India Nuclear News and Discussion - June 26-2007

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 21:49

The Hindu :: June 26, 2007 :: 'No too many holes in Indo-US nuke deal'

Washington, June 26 (PTI): Stressing that the Indo-US civil nuclear deal is not an arms control agreement or a trade off for New Delhi's strategic programme, a top Indian negotiator said there are not "too many gaps" in coming to the final understanding and that the two countries are "closing" it.

"Basically, I do not think there are many problems in the gaps. The issue is how you take broad political principles and make them into legal language," Indian High Commissioner to Singapore S Jaishankar said at the Carnegie Endowment Conference International Non-proliferation Conference here.

"The translation of the March 2006 and the July 2005 understandings into the 123-Agreement, it is really easier said than done because you are working on a legal document with a worst case contingency approach.

"You have to find very exacting, very rigorous language to reflect that. And that is where the challenge lies," Jaishankar, a top member of the negotiating team, said.

The Indian envoy was participating in a panel discussion on "Forging Non Proliferation Consensus after Indo-US Civil Nuclear Cooperation".

The top Indian envoy may be officially participating at the Carnegie Conference but privately he is said to be carrying on the dialogue on the 123-Agreement meeting in the sidelines with senior officials of the Bush administration dealing with the issue.

Jaishankar made it clear that New Delhi was looking for a "clean and straightforward" exemption to the NSG guidelines on enrichment and reprocessing.

"Our understanding with the US is that we will work with it not to transfer enrichment or reprocessing technologies to states that don't have, the operative part is don't have. We have been reprocessing since 1964 and we have been enriching for at least about ten years," Jaishankar said.

So, we will not fall in our eyes into a category of states that these technologies would not be available as per the current international consensus in the making, he added.

The Indian diplomat stressed, that everything India was willing to do was to be covered by the July 18 statement. "There is no commitment outside that statement. We frankly don't envisage anything outside that statement," he said.

"There is a certain restraint on the part of India -- a minimum deterrent and no first use are the part of that restraint," he said, adding India's commitment to Article six cannot be doubted.

One of the reasons we did not sign the NPT was that Article six was not strong enough. We are officially committed to a world free of nuclear weapons, Jaishankar said.

"To confuse the strategic restraint as it sort of evolved during the course of the last administration -- is really mixing apples with oranges," he said.

"With regards to full scope safeguards,as far as we are concerned we have an understanding with the administration," Jaishankar remarked making the point that Bush administration has indeed consulted the US Congress, its allies and members of the Nuclear Supplies Group.

Jaishankar argued that India does not deny that there is a consensus on the issue of non-proliferation.

"We are in a position to contribute to that consensus," Jaishankar said going on to make the point that the evolving issues have to be seen in a larger political context.

India cannot be expected to be a partner and a target at the same time. India brings value to the consensus at a time when it is under serious test," he said adding it would appear that while there are many elements that constitute a consensus, there are also aspects on which the international community is still significantly divided.

The top diplomat argued that the US-India civilian nuclear deal is a significant departure from orthodoxy and is critical to see what was within and without of the agreed framework.

"The understanding focuses exclusively on civilian nuclear energy cooperation. On the Indian side, there is no expectation that the agreement would contribute to its weapons programme. We must be equally clear that this is not an arms control agreement," he said.

Suggestions have been made that US negotiators could have demanded tougher conditions including a moratorium on fissile material production. In that situation, there would have been no agreement, he addded.

Making clear that India's strategic programme was clearly outside the purview of the Indo-US understanding, he said,"Any attempts to intrude into that domain or determine externally what India regards as its national prerogative would obviously undermine the basis of the agreement."

Jaishankar asked the gathering to do not let orthodoxy and intellectual rigidity undermine a path breaking initiative of such great potential. "Appreciate the contribution that India can make to the revival of global nuclear industry and create a climate for more confident and predictable nuclear trade with India," the top Indian envoy said.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 26 Jun 2007 22:01


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 22:05

ramana,

thanks.

You mentioned Jaishankars speech. Do you have a URL for the complete version of it?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 26 Jun 2007 22:08

No working on it. Usually Cspan has the video of such an important discussion. Could be tonite re-broadcast.

Also CIEP will have transcripts and MEA site will do the same.

I want to know what did Einhorn say for he is now NPA #2?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 22:20

I am not sure what anyone can say - IF Jaishankar really represents the GoI. This is pretty close to AK's 'all or nothing'.

Hopefully Tellis got wind of it before Jaishankar opened his mouth at the conference.

To place this in the proper context - this conference had a totally different agenda. They had expected the Indo-US deal to have been signed before thsi conference took place.

The current topic (nuke free world) falls right into the Indian thinking (I wish India had taken greater advantage of the situation and hammered denuke everyone nara). NPAs have a totally different agenda - they cannot - ever - talk of a nuclear free world - no NPAs, no nuclear free fatwas, dismantle all foundations, etc.

Outside of India and the Carnegie Endowment, who can really talk this talk? Not even Japan or NZ!!!!! Forget Aussies and the like.

The beauty with India (IMVVVHO) is that she can flip-flop and yet do extremely well in both spheres. The rest of the world will go through withdrawals and will need rehab.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 26 Jun 2007 22:21

NRao wrote:
I am not sure what anyone can say - IF Jaishankar really represents the GoI. This is pretty close to AK's 'all or nothing'.


huh?! He works for the GoI and is involved in the negotiations with the US...what other credentials do you need before you accept that the GoI is speaking in one voice with the scientists?


And in other news, predictable FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) from NPA Einhorn on India -- same old "nuclear flashpoint, nuclear flashpoint" horsemanure in Einhorn's drool. The NPAs want India to use up the weapons program material in the civilian program (as Valkan had pointed out in an earlier version of this thread), and they will not back down from that agenda any time soon.

'N-deal could lead to arms race'

Agencies

Washington, June 26: A known critic of the Indo-US civil nuclear deal has claimed that the agreement, which he said would provide New Delhi with uranium for fissile material production, could lead to an arms race between India, Pakistan and China.

"The civilian nuclear deal will free up for India Uranium needed for its weapons programme, will force Pakistan to keep pace and perhaps even make China to re-think on resuming fissile material production," Robert Einhorn, a former US State Department official, said.

Einhorn, a key official dealing with non-proliferation issues during the Bill Clinton administration, was speaking at a panel discussion "Forging Non Proliferation Consensus after US-Indian Civil Nuclear Cooperation".

He said the deal posed several risks - some countries under pressure will calculate that costs are "manageable" and that the US will show "understanding", that rules can be bent or ignored under the pretext of commerce and the substantial increase in the fissile material stock leaving open the possibilities of theft and seizure.

The US, in the process of forging the new consensus, has a special responsibility to allay fears of allies and reassure commitment to security in the context of what has happened with Iran and North Korea, Einhorn said.

About India's contribution in the NPT regime, Einhorn, presently with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, maintained that New Delhi should resist in "re-making" it. (and why the hell should India resist remaking the NPT to its benefit? To make the oiseaule NPAs happy?)



URL: http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=88694



Indian Express has a large ad on its webpage stating "Bomb Iran?"..hmm
Last edited by Rye on 26 Jun 2007 22:28, edited 2 times in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 22:24

[url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/The_United_States/India_says_gaps_in_finalisation_of_N-deal_no_major_problem/articleshow/2150920.cms] Times of India :: June 26, 2007 :: India says 'gaps' in finalisation of N-deal no major problem
[/url]

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 22:27

"The civilian nuclear deal will free up for India Uranium needed for its weapons programme, will force Pakistan to keep pace and perhaps even make China to re-think on resuming fissile material production," Robert Einhorn, a former US State Department official, said.


Is that his definition of 'proliferation'?

What makes him think that China will not start it because of RRW?

huh?! He works for the GoI and is involved in the negotiations with the US...what other credentials do you need before you accept that the GoI is speaking in one voice with the scientists?


Ah. That is easy to answer.

Track record (of MMS GoI).

Frankly, I am very pleasantly surprised with that Jaishankar talk. Just would have liked to see that from MMS himself prior to the Hyde Act being passed. I have my suspicions, may post it l8r at a more opportune time.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 26 Jun 2007 22:38

Now we understand Ashok Mehta article on Equal partnership. And S. Jaishankar's remarks about the civilian nature of the deal. It was for the NPAs.

Interesting that from the meet agenda Tellis is speaking today about something else.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 26 Jun 2007 22:46

Well, ramana, you missed this lunch

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3528
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Postby Satya_anveshi » 26 Jun 2007 23:03

That reaffirmation from Jaishankar makes a mokery of resistance from scientists. If things were so hunky dory, where is the questions of AK going on record to offer resignation if things were to come to that extent?

Mr. Jaishankar is fooling us (again).


The people, method, and the means employed in reaching this agreement are all suspicious.

The fact that MMS and Sonia, with little to no opposition, are driving this show is reason enough (for some) to conclude that there is something insidious going on. And don't forget the preceeding events of how people , like Mani Iyer, Nutwar, Kalam who voiced reservations against this deal, were kicked out of the loop.
Last edited by Satya_anveshi on 26 Jun 2007 23:10, edited 3 times in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 26 Jun 2007 23:03

NR, Thats old hat.

I was referring to this
Link

He is talking about 'Taking disarmament seriously'!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 26 Jun 2007 23:58

USI Journal [url=http://www.usiofindia.org/article_Jan_Mar07_1.htm]Beyond The 123 -
Is There A Plan B ?[/url]


The traffic signals ahead for 123 are definitely amber and blinking rapidly, requiring movement with extreme caution. But, at this stage, the million dollar question that should be posed to national policy makers – is there a Plan B?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
General Shankar Roychowdhury, PVSM (Retd) is a former Chief of the Army Staff.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 28 Jun 2007 00:15

This should have been posted by now.

From Telegraph, 27 June 2007

Look Who is talking?


[quote]
LOOK WHO’S TALKING
- India could get away with what it wants on the nuclear issue
Diplomacy-K.P. Nayar


The gloves are off in the negotiations on the so-called 123 Agreement, the next step towards operationalizing the Indo-US nuclear deal. Ending the pretence that all is well with the talks between the high profile US undersecretary of state for political affairs, Nicholas Burns, and the foreign secretary, Shivshankar Menon, India has finally told the Americans to take it or leave it. Not since the era of V.K. Krishna Menon has any Indian government representative publicly told the Americans where to get off. S. Jaishankar, South Block’s negotiator for the 123 Agreement, did in Washington on Monday. Before getting to what Jaishankar said this week, it is necessary to draw the setting for his remarks. Once every two years, leading proponents and negotiators of non-proliferation from Beijing to Moscow to Geneva to New York gather in Washington under the umbrella of a conference organized by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The last such conference in 2005 was addressed by Mohamed El Baradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the glow of the Nobel Peace Prize still very much on his persona. This week, the keynote speaker was the British foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, who last year authored a white paper on her country’s nuclear deterrent, the smallest among the five nuclear weapons powers recognized under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

[b]Jaishankar, now high commissioner to Singapore and a doctoral degree-holder in nuclear diplomacy, was invited to speak at the latest conference on the subject: “Forging Non-Proliferation Consensus After US-India Civil Nuclear Cooperationâ€

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20886
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Indian Chatranj and Texan Poker

Postby Prem » 28 Jun 2007 01:03

Last week Kakodakar said ths same thing about India going its own independent way . There is no threat in the speech but a gentle .simple reminder of the consequences of keeping India out of current Nuke regime. NPAs and their chelas in Congress keep misreading the Indians .
The softness is not a weakness but cultural trait hidding inner stubborn strength capable of doing Herculean tasks.

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

Postby ShibaPJ » 28 Jun 2007 01:07

ramana wrote:This should have been posted by now.

From Telegraph, 27 June 2007

Look Who is talking?

Awesome.. After so much fuzzy logic statements, first clear-cut, on your face talk by GoI. I guess, this would bring the BP of many BRfites down. I so much wish, some of this to be spoken to the Chinese. They deserve it first & foremost. much more than the Americans.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 864
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Postby sivab » 28 Jun 2007 01:25

One or two issues still in way of 123 agreement: PM

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Wednesday said that there are still 'one or two issues' in the way of finalizing a bilateral civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the US.

Manmohan Singh was referring to continuing differences with the US over India's insistence on getting prior consent for re-processing US-origin spent fuel and its sovereign right to test a nuclear device.

Speaking to reporters after launching 'The New Asia Power Dynamic', a collection of essays unfolding the rise of Asia on the global stage, at his 7 Race Course residence, Manmohan Singh also said that his government has been completely transparent about the nuclear deal and has kept parliament informed about every stage of the civil nuclear negotiations with the US.

When asked whether he would go to the US in September, he said: 'Dates haven't been worked out yet.'

S. Jaishankar, India's high commissioner to Singapore and a key negotiator on the nuclear deal, Tuesday said in Washington that there were 'gaps' in perception, but they do not pose any major problem in the finalisation of the 123 agreement.

India and the US have held four rounds of talks to finalise the text of the 123 bilateral agreement, that will open the door of nuclear commerce between them, without a breakthrough on crucial issues like reprocessing, testing and the US' insistence on right of return of nuclear equipment and fuel in the case of New Delhi conducting a nuclear test.

India has indicated that it will set up a dedicated facility for reprocessing and place it under international safeguards to break the logjam over reprocessing.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected to come here next month for a crucial round of talks that may finally lead to a breakthrough on contentious issues blocking the 123 agreement. :roll:

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20886
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Postby Prem » 28 Jun 2007 01:27

ShibaPJ wrote:
ramana wrote:This should have been posted by now.

From Telegraph, 27 June 2007

Look Who is talking?

Awesome.. After so much fuzzy logic statements, first clear-cut, on your face talk by GoI. I guess, this would bring the BP of many BRfites down. I so much wish, some of this to be spoken to the Chinese. They deserve it first & foremost. much more than the Americans.


With Chinese , actions will speak louder. Substitutue Jaishankar with the ever increasing numbers of Agni ready to do the Tandav dance at the command of humble Indoos. We have broken their FDI/ Investment monopoly in short time and same will be repeated in security field.
Pranab Da has already declared India as the Lynch pin of Asian security.
Next stop
India essential for world economic well being threatened by Chinese export -BRF
Last edited by Prem on 28 Jun 2007 03:07, edited 2 times in total.

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

Postby ShibaPJ » 28 Jun 2007 01:45

Pranab Da has already declared India as the Lynch pin of Asian security.

Prem, when was that? I know, the talk has been about India & PRC as two pillars of Asian future, security blah blah..

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 28 Jun 2007 03:07

KP nayar says
the United Progressive Alliance government when it changed its strategy on the negotiations and decided this week to go public with its bottom line in the talks.


So there was a change only last week. Why? Looks like it was different from the stance when Burns was in Delhi.

Also note CSPAN etc are not carrying the talk. Maybe over weekend?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20886
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Postby Prem » 28 Jun 2007 03:22

ShibaPJ wrote:
Pranab Da has already declared India as the Lynch pin of Asian security.

Prem, when was that? I know, the talk has been about India & PRC as two pillars of Asian future, security blah blah..



http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?fi ... ec=apworld

India says it is a lynchpin for Asian security not just economy

SINGAPORE (AP): India is not simply an engine for regional economic growth but also a lynchpin for Asia's security, the Indian foreign minister said Wednesday.

The regional superpower, with a dominant military and economy, has long been viewed with suspicion by its smaller neighbors as well as giant rival China. But India is committed to ensuring a "peaceful periphery,'' External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said in a speech.

"India is not just a motor for regional growth; it can equally be the bulwark of regional security,'' Mukherjee, who is on a three-day visit to Singapore, said at the S.Rajaratjam School of International Studies.

But he acknowledged that in charting this "bolder course,'' India will face suspicion and skepticism.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Chatranj and Texan Poker

Postby NRao » 28 Jun 2007 03:28

Last week Kakodakar said ths same thing about India going its own independent way . There is no threat in the speech but a gentle .simple reminder of the consequences of keeping India out of current Nuke regime. NPAs and their chelas in Congress keep misreading the Indians .
The softness is not a weakness but cultural trait hidding inner stubborn strength capable of doing Herculean tasks.


Dunno. IF that was the case then the Hyde Act would never have been even thought of. Imagine IF this was the OPEN GoI position prior to the Act passing. Either it was communicated to the US, which I find very hard to believe. I think the following happened:

Maybe it should be read again. I initially said that JS's speech had a threat in it. Now its in the open.


I think, as the author writes, the writing was on the wall - US not budging, NSG not willing to do the needed and IAEA hibernating (note that AK has stopped mentioning IAEA - forget going to Vienna to talk (boy, next trip in AUg/Sept will be one to remember)).

Like I mentioned IF Tellis had met Jaishankar prior to their supposed meeting, then it should not have come as a surprise. But the above article surprisingly states that SD was taken aback - which could only mean that Tellis too did not have a head's-up. Probably, IF JaiS and Tellis met, they discussed the position, which triggered this speech. IF the US - thru' Tellis - were more accommodating, then I suspect there was another speech in his back pocket that he would have delivered. And the QA would have been a lot more accommodating. JMTs.

What is unacceptable is that JS did not take the Iran issue 'off the table'. He should have addressed that issue too knowing fully well that some in the US would have brought that up. IMHO, all he had to state was the two are not tied anywhere and that the US has more to worry than ANTHING in an Indo-Iranian relationship (note: does not mean that there is nothing to worry, just that they need to prioritize their worries better than they have been - thus any mention of Iran in this deal is an excuse.)

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Jun 2007 03:42

The state department, indeed every branch of the Bush executive, is haemorrhaging with political appointees leaving the sinking ship in droves. With each passing day, the administration is losing a bit more of its will to stand up and be counted.


?????? May contribute to somethings, but...............

Based on Pranabda's speech in Singapore and MMS talking a lot more (specially about 123), there seems to be a growing confidence based on the rate of growth of the economy (Economist states that Chid feels it is self sustaining here on out!!!!), nothing to stop it, nothing to stop the huge Indian middle class, geo-location of India and the sloooow maturing of the Indian political system in general.

It may be too premature, but, anyone for PM as PM? And, now if they can find a great Prez. Kalam?

And, IF I may, close those curtains of The Family please.

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

Re: Indian Chatranj and Texan Poker

Postby svinayak » 28 Jun 2007 03:52

NRao wrote:
Last week Kakodakar said ths same thing about India going its own independent way . There is no threat in the speech but a gentle .simple reminder of the consequences of keeping India out of current Nuke regime. NPAs and their chelas in Congress keep misreading the Indians .
The softness is not a weakness but cultural trait hidding inner stubborn strength capable of doing Herculean tasks.


Dunno. IF that was the case then the Hyde Act would never have been even thought of. Imagine IF this was the OPEN GoI position prior to the Act passing. Either it was communicated to the US, which I find very hard to believe. I think the following happened:


Here is one scenario.
The UPA figured out after the nomination of President candidature that they do not have the majority in the Parliament. If this deal is signed they could lose the next election 2009 and all state election.

This change is only in the last month or so. Some section of the UPA govt may have supported this deal even with the Hyde Act since they are part of the lobby.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36001
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 28 Jun 2007 03:53

The J18 itself had its fundamental flaws.. to begin with including Iran name in it, and India happy about it especially when nothing is mentioned about Pakistan.

Secondly, India did the "jumping the gun" act, by agreeing much before needed by time, for nuclear separation, rather should have kept it as reciprocative process for each pro active process Unkil does, by means of similar acts or passing a bill in the parliament for separation plans. I know, we did only agree on conditions, but what was all that appeared became they took it for granted, that we would separate, and bang what next? the FBR issue, and other till they felt our Gorilla is too big to handle. Even MMS team did not realize or had any clue about Gorilla capabilities and especially the barc-ing types.

Furthermore, the other fundamental flaw is going after a "reciprocative" arrangement. That may played well for our NPA ill-logics, but put many Gorillas into embarrassment. A well laid out nuclear commission should have handled this in a multi-disciplinary way. NPA after getting the documents from NDA, should not have manioized and caponized.

Its still not too late.. but after USA hyding the facts, it never looks like it would get a good team support from Gorilla land.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Jun 2007 03:58

SaiK wrote:The J18 itself had its fundamental flaws.. to begin with including Iran name in it, and India happy about it especially when nothing is mentioned about Pakistan.
have manioized and caponized.


Eh? Why would it include Iran?

Anyways, here it is from the White House web site. I searched for it and could not find "Iran" anywhere in it.

Sriram
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 03 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sriram » 28 Jun 2007 03:58

GoI Directory of official websites

Ministry of External Affairs

Please refer under Speeches/Statements, bit longish.
Last edited by Sriram on 28 Jun 2007 04:11, edited 2 times in total.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20886
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Do De-Hydration to Deal ,Indoo

Postby Prem » 28 Jun 2007 03:59

Rao sahib, if US can deliver Bakistan , India can let go Iran.
Access to Iran and beyond is essential for Indian energy security and plugging Baki rear .
We also need to do some house cleaning and make sure Indian interlocuters represent India and its interests and not their own worldview set in 60s or 70s which might have misled to "Hyde.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Jun 2007 04:14

Premji,

No problems. I was only responding to your earlier post - which I took to mean that there was some intelligence used to arrive at whatever.

WRT delivering TSP. Sit tight. Enjoy Big B and his gassing.

Or may I suggest Trinity on Drummond in Montreal?

TSP will implode. Do not waste anything on it - specially political capital. India can keep her cake (Iran) and eat it too (Pakistan). A neat trick I would say.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 28 Jun 2007 04:20


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 28 Jun 2007 04:27

CPI(M) warns UPA against formalisation of Indo-US nuclear deal
"The party is of the firm opinion that the Hyde Act passed by the US Congress sets terms and conditions not acceptable for the nuclear agreement," a statement from the CPI (M) stated after its conclusion of the Central Committee meeting.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 28 Jun 2007 04:31



"I think that this is a win-win if ever there were one," she said. "And I know that it has broken some of the old taboos about how to deal with this problem. But I'm quite confident that if we keep after it, if we stay faithful to the agreements that our leaders signed, if we stay faithful to the legislation we have passed,


"If we agreed that the sun rises from the east, if we agree that the sun rises from the west"

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2237
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Postby Rony » 28 Jun 2007 05:35

ShibaPJ wrote:
ramana wrote:This should have been posted by now.

From Telegraph, 27 June 2007

Look Who is talking?

Awesome.. After so much fuzzy logic statements, first clear-cut, on your face talk by GoI. I guess, this would bring the BP of many BRfites down. I so much wish, some of this to be spoken to the Chinese. They deserve it first & foremost. much more than the Americans.


I second that.The chinis are our first and foremost enemy and they need to get the right message.But unless the chinese fifth elements in India like CPM are silenced,it would be difficult for GOI,especially the congress administration to be tough with chinese dogs.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50621
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 28 Jun 2007 06:05

pradeepe wrote:


"I think that this is a win-win if ever there were one," she said. "And I know that it has broken some of the old taboos about how to deal with this problem. But I'm quite confident that if we keep after it, if we stay faithful to the agreements that our leaders signed, if we stay faithful to the legislation we have passed,


"If we agreed that the sun rises from the east, if we agree that the sun rises from the west"


NRao, Why does Rice talk about the agreements that both leaders signed and the legislation that US has passed when she knows they are contradictory?

I think the GOI supported hyde Act in getting passed but they did not know the final version that were incorporated in it in the last minute.

It lends credence to your idea that there were sudden 'poison' pills added and the interlocutors were assuaged that its no big deal by US administration.

Who could it be- we know the usual suspects- NPAs and Cold Warriors. Were there other players who wanted to cap groups in India?

Raju

Postby Raju » 28 Jun 2007 06:47

Might be the Kissinger-Brezinski lobby, don't think anyone else has the influence to do that.

Kissinger had btw paid a visit to India, just before the July 18 deal was signed. Probably it was a move to fake confidence building.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 28 Jun 2007 07:49

Ramana,

'poison pill' observation was that of Alok_N. We never chased it after that.

WRT:

if we stay faithful to the agreements that our leaders signed, if we stay faithful to the legislation we have passed,


What is even more stranger is MMS's statement ('one or two' (only?) problems) AFTER JS states that the deal in its current avatar is a no go.

So, we have JS - J18 only, MMS - Hyde Act with one or two changes ( = J18?), and, Condi - stick with the Hyde Act (= J18).

My gut feel is that ND is still divided and that the tilt is moving towards the DAE stand. I think MMS is seeking an exit strategy. Perhaps Condi is encouraging him to stay the party line?

Acharya,

If that is a reason, God bless all those illiterates who votes against MMS and party. Even highly educated (in the US Congress) could not achieve what they did.

I also think Pranabda is making his move to become the next PM. Is it possible that he has seen a crack in the armor of you know who?

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

Postby vsudhir » 28 Jun 2007 08:01

Its a simple case of congress-congress cooperation, IMHO.

The US congress saw that the Indian (national) congress could be manouvered into see the wisdom of the former's ironclad stand.

Sadly, Indian congress awoke to see that it too had elections to fight. And unlike India's presence in Amrika, Amriki presence in India (and Indian polls) was heavy.

JMTs etc.

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Postby Raja Ram » 28 Jun 2007 10:55

The GOI from the very beginning of negotiations had clearly agreed on a set of ground rules when engaging in hitherto unexplored territory when it came to US-India talks. They were first formulated in Jaswant-Talbott series. Key amongst the rules were that the talks would be outside of media glare and non-usage of media to score points or mould opinion.

Both sides played true it for a long time and hence the progress so far. Much of what was writted was outsider speculation. The interlocutors kept a low profile and were careful when they briefed.

But the USG started to waver from these ground rules post the Bush visit to India. They started using the media. Sections of the Indian establishment, especially the PMO started using the media. But not neccassarily for the same objective. The US wanted to use the media to pressurise India to accept the deal at any cost and tried to simultaneously inject the CRE provisions through the "legislative process".


The Indian PMO wanted to build a consensus on the deal at any cost and was privately accepting the assurances from the USG that the deal will be on the same terms as the J18 agreement notwithstnding intrusive provisions in American legislation. Stupid mistake. It resulted for the first time a fissure in the Indian established position on maintaining autonomy of strategic options.

The result has been for the first time there is an avoidable fissure from within the GOI.
I think the first break out statement by AK was an act of desperation and then again public dissapproval by former AEC chairmen and others were once again necessitated as sections of the PMO failed to learn from their mistakes fully.

It is in this context that Pranab's statements, and Jai Shankar's are to be noted. It does indicate that the GOI has finally realized that they have reached the final leg and this is where they have to draw the lakshman rekha publicly.

The GOI was never going to do this deal at any cost. The Americans were told this privately. The Americans assured in private that the deal will be exactly on the terms agreed and the legislation will not come in the way. When they started publicly and privately reneging on this, the GOI has come out and said its position publicly.

From the outset, this self appointed commentator has maintained that the terms of the deal are invoilable, I think now that we are in the final leg, it is becoming apparent.

As ususal a ramble from my side. Take it for what it is worth.

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

Postby bala » 28 Jun 2007 11:15

I think the US-India Nuclear Deal is heading for stalemate. Raju may be right, the payee for this is the Kissinger-Brezinski lobby/NPA and China will have the last laugh. So much for Next Strategic Steps from Rice et al and the US China containment is going to eat dust. Already there is a move to cover up defective tyres, poisoned toothpaste & cereal from China. Meanwhile KB/NPA gets paid by China for the great hatchet job. However the NPAs are still out of a job.

India should revisit this topic several years from now. Meanwhile start the coal fired power stations and pollute away ( goal: catch up to the levels of the US and China coal C02 pollution).

Vishy_mulay
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 09 Feb 2007 09:21
Location: Melbourne

Postby Vishy_mulay » 28 Jun 2007 11:30

I have seen two simultaneous processes unfolding which will have tremendous impact on India's strategic and economic future. 1) Civil nuclear deal 2) WTO talks. My knowledge in these subjects is very limited and frankly I have not followed it in depth. Just have few question for all gurus. Do you think that US is arm twisting India in nuclear deal so that it can get good bargain in WTO talks? Corollary, will India go soft on WTO talks if we get nuclear deal on our terms? Should India compromise in WTO talks if we get nuclear deal? Admin please delete if this post does not belong here. Thanks.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests