India - Nuclear News and Discussion

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

Postby NRao » 22 Jul 2007 01:20

MilindC,

I agree with your assesment, with a twist.

I feel that a sell out was stopped by Scicom, without them it would have headed that way. Also, he stopped it himself with his statement in parliament.

However, the idea that India got what it wanted or anything close is bogus. This deal is NOT J18.

It probably has the reluctant blessings of the DAE/Scicom - with huge loop holes for future, post MMS, operations. After all no matter what happens, all reactors have to be 'passed' by the DAE by law. So, either MMS satys around to face that music or leaves (for Canada?).

I am interested in three things:
1) What happens in IAEA
2) The processing of reactor applications
3) A place where Soniaji can retire to. The next Gen should be worse

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Vivek K » 22 Jul 2007 01:31

NRao wrote:.. So, either MMS satys around to face that music or leaves (for Canada?).

.....3) A place where Soniaji can retire to. The next Gen should be worse

NRao, your post (points highlighted) is in very poor taste!

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

Postby Arun_S » 22 Jul 2007 01:54

John Snow wrote:so in one shot of ball less MMS is not only castrated India but also sold India


Whole of India will become the Roma gypsies (ensalved by invaders ~1000AD, in droves takes as dhimmi-slaves to be sold as slaves to all countries in civilized world). To be raped and exterminated at will by all and sundry including Nazi catholic Hilter.

Just the settings will be different; the new slave people will work from home.

From lords to slavery.

Wikipedia: Roma Gypsies
The Romani people (as a noun, singular Rom, plural Roma; sometimes Rrom, Rroma) or Romanies are an ethnic group living in many communities all over the world. The Roma are among the best known ethnic groups that appear in literature and folklore, and are often referred to as Gypsies or Gipsies, a term that is generally considered pejorative and is based on a mistaken belief of an origin in Egypt[1]. The Roma are still thought of as wandering nomads in the popular imagination, despite the fact that today the vast majority live in permanent housing.[2] This widely dispersed ethnic group lives across the world not only near their historic heartland in Southern and Eastern Europe, but also in the American continent and the Middle East.

Origins


The absence of a written history has meant that the origin and early history of the Romani people was long an enigma. As early as 200 years ago, cultural anthropologists hypothesised an Indian origin of the Roma based on linguistic evidence[5]. Genetic data confirms this.

The Roma are believed to have originated in the Punjab and Rajasthan regions of the Indian subcontinent. They began their migration to Europe and North Africa via the Iranian plateau around 1050.[6]

... .... Many historians believe that the Muslim conquerors of northern India took the Roma as slaves and marched them home over the unforgiving terrain of Central Asia, taking great tolls on the population and thereby giving rise to such designations as the Hindu Kush mountains of present-day Pakistan and Afghanistan. Mahmud of Ghazni reportedly took 500,000 prisoners during a Turkish/Persian invasion of Sindh and Punjab. Others suggest the Roma were originally low-caste Hindus recruited into an army of mercenaries, granted warrior caste status, and sent westward to resist Islamic military expansion. In either case, upon arrival, they became a distinct community. Why the Roma did not return to India, choosing instead to travel west into Europe, is an enigma, but may relate to military service under the Muslims.

mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 280
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Postby mandrake » 22 Jul 2007 02:10

Rishirishi wrote:I answer my own question.

Here is a calculator

http://www.fas.org/main/content.jsp?for ... tentId=367


Seems that a 30KT bomb will only case 6-7 km diameter destruction. A furter 3-4 km may face moderate destruction.

Basically if India gate was hit, Chandhi Red fort would probably face only moderate damages.

So yes, India requires at leat 200kt weapons. 1 MT to be on the sure side.


I did read that on BR only, if you have testd xKT nuke you can make 4x KT nuke through using same design. So a 200 Kt test is essentially to make a 1 MT nuke, As of now we do posess the everything to make 160 to 200 KT Nuke.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 843
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: Why this chest beating

Postby Manny » 22 Jul 2007 02:15

vnadendla wrote:I think we are going overboard with all this chest beating. There is nothing to suggest that
    Indian IP is being stolen
    India cannot test in future
    India will be saddles with mountains of spent fuel
    Indian Thorium plan is being affected.
What is likely is
    Iran policy change - big deal do they support us on Kashmir?
    126 fighter planes deal may go to US. Big deal its US or Europe or Russia. They are all Goras not just US.
With fuel supply, economic investments etc its a great deal.


Very well put. The Khadhi "intellectual" crowd is paranoid about Amrika...but have no qualms about Chin and France (They are the real enemies).

:D

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 843
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: Why this chest beating

Postby Manny » 22 Jul 2007 02:19

edwin wrote:
vnadendla wrote:I think we are going overboard with all this chest beating. There is nothing to suggest that
    Indian IP is being stolen
    India cannot test in future
    India will be saddles with mountains of spent fuel
    Indian Thorium plan is being affected.
What is likely is
    Iran policy change - big deal do they support us on Kashmir?
    126 fighter planes deal may go to US. Big deal its US or Europe or Russia. They are all Goras not just US.
With fuel supply, economic investments etc its a great deal.


Actually, it is a very, very big deal. Assume for a moment that what you said is right and the only fall-out is the MRCA going the way of the F-18s and our foreign policy change in Iran.

Scenario A: We align with the US and move away from Iran.
That allows a foreign power to enter our sphere of influence in Iran, i.e Pakistan. History has shown that where there is a realignment or removal of one power, another will enter - 1950s Tibet, 1960s Sino-Soviet split, 1970s Indo-Pak war and realignment from NAM. Even the 1990s Soviet economic collapse that reduced thier influence on us has led us to the chain of events continuing to today and leading us closer to the US.

A hostile Iran will offer Pak real "strategic depth", not the perceived one they had in Afghanistan. In the event of hostilities, our enery supplies from the ME and Africa will have to travel waters incorporating both Iran and Pakistan. It will be a tough ask for the IN to secure SLOCs given this vast distance, not too mention with the PN acquiring Orions and Harpoons. I'm sure you can agree that our energy supplies being held ransom will be nothing short of disastrous.

Scenario 2: A succeeding PM has a change of stance and realigns with Iran.
Expect to see some, if not all of those brand new reactors sitting idle. At least the 126 aircraft sitting idle will keep them company.


So..your bottom line is... you want to Choose Iran over the US.

:shock:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 22 Jul 2007 02:21

Paul wrote:

On nuclear testing, there cannot be any "give" from the US side, and the 123 agreement will probably say that the US reserves the right to stop cooperation if India tests another nuclear weapon. However, the US president does have a waiver authority on this and the judgment will be made on the "merits" — that is, in the prevailing international security context at the time.


Answer on my own question on testing penalties. This is a BIG Question mark on happens next. Looks like we are effectively neutered.


[url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Safeguards_offer_swung_it_for_India/articleshow/2222149.cms[/url]Link[/url]



It is extremely important to not formalize the voluntary test moratorium. The Hyde Act was trying to do that. India has to retain the right to test in its supreme national interests just as the P-5 who have signed the CTBT but not ratified it. Yes the US has the right to impose what it wants to do in event of a test by India.

Indian ministers who dont follow municipal corporation laws cant be expected to follow laws of a far away country in case of supreme national interest. If you think otherwise you dont know the mind of those who become PMs.
The onus is now on the US to ensure India does not have to test and break out if it wants to keep the world order it wants. IOW they have to rein their pitbulls - TSP and PRC.

As for reprocess rights, it makes sense to have a separate reprocess facility for civilian use just as any other nuke power. its the stupid Ministry of Finance that was short changing the country by not allocating budget for such a dedicated plant. OTH a dedicated reprocessing plant could not have been visibiliy funded prior to the 1998 tests.

Those who worry about Iran, lets not forget that they were also playing fast and loose with India as it suited them. Under the Shah they provided safe haven for TSP fizzle airforce and repainted F-86s after 1965.

There was a change of heart during the post Khomeini regime with the absentation in OIC vote in early 90s but they must have some quid for their pro which is not public. To me it was galling that they raised the price of gas for the pipeline thinking that they have an upper hand.
I for one wont feel too bad if they get their comeuppance.

That one is for Nadir mian.

For me Indian interests are paramount and I feel a disaster has been staved off. It is for the world to behave with India. I you think calmy with all the knowledge acquired on BR you will understand.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 843
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Postby Manny » 22 Jul 2007 02:26

edwin wrote:Hi to all the members,

I've followed BR since 1999 and finally opted on posting my first reply. While the jury is out on the current nuclear deal, I cannot help but feel uncomfortable with it given the opposition posed by the SciCom. Even Kalam himself has called for a need for leaders with more integrity a few weeks ago, perhaps he saw this coming.

It seems that Anil K aside, the rest of the Indian negotiating team are pushing through with the deal while trying their best to keep details under wraps and then presenting it as the finished article once the negotiations are sewn up. Effectively, if the safeguards are going to continue into perpetuity, no doubt our foreign policy is going to go down the drain as we are going to be held hostage to the terms of this agreement. Factor in the upcoming MRCA deal to the US and we have effectively given up all our strategic initiative, with nothing to show in return. We'll effectively be in the position Japan is today, sans advanced weapons. Many will snigger, but at the pace and path the Congress government is taking, this is moving from the realm of fiction into fact.

The speed and guile to which MMS is trying to sew up this deal points to something larger on the agenda which we may not be aware of at the moment and I hope it's nothing sinister. If the deal neuters India's nuclear capabilities, I hope he sleeps well, because obviously he's been losing sleep ever since the mother of the terrorist was caught pleading for her son's innocence.

At critical junctures like these, the decisions of a select few will determine the path of the nation for the next 15-20 years at least. The tribute paid by Haksar to his mentor, Krishna Menon is apt in this regard, and I quote:

"I said that I spent four years of apprenticeship under Krishna; this might be as
good an occasion for me to acknowledge publicly what I owe to him. What little
I learnt about the art and science of diplomacy, it was at his feet. From him
I learnt the art of negotiation. I learnt from him that in diplomacy the most
important thing was courage, a non-negotiable sense of dedication to the
interests of one's country; a capacity to see what your opponent has in mind
and to discern whether there was a basis for linking your opponent's concern
with your own.

Krishna was fiercely dedicated to his country's interest and he sought to protect
it, advance it, and project it with an incisive mind which was most elegantly
furnished with a fine tapestry of wisdom and wit. It was this mind which he
dedicated to the cause of our country, both prior to Indian Independence and
subsequently in the councils of the world where Krishna's name attracted immediate
attention and respect. He could not be deflected by flattery or blandishments from
pursuing the interests of his country with tenacity.

I am not saying that Krishna was a man without flaws, He had them, but these were
nothing when compared to the extraordinary qualities he possessed. Of course,
he just could not suffer fools, especially of the more active variety."


Krishna Menon? Wasn;' he the one who pontificated like a fool at the UN ....and all the "Patriots" went gaga over his speech? It is like one of those homless dude who stands in front of building screaming at the top of his voice in anger and then he walks away believing he has done a great job and having achieved something. What did that get India? Nothing.. IT made India look like phony moralists without any balls. He is an embarrassment. A failure!

He is no hero.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 22 Jul 2007 02:39

SO is this another Simla pact?

When we signed we gave away 91,000 TSP rapists and chunks of territory,for a mirage of peace!

Now we give away our strategic independence with a mirage of being hoisted on gaddi called super power seat?


Is congress bereft of any nationalist in its ranks?

edwin
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 21 Jul 2007 10:08
Location: sf bay

Re: Why this chest beating

Postby edwin » 22 Jul 2007 03:02

Manny wrote:
edwin wrote:
vnadendla wrote:I think we are going overboard with all this chest beating. There is nothing to suggest that
    Indian IP is being stolen
    India cannot test in future
    India will be saddles with mountains of spent fuel
    Indian Thorium plan is being affected.
What is likely is
    Iran policy change - big deal do they support us on Kashmir?
    126 fighter planes deal may go to US. Big deal its US or Europe or Russia. They are all Goras not just US.
With fuel supply, economic investments etc its a great deal.


Actually, it is a very, very big deal. Assume for a moment that what you said is right and the only fall-out is the MRCA going the way of the F-18s and our foreign policy change in Iran.

Scenario A: We align with the US and move away from Iran.
That allows a foreign power to enter our sphere of influence in Iran, i.e Pakistan. History has shown that where there is a realignment or removal of one power, another will enter - 1950s Tibet, 1960s Sino-Soviet split, 1970s Indo-Pak war and realignment from NAM. Even the 1990s Soviet economic collapse that reduced thier influence on us has led us to the chain of events continuing to today and leading us closer to the US.

A hostile Iran will offer Pak real "strategic depth", not the perceived one they had in Afghanistan. In the event of hostilities, our enery supplies from the ME and Africa will have to travel waters incorporating both Iran and Pakistan. It will be a tough ask for the IN to secure SLOCs given this vast distance, not too mention with the PN acquiring Orions and Harpoons. I'm sure you can agree that our energy supplies being held ransom will be nothing short of disastrous.

Scenario 2: A succeeding PM has a change of stance and realigns with Iran.
Expect to see some, if not all of those brand new reactors sitting idle. At least the 126 aircraft sitting idle will keep them company.


So..your bottom line is... you want to Choose Iran over the US.

:shock:


No Manny. The bottom line is that our foreign policy will be held hostage by this deal. Whether we side with Iran or not is a secondary and less relevant matter but it has to be made in the context of what is best for us.

edwin
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 21 Jul 2007 10:08
Location: sf bay

Postby edwin » 22 Jul 2007 03:05

Manny wrote:
edwin wrote:Hi to all the members,

I've followed BR since 1999 and finally opted on posting my first reply. While the jury is out on the current nuclear deal, I cannot help but feel uncomfortable with it given the opposition posed by the SciCom. Even Kalam himself has called for a need for leaders with more integrity a few weeks ago, perhaps he saw this coming.

It seems that Anil K aside, the rest of the Indian negotiating team are pushing through with the deal while trying their best to keep details under wraps and then presenting it as the finished article once the negotiations are sewn up. Effectively, if the safeguards are going to continue into perpetuity, no doubt our foreign policy is going to go down the drain as we are going to be held hostage to the terms of this agreement. Factor in the upcoming MRCA deal to the US and we have effectively given up all our strategic initiative, with nothing to show in return. We'll effectively be in the position Japan is today, sans advanced weapons. Many will snigger, but at the pace and path the Congress government is taking, this is moving from the realm of fiction into fact.

The speed and guile to which MMS is trying to sew up this deal points to something larger on the agenda which we may not be aware of at the moment and I hope it's nothing sinister. If the deal neuters India's nuclear capabilities, I hope he sleeps well, because obviously he's been losing sleep ever since the mother of the terrorist was caught pleading for her son's innocence.

At critical junctures like these, the decisions of a select few will determine the path of the nation for the next 15-20 years at least. The tribute paid by Haksar to his mentor, Krishna Menon is apt in this regard, and I quote:

"I said that I spent four years of apprenticeship under Krishna; this might be as
good an occasion for me to acknowledge publicly what I owe to him. What little
I learnt about the art and science of diplomacy, it was at his feet. From him
I learnt the art of negotiation. I learnt from him that in diplomacy the most
important thing was courage, a non-negotiable sense of dedication to the
interests of one's country; a capacity to see what your opponent has in mind
and to discern whether there was a basis for linking your opponent's concern
with your own.

Krishna was fiercely dedicated to his country's interest and he sought to protect
it, advance it, and project it with an incisive mind which was most elegantly
furnished with a fine tapestry of wisdom and wit. It was this mind which he
dedicated to the cause of our country, both prior to Indian Independence and
subsequently in the councils of the world where Krishna's name attracted immediate
attention and respect. He could not be deflected by flattery or blandishments from
pursuing the interests of his country with tenacity.

I am not saying that Krishna was a man without flaws, He had them, but these were
nothing when compared to the extraordinary qualities he possessed. Of course,
he just could not suffer fools, especially of the more active variety."


Krishna Menon? Wasn;' he the one who pontificated like a fool at the UN ....and all the "Patriots" went gaga over his speech? It is like one of those homless dude who stands in front of building screaming at the top of his voice in anger and then he walks away believing he has done a great job and having achieved something. What did that get India? Nothing.. IT made India look like phony moralists without any balls. He is an embarrassment. A failure!

He is no hero.


Manny, I think you may have misread me. I am not here to pontificate or defend KM. I am alluding to the context out of which Haksar speaks about the art of negotiation, and in regard to the negotiations going on with the nuclear deal, it is in this regard that I quote him. This is not the thread for a KM analysis.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 843
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Postby Manny » 22 Jul 2007 03:12

I meant... K Menon in his "famous" UN speech.. was pontificating and gained nothing,

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 22 Jul 2007 03:36

On a very serious note MMS seems to very much dependent on Self
Reliance as Ambanis would vouch.

Having him and SG in pocket Reliance is now selling India chep. Some self Reliance of home made variety I guess.
Last edited by John Snow on 22 Jul 2007 04:05, edited 1 time in total.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Postby Victor » 22 Jul 2007 03:54

Frankly, to expect full J18 has always been unrealistic. The only explanation for the J18 statement is that Bush is an idiot and MMS is a dreamer and neither bothered to check the reality meter with the babus. J18 felt good to us but a lot of very important countries couldn't believe what they were hearing. Now those potential spoilers may have been silenced effectively.

What was 100% agreed to in Washington this time by both sides is that the deal MUST get done. It was simply too important for both countries and also, without sounding too grand, the whole world, for there not to be a formalized agreement between the US and India. Too many big things are going to come out of India in the foreseeable future for the country to not have a place at the table and for now, the US is Chairperson.

With this deal, the US has won in the sense that it is not J18. But India has also won because the deal is most likely as close to J18 as is possible under today's circumstances, probably with the door open for full J18 down the road. So it is a win-win and defacto J18. I am certain that we have not bartered away our nuke independence and have maintained full ownership of our IP now and into the future. IOW, I believe that MMS' statement to parliament holds.

If this is true, then the US (and by extension all others who matter) have to play on our terms from now on. That is HUGE and is why I say "we have arrived". In all likelihood, it will open the floodgates--think fast-track for Kaveri/cryogenic/GSLV/Phalcon/FBRs etc--India fully plugged in, not on the outside looking in. If you look at the other things already happening in parallel both in the US and in India, this is natural.

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

Postby sraj » 22 Jul 2007 04:09

Three DDM Reports + S Varadarajan believes India got what it was asking for.........best to withhold judgment until more details are available.....preferably the entire 123 text.....in any case Parliament should have its say on this agreement.

Big deal: Both sides happy
NEW DELHI: It was an exhausted group of negotiators and strategists from India who wearily trudged out of the state department offices on Friday.

Until M K Narayanan grabbed Indian diplomat Raminder Jassal, and hugged him. Even the normally dour R B Grover, chief of the strategic plans division of the department of atomic energy, smiled.

The final hours were not about the big ticket items - which had been agreed on in the early days of the talks. It was the little things that could have become big that occupied everybody's waking hours - the conditions, the assurances that ensured the baseline demands of the US and India.

From the Indian side, the star of the show was the national security adviser. For the past four days, it was this non-diplomat who led the Indian negotiations with his counterpart Stephen Hadley, climbing over one obstacle after another.

It was his idea to take along Anil Kakodkar, chief of the DAE, famously described by unnamed US officials as "the 600 lb gorilla", who has led the domestic battle against the nuclear agreement.

The quiet, unobtrusive player in the background was Indian ambassador to the US, Ronen Sen, who has spent many frequent flyer miles trying to change perceptions among sceptics in India and getting key groups of Indian Americans in the US to lean on their Congressmen to bat for India.

Kakodkar was armed with his list of demands. If he didn't get satisfaction on all of them, he got it on over 90% of them, said sources. For instance, the two sides succeeded in quarantining the US's "right of return" from the vagaries of politics that has left the Indians scarred with the memory of Tarapur.

While the US reserves the right to cease cooperation in case India conducts a nuclear test, the agreement reportedly sets out benchmarks or conditions under which cooperation would cease. These conditions would be technical in nature, which will make it much more acceptable to Indians still skittish about this particular provision of US law.

On the US side, the logjam was broken by none other than George Bush. It was Bush who gave political direction on the reprocessing issue, and it was Hadley and Condoleeza Rice's job to put it in acceptable terms. The Cheney vote of confidence was important for the negotiators, but there is no Cheney stamp on the agreement so that it is more acceptable to the Democrat side of the aisle in the US Congress, which gives final nod to the deal.

The agreement, according to sources, when it is unveiled will be unique. It gives nuclear privileges to a single country, India, which is not only not a member of the NPT, or P-5 or even a member of the NSG. A nuclear outlaw, whose actions in 1974 actually crafted the existing global non-proliferation regime, from the NSG to the 1978 NNPA, these laws were targeted at India.

Thus, beyond the commas and the reprocessing, the real significance of the 123 agreement lies here - a rollback of history, so to speak, by the perpetrator of the existing regime for the regime's target. The importance is greater because it comes at a time when glaring nuclear aberrations abound - in North Korea and Iran. Remember, it was Iran that led the campaign as recently as last September in the 60th anniversary of the UN to ask India to sign up to the NPT. Conceptually, therefore, the 123 was a difficult task.

Just turning the clock around was more than a leap of faith for many believers of the existing order. For others, it was inconceivable that India should be the beneficiary of such privileges. In India, the protests were a mirror image. There were those who advocated India's nuclear confinement, interpreting it as sovereignty. There were those who believed it wouldn't happen because it sounded too good to be true and the US was notoriously unreliable.

It was, therefore, left to the Prime Minister and his often diffident determination. Negotiated in two years, it's still one of the quickest 123 texts ever. But as Richard Stratford, US' top negotiator, told the Indian delegation the last time, "It's the hardest one I have ever done." According to a delegation member, the Indians at the table beamed with pride.

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

Postby sraj » 22 Jul 2007 04:12

‘Breakthrough’ in nuclear deal
[quote]New Delhi: At the end of four days of what was described by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as the “last legâ€
Last edited by sraj on 22 Jul 2007 04:26, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby sraj » 22 Jul 2007 04:16

Deal is sealed
[quote]NEW DELHI, JULY 21:In a significant departure from all 123 agreements that the US has signed with other countries, [b]India has extracted an explicit commitment in its bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement, which was finalised in Washington yesterday, that the US will “not hinderâ€

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

Postby sraj » 22 Jul 2007 04:20

US-India nuke deal: 1.. 2 ..3..go
WASHINGTON: It took 300 working hours for Indian and American technical experts to put together a 30-page document that constitutes the so-called 123 Agreement which will bring into effect the U.S-India civilian nuclear deal.

As the Indian negotiating team caught a United Airlines flight out of Washington Dulles Airport - named after the architect of the Cold War John Foster Dulles - on Friday night, the warm glow and relief of a strategic breakthrough was evident even through such trivia they bandied about.

Technical experts, led by principally by India's S.Jaishankar and U.S' Richard Stratford, met in New Delhi, Washington, Pretoria, and London among other places to hammer out the complex document that is at the heart of the deal.

The quibbled over commas, footnotes, parentheses, and most famously, square brackets [which is diplomatic jargon for contentious portions of a text.]

But at all times, diplomats said, they were conscious of the political will on both sides to consummate the controversial deal that has critics on both sides.

That hard-fought 123 Agreement, still under wraps except for broad outlines, will now be presented before India's Cabinet Committee on Security for a final seal of approval and to the U.S Congress for a yes-no vote before things start rolling.

Officials declined to speak on record about the details of the 123 agreement, but the broad picture sources offered suggests both sides made important concessions to arrive at a mutually acceptable text sans square brackets.

From India's side, there was never any doubt that it would win the right to reprocess spent fuel from the moment it made the offer – a concession - of setting up a dedicated safeguards facility.

The more contentious portion of the agreement related to sanctions and the 'right of return' of materiel and technology in the event of India conducting a nuclear test – a congressionally mandated law that Washington said it could not overwrite.

Instead, sources suggested without getting into details, the agreement included language to work around this situation. The language, which Indian negotiators ensured would preclude a repeat of the Tarapur episode, when US invoked sanctions despite guarantees, is to New Delhi's satisfaction.

One key element in the negotiations that finalised the deal was the direct involvement of representatives from India's scientific establishment. Dr R.B.Grover, Director of Strategic Planning Group in the Department of Atomic Energy, participated in the technical talks and ran the developments by Dr Anil Kakodkar, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.

Kakodkar did not take part in the talks directly, but was a major backroom presence. While the political establishment hopes that this show of consensus will mollify dissenters in the scientific community, the government itself faces the tough task of getting its allies and the opposition on board.

That is why, sources said, it was decided that 123 Agreement would not be released before the CCS had discussed it and the government had briefed allies and key opposition leaders.

In Washington, administration officials are expected to brief key law-makers and their aides on the agreement and bring it up for a final vote soon.

The country's vocal non-proliferation community is expected to raise hell as usual about concessions to India. But the vote in Congress will be a straight up-down, yes-no vote with no amendments allowed, so the administration expects to get it done without too much trouble.

The U.S-India deal ends more than three decades of nuclear isolation for New Delhi, during which time sanctions forced it to develop its own indigenous nuclear industry but also prevented it from tapping into technological advances and exchanges with the rest of the world. With this agreement, India becomes the only country in the world which has not signed the NPT, but can still conduct nuclear trade with the world while retaining its nuclear weapons program.

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

Postby ShibaPJ » 22 Jul 2007 04:34

Deleted.. Sorry, it was a double post.
Last edited by ShibaPJ on 22 Jul 2007 04:44, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby ShibaPJ » 22 Jul 2007 04:41

sraj wrote:Deal is sealed

Great article, Sraj. First article with serious insight of the deal (I hope, w/o DDM spin). JMTs, it addresses all serious deal-breakers from Indian pov. If this is what the actual deal is, then hats off to AK & his team. They would be remembered in annals of Indian history for providing yeomen service and being the protector of Indian stategic interests..

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7041
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Postby Muppalla » 22 Jul 2007 04:45

[quote="sraj"]Deal is sealed
[quote]NEW DELHI, JULY 21:In a significant departure from all 123 agreements that the US has signed with other countries, [b]India has extracted an explicit commitment in its bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement, which was finalised in Washington yesterday, that the US will “not hinderâ€

williams
BRFite
Posts: 239
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Postby williams » 22 Jul 2007 05:03

From the same article

WHAT CLINCHED IT

• US for in-principle consent

• Separate agreement when India needs to reprocess US-origin spent fuel

• Dedicated safeguarded facility for US-origin spent fuel

• Fuel Supplies: US agrees to honour its commitment on lifetime fuel supply for civil Indian reactors


I am not sure what this means.. Gurus can explain..

The agreement allows India up to 20 per cent enrichment of fuel.


The following is still a sticky point. There will be repercussion when we test


While the US legal provisions will get activated almost immediately, the exercise of the right to return will not be immediate. A bilateral working group will first be formed to look into circumstances leading to India’s decision.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1015
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 22 Jul 2007 05:09

I did read that on BR only, if you have testd xKT nuke you can make 4x KT nuke through using same design. So a 200 Kt test is essentially to make a 1 MT nuke, As of now we do posess the everything to make 160 to 200 KT Nuke.


As per my understanding India has conducted a proven 25kt design. Hence the multiplied by 4 it adds up to 100kt.

Can you provide link 160 kt capability
Thanks

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Postby ramdas » 22 Jul 2007 05:09

Ok ...so this is what things look like.

1. In the event of a nuclear test, the US is still free to ask for a return of equipment, though that process will not be immediate and will drag on. What about fuel supplies ? are there iron clad guarantees pertaining to fuel supplies in the interim ? what about fuel supplies to reactors imported from say, Russia ?

2. On reprocessing, we seem to have got something. Is it what we demanded or something partial ? Does the term "permission for 20% enrichment make sense ?" I thought the issue was not uranium enrichment but plutonium reprocessing.

3. What about the FMCT issue ?would the commitment not to obstruct our strategic program imply that we can dodge the FMCT ? That would be a gain if it the case, but the ambiguity still persists.

Until the answers to these qns are clearly in favour of India, I shall not eat up my past words. Though I would be deeply relieved if I had to.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Postby ramdas » 22 Jul 2007 05:14

At least regd. fuel supplies.. there seems to have been an agreement for lifetime fuel supplies for imported reactors with language to ensure that Tarapur does not happen immediately if we test - if so, good. But we must wait for confirmation. The FMCT issue still persists. As does the "20% enrichment" question.

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

Postby NRao » 22 Jul 2007 05:37

India, US finalise 123 accord for n-deal

Washington/New Delhi, July 22 (IANS) India and the United States have finalised an agreement to implement their path-breaking civil nuclear deal two years after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush set out on their "historic initiative".

The dramatic announcement of the accord Friday after four days of hard negotiations came two days too late for the second anniversary of the two leaders' joint statement of July 18, 2005.

A rather bland, carefully drafted joint press statement issued Friday merely said the two sides "are pleased with the substantial progress made on the outstanding issues in the 123 agreement. We will now refer the issue to our governments for final review."

But officials were quick to assert that the agreed text was final and only awaited review at the political level confirming that all the sticky issues had been resolved following a high-level push from the White House.

"Both the United States and India look forward to the completion of these remaining steps and to the conclusion of this historic Initiative," the statement concluded indicating that they had finally wrapped up what was obviously planned to be a birthday package.

The talks were supposed to end Wednesday after a long session between India's National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan and his US counterpart Stephen Hadley, but with no breakthrough in sight Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stepped in to provide political impetus to the talks.

It was finally a political push from the top provided by a meeting with US Vice President Dick Cheney late Thursday that clinched the deal sending negotiating teams led by Indian Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon and US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns into what the latter called "extra innings" using a baseball term.

Still unable to wrap up the deal by nightfall, Menon who was all set to head home that night missed his flight and decided to stay back. So did Narayanan and Department of Atomic Energy Chairman Anil Kakodkar, whose nod was considered a must to clinch the deal.

That an agreement was close at hand now became apparent, but when it did come it took scribes expecting another long day by surprise. That the joint statement claiming only "substantial progress" did not capture the import of the announcement did not help matters any.

The joint statement also did not say what were the couple of tough issues stalling the agreement or how they were resolved. Nor was an official comment forthcoming from either side.

But India apparently put on the table an out-of-the-box Indian proposal for setting up a fully safeguarded stand-alone dedicated facility for reprocessing US-origin fuel as Washington would neither permit reprocessing nor is it willing to take back the spent fuel.

Sticky points included India's insistence on its right to reprocess US nuclear fuel, conduct a test and guarantees for continued supply of fuel for the 14 civil reactors it has agreed to place under international safeguards under a separation plan. Eight other reactors designated military would not be subject to inspections.

High-level interventions from Cheney and Rice were reflective of President Bush's keenness to get the nuclear deal done before he leaves office in January 2009 to score a major foreign policy success on par with Richard Nixon's 1972 opening to China.

Coming after several tortuous rounds of what is euphemistically called "steady progress" - the just concluded round of talks was considered critical in the race to beat the clock with only a small window left to present the final deal to the US Congress for an up or down vote before it goes into another election cycle.

India also needs to sign an additional protocol with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and get the approval of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group.

Meanwhile, as Menon and Burns were negotiating the last "couple of feet" to borrow another Burns phrase in their "constructive and positive" dialogue, the White House spokesman Tony Snow voicing Bush's wish declared: "Obviously we are working with the government of India on something that is of intense mutual concern to us. We want to get it done.

"Congress has expressed support for the president's strategic partnership with India to work for the full civil nuclear energy cooperation that was part of the Hyde Act last December," he told reporters.

"So we're continuing our conversations in support of fulfilling that strategic partnership, and when completed it obviously will make available efforts both in terms of energy security and non-proliferation - what this will do, of course, is bring India into the non-proliferation regime," Snow added.

Separately at the State Department, deputy spokesman Tom Casey said going into "extra innings" indicated that "both sides are very committed to reaching an agreement here.

"We believe that concluding a 123 agreement is something that is vital to being able to fully implement the US-India civil nuclear accord and is something that is important for both countries," he said.

It was also important, Casey said for "reinforcing the non-proliferation regime through an advancing dialogue between the United States and India as well as India's dialogue with the IAEA in terms of bringing some of their facilities under inspection and under the non-proliferation regime".

"Lack of an announcement of an agreement today should not be taken as anything indicating that we won't ultimately be able to have a deal and be able to move forward on this," he said by way of an escape clause hours before the joint statement.

"It's clear that both countries have the goodwill necessary to do this, are willing to work with one another to achieve an agreement, and we're certainly hopeful that we'll get one in the very near future," he added.

Asked why the US was not prepared to discuss the issues involved, Casey said he could not do a "play-by-play commentary" on ongoing diplomatic negotiations but an agreement when concluded will be a public document open to scrutiny and full Congressional review.

"Certainly there are issues involved here that require us to make sure that we're in compliance with US law, and I can assure you Nick Burns and the other folks negotiating this are going to make sure that whatever agreement is ultimately reached is in full compliance with our legal obligations. That's part of what we do," he said.

'N-deal should be okayed by parliament'

The India-US civil nuclear energy cooperation deal must be ratified by parliament, politicians and experts demanded here Saturday hours after negotiators from the two sides finalised an agreement to implement the historic initiative.

The fate of the country was left "in the hands of two bureaucrats, (National Security Advisor) M.K. Narayanan and (Foreign Secretary) Shivshankar Menon. That is because the executive has unlimited powers in this country," senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and former central minister Murli Manohar Joshi said.

He was addressing a seminar on Treaty Making Powers of Government: Strategic Concerns for Our Economy, organised by the National Working Group on Patent Laws of the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Assocham).

"Once this deal is concluded we are bound by it and constrained in making nuclear weapons. Pakistan, a rogue state, is not (constrained) since it has not concluded the treaty, nor is Israel nor North Korea," Joshi said.

His remarks came soon after India and the US finalised an agreement to implement the deal. A joint press statement issued in Washington Friday said the two sides "are pleased with the substantial progress made on the outstanding issues in the 123 agreement. We will now refer the issue to our governments for final review."

However, the opposition at home to the path-breaking deal that will open the doors of commerce in nuclear energy for India after three decades showed no signs of abetting.

Communist Party of India (CPI) national secretary D. Raja said, "Since neo-liberalisation paradigm of development emerged in the early 1990s, there is a growing concern specially in the Left and the CPI about the growing influence of the US on our foreign policy, our trade, our agriculture and economy - and in fact our sovereignty."

Raja, whose party provided outside support to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government, favoured parliamentary ratification of all international treaties in any way affecting the sovereignty of the nation.

He said, "There must be a constitutional provision to ensure that international treaties are ratified by parliament".

He added that, in spite of such a provision, "if the government goes ahead and signs the treaty, what do we do? At the political level this is a challenge."

Noted Supreme Court lawyer and constitution expert Rajeev Dhawan said, "We are confronted with the American empire. It has tried to consolidate its hold on our economy and every other aspect for last 25 years. These powers have multiplied since the world became unipolar."

Reading out from the Hyde Act, relating the India-US nuclear deal and passed by the US Congress and Senate, he pointed out that the law clearly directs India "must demonstrate responsible behaviour towards nuclear non-proliferation" and wondered: "You are telling a sovereign nation you will henceforth follow our policy."

Former Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) chairman A. Gopalakrishnan pointed out how the US system makes their executive fully accountable to the legislature and therefore nothing that is not endorsed by the US Congress and Senate can be implemented, unlike the case of India where the government is not bound to come to parliament for ratification.

IANS

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6965
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Postby Mort Walker » 22 Jul 2007 05:48

All of the news reports talk about the US congress approving the final 123 Agreement. Since the Hyde Act is the basis of the 123 Agreement having passed both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate, this agreement should only have to pass the US Senate. Is this not correct?

Also, it appears the final details will be made public in India by the Foreign Minister who will present the agreement to Parliament. My take is that it will be sort of like the Fin Min presenting the budget. Since all UPA allies essentially support the government, the agreement will get approved. If scientists, within the establishment, the left parties and BJP+allies dissaprove of the deal, can they raise a no-confidence vote against the government?

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7041
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Postby Muppalla » 22 Jul 2007 06:06

Mort Walker wrote:If scientists, within the establishment, the left parties and BJP+allies dissaprove of the deal, can they raise a no-confidence vote against the government.


Left+BJP Sponsoring no-confidence is an impossibility. Lonely BJP's fight will be like Shekawat's fight against Pratibha Patil. These are useless things to do in the current setup.

I agree with most of the BR folks that we still need to see the fine print. All we can do is hope for the best.

However, if this deal has to be stopped, there is no one who can stop this one except if there is rebellion in the ranks of GOI. We have to see if Pranabda rises to the occasion. That is the only possiblity. All other talks of agitations, riots and SciCom's mass resignation are not going to work.

Take the example of Dasmunshi's recent abuse of Abul Kalam during the early phase of presidential nomination. In spite of calling Kalam as non-scientist and just a clerk(or whatever), there is absolutely no outrage.

Current situation regarding N-Deal is like importance of Frodo in Lord of the Rings. If Frodo couldn't deliver the effort of all other is useless. Similarly if Menon at the babu level and Pranabda at the political level could not rise to the occasion the end(sale of India's independence) is imminent.

I still have some faith in the checks and balances of Indian system. Hope it works.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Postby ramdas » 22 Jul 2007 06:45

in case the deal is a sell-out, it is hard to predict beforehand what effect whistle blowing by scientists will have -more so if Dr. Kalam is one of the whistleblowers. After all, Dr. Kalam is a very popular figure - any direct election for president would have seen him winning hands-down. As for the lack of reaction to dasmunshi's diatribe, could very well be due to the attitude of "let stray dogs bark... they do that all the time".

It will be a while before Dr. Kalam recedes from public memory. sell-out or no sell-out the manner in which the MMS establishment has dealt with this issue is less than transparent to say the least.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Postby ramdas » 22 Jul 2007 06:48

i do not understand why the left is currently so paranoid about the BJP returning to power if they join hands with the opposition to undo the govt on an issue such as this - the BJP as far as I understand is in no position to fight an election now, and might find itself losing seats.

What then is the left paranoid about ?

menon
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 02 Dec 2005 09:23

Postby menon » 22 Jul 2007 07:25

deleted duplicate post
Last edited by menon on 22 Jul 2007 07:31, edited 1 time in total.

menon
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 02 Dec 2005 09:23

Postby menon » 22 Jul 2007 07:25

ramdas wrote:i do not understand why the left is currently so paranoid about the BJP returning to power if they join hands with the opposition to undo the govt on an issue such as this - the BJP as far as I understand is in no position to fight an election now, and might find itself losing seats.

What then is the left paranoid about ?


simple yaar. Unkil has met Left's needs. So they HAVE to support unkil. So they need a fig leaf. So this is the fig leaf

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 22 Jul 2007 07:52

As Kalam saab said India doesnt have any visionary leaders today yesterday and tomorrow.

Just a sample point in the context of Indian History and leadership vacuum.

From the CIA declassified docments about PRC encouraged by unkil to attack.
[quote]
[quote="Laks"]link
US assurance critical to China’s 1962 India attack
[quote][b]A critical element in the Chinese decision to launch military action against India in 1962 lay in an “assuranceâ€


Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Postby Victor » 22 Jul 2007 08:23

John Snow, I understand where you are coming from. I too wish that India could design and fabricate all our engines and reactors from the nut-bolt level up and I have little doubt that we can do it--eventually. There is nothing wrong with taking help in leapfrogging however if we have something of equal or more value to give in return. The Americans themselves did that-- WW2 with the merlin engine and later with Von Braun's German rocket expertise. Without these two, they may not have been preeminent in aerospace today. Ditto the Russians, Japanese, Chinese etc. BTW, we are not talking about taking their IP/design, we are talking about the tools which we don't have or can't get easily now. And we are certainly not begging.

Our moment has arrived, let us grab it. We don't have time.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3150
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 22 Jul 2007 08:27

This story is quite positive:

Thank Steve, India almost at N-finish line

[quote]New Delhi, July 21: India is the world’s sixth nuclear weapons power in all but name.

Over lunch in Washington yesterday, two years and two days after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush agreed that India and the US would enter into a special, nuclear relationship, the deal was finally done.

Foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon is flying back tonight and the cabinet committee on security will meet over the next week to clear the deal. With that, the US government goes back to its Congress with the text. It’s enough to make the deal public.

In the end, Delhi got exactly what it has wanted from the beginning: the right to reprocess spent fuel from civilian nuclear reactors, as well as a very delicately worded compromise on fuel assurances from the American side.

Still, when the story of the Indo-US nuclear deal is written, the award for the hero of the hour must go to Bush’s key aide and US national security adviser Steve Hadley.

It was with Hadley that his Indian counterpart M.K. Narayanan has been confabulating for the last many months and to him that Narayanan made the proposal for a separately safeguarded storage facility to reprocess the spent fuel on the eve of the Heilingendamm talks in Germany in early June.

Hadley called Narayanan on Thursday morning and said: “On your way to meeting the Vice-President (Dick Cheney) at 2pm, could you drop by my office please?â€

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

Postby nkumar » 22 Jul 2007 08:38

Guys, I am very skeptical about what we have got from this N-deal. Of course, I am not against the deal but we want it on our terms. I feel DDM is spinning the opinions too much.

Here is an article from Asian Age which has fought alongside Scicom in India's interests. I still maintain, the whole thing is looking very shady.

Text is pretext for delay, team returns


By Seema Mustafa

New Delhi, July 21: The US and India might have reached a broad understanding but have not clinched an agreement on the civilian nuclear energy agreement. The terse statement issued by the two sides after five days of intense negotiations records the meetings held in Washington, describes the discussions as "constructive and positive", but does not contain any phrase that suggests that a final agreement, which will withstand the scrutiny of both Indian Parliament and the US Congress, has been reached.

The statement says, "Undersecretary (Nicholas) Burns and foreign secretary (Shivshankar) Menon are pleased with the substantial progress made on the outstanding issues in the 123 agreement. We will now refer the issue to our governments for final review." And then, "Both the United States and India look forward to the completion of these remaining steps and to the conclusion of this historic initiative." Off the record, US officials have claimed in their media that an agreement has been "effectively" reached with Reuters quoting one of them as saying, "We’re fairly confident this is going to move forward and be completed in the next week or so." In other words, it has not been "done" as yet.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh personally intervened to set up this round of talks, which was extended by a day after US vice-president Dick Cheney met the Indian delegation with words that the unidentified "sources" kept telling the journalists in Washington had opened new possibilities. The discussions were covered in secrecy with not a word from even the normally frank American delegation about the sticking points and the progress on each point. Instead, the "sources" kept the focus on the reprocessing of spent fuel, which they now claim has been resolved, but there is no word as yet from Indian officials about the host of serious objections that had been raised by the nuclear scientists and parliamentarians on the Hyde Act, which remains the basis for the 123 agreement.

The US has pulled out all the plugs to get the agreement off the ground. US vice-president Dick Cheney, recognised as the official trouble-shooter, secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and defence secretary Robert Gates all met the Indian team led by national security adviser M.K. Narayanan at different points during the negotiations. In the process the US also made it clear that it could not manoeuvre beyond a point as it had to report back to the US Congress, unlike India where Prime Minister Manmohan Singh could have the last word, at least legally. The terse statement and the absence of the usual bonhomie on the last day before the officials left for New Delhi, experts here said, was a clear indication that the Prime Minister still does not have a deal that he can present to Parliament with any degree of confidence.

There has been no word on the host of objections raised against the Hyde Act by the nuclear scientists and the parliamentarians, including India’s right to test. It is also not clear if the current negotiations have met any or all of the assurances given by Prime Minister Singh to Parliament, for which he is going to be held accountable. The BJP and the Left are expected to raise the issue in the forthcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament and demand that they be made privy to the 123 agreement that has reportedly emerged from these consultations.

The Indian proposal for a separate safeguarded facility for reprocessed fuel is not likely to find acceptance in Parliament, particularly as reports suggest that the US has insisted on further controls that could convert this into a dumping ground for radioactive waste from other countries. Significantly, this proposal has already been rejected by the strong non-proliferation lobby in the US. Arms Control Association executive director Daryl G. Kimball, who had been in the forefront against this deal in the US, has circulated a letter saying, "If the US side has agreed to this unusual Indian proposal, it would still be next to impossible to ensure that US technology and material would not be used directly or indirectly to support or facilitate India’s unsafeguarded weapons-related plutonium reprocessing activities." He said that if agreed to, this would "represent the fourth major departure from US policy since this surreal episode in nuclear politics began".

The BJP has rejected the deal and made it clear that it will not accept any agreement that does not uphold Indian nuclear sovereignty. The Left, which has said there can be no negotiations without amendments to the Hyde Act, will now have to take a position about talks that did take place without any such corrective measures. Prime Minister Singh has been repeatedly reminded from all quarters that the deal cannot proceed without the approval of Parliament, and that he has to meet each and every assurance that he gave after the Hyde Act was passed by the US Congress.


I hope we get all we want in this N-deal.

ShyamSP
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2097
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby ShyamSP » 22 Jul 2007 09:11

ramdas wrote:i do not understand why the left is currently so paranoid about the BJP returning to power if they join hands with the opposition to undo the govt on an issue such as this - the BJP as far as I understand is in no position to fight an election now, and might find itself losing seats.

What then is the left paranoid about ?


Majority of commies are supporters of US/West anyway. Main job of commies is to act as opposition to marginalize real opposition and support the government when the rubber hits the road. They have used this tactic several times and I think they will do the same for this deal too.

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

Postby NRao » 22 Jul 2007 09:51

Until the actual words come out we are bound to have this highs-lows.

However, Daryl G. Kimball, ironically, has used "sellout" WRT to this deal!!! Which I thought was rather funny. Also, he is out to stop Indian production of fissile material for bombs - his main goal (of 5). He wants the US President to certify that every year. Talk of taking over a foreign policy of a sovereign nation.

I think MMS has trapped himself and will nto be really able to get out without major help.

On the technical side the game is not over. Kakodkar has always challenged the IAEA to do a better job, and, this is not going to sit very well with the US. IF he has managed to get a template - in the form of 123 - then we can expect him to twist a few arms within the IAEA. Which is what I expect. I think AK is angling to sideline the US and he will succeed.

Raju

Postby Raju » 22 Jul 2007 10:14

Cheney, Narayanan stars of N-deal

Chidanand Rajghatta | TNN

...

On Thursday, when Narayanan called on the US vice-president, Cheney was only 48 hours from becoming the de facto US president, albeit only for a couple of hours while Bush was to be briefly incapacitated for a colonoscopy procedure.

Narayanan, in contrast is way down the pecking order in the Indian government, his National Security Advisor designation being of the rank of Minister of State. Yet, during his stay in Washington, he met all three cabinet "principals" (Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, defence secretary Robert Gates, and his NSA counterpart Stephen Hadley), topping it with a meeting with the president-in-waiting.

Clearly there was more to his Washington engagements than the US-India nuclear deal. In fact, sources who were in the loop about the Narayanan-Cheney meeting told TOI that the call was fixed well before the second day impasse in nuclear talks that the vice-president was credited with breaking. The deal found just a passing mention during the half hour pow-wow, which involved a broader discussion on security matters, including the situation in the Indian neighbourhood, they said without elaborating.

So it the nuke deal part of an overall strategic arrangement which ties India and US in a security partnership? The reply from a high level diplomatic source was precise but cryptic: "The only touchstone is India's interest."


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests