Indian Nuclear News & Discussion - 25 Jul 2007

Locked
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

No damage to BARC facility in Srinagar attack
Asked what work the BARC facility did, S.K. Malhotra, head, Environment and Public Awareness Division, DAE, said it used cobalt-60 as a source for irradiating food items, especially fruits, to preserve them for a longer period.

The irradiation facility was originally a big one. However, after militancy took root in Jammu and Kashmir, the BARC scaled it down and relocated some units and staff in the BARC at Trombay, Mumbai. The vacant space and buildings were given to the CRPF.
In another incident related to the DAE, a trailer transporting 62 drums of radioactive yellow-cake (magnesium diuranate), overturned at Narsannapeta in Srikakulam district in Andhra Pradesh on Wednesday morning. The container was loaded on another trailer and it left for the Nuclear Fuel Complex, (NFC), Hyderabad, on Thursday afternoon.

The drums were intact and there was no spillage of the yellow-cake, Mr. Malhotra said. DAE personnel, who reached the site, found that there was no change in the levels of background radiation.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

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

Post by Arun_S »

Rishirishi wrote:I am assuming that with access to imported PU, Thorium can be used for powering the AHWR, Am I correct?
Pu is not mandatory, even moderately enriched U can be the driver fuel.

IIRC the commercial Pu from decommissioning of Rusian nukes is already cornered by US companies and almost half of it already consumed in US power reactors. Dont count on imported Pu.
Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Post by Tilak »

Fears on N-deal remain, says BJP
27 Jul, 2007, 0229 hrs IST, TNN
NEW DELHI: The BJP, which maintained that its concerns over the fate of India’s nuclear weapons programme still persisted, on Thursday told the prime minister that it would go by the content of the agreement reached with US rather than the semantics of the deal.

The party, however, held back its verdict on the nuclear pact saying it would rather wait for the full text of the draft 123 agreement before coming out with its response.

Accompanied by a high-level delegation comprising external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee, National Security Advisor MK Narayanan, foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and AEC chairman Anil Kakodkar, the prime minister met a BJP contingent led by his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee on Thursday morning as part of the ruling coalition’s efforts to hammer out a consensus on the deal. The BJP team comprised, besides Mr Vajpayee, Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Jaswant Singh, BJP president Rajnath Singh, former external affairs minister Yashwant Sinha and Rajya Sabha member Arun Shourie.

While the government delegation sought to impress upon the principal opposition party that all its concerns had been addressed by the draft 123 agreement, the latter preferred to adopt a ‘wait-and-watch’ policy. “Our apprehensions have not been allayed completely,’’ Mr Sinha told reporters after the meeting, which lasted an hour and a half.

“We have no reason to distrust him, but would first like to go through the text of the draft agreement,’’ the former external affairs minister said, adding, “The text of the agreement is clearly frozen. Neither India nor the US can now make any changes in it. But they (government) have not shared with us the text of the agreement. They tried to share only the main elements of the agreement.’’

The BJP delegation, Mr Sinha pointed out, had told the prime minister that in the absence of the text, “to which we are not privy at this stage, it will be difficult for us to respond in detail to the provisions of the bilateral agreement’’. “They were trying to assure us that the agreement would have no impact on our weapons programme and the three-stage nuclear programme and that all our concerns about the reprocessing of fuel have been taken care of,’’ the BJP vice-president said. Mr Sinha said his party would examine the text, when it is made public, after juxtaposing it with the 1954 US Atomic Energy Act and the Hyde Act.

The former external affairs minister maintained that the Opposition would try to look into the substance, and not the language of the text, for its ``correct meaning and interpretation.’’ ``Certainly, this issue will also come up in Parliament. We do have our doubts,’’ he remarked.Speaking to newspersons later in the day, BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad said that his party’s main concern was whether the Hyde Act, passed by the US Congress, would supersede all other laws. ``There were no clear answers to our apprehension,’’ he said.

When the joint-statement on the deal was released during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the US in July, 2005, the BJP had, Mr Prasad pointed out, raised four principal objections — there should be no compromise on our strategic security and nuclear sovereignty, no compromise on our independent decision-making in foreign policy and the fate of large-scale public funds if the United States stopped fuel supply to our reactors.

The Agreement will be measured against the prime minister’s assurances to our main concerns, as outlined by his interventions in Parliament.
I believe there are a lot of "if-then-else" clause's in the allegedly frozen text, which UPA is shying away from, revealing. No surprises there.. :roll:

The agenda is to save the government, rather than approaching the main national opposition party. Why else would the communist drones be briefed first..
ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Post by ShibaPJ »

Who is this we? GoI of the government of the United Progressive Alliance, an alliance in power due to communists. Is a formal cap and/or rollback is the only "rekha"?
ShaurayT, I am not a spokesperson for GoI or UPA. I am trying to look at what is beneficial to us Indians. I thought, you would be able to figure this out on your own.
Does the 20% apply to NWS?
No.. so also the strategic non-civ programme. You enrich/ reuse it to 99.9999% for all you can.
123 is also under US laws, the no test referece exists by reference and does not need to be sepcified. Any basic understanding of written contracts will clarify the issue.
India is not legally bound to HA, only to 123.. That's why it is extremely important not to have any test reference in there.
After having agreed to perpetual safeguards, there is no doubt and Hyde calls for it. Congress will not be voting on the bill till they see, essentially a final unsigned IAEA agreement.
So what? perpetual safeguard is only against perpetual (life-time) fuel supply. What's the issue?
No, it does not change it overnight but the trajectory has been changed. What POK II started towards a trajectory, which envisaged nothing less than NWS, 123 changes it to an NPT+ category.
Again, Unkil can't bestow or take-away NWS status from us.. We are one, but we also need to have eco. strength to count as one complete superpower. Tell me, without-123, how would India manage her exponentially expanding energy requirements?
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

believe there are a lot of "if-then-else" clause's in the allegedly frozen text, which UPA is shying away from, revealing.
Actually what makes both the leftist meeting and this is the presence of AK has not made any impression on both these teams!!

AEC is supposed to meet on Friday and I would like to see what would that lead to.

AKs presence in DC was to protect some parts of the deal - and not to OK the entire thing. So, from that perspective there must be areas that are left to imagination and not to the likings of DAE, etc.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

ShibaPJ wrote: I am trying to look at what is beneficial to us Indians.
That is indeed what we are doing here. However, one does not have to live a lie in order to gain benefits and that is what my fundamental problem with this deal is, J18 is a lie - as the interpretations and expectations were never reconciled. It comes across as an agreement, where one of the parties was suckered in and that party was, the present GoI.
Does the 20% apply to NWS?
No.. so also the strategic non-civ programme. You enrich/ reuse it to 99.9999% for all you can.
Thank You. I know, what we can do with our own fuel. All I am saying is please do not call this de-facto NWS or enjoying the same rights and privileges as the NWS. The Rediff article boldly claims so and I wanted to point out their audacity in being able to spin without any basis in fact.
123 is also under US laws, the no test referece exists by reference and does not need to be sepcified. Any basic understanding of written contracts will clarify the issue.
India is not legally bound to HA, only to 123.. That's why it is extremely important not to have any test reference in there.
Is the US government bound by 123 and Hyde? Is Congress bound by 123 and Hyde? I will say this again - 123 does not have to say no test, it is there by reference - it means it is there in another document under which the current contract is being done. 123 will not survive an Indian test. US sanctions were always there with or without 123 but in this instance, we just signed on the dotted line. Moreover, we have set an understanding that we will understand these sanctions and accept it as we accepted the 123, which are under US laws. We are setting an expectation that except for extraneous circumstances, we are unlikely to test. We are limiting the further development of future Indian weapons to the theoretical domain only, without any opportunity for practical proofs, as demanded by our military. As any power would to on a pro active basis to ensure 360 degree security options. My understanding is the US or any other power has not yet, deployed a weapon system, unless some version of it has been tested before, so far. I do not know, what 123 says about sub-critical tests - banned by Hyde.
After having agreed to perpetual safeguards, there is no doubt and Hyde calls for it. Congress will not be voting on the bill till they see, essentially a final unsigned IAEA agreement.
So what? perpetual safeguard is only against perpetual (life-time) fuel supply. What's the issue?
So, why not say it the way it is. the Perpetual supply has conditions and one of them is - no test. The issue is an expectation has been set. The issue is India just limited her geo-political ambitions to the realm of the NPT+ category only. If there is consensus on the issue, then so be it, I will grumble a little and then eventually reconcile to the will of the people.
No, it does not change it overnight but the trajectory has been changed. What POK II started towards a trajectory, which envisaged nothing less than NWS, 123 changes it to an NPT+ category.
Again, Unkil can't bestow or take-away NWS status from us..
It is not about bestowing, it is the wrong way to look at the issue. It is about our ambitions and what was accomplished against those ambitions and the compromises made and the costs of the compromise.
but we also need to have eco. strength to count as one complete superpower.
We are a long way from being any power, let alone a super power. Our economic strength is least dependent upon this deal.
When you wake up tomorrow and this deal disappers, nothing will be lost, except for a few ruffled feathers, which can be bought for a few Rs.
Tell me, without-123, how would India manage her exponentially expanding requirements?
Coal, Hydro (untapped potential of 37K MW from NE alone), Gas, more uranium mines, supplies fron non-NSG, acceleration on 3 stage, work with others such as Russia to win them over for Uranium supplies either directly or through non NSG member Ukraine, tell the US to **** off and look the other way in our quest for energy, work on more campaign specific safeguards, send $1 billion worth of Indian made Arjun tanks and LCH to Niger for access to yellow cake, work with a sympathetic US administration to supply fuel under such safeguards using Presidential powers and win waivers from the US congress by legally bribing them to vote in India's favor, reform of PSU based power distributors, subsidies for Wind and Solar, convert to ethanol for diesel fired plants (I do not know, if the last one is possible) - IOW: The options are endless and any notion that Indian choices were limited is a lie.

We should have negotiated any such nuclear deal from a postition of strength, by being truthful to the ambitions of the Indian people and by an accurate recoginition of the other parties intent. I do not believe, the present GoI has done these.
Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7113
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Muppalla »

Govt to come with White Paper on disinvestments

26 Jul, 2007, 2017 hrs IST, INDIATIMES NEWS NETWORK

NEW DELHI: The Union Government has decided to come up with a White Paper on disinvestment of Centre’s equity in major public sector undertakings from 1999. A decision to this effect was taken at a meeting of the Union Cabinet earlier this evening presided by Prime Minister Mammohan Singh.

The decision is in a way to target the National Democratic Alliance led by former Prime Minister AB Vajpayee. Most of the disinvestment deals done during the NDA regime will come up for scrutiny in the White Paper. This is a politically loaded move to ward off any opposition to the nuclear deal cleared by the Cabinet Committee on the political affairs two days ago.

This will also divert the Left allies move to take on the UPA government on the nuclear deal.

The Left parties have decided to put the government on mat during the ensuing monsoon session of Parliament on the 123 agreement in the present form.

Meanwhile the Union Cabinet has also allowed the major public sector companies to invest their cash surpluses into mutual funds. This decision will give a major fillip to the equity markets that are already in a buoyant mood. The cash surpluses running into thousands of crores are bound to be channeled into the stock markets via mutual funds.
Last edited by Muppalla on 27 Jul 2007 07:02, edited 1 time in total.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

Muppalla wrote:Govt to come with White Paper on disinvestments

.
Blooy B**tards. This is nothing but direct vendetta on the biggest critic of the deal, the eyes they cannot pass a wool over - Arun Shourie.
enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Post by enqyoobOLD »

I don't understand. Why is the NDA so fearful of the deals done on disinvestment during it's tenure being exposed?

OTOH I don't disagree that this sounds like a ploy to win the hearts and minds of the BJP for the nuke deal. They were all set to micro-criticize the text, since they don't seem to have anything to say on the substance of the nuke deal. The propaganda barrage was no doubt being readied for the Energizer Bunnies to start.

The UPA has no doubt mastered the art of politics and diplomacy:
When u have them by the ba**s, their hearts and minds follow
A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1205
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Post by A Sharma »

Manmohan basks in post N-deal glory

The body language of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [Images] surprised his officers on Thursday. He leant back on the chair sitting with his leg stretched while talking to his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee and his colleagues at a meeting held at his residence in New Delhi to brief the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders about 123 agreement that has been finalised between India and US.

The attendees consisted of BJP president Rajnath Singh, former Defence Minister Jaswant Singh, former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra, former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha and senior writer and thinker Arun Shourie.

PM Singh is always self-conscious, tight-lipped and sits straight. But today his body language conveyed more than Narayanan's briefing to the leaders of India's leading opposition party.

PM Singh who is acutely underplaying his "achievement" of getting the extraordinary nuclear agreement with US is all set to make history and he is well aware of the fact that opposition parties, whether they hate it or love it, have to live with it.

The meeting took place in an amenable atmosphere. BJP leaders didn't raise any fundamental criticism.

In the meeting, Vajpayee didn't speak. Arun Shourie tried to argue but the PM told him to rest assured that his concerns have been taken care of in the agreement.

Yashwant SInha tried to lay claim to some credit, saying that BJP's criticism in parliament has helped India gain some more concessions.

It made the difference when Atomic Energy Commission's chief Anil Kakodkar told BJP leaders, "We have a good deal."

PM Singh's team delightfully heard former Foreign Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh, the negotiator of the next steps in strategic partnership with US. He gave a long speech about the deal alarming the government but his speech did say "...officers (diplomats) have done a superb job."

According to a BJP leader, PM Singh and his team are not saying, 'Here are the proposal, terms and conditions which we may accept and sign the deal. They are saying 'This is the deal India has agreed to. The deal is done. They are not asking for the BJP's or Left's opinion. Only informing us."

A senior BJP functionary told rediff.com, "It appears BJP will not keep up the pressure on government because now the deal is done and terms have been accepted by India."

Government is going ahead and signing the deal because CCPA and CCS have approved it.

Now, if anything goes wrong in Congress, at Washington level, "It will be the US's headache," said an officer in the PMO.

In both meetings, PMO officials have told politicians that the 123 agreement doesn't mention India's right to nuclear test. Since the 123 agreement is silent on the future test it's not binding on India, argue the negotiators.

From the Indian side the deal is done, conditions finalized. The signing of it, by Foreign Minister Pranav Mukherjee and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is the only formality left.

According to sources in the PMO, Rice and Mukherjee will formally sign the deal when Rice visits New Delhi in month or so.


On July 25, leaders of the Left parties had been apprised of the deal by PM Singh, Narayanan and Foreign Secretary S S Menon and others.

CPI-M's Prakash Karat who was also present in the meeting didn't speak much and said that his party will comment only after the text of the deal is given to them.

Similarly, CPI's A B Bardhan told the PM, "From what we have read in the newspapers it seems that you have got a good deal but we will form our opinion only after reading the test."

In effect, Congress's political opponents are being told, 'It's a historic event. India is joining the nuclear world order by signing this deal.'
An eyewitness who was present in the meeting on Thursday said PM Singh is in a jubilant mood without actually celebrating the event.
Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Post by Vivek_A »

U.S. to Announce Nuclear Exception for India
By DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON, July 26 — Three years after President Bush urged global rules to stop additional nations from making nuclear fuel, the White House will announce on Friday that it is carving out an exception for India, in a last-ditch effort to seal a civilian nuclear deal between the countries.

The scheduled announcement, described Thursday by senior American officials, ends more than a year of negotiations intended to keep an unusual arrangement between the countries from being defeated in New Delhi.

Until the overall deal was approved by Congress last year, the United States was prohibited by federal law from selling civilian nuclear technology to India because it has refused to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The legislation passed by Congress allows the United States to sell both commercial nuclear technology and fuel to India, but would require a cutoff in nuclear assistance if India again tests a nuclear weapon. India’s Parliament balked at the deal, with many politicians there complaining that the requirements infringed on India’s sovereignty.

Under the arrangement that is to be announced by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Mr. Bush has agreed to go beyond the terms of the deal that Congress approved, promising to help India build a nuclear fuel repository and find alternative sources of nuclear fuel in the event of an American cutoff, skirting some of the provisions of the law.

In February 2004, President Bush, in a major speech outlining new nuclear policies to prevent proliferation, declared that “enrichment and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.â€
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Post by vsudhir »

Nuclear deal with India meets skepticism in Washington (Reuters)
Congressional sources and other experts said Wednesday the agreement reached last week appears to go a long way toward meeting the demands of the Indian nuclear establishment, giving New Delhi rights only accorded to Japan and the European Union, core allies of Washington.

"The administration is going to call this a success even though from policy and legal perspectives, there are major problems," said one congressional source, who spoke anonymously because he learned details of the deal on a confidential basis.

The pact, approved by the Indian cabinet Wednesday, would allow India access to U.S. nuclear fuel and equipment, even though New Delhi has refused to join nonproliferation pacts and has tested nuclear weapons.

"We're very satisfied because we know the agreement is well within the bounds of the Hyde Act," Burns told reporters after testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1975
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Post by bala »

[quote]“Now we’ve gone beyond that, and given India something that we don’t give to Russia and China.â€
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1975
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Post by bala »

India must use thorium-based nuclear reactors: Kalam

India has to take up nuclear power generation in a big way with thorium-based reactors to meet its growing energy needs, former president, A P J Abdul Kalam, said Thursday.

Thorium, a non-fissile material, is available in abundance in India. Intensive research is needed to convert thorium to maximise its use and to generate electricity with thorium-based reactors, he said while addressing professors at the Anna University here, where he has taken up a teaching assignment.

Referring to regions in India that periodically face earthquakes, he said it was essential to work on mission mode research to forecast temblors.

Multiple parameters should be used with "precursors like pre-shock conditions and electromagnetic phenomena prior to the final rupture and atmospheric and ionosphere anomalies," he said.

"Earthquakes can be forecast...if somebody tells you it cannot be done, tell them it can be (done)," he said.

"Between now and 2050, two important events will take place in our country. India would have become a developed nation by 2020 through an integrated development plan in five key areas where we have core competence," Kalam said.

"We would have also realised energy independence by 2030. During this period, the number of youths, accounting for 54 per cent of the total population, will continuously grow till 2050, which will be unique to India."

This will provide an opportunity to develop a "Global Human Resource Cadre" that will be an essential resource for India and many other countries, he said.
Sanatanan
BRFite
Posts: 487
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 09:29

Reprocessing and Enrichment

Post by Sanatanan »

In page 2 of this thread (26 Jul 2007) ShauryaT wrote [font decoration in the quoted text, mine]:

The linked Rediff article claims, India got the same rights as nuclear weapon states - I am simply aghast that after all this, starting with the different interpretations of J18, M2 (perpetual safeguards), and now 123, which seems to limit reprocessing to 20% enrichment levels - same as allowed for NNWS, fuel guarantees that do not survive an Indian nuclear test, codified expectations set on Indian quantitative and qualitative weapons development, and to top it all Hyde, which does not even pretend that India should ever be a de facto NWS and finally the IAEA agreement - which will be applied on the same lines as a NNWS - do not know on what grounds are they saying India as a defacto NWS.
I have observed that since the conclusion of the present round of talks in Washington, the words "reprocessing" and "enrichment to 20%" are being used in the same breath in media reports and also in some BRF posts. I thought that "reprocessing" referred to recovery of Pu from the spent fuel, while "enrichment" refers to increasing U235 isotopic in the new fuel. Some time back there was a short discussion in BRF which indicated that Pu cannot be enriched / will be extremely difficult to enrich.

What does "reprocessing to 20% enrichment levels," mean? Is it that India proposes to import natural or slightly enriched uranium, presumably as UF6, and process it further to obtain enrichment levels up to 20%? Is this process of putting the imported fuel again through India's enrichment plant also called "reprocessing"?

Thanks in advance for the clarification.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Post by merlin »

According to the existing separation plan, anything that is not under IAEA safeguards automatically becomes military and has a totally different fuel cycle loop - that includes the FBRs. And that also includes any and all kinds of reprocessing done on the military side all the way up to weapons grade. So the question of constraints does not arise.
Constraints meaning voluntary cap on fissile material production even on the strategic side. Something that won't be codified into 123 but may have been agreed to.

Will we be getting (via Parliament) the absolutely full 30 page 123 agreement to see? That will tell whether people on this thread who are wildly jubilant are right in being so or not.

Nobody has answered my question on the spent fuel already at Tarapur? Is it governed by the same right to reprocess as codified in 123? If not then what happens to it? If is is then we should first sign the reprocessing agreement with the country where the seed fuel originated from and check how easy that agreement was. Future agreements with that country will more or less be the same.

As far as the timing of the investigation into sale of assets go, we all know who the master of dirty tricks is. They must want the deal so bad they are willing to stoop this low to get it :evil:
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

That will tell whether people on this thread who are wildly jubilant are right in being so or not.
From that one report that AK has declared this deal as a good deal, it is probably time to celebrate.

However, this deal is not black-and-white - the paper content. There will be plenty in the US that will oppose it. And, even if it passes the US Congress the fact that a lot of influential people will oppose it (in the US and countries like Australia and Japan, etc) means that India still has her work cut out.

At best it is a political win, not quite the technical win one would have liked. My feel is that it is a corner-stone agreement, but only WRT the prez in the US. It will take the US some 10-20 years to realise what a partnership is about (note that they talk of Japan and Euroatom as allies). It is only after that mental transformation takes place - as an equal - that India will realise some of the benefits of her own work (FBR, etc).
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Post by CRamS »

My take: I'll let the experts dissect the nuances in the actual text, but from a high-level view, it always seemed to me that it is in Unkil's interest to give enough to MMS to keep opposition at bay. And thats exactly what seems to have happened. I still refer this August body to the WP interview with Uneven after J18 where he linked this 'deal' with concession to TSP on Kashmir. Wonder what MMS has promised on this front.
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

U.S. to Brief on Nuclear Agreement With India Today

Post by sunilUpa »

U.S. to Brief on Nuclear Agreement With India Today

By Ashok Bhattacharjee and Bibhudatta Pradhan

July 27 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. will today announce details of a civilian nuclear accord with India, an agreement allowing power plants in the energy-starved nation access to fissile material and technology.

Nicholas Burns, the U.S. undersecretary for political affairs, will brief reporters from Washington on the just- concluded, so-called ``1-2-3 agreement'' at 8 p.m. India time, the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi said in an e-mailed media advisory. Indian officials, including Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon, will brief the local media at 6 p.m. local time.

The agreement gives effect to bilateral cooperation between the U.S. and India on nuclear energy and needs to be approved by both governments. The accord, a key element in U.S. President George W. Bush's foreign policy, was held up by differences over whether India would get a perennial supply of nuclear fuel, be allowed to reprocess spent fuel and keep the right to conduct nuclear tests


It would be great if someone could record the pressbriefing in India as well as USA. Later we can disect it based on actual briefing, not on what DDM reports/interpretation. I guess CSPAN should have it live.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

You are the third person I am hearing this from - did not quite believe the other two. MMS had tried to make Siachen the Peace Mountain, he recently did mention he would like to see the LoC as the Peace Line (paraphrasing), the Indian Army is about to vacate schools, etc in Kashmir - looks like a lot of concessions. Army Chief had to intervene publicly in the case of Siachen.

But, I think that is Ok for the time being. Pakistan will be an egg in the USs face.
Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Post by Victor »

It is simply a smart move by the neocons to get India firmly on their side now, while they still have something significant to give. They clearly see India as preeminent in a few decades--economically, militarily, culturally and most importantly, demographically. This inspite of all their decades of efforts to stop us. All garbled voices of protest/dissent by half-wits and lifafas in the US will be silenced after a closed-door session with Cheney. Strategic national interest (self preservation) comes first and those who have the most to lose understand and act on this best.

It is not about nukes. We already have that in spades.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4514
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Post by Tanaji »

Nrao,

Could you please post the link for the following:
From that one report that AK has declared this deal as a good deal, it is probably time to celebrate.
TIA
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

A Sharma wrote:Manmohan basks in post N-deal glory

........................................

It made the difference when Atomic Energy Commission's chief Anil Kakodkar told BJP leaders, "We have a good deal."

.........................................
Basic assumptions apply.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4514
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Post by Tanaji »

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

Post by ShibaPJ »

ShauryaT,
We both are batting for the same team. The difference seems to be if a particular approach is Ok for the long-term well-being.

Now we know that NDA did try for a similar deal, then the half- and qtr-brights botched it. It is clear that J18 is not fully adhered to in the draft 123 and I also believe that down the road (maybe another 5 or 10 years), we would have been in a far better position to get a better deal. But then, do we really want to wait for 10 years to get a better deal or take a compromise deal now and push on the accelerator on domestic R&D, at the same time leapfrogging into the 3rd stage of our domestic program? I believe, the trade-off is worth it, also if AK & his team has blessed it, then it gives a better comfort level. Let's wait & see the fine print before speculating further.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

ShibaPJ, 5 to 10 years down the line US would have sorted the ME mess and not agreed to any deal veal. That is a possibility to consider. Cheney intervened only due to greater political considerations and how this fits into their grand strategy.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

AKs blessing and protection are two different things.

He has to protect the civilian and nuclear efforts. He can bless the "deal" - with the clear understanding that he has nothing to do with that aspect, which could have a huge political component.

His "blessing" has to be seen in light of his uneasy relationship with the present PMO. I would imagine that MMS would keep him at an arms length and yet use his quotes when it suites him (MMS). MMS = PMO, PMO = MMS, not meant to be personal.
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Post by g.sarkar »

merlin wrote:Constraints meaning voluntary cap on fissile material production even on the strategic side. Something that won't be codified into 123 but may have been agreed to.
Will we be getting (via Parliament) the absolutely full 30 page 123 agreement to see? That will tell whether people on this thread who are wildly jubilant are right in being so or not.
While we will never get the whole truth from Delhi, because nothing stays secret in the US for too long, we will soon get to know what the real deal was. Once Bush starts explaining the details of the agreement to the US Congress to gather support, everything will become public.
Gautam
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

It might be in closed session to protect the deal.

From above post
WASHINGTON, July 26 — Three years after President Bush urged global rules to stop additional nations from making nuclear fuel, the White House will announce on Friday that it is carving out an exception for India, in a last-ditch effort to seal a civilian nuclear deal between the countries.

The scheduled announcement, described Thursday by senior American officials, ends more than a year of negotiations intended to keep an unusual arrangement between the countries from being defeated in New Delhi.
Last edited by ramana on 27 Jul 2007 19:11, edited 1 time in total.
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Post by sunilUpa »

cspan3 has live coverage of Burns press brief right now.

Link

Just now heard him saying that US has still retained the right to ask for return of US supplied equipment and Fuel in case of a nuclear test by India.

Now talking about dedicated reprocessing facility proposed by India and how US agreed to this proposal.

Can some one with DVR record this?

Quoting Burns " Legal right of any future President to enforce return of equipment/fuel in case of hypothetical scenarios is still preserved". He also said they understand Indias need for uniterupted supply of Fuel for life of reactor and in most cases it will be so.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Post by ShauryaT »

enqyoob wrote:I don't understand. Why is the NDA so fearful of the deals done on disinvestment during it's tenure being exposed?
Who says they are afraid, enqyoob ji? These turds have tried this stunt before, when they were all set to "expose" the centaur hotel sale - whatever came of that?
They were all set to micro-criticize the text, since they don't seem to have anything to say on the substance of the nuke deal.
Which part of ABV's statement don't we understand - India should not accept anything less than what, China was offered? Do you remember the offer of two reactors under safeguards by Mishra as opposed to the 2/3 by MMS? Transalation the US was not ready to accept India as a defacto NWS and India would not cap or rollback, its program. The solution - J18-M2-Hyde-123-IAEA = NPT+.

So there is three of us now. The NWS, NNWS and then the SNW to be treated as an NNWS - wherever possible.
The UPA has no doubt mastered the art of politics and diplomacy:
You mean of thuggery and treachery?
When u have them by the ba**s, their hearts and minds follow
Sure, IG used the same logic during emergency, because democracy is soooo inconvenient. How dare an opposition oppose a policy set by the ruling family of India?
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Post by sunilUpa »

Burns just said that agreement may not go to Congress till IAEA agreement is finalized, most probably till end of the year.

First step - agreement with IAEA

Second - Congressional approval

Third - US companies can start Nuclear commerce with India

Fourth - India sets up dedicated safeguarded reprocessing plant, then it can reprocess the fuel.

Note - This Safeguarded reprocessing facility is not meant to reprocess only US supplied fuel. If India wants to reprocess fuel supplied by any country, and if the supplier country agrees to this, then reprocessing can be done only in IAEA safeguarded facility.
Last edited by sunilUpa on 27 Jul 2007 19:45, edited 1 time in total.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Burns:

1. India and the US will have the same "explanation" and "presentation"
2. 123 text will be released l8r
3. 2005 Rice approached India about this deal
4. India released from Iran - he defended India, but did not agree with Indian stand
5. 123 is "within the Hyde Act" - {of course "complice with"}
6. ((Like I mentioned there is enough FUD for both the US and India to sqeeze out of this deal))
7. Dehyphanate India and Pakistan
8. Place and importance of Pakistan - fight terror, AQ and Talibs
9. Place and importance of India - spread democracy, fight AIDS/HIV
10. ALL fuel supplied by any country will be under IAEA reprocessing - STrafford.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

United States and India Complete Civil Nuclear Negotiations

[quote]
Statement by Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Washington, DC
July 27, 2007
Joint Statement by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Indian Minister of External Affairs Shri Pranab Mukherjee

The United States and India have reached a historic milestone in their strategic partnership by completing negotiations on the bilateral agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation, also known as the “123 agreement.â€
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Post by Sumeet »

Nuke deal not the best, but a good one: Centre

New Delhi: The Centre on Friday tried to hardsell the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement to the political setup in particular and the nation as a whole, saying it will open the way for bilateral cooperation between India and US.


Briefing journalists on the nuclear deal, National Security Adviser MK Narayanan, however, admitted that the "deal is not the best, but is a very good one." In the same breath, he claimed that "India has retained its right to test."


The government fielded the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Anil Kakodkar; Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and National Security Adviser MK Narayanan at a briefing on the nuclear deal.


Narayanan said the Indo-US bilateral agreement on nuclear deal fulfills the terms outlined by Prime Minister in Parliament on August 17. He said there was no reference in the agreement to the nuclear tests carried out by India in 1998. "It refers to only civil nuclear cooperation."


Asked what he felt were the shortcomings of the agreement, Narayanan said India would have liked to get reprocessing and enrichment technologies.


"India is not a proliferator," he said. The NSA clarified that the agreement "does not interfere with India's breeder programme in any manner." He also claimed that the text fully reflects fuel supply assurances. "The text will be made available soon," he said.


Asked if the fighter aircraft sale issue was linked to the nuclear deal, Narayanan replied in the negative. "There was no reference to any arms deals in the five days we spent on finalising the agreement. The outcome would improve relationships and this would lead to other enhancements. There are no conditions attached with this agreement . This is a simple civil nuclear deal," he stated.


Menon also reiterated that there was no condition attached to the agreement. "This was an agreement on civil nuclear coopeation and we did not negotiate anything else," he said.


"There is no time limit for the completion of India-specific safeguards negotiations. But we hope the negotiations will complete soon. It has to be different and specific to the Indian conditions of the world scenario," he said.


Asked about political consensus with the UPA on the deal, Narayanan said: "We have met the Left and they have said that they would see the agreement first before reacting. But it seems they are more or less convienced. The Left parties and the NDA have indicated that they were more than satisfied with the agreement," he claimed.


Kakodkar clarified that the fuel assurances in the text of the agreement are consistent with what the US had promised earlier. "The text is excellent in the sense that there is always some scope. There is some give and take. We have got all the agreements that the PM had assured the Parliament about.


Kakodkar said he was satisfied with the deal. "The right to reprocess spent fuel and reusing it for other purposes has been agreed to in the deal, " he said. "This agreement covers full rights for fuel supply."



Menon described the agreement as a strategic milestone between India and US. "This achievement reinforces the growing relationship between the two countries," he said.


"The agreement was intended to primarily drive the civil nuclear deal. We are not using this to enhance our strategic nuclear capability. We have not mortgaged any rights. Rather we have enhanced our rights whereever possible," Menon said.


"We hope India will get unconditional exemption from Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines on fuel supplies," he said. Menon added that India is ready to work with like-minded countries.


Narayanan said India will actively seek international support for NSG approval. "The treaty gives equal benefits to India and US," he said. He hoped India will get unconditional exemption from Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines on fuel supplies. "India will now further negotiate safeguards agreement with International Atomic Energy Agency," Kakodkar said.
Last edited by Sumeet on 27 Jul 2007 19:54, edited 1 time in total.
ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Post by ShibaPJ »

Ramana,
Can US realistically clean up the ME mess in the near future? Iraq & Afganistan mess are only getting worse. Both the bear and lizard are in the upswing and have lots of leverage to cause mischief. From Indian pov, with the recent gas discoveries and the probability of 3 stage program bearing fruit, the pressure point would somewhat ease to only the 'oil' front (provided we become self-sufficient in natural gas).

Isn't it the best time for Unkil to get the deal and get this ascending power in it's group that risk losing her to the bear hug? If Cheney only spent 2 mins out of 30 to say yes to 123 to MKN, then we can well think of Unkil's pain points and pressing priorities.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

NRao wrote:Burns:

1. India and the US will have the same "explanation" and "presentation"
The advocacy groups and lobby have made sure to highlight the difference between the J18 and the Hyde act. Even BRF has to take the credit to make sure that J18 is highlighted for Indian interest.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Thats what I was implying. One can get a better deal further downstream but on the other hand one might not due to the very factors you say.
In the end NDA tested and UPA got the deal. The deal would not have come if the NDA never tested. UPA and INC would never have tested due to their political thought process.

So it is a win-win for India.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Post by CRamS »

NRao wrote:Burns:

7. Dehyphanate India and Pakistan
Yeah right. I'll believe it when the doctrine of balance of power between the world's largest democracy --- India, and worlds pre-eminent terrorist state --- Pakistan, is confined to the dustbin of history. I'll believe it when a high level US official visits only India and not 'South Asia'. I'll believe this when India and Paaaaakistaaaan are not mentioned in the same breath.

8. Place and importance of Pakistan - fight terror, AQ and Talibs
How about LeT, Jaish, in fact Mush himself who are terrorists when it comes to India? Or is that Kosher?

9. Place and importance of India - spread democracy, fight AIDS/HIV
Nobody need place India anywhere on these counts. India stands on its own.
Locked