have all its nuclear facilities under international safeguards as required by the group. China was opposed to the waiver but did not take a public stand on it. It encouraged countries like Ireland, New Zealand, Austria and Switzerland to oppose a consensus on the waiver for India, arguing that it would seriously undermine the NPT, that it would upset the nuclear balance in South Asia and trigger a nuclear arms race, and that a criteria-based rather than a country-specific approach should be adopted in order to avoid the charge of discriminatory practice. This was conveyed to me by the then New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark when I called on her to solicit her country’s support at the NSG.

However, whenever the issue was raised with the Chinese in meetings between our top leaders or senior officials, the response was a standard mantra: China welcomes the opportunity to promote civil nuclear cooperation with India, but would not want to undermine in any way the international non-proliferation regime. This was ambiguous enough to give China tactical flexibility at the NSG. In light of this ambiguous public posture, our assessment was that if a broad consensus could be built on granting India a waiver, China would not be the one country to raise its hand and oppose the decision. {Such a naivety comes because we have not understood that China considers us as an enemy, as a competitor who needs to be shackled and acts accordingly. How did we come to a conclusion that China wouldn't stand in our way if a consensus emerges when China had already done so in 2008 and no less than the PM of New Zealanad had said so!! I don't know what to make of our diplomats.} And this is precisely what happened. On the morning of September 6, 2008, even before the last holdout countries like Ireland, New Zealand and Austria had formally dropped their opposition, China conveyed a message to the Indian delegation that it had decided to support the draft waiver decision.

Future-proofing the waiver

Eight years later the geopolitical backdrop against which the NSG meeting took place in Seoul has changed substantially and made it more difficult for India to obtain what should have been a very simple, straightforward decision on membership. The waiver in 2008 had involved very difficult and complex negotiations on the wording of the decision reconciling the different requirements posed by certain key member countries. India’s current application for membership could have been approved by a simple reference to the waiver decision itself which spells out the basis on which it was granted. This may have been the reason for China to take a public stand opposing India’s membership since there was no scope to attach additional requirements beyond those contained in the waiver.

It is only if there is a fresh discussion on so-called “criteria” applicable to all non-NPT applicants that the criteria on the basis of which India has already received a waiver could be reopened. This is a slippery road and India should be careful that in subsequent deliberations the NSG does not revisit the terms and conditions of the India-specific waiver. In case such a threat is perceived, it is better to preserve the substantive gains already obtained through the waiver rather than to push hard for membership. The waiver has allowed India to engage in civil nuclear commerce with a number of countries. It has entered into long-term nuclear fuel supply agreements with a number of supplier countries and is negotiating the supply of advanced nuclear reactors with Russia, France and the U.S. Membership of the NSG would not make a substantive difference except that it would make the conditions for international civil nuclear commerce and cooperation more predictable in the long run and also ensure that in any future amendments to NSG guidelines India is an active participant.

A more confident China’s strategy

Why has China taken a more public and upfront position opposing India’s membership in the NSG? Clearly China today is a more confident and assertive power than in 2008. It may even consider being the last man standing as a demonstration of its newfound great power status rather than a sign of international isolation. Trying to isolate or embarrass China on this count may therefore be counterproductive. Second, there is a clear enhancement of China’s commitment to Pakistan, not only as its traditional proxy against India but also because it has been assigned a key role in Xi Jinping’s ambitious One Belt, One Road project. Third, it is to relegate India to the minor league by clubbing it together with Pakistan, thereby dismissing the de-hyphenation which the U.S. has projected at least rhetorically. This also seeks to reject the India-China hyphenation which U.S. strategy appears to promote. China considers itself as being in the same league as the U.S. {Even if it is not in the US league, we are definitely not in China league either; but, we are the only credible challengers to Chinese hegemony}

The NSG drama has brought to the surface trends which have been incipient so far but whose implications go beyond the immediate issue of NSG membership and reflect the ongoing changes in the geopolitical landscape. We should take advantage of the NSG experience to carefully assess these changes, their impact on India and fashion an appropriate response strategy. That is more important than the pursuit of NSG membership.

Shyam Saran is a former Foreign Secretary. He is currently Chairman, Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), and Senior Fellow, Centre for Policy Research.


Shyam Saran seems to have given up the NSG hopes and wants to look beyond that.

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby malushahi » 28 Aug 2016 05:49

SSridhar wrote:Shyam Saran seems to have given up the NSG hopes and wants to look beyond that.

he was the point man on 123 and climate change (both major legacy issues), and should know the sub-surface currents well, but which gallery is he serenading here?

is it truly a lost cause? the ct in me says he has rolled a loaded dice on this one.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 29 Aug 2016 12:01

U.S. to help with NSG entry - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu
The U.S. will push for India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group when the issue is taken up later this year, at the “highest levels”, U.S. Ambassador to India Richard Verma has said.

In comments exclusively to The Hindu on Sunday, ahead of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s arrival in Delhi, which coincides with Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar’s visit to Washington on Monday, Mr. Verma said, “We were disappointed in [the NSG decision in June 2016], but will continue to work constructively with India and all NSG members on India’s accession in the months ahead.”

“We have pushed strongly on this issue with NSG members at the highest levels of our government,” he added.

The Obama administration will hold its last round of the Strategic and Commercial Dialogue (S&CD) with India on Tuesday, when Mr. Kerry and U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker will meet their counterparts Sushma Swaraj and Nirmala Sitharaman in Delhi.

Officials on both sides confirmed to The Hindu that the NSG membership issue will be discussed, including the hope within the government that the U.S. will take up India’s case at the “highest levels”, i.e. between President Obama and President Xi, possibly during their upcoming meeting at G-20 next week. In 2008, former President George Bush’s phone call to former Chinese President Hu Jintao swung a waiver from the NSG in India’s favour.

Responding to a question from The Hindu on whether the U.S. hadn’t done the “heavy lifting” required, Mr. Verma rejected the concerns, saying, “I can reassure you we will continue high-level engagement in support of India’s membership.”

Diplomatic efforts needed


Other former U.S. officials have also hinted that Indian diplomacy, not Mr. Obama’s intervention was needed to bring a shift in China’s stand, that India sign the Non proliferation treaty to join the NSG.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 29 Aug 2016 12:07

From Business Line,
United Nations General Assembly president-elect Ambassador Peter Thomson will hold talks on UNSC reforms with Indian leadership. He is expected to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi and External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj. Besides reforms, sustainable development goals will figure high on the agenda.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 04 Sep 2016 06:53

India, Vietnam call for UN reform, UNSC expansion - PTI
India and Vietnam today called for a reform of the UN and an expansion of the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership, with enhanced representation from developing countries.

The two nations stressed on the need for reform of the UN Security Council in a joint statement issued after Prime Minister Narendra Modi held wide-ranging talks with his Vietnamese counterpart Nguyen Xuan Phuc here.

“Both Vietnam and India stressed the need for reform of the United Nations and expansion of the UN Security Council in both the permanent and the non-permanent categories of membership, with enhanced representation from developing countries,” the joint statement said.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed gratitude for Vietnam’s consistent support to India’s candidature for permanent membership of a reformed and expanded UNSC.

“The Prime Ministers reaffirmed support for each other’s candidature for non-permanent membership of the UNSC, Vietnam for the term 2020-21 and India for the term 2021-22.
Both sides expressed satisfaction at the conclusion of the Programme of Cooperation in UN Peacekeeping Matters,” the statement said.

The Indian side expressed its commitment to capacity building and training to enable Vietnam’s participation in UN peacekeeping operations, it said.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 04 Sep 2016 08:14

India non-committal on ratifying it [Paris Climate Deal] by year-end - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

We should not come under pressure just because the US & China have signed it yesterday. We should also link it up with our admisison to NSG. We mentioned it in passing after the Seoul Plenary.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 817
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gyan » 04 Sep 2016 10:26

What is happening on the front of Australia Group and Wassenaar Group? Have we even applied?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 04 Sep 2016 13:31

Gyan, it is my understanding that there are two issues in the membership of the AG. One, Indian membership has to be co-sponsored by another member country (the incumbent GotUS should do it shortly, Insha Allah) and a few chemical items (over & above those banned by the Chemical Weapons' Convention, CWC, of which India is a member) are yet to be brought under Indian control regime as the AG requires.

The Wassenaar Arrangement may require NSG first.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 817
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Gyan » 04 Sep 2016 14:10

Thanx for the info SS.

Amoghvarsha
BRFite
Posts: 215
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 12:56

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Amoghvarsha » 05 Sep 2016 02:14

SSridhar wrote:Gyan, it is my understanding that there are two issues in the membership of the AG. One, Indian membership has to be co-sponsored by another member country (the incumbent GotUS should do it shortly, Insha Allah) and a few chemical items (over & above those banned by the Chemical Weapons' Convention, CWC, of which India is a member) are yet to be brought under Indian control regime as the AG requires.

The Wassenaar Arrangement may require NSG first.


Sridhar Ji

Noob question

Why Wassenar Group requires NSG membership?AFAIK they say that controls should be in accordance with different non proliferation treaties,but NSG membership isnt a mandatory requirement.And at the end of the day if US pushes our case,differences will be ironed out.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4956
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby RoyG » 05 Sep 2016 02:20

What do we get from NSG membership that we don't get from the waiver?

Seems to me that we are trying to join these international groups to bolster our case for UNSC membership.

We have technology, human resources, energy, to act outside these groups and do perfectly fine otherwise.

Amoghvarsha
BRFite
Posts: 215
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 12:56

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Amoghvarsha » 05 Sep 2016 03:51

^^^^We dont have a waiver for re processing i believe.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4956
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby RoyG » 05 Sep 2016 04:06

Ras Al Ghul wrote:^^^^We dont have a waiver for re processing i believe.


W/o signing the CTBT or NPT, we won't get it.

There is no way that they are going to just hand us the technology w/o some sort of assurance that we wont test in the future.

This Kerry is full of sh*t.

One thing I don't understand from all this is, why didn't we just do 10-20 tests over a span of 5 years after 1998. We were being sanctioned anyway. We could have easily just signed the dotted lines on CTBT and NPT and eventually joined NSG as a permanent member as a full fledged NWS. What is all this merry go round nonsense that we are engaged in?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 05 Sep 2016 06:39

Ras Al Ghul wrote:
SSridhar wrote:The Wassenaar Arrangement may require NSG first.

Why Wassenar Group requires NSG membership?AFAIK they say that controls should be in accordance with different non proliferation treaties,but NSG membership isnt a mandatory requirement.And at the end of the day if US pushes our case,differences will be ironed out.

I know. That was why my answer was more nuanced than simply saying NSG was mandatory for WA. Looking at the list of countries that are in NSG & WA, some of whom had raised some objections and stuck to them against us for NSG in two plenaries (Geneva & Seoul) in spite of the US pushing, it is my belief that there may be some resistance in WA also.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4966
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby Viv S » 05 Sep 2016 06:40

RoyG wrote:What do we get from NSG membership that we don't get from the waiver?

Nothing at all. The significance is purely symbolic.

With one exception - a veto vote in NSG affairs including granting an India-type exception to Pakistan. Though for the near future such a thing isn't possible, keep in mind memories of the AQ Khan Network will eventually fade while China's clout in the world will continue to grow.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tracking India's Admission into International Groups

Postby SSridhar » 05 Sep 2016 06:50

RoyG wrote:What do we get from NSG membership that we don't get from the waiver?


We have discussed that here before. See this, for example.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anindya and 19 guests