India Nuclear News & Discussion - 24 August 2007

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

Postby Gerard » 27 Aug 2007 06:41

All that is missing now if for Lalu to advocate burning of gobar. Then this farce will be complete...

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

Postby enqyoobOLD » 27 Aug 2007 06:45

US supreme court too, he said, has held that when a conflict arises between a valid treaty and a valid act of Congress, the "last expression of sovereign will must control".


New point. Of course, we have to see what comes of the NSG/IAEA deals, and what the COTUS does in the end.

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

Postby Gerard » 27 Aug 2007 06:51

1. The Parties shall cooperate in the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Each Party shall implement this Agreement in accordance with its respective applicable treaties, national laws, regulations, and license requirements concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Postby BSR Murthy » 27 Aug 2007 06:52

Doubts Grow Over U.S.-India Nuclear Deal

By MATTHEW ROSENBERG
The Associated Press
Sunday, August 26, 2007; 2:50 PM

NEW DELHI -- The United States gave India nearly everything it wanted in a landmark nuclear energy deal, but that may not be enough for a vocal chorus of Indian critics.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00683.html

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

Postby enqyoobOLD » 27 Aug 2007 06:57

a vocal chorus of Indian critics.


He means,
Going round and round beating on a drum
??
8)

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Postby BSR Murthy » 27 Aug 2007 07:02

Dissent Threatens U.S.-India Nuclear Cooperation Deal
Delhi Parties Say Pact Limits Sovereignty


By Emily Wax and Rama Lakshmi
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, August 26, 2007; Page A14

NEW DELHI -- After two years of painstaking negotiations, a historic nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and India appears to be unraveling as a broad spectrum of political parties calls on the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to scrap the deal, saying it limits the country's sovereignty in energy and foreign policy matters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 27 Aug 2007 07:04

sraj wrote:Advani said his party has pleaded that international agreements which impinge upon India’s strategic independence or territorial integrity should be ratified by Parliament and an amendment to this effect must be made in the Constitution.


Great catch sraj, this is probably the n'th time with reference to "territorial integrity", being mentioned [wrt. earlier reports of "concessions" on Kashmir[backdoor diplomacy] and now probably even Arunachal].

: Apologies if OT :

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Postby BSR Murthy » 27 Aug 2007 07:13

Now the markets are jittery.

V. PHANI KUMAR'S THIS WEEK IN INDIA
Fear of political uncertainty just below the surface
Commentary: Markets on tenterhooks before Congress-Left party meeting
By V. Phani Kumar
Last Update: 7:00 PM ET Aug 26, 2007

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) -- Under other circumstances, investors in India would have hailed Friday's firm close on Wall Street as just the right kind of stimulus that the local market required to start this week on a positive note. But chances are political developments on the national stage, which threaten to destabilize the ruling coalition government and possibly lead to fresh elections, will likely occupy their mind.

........

A bigger worry for investors, meanwhile, is that neither of the two national parties -- Congress or the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party -- seem to have enough currency to return to power with an absolute majority, in case the situation spins out of control and the country is subjected to fresh elections in the near-term (the current government's term has two more years to go). A third front, comprising a coalition of several regional parties, could be even worse, as such coalitions have amply demonstrated in the 1990s.

Political uncertainty has and can hit stock prices much harder than the turmoil related to the U.S. subprime mortgages. Hot money flowing into the country has had a big hand in pushing the 30-stock Sensex to its high levels, and I doubt it will waste much time heading for the exits, should political instability become a reality.

url

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

Postby Manny » 27 Aug 2007 07:14

The Ball is in India's court.

A time comes in a nations life...an Inflection point.

Are the Indians going to be Chicken littles and going to cower in a corner somewhere playing victim while the world watches?

Thats the Question Indians have to decide. And that decision would also answer the Q. Are these people men enough to stand up to China?
Last edited by Manny on 27 Aug 2007 07:27, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 07:27

BSR Murthy wrote:1 2 3... Get set, go!

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/212755._.html


great article.. deserves full posting!



[quote]

Part-I

1 2 3... Get set, go!
Image

Kapil Sibal
Posted online: Monday, August 27, 2007 at 0000 hrs Print Email
123 Agreement serves India on two fronts: allows us to support our nuclear facilities meant for weaponisation, and also those meant for energy generation

Kapil Sibal
Related Stories

Race to save deal and Govt goes into last lap from todayTies with US in our national interest, deal OK if home law changed: Advani123 agreement is not Hyde-bound, says SibalPM to dedicate two n-reactors in Tarapur, address BARC scientists Cabinet clears setting up of uranium mine in Andhra

The 123 Agreement between two sovereign nations — India and the United States of America — has been hogging the headlines of late. Even before a discussion in Parliament, parties have hardened their positions. A responsible national political party has been seen to stall the proceedings in Parliament in a manner not witnessed in the House before. Slogan shouting and use of unsavoury epithets in the course of Prime Minister’s statement on the 123 Agreement, drowning his speech in the din of the House, was yet another first in the history of Parliament. Political parties are vying with each other in upping the ante. Instead of a debate and a meaningful discussion, we have witnessed only obfuscation of issues. The BJP has still not reconciled itself to the rejection of the “India Shiningâ€

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20830
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Postby Prem » 27 Aug 2007 07:27

enqyoob wrote:AllahoAkbar! Beloveds:

EB MEANS "Energetic Bharatiya"


WHO, i ask u, would not be proud to be so described?

Bharat ka dowdnewala hoom
Bharat ki baat sunaata hoom
8)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY9K10u5OW0

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 07:32

[quote]TREASURE FOUND
Uranium in Ladakh
Bangalore, IANS: DH

Scientists have found uranium in “exceptionally high concentrationâ€

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

Postby sraj » 27 Aug 2007 07:34

Tilak wrote:Great catch sraj, this is probably the n'th time with reference to "territorial integrity", being mentioned [wrt. earlier reports of "concessions" on Kashmir[backdoor diplomacy] and now probably even Arunachal].

: Apologies if OT :

Actually, on J&K there is a Parliament resolution dating from the early 90s that ensures that GoI cannot even give up its claim on POK without going back to Parliament. Certainly very relevant though for Arunachal, Siachen, etc.

In any case, with the era of coalitions dawning upon us, it would be much better for all treaties to be subject to parliamentary ratification. Will ensure that MPs are not forced to pull down governments based on one issue on which there may be a genuine disagreement.

After all, Woodrow Wilson may have been ahead of his time but could not carry his country along in the matter of US participation in the League of Nations (anyone want to discuss the serious consequences of that decision of the US Congress? and did the US lose all credibility internationally for all time to come as a result?). Clinton had to face rejection of CTBT by the US Senate in 1999 (has the US position as leader and enforcer of global non-proliferation regimes suffered as a result?). Neither resulted in any turbulence beyond the specific issue at hand.

Every disagreement does not have to automatically result in political instability. The ratification provision for treaties might even help future PMs withstand external pressures.

Apologies if OT.
Last edited by sraj on 27 Aug 2007 08:16, edited 1 time in total.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3452
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Postby Paul » 27 Aug 2007 08:15

Did Kapil Sibal play a role in the 123 negotiations. He is a well known lawyer in the supreme court.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 08:48

BSR Murthy wrote:Doubts Grow Over U.S.-India Nuclear Deal

By MATTHEW ROSENBERG
The Associated Press
Sunday, August 26, 2007; 2:50 PM

NEW DELHI -- The United States gave India nearly everything it wanted in a landmark nuclear energy deal, but that may not be enough for a vocal chorus of Indian critics.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00683.html

read kgoan.. and you would read what he said about how congress smart brains whacked both bjp and left into one big basket.. and dropped the bomb.
The opponents run the gamut from right-wing Hindu nationalists to the communists, who are key to Singh's parliamentary majority. The nuclear agreement does not need parliamentary approval, but Singh's government could collapse if his communist allies pull their support because of the deal.


exactly means what kgoan said.. but, more. kgoan: you said bjp is not against this deal.. lot of open ended arguments are'nt closed.. reversing decisions would give them more black soot on their face rather. i hope you are watching the tamasha keenly. just pointing thats all/ no politics intended. for those who are against discussing politics here, must note this:-

American officials, who have publicly stayed out of the fray, privately confirmed that view, saying that with U.S. presidential elections coming up next year, they could only wait so long.


of course, its a more psy-op poster from pirang website... but, it ain't said anything that is totally deviating from the truth.. hence, care must be taken not give into negative psy-ops.. rather, look the politics point from getting the best of the deal.

btw, who said this: AK?
"We will talk and talk and talk and nothing will be done," said a senior member of India's scientific establishment with knowledge of the nuclear deliberations.

"The Americans will not wait forever," he said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivities. "And we will never get an agreement like this again."


We need BR eagles eye view to validate (send a SMS to that bus driver), and verify who said this?

matter is important since, this lefties could bring the govt down to achieve their motives. then, it becomes all the more visible, that MMS govt, will be given a thumping majority next time by aaam junta.. with a 2/3rd majority.. and sadly, as pointed out here.. would be too late for this deal.

and .. we did hear about the turnarround.. i am saying, its too late bjp. you mucked it all up at the wrong time. goonie visions comes to fore.. no wonder they are facing the second jolt since electing the president of India.

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

Postby Arun_S » 27 Aug 2007 08:55

Tilak wrote:
BSR Murthy wrote:'Hyde Act-like law will not be enacted in India'
27 Aug 2007, 0331 hrs IST,Indrani Bagchi,TNN

NEW DELHI: The government will not go for any law that could be a mirror of the Hyde Act in India. "It would be constitutionally inappropriate," said Kapil Sibal, Union minister for science and technology.

Wonder if Union minister Kapil Sibal know what is "Indian Interests" and if cares to tell Indian citizens if "It would be constitutionally inappropriate," keeping in View Indian Interest or in the interest of under the table paymasters? ( cash or in kind). If so which "Indian Interest" will be hurt?
Indian Parliament unquestionably has full sovereign right to amend constitution (a right it has exercised >94 times in last 57 years)?
It has full right to amendment constitution to serve Indian Republic in light of exposures to Nationhood that could be posed by Government in power signing away core Indian interests or sovereignty.
Last edited by Arun_S on 27 Aug 2007 10:55, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50080
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 27 Aug 2007 08:56

Actually, on J&K there is a Parliament resolution dating from the early 90s that ensures that GoI cannot even give up its claim on POK without going back to Parliament. Certainly very relevant though for Arunachal, Siachen, etc.


That was PVNR's master stroke. there is an old issue of India Today where the interviewer asks PVNR why there is a need for such a resolution as Lok Sabha does not have to pass such an obvious resolution. He said it shows our resolve that J&K is part of India and cannot be undone without going back.

Many WKKs point to that as an obstacle to the 'peace' process.

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

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2007 08:59

SaiK wrote:and .. we did hear about the turnarround.. i am saying, its too late bjp. you mucked it all up at the wrong time. goonie visions comes to fore.. no wonder they are facing the second jolt since electing the president of India.


BJP has waited for the time to differentiate itself. It is a long game here and atleast for BJP.
The other parties have to change their ideology and go back to their constituency to explain the change in the party stance on US. But BJP does not have this baggage. This is a big one which will fall out over several years.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 09:08

valid indeed.. i was looking top-down approach.. from nuclear deal context.

and its funny that kapil sibal says that counter hyde is constitutionally inappropriate. The inappropriateness probably he meant that we are seeking to counter hyde direct.. of course its inappropriate that way. sometimes, its hurts my brain why would such distinguished come out with such words.. may be inadvertently perhaps.

nothing stopping us to write laws such that we protect our investments and materials. kapil sibal can talk all that a lawyer wants.. but its the people's wish the nation has to cherish after.

on that basis, the bjp's survival could be seen.. but, they sure did lose the top-down approach mileage here.. meaning saying nuclear deal, they can never approach for votes. lots of people might look at them at all. of course, they should now support all ground breaking regulations that includes counter hyde, common civil code, blah.. that is actually one could envision changing many constitutional amendments, vision 2050.

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

Postby svinayak » 27 Aug 2007 09:14

SaiK wrote:
on that basis, the bjp's survival could be seen.. but, they sure did lose the top-down approach mileage here.. meaning saying nuclear deal, they can never approach for votes. lots of people might look at them at all. of course, they should now support all ground breaking regulations that includes counter hyde, common civil code, blah.. that is actually one could envision changing many constitutional amendments, vision 2050.


That is not how politics works and parliamentary system works.
There is a naive perception that it is survival of BJP. This is not just image making but a major change here.
There is a small group of highly influential people who have been doing the things and deciding. It is to target that group which is main goal here.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 09:17

btw, quickly running kapil sibal's bio, he is an harvard guy!.. mmm.. his context would really be his background there.. and most snobbish harvardians are hard wardians.. their point of view is all that matters for them.

something is not right (thinking on the amendments).
Acharya wrote:There is a small group of highly influential people who have been doing the things and deciding. It is to target that group which is main goal here.


mm.. wasn't that group already decided not to go with bjp at all for the next election? if i have read that correct? if you say, that is true, then what i read was again something of a show to revert back status quo.. interesting.
Last edited by SaiK on 27 Aug 2007 09:26, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Manny » 27 Aug 2007 09:19

Ambassador Sen: 'We will have zero credibility'




http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/aug/20inter.htm[/b]

Self edited. Old news!

:oops:
Last edited by Manny on 27 Aug 2007 10:06, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 09:28

the more sen talks, the more non-sense is read!.. sheesh. that he has already apologized for that, Manny [old khabar].

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

Postby Manny » 27 Aug 2007 09:35

Sorry. I think the above article is a tad old.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35726
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 27 Aug 2007 09:42

btw, sounds like this reuters is a straight lift of kapil sibal views, but the author is By Y.P. Rajesh., and additional report by arshad mohammud.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/ ... 24?sp=true

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

Postby bala » 27 Aug 2007 10:05

Whew, finally BJP has realized that it is pointless to pick fault with 123 or the deal, now they are after peripheral stuff like passing their version of Hyde Act (Advani Amendment to Indian Atomic Act ... aaiaa).

The CPI & M are now boxed into a corner. They have the option of tucking tail and waiting for another day to resume their fight or walk out. Either way they lose. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Lately they have been batting on behalf of Iran (looks like the China money is being routed via Iran).

Has anyone noticed that the NPT Ayatollahs are getting anxious by the day. They are now releasing timely articles about India's consensus chaos, they are hoping their bosom buddies the CPI&M come through by axing the deal. BJP is now put a spanner in their plans. These worthies will be soon relocating to the PRC.

BSR Murthy
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 02 Apr 2003 12:31
Location: Texas

Postby BSR Murthy » 27 Aug 2007 10:14

Bengal CPM's differences with politburo out in the open

KOLKATA: Differences between the Bengal CPM and party bosses in Delhi over withdrawing support to the UPA government came out in the open on Sunday with two politburo members MK Pandhe and Biman Bose strongly differing on the consequences for the government if it went ahead with the Indo-US nuclear deal.

Hours after Pandhe, the Citu general secretary, said in Kolkata that his party would withdraw support if Congress went ahead with negotiations with the IAEA, his colleague and West Bengal party boss Biman Bose told the CPM state committee meeting that Pandhe's comments were not in tune with the understanding of the CPM politburo or the central committee.

Pandhe had said: "If they (the Congress) decide to go ahead with negotiations, we won't hesitate to pull the plug. This is a unanimous decision of the politburo and the central committee. Our central committee will take stock of the situation in its meeting from September 29. We have empowered the politburo to take a decision if anything happens in between." Asked how CPM would fare in the event of a snap poll, Pandhe said: "We may lose some, we may gain some seats. What is of supreme importance to us is the fact that we can't allow our country to become a strategic partner of the US."

Bose, however, struck a completely different note. He told state committee members there was no reason to worry about snap polls and that the politburo was only keeping a watch on the situation. Off the record, CPM's Bengal stalwarts who've kept the party flag flying in the state for 30 years spewed venom on Prakash Karat's hardline. One senior central committee member and MP, who spoke on condition of anonymity to TOI, called Karat's pullout threat a "Talibani stand". His words: "It's (withdrawal of support) a demand being placed from sections of the CPM Talibans in Delhi."
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Diff ... 312980.cms

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 383
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Postby kshirin » 27 Aug 2007 11:52

enqyoob wrote: My serious objection to the GOI taking forever to decide on the IAEA/NSG /123 deals is captured quite well by the story of The Milkmaid and The Pot of Milk:

After 40 years of struggling, our scientists and engineers and diplomats, with a LOT of help from NRIs, have finally managed to extract an unbelievably fair deal that gives us an open door to accelerate through and grab that ladder to the First World, after 40 years of having those doors slammed on our noses.

Instead of racing with all the speed and smarts at our disposal, and grabbing on to that one rung on the ladder that we can reach , here we are debating whether we should buy America and all the rest of the world, or save the trouble and just go take them over.....



I too used to burnout thinking of how we messed up our development strategy though even today one gets exhausted explaining why and how to those who cling to the self-serving platitudes of bygone eras, then decided personal burnout wasn't worth it since I wasnt helping anyone with it. I think we need to develop our manufacturing sector now single midnedly, why I could explain later.

I do support the deal, I was gasping when I read it and it is a measure of our success that even foreigners agree that they cannot believe how India got such a good deal, I"m just airing other issues as well as this is the only forum for intelligent debate -most people are busy gossipping and have no time to discuss issues - so that I can gte an intelligent response.

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 383
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Postby kshirin » 27 Aug 2007 11:59

I mean, taking over the US and UK was not meant as a substitute for the deal, but as complementary actions.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2007 12:37

I personally fail to understand the great anguish of some people towards a public discussion on the deal. A nearly "brahmanical" attitude (BTW I am one to so dont get castist on me); hey "we know the best how can you raise questions; this is too important to be discussed with fools" exists I think. I also find the people rushing to prostate themselves on the altar of Indian babucracy "they are god; what a deal" rather unsettling.

I say the above because; my reading of 123 along with what I have read of Hyde (not read the entire act myself) etc; tells me that there is a long way to go yet before the current effort results in net advantage to India. For each "sensetive techonolgy"; for each shipment of uraninum there will be other deals to make; each of which will have to be closely monitered to ensure that no torjan horses are being slipped in, the words like trust and good faith do not exist in the vocabaoulary of Geo-politics.

The debate outside draws greater attention all aspects of the deal; educates people or at least creates awareness and enables future generations of deal makers to be on guard for next steps. I welcome the chaos and confusion, and if it results in no deal accidentaly, perhaps that would be the reality. We do not need manufactured "realities", if the Indian reality is dust grime and lack of power so be it. I do not want a Singapore as India.

Unfortunately I still wait for the GoI to make credible public statements on how the current deal is going to be used for a policy towards greater good. Given that the deal is a significant departure from the stated policies of earlier era's; the Govt owes the Indian people a clear roadmap. Unfortunately the attitude is "too sensetive for people to know"; coupled with a tendency to mock; rather than debate.

Very well; let us see the next chapter.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3452
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Postby Paul » 27 Aug 2007 12:56

[quote]Crucial talks on 123 agreement today

Cong digging into past to take on Left

From Utpal Borpujari, DH News Service, New Delhi:


Even as the Congress leadership is readying itself to hold further negotiations with the Left on the 123 agreement on Monday, the ruling party is also preparing a game plan to launch a counter-offensive against its outside allies in case it withdraws support to the UPA government.

While leaders in the Congress are not yet ready to formally speak out against the Left parties despite the latter’s strident criticism of the agreement and instead are repeatedly arguing that all the Left concerns would be replied to during the Parliament debate on the issue, there are indications from the AICC sources that if it comes to the crunch, the Congress party would hit out at the Left rather strongly.
Fulcrum of attack
The fulcrum of the attack, the sources indicated, would be a counter-offensive to neutralise the Left allegation that the UPA government was selling off the country’s “sovereigntyâ€

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:02

enqyoob wrote:abcc, ever heard a swan singing? Or a Canada Goose? 8) Remarkable resemblance to an Energizer Bunny braying, IMO.

Next year we'll be told that the Peopre's Ribelation Almy has ribelated this virrage and arr the mountains alound it.


You took that metaphor seriously? :)

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:06

enqyoob wrote:
The yankee restrictions opened the economy to allow the rest of corporate America to enter. And the country was pillaged ruthlessly, all the men and women were made executives and call centre operators, and all the children were made attendants at McDonalds.


And the sight of Brinda Karat caused millions to launch ships, boats, airplanes, whatever, to escape. The Face That Launched a Thyausand Points of Light.


Enqyoob The Great.

If you think that Brinda Karat is the face that would luanch a thousand ships, then I think you need an ophthalmologist. :mrgreen:

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:23

Acharya wrote:
abhischekcc wrote:
Here is the story of the Trojan Horse, refurbished for a modern readership 8) .

Enjoy.

Trojan Horse


How true are these. Why do they Hold KS as responsible.


Well, the KS-Doctrine (if may term it thus) has the following arguments:
1. Asia (politics) will become increasingly complex in the coming days, and the west will not be able to handle it properly.
2. The west will need a local partner if it has to manage its interests in Asia to its advantage.
3. India can reliably fill the emerging force gap that the west will experience in Asia.


These points seem reasonable to a person who only has a cursory understanding of western interests in Asia. To those who can fill in the blanks that KS conveniently left unspoken of in his doctrine - they make the following interpretation of KS-Doctrine.

The reference to 'Asian politics will become increasingly complex' refers indirectly to the rise of China. These is no other current geopolitical development that equals China's rise, and that is the greatest challenge that the west is facing since the fall of the USSR.

The reference to 'west will need a local partner if it has to manage its interests in Asia to its advantage' means that the west, on its own, will not be able to manage the rise of China - MILITARILY. And please do keep in mind - the main advantage of the west over the rest is still military power - not economic power. They still look at the world in 19th century prism.
But as the war in Iraq shows - the west has reached the zenith of its military power. They can no longer make viable military threats against Asia.

And that leads us to the third point of KS-doctrine - that India should do the west's dirty work in Asia.

THAT MAN IS PRACTICALLY BEGGING THAT THE WEST MAKE INDIA ITS HATCHET MAN.


--------
Acharya - its only when you fill in the blanks of the KS-doctrine that you realize what wool he has tried to pull over our eyes.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2007 13:28

abhischekcc wrote:Acharya - its only when you fill in the blanks of the KS-doctrine that you realize what wool he has tried to pull over our eyes.


And why is he doing that? Is it sheer sell out? Or is there a greater Chankian ploy?

Should we pretend to be wests hatchet men for a while? Many mercenaries have gone to become stronger than the masters who employed them Including EIC.

Can we please take this debate in Indian intrests thread.

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:29

Calvin wrote:How are we tying ourselves to the US? What, if anything, keeps us from pursuing our economic interests elsewhere in the world?


Nothing prevents us from pursuing ECONOMIC interests with the rest of the world. It is the military dimension of the alliance that we don't need. It unnecessarily makes us partners in something that we don't need.

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:30

Sanku wrote:
abhischekcc wrote:Acharya - its only when you fill in the blanks of the KS-doctrine that you realize what wool he has tried to pull over our eyes.


And why is he doing that? Is it sheer sell out? Or is there a greater Chankian ploy?

Should we pretend to be wests hatchet men for a while? Many mercenaries have gone to become stronger than the masters who employed them Including EIC.

Can we please take this debate in Indian intrests thread.


ok

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 » 27 Aug 2007 13:47

There is one point that pro-american members often forget while castigating the left - It was opposition from the left that prevented the BJP government from sending Indian troops to Iraq to support the american occupation there.

All patriots should be grateful for that - regardless of left or right leaning.

UPrabhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 98
Joined: 21 Sep 2004 11:51

Postby UPrabhu » 27 Aug 2007 14:42

Bala, finally BJP has realized? What are you talking.. read what Mr. Advani had said on 13th Aug (I think or around tht time) when Joe Liberman was in India. Advani had told Liberman that BJP is not against the deal but the Hyde Acts indirect ability to put pressure on future GoI (Congress party being notorious record of bowing to pressure). So if BJP + Congress pass something like Bharatiya Anushakti Act, it can make sure future GoI does not succumb to pressure.

It is just the press reporting selectively.. problem still is MMS not wanting to do anything with BJP the main opposition party whose approval he needs to carry


bala wrote:Whew, finally BJP has realized that it is pointless to pick fault with 123 or the deal, now they are after peripheral stuff like passing their version of Hyde Act (Advani Amendment to Indian Atomic Act ... aaiaa).

The CPI & M are now boxed into a corner. They have the option of tucking tail and waiting for another day to resume their fight or walk out. Either way they lose. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Lately they have been batting on behalf of Iran (looks like the China money is being routed via Iran).

Has anyone noticed that the NPT Ayatollahs are getting anxious by the day. They are now releasing timely articles about India's consensus chaos, they are hoping their bosom buddies the CPI&M come through by axing the deal. BJP is now put a spanner in their plans. These worthies will be soon relocating to the PRC.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 27 Aug 2007 15:06

UPrabhu wrote:It is just the press reporting selectively.. problem still is MMS not wanting to do anything with BJP the main opposition party whose approval he needs to carry


Dumpin on BJP and lumin them with left is just a easy track to take for some folks who wish to avoid a serious look into the future post 123. Any concerns are given a politcal color and laughed right out.

I also note that there are various reports in IE that the nuclear fuel is running out. This angle has not been discussed at all either in BRF or in political space. Are these news real? Is the situation desperate? Or is it a pressure tactic? Various issues are open and the politicisation of debate removes the focus from issues.

I really dont know why there is such a great reluctance to face up to reality.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest