India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1506
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Aug 2008 04:15

Rangudu wrote:So many what ifs but so few answers. One thing is clear, no one has changed his/her views on this thread since July 18, 2005. Every one is projecting his/her pet theories, conspiracy or otherwise in the name of discussing the nuclear deal.


Sorry, can't let you paint everyone with the same brush - if you don't include yourself into it.

What expecting jingos to first have a mind and second change it when presented with evidence!
:P

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 956
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sivab » 25 Aug 2008 04:16

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1185515
Let deal fail, but India won’t trade off national interest
Seema Guha

NEW DELHI: As US and Indian officials sit down to rework the wording of a fresh waiver draft for the September meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, highly-placed sources in the government involved in the nuclear deal have categorically ruled out accepting major changes in the new document.

Taking a tough stand, New Delhi has held out the ultimate threat of walking away from the landmark agreement rather than accept strings attached to the NSG waiver. Asked how much ground can be yielded without compromising India’s national interest, sources said there was very little ground to manouevre.

“Yes, we are willing to go along with cosmetic changes, alteration in wording but nothing more. We have made this clear to all our friends,”’ a senior official said on condition of anonymity on Sunday.

He made it clear that there will be no commitment on testing beyond what has been the official position of unilateral moratorium on future nuclear tests. Yes, if the draft wants to put on record India’s commitment to non-proliferation, we have no objections as no one can question our impeccable record on that score, he added.

The official said even a periodic review by the NSG of India’s non-proliferation stand was unacceptable. “A periodic review brings with it several problems. No country will be willing to invest billions of dollars for the next fifty years or so, with a damcolese sword hanging on its head. A project may have to be stopped half way through if even one member of the NSG suddenly decides that India has not fulfilled its non-proliferation commitment. We can’t let down the country’s future by agreeing to such terms,” an official said.

Strategic analyst K Subrahmanyam, a staunch supporter of the Indo-US nuclear deal is not perturbed over the delayed decision by the NSG. “Only those who do not know how the system works believed that the waiver would be obtained in the first meeting. The important meeting is the one ahead and I am confident India will get what it is looking for,” he said. 8)

He believes the ball is now in the US court. It is for Washington to get the language right, one acceptable to India as well as the non proliferation group within the NSG. Subrahmanyam feels that the US, Russia, France, Japan and all countries which are interested in doing multi-billion dollars worth of business with India, will go out on a limb to convince the smaller countries.
:roll:

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Aug 2008 04:27

narayanan wrote:This is the cold reality of being weaker in conventional and economic might, and all the megaton bums and IRBMs in the world won't change that.

Look at the Indian response to 61 years of Pakis killing our citizens daily - and compare that to what China would have done to a neighbor who tried that for even a day. There is absolutely no deterrence, until India shows some smarts.
Very ironic that in the same sentence, you do state that India's nukes shall not deter China, but fail to mention that TSP's nukes have deterred India's superior conventional response capabilities.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Aug 2008 04:30

Gerard wrote:
Prasad said even if subtle changes acceptable to all the NSG members and to India were introduced in the waiver document through “language fixing”, the non-proliferation intent would remain. “The intent is to get India to give up the testing option,” he said.


Once sales are not conditional, this intent is irrelevant.
Interesting Gerard. Is any NSG member of the view, that the current draft does not have conditions?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Aug 2008 04:36

Rangudu wrote:
Gerard wrote:
Iyengar said Delhi should have pursued civilian nuclear trade through bilateral pacts that would have allowed India to negotiate with each nuclear supplier.


And the NSG full scope rule would magically disappear during this bilateral negotiation?


Exactly. If some CPIM Chinese puppet had said this at least we could chalk it up to ignorance but when people like PKI say it one has to wonder who they are trying to fool.
The doors could have been opened through non-NSG members first. Who knows, what the geo-political situation would be in another 5-10 years? We should not have looked at nuclear energy as the linchpin till the third stage was ready. Also, the ability to virtually double our reserves is no joke. It provides ample options.

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 25 Aug 2008 05:01

ShauryaT wrote:The doors could have been opened through non-NSG members first. Who knows, what the geo-political situation would be in another 5-10 years? We should not have looked at nuclear energy as the linchpin till the third stage was ready. Also, the ability to virtually double our reserves is no joke. It provides ample options.

Exactly.

1. Full scope safeguards are not a requirement if Natural Uranium is imported from non-NSG countries such as Namibia, Niger, Uzbekistan or the 100+ other countries which are not members of this 45-nation NSG cartel.

2. Enriched Uranium is not needed to feed indigenous PHWRs, thereby obviating the need for expanding enrichment capacity.

3. Capital costs of indigenous 540 MW PHWRs (Tarapur 3 & 4) at $1200/KWe see here Kakodkar's statement on Slide 14 compares favourably with all the import options.

Would anyone like to pick holes in the "non-NSG Natural Uranium + indigenous 700 MW PHWRs" option as an alternative to this unending rigmarole of the last 3 years which is fast becoming an unedifying spectacle?

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Gerard » 25 Aug 2008 05:08

ShauryaT wrote:Interesting Gerard. Is any NSG member of the view, that the current draft does not have conditions?


Under the draft we have seen, are sales conditional on testing, no ENR etc?

Even the previous Russian reactor sales were conditional on an INFCIRC66 agreement.
The question is, what is acceptable and what is not.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54019
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 25 Aug 2008 05:09

OK. Its not about the fuel. Its about trying to square the NPA laws and India's position in the world. The GOI tried very hard and swallowed a lot of manure to make this happen. But its not happening as the turds who broke their own rules want to impose their will on India. The US has not tried hard enough despite the rope that India gave.
Again I say India cant make any more concessions to the waiver despite what people see as evaporating opportunities.
All the give has been given already. There is no more give.

In fairness I repeat what I said before. Only MMS would have been able to pull it off. It would be very difficult for any other politician to have pulled it off. Not ABV, not LKA, not Rahul Gandhi and least of all Karat.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Rangudu » 25 Aug 2008 05:28

^^ That I agree with totally.

No more concessions esp on NSG draft. If the US does not push hard next time, the biggest loser will be the US. India has won already and need to make any more concessions.

I'll be okay with some wording change, maybe change from active to passive voice or using more adjectives but no Hyde like conditions in the NSG waiver, period.

There will be a need for a new draft just so that the NPAs can save face a little bit but nothing significant must change or India says no thank you.

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 25 Aug 2008 05:28

RajeshA wrote:A Live Example of Unkil trying to manipulate Indian Media and Indian Media quitely acquiescing.

A small setback at NSG: Economic Times Bureau

But while we can well demand a “clean exemption”, and oppose conditionalities, it does makes sense to be reasonably flexible. The Indo-US nuclear deal after all does have built-in mechanisms for such practicalities.

The 123 Agreement, for example, requires further legislative changes prior to key technology transfers and the like. If in its next meet the NSG remains chary of granting India carte blanche approval on sensitive issues like trade in enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) technology and equipment, a measure of flexibility on our part, without compromising our core concerns, may not be out of place.

The agreement with the NSG can leave waiver requirements for ENR technology to a later date. The immediate task at hand is to get an NSG waiver, albeit conditional, so that the nuclear deal gets legislative okay in the US Congress without further delay. The Bush administration, after all, has only a few months in office. So speed is of essence.

Also, ENR may not have operational significance in the here and now. Of course, once the nuclear deal has legal sanctity, and India resumes nuclear trade with the international community after a gap of over 34 years, the environment would be so much more conducive for greater give and take.


As if the Economic Times was really in the loop, what the core restriction will be. Sacrifice of full civilian nuclear cooperation (ENR Technology) is what the haggling would be. If US can't sell additional conditions to the Indian electorate, than how about additional restrictions.

Economic Times is the traitor.

Here is a suggestion:

1. US wants ENR technology to be taken off the table. India says fine, in that case we can take out 2d (below) from the waiver.
2d. Refraining from transferring enrichment and reprocessing technology to states that do not already possess these.

2. India proposes some 'cosmetic' changes to the draft of its own, such as:
2f. Harmonizing its export control lists with those of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and [committing to - delete] adhering[ence] to current NSG guidelines

2g. Continuing its unilateral voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests, and declaring its readiness to work with others towards conclusion of a multilateral, non-discriminatory, and verifiable Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.

This game has been played for too long around the Indian goal area. It needs to be taken into the opposing team's goal area.

SureshP
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby SureshP » 25 Aug 2008 05:29

Taking the knights
Print Email
Posted online: Monday, August 25, 2008 at 2353 hrs Print Email
India needs to show some toughness to smaller NSG nations now

The Indian Express: New Delhi need not panic, following the inconclusive discussion at the Nuclear Suppliers Group last week on exempting India from the current international rules on atomic commerce. Having taken a little longer than three years to make up its own mind on the historic civil nuclear initiative with the United States, India could not have expected that the 45 members of the NSG would simply roll over. That the NSG, set up originally in 1975 in response to India’s first nuclear test in May 1974, is being asked to redefine the rules to favour New Delhi underlines the weight of the wrenching proposition before the international community. Prolonged and bitter internal wrangling over the nuclear initiative and has made it a lot more difficult for Indian diplomacy to wrap it all up at the international level on short order.

Given these circumstances, the outcome from the first sitting of the NSG has not been entirely unproductive. It underlined some basic trends in favour of the initiative. Excepting China, the other nuclear weapon powers — Russia, France and Great Britain — have lent solid support to the Indo-US nuclear deal. So have many other major powers like Germany and Japan. By all accounts, a majority at the NSG now supports a “clean” waiver to India. On the negative side, the resistance has crystallised around a group of small states, including Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland. These “White Knights” of the Western world, well known for taking ‘pure’ positions on global issues, are demanding that the NSG toughen the terms under which India might be allowed to regain access to international nuclear trade.

As the NSG reconvenes early next month, India’s first task is a bilateral one. It must ensure that the political leaderships of the blocking nations are fully aware of the costs to their relations with India that an uncompromising stance would engender. On the multilateral side, New Delhi must reaffirm that it cannot and will not accept fresh conditionalities, other than those it is already committed to. Subject to that limit, India must be prepared to address some of the genuine political unease at the NSG. What is needed over the next few days is hardball diplomacy rooted in a combination of strategic rigidity and tactical flexibility.

editor@expressindia.com

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/352834.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16509
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 25 Aug 2008 05:57

“If this goes through, it will only be by fixing language (of the waiver document),” said A.N. Prasad, former director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, who has been among critics of the proposed civilian nuclear deal.

“What happened yesterday was no surprise at all,” Prasad told The Telegraph. “It would have been stupid to expect that all the NSG member countries would agree to unconditional nuclear supplies (to India),” he said.


IF he made this statement prior to the first meeting or after the second one I would have respected him. Perhaps, the fact that they scheduled two meetings was part of this (dumb) strategy, and, may get him off the hook.

"fixing language" is kicking the can - as in 123, etc. These are no deals (specially without ENR), for the real deal will have to made in 20-40 years by the next Indian gen.

With such a black-and-white topic what is there to debate about. NPA venting I can understand, but that could be easily solved by giving them a permit from GoI I would imagine. The principals should have nailed the verbiage long back. What a waste of time.

I feel India will get what she wants - after theatrics that rivals the Chicoms (hats off to them) Olympic opening and now the ongoing closing.

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 25 Aug 2008 06:01

Here are some more 'cosmetic' changes which India can suggest in the NSG draft waiver:
2a. Deciding to separate its civilian nuclear facilities from its strategic and military nuclear facilities in a phased manner and file a voluntary offer [declaration - delete] regarding its civilian nuclear facilities with the International Atomic Energy Agency

2b. [Conducting negotiations with the IAEA and - delete; superflous] [o]Obtaining approval of the IAEA [its] Board of Governors [regarding - delete] for a Safeguards Agreement for application of safeguards only to the civilian nuclear facilities designated by it at its sole discretion [that is in accordance with IAEA standards, principles and practices (including Board of Governors document GOV/1621) - delete; superflous; the approved IAEA Safeguards Agreement stands on its own, it does not need to be described here]

2c. Committing to sign and adhere to an Additional Protocol with respect to India's civil nuclear facilities which takes into account the existence of India's strategic and military nuclear facilities which would therefore qualify for a "national security exclusion"

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54019
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 25 Aug 2008 06:16

So may be the two step mtg for the NSG is a good thing. The first mtg allows the NPA to vote with their hearts and spit the poison they have choked on for so many years since 1974. The next mtg they can vote with their minds and make amends.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Gerard » 25 Aug 2008 06:19

Plan panel expert warns of coal shortage
India needs to concentrate more on nuclear and solar energy, for efficient energy usage and consumption, since the coal reserve of the country will be depleted within the next 45 years.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Aug 2008 06:47

Send sraj to the negotiating table :D

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Suppiah » 25 Aug 2008 06:48

The best we can hope for is that all this drama is stage managed to appease the Chinese and also set the stage for telling TSP there is no way you can get because it was so difficult to sell India's deal. Perhaps there were two drafts, one sitting duck and one real, with subtle meaningless semantic changes.

The fact that Uncle sent minnows to NSG states may not mean they want to under sell the deal, just a reflection of the independence of the some of these countries' foreign policy. US columnists are saying this deal is just about the only sensible thing Bush has done in his 8 years, so he will not want to leave seeing it dead.

If the deal dies, what are the chances of NSG collapsing? I think low because US/West would not want to handover freedom to sell nuke material to terrorists and despots to Russia and China on a silver plate. Not that they are not doing it anyway.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Aug 2008 06:57

Suppiah wrote:If the deal dies, what are the chances of NSG collapsing? .
Think about this. If the deal passes, what will be the purpose of the NSG?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16509
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby NRao » 25 Aug 2008 07:05

Gerard wrote:Plan panel expert warns of coal shortage
India needs to concentrate more on nuclear and solar energy, for efficient energy usage and consumption, since the coal reserve of the country will be depleted within the next 45 years.


Strange!! Just woke up I guess.

As a plannign commission member he should have known that coal would have run out some time this century and planned for it. Seems more like a plant at this point in time.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby enqyoob » 25 Aug 2008 07:25

Very ironic that in the same sentence, you do state that India's nukes shall not deter China, but fail to mention that TSP's nukes have deterred India's superior conventional response capabilities.


I don't know what is ironic there (I don't see you disagreeing... 8) ) but the fact is that LOOOONG before TSP acquired nuclear capabilities, India was already deterred by TSP and its powerful friends. So I don't agree that it is TSP's nuclear capabilities that have deterred India - in fact I hold the view that TSP may have nuclear "capabilities" but no weapons and no hope of getting any weapons - and STILL, India is effectively deterred. And no amount of "testing" whether of 1 KT or 100MT weapons, will change that. But China is not India.

Somehow, I can't get this image right in my mind: Abdul1 says to Abdul2: "Birather, I am not coming across the LOC tonight to steal cows, because the yindoos have successfully tested a 1MT nuke!"

And at the same time, I have no trouble seeing this:
Hong Shin, the Peopre's Ribelation Almy wants you to malch ovel that lange and set up camp on top of that lidge. Ret's teach these uppity lound-eyes a resson! Test BIG nuke, eh?
Last edited by enqyoob on 25 Aug 2008 07:39, edited 1 time in total.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby enqyoob » 25 Aug 2008 07:36

The next mtg they can vote with their minds and make amends.


My guess is that they will do a secret ballot on the real thing, because their hearts AND minds will have been "won" by then. Then they will just announce it as a "consensus" and not reveal the vote figures.

It all comes down to our feelings on the spinal strength of MMS and the alertness of his cronies. I still hold that there's nothing wrong with either.

Also, the "hearts and minds" of the various noisemakers - we see that the 'roos and the Mounties have come around, after all their noise, and the Germans seem to be on board as well, and the Japanese are awfully quiet. Likewise, the kiwis and the prussians and the sinn fein will come around too, in good time. They just have to do their quota of chest-thumping.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Arun_S » 25 Aug 2008 07:57

narayanan wrote:Arun, trouble is, I can't agree that the Dlagon will be detelled by 10 bums or 10,000 bums, from small incursions into Arunachal etc. Just as India need not be deterrred by China's existing nuke capabilities from pushing them out any time. In fact this precisely why there is no sense in burning up national credit by going and doing "tests" of high-yield nukes.

Both countries know that the other is not going to go to the strategic nuclear option, but neither can bet that the other won't react with battlefield nukes, especially in remote Himalayan valleys.

So conventional power and economic self-reliance, with a few tactical nukes available if things get really serious, are all that really matter there. If China tries takeovers in Arunachal and India decides to make an issue of it and throw them out, then of course China will try to use that to attack somewhere else, but if they know that there will be an Indian breakout in another place, or that the IAF will wipe out their incursion forces, then there is deterrence.

IMO, any Indian nuke test will be met with precisely a new Chinese land incursion, that stays well below the threshold for a nuclear war. And unless India has conventional power, there's not a damn thing Dilli can do about it other than to close its eyes and pretend that nothing is happening. This is the cold reality of being weaker in conventional and economic might, and all the megaton bums and IRBMs in the world won't change that.

Look at the Indian response to 61 years of Pakis killing our citizens daily - and compare that to what China would have done to a neighbor who tried that for even a day. There is absolutely no deterrence, until India shows some smarts.

Narayanan, At one point you say that
    >>"Arun, trouble is, I can't agree that the Dlagon will be detelled by 10 bums or 10,000 bums, from small incursions into Arunachal etc. Just as India need not be deterrred by China's existing nuke capabilities from pushing them out any time. In fact this precisely why there is no sense in burning up national credit by going and doing "tests" of high-yield nukes. " .... ... "There is absolutely no deterrence, until India shows some smarts."

and at other
    >>"followed by a sharp escalation in tensions and threats of "vely vely vely vely VELY glave consequences", and India tests 10 bums under the National Security Imperative clause of CTBT"

Make up your mind in the line of reasoning.

If you reason is that "100,000,000,000,000,000,000 sq.mm of Arunachal Pradesh," is below N threshold w/China, even more better for India to play with China on same terms in Tibet and Sinkiang, and start nibbling Ladhak's Aksaichin that Chinese are forcibly occupying. It is obviously a love game only, specially when the other hand wields a big club. But get that big club (read credible Thermo-Nuke) before the love game hits India.

Love and understanding comes from the warmth of TN Vajra.

"Uddanda ko danda bhasha avshaya samajh aati hai." {For non-Sanskrit language brothers, the "Urchins understand the language of the stick"} its foolish to defer making a stock of big "Danda". TN now!!!

Zimple onleee ...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54019
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 25 Aug 2008 08:20

NRao The report says
"We should focus on our solar and nuclear generated source of energy since the rate at which coal and lignite is getting consumed, the nation's coal reserve will run out within the next 45 years", said Kirit Parikh, member of Planning Commission, in an interactive session on, Energy Scenario for India in 24th century, organised by the Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ICC).


BTW all will be dead and probably on Mars!

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 25 Aug 2008 08:22

Thanks, Shaurya, for the confidence. :)

Here is the problem: even a 2nd NSG waiver draft finalized after tough negotiations by MEA with the Americans over the next 2 weeks will be MEANINGLESS and WORTHLESS unless the US COMMITS to opposing any changes to this draft at the next NSG meeting.

Solution: Before we embark on discussing a 2nd draft with the Americans, they need to commit that they will oppose any changes to the agreed draft at future NSG meetings. If they do not do so, it is pointless to come up with an agreed draft. Alternately, the US has to commit that the final waiver language will not be passed by NSG unless it has been cleared with GoI.

Otherwise, if the NSG passes a waiver with a lot of fanfare on Sept 5 which crosses Indian redlines, but is a fait accompli, what does GoI do? It may not even realize that its redlines have been crossed until much later when it finishes analyzing and debating complex, deliberately obtuse language open to several interpretations (have we learned anything from the Hyde fiasco?).

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 846
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Manny » 25 Aug 2008 08:44

This is interesting.

Swiss, CIA and Khan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/25/world/25nuke.html?hp

Manny


As recounted in books and articles and reports by nuclear experts, Mr. Tinner worked with Dr. Khan for three decades, beginning in the mid-1970s. His expertise in vacuum technology aided Dr. Khan’s development of atomic centrifuges, which produced fuel for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, now variously estimated at 50 to 100 warheads.

Yet while Mr. Tinner repeatedly drew the attention of European authorities, who questioned the export of potentially dangerous technology, he never faced charges. Mr. Tinner’s involvement with Dr. Khan deepened beginning in the late 1990s, when, joined by his sons, he helped supply centrifuges for Libya’s secret bomb program.

In 2000, American officials said, Urs Tinner was recruited by the C.I.A., and American officials were elated. Spy satellites can be fooled. Documents can lie. Electronic taps can mislead. But a well-placed mole can work quietly behind the scenes to get at the truth.

For instance, the United States had gathered circumstantial evidence that Iran wanted an atom bomb. Suddenly it had a direct view into clandestine Iranian procurement of centrifuges and other important nuclear items.

“It was a confirmation,” recalled Dr. Samore, the former national security official who is now director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. “That was much more significant than Libya,” because that country’s atomic program was in its infancy whereas Iran’s was rushing toward maturity.

Despite considerable income from their illicit trade, the Tinners had money problems, a European intelligence official said. Eventually, Urs Tinner persuaded his father and younger brother to join him as moles, and they began double lives, supplying Dr. Khan with precision manufacturing gear and helping run a centrifuge plant in Malaysia even as their cooperation with the United States deepened.
Last edited by Manny on 25 Aug 2008 08:48, edited 1 time in total.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 08:47

sraj wrote: Otherwise, if the NSG passes a waiver with a lot of fanfare on Sept 5 which crosses Indian redlines, but is a fait accompli, what does GoI do? It may not even realize that its redlines have been crossed until much later when it finishes analyzing and debating complex, deliberately obtuse language open to several interpretations (have we learned anything from the Hyde fiasco?).



All that is fine Sraj but do you think in real life that would happen? Meaning that NSG will be allowed to pass a waiver with language that not acceptable to India?

That can only happen when the majority consensus in NSG - especially among the big nuclear powers and not among the pipesqueaks - is to screw India come what may. I don't think by any stretch of imagination that's the intention of France, Russia, the US and even Japan and Germany, all of whom are looking foward to the huge business opportunities that will beckon once India is allowed to trade.

A NSG draft which India will reject and not use as a template to open nuclear commerce serves no useful purpose for anyone other than NPAs. And we all know that the NPAs' bark is more dangerous than the bite.

I frankly think that the whole purpose of the last meeting was to give the inconsequential pipesqueak nations an opportunity to let out their bile, as well as to guage who stood where. The next meeting will "sort" out these minnows and things will be back on track with "cosmetic" changes - which will be shown to GoI before being placed on the table on Sept 5.

The US has been on this with us since 2005. Whatever it's motives may be they aren't stupid. And it would be stupid to think that the MMS and Congress can make any more concessions that what they've already made.

Let's see what Sept 5 brings in. The endgame has just started so let's not forfiet the game at this stage.

However, India must and should walkout of this tamasha if there's even an hint of "prescriptive" conditions or anything that doesn't look like a clean and unconditional waiver.

And for a change, in such a situation India, should do something demonstrable and unambigious - even undiplomatic - to teach the naysayers as well as others a lesson they'll not forget in a hurry.

JMT

Sanatanan
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 09:29

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Sanatanan » 25 Aug 2008 08:50

NRao wrote:I feel India will get what she wants - after theatrics that rivals the Chicoms (hats off to them) Olympic opening and now the ongoing closing.


I agree this would be the most likely, but most unfortunate scenario to unfold in the days to come.

For me, I would like to rephrase the quote above by saying "The deal would get shoved down India's throat by US & NSG with the connivance of some Indians." I also agree that it is the future generations of Indians who will suffer, as they would have to live in a country whose nuclear and high-tech industry has been successfully emaciated.

Another view of mine, not directly related to the above:

Just as the US was shooting from the shoulders of NZ, Austria and others, GoI may be conveying its message to the US and NSG via (mainly) the English Language media. [Btw, does Israel - one of the other non-member adherents to Infcirc/254 Parts 1 and 2 - which has been quiescent up to now, have some influence over policies adopted by these countries?]

Perhaps GoI does not wish to directly convey its "negative" views to the US through the usual diplomatic channels. So, it may not be right to consider what SV and some others in the media write as their own "analysis" or "view". Rather, it is just that at the moment, they happen to be the chosen conduit for expression of GoI's view on the matter. If I recall correctly, earlier it used to be Raja Mohan and the likes who, by the lack of verbiage from their keyboards, seem to be "out of favour" now.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 08:55

Manny wrote:This is interesting.

Swiss, CIA and Khan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/25/world/25nuke.html?hp

Manny


Aha Manny Sir!

Thanks for posting this. This is something I was looking out for. See the dateline Aug24? Interesting isn't it?

I expect a few more skeletons coming out of the cupboard for public viewing between now and Sept 5.

A part of the "persuasion" tactics IMHO. :wink:

But in Europe, there is much consternation. Analysts studying Dr. Khan’s network worry that by destroying the files to prevent their spread, the Swiss government may have obscured the investigative trail. It is unclear who among Dr. Khan’s customers — a list that is known to include Iran, Libya and North Korea but that may extend further — got the illicit material, much of it contained in easily transmitted electronic designs.

The West’s most important questions about the Khan network have been consistently deflected by President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, who resigned last Monday. He refused to account for the bomb designs that got away or to let American investigators question Dr. Khan, perhaps the only man to know who else received the atomic blueprints. President Bush, eager for Pakistan’s aid against terrorism, never pressed Mr. Musharraf for answers.

“Maybe that labyrinth held clues to another client or another rogue state,” said a European official angered at the destruction.

The Swiss judge in charge of the Tinner case, Andreas Müller, is not terribly happy either. He said he had no warning of the planned destruction and is now trying to determine what, if anything, remains of the case against Friedrich Tinner and his sons, Urs and Marco.

arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby arnab » 25 Aug 2008 09:08

Arun_S wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Perhaps one should keep in mind, there are other Uranium producing countries outside of NSG, namely
a) Namibia (7.5%)
b) Niger (7.4%)
c) Uzbekistan (5.5%)

Now that India has a Safeguards Agreement with IAEA, it should be less of a problem, importing Uranium from these countries.

Instead of throwing away our money at the NSG countries, we can invest that money
a) in R&D for enrichment, LWR Technology, etc.
b) courting Namibia, Niger and Uzbekistan big time

as well as earning money by selling our reactors and technology to all, who are willing to buy, of course with Safeguards, and so ...

How about starting by selling to that country, with which we have civilizational ties. :twisted:

WE HAVE OTHER OPTIONS.

In the first place there was no legal compulsion in trading with these countries even before the recent Indian additional safeguard agreement w/IAEA? These countries who themselves are signatories to IAEA charter and NPT, but thanks to Dr.Homi Bhabha stature and leadership at IAEA in 1950 and 60's, the NPT & IAEA did not prevent these countries from exporting uranium to India as long as the power reactors using it was in facility specific safeguard , just like many indigenously built PHWR and the Russian Kudankulam nuclear power plant.

Why do "mujra" when there was nothing preventing going to the water-hole in the first place?


http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf23.html

I think it is a bit more difficult then that. Niger and Namibian mines are controlled by Australian (Rio Tinto) and Canadian (Uraniumone) companies. Only Uzbekistan (Navoi) might offer some option - though I doubt it. Incidentally the Chinese Govt through Chinalco has bought a 14.99 per cent share in Rio Tinto

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 09:15

arnab wrote: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf23.html

I think it is a bit more difficult then that. Niger and Namibian mines are controlled by Australian (Rio Tinto) and Canadian (Uraniumone) companies. Only Uzbekistan (Navoi) might offer some option - though I doubt it. Incidentally the Chinese Govt through Chinalco has bought a 14.99 per cent share in Rio Tinto


To add, it does seem extremely unlikely that the NSG cartel would go to such lengths to control trade in uranium and then leave such obvious loopholes for countries like India - who has always been denied - opportunity to circumvent.

Just wondering...

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1506
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Aug 2008 09:27

I don't believe either India or the US can be complacent that the second meeting will
greet them with the pipsqueaks and others coming back with changed hearts & minds.

Those intending on scuttling the deal are going to find a way to - delay the decision post next meeting.

I sure hope the US & India have a response to such tactics.

ShauryaT: You are correct - what is the role of the NSG if India is in the tent pissing out?
Last edited by Pulikeshi on 25 Aug 2008 09:30, edited 1 time in total.

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 25 Aug 2008 09:29

amit wrote:
arnab wrote: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf23.html

I think it is a bit more difficult then that. Niger and Namibian mines are controlled by Australian (Rio Tinto) and Canadian (Uraniumone) companies. Only Uzbekistan (Navoi) might offer some option - though I doubt it. Incidentally the Chinese Govt through Chinalco has bought a 14.99 per cent share in Rio Tinto


To add, it does seem extremely unlikely that the NSG cartel would go to such lengths to control trade in uranium and then leave such obvious loopholes for countries like India - who has always been denied - opportunity to circumvent.

Just wondering...

1. While many (not all) existing mines in these non-NSG countries are indeed controlled by French, Australian, and Canadian companies, they also have a large amount of unexploited/undeveloped uranium reserves as well as several mines owned and operated by state-owned enterprises. An Indian company has actually obtained a concession in Niger, and Union Minister Jairam Ramesh publicly announced a few months ago that GoI has contacted the highest levels of the Namibian govt to discuss supply of uranium.

2. amit: do you recall the story posted by ramana of the parrot which refuses to fly away because it is under the illusion that it is tied to its perch? why do we persist in believing that these cartels are all powerful without even making the effort to discover our own rights under international law? this subject has been discussed several times on these threads.

Sanatanan
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 09:29

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Sanatanan » 25 Aug 2008 09:51

sraj wrote:1. Full scope safeguards are not a requirement if Natural Uranium is imported from non-NSG countries such as Namibia, Niger, Uzbekistan or the 100+ other countries which are not members of this 45-nation NSG cartel.

2. Enriched Uranium is not needed to feed indigenous PHWRs, thereby obviating the need for expanding enrichment capacity.

3. Capital costs of indigenous 540 MW PHWRs (Tarapur 3 & 4) at $1200/KWe see here Kakodkar's statement on Slide 14 compares favourably with all the import options.

Would anyone like to pick holes in the "non-NSG Natural Uranium + indigenous 700 MW PHWRs" option as an alternative to this unending rigmarole of the last 3 years which is fast becoming an unedifying spectacle?


Lack of Nat U is only a contrived excuse and not the real reason behind this "deal". It is the need to import "parts and equipment" which the non-NSG countries - Namibia, Niger and most probably Uzbekistan - cannot supply. That may be one of the reasons for not moving in their direction so far.

I believe, hard work still needs to be (and can be) done, in India, to be able to build indigenous 700 MWe PHWRs in a manner that minimizes import of crucial equipment and components from the NSG countries without putting India in such a position that it will accept any and all prescriptive conditions even at the loss of self-respect. It may not be achieved at the relativistic speed tactically projected as a requirement by the deal proponents, but it is ultimately the surer path. To me, the very concept of inspections, intrusive or otherwise, is abhorrent not to mention insistence on signing all kinds of unequal treaties like any country that has lost a war is forced to.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 12:09

sraj wrote:2. amit: do you recall the story posted by ramana of the parrot which refuses to fly away because it is under the illusion that it is tied to its perch? why do we persist in believing that these cartels are all powerful without even making the effort to discover our own rights under international law? this subject has been discussed several times on these threads.


Indeed it has been discussed Sraj but without any suitable conclusion.

It's not about believing that these cartels are all powerful. It's about believing that the whole idea behind the deal is not only about supply of uranium but something a bit more complex than that.

That's one reason Russia and France desparately want to get the waiver through so that they can do business with India - including the whole spectrum of nuclear trade. If it was only about uranium then Russia could have supplied the uranium to safeguarded reactors, na? India has alwasy been willing to put civilian reactors using imported maal under international safeguards.

Maybe it needs to be restated that the whole idea behind the deal is as much about ending the unfair pariah status confered on India as it is about uranium shortage.

And - on this one I'd go out on a limb - it's about signalling the beginning of the end of NSG. The dichotomy of exemption to India will break the NSG the way it is structured now. And that will not come one day too soon.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 25 Aug 2008 12:17

sraj,

Great suggestions! I advise you, you put all your proposals in one place, both concerning Part 2 of the Waiver, as well as those regarding the freezing of the second draft, and prior permission from GoI before submission of any draft. Very impressive work, sraj.

I do think, US is aware, that No-Nuclear Testing and CTBT clauses will not fly in Delhi. IMO, US too would be thinking from a Business PoV and packaging that as a non-proliferation sop to the pipsqueaks. They are already thinking ahead regarding Congress approval of 123. Congress can hardly deny a valid business case for the sake of non-proliferation. If ENR had been allowed in the waiver, there could have been an uproar from many Congressmen, that Bush sold out on American business interests, which is a far more severe accusation than selling out on non-proliferation restrictions.

So I think, that this no-nuclear testing clamor was simply a ruse. Indians are being made to believe that if GoI / US can ensure that no such clause is added, India would be more than happy. Also the inclusion of
2d. Refraining from transferring enrichment and reprocessing technology to states that do not already possess these.

was also included in the first draft so that if ENR is denied to India, GoI can also argue, that India is also not making any ENR commitments to the NSG.

It would be sensible for GoI, that in case India is being made to sacrifice on ENR, then that is a delay rather than a denial. GoI/US can agree on some date, after which ENR will automatically be allowed to India, 2 years, 3 years, or on completion of the Separation Plan in 2014 or earliear. In the mean time US Congress too could change their Laws to permit ENR, especially in view of an upcoming expiry of ENR denial to India. There is also a provision in 123 Agreement, that ENR be allowed to India upon an Amendment to the Agreement.

It would not be desirable, if India again needs a new consensus of the whole NSG, before ENR is allowed. That will be extremely difficult to push through.
Last edited by RajeshA on 25 Aug 2008 12:24, edited 2 times in total.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 12:18

Pulikeshi wrote:I don't believe either India or the US can be complacent that the second meeting will
greet them with the pipsqueaks and others coming back with changed hearts & minds.

Those intending on scuttling the deal are going to find a way to - delay the decision post next meeting.

I sure hope the US & India have a response to such tactics.

ShauryaT: You are correct - what is the role of the NSG if India is in the tent pissing out?


Boss you're absolutely spot on. The intention will be there to delay in such a way that the 123 can't be passed by the present Congress during the Lame Duck session.

However, what happens on Sept 5 will also give India a fair indication of what the US is actually wanting out of the deal as opposed to what it has been stating all this time. Not for a moment should one think that the US can't get its way if it really wants to, especially with the big powers either supporting it or staying officially neutral (China).

One thing's for sure: Our friends and foes will be exposed in equal measure on Sept 5.

PS: Just to re-clarify my stand, as stated a few posts above, any rewording of the text which puts into question the clear and unconditional status as outlined by AK should be trigger for India to walk out of the deal. It also should be the trigger for some very un-diplomatic action against the righteous bunch of pipsqueaks.

Ultimately that will be the final test for MMS to prove his credentials as a leader. IMHO.
Last edited by amit on 25 Aug 2008 12:52, edited 1 time in total.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby amit » 25 Aug 2008 12:25

RajeshA wrote: It would be sensible for GoI, that in case India is being made to sacrifice on ENR, then that is a delay rather than a denial. GoIUS can agree on some date, after which ENR will automatically be allowed to India, 2 years, 3 years, or on completion of the Separation Plan in 2014 or earliear. In the mean time US Congress too could change their Laws to permit ENR, especially in view of an upcoming expiry of ENR denial to India.

It would not be desirable, if India again needs a new consensus of the whole NSG, before ENR is allowed. That will be extremely difficult to push through.


Boss,

I'm not too sure that would be good play.

Once ENR is postponed, then the US will have no incentive to get it back on the table. Remember that the main worry on ENR for the US is the fact that it might place folks like Westinghouse at a disadvantage vis a vis the French and Russians as the latter might use ENR as a sweetner for a deal.

Once the playing field is made level with a postponement on a decision on ENR, then why should the US even revist the whole issue? And what's the incentive for it to change internal laws to allow it's export?

I don't think agreeing to a postponment on a decision on ENR would be good strategy on the part of India. IMHO, of course.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 25 Aug 2008 12:32

amit wrote:
RajeshA wrote: It would be sensible for GoI, that in case India is being made to sacrifice on ENR, then that is a delay rather than a denial. GoIUS can agree on some date, after which ENR will automatically be allowed to India, 2 years, 3 years, or on completion of the Separation Plan in 2014 or earliear. In the mean time US Congress too could change their Laws to permit ENR, especially in view of an upcoming expiry of ENR denial to India.

It would not be desirable, if India again needs a new consensus of the whole NSG, before ENR is allowed. That will be extremely difficult to push through.


Boss,

I'm not too sure that would be good play.

Once ENR is postponed, then the US will have no incentive to get it back on the table. Remember that the main worry on ENR for the US is the fact that it might place folks like Westinghouse at a disadvantage vis a vis the French and Russians as the latter might use ENR as a sweetner for a deal.

Once the playing field is made level with a postponement on a decision on ENR, then why should the US even revist the whole issue? And what's the incentive for it to change internal laws to allow it's export?

I don't think agreeing to a postponment on a decision on ENR would be good strategy on the part of India. IMHO, of course.


Amit,
I didn't say, they should postpone a decision on ENR, but rather delay the supply of ENR, in case something must give.
GoI/US can agree on some date, after which ENR will AUTOMATICALLY be allowed to India, 2 years, 3 years, or on completion of the Separation Plan in 2014 or earliear.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20447
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Philip » 25 Aug 2008 12:32

The inferiority complex of the non-nuclear weapon states,satellites and allies of the US/NATO has been exposed in the NSG standoff.Countries like Australia especially imagine that they're the equal of India in military terms .These nations all enjoy the safety net of the western nuclear powers ,safeguarding them from any attack,yet want India to buckle down in servitude as during the colonial days .They have been bound and handcuffed by signing the treaties like the NPT/CTBT,etc. and want India similarly to join the ranks of the nuclear imprisoned.The US cannot unilaterally exempt India as it would bring down the entire non-proliferation structure.How much influence lame-duck Pres.Bush can muster is the moot question.In any case,even if the NSG go ahead,they might bring into force new rules of the game at a later date and achieve their goal.

This is the time to stand firm.Too much has already been sacrificed by India.Further compromises are meaningless.MMS can gain some sympathy and much stature by saying NO to any further conditions.AS almost every analysts has said,it is upto the US to move matters with the NSG not India.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 25 Aug 2008 12:39

Philip wrote:The inferiority complex of the non-nuclear weapon states,satellites and allies of the US/NATO has been exposed in the NSG standoff.Countries like Australia especially imagine that they're the equal of India in military terms .These nations all enjoy the safety net of the western nuclear powers ,safeguarding them from any attack,yet want India to buckle down in servitude as during the colonial days .They have been bound and handcuffed by signing the treaties like the NPT/CTBT,etc. and want India similarly to join the ranks of the nuclear imprisoned.The US cannot unilaterally exempt India as it would bring down the entire non-proliferation structure.How much influence lame-duck Pres.Bush can muster is the moot question.In any case,even if the NSG go ahead,they might bring into force new rules of the game at a later date and achieve their goal.

This is the time to stand firm.Too much has already been sacrificed by India.Further compromises are meaningless.MMS can gain some sympathy and much stature by saying NO to any further conditions.AS almost every analysts has said,it is upto the US to move matters with the NSG not India.


Very true, Philip.
The Pipsqueaks have been feeding their citizens with documentaries of Indian poverty for ages, trying to prove that India is far below them on the national power ladder and in the food chain. All of a sudden, they are being forced to look in the mirror and accept that they are the pipsqueaks and that the poor Indian is a citizen of a higher power.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests