India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby arnab » 26 Aug 2008 12:37

nkumar wrote:
arnab wrote:
nkumar wrote:"Hyperventilating"..good word to use..reminds me of the articles of C. Raja Mohan, KS and the daily dose from IE about India losing face internationally if we don't sign the deal :rotfl:


Uh..so if we can't beat 'em - Join 'em :) I thought folks came to BRF to specifically avoid this sort of sensationalism. If we are here to mirror mainstream media, why bother ?


How difficult it is for you to understand that I was highlighting the selective quoting and then highlighting it as an important point. Did we agree to statements like these, 'India should not send a cow to the moon because the RSPCA objects' in the past 3 years, which Sreenivasan is suggesting that India should have no problem with.


I'm sorry - not understanding onlee. Are you arguing the following: First, India is already compromised by agreeing to the 123 agreement and the IAEA agreement? Second, that the NSG 'additional' conditions make the earlier agreements even worse because they are no longer a 'clean and un-conditional' (whatever that means only AK knows) waiver? Third, therefore MMS should walk out now and show 'statesmanship' irrespective of what these 'additional' conditions are? Fourth, you are saying this because you have no confidence in MMS or the babus who negotiated this deal because they are not lawyers (btw is this established? do we know that there were no lawyers in the Indian setup? They might not be sitting on the negotiation table but they could have been there in the background.)

If the answer is 'yes' to the above and unless you specify which portions of those agreements bother you and why (facts only please and not what you 'think' the sub-text means), then it is hyperventilation and therefore unhelpful. Again, you might want to read the FAQs.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 12:38

Acharya wrote:
dada wrote:80% of the NSG members belong to the European Union/Erstwhile Russian States
Is this a US v/s EU v/s Russian political tug of war on the Indian Nuclear Deal ?


There is US on one side, Common wealth UK - Old world , Russia and eastern states and then Japan and China.
This is basically discussion on agreement between these countries.


I would say, it is a small protest by the pipsqueak, who are being asked to shift to another room in the hotel by the Hotel Mgmt (USA), because India wants to take the Luxury Suite, and it is the men pipsqueak trying to put up a little resistance, to save face before their wives (domestic audiences).

The Lizard is frustrated that it couldn't find a big enough popsqueak, who could fight its proxy battle, after the failure of the Left Front in India. :D
Last edited by RajeshA on 26 Aug 2008 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20451
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Philip » 26 Aug 2008 12:42

NZ's membership of ANZUS goes back decades into the last century.It is quite understandable historically for it to have entered into security arrangements with its only neighbour OZ and the US,the most powerful Pacific power.We can't question the sovereign right of a nation to do so.NZ's antipathy towards nuclear proliferation is likewise its own business.

We should've in the time that we had,also lobbied the NSG nations on our own,as it would've at least given us an indication as to which nations would oppose the exemption for India.This info could've been passed on to the US in advance,as it is supposed to get the NSG clearance for us.Smaller nations have few opportunities to swell up in stature and feel big.Their vote at the NSG is one such,plus,this Bush administration is possibly the most hated ever,including by many of Uncle sam's friends,therefore making it even more difficult for these small states to behave like dutiful rubber stamps.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 26 Aug 2008 12:46


The U.S. is obviously trying to go on a fishing spree without getting wet. The agreement signed between India and the U.S. is very clear and Washington cannot go back on its commitments without losing face.
And hence it is employing a group of insignificant nations to raise objections to the waiver agreement.

Y. Parameswaran Menon,

Thrissur

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 » 26 Aug 2008 12:52

John Snow wrote: If what you say is true then does it not prove that MMS cant stand on his feet and be tough?



So MMS using India's top nuclear scientist and a key man in the negotiations to send a strong message to whomsoever is listening shows the MMS can't stand on his feet and be tough?

Well all I can say is: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Oh I get it now! The general must in true tradition of the brave lead from the front swinging is sword at the enemy! (If he doesn't do that and uses someone else - who's known as an 800lb gorrila among the enemy and an expert in swing his sword - of course that's because he's not tough!)

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 » 26 Aug 2008 13:01

nkumar wrote:amit ji,

You seem to have tremendous confidence in MMS and GoI machinery in use for this deal. But I don't share your optimism.


If you don't have confidence in the GoI machinery then it's pointless to discuss this any further don't you think?

May I point out that your lack of confidence is a subjective matter. And since it is so, whatever the GoI does will be viewed by you as being suspicious.

Fortunately I don't share your lack of confidence, not necessarily because I have tremendous faith in MMS but because I think the GoI machinery is too big and institutionalised to depend on the whims of one person in a deal this big.

In one word I don't believe India is a Bananna Republic. I think there are sufficient institutional checks and balances to ensure that no rash decision is taken.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 13:06

John Snow wrote: Actually my sources in PMO say that they are taping into swiss banks again for yet another no confidence winning motion, being eagerly sought by samajwadi party again in the interest of the Nations Resident Indians. :mrgreen:


Snow ji,

I applaud your wide angle telescopic vision of India and what happens in the PMO as well as what is in the interest or otherwise of Resident Indians.

Such vision usually comes when one is sufficiently far away from the object of vision (in this case India). The further you are physically, the better the vision becomes. That is why NRIs are such assets to RIs - they can show these poor buggers how wrong they are and how easily the goras run rings around them.
Last edited by amit on 26 Aug 2008 13:23, edited 1 time in total.

nkumar
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 06 Jul 2007 02:14

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby nkumar » 26 Aug 2008 13:15

First, India is already compromised by agreeing to the 123 agreement and the IAEA agreement?
>> 123 rooted in Hyde is problematic, 123 doesn't promise full civil nuclear cooperation, it does not promise dual use techs etc etc. It has been debated many times, you need to read the archives.

Second, that the NSG 'additional' conditions make the earlier agreements even worse because they are no longer a 'clean and un-conditional' (whatever that means only AK knows) waiver?
>> The kind of additional conditions being discussed right now amongst NSG countries will be detrimental for India. Now don't ask what kind!

Third, therefore MMS should walk out now and show 'statesmanship' irrespective of what these 'additional' conditions are?
>> You are needlessly putting words in my mouth. Read what I wrote. There was an 'If' in the beginning if you missed.

Fourth, you are saying this because you have no confidence in MMS or the babus who negotiated this deal because they are not lawyers (btw is this established? do we know that there were no lawyers in the Indian setup? They might not be sitting on the negotiation table but they could have been there in the background.)
>> Statements of MMS have been extensively quoted before, about his commitments to the Parliament regarding the deal, evolving a consensus etc. Please show me, where did I say that babus have to be lawyers? Why can't they take the lawyers expert in international law in negotiating team? I have just shown you an example of the some of the statements given by our babus who are themselves negating their earlier stand. And please recall the statement of MKN regarding lawyers.

I am not arguing with you anymore.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 13:16

nkumar wrote:
If the NSG is seeking to bring into the waiver only those elements which India has approved in one way or the other in the last three years, we should have no hesitation to discuss the amendments suggested. There is no such thing as an unconditional waiver, as is obvious from the present draft. But if the NSG is suggesting inclusion of new conditionalities such as signing of the NPT or CTBT even in the distant future, they should be rejected outright.


What Sreenivasan is suggesting is that India should agree to more amendments. Is that not an important point of the article? How does this square with clean and unconditional waiver?



NKumar,

I really fail to understand your point here? Sreenivasan is saying :

only those elements which India has approved in one way or the other in the last three years


And you interpret that as:

India should agree to more amendments


Where did that more come from?

I read more to mean this:

But if the NSG is suggesting inclusion of new conditionalities such as signing of the NPT or CTBT even in the distant future, they should be rejected outright




As I said my reading of Sreenivasan's article is more as a trial balloon to see what flies and what does not. I still hold the view that the various spokesmen and organs of GoI are working in tandem on some strategy.

One question that I would request you to answer as that would make it clear to me where exactly you are coming from.

And that is what do you think is Sreenivasans point or motive in writing this article?

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 13:24

I think the whole controversy about T. Sreenivasan's Article is
What is Baby?
What is Bathwater?
What is the Rubber Duck?

For some, the Rubber Duck belongs with the Baby, for others it can be thrown away with the Bathwater.

nkumar
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 06 Jul 2007 02:14

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby nkumar » 26 Aug 2008 13:42

amit, here are my problems:

If the NSG is seeking to bring into the waiver only those elements which India has approved in one way or the other in the last three years, we should have no hesitation to discuss the amendments suggested.

This statement can be interpreted in many ways. My interpretation is that (and you might differ from it) he is suggesting that there might be diluted hyde type conditions in the NSG waiver and India should have no problem with that, which IMO, is the ultimate goal of US and its poodles (You may disagree).

There is no such thing as an unconditional waiver, as is obvious from the present draft.

Why is he making such a statement? If AK and GoI has stated that we are looking and expecting for a clean and unconditional waiver, then he should have reinforced that stand. His statement does the opposite.

If you don't have confidence in the GoI machinery then it's pointless to discuss this any further don't you think?
>> I have given examples of the statements by our babus. Any they don't inspire confidence in me. Perhaps you see those contradictions as innocuous. Yes, I also think it is pointless to discuss.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 13:48

nkumar wrote:amit, here are my problems:


NKumar,

Fair enough.

The difference between your POV and mine, as I see it, is that I'm willing to wait till Sept5 or by whichever date that we get to understand what's the revised draft is and then take a judgment call on whether whatever action the GoI takes is to India interests (as I see it) or not.

You seem to have already lost faith in GoI as it does not inspire much optimism/confidence on your part.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it pans out.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 13:57

Philip wrote:NZ's membership of ANZUS goes back decades into the last century.It is quite understandable historically for it to have entered into security arrangements with its only neighbour OZ and the US,the most powerful Pacific power.We can't question the sovereign right of a nation to do so.NZ's antipathy towards nuclear proliferation is likewise its own business.


Just as it is our business to decide not to sign any stupid treaty till such time we are assured that our neighbourhood is cleaned up and our security is taken care of.

If 4 million people have a sovereign right, I would supposed 1.1 billion people should have the same sovereign right to both energy and military security, don't you think?

Why this sudden bhaichara for the Kiwis? :-?

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby harbans » 26 Aug 2008 14:04

Nkumar Ji will just give my take on this. Officially the US has conceded it cannot CRE Indian strategic assets. However there are hardline NPAs who still have clout on Capitol Hill and beyond. What the US achieves and India does too by this deal is acceptance of it's strategic programme, acceptance of producing strategic weapons, acceptance of separation of civil and military programmes. Very importantly it does another thing that is being overlooked on this forum. That it isolates Iran, North Korea and Pakistani strategic programmes. These Western powers realize at official levels need CRE. Bringing India into the tent at the moment is important for them. As long as India stands outside the Nuclear programmes followed by these rogue nations get justification.

Bringing India into the tent brings more legitimacy to the NSG and Nuclear club while reducing tremendously the legitimacy of the rogue Nuclear triplets. Also consider the possibility of Al Qaeda/ Taliban type takeover of Pakistan in the coming months/ years. US is not prepared to leave Pakistani nukes in those hands. Neither should India. US realizes it alone cannot eliminate Pakistani nukes under such a condition. It would need Indian help. Sustained round the clock bombing campaigns by India and the US might be a necessity to remove Porky Jihadi nukes in the future. That will not be possible without strategic relations between India and the US and India being inside the tent, just not possible to do that with India outside with the rogue tripartite. This is a point that NZ, Austria, hardline NPAs don't understand as yet because so far India has been projected to them along with the rogue nuclear states. After Indias nuclear tests in 98, US official dom over hundreds of meetings made an attempt to understand India's position. The nuke deal underlines that understanding.

JMT.
Last edited by harbans on 26 Aug 2008 14:44, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 14:07

Many of BRFites have developed a keen interest in the personage of T. P. Sreenivasan because of his Article in Rediff.

NSG: Do not discard the baby with the bath water by T P Sreenivasan: Rediff

Perhaps they would wish to explore his illustrious biography further and try to deduce his motives.

My personal impression was that the gentleman can be a strong advocate of arguments which are offered from the PoV of moral astuteness and idealism. However if one's arguments are purely based on raw power and/or national interest, there may be others who could make a more forceful advocacy. A somewhat Nehruvian frame of mind.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 14:19

harbans wrote:Very importantly it does another thing that is being overlooked on this forum. That it isolates Iran, North Korea and Pakistani strategic programmes. These Western powers realize at official levels need CRE. Bringing India into the tent at the moment is important for them. As long as India stands outside the Nuclear programmes followed by these rogue nations get justification.

Bringing India into the tent brings more legitimacy to the NSG and Nuclear club while reducing tremendously the legitimacy of the rogue Nuclear triplets.


Very right you are, Harbans Ji.

The Nuclear Issues have been a top priority with the Bush Administration. They have often said, that every case requires a different answer.

North Korea - Denuclearize through the 6 Party Talks
India - Bring inside the Tent
Iran - First Diplomacy, Then the War
Pakistan - Managed Disintegration and Assisted Defanging

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20451
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Philip » 26 Aug 2008 14:26

Amit,no extra love lost for the Kiwis,just explaining their attitude.I agree absolutely,that we shouldn't sign anything (CTBT/NPT or whatever,until there is genuine global disarmament and not until the establisehd N-powers start reducing their arsenals.We were after P-2 condemned especially by the US so much that these smaller nations cannot understand Uncle Sam's realpolitik today and selfish hypocrisy.NZ,Norway and Austria aren't vying for billions of dollars in nuclear plant contracts or billions more for strike aircraft,etc! Their nuclear concerns have been dumped by Uncle sam who wants to rake in largesse from India,while also clamping alid upon India's nuclear weapons growth.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 14:34

TPS is suggesting a second version of the 123 - verbiage that will satisfy both side (in the NSG N sides) to declare victory at home and kick the can even further. The red line is CTBT/NPT/etc, beyond which India will have to walk away. In contrast to AK, he would like to make some modifications and get a deal. Modifications he feels - even though it is with a group of countries - really will not matter. I have to assume what he means is that, in the future, even a single "no" vote (cast by the US) would break a NSG consensus - and therefore would be a safe bet for India as of today. Like the 123, rest - dekha jaiyega.

He thinks like a diplomat he is, while AK thinks like a scicom he is.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby harbans » 26 Aug 2008 14:39

1. North Korea - Denuclearize through the 6 Party Talks
2. India - Bring inside the Tent
3. Iran - First Diplomacy, Then the War
4. Pakistan - Managed Disintegration and Assisted Defanging


Well put. Just numbered them. 3 and 4 are tricky. 3 for Israel and 4 for the rest of the West and India. 4 is the real tricky one. While disintegration is occurring already as evident by fissures in Pakistan how well it can be managed is uncertain. US has no options but to prepare plans for defanging Porkistan. Without India it is not possible. For that India's strategic programme requires legitimization to a large degree and it has to be done fast. CRE for India is not an option for US as of now. While noises have been made to placate hardline NPAs the US has been in somewhat of a rush to bring India into the tent. Aspect 4 is what drives them. Ofcourse energy security and clean emission is another added advantage to convince many naysayers of the deal. JMTs etc.

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 » 26 Aug 2008 14:51

Philip wrote:Amit,no extra love lost for the Kiwis,just explaining their attitude.I agree absolutely,that we shouldn't sign anything (CTBT/NPT or whatever,until there is genuine global disarmament and not until the establisehd N-powers start reducing their arsenals.We were after P-2 condemned especially by the US so much that these smaller nations cannot understand Uncle Sam's realpolitik today and selfish hypocrisy.NZ,Norway and Austria aren't vying for billions of dollars in nuclear plant contracts or billions more for strike aircraft,etc! Their nuclear concerns have been dumped by Uncle sam who wants to rake in largesse from India,while also clamping alid upon India's nuclear weapons growth.



Philip ji,

Thanks for explaining your POV. I agree with you on this.

It's a problem for Uncle Sam to sort out with his poodles.

If he wants a Doberman inside the tent for his security then he'd better make sure that the little poodles stick to one small corner of the tent. No need for the Doberman to either negotiate for space with the poodles or to give them too much importance.

JMT

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 15:00

USA likes to put things in Black & White. "Axis of Evil", "With us or against us", etc. The NPT Hold-outs could have become one such demonization, but with India being part of this group, this demonization never sounded credible. With India inside the Tent, US would be able to draw the sharp line between Non-Proliferators and Proliferators. In the next US Administration, this redefining of Good and Evil will be done again.

They will always say, that "a solution to Israel's status will be found after a Permanent Peace has been established between Israel and the Arabs, thereby postponing Israel accession to NPT indefinitely. However Pakistan needs to sign on to NPT right away ...."

Nitesh
BRFite
Posts: 899
Joined: 23 Mar 2008 22:22
Location: Bangalore
Contact:

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Nitesh » 26 Aug 2008 16:19

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\08\26\story_26-8-2008_pg4_20

TOKYO: Japanese and Australian politicians said Monday that a new nuclear body would meet for the first time in October and discuss a controversial India-US atomic energy pact.

Former Japanese and Australian foreign ministers Yoriko Kawaguchi and Gareth Evans are co-chairs of the new body, which Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd proposed earlier this year to bolster anti-nuclear efforts. “It is extremely important for Japan, the only victim of nuclear attacks, to aim to build a world without nuclear weapons,” Kawaguchi told a joint news conference with Evans after they met Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.

The International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament will gather up to 16 members from around the world. It hopes to lay the groundwork for the next review conference of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 2010. Kawaguchi said the group would first meet in October, although she declined to name the exact date, location or the membership.

The commission will discuss “issues of what to do with countries that are developing nuclear programmes while violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty or who are not members of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty,” she said. She was referring to India, which is seeking international approval for a nuclear technology sharing deal with the United while refusing to sign the non-proliferation and test-ban treaties.

Evans said the India-US deal was “very controversial,” having positive and negative aspects. “We’re all going to have to work harder if we really do want a global regime that is very strong, that picks up all the best of the NPT and makes it even stronger and applicable universally,” Evans said. Rudd has said Australia, which has the largest known uranium reserves, and Japan, a major nuclear energy power, could play a role in non-proliferation. Both countries have signalled support for the India-US deal, despite earlier reservations.

ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ShibaPJ » 26 Aug 2008 16:41

I don't see any reason to throw either the baby or the bathwater yet. Exact contours of the discussion, and the NSG draft will be known around Sep 5th and we will see, if Indian red lines are being crossed. AK, PM and even Kangressi spokesman have said that India will not accept any new/ additional conditionalities and that gives me some comfort. I hope, GoI has a contingency plan in place to handle the 6 NSG holdouts, either thru the diplomatic channels or getting GB/ Unkil to do the hatchet job. This would also prove if Unkil/ GB is desparate enough for the deal.

Though OT, I wish MMS had shown the same zeal and single-mindedness to manage India's other pressing issues (J&K, maoism etc). Like GB, he will have only one achievement for his tenure as the PM, and his desperation shows.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 16:52

Swiss engineers, a nuclear black market and the CIA by William J. Broad and David E. Sanger :IHT

The president of Switzerland stepped to a podium in Bern in May and read a statement confirming rumors that had swirled through the capital for months. The government, he acknowledged, had indeed destroyed a huge trove of computer files and other material documenting the business dealings of a family of Swiss engineers suspected of helping smuggle nuclear technology to Libya and Iran.

The files were of particular interest not only to Swiss prosecutors but to international atomic inspectors working to unwind the activities of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani bomb pioneer turned black marketeer. The Swiss engineers, Friedrich Tinner and his two sons, were accused of having deep associations with Khan, acting as middlemen in his dealings with rogue nations seeking nuclear equipment and expertise.

The Swiss president, Pascal Couchepin, took no questions. But he asserted that the files - which included an array of plans for nuclear arms and technologies, among them a highly sophisticated Pakistani bomb design - had been destroyed so that they would never fall into terrorist hands.

Behind that official explanation, though, is a far more intriguing tale of spies, moles and the questionable compromises that governments make in the name of national security.

The United States had urged that the files be destroyed, according to interviews with five current and former Bush administration officials. The purpose, the officials said, was less to thwart terrorists than to hide evidence of a clandestine relationship between the Tinners and the CIA.


For all those who think, that the Pipsqueak in Europe are independent voices. If the CIA can get something like this done, then brandishing the whip would be sufficient for the likes of Ireland, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Sweden to fall in line at the NSG.

Austria and NZ have elections this year and remain special cases.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Rangudu » 26 Aug 2008 19:47

It will take nothing short of the same type of Presidential level effort by the US to get NZ, Austria etc to fall in line. The likes of Phil Goff are not the people to talk to. They cannot be reasoned with, period.

It will take Bush to talk to Helen Clark, Hank Paulson to talk to NZ trade and commerce minister, Bob Gates to talk to NZ defence minister etc.

When the clerk at a local office acts uppity, you get the job done by getting the office chief's attention. The time to play nice with the clerks has come and gone.

Also, just because we believe that it is the US' job, it does not mean that we stop using our leverage with these countries. BCCI bigwigs must talk to NZ cricket chief, chamber of commerce people must be tapped to make sure to everyone in NZ regarding the long-term consequences of their actions. We need to crack the whip because we can.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sraj » 26 Aug 2008 19:51

Philip wrote:NZ's membership of ANZUS goes back decades into the last century.It is quite understandable historically for it to have entered into security arrangements with its only neighbour OZ and the US,the most powerful Pacific power.We can't question the sovereign right of a nation to do so.NZ's antipathy towards nuclear proliferation is likewise its own business.

No one is questioning NZ's sovereign right to make decisions appropriate for its security needs.

Two questions:

1. If they are sincere about their antipathy to nuclear proliferation, why do the Kiwis still cling desperately to the implicit nuclear umbrella provided by their ANZUS military alliance with Australia and the US? Who has threatened them over the past 60 years?

2. Did the Kiwis make any noise about Chinese proliferation at any time? Why did they not block China's membership of NSG in 2004 (that was a 'consensus' decision too, right? :roll: )

Amit,no extra love lost for the Kiwis,just explaining their attitude.

The Kiwis' attitude is easily explained by two words: "hypocrisy" and "double standards"

Even worse, providing the US with plausible deniability while playing the US game in the hope of getting some crumbs somewhere else down the line makes them mercenaries to boot.

btw, GoI has sent senior officials to NZ on several occasions over the past couple of years to reason with them.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby sivab » 26 Aug 2008 20:21

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/00 ... 261616.htm

India nuke deal is prime focus of US nuclear policy: Rice

Washington (PTI): As India and the US work overtime to get a clean NSG waiver, the Bush Administration said the Indo-US atomic deal was currently the "principal focus" of its nuclear policy and given a priority over a similar pact with Russia.

Asked whether developments in Georgia will affect the US-Russia civilian nuclear deal, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the present focus of America's nuclear commerce policy was the India deal and not the one with Russia. :rotfl:

"Our principal focus right now has been on the India civil nuclear deal, having worked through the IAEA, now working through the NSG, and still trying to get into a position to make the appropriate presidential determinations in early September. So that's our focus right now on the civil nuclear side," Rice told reporters on her way to Tel Aviv.

Rice's comments came even as Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon discussed a strategy with senior US officials in Washington to address reservations expressed by some countries at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) over the draft waiver that is required to push the Indso-US nuke deal forward.

Echoing Rice's sentiments, White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto said the current focus of the administration was to see the India-US deal through. The fate of the deal rests with the 45-member NSG which is due to meet for the second time in two weeks on September 6.

"I think we have another nuclear agreement in the queue ahead of that (Russian deal), that we're really focussed on right now, and that's the India civil nuclear agreement. And that's generating a lot of work and time and energy on our part to get that done," Fratto said. :rotfl:

"We were able to work that through the IAEA and now working with the NSG, and trying to get that through NSG, and eventually for presentation to our Congress," Fratto added.

The Deputy Press Secretary was asked whether America intends to pull out of the US-Russia civilian nuclear agreement, given Russia's military action in Georgia, or the deal would be completed by the end of the year.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 20:26

Rangudu wrote:It will take nothing short of the same type of Presidential level effort by the US to get NZ, Austria etc to fall in line. The likes of Phil Goff are not the people to talk to. They cannot be reasoned with, period.

It will take Bush to talk to Helen Clark, Hank Paulson to talk to NZ trade and commerce minister, Bob Gates to talk to NZ defence minister etc.

When the clerk at a local office acts uppity, you get the job done by getting the office chief's attention. The time to play nice with the clerks has come and gone.

Also, just because we believe that it is the US' job, it does not mean that we stop using our leverage with these countries. BCCI bigwigs must talk to NZ cricket chief, chamber of commerce people must be tapped to make sure to everyone in NZ regarding the long-term consequences of their actions. We need to crack the whip because we can.


Rangudu,
Talking with NZ is good, and would help them to yield a bit, but I think what would help is

1. Isolate them at the NSG. If US cracks its whip, Ireland, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Sweden will very easily start seeing the issue in the correct light. Get France, Germany, Britain and Italy to come down heavy onto the Austrians. They too will buckle. NZ can talk tough only if Helen Clark can say, there are other like minded countries, who support NZ. Once that goes, they cannot say, they are the only ones in the world who care about non-proliferation.

2. Activate the Indian Kiwis. Helen Clark is playing to the gallery on this non-proliferation issue because of the elections in Nov. 2008. If the Indian Kiwis in Auckland, which are in big numbers, protest about the Labour Party's unfriendly policies to India, she will very quickly turn around.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby vsudhir » 26 Aug 2008 20:32

Send Prakash karat and an NDTV crew to NZ as emissaries of the GoI. problem solved onlee.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54023
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 26 Aug 2008 20:42

NRao wrote:TPS is suggesting a second version of the 123 - verbiage that will satisfy both side (in the NSG N sides) to declare victory at home and kick the can even further. The red line is CTBT/NPT/etc, beyond which India will have to walk away. In contrast to AK, he would like to make some modifications and get a deal. Modifications he feels - even though it is with a group of countries - really will not matter. I have to assume what he means is that, in the future, even a single "no" vote (cast by the US) would break a NSG consensus - and therefore would be a safe bet for India as of today. Like the 123, rest - dekha jaiyega.

He thinks like a diplomat he is, while AK thinks like a scicom he is.


When the chips are down people will look at the language that was agreed to. AK has the right approach- nail it down.

TPS has been sipping too many coolers at diplomaitc bashes and with his IAEA connections I dont know on whose behalf he is floating hose balloons. When it is at a crucial stage like this, its time to circle wagons and rally round the main point of view(AK) and not release floaters that could undermine the main POV. In my book TPS is suspect.

I dont care how resaonable he is but you dont undermine the main arguement. And Rediff too for floating that garbage.

I used to read Rediff for Varsha Boshle and Rajeev Srinivasan. The former has left and the latter can be read in India Currents.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 20:44

Me also thinks that NZ could also be working at the instance of the Lizard.

NZ is known for its Western Renegade outlook and strong anti-nuclear stance. So just because majority of the people there are ones who ran away from their Anglican Motherland, we might look at NZ as a Western country, however Helen Clark has always had close relations with China as Jiang Zemin himself said, that Helen Clark is an 'old friend'. Helen Clark has also strongly supported China's entry into WTO. Chinese also form the biggest ethnic community after Whites and Maoris.

@Acharya Ji,
Regarding our discussion earlier about the Catholics trying to sabotage the Nuclear Deal....

Helen Clark is a declared agnostic.
Last edited by RajeshA on 26 Aug 2008 20:50, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Pulikeshi » 26 Aug 2008 20:45

“It is extremely important for Japan, the only victim of nuclear attacks, to aim to build a world without nuclear weapons,” Kawaguchi told a joint news conference with Evans after they met Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.


I hope these blokes along with our WhiteKnightAyatollahs realize that -
India is trying to make sure it does not become the second victim of nuclear attacks!

R,

India is indeed going to the Chief (US) and not relying on the clerks (NZ, etc.)!

There are more options with India than just walking away from the table.
Some are more expensive than others....

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 20:56

Enemies of State PoV :evil:

Left, JD(S) and Muslim groups slam nuke deal: PTI

These agreements are clearly aimed at making India a strategic ally of the US in the lines of Israel, Salim said.


India - Israel equal-equal seems to be the new strategy of these Islamofriendly Reptiles.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 26 Aug 2008 21:00


" It is fortunate to the Govt that people do not THINK"

Adolf Hitler 1937

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 26 Aug 2008 21:04

RajeshA wrote:
@Acharya Ji,
Regarding our discussion earlier about the Catholics trying to sabotage the Nuclear Deal....

Helen Clark is a declared agnostic.

As I said before It is not about one person.

The country is represented by a ruling elite. Most of the countries have the ruling elite homogeneous. European countries and commonwealth have ruling elite whose world view is from their Anglican/Catholic background.

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby RajeshA » 26 Aug 2008 21:16

ramana wrote:When it is at a crucial stage like this, its time to circle wagons and rally round the main point of view(AK) and not release floaters that could undermine the main POV. In my book TPS is suspect.

I dont care how resaonable he is but you dont undermine the main arguement.


Phully Agree with you Saar. It is time our leaders, bureaucrats and ex-bureaucrats, sing the same song. Dilly-Dallying not good now.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54023
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby ramana » 26 Aug 2008 21:23

Is the old Commonwealth seeing its hold on Inja slipping away and are styming the US? What is the UK chatterati saying about the NSG waivers? Eg. Economist and Times. We now the FT said it was bad for NP goals. Guardian has its Left/Liberal Point of view.

See right after Independence, US started supporting the TSP as they sought bases agaisnt the SU and allies in the Muslim world to hedge against the new Arab nationalism that had SU support in Middle East. India was left to fend for herself and mainly in UK orbit etc. through the Commonwealth. Now US is adjsuting its policies vis a vis India and that will reduce the UK infleunce. Some of the most diehard imperialsits are in the colonies. Most of the leading families in the Colonies have made their fame and fortunes in India. See their graveyards.

Yeah I know they have a Modern post Colonial outlook and all that but it goes away when looking at India.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7820
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Gerard » 26 Aug 2008 22:09

No time for nuke deal now, over to Obama
The Bush administration and the UPA government can huff and puff all they want to get the US-India nuclear deal past the Nuclear Suppliers group in Vienna next week, but according to a prominent lawmaker who supports the agreement, it's not going to get through Congress in this session and will be deferred to a prospective Obama administration. ''It's not going to happen,'' New York Congressman Gary Ackerman, a Democrat who is also the co-chair of the Indian-American Caucus, told ToI in Denver on the sidelines of the Democratic National Convention. ''There simply isn't enough time.''

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby svinayak » 26 Aug 2008 22:18

Gerard wrote:No time for nuke deal now, over to Obama
The Bush administration and the UPA government can huff and puff all they want to get the US-India nuclear deal past the Nuclear Suppliers group in Vienna next week, but according to a prominent lawmaker who supports the agreement, it's not going to get through Congress in this session and will be deferred to a prospective Obama administration. ''It's not going to happen,'' New York Congressman Gary Ackerman, a Democrat who is also the co-chair of the Indian-American Caucus, told ToI in Denver on the sidelines of the Democratic National Convention. ''There simply isn't enough time.''

End of the story

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

Re: India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

Postby Rangudu » 26 Aug 2008 22:22

What end of story?

NSG waiver is not tied to US legislative deadlines. Unkil and France/Russia had an arrangment that the latter will not use any NSG-Congress gap to seal deals with India. Despite Russian-US tensions that will probably stand.

Unkil has every reason to push this in NSG now. The deal is still more likely to go through in NSG than not.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests