Nuclear Discussion - Nukkad Thread: 08 Apr 2008

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

Postby Sanku » 11 Apr 2008 16:54

merlin wrote:
All I will say is, the folks who have left the forum because they thought that BRF is becoming an echo chamber are grouping to create what another echo chamber?


Yep, all the usual suspects are there and now its getting ugly (OFBJP and all that)


Perhaps if they cant come here we can go there? :twisted:

Which place is this?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35684
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 11 Apr 2008 17:15

[url=http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1294&st=300]
:?: [/url]

< click on the ? >

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

Postby Sanku » 11 Apr 2008 17:45

^^^^

That didnt sound like a pro-deal kind of place!! I am confused?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35684
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 11 Apr 2008 18:05

may the team that left here headed by a physicist, were kicked out of that place as well or did not flourish. btw, i was and am still having a balanced approach. i am both pro and anti deal, depending on the clarity of things i see.

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

Postby svinayak » 11 Apr 2008 18:39

satya wrote:No ordinary deal

In the grand stand of world politics, the chances of India’s tortoise like victory against China are fancied by all — except the Chinese and the Indian communists. Many may imagine that Chinese prosperity is based on selling millions of plastic Hanumans to India and rubber sandals and bath brushes to Wal Mart. Not so. China’s huge trade surplus comes from manufacturing based on technology purchases unfettered by the 123 clause, utilised to manufacture computers, electronic goods, medical and diagnostic equipment and aerospace parts

In 2001, China imported and paid for 227 hi-tech and dual use licenses which jumped to 7,800 in 2007, while India’s slumped from 574 in 2001 to 356 in the same period. Not surprisingly China’s high-technology industrial output went from 250 billion Yuan in 1999 to 1750 billion Yuan in 2005.

Since the Americans strengthened their Atomic Energy Act in 1978 with the NNPA, they followed up with the Export Administration Act in 1979, which was re-validated in 2004. As a result no American company has replied to an Indian hi-tech tender for 29 years. The consequences have been calamitous. Clever Indian scientists have often used Russian alternates or acquired European equivalents, at unreasonable cost. In 1992 in the high-tech electronic warfare field, European and Indian PSUs quoted Rs 23 crore for an EW set for the Navy. At the time the most advanced set in India was an American one imported in the German HDW submarine with an obviously fiddled End-User certificate. That set was acquired for Rs 10 crore. Fortunately, the Israelis entered the market at Rs 11 crore and saved the day. The absence of American competition in the high technology arena will cripple our rate of advance. The Deal seeks to give India a level playing field and it is unimaginable why politics should intrude into what is clearly a matter of technology, costs and national security.


And now some people have written articles to show how this deal is required to create a hedge against China. But the deal may actually do a CRE on India.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6138
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 11 Apr 2008 18:50

shyam wrote:
derkonig wrote:MMS must have offered complete CRE on our nukes + signing of CTBT+FMCT+NPT +unkil's custody & permission to use(ala Jalashwa) for our nukes as a package deal

In return, uncle must have offered nobel prize for economics to MMS.


No, more likely the Nobel peace prize, jointly with Unkil's blue-eyed India-specific terrorist Mush after signing the nuke deal and diluting India's soverignty over the Kashmir valley (joint control: which means de-facto surrender to APHC/ISI/LeT/PA combine). But one thing for sure. MMS is truly honest to himself and his fellow ideolouges in that he is not in all this for any nobel prize or personal gain: his western-inspired vision is a loose federation 'South Asian' countries which castrates any chance of Hindu assertion and resurgence.

derkonig
BRFite
Posts: 953
Joined: 08 Nov 2007 00:51
Location: Jeering sekular forces bhile Furiously malishing my mijjile @ Led Lips Mijjile Malish Palish Parloul

Postby derkonig » 11 Apr 2008 19:12

CRamS wrote:
shyam wrote:
derkonig wrote:MMS must have offered complete CRE on our nukes + signing of CTBT+FMCT+NPT +unkil's custody & permission to use(ala Jalashwa) for our nukes as a package deal

In return, uncle must have offered nobel prize for economics to MMS.


No, more likely the Nobel peace prize, jointly with Unkil's blue-eyed India-specific terrorist Mush after signing the nuke deal and diluting India's soverignty over the Kashmir valley (joint control: which means de-facto surrender to APHC/ISI/LeT/PA combine). But one thing for sure. MMS is truly honest to himself and his fellow ideolouges in that he is not in all this for any nobel prize or personal gain: his western-inspired vision is a loose federation 'South Asian' countries which castrates any chance of Hindu assertion and resurgence.


All hail the USSA(US of South Asia), MMS's utopia,

Where the head is held bowed or severed from neck,
Where the dhimmi/yindu is full of fear,
Unto this dhimmiland, my dear non-PM lead my country..

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

Postby NRao » 11 Apr 2008 19:44

In 2001, China imported and paid for 227 hi-tech and dual use licenses which jumped to 7,800 in 2007, while India’s slumped from 574 in 2001 to 356 in the same period. Not surprisingly China’s high-technology industrial output went from 250 billion Yuan in 1999 to 1750 billion Yuan in 2005.


Such stats make no sense in this scenario. China has retained her strategic nukes!! Which is what some in India want, but those Indians who are willing to either give it up or kick-the-can fall in the opposite bucket and can/should-not make this argument.

I would like to argue that India would make much more turn over than China - given a chance AND be FAR more responsible than China in the proliferation area.

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

Postby Rye » 11 Apr 2008 20:04

People dumping on the Govt. for cutting funding to various programs should allow for the possibility that these programs could be funded in secret.

derkonig
BRFite
Posts: 953
Joined: 08 Nov 2007 00:51
Location: Jeering sekular forces bhile Furiously malishing my mijjile @ Led Lips Mijjile Malish Palish Parloul

Postby derkonig » 11 Apr 2008 20:14

Rye wrote:People dumping on the Govt. for cutting funding to various programs should allow for the possibility that these programs could be funded in secret.


Would be unlikey considering MMS track record, he seems hell bent on doing a CRE n our nukes.

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

Postby Rye » 11 Apr 2008 20:18

derkonig wrote:
Would be unlikey considering MMS track record, he seems hell bent on doing a CRE n our nukes.


Are you sure you are not letting your prejudice speak on your behalf? It would appear such decisions are not taken by one person in the GoI, as you are implying.

Kalantak
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 24 Feb 2008 12:01

Postby Kalantak » 11 Apr 2008 20:32

Rye wrote:People dumping on the Govt. for cutting funding to various programs should allow for the possibility that these programs could be funded in secret.

True. If usa can sign the 123 deal and then slip in an Hyde act, similarly the babus can also say we are cutting the funding and slip in a few crores for the research projects through the misc expenses route.

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

Postby Rye » 11 Apr 2008 20:37

Kalantak wrote:
True. If usa can sign the 123 deal and then slip in an Hyde act, similarly the babus can also say we are cutting the funding and slip in a few crores for the research projects through the misc expenses route.


This strategem would seem prudent if the game consists of three parties: Us, them, and third-party observers with a stake in the outcome (since they are NPT signatories).

Multatuli
BRFite
Posts: 612
Joined: 06 Feb 2007 06:29
Location: The Netherlands

Postby Multatuli » 11 Apr 2008 20:45

MMS´track record and ideological tilt are more reliable indicators of what´s happening. also, the way MMS has handled the ´nuclear deal' so far indicates that decisions are taken by a few in an autocratic manner ( I know what´s best, and since I am in government I will do what I want ).

Besides, would any government with self respect, ever consider cutting the published budget for nuclear research, to please a 'strategic partner' ? Do you see how slavish the mindset of the current decision makers in Delhi is that they hide the allocation for nuclear research to please the Americans ? And mind you this is the best case scenario ! I personally don't think that MMS will allocate secret funds for nuclear research. Let´s not mistake our wishes for reality, when did this UPA government show any backbone and astuteness in forreign affairs policy ? These people are only shrewd when it comes to deceiving and manipulation the Indian public, neber when they deal with Western countries, Islamic countries or China.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50059
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 11 Apr 2008 21:03

The writer of the Ind Exp op-ed despite being from the Indian Navy was wondering to US interlocutors about the strategy of estalishing FORTAN and compared it to Wake island in Pacific Ocean during Pearl Harbor. I guess he is fully NWCized*! And writes on nuke strategy for IN. :(

A whole bunch of IN officers go to NWC Rhode Island and get familiarized to higher direction of war under massa's teachers. And only these make it to the head shed.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5200
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 11 Apr 2008 21:29

Was the NDA government misled on the expected performance of S1 by the scientists in control at that time?

Ramana: I know you hate this line of questioning but it is important to know the truth. However, final discretion is with you. Thanks.

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

Postby John Snow » 11 Apr 2008 21:48

After the POK II test Sri Akhanda Vajpayee declared that we now have Maha Bum , but (RC or) some one whispered from behind only boosted saar not really maha bum, then Shri ABV corrected we have Mahan Bum after some analysis the n will be taken out of Maha(n) Bum.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35684
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 11 Apr 2008 21:50

Kalantak wrote:
Rye wrote:People dumping on the Govt. for cutting funding to various programs should allow for the possibility that these programs could be funded in secret.

True. If usa can sign the 123 deal and then slip in an Hyde act, similarly the babus can also say we are cutting the funding and slip in a few crores for the research projects through the misc expenses route.


That is highly silly! what are we hiding? for what? We are talking about civilian research. the research activities may be strategic and stealthy, but not the budgeting and the program itself as being run.

We are an open democracy and not following the vetoing route of american demo-crazy. Hope you are not mixing civil-mil, that is already separated or under separation plan currently. Any more data here would be helful.

imho, there should be nothing secret in civilian plan, if the "separation plan" is clean.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50059
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 11 Apr 2008 21:54

To be honest there was a very valid reason why the moratraium was announced. Recall ABV authorized six tests. RC and his team set off five tests and the last one was removed and taken back for inventory. The line was "Why waste it?"

Now S1 was a superduper latest design weaponizable config from Chengappa and RC statements to Chellaney. From WOP the design was authorized by Rao in 1995 and took 18 months to completion. However Rao was ready to test in 1995(ie is before it was ready) and deferred for various reasons. Understanding that India would have one shot at testing and S1 was not ready means that it is not the core of Indian deterrence. The S1 shaft was dug on Mrs G's orders in early 80s for a boosted device. PKI was the design team leader. He also is the one who weaponized the POKI config and it was tested in S2. And the S1 primary is validated that design.

On May 16th the G8 were gathering in Germany to issue a resolution to sanction India and the thought process was to soften those by declaring the moratraium and as the core weapon was validated there was no point in further verification. The Radio Chem analysis etc came much later. True WOp says the team was disappointed by the crater and this was explained by RC as over buried rather than under performed.

So my point is the moratarium was the right thing at that time. And once the results were examined they should have gone ahead and completed the verification. The big stumbling block was RC who pooh-poohed PKI and others who were quite knowledgable and wanted peer review. Then India got tangled up in the Parakram mess and a test while that was going on would have caused more issues. I think the NDA govt might test if it came back to power but then Notwar singh type of deluded fools came to power recall his "India should not have tested" remarks soon after he took office. And then the J18 agreement was announced. And here we are.

So bottom line is that Indian deterrent core weapon is quite validated and its the boosted version. Yes its heavy and thats why Indian missiles have such less range. The S1 type is nice to have to reach far of places but as it is unproofed it might have to be tested in use like the one in WWII. If India completes the separation plan and funds its weapon labs adequately(LIF, HEU facilities, super computers etc) then there will always be a chance that the opposing force has to take into account that S1 type design is credible. And act accordingly.

I mean if the P-5 can use computers to validate new designs why cant India which has better physicsts and computer engineers than anyhwere else in the world provided they have the resources.

And the UPA under lot of pressure has kept that test issue out of 123. And from what I read Indian govt will exercise the option as needed for its a very powerful disincentive to West to behave.
Last edited by ramana on 11 Apr 2008 22:13, edited 1 time in total.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Postby vera_k » 11 Apr 2008 22:10

ramana wrote:I mean if the P-5 can use computers to validate new designs why cant India which has better physicsts and computer engineers than anyhwere else in the world provided they have the resources.


It would all be about how comfortable one is with the risk of something not working when needed. The core problem may be psychological where Indians are not comfortable with the idea of using nukes in war. Because the risk of going with something that is untested is close to zero if you believe there is little chance that you will ever use it.

With the RRW, the US has chosen not to assume this risk by using components that have undergone prior explosive testing, so the first part about the P-5 relying completely on computer validation is debatable.
Last edited by vera_k on 11 Apr 2008 22:18, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50059
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 11 Apr 2008 22:16

yes recall that S2 was designed in 1978 and weaponized in 1989 and tested in 1998. So India does have the wherwithal to field implosion type fission weapons without testing and that a great feat. Now S1 has validated the boosted fission design and showed some adjustments that could be made to the rest of it if desired.

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

Postby ramdas » 11 Apr 2008 22:19

Unfortunately, Ramanaji the Macaulayist elite now in control of things are a big obstacle. Such people have a human body and brain, but their thought process is more like that of a dog owned by its master. (I do not need to say who the master is). All those who bat for the deal in its current form without paying attention to strategic needs do not take into account that these dogs in human form are the people who are driving the deal. It is important to be very wary of the intentions of such elements.

They want massa's grace and want to doom the whole country to an existence they consider ideal. There is no point in trusting the most servile dog among these entities to secretly do anything positive towards national resurgence.

Such a pity that instead of a "naravyaaghra" at the helm, we have a bunch of people fit for the title "narashvaana".

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

Postby ramdas » 11 Apr 2008 22:26

But pure fission weapons are puny. They can only destroy a few blocks of a city. These cant even devastate TSP, let alone PRC. At the very least, we need enough to do such damage to PRC in a second strike that PRC can never function as an organized entity after that. This will require a few hundred weapons of around 200kt yield.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 11 Apr 2008 22:31

deleted OT
Last edited by vsudhir on 12 Apr 2008 05:02, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby bala » 11 Apr 2008 22:45

Arun_S wrote:Since many including Bala at el are uninformed


Arun_S, there you go again demonizing me. I am not uninformed about Hyde, I can read, as well as you can, the Hyde act in its entirety. Hyde is filled with all kinds of nonsense which is not in India's interest, the NPT crowd has spilled their bile into it, the neo-cons got their say, conservatives got their say and the state dept clowns got to put their pet peeve on Iran. I don't support hyde either.

My position is surprising quite close to yours with a twist: clean exemption from NSG, Indian Jekyl Act, funding for Laser Ignition Facility/Center, India announces publicly that before it signs 123 it will conduct n (could be 10 or more ) tests to create a viable deterrent and names China as the principal adversary as the reason (Defence Minister George Kaka was right!).

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5200
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 11 Apr 2008 22:48

bala wrote:My position is surprising quite close to yours with a twist: clean exemption from NSG, Indian Jekyl Act, funding for Laser Ignition Facility/Center, India announces publicly that before it signs 123 it will conduct n (could be 10 or more ) tests to create a viable deterrent and names China as the principal adversary as the reason (Defence Minister George Kaka was right!).
Except for sign the deal?

Kalantak
BRFite
Posts: 110
Joined: 24 Feb 2008 12:01

Postby Kalantak » 11 Apr 2008 23:01

SaiK wrote:
Kalantak wrote:
Rye wrote:People dumping on the Govt. for cutting funding to various programs should allow for the possibility that these programs could be funded in secret.

True. If usa can sign the 123 deal and then slip in an Hyde act, similarly the babus can also say we are cutting the funding and slip in a few crores for the research projects through the misc expenses route.

That is highly silly! what are we hiding? for what? We are talking about civilian research. the research activities may be strategic and stealthy, but not the budgeting and the program itself as being run.

Many many moons ago the Agni program was officially said to be in cold storage, yet improvements were being made in range extension and newer materials but no tests were conducted. The same thing is happening in the nuclear sector. From outside it looks as if the program has come to an screeching halt but research still continues. Research in such highly sensitive areas are not stopped just because a deal was signed which may or may not reach fruition.

SaiK wrote:imho, there should be nothing secret in civilian plan, if the "separation plan" is clean.

This is the actual 'highly silly' part. :D Research in areas of highly sensitive nature whether conducted in civilian or military fields are highly secret and classified. The outcomes of such research are not fully available in public domain but released in bits and pieces so that no person or entity can fully understand the larger implications of the study that was conducted and many times false data is released to derail others who may try to reverse engineer their way. There cant be a truly seperate civilian and military program since research done in civilian area has applications in military field and there is bound to be cooperation between the two. BTW both civilian and military programmes are for achieving India's strategic goals and no entity is strong enough to prevent that from happening, even the usa.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35684
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 11 Apr 2008 23:04

vera_k, can't be zeroed, since pok2 results aren't such, hence there is deterrance value much greater than zero.

RC's directions read in is 200kt heads. This is the untested scope, that we need the high tech blast labs and super computers.

hence, puny feelings should'nt be there, is my thought.

kalantk.. research is classified.. you should read me as saying that the name of the program is <blah>, funds allocated is <this>. i am talking at budget levels. i am not talking about the research itself.

3rd phase of Th reactor = 50K crores. doesn't reveal any thing at all.

get it?
Last edited by SaiK on 11 Apr 2008 23:10, edited 2 times in total.

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

Postby ramdas » 11 Apr 2008 23:07

My position is surprising quite close to yours with a twist: clean exemption from NSG, Indian Jekyl Act, funding for Laser Ignition Facility/Center, India announces publicly that before it signs 123 it will conduct n (could be 10 or more ) tests to create a viable deterrent and names China as the principal adversary as the reason (Defence Minister George Kaka was right!).


But then, our macaulayist powers that be want to sign the deal without taking any of the other steps you have mentioned. So, the best outcome is for the deal to be scuttled, so that some dispensation in the future has the option of building a credible deterrent.

Now S1 has validated the boosted fission design and showed some adjustments that could be made to the rest of it if desired.


The boosted fission design was validated. But that was by an earlier team. By Arunji's account, that was a group of more capable people with greater integrity. At least had RC agreed to a peer review, there would have been more reason to trust the thermonuke. But Arun says that a shoot the messenger attitude has been adopted.

A mainstay boosted fission device of 150kt uses 15kg WgPu. So, it means an arsenal of 40-50weapons only. This is completely insufficient.

surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1421
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Postby surinder » 11 Apr 2008 23:15

Acharya & CSharma,

THanks for the links to the Ashley Tellis's interview. It was most helpful.

He clearly says that ABV was willing to give as much as MMS gave.

By the way, Strobe Talbott came to India few weeks back and said that BJP/NDA would have jumped at the current 123 as it gives them more than they wanted. He also said that India negotiated really well. Neither of the statements appear to be true.

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

Postby bala » 11 Apr 2008 23:25

ShauryaT wrote:Except for sign the deal?


ShauryaT, please re-read, all pre-conditions have to be met before signing otherwise a "no-go". Also Jekyll Act must counteract all offensive clauses (to India) in Hyde Act.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 11 Apr 2008 23:35

deleted OT
Last edited by vsudhir on 12 Apr 2008 05:02, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Rye » 12 Apr 2008 00:00

ramdas wrote:
At least had RC agreed to a peer review, there would have been more reason to trust the thermonuke.


Wouldn't that peer-review process also result in releasing the same information that the NPAs are so desperate to find out?
Last edited by Rye on 12 Apr 2008 01:00, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby ramdas » 12 Apr 2008 00:14

Wouldn't that peer-review process also result in releasing the same information that the NPAs are so desperate to find out that info.?


Not if it was with PKI and other past DAE people. What emerges from Arun's account is disturbing. Why was CAT not consulted before hand ?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5200
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 12 Apr 2008 00:52

bala wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:Except for sign the deal?


ShauryaT, please re-read, all pre-conditions have to be met before signing otherwise a "no-go". Also Jekyll Act must counteract all offensive clauses (to India) in Hyde Act.
Bala, trust me I am most glad to be corrected on this one. Finally, we can agree that as it stands today, India should not sign the 123, in part due to the Hyde act.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2149
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 12 Apr 2008 00:57

Katare wrote:Even if India tests and they put sanctions there is no way they can take the power plants/hardware back or stop the supply immediately. Technically and commercially it is not possible. Also most of the imported reactors would be financed by exporting country, sanctions would mean that they loose that equity money (aka Dabhol/Enron/GE). Even the reactors and hardware Indian imported pre Smiling Bhudhha are being run with imported fuel supplies on the basis of safety concerns etc. On top of it, we would have a significant stockpile, technology and capacity to ease the pain through transition.


Arun_S wrote:1. First, they sell India the equipment. Then the Indian budgetary constraints whittles down India's indigenous capabilities, to the extent that whatever talent pool is left is hard pressed to run and maintain even those reactors outside the separation plan in civil side. They cant run the new reactors for which they have no experience compounded by manpower shortages. Plus, the hypothetical imported reactors are different designs, with which the native (sic) Indians are unfamiliar with. It takes ~5 years of hand holding to master a new reactor design. The case of Kudankulam is good benchmark. Getting a reactors operators accredition takes 3-5 years. In CANDU's case, the exercise to obtain complete indigenization was excruciatingly painful, and lasted nearly a decade. You may not have forgotten the progress (or lack thereof ) in late 70's.


Civilian nuclear deal would increase India's indigenous capacity manifold by bringing new capital, technology and management practices. Budget support and constraints would only go down as more commercial money would be available for commercial purposes and goI could focus on strategic research. New designs would certainly take years to master and would require hand-holding which would actually be immensely helpful and learning experience for Indian scientists. Productivity gains through infusion of new/western technology, management practices and capital is how developing countries manage to grow much faster than developed countries.

Arun_S wrote:2. Then, they cite the breakage of clauses of the NSG deal to stop fuel supplies. If everything was so hunky-dory, what happened to the Tarapur (TAPP 1 & 2) fuel supplies? In this case, other suppliers could step in because no commitment to them was broken! Further, in the case of TAPP 1 & 2, there was no overt objections raised by the US. In the new hypothetical scenario, there will be strenuous efforts from the US to stop ANY supplies to the Indian reactors. In any case, the Hyde Act puts a stop to this in its explanatory notes.


There are enough safeguards in the deal to manage this situation admittedly with lotsa pain. Without the deal there won't be any plants to shut off. It is better to have them even if there is a danger that we may have to shut them off in some unlikely scenario. I doubt that other will abandon lucrative contracts and good partner just because USA is not supporting the deal. They haven't done that before and IMHO, its highly unlikely Russia/Fr or even Britain would do that in future.

Arun_S wrote:3. Running the reactors on indigenous supplies will deplete/erase India's "significant stockpile", thus foreclosing the FBR and AHWR options, and crippling the strategic program permanently.


Stockpile can't be used for unsafeguarded reactors and for every safeguarded reactor there is a provision for stockpile for its entire commercial life. Domestic supplies could be used exclusively for unsafeguarded reactors making Plutonium

Also most of the imported reactors would be financed by exporting country, sanctions would mean that they loose that equity money (aka Dabhol/Enron/GE)


Arun_S wrote:How can you be so sure at this stage as to the details of the funding? It could also involve sizable Indian participation in the funding!


This is not funding detail but standard procedure and norms for commercial Imports. The exporting country provides subsidized loans (through (EXIM Banks) and equipment supplier takes equity in project to achieve financial closure of project.

Anyhow the strategic program is funded through defense budget and budgetary support for civilian program depends on the need and reserves of NPCL/BHAVANi which are running well over a billion each IIRC.


Arun_S wrote:Bullshit, what are you smoking to conjure this? BARC, IGCAR/MAPP, and the U enrichment plant at Rattehalli are central to the strategic program, and they have been hit hard by the budgetary constraints. The decision to add an additional few thousands centrifuges at Rattehalli has been put off because of these constraints. These are supported by DAE funds and not from the defense budget, with the exception of the ATV reactor project in IGCAR.


This is completely wrong statement Arun and spun by DDM and leftist journalists, check the budget document itself. There are no budget constraints but lotsa capacity constraints. Last year DAE could not spend allocated budget and returned 28% of it back unused. The capacity to spend money comes from maturity of industry which is not there and civilian nuclear deal may be a step in that direction.

Also DAE budget cuts for this year is incorrect, DAE's budget has been increased by 25% this year on what they spent last year.

India is not making any commitment to any country that it'll not test nuclear devices in future. The commitment would only involve material imported from those countries would not be used for strategic program which is fair IMO.


Arun_S wrote:Sure, India has made no such tacit promise. But its various actions like the 123/NSG goal and its whittling down of strategic assets tacitly points in that direction. Nobody said that India cannot test even after signing the 123/NSG deal. But then again, going by that train of logic, there is nothing stopping anybody from going to the top of a tall building and jumping, especially if one is determined to do so. And MM Singh provided GOI funding of lobbyists to help pass the Hyde Act on US terms not Indian.


That is why I asked what would be the cost of jumping from the tall building. IMO, It would be the same or less than what we would have already paid by not signing the deal.

Burn can say what he wants, Pranav also said a lot of things what you believe is your choice. About FMCT/CTBT/Missile, I don't believe it is possible for any nation to force this on us


Arun_S wrote:1. There's a huge difference between Burns and Pranab.
Have you even read the Hyde Act and its objectives? It is the clearest statement of intent published as of date, which explicitly states the desire to cap India's nuclear program/deterrent. By subscribing to the Hyde act, India tacitly subscribes to this theory too! Since many including Bala at el are uninformed, let me cite the Act and relevant Sections.


    Yes I have read Hyde Act and 123 agreement in some details but I did not come to similar conclusions. You have more trust in American politicians than Indian ones. I don not subscribe to that view. Both parties are balancing their domestic politics so there is bound to be some differences in their statements which media would harp on. What counts is what we sign off to and the general goodwill of signing parties later. Although admittedly USofA has not been a reliable partner historically and this is a risk worth exploring before we sign on anything. I value your comments and insight immensely on that front. But I think in post cold war and civilian nuclear deal most of the thorny issues between India-US would have been removed. I can see a flourishing and mutually rewarding relationship between two of our nations if nurtured properly and based on common values.

    Arun_S wrote:A. The Hyde Act envisages (Section-109) India to jointly participate with the U.S. in a programme involving the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration to further nuclear non-proliferation goals. To go a bit further, the Hyde Act requires the U.S. to "encourage India to identify and declare a date by which India would be willing to stop production of fissile material for nuclear weapons unilaterally or pursuant to a multilateral moratorium or treaty."


    Hyde act is not binding for India we are not signing off on hyde act. Also congress has limited power on enforcing international treaties at best it could call for congressional hearing and make some political noises that’s about it. Nuclear non-proliferation and stopping fissile material production are two of the stated goals of India (and almost every major nation) on its own conditions. I do not see any contradiction from our long stated position here

    Arun_S wrote:B. Further, if one goes through the Hyde Act, the MTCR is brought into the picture without relevance (but with a specific objective) (so much for fluffy statement like 123/Hyde is about power and has no military relavence). Is this proof enough of the FMCT/Missile cap? Now lets's get specific. The Act draws a NEW distinction between an "MTCR adherent" and a "unilateral adherent" to expressly keep India within the sanctions purview of Section 73 of the U.S. Arms Export Control Act. That section decrees a wide spectrum and crippling trade and other sanctions in case MTCR-controlled items are transferred. But in keeping with MTCR's status as a cartel that regulates transfers outside the league but not within, Section 73 is not applicable to any export "that is authorized by the laws of an MTCR adherent" or is for "an end user in a country that is an MTCR adherent."


    C. The Hyde Act's Section 107 explicitly states: "Congress finds that India is not an MTCR adherent for the purposes of Section 73 of the Arms Export Control Act." In singling out India, the Hyde Act goes beyond the Arms Export Control Act, which defines an "MTCR adherent" as either "a country that participates in MTCR or that, pursuant to an international understanding to which the United States is a party, controls MTCR equipment or technology in accordance with the criteria and standards set forth in MTCR." India cannot "participate" in MTCR despite India's voluntary adherence to the MTCR guidelines, which have been conveniently brushed aside.

    D. While the MTCR has treated China differently, the Hyde Act demands through its Section 104(b)(6)(B) that India tow the MTCR's current guidelines and "practices," followed by an exemplarily astounding statement requiring that a "unilateral adherent" is also required to abide by "any subsequent changes to the MTCR guidelines and annex." The dangers to the Indian missile program stemming from an open-ended Indian commitment have been underlined by the move of some MTCR states to institute what they call the International Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation. This is a missile related NPT. Chellaney and Bharat Karnad have cried themselves hoarse on these issues!


    India is and should be an adherent to MTCR. MTCR, as I know of it is about export control of long range missile and related technology which India has always followed and would/should follow in future. All members of MTCR have equal rights and its a voluntary organization with doors open to all. Anyhow still we are not signing off on anything related to MTCR. Nothing in MTCR is binding on China or India and there is no exception(or even a question of exceptions arises) have been made for China. MTCR works on consensus (no-veto) and its changes would largely reflect world view in which we also live. Better we can join the group and be a party in decision making.

    Arun_S wrote:E. Sections 104G(i) is tantamount to an FMCT, and, Section 104(H)(i)-(iii) IS TANTAMOUNT TO ASKING INDIA TO SUBMIT ITS WEAPONS DESIGNS.


    There is no subsection H in section104, I think you are talking about 104(g)(H) (i) to (iii) related to President's obligation to report to congress annual estimate of India's nuclear activity. There is no obligation for India to share any details of its strategic program, the obligation is for president to estimate and report to congress. It is absurd to even suggest that there could be such an agreement/demand from USofA. In any case USA makes estimate of every nations nuclear activity anyhow, now it'll have to share that report/estimate with congress.

    Arun_S wrote:F. The most galling part in an already inflammatory Act is Section 110(5), the act seeks to hold India to a bizarre standard for continuation of cooperation by mandating a cutoff of all exports "if an Indian person engages in transfers that are not consistent with NSG or MTCR guidelines". The act's Section 110(5) defines the term "Indian person" as encompassing both entities and individuals (including "non-Indian nationals") under India's jurisdiction. COULD NOT SUCH A PERSON BE FABRICATED OR PLANTED??2. So, judging by the above, what's the difference between the Hyde Act and the Treaty of Versailles?


    Section 110 only gives definitions to the terms and words used in the act elsewhere and subsection 5 of section 110 defines term Indian which is generic and common legal concept IMO. I can't see how can you leave out any individual or entity out of the purview of our law if it exists under Indian govt jurisdiction.

    Arun_S wrote:3. Have you heard of the quote by Dean Rusk (JFK's Secy of State) - "Once you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow".
    [/quote]

    I had never heard this quote until today! I do not think USofA can get to India's balls, even when we didn't have enough food to eat we didn't capitulate with a bright future ahead of us I do not think resurgent Indian's got much to fear from west.

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

    Postby bala » 12 Apr 2008 01:21

    ShauryaT, I have been with BRF for a long time, including those heady days of 98 when India boldly defied the world and went about testing. Sunil Sainis (where is he nowadays) led the analysis on the bums. We in BRF stoutly defended India and pooh poohed anyone who said that the bums did not work etc (see archives). To find that TN did not quite work the way it should have is very disheartening to say the least. US President Clinton imposed sanctions on India and ABV announced RIB bonds to which I gladly gave my money. It is a long journey since then. President Bush seemed to have broken the guardian knot and forged a new relationship with India. His intent originally was to co-opt India and bring it inside the tent so to speak. The twists and turns of the US congress is where we are today. Sad state of affairs but the reality is such. India needs to do whatever is in its best interest but at the same time we have to be cognizant about world conditions and the Panda claws next door. By not signing 123, China would gleefully claim victory and chuckle along. Remember that CPI&M has stated China goals very clearly - they oppose the current Nuclear Deal Hyde notwithstanding, they oppose joint military exercises with the US, they oppose friendship and military tie-ups with Israel. China is winning all the battles thus far and this is upsetting to me.

    My only hope is that India finds a way (whether it is this 123 or another 345 version) to be co-opted in the club and be allowed free trade in Uranium the way others are dining and supping at the table.

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

    Postby John Snow » 12 Apr 2008 01:45

    Kalantak said

    "Many many moons ago the Agni program was officially said to be in cold storage, yet improvements were being made in range extension and newer materials but no tests were conducted. "


    Developing missiles is different kettle altogether compared Jet Engine or a deliverable Nuke weapon of desired explosive power. They have to be tested a great number of times for reliability and complexities are of different nature..... each unique

    On paper S1 could be great and fine but when it lands on enemies musharaff it better penetrate completely with correct KT/MT

    SaiK
    BRF Oldie
    Posts: 35684
    Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
    Location: NowHere

    Postby SaiK » 12 Apr 2008 01:46

    We have created a tristated situation by analyzing that RC et al were being mis-represented for UPAvasis gains, and politically rendered AK et al to come to a conclusion that we can deliver the maals for the intended deterrence again chinx, satisfying the NFU.

    There is a larger yindutvic feeling that we take it as given that comes out of respected people's words, and build up a huge deterrence in our minds. Though the substantiations of the maal is largely strategic, still worked towards our political goals.

    It is indeed hard to realize that Arun bhai had to feel that we have a longer way to go to feel the realizations, and its in appropriate to sign the deal, as is without knowing fully, MMS's stampings on his budget that he would devote allocated funds to the purpose of NFU doctrine, and its related projects.

    Largely, I get a feeling its all about the not-done maal, but the design of which was verified by s1 shafted warhead, and that the design is basically valid to produce the 200KT thermos easily with the help of facilities we have thus far developed.

    This is all about testing in the 123 deal, and this is creating restless-ness to everyone. Its an understanding that we get MMS team to make know to the public (some commission), exactly what is happening, and where we are to get chewed.

    The deal is invalidated if public sees these texts in the deal later that we can never ever test even in the labs., basically making the 123 to CRE begin.

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

    Postby Rye » 12 Apr 2008 01:54

    bala wrote:
    Sunil Sainis (where is he nowadays) led the analysis on the bums. We in BRF stoutly defended India and pooh poohed anyone who said that the bums did not work etc (see archives).


    Nothing seems to have changed other than the people's perception based on this deal and the associated fear of freezing the program to its current level. People don't seem to have enough sense on what to say in public and what not to.
    Last edited by Rye on 12 Apr 2008 03:02, edited 3 times in total.


    Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest