India Nuclear News & Discussion - 07 Aug 2007

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 19:57

>>>Power reactors have 40 year life.

I read sometime back India is designing reactors with an expected lifespan of 100 years

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 19:59

The Left is just making noise for the benefit of their Commie support base - I don't think they will bring down the govt over this, because the key statement was right after the deal was announced - I assume that MMS would have shown the text to the Speaker etc. They were fully supportive at that point.

Now they have to look Nationalistic to compete with the BJP. That's all.

From Left's POV, the nuclear deal is the last hope to have a big hand in the lucrative Power sector unions. This is because nuke plants will have government interference all the time, so there will be unions etc.

If this deal falls through, the writing is on the wall - the Power sector will be completely divested, and Reliance, Tata etc. will be allowed to go build privately-run thermal and hydro plants on a massive scale. They will kick out the unions, and the State Electricity Boards - the bribe sources for the CPI(M) will be dismantled. So there is NO WAY that the Left is going to let this deal fall through.

When all is said and done, MMS and Sonia will come out all roses, the Left will get the blackmail money, and the BJP will... (never mind, we all know what the BJP will get). :roll: And they will blame it all on a Catholic/Muslim/Evangelist/Communist/American/Macaulayite/JNU Conspiracy Against Yindoos.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 08 Aug 2007 20:07

enqyoob wrote:The Left is just making noise for the benefit of their Commie support base - I don't think they will bring down the govt over this


I was afraid of that too. :) I wuz quitely hoping that Beijing is pissed over this deal that they would order their cohorts in India to bring down the guvrmand. :D
However, I still think that the third front can be resurrected.



Now they have to look Nationalistic to compete with the BJP. That's all.

I disagree with this. The left has never taken a nationalistic stance on anything. Even for pretence. All of their pressure is to make India serve their 'internationalist' agenda. The reason why they hatethis deal is that it takes India closer to US, which is of course their favourite punching bag.

Anyway, I expect the left to negotiate behind closed doors for some benefit, grumble in public, and just stink all over the country.

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 20:10

Brajesh Mishra wrote:"If the NSG countries support this idea of fuel reserve, we don't have to worry much. However, the agreement with the NSG will have to be arrived at before the deal is signed," he said.


sounds reasonable.. since this is not a bi-lateral deal, as we have to include the iran etc words.

needed:-

America work with NSG countries to ensure fuel reserve level is maintained through out the life of agreement.

is that possible? may be yes, from a poodled nations point of view.

there is a better alternative, India deals with each NSG country and comes up with a bi lateral agreement.
"The separation plan of March 2, 2006 reinforced that concern. The promise to go in for an early conclusion of the Fissile Material Cut- off Treaty (FMCT) further reinforced that concern," he added.

what is the "cut-off" date? i did not see it the texts about the time frame.. what is early means? perhaps reword "early" to "acceptable" or just delete that early word. or, if India is confident about its weapons program, then we can accept a figure there.

regarding hyde:

How much of presidential veto has the power to allow India to be in the fuel supplies after a nuke test? If he/she does, then what is the probability of a future US prez who is pro-India?

The points here should be addressed in as much separate deals as possible. Indo-French., Indo-Russion, Indo-Austrailian, Indo-Nigerian, Indo-Kazhakstan deals., etc.

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

Postby Satya_anveshi » 08 Aug 2007 20:10

Any analysis that sees this deal from electoral point of view is deeply flawed. There is no way one can explain the benefits of this deal to the common man and there won't be any in the near and medium term.

One has to see this issue beyond politics and yet, all political parties except UPA are against this deal. They are literally crying bloddy murder. I wonder why.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53456
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 08 Aug 2007 20:10

PTI Report in Pioneer, 8 August 2007
PM is firm on 123, Brajesh Mishra eyes it unsafe

PTI | New Delhi

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has made it clear on Wednesday to the Left leaders that the India-US civil nuclear deal will not be renegotiated, shortly after the allies rejected the 123 Agreement.

Singh, however, conveyed the Government's willingness to address the concerns of the Left parties when he spoke to CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat and CPI leaders AB Bardhan and D Raja last night, highly placed sources said.

The Prime Minister asserted that the 123 Agreement, that will operationalise the nuclear deal, has been approved by the Cabinet and that there was no question of renegotiating it, the sources said.

Singh will make a statement on the issue in Parliament on August 14, 2007.

The Prime Minister's phone call to Left leaders came hours after the four Left parties rejected the Agreement, saying that there were many concerns regarding the deal in context of the Hyde Act.

The Left parties insisted that the Agreement fell short of the assurances given by the Prime Minister to Parliament.

In the backdrop of the Prime Minister's reaffirmation that his Government will not move back in finalising the deal with the US, former national security advisor Brajesh Mishra has said in an exclusive interview that the Agreement will make it difficult for the Government to carry out an atomic test should such a need arise since economic costs would be "far greater" than in the past.

{This is due to the economic growth of India. As the economy grows it will be more costly than in the past. In some ways 1998 was the best time to test as it minimized the impact of the sanctions. If India were to test now the costs would be higher but then the finanical reserves are also higher.}

The 123 Agreement would also "stymie" India's right to reprocessing fuel received from the US, he told Karan Thapar on India Tonight programme telecast on CNBC channel.

He said that our concerns of independent conduct of foreign policy could be impeded as the pressure on the Government would grow. America being a more powerful and more important party would come "every other day" asking for India's support, he said.

"Suppose you have an Iraq type of situation... Is the Government of India... Whether it is today's Government or tomorrow's Government... Whether it is capable of saying no, we cannot do this... We do not agree with you and we are going to continue with our cooperation with Iraq," he asked.

{But isnt that a weakness of the govenrment in power if it does not pursue Indian interests? The US will come to seek support as the international balance of power requires them to come to India as needed. That should be an oppurtunity ot advance Indian interests provided they know what those interests are.}

The agreement also leaves critical issues like right to build fuel reserves, right to reprocess and access to sensitive technologies for the pact with the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG), Mishra contended.


enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 20:14

The left has never taken a nationalistic stance on anything


True. Let's change that to "Left has to look anti-capitalist and For the People" Esp. after their hoochie-kootchie with the American Embassy "diplomats" regarding Nandigram came to light.

But the effect on BJP is still unchanged. They will be left scratching their musharrafs. Anti - nationalist, anti- capitalist-entrepreneurial, anti-people, pro-Cluelessness. All that MMS and Sonia have to do is explain to their admiring crowds that
What it is we could do? BJP had already promised Morarjitorium on anu-bum test, and sold the national interest to the Americans!


Quite honestly too.

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

Postby bala » 08 Aug 2007 20:19

Luxtor wrote:Don't be so sure Bala, Remember the U.S. signed legally binding contract with the Pakis


Good thing you mentioned the GUBO Pakis. India-US relationship is not a GUBO relationship. There is much more respect and give/take. I have said this before, India is now practically the P6 and it has to grow up and act like one. Someone mentioned the servile attitude that prevails in a Wipro/Infosys when it comes to dealing with Goras. India has to realize that it is second to none and has worldwide clout and capability.

Sure the US can renege on commitments but there are consequences when it deals with big boys. Big boys can also renege and impose their will, e.g. Russia recently tore up an agreement with the US. With the economic boom, India, down the road, may have the capacity to tear up contracts with other nations it if feels they are counterproductive. Maybe 10yrs from now India can rewrite the 123 agreement to much more favorable terms, who knows.


Geeth wrote:Indian doesn't have any domestic law, and even if we have, it can do sweet buggerall to US.

This is a one way agreement, which will make us subservient to US whims and fancies. Tomorrow, US may ask India to send troops to Iraq/iran...or else


This is the same servile attitude that I have referenced above. So what if US has its biased Hyde Act, nothing prevents India from having one. In the end these Acts are all toothless and express Angst/Anxiety/NPT Ayatollahs Fatwas. The 123 agreement is not one way. India is getting scarce Uranium fuel on pretty decent terms for civilian nuclear power.

Yeah, the US can ask and cajole India for a lot of things, but India has the right to politely decline. Burns mouthed inanities on Iran and India and he quickly retracted the nonsense. Again it all comes down to playing the game with the big boys.

Raju

Postby Raju » 08 Aug 2007 20:31

ramana wrote:{This is due to the economic growth of India. As the economy grows it will be more costly than in the past. In some ways 1998 was the best time to test as it minimized the impact of the sanctions. If India were to test now the costs would be higher but then the finanical reserves are also higher.}

The 123 Agreement would also "stymie" India's right to reprocessing fuel received from the US, he told Karan Thapar on India Tonight programme telecast on CNBC channel.

He said that our concerns of independent conduct of foreign policy could be impeded as the pressure on the Government would grow. America being a more powerful and more important party would come "every other day" asking for India's support, he said.

"Suppose you have an Iraq type of situation... Is the Government of India... Whether it is today's Government or tomorrow's Government... Whether it is capable of saying no, we cannot do this... We do not agree with you and we are going to continue with our cooperation with Iraq," he asked.

{But isnt that a weakness of the govenrment in power if it does not pursue Indian interests? The US will come to seek support as the international balance of power requires them to come to India as needed. That should be an oppurtunity ot advance Indian interests provided they know what those interests are.}


Testing in future might actually be a bit easier because of increasing friction between US and China esp over the currency/trade issues. Depending on whose side we take, they will keep their silence on the issue. I just get the feeling that MMS & crew will naturally support the US and China will then do what it pleases at the border.

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

Postby Rye » 08 Aug 2007 20:37

The first minefield for MMS is the Iran issue that will arise during his visit to Texas...hope he gets fully briefed with the right answers......the left/CPI(M) and its penchant to support Iran for vote-bank purposes, actually makes them useful idiots from India's POV.

India should just offer support in stabilizing Afghanisthan but not Iraq or Iran.
The US will not allow anyone else near Afghanisthan just yet..rather, the US would rather let the Pakis and their "Strateric depth" in Afghanisthan than India.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53456
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 08 Aug 2007 20:45

geeth wrote:>>>Power reactors have 40 year life.

I read sometime back India is designing reactors with an expected lifespan of 100 years


Power reactors get low cycle fatigue from the different thermal transients- start-up, tripping etc. No one has fatigue data for 100 years. So need to take it with a pich of salt. Also need to figure in how much residual radioactivity is there in a 40 year vs 100 year plant for safe disposal issues.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 08 Aug 2007 20:48

Guys enlighten me on this.

Given that:
1. The Hyde act is a US National treaty governing how its government should act. This treaty by itself is quite disruptive wrt india's nuclear trade with the US, sets many unnecessary preconditions, forces the GOTUS to act contrary to India's interests in a situation where India tests.

2. 123 is the B/L aggrement between the US and India on civilian nuclear trade. AFAIK its main utility for india has been that it more or less formalizes india as P5+1, thus enables india to TRADE WITH THE NSG. Earlier, NSG would not even talk to us unless we had signed NPT, CTBT etc.

Am I correct in assuming, that once 123 has opened that very vital NSG door, India can have b/l deals with the other more significant nuclear powers France, and Russia (and Australia) to provide its needs. Is it possible that once this happens our dependence on the US and 123 diminishes. Thus we regain the independance we have always had, ALONGWITH ACCESS TO ALL INTERNATIONAL TECH AS WE MAY BE ABLE TO DERIVE out of our B/L treaties.

3. What we deal with the NSG is now of paramount importance. Here we MUST NOT in any way allow OUR NUCLEAR TESTING to be made an issue, or to be tagged to any restrictive / punitive measures, fuel / equipment withdrawl etc. America's utility as a nuclear equipment supplier is also not sacrosanct, other nations offer similar / better tech and deals.

Therefore 123 opens that vital door, We profusely thank america and GWB and move on to NSG, where the next battle lies.
Last edited by p_saggu on 08 Aug 2007 21:05, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby bala » 08 Aug 2007 20:49

China has the 3 Ts problem: Tibet, Taiwan and Trade. None of these are going away in the near future and in fact each day a new trouble chapter is being written. Another T that has bugged them in the past is Tiananmen Square. The 2008 Olympics are ideal for highlighting these issues and already the process has started with Chinese dissidents and intellectuals ask party leaders to honor rights

India must use the opportunity to its advantage to stymy any China opposition to the US-India relationship including the nuke deal.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 21:09

China has 4 T problems.

Let's not forget Tarrel than Ocean, Deepel than Mountain Fliend, TSP. Surely the situation there is causing some indigestion in Beijing? If the Americans come in and take over with BB-type puppet government, all that investment in Gwadar etc. goes down the tubes. If OTOH the Lal Masjid types take over, not much love there either - they can expect more unrest in Uighuristan.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3546
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Postby Paul » 08 Aug 2007 21:24

Not sure why PRC's Gwadar investment will go down the tube if BB comes to power. Her father was an avid Mao worshipper and committed TSP to be China's wh0re for eons to come. She got missiles to NoKo for Nukes and is as rabidly anti Indian as any avergae Abdul on the street. Besides, Gwadar policy will be decided by the military and will be kept out BB's purview.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 21:29

Because this time around, without total American protection, BB's life expectancy can be measured in hours.

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 21:35

Raju wrote:
ramana wrote:{This is due to the economic growth of India. As the economy grows it will be more costly than in the past. In some ways 1998 was the best time to test as it minimized the impact of the sanctions. If India were to test now the costs would be higher but then the finanical reserves are also higher.}

The 123 Agreement would also "stymie" India's right to reprocessing fuel received from the US, he told Karan Thapar on India Tonight programme telecast on CNBC channel.

He said that our concerns of independent conduct of foreign policy could be impeded as the pressure on the Government would grow. America being a more powerful and more important party would come "every other day" asking for India's support, he said.

"Suppose you have an Iraq type of situation... Is the Government of India... Whether it is today's Government or tomorrow's Government... Whether it is capable of saying no, we cannot do this... We do not agree with you and we are going to continue with our cooperation with Iraq," he asked.

{But isnt that a weakness of the govenrment in power if it does not pursue Indian interests? The US will come to seek support as the international balance of power requires them to come to India as needed. That should be an oppurtunity ot advance Indian interests provided they know what those interests are.}


Testing in future might actually be a bit easier because of increasing friction between US and China esp over the currency/trade issues. Depending on whose side we take, they will keep their silence on the issue. I just get the feeling that MMS & crew will naturally support the US and China will then do what it pleases at the border.


Global economic situation is unstable from now onwards. The impact of trade blocks and financial blocks will be higher since India's trade account which is getting progressively bigger will be affected.

AniB
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 00:34
Location: Rockies

Postby AniB » 08 Aug 2007 21:42

India will unveil 1yr stats on AWHR around 2014: Uses Th, makes tiny waste, self cleaning’. And yes the only FBR farm running in the world is also doing well cleaning up Rg-Pu. Thank you.
Our mantra is “We cannot wasteâ€

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 21:44

>>>This is the same servile attitude that I have referenced above.

I have just pointed out the fact, and it doesn't reflect my attitude.

>>>So what if US has its biased Hyde Act, nothing prevents India from having one.

Then why we haven't had any till now? It would have prevented the gang of four poodles from approving it without ever reading it orshowing it to anyone.

>>>In the end these Acts are all toothless and express Angst/Anxiety/NPT Ayatollahs Fatwas. The 123 agreement is not one way. India is getting scarce Uranium fuel on pretty decent terms for civilian nuclear power.

Pretty decent term is something you feel. I feel it is pretty indecent terms, which we could have discarded.

>>>Yeah, the US can ask and cajole India for a lot of things, but India has the right to politely decline.

I feel that right is being surrendered with this agreement.

>>>Burns mouthed inanities on Iran and India and he quickly retracted the nonsense. Again it all comes down to playing the game with the big boys.

Playing games is fine. But walking into a trap is something else.

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 21:45

copying as is from email.

Your Comments on BRF:

"BK may be right.. but may be wrong, especially MMS. He should have traced those strings behind him where it leads to. I am sure he would have changed his article to reflect a mahoutini.

I wish we elect a black belt jones as the PM next time with a 2/3rds majority, and could deal Bush or any Khan, like how Putin does but less communism."
Finally someone is owning up to on BRF, that our Majority of Indian people's choice:
from Italian 'Mahoutini', CPI(M)-chinese bandicoots and assortment of Laloo, Mayawati
Mulayams, JayLalita, Karunanidhis, pawars and Hajpayees & Co.

JaiKissan
(previous Avatar)

P.S.(if you really care)
Does anyone ask on BRF to supposedly 'educated' or 'well informed' Jingoes
1) Why did we not test before 1967 NPT Cutoff date, when we had reprocessed Plutonium in 1965?
2) Why did we invite International Sanctions including NSG in 1974, and try to call/fudge the test a PNE?
What were the India's National/Security/strategic Compulsions to test and fudge at that time?
(supposedly we had Indira= black belt jones as the PM with2/3 majority)
3) Who advised and declared the tests successful, declared unilateral moratoriun and still got new sanctions in 1998?
4) And Who tells the truth that the Bums tested in 1998 were duds/or a TN Varieties or H-bomb a fudging
(similar to earlier PNE fudging)? BRF Jingoes/analysts-with articualtely fed data, DAE community, Military
or Karnad or Hajpayee?

OR

Contradictions from our Demi-gods?

July/August 2007
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... c632c2d93a
It is a pity our negotiators have chosen not to pursue extending the cooperation into the area of fast reactors at least to the extent that we should be able to access the international market for equipment and components which otherwise have to be produced by Indian industry with considerable effort .

1) Chest Beating/Bravado, July 2005

http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com/2005/0 ... perts.html
Pointing to the importance of the indigenous fast-breeder reactor (FBR) programme, A.N. Prasad, former director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), told The Hindu the suggestion of allowing safeguards "goes against the national interest." "Since FBRs will be the mainstay of India's nuclear power programme for some time, and since there is a lot to be established for the first time and improved upon to achieve a level of maturity required to make it a success, bringing in safeguards at this stage just because they are civil nuclear facilities will seriously hamper our efforts and cut into our freedom to pursue the development of this programme."

He said that "only those who have hands on experience in operating such facilities and also dealing with intrusive safeguards can fully appreciate this aspect" and warned that the issue "should not be taken lightly."

Dr. Prasad also said that the suggestion made in some quarters about separating civilian and military facilities for safeguards purposes is not feasible. Given the "small scale of the military activities involved," dedicating reactors for a single purpose "is not only impractical but also not cost effective."

In the context of the Prime Minister's visit to Washington, Dr. Prasad said any change in U.S. policy on the nuclear supplies front should be "carefully assessed to see if there are any unacceptable conditions." At no point should India "compromise the basic inherent strength so relentlessly built over the years under heavy odds." -2037

2) Reality:
December 2005

http://inhome.rediff.com/news/inter.htm
Our assurance to place all nuclear power reactors and nuclear materials we receive from outside the country under international safeguards should allay the fears of the international supplier community.

How will India get fuel for FBRs if they are not put under the fullscope safeguards? And if FBRs are listed on the civilian list what will be the eventual scenario? What will be India's loss?

It is premature to talk about this specifically. Let the negotiations proceed and the separation plan come out.

India claims that it has not departed from any of its international commitments of proliferation, but now the world is looking for actual proof and verification mechanism in place for the future. Why should critics object to it when India has nothing to hide?

As I have already said, we should be prepared to open out all facilities and subject all nuclear materials which we receive from outside along with our own facilities hitherto not subject to safeguards in which the imported nuclear material will be used for IAEA safeguards. Others to be negotiated.

3. Capitulation and Still Whining(Lies)
It is a pity our negotiators have chosen not to pursue extending the cooperation into the area of fast reactors at least to the extent that we should be able to access the international market for equipment and components which otherwise have to be produced by Indian industry with considerable effort .

4. Contrast with China

1962-1972 Cultural Revolution, and Testing Bums, No UN seat( forget the UNSC),
20 Million died, as per some estimate.
1964 Bums, and Deng Psiao Ping purged and made a factory worker.
1970-73 Deng restored, and given authority to negotiate with Unkil, visits Unkil.
1972 China joins UN as P-5 UNSC with India's support and Insistance
1977 China opens door to Unkil and still today labelled as Deng's China
Rest is history.


geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 21:51

When the Hyde Act was passed, Manmohan said it is the 123 agreement that matters and not the Hyde Act. Still he approved a 123 agreement which clearly mentions that Hyde will prevail over 123. Is he not taking the country for a ride?

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 21:52

AniB wrote: Lets be cool, collected and independant. This is very big game afoot.


Let us start with renegotiating 123

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 21:55

[quote="AniB"]
Our mantra is “We cannot wasteâ€

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 22:08

Let us start with renegotiating 123


Acharya: An admirable sentiment, no doubt. You have some ideas on the feasibility and process for doing this? Apart from "elect BJP to power again"? You see the GOTUS negotiating agreements beyond what can be passed in COTUS? You see COTUS in the next 4 years, passing something far more pro-India than the Hyde Act? You see India dictating to the NSG the terms under which India will buy reactors and fuel from them, the GOTUS, WHOTUS, POTUS and COTUS be :P ???

I am really curious about the source of this optimism, admirable as it, assuming, of course, that it is based on sober reflection.

Brings to mind the Macaulayite Nursery Rhyme from my very misspent kindergarten days: (So many sweet wimmens that I should have befriended instead of being horrified of, just because of their constant plotting to get me into trouble with Teacher..) :eek: :eek:

"Let's to bed! Said Sleepy Head

TARRY AWHILE! Said Slow

"Put on the Pan!" Said Greedy Nan

"Let's renegotiate before we go!"
Last edited by enqyoobOLD on 08 Aug 2007 22:14, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 22:12

you can't make $$ with it.. onleee "paisa"! :lol:

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 22:15

enqyoob wrote:
Let us start with renegotiating 123


Acharya: An admirable sentiment, no doubt. You have some ideas on the feasibility and process for doing this? Apart from "elect BJP to power again"? You see the GOTUS negotiating agreements beyond what can be passed in COTUS? You see COTUS in the next 4 years, passing something far more pro-India than the Hyde Act? You see India dictating to the NSG the terms under which India will buy reactors and fuel from them, the GOTUS, WHOTUS, POTUS and COTUS be :P ???

I am really curious about the source of this optimism, admirable as it, assuming, of course, that it is based on sober reflection.


LOL!

Very simple. Circumstance will change and testing will resume.
123 will be renegotiated.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 22:27

Very simple. Circumstance will change and testing will resume.
123 will be renegotiated.


Please elaborate. If u were CPI(M) I would be scared at that, because maybe the Comlades in Beijing can plomise to stalt something that folces India to test. Or Musharraf might, except he has no golas. But otherwise, what are these changed circumstances?

A total collapse of the India economy so that ppl are all starving and hence willing to follow a bunch of yahoos who call for Jihad or "Lebens-Ram", and the Bliss of Houristan or the Certainty of Rebirth?
Last edited by enqyoobOLD on 08 Aug 2007 22:35, edited 2 times in total.

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

Postby Rye » 08 Aug 2007 22:28

Acharya,

And why are we certain circumstances will change? Because the current BPO boom will make us stronger by making us dependent on external investments?

What about the strengthening of the local industry and the energy requirements to strengthen the hands of the local industry? What good is an ephemeral service-oriented BPO industry without a solid manufacturing base for long-term support for local industries? How are the locals going to gain the skillz to improve the manufacturing base by leaps and bounds?

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12865
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Postby Suraj » 08 Aug 2007 22:38

From Bloomberg:
Tata To Build Nuclear Plant If Rules Changed: Ratan Tata
Tata Power Co., India's third-biggest utility, may build nuclear power plants if the government changes rules, Chairman Ratan Tata said.

``Tata Power has alignment with some major nuclear equipment suppliers and is ready to go,'' Tata told shareholders at a meeting in Mumbai today. ``There is considerable homework that has been done.''

The Indian company may partner Areva SA, the world's largest builder of nuclear plants, for projects, he said. Tata Power plans to spend 26 billion rupees ($641 million) this year on adding new power capacity, Tata said.

The Mumbai-based company plans to add more than 9,350 megawatts of capacity to gain from rising electricity demand in Asia's fourth-largest economy. India's economic growth of more than 8 percent in the past four years has caused power demand to exceed supply, leading to blackouts.

India has set a target of 40,000 megawatts of nuclear power capacity by 2020.

AniB
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 00:34
Location: Rockies

Postby AniB » 08 Aug 2007 22:47

What is Patrotva

Yes you can make money.. Just need characcjhtar and integrity. Ref Arundhati Ghose.

A little while ago you were 4th grader?.. Then after much Pinglish studies together with Mahd-ed dra you are now interactive again. As is your wont and mettle, dramatic and penetrating.

This is phase where we experiment with economics trained Ph.D senotaph, over Jagjivan Ram or Lalloo.

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

Postby Rye » 08 Aug 2007 22:48

Is it just me or this is JaiKissan character the same one that flipped his lid before J18? He flipped his lid because people here were skeptical of US's potential offerings back in 2005.

Still remember his hysterical rantings pushing the deal as the only thing that can possibly save India...talk about flip-flopping.

AniB
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 00:34
Location: Rockies

Postby AniB » 08 Aug 2007 22:54

Enqoobe that last post was not persOnal. Just Brehmstahlung.

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 22:57

Its very simple.. India can't come out of moratorium as one could think off.. there are repercussion even if we do test and do not announce that we did.. the world would know a big Tsunami struck India again.. [if we plan, and there exists only one stealthy place to do the test..].

Furthermore, there is nothing in the political circle and from the strategic community that says, we need to re-test cause of a fundamental change in our design or doctrine., which becomes outside the deal [testing itself].

Can't we agree to testing with security environment getting the risk indications, that is clearly documented. Of course, the document does not differentiate between the two type of needs for testing.. but just testing. Its our bloggers who are interpreting for being the non-trigger happy case.

The best option would be to remove "testing" word altogether from the agreement., and perhaps keep it under wraps like many things yankee does.. withdraw from agreement / deal with a one year notice of termination.

AniB
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 18 Sep 2004 00:34
Location: Rockies

Postby AniB » 08 Aug 2007 23:14

Let Tata, Birlas, Ambanis. Indian Navy, Larsen/Toulbro in. So also Hyderabad and Jharkand. 100 milliion tonnes of steel. When will Naxals realize what the global stakes are at?

Really, what does Chicom control in India? What the global stakes are at! Jyoti da???

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 23:20

The funny thing about the "testing" hangup is that it is probably the easiest problem to overcome. Ever heard of "joint exercises"? It's all a matter of convergence of interests (and money, no doubt). In the 1980s, would you have imagined F-15s and F-16s in joint maneuvers with IAF planes, except as a shooting war? But the less speculation on such things, the better.

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 23:28

Rye wrote:Acharya,

And why are we certain circumstances will change? Because the current BPO boom will make us stronger by making us dependent on external investments?

What about the strengthening of the local industry and the energy requirements to strengthen the hands of the local industry? What good is an ephemeral service-oriented BPO industry without a solid manufacturing base for long-term support for local industries? How are the locals going to gain the skillz to improve the manufacturing base by leaps and bounds?

ANybody who has read history will be able to recognise the current times with unstable TSP and an insecure PRC leadership trying to retain what is not theirs.

This will breakout and the global economic and strategic circumstance will change. It could be in 5-20 years time.

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 23:28

what if unkil shifts his new gadgets to be tested from nevada to pokhran under this agreement?

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

Postby Rye » 08 Aug 2007 23:34

SaiK wrote:
what if unkil shifts his new gadgets to be tested from nevada to pokhran under this agreement?


Unless the entire US DoD and Pentagon heads start to drink heavily and do some LSD before making policy decisions, such things won't happen....US does not trust any other country....an attitude India and Indians could learn from.
Last edited by Rye on 08 Aug 2007 23:42, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Rye » 08 Aug 2007 23:40

ANybody who has read history will be able to recognise the current times with unstable TSP and an insecure PRC leadership trying to retain what is not theirs.

This will breakout and the global economic and strategic circumstance will change. It could be in 5-20 years time.


Fast forward to that time in the future: would India be better served with a robust internal economy or a robust arsenal of nuclear weapons?

So isn't it better to sharpen our knifes and strengthen our jaws so that we can bite? 5-20 years is a long time, wouldn't it be more prudent to ensure that India's power trajectory moves up and to the right, even as Indian babus and netas (hopefully) take their jobs seriously and follow through on India's road map for the three-stage plan?

Isn't waiting for the "perfect 123 agreement" a little bit like waiting for "the perfect mate to procreate"...it could happen, but if it doesn't, there's going to be no procreation.

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 23:40

SaiK wrote:what if unkil shifts his new gadgets to be tested from nevada to pokhran under this agreement?

That is called common interest


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests