India Nuclear News and Discussion - June 9th

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Postby Satya_anveshi » 22 Jun 2007 21:02

ramana wrote:Is half bright trying to encourage mushy?


What is a mushy or any Paki leader but a pawn in the game of chess to check on Indian minister. We continue to allow a pawn to deter our moves and thus losing focus in building a better defensive or an offensive strategy. It is only when we get another a pawn to stunt Paki pawn will we be able to think outside the contingencies and plan a cohesive strategy.


Assuming Pakistan to possess the most complex nuclear knowlede is a futile game from the start ( and I know you know it). That statement from dumbwit should be considered a direct threat to India rather than seeing it as a encouragement to mushy . In doing so, we will once again abet the deniable perfidy that the US and the west is committing against India.
Last edited by Satya_anveshi on 22 Jun 2007 22:07, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53422
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 22 Jun 2007 22:03

joey wrote:
ramana wrote:The Pu story is psy-ops about arms race in the sub-continent. One more last ditch attempt by the NPAs.


How can you be so sure about this? the pic shows a third site isnt it?


In reply to this:
Apu wrote:Indian government unfazed by reports of third Pak nuclear reactor

The Indian government appeared unfazed on Friday by a Washington-based think tank's report that Pakistan was building a third plutonium production reactor at Khushab and declined any official comment on the issue.

Officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there was nothing new in the report and claimed they were aware of what was happening at Khushab nuclear site, 100 kms from Islamabad, and at Chashma, where work on building a plutonium separation facility was in progress. They also said efforts to drag India into the picture were completely uncalled for and unnecessary.

"Why does India always get dragged in?" a senior official asked. "What does this have to do with India?"

Satellite images taken on June 3 analysed by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) at Washington indicate that the third Khushab reactor is a replica of the second heavy water reactor also being built there. According to David Albright, the Institute's Director, and Paul Brannan, who co-authored the report, "The recent activity at Khushab and Chashma should be viewed as a sign of an accelerated nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan." The report, published on June 21, goes on to say "Both India and Pakistan appear on the verge of greatly expanding their production of nuclear explosive materials and nuclear weapons, including more powerful weapons."

"Recent debate on the proposed US - India peaceful nuclear agreement has highlighted India's desire to maintain a massive plutonium production capability for weapons that can add to an already large stock of weapons plutonium," say Brannan and Albright, a former United Nations IAEA nuclear inspector.

"That and suggestions of an arms race is a complete non-sequitur," said K Santhanam, former Director of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis. "There is no connection with this and the Indo-US civil nuclear deal," Santhanam said. "This is part of the non-proliferation, ayatollah brigade jargon" he said.

According to the IDSA's Uday Bhaskar, "This is not new. After 1998, when Pakistan got its uranium enrichment reactor, it has been attempting a qualitative jump, towards enrichment of weapons grade plutonium."

The ISIS report says "Pakistan may have concluded that it needs more plutonium to improve the quality of its nuclear arsenal and build a new generation of lighter, more powerful weapons." "It may also want larger yield (50-100 kiloton) fission weapons that can cause far more damage to Indian cities than its current relatively low-yield weapons," the report adds.

"India has no cause for alarm," Santhanam said. "The existing Pakistani nuclear weapons programme is based on enriched uranium, the technology for which was stolen by AQ Khan. This is more in the nature of Hanuman's poonch (tail)," he said, explaining that such a process takes time and yields very low volumes, making it unnecessary for India to get worried.

"If the reactor (at Khushab) is being indigenously built, there is no question of it attracting safeguards," Santhanam said. "But if there is assistance from China, which has assisted their nuclear development, there will have to be safeguards."


-------------
As you can see K Santhanam has answered clearly what the game is.

As for Satya_anveshi, (Can I call you satya?)

See the ISIS report about TSP quest for higher yield this is an enouragement to TSP to get new stuff. They are desparate to keep the Indian isolation and are encouraging the China-TSP nexus to do something.
What more is needed to understand the NPA/Cold Warriors thinking? BTW Zbig thinks that the deal was a bad move to allow India to return to the high table.
But that is a US problem.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 22 Jun 2007 22:28

Besides, the US and other 'non Muslim' countries better sleep less at night. What makes anyone think that even Mush is a true friend? There is always that small chance that even he may (being polite here) have a look-west dream.

The sound of 'Strategic depth' is still resonating in Islamabad.

NPAs in the US, with every passing day, are unable to look at the entire picture - it is getting too complicated for their brains.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53422
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 22 Jun 2007 22:57

Its not just the NPAs. Its the old style Cold Warriors who believe in Exceptionalism. They are doing their best to keep the flame burning.

bala
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Postby bala » 22 Jun 2007 23:02

The US-China nexus, CHINUS, always play their cards to heighten the hatred of TSP towards India. When India clearly does not give two hoots to TSP, ChinUS, tries its hand at instigation and incentives to its whore TSP.

"Why does India always get dragged in?" a senior official asked. "What does this have to do with India?"
is very appropriate.

Zbig is a bigot of the highest order. His arched eyebrows shows hatred and he is stuck in cold-war rhetoric. It is about time he grows up and smells the coffee. China is a looming threat to the US.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53422
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 23 Jun 2007 03:04

Ashok Mehta in Pioneer, 22 June 2007

It's an equal partnership

The India-US 123 Civil Nuclear Agreement (CNA), integral to the evolving strategic partnership between the two, has been the most deeply debated foreign and security policy issue of recent times in both countries. So far, Indian and US negotiators have met four times to discuss the CNA, first in Delhi, then Capetown, London and last week again in Delhi where an agreed text could not be worked out.

The deal is stuck principally over India's explicit right to reprocess spent fuel, which it wants mandated in the CNA rather than in a later agreement as the US would like.

India's goal is to reach the CNA which fully reflects the Joint Statement of July 18, 2005, Separation Plan of March 2, 2006, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement in Parliament of August 17, 2006. The Hyde Act, according to India, contains certain extraneous and prescriptive provisions which are unacceptable. But the US Administration has assured India there is nothing in the Hyde Act that will prevent it from meeting its obligations from earlier agreements.

In India, there are fears it is being hustled into a CNA that will curtail its strategic programme and autonomy. At the same time, many see an India on the rise and the US as willing to make that rise happen in the mutual interest of both. Clearly, there is an energy security dimension as well as an overriding strategic partnership in the offing. This is India's biggest foreign policy initiative in the last 35 years.

There are three major steps that have to be taken before the CNA can become law and implementable. First, the ongoing bilateral Civil Nuclear Agreement being negotiated has to be concluded. Second, an India-specific IAEA safeguards and Additional Protocol have to be drawn up. And third, the 45-nation NSG must change rules to allow India to conduct nuclear civil cooperation with its members. In October 2006, India made a presentation to the NSG. Former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran is the pointsman for negotiations with NSG members. He has already softened the difficult countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada and in the Nordic region.

A lookback as to how India has reached the threshold of the pathbreaking CNA will be useful. The July 18, 2005, CNA came in the form of a joint statement and was the culmination of a process begun by the NDA Government through the untidy acronym NSSP (Next Steps in Strategic Partnership) in January 2004. The Joint Statement confers obligations on both countries - US to adjust domestic laws to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade including fuel supplies; India to separate civil and military nuclear reactors and place civil facilities under IAEA safeguards. In other words, US is helping liberate India from nuclear apartheid but, at the same time, meeting its non-proliferation concerns.

India's separation plan emerged on March 2, 2006, and was tabled in Parliament on May 11, 2006. It requires India to place 14 out of 22 thermal power reactors under IAEA safeguards in phases by 2014. Fast breeder reactors are not covered under safeguards. As for future reactors, the Government of India retains the sole right to determine such reactors as civilian or otherwise.

The separation plan will not affect India's strategic programme. Weapon-grade plutonium is extracted from CIRUS and Dhruv reactors. The yearly yield of CIRUS is 9.2 kg and Dhruv 22 kg. The available plutonium stock is 648 kg which is good for about 100 weapons. In addition, there is unsafeguarded reactor-grade plutonium in huge quantities and according to one nuclear scientist, "You could have bombs coming out of your ears."

The CNA is about reconciling the Hyde Act within the parameters of the two bilateral agreements on July 18 and March 2 and the Prime Minister's statement in Parliament on August 17. CNA is stuck essentially over two issues: India's right to reprocess spent fuel and fuel supply guarantees and maintenance of a strategic fuel reserve. On reprocessing, the US President will have to reassure Congress that reprocessed material will not be diverted to military use which could entail dual US and IAEA safeguards. The second sticking point is a potential deal-breaker as a nuclear test by India would result in total suspension of bilateral nuclear activity and sanctions. Period.

The CNA is about India's energy security as well. While nuclear power constitutes between two and three per cent of domestic use, by 2030 nuclear energy component of power will go up to between eight and 10 per cent. The CNA should not be made the centrepiece of the India-US strategic partnership, which has tremendous potential in providing India access to US space, technology and science, besides a robust defence cooperation relationship. There are expectations on both sides. The US wishlist includes India's participation in Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) and Container Security Initiative (CSI) and support in its global war against terror and India reaping the benefits of being on the right side of the world's only superpower. Not surprisingly, Pakistan and China have not taken kindly to the nuclear deal. The Chinese especially, said that any CNA must strengthen the NPT regime and added that only NPT countries that forego nuclear weapons qualify for civil nuclear cooperation. It was speculated that China might offer a similar nuclear deal to Pakistan. But nothing has been heard so far.

Public surveys done in India's four largest cities have shown that CNA is the key driver in the high ratings of US image and popularity in India. At least one survey reflects that anti-Americanism has dropped to around four per cent in India when the global trend is otherwise. This is good news for the Bush team and the US and a sign of better things to come. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected in Delhi in July when the nuclear deal is expected to get unstuck. The US is in a hurry to clinch the deal because of a variety of business interests and policy imperatives. The CNA was given a push at the recent meeting between Mr Manmohan Singh and US President George W Bush during the meeting of the G-8 in Berlin.

The US is trying to restructure world order and find India a place in the sun. The strategic partnership will present India with new opportunities to break out of south Asia and take its legitimate place as an emerging world power. The CNA will give India, a non-NPT signatory, access to nuclear commerce in the world while retaining its weapons programme. This is quite unprecedented. The US will benefit from India's growing stature in Asia and beyond.

In the context of the CNA, a former Foreign Secretary said: Whether the deal gets done or not, "it is better to have loved and lost than not to have loved at all".



So that is the Army's thinking.

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

Postby svinayak » 23 Jun 2007 04:24

ramana wrote:Ashok Mehta in Pioneer, 22 June 2007


It's an equal partnership
So that is the Army's thinking.


The title says that India has more than UK/France and probably China.

That means the deal will not add to what India already has. THis is a major info from the defence

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 23 Jun 2007 04:39

The CNA is about reconciling the Hyde Act within the parameters of the two bilateral agreements on July 18 and March 2 and the Prime Minister's statement in Parliament on August 17.


We are going in circles.

IF the Hyde Act is part of US Law, then what can the US contribute to any reconciliation. All "reconciliation" has to come from India - that is J18/M2.

And, IF India has enough to make nukes coming out of the ears, then why any concerns from NPAs and acceptance from the US Admin to any NPA concerns? It also does not jive with the title.

Also, it looks like as a side swipe at DAE.

At first pass this article does not look too good. Wonder if it is to set up for Conndi's visit - soften the area. Let us see, I for one would expect more such (one sided) articles.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36388
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 23 Jun 2007 04:40

Assumptions: Lets say nuclear testing word is removed from the agreement documents, reprocessing allowed, and supply guarantees are got. We sign the agreement.

Testing:-
1. Would India be ready to test given an oppty somebody else tests?
or
2. Would India prepare for testing ASAP.

Reprocessing:-
1. AFAIK, Obamma was under the view, that if reprocessing is allowed, we should share this technology and waste processing techs with them. How far this is acceptable?

or

2. Are we going to get western technology and management (IAEA) to get this done?

Supplies:-
1. Would there be a counter guarantee to supply thorium (its an assumption for a future requirement/reserves) to America and other supplying nations?

2. What are the thresholds that would break supplies? if India does not vote for every American foreign policy, etc?

Of course, I am assuming that India has to compromise somewhere and it can't be on the civilian side since we have very few options. Strategically, we could be asked not to seek for UNSC forever, dont claim for NWS but behave like a subordinate like Israel etc.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 23 Jun 2007 05:04

The title says that India has more than UK/France and probably China.


But it doesn't.
They have hundreds of operational warheads plus several tons each of weapons grade Pu and U in stockpile.

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Postby rocky » 23 Jun 2007 12:01

ramana wrote:So that is the Army's thinking.
I wouldn't take Ashok Mehta's word as one from the Armed forces. He's very inconsistent, and on few occasions has been quite incoherent in matters relating to even defence.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53422
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 23 Jun 2007 21:43

No matter he seems to have some higher authorization. He givves figures to one decimal place.
What I get from this is there is enough FM for a notional deterrent of ~ 100 weapons based on WG Pu- (648kg). Annual augmentation of this stockpile is is (9.2 kg + 22kg ). But note Cirrus is to be taken down as part of separation plan. The plan also said that they would add a new reactor to replace Cirrus on the mil side. by revealing the annual augmentation stock he is giving out the operational efficiency of the two reactors.
To add to this he talks about large amount of reactor grade material that has or can be refined.

So the sum total of this revelation is that India has adequate stocks and there should be no needs for diversion that the West fears. All reprocessing is to feed the FBR which is on non-civilian side for it refines the reactor grade as needed and has to be outside the separation plan till adequate stocks are built up.

Hence the US drive to put FBR under safeguards and fast track FMCO

My comment is that WOP gives different amounts of material required for the POKII tests- 2kg to 8 kg. So this 100 weapons is a lower bound amount and could be more with existing stockpile.

Also note that in 2030 the electrical power to national grid will be ~ 8 to 10 percent from 2 to 3 percent now. That means this can be done with thermal plants i.e. even without the nuke deal.

So the deal is about undoing the wrongs of the NPT which had a premature cut-off date for testing.
As an aside KS had presented a paper to BAS and elsewhere as to how to square the circle of the NPT in 1992 before the indefinite extension of NPT in 1995. The US under the NPA/Cold Warrior spell ignored it.

So the challenge to the NSG is do you want to deal with India or not. This is summed up in the last quote.

The bit about China and TSP are non-sequitor. That is for the others to worry about. Reason is India is already affected by the PRC-TSP nexus since 1987. There is no new additional threat yet.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 23 Jun 2007 22:04

Ramana,

These two are of interest:

But the US Administration has assured India there is nothing in the Hyde Act that will prevent it from meeting its obligations from earlier agreements.


and

Clearly, there is an energy security dimension as well as an overriding strategic partnership in the offing.


The decimal points on these two are very crucial.

The latter actually leads to plenty of other questions: who, what, why, etc. Clearly, the US will want to lead in any partnership of this kind.

Recall the article about AK being a 600 lb Gor? The US civilians had acknowledged that India had enough FM. So, that was never an issue - outside of NPAs of course (but then who cares about NPAs now? They have made themselves relics).

My feel is that the issue is not about Indian capabilities (either path), it is about how to hook India into a greater US plan. I suspect the US wants a say in Indian button pressing sequence. Partnership.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 23 Jun 2007 22:17

What I get from this is there is enough FM for a notional deterrent of ~ 100 weapons based on WG Pu- (648kg). Annual augmentation of this stockpile is is (9.2 kg + 22kg ). But note Cirrus is to be taken down as part of separation plan.


But nothing is mentioned of the PHWRs placed on the military side.

From

India Research Foundation -Impact of Indo-US Agreement on Indian Strategic Weapon program: Will it make available more indigenous Uranium reserve for Indian Weapons Program?
Date: 02-May-2006 Author: Arun Sharma

Assessment
Let us look at facts to understand merit of this argument.

1. Indian strategic nuclear weapons use approximately 3 Kg Plutonium.

2. India has large un-safeguarded Plutonium stockpile (conservatively estimated to between 3,000 Kg and 6,000Kg), a fraction of that will suffice to make hundreds of nuclear weapons if India choose to exercise the option.

3. Indian PHWR reactors that are outside IAEA safeguard when operated for efficient power generation would have cumulatively required just 5,842 tonnes. India is estimated to have mined about 9,200 tonnes of natural-uranium, indicating that about 55% of the fuel and 8% of its reactor capacity was used in low fuel burn mode, generally associated with operating the reactors in mode optimized to generate weapon grade Plutonium. This corresponds to about 2,400Kg weapon grade Plutonium enough for 800 strategic nuclear weapon.

4. Current Indian reserves of uranium estimated between 77,500 – 94,000 metric tonnes, enough to support 12,000 MWe power generation for 50 years. 5. Current Indian PHWR reactors that are outside IAEA safeguard annually require 116 tonnes of natural-uranium when operated in a mode optimized for power generation. When operated in a mode optimized to generate weapon-grade Plutonium they require just 747 tonnes of natural-uranium annually, in the process they generate 745 Kg weapon grade Plutonium, which is enough for 248 nuclear weapons per year.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 24 Jun 2007 04:40

Nuclear scientist hospitalised
Eminent nuclear scientist Dr. P.K. Iyengar has been hospitalised following discomfort in the chest, according to family sources.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 Jun 2007 06:30

ramana wrote:Ashok Mehta in Pioneer, 22 June 2007
The available plutonium stock is 648 kg which is good for about 100 weapons. In addition, there is unsafeguarded reactor-grade plutonium in huge quantities and according to one nuclear scientist, "You could have bombs coming out of your ears."[/b]



:rotfl:

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23743
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 24 Jun 2007 07:40

My feel is that the issue is not about Indian capabilities (either path), it is about how to hook India into a greater US plan.

NRao, while that could be one part of the story, the other part certainly is the self-appointed NPAs. While players of the first part (PotUS, Condi etc.) are aware of the game plan of the latter and use them to achieve their aims, the latter may not be fully aware of the plan of the former.

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

Postby vsudhir » 24 Jun 2007 07:48

SSridhar wrote:
My feel is that the issue is not about Indian capabilities (either path), it is about how to hook India into a greater US plan.

NRao, while that could be one part of the story, the other part certainly is the self-appointed NPAs. While players of the first part (PotUS, Condi etc.) are aware of the game plan of the latter and use them to achieve their aims, the latter may not be fully aware of the plan of the former.


Nah. Where we are concerned, its all just one large choreographed setup. If the NPAs slip up and howl something that's inconvenient to SD/WH then the latter say the NPAs don't represent admin view and where it is convenient, the admin adopts NPA talking points like it just hatched out of their collective egg.

vnadendla
BRFite
Posts: 132
Joined: 09 Mar 2006 00:40
Location: USA

Is this a way out?

Postby vnadendla » 24 Jun 2007 07:58

Insted of Military and Civilian separate out Indian Nuclear facilities into three parts
    1) Military - No Safegaurds
    2) Indian Civilian - Blackbox safegaurds : Can only see fuel coming in and out. Not intrusive or IP stealing. This will include FBRs.
    3) International Civilian - Whitebox more intrusive safegaurds.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6473
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 24 Jun 2007 08:56

Gerard wrote:Nuclear scientist hospitalised
Eminent nuclear scientist Dr. P.K. Iyengar has been hospitalised following discomfort in the chest, according to family sources.


I am not suspecting anything per se here, but as the so called 'deal' talks heat up, it is of paramount interest that the heavy lifting nay sayers like AK, PKI etc are provided Z-level security. Remember, the CIA operates with a Jihadi like mindset, anything goes as long is it is in US national interests. I think we should take out the Z-level security from the Paki loving APHC scum in Kashmir, give it to the patriotic scientists opposing this sell out, and let the APHC stew in their own juice :-).

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 24 Jun 2007 16:21

CRamS wrote:
Gerard wrote:Nuclear scientist hospitalised
Eminent nuclear scientist Dr. P.K. Iyengar has been hospitalised following discomfort in the chest, according to family sources.


I am not suspecting anything per se here, but as the so called 'deal' talks heat up, it is of paramount interest that the heavy lifting nay sayers like AK, PKI etc are provided Z-level security. Remember, the CIA operates with a Jihadi like mindset, anything goes as long is it is in US national interests. I think we should take out the Z-level security from the Paki loving APHC scum in Kashmir, give it to the patriotic scientists opposing this sell out, and let the APHC stew in their own juice :-).


I'd put pressure from the PMO as a more likely cause than the CIA.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Is this a way out?

Postby NRao » 24 Jun 2007 16:25

vnadendla wrote:Insted of Military and Civilian separate out Indian Nuclear facilities into three parts
    1) Military - No Safegaurds
    2) Indian Civilian - Blackbox safegaurds : Can only see fuel coming in and out. Not intrusive or IP stealing. This will include FBRs.
    3) International Civilian - Whitebox more intrusive safegaurds.


You are re-writing J18, etc.

Re-write the Hyde Act. And let the US join the main stream?

Hold the J18 constant and let them 'reconcile' the Hyde Act.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 24 Jun 2007 16:38

Biraders

Dearly detailed look at KRL

http://verificationthoughts.blogspot.co ... l/Pakistan

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 24 Jun 2007 17:11

JCage wrote:Biraders

Dearly detailed look at KRL

http://verificationthoughts.blogspot.co ... l/Pakistan



In March, I argued that it was going to be difficult to convince India and Pakistan to agree on "on a mandate which explicitly excludes verification. After all, while it is difficult to say how much weapons usable stuff has been produced on the subcontinent, fissile material imbalances between the two countries are likely". So, I've been talking a bit to members of the European diplomatic community, and some other people I know, about why they thought that the six president's proposal hasn't flown yet. Most are putting the blame squarely at China which, in their view, seems to magically control the motions of several other members of the Conference on Disarmament. Not a single person mentioned the role of India and Pakistan on this issue. It is somehow like their positions don't really matter. I think that's a peculiar train of thought, knowing that the CD operates on the principle that everyone should agree to everything, and that India nearly managed to block the adoption of the CTBT in the mid-1990s.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 24 Jun 2007 17:54

Birader Gerard, indeed dirty kaffirs of India are upto something in dark places. The good chinese govt loved by the NPA should always get a free pass because they are of the book of NPT.

But look TFTA herrows from land of pure are very good at technology.

[quote]Whether or not Iran keeps this pace, it seems that the Iranians are rushing to build large numbers of centrifuges that don’t work very well. (Paul has a nice roundup on some of the problems.)

That, to me, is very, very telling.

Iran—far from complying with UN Security Council demands for suspension—is racing, either for a bomb or to create “facts on the groundâ€

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 24 Jun 2007 18:26

Three points of interest WRT such articles:

1) On the strategic side India needs to keep out of any discussions related to TSP/Chicom, what they did, etc, etc, etc. It only provides others to get a toe into the internal discussions (as we can see with the Hyde Act). India needs absolute control - right down to the last nut and bolt.

2) WRT civilian side. Here too India needs total control with enough openness to allow market forces to operate within the Indian scene (not the other way around - not, India operating within the international market forces).

3) All this until India is accepted as a NWS. In fact, I would encourage other nations to toss China out of those organizations (a job for the NRIs, not the GoI). What purpose has China served within them anyways? It is in relation to this point that such articles need to be collated.

In either case, TSP/Chicom and their tails, the NPAs, have to be treated as vaporware. As long as India has CMD, that is what they are and since India needs to have total control, what purpose does it serve to talk to them?

Let the NPAs talk as much as they want about TSP/Iran/China/etc. After all they need to put some food on the table for their families too.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 24 Jun 2007 19:32

And the NPA longs to visit BARC...

A helpful Indian did confirm to me, over a beer, that BARC may well have a bus shuttle service running from the main gate to the two reactors (I had deducted that from the GE imagery, but did not trust my own analysis). In his words (almost), "what would you expect? It's a very long walk from the main gate!". I ceased the day and said that I was looking forward to an invitation to visit the facility (I would just love to visit that place; it looks so green and healthy). My Indian friend looked at me in disbelief.
Hey man, you can't blame a guy for trying. I'm Swedish … harmless … I promise …

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5228
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 Jun 2007 21:17

NRao wrote:All this until India is accepted as a NWS. In fact, I would encourage other nations to toss China out of those organizations (a job for the NRIs, not the GoI). What purpose has China served within them anyways? It is in relation to this point that such articles need to be collated.
There is an easy and obvious way to the above. Democracy is the minimum condition to be part of these international groupings. Now, all that is needed is some testerostones on the part of those championing the cause of democracy and put their dollars behind where their mouths are! Anyone? Quiz: which country, under which President made it possible for China to be part of the international regimes?

No prizes for correct answer. Conclusion: Principles of democracy and fairness are a poor substitute for power in the geopolitical game.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 24 Jun 2007 22:52

The usual suspects...

Nuclear 'spent fuel' raises concern in south India
The placement of half a dozen powerful nuclear reactors together at the Koodankulam complex in Tamil Nadu is raising concern in the state, though the government says there is nothing to worry.
Questions are being asked as to what would happen to the spent fuel emerging from the plant, located in Tirunelveli district, about 1,000 km south of here.
The fears have been raised by a spectrum of people from M.V. Ramana of the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies on Environment and Development to fishermen.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3245
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 25 Jun 2007 05:33

Sparks of nuke hope

[quote]Jamshedpur, June 24: Atomic Energy Commission chairperson Anil Kakodkar today brushed away speculation of shelving of a nuclear plant in East Singhbum “due to its proximity to uranium ore at Jadugodaâ€

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3245
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 25 Jun 2007 05:42

Nuclear talks go under cover

[quote]K.P. NAYAR
Washington, June 24: The tortured negotiations over a 123 Agreement to operationalise the Indo-US nuclear deal will resume “under coverâ€

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7562
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 25 Jun 2007 05:59

India agreed to that part of the joint statement two years ago because it appeared that the CD would not make progress towards an FMCT in the foreseeable future.


Sigh....

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5228
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jun 2007 06:15

The possibility of a new coordinator pushing through an end to fissile material production is creating nightmares in New Delhi and in Trombay, the high table of the country’s nuclear establishment.
I am waiting to find the god damn fricking truth, is Arun_S right in his analysis or is India's fissile material limited to Dhruv, Cirrus and the TFBR - for now.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 Jun 2007 07:58

India is committed, under the original July 18, 2005, joint statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush, to working with the Americans on an FMCT.


Make no sense.

On one hand India feels obligated to keep its commitments to the J18 and on the other hand is willing to negotiate away the commitments made by the US? Lunacy.

Also, the Carnegie Foundation get together is supposed to start sometime now - that is why Jaishankar is here.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 Jun 2007 08:13

ShauryaT wrote:
The possibility of a new coordinator pushing through an end to fissile material production is creating nightmares in New Delhi and in Trombay, the high table of the country’s nuclear establishment.
I am waiting to find the god damn fricking truth, is Arun_S right in his analysis or is India's fissile material limited to Dhruv, Cirrus and the TFBR - for now.


The only way to force issues to announce that J18 cannot be parcelled. That India will work on the FMCT only when the J18 is passed in the US COngress.

Also, this 'new coordinator' could be a fast one from the US side.

WS is the way out.

Laks
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 11 Jan 2005 20:47

Postby Laks » 25 Jun 2007 09:14

:?: :!:
http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/23/stories ... 250300.htm
No harm in accepting moratorium on nuclear tests, says expert
BANGALORE: Member of the National Security Advisory Board K. Sreedhar Rao on Friday suggested that there was no harm in India accepting a permanent moratorium on nuclear tests. The U.S. is insisting on such a moratorium in the run-up to the 123 Agreement under the Indo-American civilian nuclear cooperation deal.

Delivering a talk on the deal here, Mr. Rao said conceding the demand would not affect the country’s weapons programme.

The Indian scientists had told him that the research could be continued for some 20 years without any test. Simulated computer tests were enough. If India was forced to conduct tests in the event of neighbours resorting to it, India could depend :roll: on the U.S. President’s powers to waive off the moratorium. On the other hand, India may be in a position to dump the agreement and go ahead with the tests after 20 years.

The former Foreign Secretary A.P. Venkateswaran and a few participants expressed apprehension that the deal would lead to over dependence on the U.S. which could adversely affect the country’s security. Mr. Venkateswaran pointed out that the U.S. had failed to keep its 1970 commitment to supply fuel to Tarapur atomic energy plant, leading to huge losses for the country.

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Postby Satya_anveshi » 25 Jun 2007 09:54



Now, Hindu newspaper, which has so far done a yeoman job in providing bandwidth to the dissenting voices, does not think this story is necessary in the National or Frontpage section. Currently this story is shown in Karnataka section.

If you see last few posts on the forum, bad signs are everywhere including changing health condition of PK Iyengar. People can read lot into it.

There is a drastic change in the strategy employed by PMO (in messing up India's future) and it is showing but there is no clue in the change in objectives from anywhere.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 Jun 2007 16:34

ShauryaT wrote:
The possibility of a new coordinator pushing through an end to fissile material production is creating nightmares in New Delhi and in Trombay, the high table of the country’s nuclear establishment.
I am waiting to find the god damn fricking truth, is Arun_S right in his analysis or is India's fissile material limited to Dhruv, Cirrus and the TFBR - for now.


Forgot, what ever happened to the 'bombs out of the ear' theory/fact?

Also, slowly GoI is conceding every point and then match to the US.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23743
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 25 Jun 2007 17:23

Laks wrote::?: :!:
http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/23/stories ... 250300.htm
No harm in accepting moratorium on nuclear tests, says expert
BANGALORE: Member of the National Security Advisory Board K. Sreedhar Rao on Friday suggested that there was no harm in India accepting a permanent moratorium on nuclear tests.

Does anybody know this gentleman and his antecedents, K. Sreedhar Rao ?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16391
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 Jun 2007 17:39

SSridhar wrote:Does anybody know this gentleman and his antecedents, K. Sreedhar Rao ?


From this:

[quote]
Bangalore International Centre: K. Sreedhar Rao, retired member, National Security Advisory Board speaks on “Indo-U.S. civil nuclear cooperation agreementâ€


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests