India Nuclear News & Discussion - 07 Aug 2007

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 08 Aug 2007 08:29

Like that story about the monkey, Uncle has dipped his hands inside the narrow-necked bottles of Afghanistan and Iraq, and has closed his fists around the nuts inside. He cannot pull his fists out, and yet he won't let go of the nuts. He's preoccupied with this, and is more vulnerable than us right now.

The advantage should be ours. Time is on our side, and not Uncle's.

As far as Bush warning that he'll be out of office soon, and that chances for a settlement will disappear with him, I doubt that. US national security interests cannot disappear with the departure of one man. I admit that once the Democrats are in the Whitehouse, their natural inclination will be to try and re-focus onto Europe-vs-Russia, as was the case under the previous Clinton admin.

But the problem is that reality won't let them do it easily. The problems in Iraq and Afghanistan won't go away. The upsurge in islamic terrorism won't go away just because the US withdraws from those lands, just as it didn't go away while the US was turning its back on those countries in the runup to 9/11.

Nextly, the more the Democrats try to pursue their preferred Atlanticist agenda on foreign policy, the more an antagonized Moscow will be willing to give India concessions in return for its favour. Remember, Putin isn't Yeltsin, and his tendency in a confrontation is not to give in like that spineless Yeltsin did, but rather to escalate the fight in whatever way is convenient. India would present itself as a convenient card to play, especially if we're spurned by a post-Bush Whitehouse and Congress.

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Postby Luxtor » 08 Aug 2007 08:35

[quote="bala"]In "Insulating India’s reactors from fuel disruption reality check", Siddharth Varadarajan does a fine job explaining the hurdles of nuke material return. The US President of the Day will have a tough time invoking Hyde and asking for return on nuke material, that was my reading of the 123 and Siddharth explains very well why this could be next to impossible if India chooses to test.

The negotiating team of US-India are pretty smart to understand the nuances and they have boxed in Hyde on all corners (thorough hiding I would say) and effectively deep-sixed the NPT Ayatollahs add in clauses. On paper it looks like the US president has preserved the rights due to Hyde but in practice it is a whole other game. Whew, so much for scenarios.

Don't be so sure Bala, Remember the U.S. signed legally binding contract with the Pakis to supply F-16s in the 80's and even took full payment for them but refused to supply the fighters due to nuke proliferation concerns about the Pakis. So just having an agreement with the U.S. doesn't mean anything...let's not live in a fool's paradise. If we're going through with this nuke agreement with the U.S. then that's ok but let's not have any illusions about the consequences if we choose to test nukes in the future. If we're fully aware and willing to live with those consequences then fine. In the mean time we should continue to develop our own nuke technology so that we can become fully independant. Some of the provisions of the 123 agreement I suspect is meant to curtail our independant nuke tech developement or atleast it's meant for the U.S. to keep a close eye on it so they can trip us up from time to time when we make a headway. :twisted:

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1580
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Postby ldev » 08 Aug 2007 08:36

Raju wrote:that is globalist agenda. East asian 'tiger' currencies were fully convertible when they crashed. Chinese and Indian currencies did not crash then because they were non-convertible.


I do not want to derail this thread. But, you have to decide which strategy to follow. On the one hand you do not want to become an export oriented economy like China has done. On the other hand you do not want to leverage an economy of 1 billion plus people to create a rupee zone, as if an economy of 1 billion people if it is large and prosperous enough can ever be compared to the pygmy sized economies of South East Asia. Heck, the US with 300 million people as leverage has created a fulcrum and the resulting dollar zone goes around the world.

Now, if you want to do nothing at all, then sit back and be prepared to be pushed around by other nations.

Raju

Postby Raju » 08 Aug 2007 08:44

the main question is that of leverage...or to be more precise 'disruptive leverage'. Once you have that no one pushes you around. That can either be megaton nukes or disruptive technologies and threats to unsheath them.

123 could be the result of such a threat.

the global economic order established by US is of no use to us. It will not help us prosper with independence. It will lead only to an 'either-or' situation.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1580
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Postby ldev » 08 Aug 2007 08:54

Raju wrote:the main question is that of leverage...or to be more precise 'disruptive leverage'. Once you have that no one pushes you around. That can either be megaton nukes or disruptive technologies and threats to unsheath them.

123 could be the result of such a threat.

the global economic order established by US is of no use to us. It will not help us prosper with independence. It will lead only to an 'either-or' situation.


North Korea also has disruptive leverage with more than half of its people starving. Is that the way to go? The USSR had huge disruptive leverage with more than 12,000 nukes, ICBMs galore, nuke subs etc. The country does not exist today. Sure it disrupted for a while but then it got itself disrupted big time.

With todays missiles (including Agni 3) CEP accuracy, megaton nukes are no longer necessary. What India has, 200KT-300KT, is more than adequate.

I love this thing about conventional thinking among progressive circles in India i.e. the global economic order established by the US is of no use to us. Great statement. Something like IG used to say in her populist days," Garibi Hatao". Well duh, to remove Garibi, you need to create wealth and unfortunately her policies perpetuated poverty. Well, what economic order do you want and who is going to create it? Because while you are tinkering around trying to create this new economic order, the existing one created by the US works just fine for most people to create wealth. So long as you do not have money to buy a house, there is no shame in renting one to have a roof over your head. And in any event if you want to create your own economic order, you have to start with that rupee zone, otherwise the idea is likely to be still born.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1196
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 09:07

>>>In "Insulating India’s reactors from fuel disruption reality check", Siddharth Varadarajan does a fine job explaining the hurdles of nuke material return. The US President of the Day will have a tough time invoking Hyde and asking for return on nuke material, that was my reading of the 123 and Siddharth explains very well why this could be next to impossible if India chooses to test.

After reading the text in a hurry, this is what I could understand:

1. 123 agreement clearly states that domestic law will prevail over any/all provisions of 123 agreement. This, IMO, makes the 123..a piece of toilet paper.

2. Hyde Act prevents sale of any nuclear material once the US decides that things are not happening according to their wish. This need not be a nuclear explosion - ordering a couple of more nuclear reactors from Russia, France etc., or even a visit of Foreign Minister to Iran could become an excuse for termination. Further, Hyde Act asks the US Govt to actively lobby NSG to prevent fuel/equipment supply to India.

3. People are having orgasms at the thought that it will be very difficult for the US to ask for the return of the equipment and fuel already supplied..nobody is thinking about future supply of critical components for the operation of reactors after co-operation is terminated. If fuel is denied, we can probably arrange for it by hook or crook. But we cannot make or procure from other sources critical components or software or electronic parts, design of which is not known. It will also be difficul to experiment with locally replaced components, bcause of the hazard involved, apart from the time taken to do so.


>>>The negotiating team of US-India are pretty smart to understand the nuances and they have boxed in Hyde on all corners (thorough hiding I would say) and effectively deep-sixed the NPT Ayatollahs add in clauses. On paper it looks like the US president has preserved the rights due to Hyde but in practice it is a whole other game. Whew, so much for scenarios.


I feel the clause which says the prevalance of the Domestic Laws over 123 agreement effectively thrusts the Hyde Act down the Indian throat. Hyde Act is NPT, CTBT, US jealousy, greed etc fused into one. 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....?

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 08 Aug 2007 09:29

geeth wrote:1. 123 agreement clearly states that domestic law will prevail over any/all provisions of 123 agreement. This, IMO, makes the 123..a piece of toilet paper.


On the other hand, Hyde Act / 123 is just a bilateral thing, and not an international treaty. US cutoff is not as impacting as cutoff by the world.

2. Hyde Act prevents sale of any nuclear material once the US decides that things are not happening according to their wish. This need not be a nuclear explosion - ordering a couple of more nuclear reactors from Russia, France etc., or even a visit of Foreign Minister to Iran could become an excuse for termination. Further, Hyde Act asks the US Govt to actively lobby NSG to prevent fuel/equipment supply to India.


It sets no benchmarks which require others to be blocked from trade with India.

3. People are having orgasms at the thought that it will be very difficult for the US to ask for the return of the equipment and fuel already supplied..nobody is thinking about future supply of critical components for the operation of reactors after co-operation is terminated. If fuel is denied, we can probably arrange for it by hook or crook. But we cannot make or procure from other sources critical components or software or electronic parts, design of which is not known. It will also be difficul to experiment with locally replaced components, bcause of the hazard involved, apart from the time taken to do so.


I dunno, lots of things can be reverse-engineered, and spares can be kept for that purpose. Ultimately, what limits us is fuel, and if it can be reprocessed by us, it can be reshaped and re-inserted into our own indigenous design.


>>>The negotiating team of US-India are pretty smart to understand the nuances and they have boxed in Hyde on all corners (thorough hiding I would say) and effectively deep-sixed the NPT Ayatollahs add in clauses. On paper it looks like the US president has preserved the rights due to Hyde but in practice it is a whole other game. Whew, so much for scenarios.


I feel the clause which says the prevalance of the Domestic Laws over 123 agreement effectively thrusts the Hyde Act down the Indian throat. Hyde Act is NPT, CTBT, US jealousy, greed etc fused into one. Indian doesn't have any domestic law, and even if we have, it can do sweet buggerall to US.[/quote]

But NPT, CTBT are international treaties with the broad participation of the international community. Hyde Act / 123 is just bilateral, and can compel US cutoff but not automatic broader international cutoff.

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....?


Well, that presumes that US can tack on other extraneous quid pro quo while masking its already existing risk/exposure under 123.
I dunno, I think 123 puts them on the same shaky ledge as us. If we fall, they fall too.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 09:43

per the non-trigger-happy condition, and that if India needs to test, would be pre-drawn conclusion since India would test only if neighboring countries test. Can this include NK or Iran itself test again? Isn't Iran part of being in the neighborhood, that we have declared to have them clear of nuke weapons.

Its impossible for chinese not to test, if America starts testing. hence, i think we have the security based testing situation per varadarajan's explanation standing to withstand introspections thus far.

America will have to accept within a given time, that our case is genuine, and we all have an agreement here.

I am thinking, the N test fear is non sequitur., provided we have repeatedly read the texts that allow us prevail any sanctions or return of fuel on a nuke test for security reasons.

We have to ensure, that the deal does not harm our 3 stage ambitions, to use Th power. We need to see clause that ensure Oz, Fr, or Ru, African countries don't ride due to terror business tactic pressure by the sole Super power.

Well, they can say, we still support your fuel reserves, but its up to the supplier county to sell you. America can either withdraw, or jack up the price of the fuel such that we can't buy or is not feasible.

Agreements and deals should point to such loopholes as early as possible. Another worry is American business houses are waiting for this deal.. for profit making. We don't want dabols after dabols happening and fcuking us up.

I am only worried about MMS govt easily selling our nuclear power quota to american business houses faster than anyone else. We need to tighten our corruption cell, vigilance cell, security & strategic related trade practices that can easily hide the dark horses with in many of such high strategic and secret deals.

BARC quota must be guaranteed.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 08 Aug 2007 09:48

Our only alternative to this deal is if we can come up with a better N-power development timetable on our own. I don't see any critics offering up anything better.

As for India being hostage to US foreign policy, I don't see that US can use 123 to force us into Iraq. That's nonsense. We're not a piddly-sized poodle like Pakistan. There's too much natural domestic pressure anyway against going into Iraq or other poodle tricks, so an Indian public would easily buffer Indian govt against foreign pressure on that stuff.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52340
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 08 Aug 2007 10:07

Raju wrote:
ldev wrote:The first step has to be full convertibility of the rupee and the creation of a rupee zone. That is the way to superpowerdom. Not the way things are right now.


that is globalist agenda. East asian 'tiger' currencies were fully convertible when they crashed. Chinese and Indian currencies did not crash then because they were non-convertible.



Ldev, Till 1965 KSA used to bank on the Indian rupee. There was a large rupee trade area from East Africa to India.

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 10:32

ramana wrote:

Ldev, Till 1965 KSA used to bank on the Indian rupee. There was a large rupee trade area from East Africa to India.


This was destroyed with the 1962 and 1965 war.

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

Postby Arun_S » 08 Aug 2007 10:36

enqyoob wrote:OK, Arun, I see that he has a technically correct point. However, the idea of testing nukes today, or in the very near future, is ludicrous. It would utterly destroy India's burgeoning economic growth, at a time when the rate is amazingly high. It would be equivalent of the effect of 9/11 on the Internet Boom.

Now the question to be asked is whether this deal especially kills India's plans for testing. That's a dog-in-the-manger argument, isn't it? Like
I was JUST going to test, when you guys went and that stupid deal


That and 2 rupees might buy a paper cup of coffee.

No Indian government, not in 2007 and not in 2010, is going to conduct a nuclear test, unless the security situation deteriorates to the brink of war against China (not against TSP, because they are nuke-nude). The idea that a live demonstration is either necessary or sufficient to get the Chinese to then back down, is also quite unsupported. .....

.. . . . . I think ppl here have forgotten how lucky India is to have come through the 1998 events. First, it was such a timely thing - made all the difference in Kargil less than a year later.

Secondly, if would REALLY have destroyed India's economy - if not for the Pakis. Remember the anxiety following May 12, 1998? And the wild celebrations when we heard that the stupid Pakis had also tested? Why were we so relieved, happy?

Enqyoob sir: Nuclear test to proof yield is an issue that is central to other issues apart from Indo-US Nuclear deal and B Karnad also thinks it is central. This Indo-US civil nuke agreement in which MMS and Indian Govt slept while the farm was being burnt by Hyde Act. Sitting cosy, nothing to fear of far off fire in the farm. But goddammit it did burn the crop it was banking on to keep away hunger few months later and keep the powder dry. Such complacence would not have happened if only GOI knew how American systems works, their mindset and preparatory games (and dance) before an event that matters to them.

On the topic of when next nuke test; Not sure if many people knew that after 1998, the next round of tests were made ready not many ago ~2002 and it was not China that was rattling. So thinking that imminent test is not necessary and can done in leisure when the big gorilla or komodo dances in next 10 -30 year time frame is IMHO flawed.

B.Karnad has a role and purpose to be an avant Indian hawk.
Last edited by Arun_S on 08 Aug 2007 11:47, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 10:39

Arun_S wrote: This Indo-US civil nuke agreement in which MMS and Indian Govt slept while the farm was being burnt by Hyde Act. Sitting cosy, nothing to fear of far off fire in the farm. But goddammit it did burn the crop it was banking on to keep away hunger few months later and keep the powder dry. Such complacence would not have happened if only GOI knew how American systems works, their mindset and preparatory games (and dance) before an event that matters to them.


Is it possible that some people in the MMS govt actually wanted it that way.
They wanted a noose in that deal.

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Roop » 08 Aug 2007 10:41

A minor request: can we please avoid getting bogged down in economic discussions on this thread?

On the 123 deal, I'm with Enqyoob and LDev. Much of the "criticism" of tis deal comes across as whining. "US wil do x-y-z bad things to us because of this deal" etc. Well, if the US was so minded to just blindly attack/screw India, they could have done it anyway, even without the deal. (And they came pretty close in 1998, until the Mad Packees tested their nukes. Please recall that Madeleine Albright openly threatened military strikes on India at a Washington press conference. We'll never know for sure how close they came to carrying it out, because then the Packees tested and complicated America's plans). How will the deal make any of this easier for the US to do, if they are so minded? As for American "cheating" at some future point in time, it is pretty much a certainty that they will try this if they think their national interests require it and if they think they can get away with it. It is India's job to make sure that both those pre-requisites are unmet. And it is a lot easier for India to do this with a healthy economy/foreign relations going for it than without.

CramS: I don't know precisely which post of yours qualified as "zero wattage' in N3's mind, but I'll tell you, from my POV, your statement that it is not Pak but India that is nuke-nude certainly qualifies as zero-wattage commentary to me. It appears that you have set your mind against the deal, for whatever reasons, and are now busy throwing stones at anything and everything that you think GoI might consider an Indian asset, just because you imagine that your efforts will embarass MMS. It won't work, you will only embarass yourself. Do you think, or does anyone think, that planners in Islamabad/Beijing/wherever would be willing to plan their next adventure on India under the assumption that all Indian tests were duds and the whole thing was a lie?

jmaxwell
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 27 Jun 2007 13:44
Location: San Diego, CA

Postby jmaxwell » 08 Aug 2007 11:04

Arun_S wrote: He is also one who knows first hand that Americans are no god, they are just as good as any Indian. A trait seen only by expatriate Indians in USA, and often expounded by BRFites on this forum.

A bit OT but wow - you have taken the words right out of my mouth. I have seen a lot of folks from Wipro/Infosys etc. join in the last few years and when they start, they usually have a very subservient attitude. God knows how many times I have gone crazy over desis with slouched shoulders going "sorry, sorry" over every damn little thing. A few months down they realize, WTF, I am better than most of the punks here - and not just in engineering, but business and management too.

I hope this desi defeatist mentality dies a fiery death. :evil: :evil: :evil:

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

Postby svinayak » 08 Aug 2007 11:07

jmaxwell wrote:
Arun_S wrote: He is also one who knows first hand that Americans are no god, they are just as good as any Indian. A trait seen only by expatriate Indians in USA, and often expounded by BRFites on this forum.

A bit OT but wow - you have taken the words right out of my mouth. I have seen a lot of folks from Wipro/Infosys etc. join in the last few years and when they start, they usually have a very subservient attitude. God knows how many times I have gone crazy over desis with slouched shoulders going "sorry, sorry" over every damn little thing. A few months down they realize, WTF, I am better than most of the punks here - and not just in engineering, but business and management too.

I hope this desi defeatist mentality dies a fiery death. :evil: :evil: :evil:


It is due to mostly indoctrination. Foreign news inside India is regulated and also sometimes misleading.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1196
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 11:14

>>>Our only alternative to this deal is if we can come up with a better N-power development timetable on our own. I don't see any critics offering up anything better.

The timetable need not be filled with only N-Power. We can fill it up with other power viz., C-Power, H-Power, G-Power etc. In any case, N-Power contribution even with substantial foreign Reactors will be minimal.

>>>As for India being hostage to US foreign policy, I don't see that US can use 123 to force us into Iraq. That's nonsense. We're not a piddly-sized poodle like Pakistan. There's too much natural domestic pressure anyway against going into Iraq or other poodle tricks, so an Indian public would easily buffer Indian govt against foreign pressure on that stuff.

They have already done it with Iran vote. They have now said to minimise economic co-operation with Iran. At best you are trying to be optimistic.

Anyway, I personally feel that this agreement is of no use to India, but has immense value to US in terms of leverage.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 08 Aug 2007 12:03

GOTUS/POTUS diluted some of the sanctions against India

then Hyde Act diluted the Past Sanctions


then 123 Agreement diluted some of the stringent provisions of Hyde Act


now we have to see how well India is able to bargain with other nations especially France and Russia in bilateral agreement to dilute the US-123 Agreement.


therefter further dilution will take place as per Geo-political conditions and Indian economic strength

Atish
BRFite
Posts: 416
Joined: 07 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Postby Atish » 08 Aug 2007 12:57

Guys how is this for a nutshell analysis.

1. After 40 years we get investment, money/growth, electricity, economic growth, uranium supplies, technology and know how. MOST IMPORTANTLY URANIUM SUPPLIES.

2. FOr what we get, we sign an agreement wth certain restrictions.

3. This opens a door that was shut tight, and we get stuff that is good for the country.

Now my question is this: why cant we get another agreement 5,10, 15, 20 years from now, How about other bilateral agreements with other players.

Abhi jo mil raha hai le lo. Baad ki dekhi jayegi.

Now that the door has been opened, we can keep pushing and it will open ever so slowly, and attitudes, situations, calculations can change in our favor. Then we will sign the 456 Agreement.

If test was supposed to be done, we should have done it, now we do it when the geopolitical situation allows us a window, which it will at some point.

We d it when the pain of imposing sanctions, F*cking with us in a 100 other myriad ways, causes 20 times more pain to the US and God willing down to the average Joe that they have to bite their lip before contemplating it.

TIME IS ON OUR SIDE> WE ARE A RISING POWER. THEY ARE A STATUS QUO POWER> THEY HAVE FAR MORE TO LOSE.

so as Shiv says, Relax, Have a charminar.

But yes we gotta be bold, cautious and careful in the future.

Atish.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66413
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 08 Aug 2007 13:20

the price Iran is demanding for gas doesnt make it very cost effective compared to Qatari and Saudi supplies when we factor in the risk insurance
and transit fees demanded by the pakis in between. if India were bordering Iran it would be a very sound business case.

RIL is not betting on the IPI instead beefing up its muscle to take supplies
from the sea also.

I am kinda against the fixed nature of pipelines, why not cheaply rent a
fleet of ULCC sized LNG carriers and run them to the gulf ? being moving
targets they are far harder to counter and the loss of one means just the
loss of that cargo not the stoppage of entire pipeline.

inside India we must ofcourse build pipes and we are doing that.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 08 Aug 2007 13:24

Is there a definitive scientific paper on our thorium route and the cost and time it will take us to be self-sufficient in fuel for our civilian/military reactors? It should be examined as an alternative to an import strategy that might very well cripple our entire strategic nuclear deterrenmt,as well as our economic and foreign policy.These are the fears of many in the current parliament,not just those "Left" behind.The argument in favour of toeing the US line,and that is exactly what it is going to cost us in political terms (already the heat is upon us regarding our relationship with Iran).We also know how Agni-3's testing was delayed to our detriment (beacuse our political bosses did nto want to upset the US),while the Sino-Pak military machine just keeps "rollin' on",like the song says.

Now the real test of this agreement will be if and when we place orders for more Russian reactors like those at K'lum in TN and possibly from France also,before we place any with the US! However,our "Harvard Yard" heroes of the present dispensation have already sold us pretty far down the river and it is going to be a battle for us to preserve our independence of thought,word and deed. There is going to be quite a political storm before the radio-active dust settles,with both the BJP and the Left opposing the deal.Exciting times.

Manu
BRFite
Posts: 716
Joined: 28 May 2003 11:31

Postby Manu » 08 Aug 2007 14:12

Sanjay M wrote:Nextly, the more the Democrats try to pursue their preferred Atlanticist agenda on foreign policy, the more an antagonized Moscow will be willing to give India concessions in return for its favour. Remember, Putin isn't Yeltsin, and his tendency in a confrontation is not to give in like that spineless Yeltsin did, but rather to escalate the fight in whatever way is convenient. India would present itself as a convenient card to play, especially if we're spurned by a post-Bush Whitehouse and Congress.


However, in the thread "The United States and the World" you wrote on 07 Aug 2007 at 03:44 am
Sanjay M wrote:He's too much of an outsider to know better. We can see that Atlanticists have made Hillary their candidate, as she's the natural inheritor to the Clinton Atlanticist presidency. Note that Madeleine Albright is a key foreign policy advisor to Hillary, and Albright is Brzezinski's leading disciple.

It's obvious to me that a Hillary Presidency would re-focus more again on conflict in Europe, particularly being more confrontational towards the Russians, by reinforcing NATO expansionism and pushing harder on Kosovo.

I'm concerned that further US antagonism of Russia would lead to Moscow turning closer to Beijing, at India's expense. I don't know if an angry Putin(or whoever his successor is) would be willing to give India more on the nuclear front. But I think clearly Pak would be waiting in the wings to reclaim its role as an "ally" to help the US counter Moscow's influence in CentralAsia. And so the War on Terror would again be put on the back-burner under an Atlanticist Whitehouse.


Are the 'Atlanticists' getting to you, my good man?

'Nextly', are you sure you are not trapped in a hall of mirrors?

Sorry for the digression Admins.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66413
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 08 Aug 2007 14:30

there are going to be pvt players like Reliance and Tatas in nuclear energy generation apart from Govt run orgs. even if GOI 100% signs up for GE, pvt players can sign for whoever they want like rosatom or areva.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
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 14:49

enqyoob wrote:The central tent-pole of Karnad's tent is the assertion:
the decisive quality of the premier great power attribute in the modern age, namely, a versatile thermonuclear arsenal,


This is an unsupported assertion, reflective of a complete lack of ability to think outside what was true 30 years ago. Not to mention, a dangerous level of detachment from reality.


N^3, I suggest if you want to argue against some one, please keep the insults to a minimum (this is not the chinese economy thread, u know :) ).

BK is the only Indian strategic thinker who knows hw the US system works.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7532
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 08 Aug 2007 16:40

That can either be megaton nukes


Can we please get past this?

The accuracy of modern (1970+) missiles doesn't require such large nukes.
The United Kingdom's arsenal is comprised solely of 100 kT nukes - the W76 warheads on their Trident SLBMs yet the UK's deterrent is quite formidable for any adversary...
The Russians deploy 550kT warheads on their most modern missiles, the US 475kT.

The measure of India's TN device sophistication is the ability to scale from 45kT to 200kT ('dial-a-yield') and a proof test at full yield, which unfortunately has not yet been done....

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

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 16:45

Quoting Raj M:

then 123 Agreement diluted some of the stringent provisions of Hyde Act
now we have to see how well India is able to bargain with other nations especially France and Russia in bilateral agreement to dilute the US-123 Agreement.
therefter further dilution will take place as per Geo-political conditions and Indian economic strength


Exactly. But unfortunately, it IS that last sentence that describes many of the symptoms here. Today India is not the absolute outcast that India was in the 1980s and mid-90s. BUT... the present euphoria is somewhat reminescent of the story of the milkmaid walking down the village path with the pot of milk on her head, dreaming of what she would do when she became super-rich.. :eek:

India still has some half a billion people living well below what most nations would define as poverty line. There's no electric connection to tens of thousands of villages. There are few public toilets, and fewer that work. If u read the news, half of north India is under water - and a few months down the road, most of India will be under drought. We haven't figured out that Allah may be trying to get something through our thick skulls there.

The problem on the Chinese border is 99% due to Indian inaction - and it's NOT failure to test ever-bigger nuclear weapons that is the problem. It is the abysmal state of development. No roads, poor communications, poor economy. Every time the Chinese build a road and start digging uranium or bringing tourism, the mantris wring their fat hands, but do nothing to improve India.

And most of all, the current foreign exchange surplus and middle-class "boom" is almost entirely at the sufferance of foreigners. It is NOT a case of foreigners coming to India to admire Indian technological advancement , it is just foreigners coming to sell trinkets and take the wealth away. The wealth is pouring in from outside as well, but that's because of contracts hard-won on price and performance, NOT on technological uniqueness.

IOW, India can be replaced as the supplier in MOST contracts, including those won by the IT sector. The BPO, call centers, aircraft maintenance, spare parts production, all can disappear overnight - as drastic a disaster as what happened when the milkmaid tossed her head in arrogant dismissal of suitors in her day-dream.

So it is a bubble built on goodwill, and it can be erased overnight if India does something utterly stupid like testing nukes today.

MAYBE 20 years from now, when India has solid infrastructure, energy independence, and Indian technology is way ahead of the world, India will be in a position to LEAD, not follow. And then maybe the world will start looking at India as a nation that decides what to do, and does it, and that's OK with most of the world - anyway they can't do a whole lot about it.

The milkmaids need to remember this.
*********************************************

dear abcc:

And if someone wants to argue with me, they need better facts and logic than telling me how great their momma and neighbors think they are. 8)

Prof. Karnad has my respect for speaking out consistently for the nuclear weapons developers, pointing out, accurately, that much more testing is needed to assure weapon effectiveness, and counter obsolescence. However, the cost of doing this has to be weighed carefully against the payoff. Even if a nuke is Hiroshima technology, no one can counter it. The counters are all against the response systems that detect an incoming first strike, and against the delivery systems. So the constant advancements needed are in these things. Missiles with bigger payload factors and faster response are far more needed than nukes with greater detonation probability, Given that there will be attrition of delivery systems and installed launchers, it is a lot smarter to develop a few hundred nukes of any vintage, than to rush and try to get 30 nukes of refined characteristics. IOW, probability of detonation on target is driven down far more by launcher attrition than by bomb imperfections. Soo the "WE NEED TESTS" lobby just has to be asked to take a number and shut up.

The US-Soviet rush to develop megaton nukes was driven by the need to destroy missile silos and fortified C^3 centers. This is a fool's errand for India, because it would take 10,000 weapons or so, to have any hope of destroying Chinese C^3 completely.

Karnad's premise, that Power Flows From Versatile Thermonuclear Tests, is a poor imitation of Mao's "Power Flows From the Barrel of a Gun". It IS outdated. If India diverts gigabucks to "test" things that everyone suspects alread exists, that comes at the expense of the desperately-needed development in Space weapons, communications, missile technology, electronic warfare, hypersonics, UAVs, rapid-reaction airborne forces, etc. etc.

What is needed today is to race ahead in testing THOSE things, before there are any more Snake Oil Treaties banning development in each of those. Those are the EFFECTIVE weapons of tomorrow.

Have we mastered the production of Bofors external/base-burning projectiles yet? How about snow boots? Waiting for the next adventure (this time it may be China) before rushing to beg on the world market? How long will it be b4 there is a ban on testing of ASAT weapons, and we will be left way behind China?

If you DON'T do stupid things like testing nukes, you can go ahead in all these quietly and ppl will either not know, or will know but will wink at it. It you go and "Test Thermonukes", all bets are off, and the world will make damn sure that there is no spare cash lying around for such things.

If Professor Karnad can't figure this out for himself, or can, but prefers to rant anyway, then he ain't all he's made out to be. He's shrilling about how we should be preparing better for the Battle of Vijayanagaram, but the enemy is preparing to attack at Plassey.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66413
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 08 Aug 2007 17:07

I predict GOI when it orders GE will also use offset clauses to bring in more benefits as in aviation. the Pvt bania players will go with cheapest available reactors (hope not dalian nuclear inc with a 500MW for $500K :lol: ) ..... same scene as in aviation and lot of local cos will benefit after they have mastered the initial learning phase.

GE has already obtained approval to expand its blr center, I found on the KT pollution board website.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 08 Aug 2007 17:12

Manu wrote:Are the 'Atlanticists' getting to you, my good man?

'Nextly', are you sure you are not trapped in a hall of mirrors?

Sorry for the digression Admins.


They're more real than your notional NPAs, WHO NEVER SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE PRESSLER AMENDMENT -- gee, I wonder why? They also never spoke out against Pak proliferation to Iran. Gee, I wonder why? Nor did they speak out against Chinese proliferation to Pak. Gee, I wonder why? But for some reason, they keep accusing India in particular of proliferating N-tech to Iran. Gee, I wonder why? :roll:

Pork-seating Ayatollahs? :?:

Nextly, both scenarios could come to pass at the same time. A Moscow under siege from the West could offer carrots to both Beijing and India. There's nothing mutually exclusive about that. I think it would depend upon which donation gave it the most leverage against the West.

Democrats tend to be China-appeasers, so they don't mind as much if China acquires stuff from Moscow, since they see that the same stuff can be used against Moscow. But Democrats get more upset if Moscow gives stuff to India -- hence, Clinton admin quashing the sale of Russian cryogenic rocket tech to India.
Bush admin seems to be the opposite -- it minds less if Russia gives stuff to India, but minds more if Russia gives stuff to China.
So Moscow seems to gain more by going contrarian to whichever way the prevalent US admin is leaning.
Last edited by Sanjay M on 08 Aug 2007 17:32, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 08 Aug 2007 17:30

N3,very true.Test as quickly as one can ,without waiting for any new treaty imposed upon the have-nots by the haves.Before P-2,I was recommending that India follow France's example and test as much as we could before it became too late.We should've followed up P-2 some time ago,during the sanctions regime.What would we have lost? Nothing.Sanctions were in place,so what difference would further tests have made?

Now,we are bowing and scraping abroad,scared to even whisper our reservations,while Uncle Sam has the audacity to openly warn us about our relationship with Iran,whom we need to outflank Pakistan.The US ambasador should've been summoned to the MEA and given a dog training manual to be forwarded to his mouthpiece at Foggy Bottom.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 907
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Postby sivab » 08 Aug 2007 17:52

No going back on N-deal, PM tells Left

New Delhi, Aug. 8 (PTI): Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has made it clear to Left leaders that the Indo-US civil nuclear deal will not be renegotiated, shortly after the allies rejected the 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 A B Bardhan and D Raja last night, highly placed sources said here today.

The Prime Minister noted 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 Monday.

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 it 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.

During the telephonic conversation, the Left leaders are understood to have cited reasons for their opposition to the agreement.

The Left parties yesterday said they were "unable to accept the agreement" as it "binds" India.

They asked the government not to proceed with operationalising the agreement.

The Left parties said "while the Indian commitments are binding and in perpetuity, some of the commitments that the US has made are either quite ambiguous or are ones that can be terminated at a future date."

A number of the provisions of the Hyde Act pertain to areas outside the nuclear cooperation and "are attempts to coerce India to accept the strategic goals of the US," the Left said.

They particularly referred to the provision in the law that says that India should join the US efforts in isolating and even sanctioning Iran.

The Left joined the BJP and UNPA in rejecting the agreement. BJP has demanded scrutiny of the agreement by a joint parliamentary committee.

The party plans to move a motion on the deal under a rule which will force a vote in Lok Sabha.

Former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra said the nuclear 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.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6255
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 08 Aug 2007 18:05

Mohan Raju wrote:CramS: I don't know precisely which post of yours qualified as "zero wattage' in N3's mind, but I'll tell you, from my POV, your statement that it is not Pak but India that is nuke-nude certainly qualifies as zero-wattage commentary to me. It appears that you have set your mind against the deal, for whatever reasons, and are now busy throwing stones at anything and everything that you think GoI might consider an Indian asset, just because you imagine that your efforts will embarass MMS. It won't work, you will only embarass yourself. Do you think, or does anyone think, that planners in Islamabad/Beijing/wherever would be willing to plan their next adventure on India under the assumption that all Indian tests were duds and the whole thing was a lie?


That point of mine was just rhetorical based on BK's concerns that India needs to test more to make our deterrant really credible.

But I truly mystified by N^3's and many others change of heart here. Its not deal Vs no deal. They are now talking like lefties, the butter Vs guns argument; millions without power, below the poverty line etc. In the past when lefties or firangis made this very point, the very same N^3 brigade would have come down on them with a ton of bricks, stressin that without security, economic power alone will make us a hollow power. Thus, the bottom line is still the same. Without adequate security, we are on a weak wicket. The question is does this deal help us economically without compromising on our security. Stalwarts like BC/BK/Prasad etc don't think so. I already told you, my own view is that if we can get another PM, rtaher the 'South Asian' constable Singh we have as CEO, I am for this deal, provided the PM can stand up to Unkil's hanky panky.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
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 18:18



Isn't it interesting that that SPINELESS POLICY WONK only finds his balls when the interests of US are at stake?

He did the same when the joint air force exercises were to take place, among other incidents.


GUNGA DIN kahin kaa! :evil: :x

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

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 18:27

CRamS:

There is absolutely no change of heart at least with moi (assuming I HAVE a heart, it's the same aging and much-broken one :(( )

The confusion/misrepresentation is, with all respect, caused by your mis/non-readings.

My point is certainly NOT "guns vs. butter" (actually this is a Macaulayite / Louis XIV saying. In India's case it should be
Bum vs. Roti (BVR)


I have been in support of the July 18 agreement since July 18, 2005. The lead-up to the Hyde Act and the amendments tacked on, caused a lot of heartburn, so I was quiet about it. But now the 123 text shows that the GOTUS did basically what it promised in the July 18 agreement.

The flip-flopping is all being done by the "Opponents" of the 123, and perhaps that's why they feel like everyone else is flipping around - it's all a matter of perspective. Let's see: the opposition to the deal has morphed faster than the campaign against the Sethu Samudram Canal Project, with the same degree of misinformation and blatant disregard for science, history, economics, geopolitics, and Indian / neighborhood realities. We have read patiently, anything that the opponents have to say, and come around slowly to conclude that they have nothing useful to say.

Yeah, we are all for India becoming a SuperPower, with hajaar (or karod) nuclear bums, each tested (though that poses a small problem - if u test it, you can't use it any more).

And we are all for complete freedom to commandeer the foreign fuel and enrich it and use it to build more bums.

But there are some small realities to be considered. To dismiss these as "leftist" is rather dishonest.
**********************************************

In the long run, it is a heck of a lot smarter, if you really want to focus on nukes and ignore modern weapons, to just build a good number of nukes, of WHATEVER design works sort-of OK. Then one can negotiate a Strategic Weapon Reduction agreement with the P-5, and agree to reduce the number, provided that a certain specified number and schedule of tests can be conducted to refine the designs. That can happen 10 years from now, but the number and gross megatonnage must exceed that of at least one, preferably two, of the P-5. UK and France, probably. THEN they will be interested in real nuke-reduction agreements.

But my take is that the R&D and testing should be focused much more on delivery systems, detection systems, and Space capabilities, WHILE WE STILL CAN TEST THOSE WITHOUT VIOLATING SNAKE-OIL TREATIES. (note that even Hyde&Co did not figure this out). Otherwise, we'll be like the Iraqi Republican Guards of 2020 - huge number of very destructive weapons, but basically all sitting ducks for a foe who plans on results, not ego.

There is no case for testing nukes at present, or in the near future. And so that line of argument to oppose the 123, is a complete non-starter.
Last edited by enqyoobOLD on 08 Aug 2007 18:34, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 18:31

true? this is an old chat.
Arjun : I have been reading thru this complete debate and I have only one feeling here. Why can't US just leave India alone on this issue instead of forcing it's views and decisions?
George Perkovich : The US could leave India alone. It is India that is asking for international rules to be changed, and to receive a great deal of nuclear help. This was India's idea and proposal, not the United States'.

----------------------http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=18039


if yes, it explains MMS' stand towards left.

BTW, Iagree to the left's view being left. But, having given them a freedom of left view, it is mandatory for K-angrez govt answer to those left's 9 questions. check previous thread link or here to those 9 questions if anyone hasn't read.

hey, they are anyways k-angrez' only ruling partner. have to be nice with them.
Last edited by SaiK on 08 Aug 2007 18:50, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby enqyoobOLD » 08 Aug 2007 18:40

The Left parties said "while the Indian commitments are binding and in perpetuity, some of the commitments that the US has made are either quite ambiguous or are ones that can be terminated at a future date."


AllahoAkbar! If this were the criterion, there would be no marriages. The reactors are going to be born and raised only in India.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2007 19:08

isn't the agreement only for 40 years, and extendable only if both agree? so where is the perpetual nature to this agreement?

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1196
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 08 Aug 2007 19:24

>>>isn't the agreement only for 40 years, and extendable only if both agree? so where is the perpetual nature to this agreement?

Yeah, that's what we are all wondering about!! Even though the agreement is for 40 years, you can't take back the reactors into our fold from IAEA after 40 years!!!

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3728
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Postby Vipul » 08 Aug 2007 19:26

Singha wrote:there are going to be pvt players like Reliance and Tatas in nuclear energy generation apart from Govt run orgs. even if GOI 100% signs up for GE, pvt players can sign for whoever they want like rosatom or areva.


Indeed both Reliance and Tatas are in talks with Areva for reacors. Areva is going to be the biggest beneficiary of this agreement.Its the technology leader and has the biggest reactors(1600 MW) on offer.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1114426

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

Postby Satya_anveshi » 08 Aug 2007 19:42



The ball is no more in India's court as it has done all it needed to do. That is to seek approval from CCS. The CCS consisted of the biggest poodles in the Indian Parliament namely Shivraj Patil, Pranab, AK Antony, and the good old gaddar Singh.

This approval was given within five days of reaching the agreement and without ever disclosing the text of the agreement to any political party in India.

Such are the ways of a functioning democracy.

Left knew it fully well that their silence during the negotiations will be taken as tacit approval and still chose to not do anything about it. If they wanted to do anything they could / would have threatened (at least) to review their support to the UPA led government.

All this is tamasha. Only thing that ever mattered really was that if MMS (teaming with Sonia) is driving this show, it signaled the mega screw-up of the nation ala Enron. Rest, as MMS likes to say, is intelligent use of words.

BTW: Did our resident commentator passed his comments after the agreement was reached or text was disclosed?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52340
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 08 Aug 2007 19:45

Power reactors have 40 year life.

CRS < N^3 is an out and out India first guy. Right now the deal is in India's interests. The Left has a different idea of India subservient to the internationalist Left movement.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests