Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Tilak » 30 Jun 2008 11:13

It's another thing altogether to call the PM of the nation traitor and worse and question the integrity of top scientists. I don't seem to recall the leaders of the BJP being described with the same colourful adjectives by the so called deal proponents. It's that language I refered to when I said political campaigning language.

And just for record I hold a grudge against no one.

I'll leave the last word about this to you.


Boss, the problem is you are seeing everything the prism of the "deal".There have been a lot of colorful adjectives used here .. "Jasoo Mithaiwala", "Hajpayee", "Karat and Commies are traitors" to name a few if you are talking about past instances. Nobody ever took their time off to crib about it,or raised a hue and cry, is that fair?. It's only after the "deal" that these have been taken "too seriously". What if 3rd front wins the election, and Karat ( :shock: )becomes the PM, what then ?. Bardhan and other's have also sat in seats of power. If one can recall.

Nobody has the time in the world, to police each and every word, and it's not that I'm advocating usage of such words. Coming back, what did "you" do all the while, did you complain then?. If not, IMO the solution? from now on is to.. let the people who are offended complain, then and there and let the mod respond, in which ever way he chooses. Instead to continuing with this "once upon a time" business.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby amit » 30 Jun 2008 11:50

Raju wrote:Congress itself is not fully supportive of the deal. People like Pranab Mukherjee and A. K. Antony are at best ambivalent.
they are just doing what is unavoidable inorder to follow party line.
the old guard in Congress is against this deal.

b) Left + Jholawalas + wanna be intellectuals + EJs +... (against the deal)


EJs will be pro-US. Why should they bother about Indian Interests.



That's where the problem starts.

You are bracketing EJs with the so-called pro-deal section of the Congress (pro-US, anti-India).

Which means you are not comfortable with EJs being bracketed with the Left. But if anti-deal means being pro-India then shouldn't the Left be with the Rest of India crowd?

Maybe that's what's going to happen. BJP will bring a no-confidence motion and the Left will support it. Interesting days ahead.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby amit » 30 Jun 2008 11:54

Tilak wrote: Coming back, what did "you" do all the while, did you complain then?. If not, IMO the solution?



Tilak,

I'm not going to respond to the rest of your comment. One thing may lead to another and there just might be another flame war.

However, just for record, I was one of the few people who regularly protested everytime some of the choice epithets were used to decribe the PM. One worthy even accused me of being a member of the Congress Party because of that!

And it's good to know that you are against the use of such words/adjectives. I only wish I had found that out when these adjectives were flying thick and fast.

Cheers!

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Satya_anveshi » 30 Jun 2008 13:29

From the news reports (toilet paper) it appears that the govt has made up its mind and is ready to go for the nuke deal. For sometime now, I have been thinking that the drama enacted by Left and Cong was to give them negotiation space while not losing their political turf. So, it wasn't about the players at all.

At this point, having opposed the deal all these days, I sure can't follow N3's advice and declare victory :mrgreen: but surely explain to myself that the govt has got a reasonable deal, may be a precursor for grandfathering a few more suppliers/projects after our next round of testing (if needed) and subsequent sanctions. :| :wink:

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 30 Jun 2008 17:07

Support for the Megatonnage Theory. Amber pls. note:

[quote]Centennial anniversary of Tunguska event noted.

USA Today (6/30, Vergano) reports on "the centennial anniversary of the last big impact, the 1908 Tunguska" event, which "leveled nearly 800 square miles of swampy woodland in Siberia, traveling from the northwest to deliver a 5-megaton blast seen by hundreds of witnesses." ... USA Today reports on an impact that occurred on the Chesapeake Bay roughly 35.4 million years ago, which created "impact crater about 56 miles across," as well as the recent Nature article that details "a 7,700 billion megaton strike" believed to have occurred on Mars's northern hemisphere "about 4.4 billion years ago." (Conclusion: Mars must have had a LOT of cows!)

Regarding the Tunguska event, the AFP (6/29) noted that "the most ardent defenders of the sudden impact theory acknowledge there are many gaps." Researchers have yet to find any fragments of the body that caused the event, and "NEO (Near Earth Object) experts are likewise unsure about the size of the object." However, "[a]ll agree that the object, heated by friction with atmospheric molecules, exploded far above ground," somewhere "between several...and 10 kilometers." The AFP also noted a "rival theory" that "the Tunguska Event was caused by a massive escape of 10 million tons of methane-rich gas deep within Earth's crust."

.. "a lot of the data wouldn't be clearly understood until the Soviet Union began conducting its own.. atomic-blast impacts during the 1950s and '60s."

Also, why nuclear testing can be resumed in 2037, so GOI can go ahead and sign the New Clear Deal.

... "Earth's gravity could change the orbit of Apophis in such a way that it would collide with Earth on its next approach in 2036."

sraj
BRFite
Posts: 260
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 07:04

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby sraj » 30 Jun 2008 17:15

Govt did not disclose whole truth on nuclear deal: CPI(M)
The CPI (M) today made a fresh attack against the UPA government over the Indo-US nuclear deal, saying it had not disclosed that it was mandatory to go to the IAEA for the India-specific safeguard agreement.

"At the UPA-Left Coordination Committee meeting in October-November on the deal, what was stated by the government side did not represent the whole truth. They did not say at that meeting that it was mandatory for the Government to go to the IAEA as it is saying now," CPI-M Politburo member and party's state secretary Biman Bose said.

"This showed that certain things were not disclosed to the Committee," Bose told reporters after the ruling Left Front meeting.

Here is a question: why is the US insisting that India go first to the IAEA Board before the NSG process can be started?

So there can be a repeat of the Hyde fiasco at NSG where India watched from the sidelines as the finely balanced give and take of the J18 and M3 understandings between MMS and Bush were ripped to shreds by the US Congress, and India was presented with a fait accompli that it had nowhere agreed to and had no ability to prevent?

We need the NSG Waiver language first before taking the next step!!

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 30 Jun 2008 17:16

"Even children have reason to oppose". Ah, yes, I see that the child is holding a placard saying Say NO to the "INDO-US ARMS DEAL". Which is why the Indo-US CIVILIAN NUCLEAR technology deal insists on separation of the arms from the civilian part of the deal.

So this is proof that even children oppose the India-US Nuclear Deal? Of course that would be a more impressive argument than "IAEA and NSG will cease to exist in 5 years anyway" and besides, kindergartners reason better than most of those "experts" quoted here as opposing the deal, as seen above. :mrgreen:

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby amit » 30 Jun 2008 18:41

enqyoob wrote:"Even children have reason to oppose". Ah, yes, I see that the child is holding a placard saying Say NO to the "INDO-US ARMS DEAL". Which is why the Indo-US CIVILIAN NUCLEAR technology deal insists on separation of the arms from the civilian part of the deal.


N^3 saar,

Hope you've also noticed the nice little pataka behind that cute child holding an even cuter poster.

Looks like a model of one of the evil arrows made by Uncle Sam with money provided by one of the despicable Foundations who's names start with an R.

:lol: :lol:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54823
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby ramana » 30 Jun 2008 20:04

Raju wrote:the communists are nothing .. there are far more deadlier creatures lurking in the waters who shall oppose this deal or for that matter any deal with US tooth and nail and until the last drop of their blood. Presently the commies are leading the charge and they seem dedicated to the task as they have figured out correctly that the deal has very little to do with energy.


Raju, Please explain. Thanks, ramana

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Rye » 30 Jun 2008 20:08

Excerpt from the Rory Medcalf interview posted on the Australia thread by Duangkomon.

Meanwhile it's got this problem that it can't sign a Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty because unlike friends of ours such as the US, the UK and France, and indeed China, and if you like, Russia, it didn't get around to testing a bomb before the artificial cut-off date of 1968, but that treaty conveniently imposed for the powers of the day, thus it's been treated as a pariah since then. In the long run, I don't see how that can be sustained and there needs to be some sort of fix under international law that allows indeed Australia and others to help India build its civilian nuclear industry, but not obviously it's nuclear weapons potential. So it's very tricky, but I do think it's time for fresh thinking on this by Australia and other governments.


The "fix under international law that helps civilian but not military program by separating the facilities" is what we are witnessing in the 123.

Raju

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Raju » 30 Jun 2008 20:21

An inter-party informal consensus that includes members from right and centre of spectrum which supports and encourages the left on its present stance. this group is opposed to formalisation of any ties with the western superelite which is what this deal is all about.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 30 Jun 2008 20:27

[url]An inter-party informal consensus that includes members from right and left[/url]
Oh, that means an all-new fleet of State Transport buses and maybe even train bogies. Which company manufactures teargas in India? Need to invest.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby NRao » 30 Jun 2008 20:37

The "fix under international law that helps civilian but not military program by separating the facilities" is what we are witnessing in the 123.


Actually not.

What Oz wants - as he states:

help India build its civilian nuclear industry, but not obviously it's nuclear weapons potential.


123 does not shut down the weapons potential.

IF at all, 123 is a step in that direction, with the US trying its utmost to get more than what 123 has offered. While the US and perhaps even Oz would like to deal with India individually - just like they did with SA, etc - India cannot afford to accept that solution. And, the US does not have the time to get everyone to the same table.

India would love to help Oz get there - on nuclear weapons - just that others are not cooperating, including the US. From an Indian PoV.

On another point "help India build" -----hmmmmmmmmm... all India really needs is Uranium. What is there to build?

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7249
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Amber G. » 30 Jun 2008 20:48

Acharya wrote:
enqyoob wrote: Depressing.

Even children have reason to oppose

Acharyaji - you probably quoted me instead of N^3, but yes, to me it was depressing seeing the scenes which reminded me more of common scenes of protests in Karachi and Lahore (I did not post link to some of the more images which showed up in Yahoo cache of protests - "Islami- somthing-something Against the deal" protesters ).. burning flags/effigies/Crayola looking missiles and, as you reposted, young children carrying signs)

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 30 Jun 2008 20:57

as you reposted, young children carrying signs

Not to mention (so I won't) older children reposting those without even bothering to check what the sign said it was opposing. :roll:

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Rye » 30 Jun 2008 21:06

NRao wrote:
What Oz wants - as he states:

help India build its civilian nuclear industry, but not obviously it's nuclear weapons potential.


Oz may want a lot of things, like I do....does not mean they are going to get it. But my reading of what he is saying here is that Rudd's position of "sign the NPT or we cannot do business" needs to be reconsidered at the australian end and the solution he suggests is pretty much what India has negotiated for itself in the 123. That is not to say that the US will not demand India's cooperation on strategic affairs, but the GoI does seem to draw the line on how far it is willing to align itself to the US or any other power, for that matter.

If one starts of with a specific bias/prejudice, then every reading will take on that bias no matter what is actually written. In this case, I find it important that this was an interview to an australian audience after the recent statements by Rudd during the visit of DM Pranabji to Australia. he is basically arguing that Australia is going to have to hedge its bets against both China and India to be part of the group controlling the Indian ocean (and all the international trade/shipping lanes).

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby svinayak » 30 Jun 2008 21:42

enqyoob wrote:

So this is proof that even children oppose the India-US Nuclear Deal? Of course that would be a more impressive argument than "IAEA and NSG will cease to exist in 5 years anyway" and besides, kindergartners reason better than most of those "experts" quoted here as opposing the deal, as seen above. :mrgreen:

That means even the children have better hudgement of the deal and better than the people discussing here.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby svinayak » 30 Jun 2008 21:47

Amber G. wrote:
Acharya wrote:
enqyoob wrote: Depressing.

Even children have reason to oppose

Acharyaji - you probably quoted me instead of N^3, but yes, to me it was depressing seeing the scenes which reminded me more of common scenes of protests in Karachi and Lahore (I did not post link to some of the more images which showed up in Yahoo cache of protests - "Islami- somthing-something Against the deal" protesters ).. burning flags/effigies/Crayola looking missiles and, as you reposted, young children carrying signs)


It started with people like who make these comments
Maybe the whole thing, including the picture, is a grand conspiracy

Even children have better judgement.

Duangkomon
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 84
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:12

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Duangkomon » 30 Jun 2008 22:01

Even children have better judgement.


Acharya, the placard held by the child reads "No to Indo Us arms deal" not "No to Indo US nuke deal". May be you are right ,children do have better judgment.

Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1433
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Kati » 30 Jun 2008 23:25

Slightly dated material

Indo-US Nuclear Deal

A Recipe For Blackmail

Nirmalangshu Mukherji, http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/r ... uclear.htm

The current Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh, is often credited with ushering in a new economic order (read ‘neoliberal era’) in India in the early 1990s. If credit is due to him, so is the responsibility for bringing the country to economic enslavement (read ‘imperialist control’) in the last two decades to the point of no return. Despite glowing certificates from economists such as Amartya Sen (The Hindu, 15 August), the fact remains that the economic policies initiated by Dr. Singh, and cheerfully pursued by the right-wing NDA government during its infamous rule (1999-2004), have left the country in an unprecedented state of inequality and impoverishment of the masses (Utsa Patnaik, A Republic of Hunger).

If there was one dominant factor in the remarkable general elections of 2004 which raised Dr. Singh to Prime Ministership, it is that people’s anger was targetted at the consequences of neoliberal economic policies initiated by Rajiv Gandhi-Narasimha Rao governments, continued by Deve Gowda-Gujral governments, and taken to the limit by NDA. The nexus between NDA and the Sangh Parivar, on the one hand, and US imperialism, pro-Israeli lobbies, mainstream media, Indian big business, and MNCs, especially financial corporations, on the other, has led to a class war between the elites and their hanger-ons (top 20%) and the rest of the people. Election 2004 was very much a non-violent expression of this class war (see my ‘Election 2004 and After’, Revolutionary Democracy, 10.2, October 2004).

More significantly for the issue in hand, the events just after the elections left no ambiguity about who controls Indian economy by now. Apprehending an imminent ‘socialist’ agenda with the Left agreeing to support the Congress government, foreign financial institutions and big business immediately threatened the ubiquitous flight of capital which led to a massive crash in the stock market. By then, Indian economy – like the earlier era in Latin American economies – had already become so dependent on imperialist coffers for maintaining high growth and employment rates (benefitting a small section of the people) that any perceived departure from the direct interests of international institutions was firmly disallowed. As a result, we watched the unholy spectacle of former finance minister, Mr Jaswant Sinha, and Dr. Singh joining hands to assure their ‘contacts’ in the financial oligarchy that no deviation from existing policy will be mooted. The markets jumped back to unprecedented highs and Dr. Singh was nominated as the Prime Minister. He wasted no time in filling almost the entire financial set up with his colleagues from the World Bank and the IMF. Tied down by a benign National Common Minimum Programme, the left has been a mute spectator to this attack on the people to serve international capital interests.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the proposed nuclear deal with US, the stranglehold on economy is sought to be extended to the energy and the military spheres – a control that can only further serve the interests of the international monopoly capital in line with US’s ill-concealed geo-political ambitions. It is heartening to note that the left has finally risen – after two years of unexplained slumber – to its historical responsibility of resisting imperialist aggression.

It is important to be clear about the character – limits – of this delayed resistance. The nuclear deal – rather benignly titled ‘1-2-3 agreement’ as if it is some kind of an innocent game – promises regular supply of fuel material to maintain and enhance India’s nuclear capabilities ostensibly for the generation of nuclear energy only. While the conversation on the deal was started by US’s close ally in the subcontinent, the NDA regime, it was officially inaugurated with a Bush-Singh meeting in Washington in 2005. At that point, the spokesperson of the CPM, Mr. Sitaram Yechury, reportedly held that the left was neither in favour nor opposed to the deal; they wanted to wait for the actual text of the agreement. Now that the text has been made available, the left is opposed to certain clauses of the agreement.

Without wasting time on the fine-print, assume that the deal is rectified to assuage the left. It stands to reason that, at this point of time with the prospect of elections in West Bengal and elsewhere after the Nandigram massacre, the left will concede to almost any face-saving device. For the records, recall that, after much hue and cry, the left had agreed to the new EPF regime when the government agreed to raise interest rate from 8% to 8.5%. Nevertheless, assume further that the rectifications so enforced on demand from the left allows India to retain control over its nuclear facilities, especially the military ones.

But, once signed, the deal will be binding for half a century. Assuming regular supply of fuel despite India’s refusal to sign the non-proliferation treaty, nuclear energy could well become India’s mainstay in the energy sector in the years to come. Indian and foreign MNCs are already rubbing their palms in anticipation of capturing the nuclear energy market. Set aside the principled issue of whether nuclear energy should dominate the energy sector at all. Ignore also the moral – in fact, the historical – issue of whether one should enter into any deal with US even if it is a favourable one; US could be viewed as the biggest terrorist state in the history of humanity (Noam Chomsky, Failed States).

Even then, the point remains that, deal or no deal, the US can always walk out of the assurance to supply fuel. In recent years, the US not only ignored the Geneva convention and UN resolutions on terrorism, it walked out of the Kyoto protocol on the environment, the ABM treaty, and the biological warfare convention, among others (Richard Du Boff, 'Mirror mirror on the wall, who’s the biggest rogue of all?', Znet, 7 August 2003, for a comprehensive list of recent violations of international treaties by US). And the moment US walks out, the entire energy sector will be in jeopardy.

With virtual control of the energy sector, US will be in a position to enforce any economic, political and military regime on India. As a nuclear-junkey, India will not be able to resist the regular supply of nuclear fuel to the system and turn cold turkey. Addicts will do anything to keep the drug supply going.

Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1433
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Kati » 30 Jun 2008 23:41

Indo-US Nuclear Deal and Its Consequences

Dr. Dipak Basu, http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_061219.htm
[The author is a Professor in International Economics in Nagasaki University, Japan]

In the euphoria of the recent U.S senate approval of the Indo-US nuclear deal, Indian establishment completely forgot the future effects of that deal. The Indo-American treaty on nuclear issue is being imposed upon India against the public opinion, without any voting in the parliament or any referendum of the people. Now the government of India is trying to erase out India’s nuclear deterrent against Pakistan as well by saying that without this Indo-US nuclear deal, there will be no future development of the nuclear energy in India.

The nuclear deal it has little to do with the nuclear power generations but it aims at the elimination of India’s ability to produce any nuclear weapons. Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), which India has refused to sign so far, is about to be imposed upon India through a back door with devastating consequences for India’s immediate future.

Already the US senate has imposed a new clause that in future national security organizations of USA, which means CIA and FBI, would now collaborate with India regarding nuclear non-proliferation. This in effect would imply that US organizations would make sure India will not be able to gain any advantage to use its nuclear facilities to create nuclear weapons.

Dr Homi Sethna, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and one of the founding-father of India’s nuclear program, said that what Dr Manmohan Singh was about to sign was worse than joining the NPT regime. Dr A. Gopalakrishnan, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, has outlined how precisely commitments made by Dr Singh to Parliament and the people have been blatantly undermined and notes that if the deal goes through in its present form, it will "compromise the sovereignty of this country for decades to come". He has exposed the very enormous financial price that India will have to pay as well, between Rs 300,000 to Rs 400,000 corers in nuclear reactors that will be totally dependent for their existence on a yearly audit of our policies by the US Congress. Dr P.K. Iyengar, another former chairman of the AEC, has called the deal "giving up sovereignty". These men have spent their lives translating an Indian vision of a self-reliant industrialization, crafted by Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, into reality. They do not have a political or personal agenda. However, after a recent meeting with the Prime Minister they have eaten their words. The counterparts of these retired scientific administrators in India’s nuclear establishment who are currently employed are silent about the issue.

China-Pakistan Collaboration:

Pakistan and China have finalized in August 2006 landmark accord on nuclear energy cooperation, under which Islamabad will acquire 6 Chinese nuclear reactors. The nuclear energy cooperation deal with China has brought great solace to Pakistan, as the United States is not willing to extend such cooperation to Pakistan. With Chinese cooperation, Pak would build six new nuclear reactors in next 10 years having capacity of 2,000 megawatts. This was part of Pakistan’s plan to increase the capacity of N-power generation to over 8,000 megawatts by 2025. China has already helped Pak build a nuclear reactor of 350 megawatts at Chashma and it was currently building one more at the same place with the same capacity.

China has already supplied Pakistan enrichment plants and heavy water plants, and nuclear weapons as well. Chinese nuclear plants offered to Pakistan will not be under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Thus, Pakistan can very well use these to produce nuclear weapons. Although China is a member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) of 45 nations and a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), China like in all other international spheres does not care about its obligation to any international treaty if its national interest demands so. China’s national interest is to set up Pakistan against India by providing every weapons and missiles it has got.

China has so far violated every rule of the NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty) and NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) by supplying nuclear power plants with enrichment facility, which can produce nuclear weapons to Pakistan, North Korea and possibly Iran. For that USA will never dare to impose any sanction against China.

Does India need US nuclear power plants?

It is not true that without the American support India’s nuclear energy program would come to a halt. As Pakistan is getting everything regarding nuclear energy from China, India can also get nuclear power plants from Russia.

The real issue is whether India needs any US assistance at all regarding its nuclear energy sector. The argument of Man Mohan Singh, as he said in the Parliament recently, that otherwise India would be a nuclear ‘Pariah’ is false. In 1974, USA has imposed sanctions so that India cannot get any nuclear related materials or technology. After 1998 USA has imposed more sanctions on India so that it cannot get any defense related technology or materials at all. However, India since 1974 has received every nuclear technology, and materials including conventional nuclear power plants, Fast Breeder reactors, reprocessing and enrichment plants and heavy water plants from the Soviet Union and Russia without any restrictions attached to these. As a result, India is al most self-sufficient regarding nuclear technology and can produce nuclear weapons despite all the efforts of the United States to stop it.

Only for the last two years, because of its membership of the NSG, Russia now wants to supply nuclear power plants with added safeguards that the plants cannot be used to produce any nuclear weapons. However, at the same time, it has offered offshore nuclear plants to India, which would be without any restrictions. India can have both or either of the on-shore or offshore nuclear power plants from Russia and as a result for the future development of electricity production, India does not need US support at all. Thus, it really does not matter if India would refuse to sign the Indo-US treaty on nuclear energy.

CPI (M) is opposing the treaty by saying India does not need nuclear power plants. That is a non-issue here. Even if India needs nuclear power plants to supplement it energy requirement in future, India does not need nuclear power plants from USA. Russia can still supply whatever India needs at a much lower price.

India’s nuclear weapons:

The treaty has little to do with nuclear energy development in India but deals with the question of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and how to prevent India from becoming a nuclear weapon state. It is very clear that the treaty does not treat India as a present or future nuclear weapon state. The treaty will never legitimize India’s nuclear weapons, but will ruin any prospect of India to have any independent nuclear deterrent against even Pakistan; China is far cry.

When India will sign the Indo-US treaty, Pakistan without any treaty with the US will receive whatever it wants from China and will go on producing nuclear weapons but India cannot. The reason is that the treaty will force India to separate Indian’s nuclear facilities including the research institutes into two groups, military and non-military. About 90 percent of all nuclear facilities, including the Russian built Fast Breeder Reactors which can produce plutonium for nuclear weapons, will be included in the civilian sector and there will be regular inspection by the IAEA and the US authority to make sure that these facilities will not be used to produce nuclear weapons.

If India, in this situation, wants to keep its option for nuclear weapons, it needs to reconstruct every facility once again at a prohibitive cost. India for the military part of the nuclear sector will not be able to import technology or materials from any of the countries of the NSG, including Russia. Thus, India’s nuclear weapons program will disappear. This is the real aim of the Indo-US treaty. Man Mohan Singh’s recent declaration in the Indian parliament that India would maintain the option to test nuclear weapons is very theoretical. In practice, India will be unable to do that because of lack of availability of appropriate facility to develop and test nuclear weapons in near future.

Conclusion:

The prospect for India in this situation is very bleak but the government of India itself is creating it. In the case of nuclear deal with the US also, India just like in 1991 and 1995 is accepting a subordinate position in relation to USA and the Western countries. USA will never accept any inspection of its nuclear facility by the IAEA. It will carry on developing new nuclear weapons and will test those in laboratory conditions. It has no separation of nuclear facilities into military and civilian sectors. However, India is accepting inspection of its nuclear facility by the American authority without demanding any corresponding right of inspection of the American nuclear facilities by the Indian authority. Just like other two treaties, with IMF in 1991 and with WTO in 1995, this Indo-US deal on nuclear energy is unequal, discriminatory and unjust.

The result will make Pakistan much stronger than India in very near future. That serves the geo-political interest of the United States with Pakistan as the bridge to the Islamic world as Pakistan was the bridge to China in 1971, when both USA and China were about to attack India jointly to save East Pakistan. The unfolding scenario will ruin India in the process when India will be forced to surrender also to the demands of Pakistan, a NATO ally of USA and China, the most important business partner of the U.S corporations and on whom the fate of the US Dollar depends.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Rye » 30 Jun 2008 23:47

Dipak basu quote:
The result will make Pakistan much stronger than India in very near future.


And we are supposed to take Dipak Basu's "analysis" seriously with gems of this sort? Sounds like plain old scaremongering demagoguery. His views are most likely pro-non-proliferation biased which is why the fellow has carefully avoided any mention of the separation plan that does keep a bunch of facilities out of IAEA safeguards.
Last edited by Rye on 30 Jun 2008 23:50, edited 1 time in total.

Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1433
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Kati » 30 Jun 2008 23:50

Indo-US Nuclear deal: Do We gain or Lose?
Brig. Arun Bajpai
http://www.bharatwaves.com/portal/modul ... itemid=151

.....
By granting the de facto Sixth nuclear power status to India, US has very cleverly put an end to India’s ambition of becoming a military super power one day. India now per force will have to abide by all those conditions that are binding on the current nuclear capable states. The first among them is the US demand that India must separate its military and civilian nuclear installations and put its civilian nuclear installations under IAEA safeguards to be eligible for latest nuclear technology and fuel transfers to India. US very glibly says that it has no objection to what India does with its military related nuclear installations.

....
Once India separates its 21 nuclear reactors into military and civil watertight compartments then its military warheads producing capability will automatically go down. Same will be the case with its military oriented nuclear research capability. Besides civilian and military oriented research will not be able to complement each other. So now if India wants to retain its current military oriented nuclear capability then it will have to spend enormous amount of money to recreate new military facilities. Needless to say this measure will not be cost effective.

.....
Once India separates its 21 nuclear reactors into military and civil watertight compartments then its military warheads producing capability will automatically go down. Same will be the case with its military oriented nuclear research capability. Besides civilian and military oriented research will not be able to complement each other. So now if India wants to retain its current military oriented nuclear capability then it will have to spend enormous amount of money to recreate new military facilities. Needless to say this measure will not be cost effective.

In other words India’s Nuclear deterrent will not only remain minimum but will also be much behind times. Add to this the second international obligation of moratorium on nuclear related tests and the third demand of US of multilateral Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty, and the picture is complete. After this Indo –US deal, Indian nuclear threat will remain small and regional for a long time to come not materially affecting the Super power like US.


.....

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby NRao » 30 Jun 2008 23:54

Kati,

It would be nice to post a date along with the articles. Some of them have been posted too.

Rye,

Thanks. My bad.

N-

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7249
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Amber G. » 30 Jun 2008 23:54


India has unlimited solar power and ocean energy, but is unable to exploit these due to lack of sufficient R & D.


To person with no information this would be a good argument.


Sivji – if it weren’t for “lack or R&D” or some other minor technical hitches, just 1 cubic kilometer of sea water near Jhuhu beach alone will let you extract about 10 Kilo of Gold to make you rich.

(See; http://www.seafriends.org.nz/oceano/seawater.htm )

Not to mention about a three tons of uranium ..
Or enough hydrogen for fusion reactors to run for eons.

This is not to diss alternative energy sources , but when one brings these into discussion and start comparing apples and oranges the part becomes a little dishonest.

That is , if one has to compares (in relationship with deal etc) one should take care that it is apples vs apples.. …practical ground realties .. if one figure is based on say what is probable, and based on good estimate, don’t compare it with sky in the pie estimates of a second figure. ..

Sure, look at the alternatives carefully.

But look at all the figures and facts honestly, or as honestly as we can, and if we don’t need the nuclear energy (or it is not worth the price/ concession on national interests etc) so be it, but the decision should be based on facts and best judgment …not on psy-ops. ,,not where some body got their ration card :)

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7249
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Amber G. » 01 Jul 2008 00:50

Wiki summary for opposition in India
Although many mainstream political parties, including nationalist ones ranging from the Rashtriya Janata Dal, Dravida Munnetra Kazagham and the Nationalist Congress[9] support the deal, it's realization ran into difficulties in the face of stiff political opposition in India. The main opposition party BJP criticized the deal saying that it compromised India's nuclear weapons program, despite the fact that they had started negotiations on the agreement when in power. More crucially, the communist parties, which are not a part of the government but support it externally in the Indian Parliament, threatened to withdraw their support over the issue. They cited what they described as the imperialist policies of the U.S.A. as their primary reason of opposition. They also feel that India should be self-sufficient rather than depending on others.[citation needed] However, the government remained steadfast on its commitment to the deal and has refused to back down on the agreement, leading to the possibility of mid-term elections in India. Senior BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani, in a statement to the Indian Express newspaper, seemed to indicate willingness to support the government provided some legislative measures.[17] However his party refused to follow that line and stuck to its earlier stand.[18] According to political commentators, if the Indian government, whether the current dispensation or a new one, were to renege on its commitment to the deal, it would seriously undermine India's credibility in the international arena, besides rendering useless the considerable effort and time spent in finalising the agreement. In November 2007, former Indian Military chiefs, bureaucrats and scientists drafted a letter to Members of Parliament expressing their support for the deal. http://www.indianexpress.com/story/239308._.html Negotiations are ongoing between the government and the left parties to resolve the issue. On November 17 the left parties provisionally agreed to let the government initiate talks with the IAEA for India specific safeguards, which is being seen as a good sign for the deal eventually getting through.[19]

The primary opposition to the Nuclear deal in India, however, comes from the Communist Party of India (Marxist)[20], whose core ideology has rested on a platform of Anti-Imperialism and Anti-Americanism[21]. Their opposition has also been said to stem from their alleged support for Chinese Communist hegemony in the region.[22][23]

The Indian union minister for science and technology and one of the prominent spokemen of the Indian National Congress party Kapil Sibal in an interview to NDTV's Barkha Dutt said that the American constitution clearly states that agreement between the United States of America and any other state of the world is above domestic American law. Hence the 123 agreement is not limited by the Hyde act.

On June 19, 2008, news media reported that Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh threatened to resign his position if the Communists in India continue to oppose the nuclear deal, an opposition that Singh declares as irrational and reactionary[10].

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 880
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Mihir » 01 Jul 2008 01:25

amit wrote:As an example Renewable Energy Corp is setting up the world’s largest photovoltaic plant. When completed by 2010 it will produce enough equipment to
generate up to 1.5 gig watts of energy annually, enough to serve several million homes.


Amit, I believe that is 1.5 GW of peak capacity. The capacity factor of those devices will probably be about 20%

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 01 Jul 2008 01:33

ust 1 cubic kilometer of sea water near Jhuhu beach alone will let you extract about 10 Kilo of Gold to make you rich.
Digging the sand there would probably get you more, since Haji Mastaan's crews occasionally had to dump their imports overboard when the Customs boats decided to stop them.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby John Snow » 01 Jul 2008 02:04

enqyoob wrote:
ust 1 cubic kilometer of sea water near Jhuhu beach alone will let you extract about 10 Kilo of Gold to make you rich.
Digging the sand there would probably get you more, since Haji Mastaan's crews occasionally had to dump their imports overboard when the Customs boats decided to stop them.

Incorrect and just a conspiracy theory! :mrgreen: :((

The correct version should read " when the Customs were not sufficently paid , hence motivated to do work and decided to stop them"

8) :wink: :rotfl:

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Katare » 01 Jul 2008 02:26

How can you build a consensus?

-Left simply doesn't want any deal with the USofA

-BJP want's a Pokharan III provision, will see how Advaniji would get anyone in NSG/US Congress to support Pok III next year :mrgreen:

Both conditions eventually mean there is nothing that govt can do to renegotiate or build a consensus.

This is utter partisan politics at its best with no regards for national interests. Everyone has their eyes set on winning maximum seats in next election national interests gaye bhaad mein.

It's not a good or bad deal it's a no deal!

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby svinayak » 01 Jul 2008 03:12

Duangkomon wrote:
Even children have better judgement.


Acharya, the placard held by the child reads "No to Indo Us arms deal" not "No to Indo US nuke deal". May be you are right ,children do have better judgment.

Children know that it is the same thing.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby satyarthi » 01 Jul 2008 03:25

Katare wrote:How can you build a consensus?

-Left simply doesn't want any deal with the USofA

-BJP want's a Pokharan III provision, will see how Advaniji would get anyone in NSG/US Congress to support Pok III next year :mrgreen:

Both conditions eventually mean there is nothing that govt can do to renegotiate or build a consensus.

Time to build consensus was in the beginning of the process when the outlines of the deal were determined. If not the leftists, then perhaps BJP could have been brought around. Even afterwards, the govt continued to keep the opposition at arms length. No role was given to the opposition in framing the deal.

At this point, asking BJP to support a fait accompli, is like canvassing for a father for the baby in the 3rd trimester of the pregnancy.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby NRao » 01 Jul 2008 03:28

India looks to 'foreign' help to save nuke deal

Image

NEW DELHI: Having left the nuclear deal almost until the eleventh hour, India and its international allies are trying to scrounge for ways to save the nuclear deal — and looking for ways to "telescope" the next few stages.

Left to itself, the next stages of the IAEA ratification and the NSG approval could take months that would go beyond the timeline of both the UPA government and the Bush administration. But the better part of the nuclear world like the UK, US, Russia and France are all openly backing the India-US nuclear deal at this moment.

Diplomatic sources said India would be able to count on many more helping hands, because nobody really wants to see India lose this opportunity.

At the IAEA stage, Indian officials haven't yet been given the green signal from the government to go ahead to the next step. But (if and) when they do, they will initial the finalized draft, which then becomes a finalized text. While this text will be sent to the board of governors by the IAEA secretariat, there is a possibility that NSG leaders like UK, US, Russia and France could circulate the finalized text at the NSG.

The hope is that it may be possible to work on the NSG exemption and the IAEA governors' approval almost simultaneously. This would be unusual, said sources, but not impossible, because most of the IAEA governors are NSG members.

The NSG deliberations will take a minimum of two months before any exemption can be forthcoming. At this stage, it will already be September-October, which would include forcing many Europeans to forego their vacation in August.

If this tight timetable can be followed, US President George Bush could be writing out a presidential determination on the deal by October. The determination is to the US Congress to approve the package — 123 agreement, IAEA safeguards (which should have been approved by the governors by then) and the NSG waiver.

If the Congress receives the determination before it breaks for elections in November, it could take it up during the lame duck session before January 2009. This would involve its own "telescoping" but that would be the US' responsibility, not India's.

All of this is terribly ambitious depending on virtually precision timing and coordinated efforts by many countries apart from India and US to get this deal done. It's a kind of racing the clock that, in many ways, has characterized the deal so far — with its numerous near-death experiences.

The government seems determined, said sources. On Monday, minister of state for external affairs Anand Sharma said in Dubai, "The nuclear deal with the US will help in ending nearly four decades of nuclear apartheid for India during which there were no transfer of technology. In the coming years, India will need a lot of energy, especially nuclear energy, to fuel its growth which has nearly touched 10%," he said.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Gerard » 01 Jul 2008 04:16

Manmohan: allow us to go to IAEA, NSG
“Once the process is over, I will bring it before Parliament and abide by the House”

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby shiv » 01 Jul 2008 05:37

Kati wrote:Already the US senate has imposed a new clause that in future national security organizations of USA, which means CIA and FBI, would now collaborate with India regarding nuclear non-proliferation. This in effect would imply that US organizations would make sure India will not be able to gain any advantage to use its nuclear facilities to create nuclear weapons.


Nonsense. This could also mean that India and the US will cooperate to ensure no third party gets the stuff that India will start getting. Another case of twisting a meaning to suits one's own bias. It appears that authors in the print media are as biased as I am allowed to be on an open forum, Probably naive of me to expect anything different.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Satya_anveshi » 01 Jul 2008 05:42

For everytime an eebee called someone a traitor for supporting the deal, the whybees refer it 100000 times.

e.g.,

eebee: MMS is traitor to bring such a fate upon India throught this deal.

whybeees:

eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
.
.
.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.

Just an observation. It has been ages since anyone in the deal-opposing camp called anyone names or referred anyone as such. It is only pro-deal people playing psyops on innocent bystandars giving them ideas of MMS being a traitor. :eek:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby shiv » 01 Jul 2008 05:49

Amber G. wrote:

India has unlimited solar power and ocean energy, but is unable to exploit these due to lack of sufficient R & D.


To person with no information this would be a good argument.


Sivji – if it weren’t for “lack or R&D” or some other minor technical hitches, just 1 cubic kilometer of sea water near Jhuhu beach alone will let you extract about 10 Kilo of Gold to make you rich.



Not only that - that cubic kilometer of seawater after being sucked clean of heavy metals would provide 1 cubic km of drinking water for Mumbai (5 minutes supply for Dharavi and the Ambani residence).

All because of lack of R&D which will start one femtosecond after the nuke deal is rejected.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby Neshant » 01 Jul 2008 05:50

MMS can't even defend Hindus right to basic facilities for a pilgrimage in their own land.

What hope does he have of defending India's interests against the US.

I no longer trust him or his ilk.

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

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby enqyoobOLD » 01 Jul 2008 05:56

Acharya, the placard held by the child reads "No to Indo Us arms deal" not "No to Indo US nuke deal". May be you are right ,children do have better judgment.
Children know that it is the same thing.


Acharyaji, I bow to that masterpiece. So the child in the picture is holding a sign saying "NO TO INDO-US ARMS DEAL" with a US missile effigy in the background, because the CHILD KNOWS that it is the same thing as the "INDO-US CIVILIAN NUCLEAR COOPERATION DEAL".

IOW, the child "knows" that if the US-India civilian nuclear cooperation deal is approved, the US Imperialists are going to supply big nuclear rockets to India. Or maybe drop them on India?

In Mallostan there is a saying that is ruined in the translation, but the best I can do is:
"Roll around where you fall". This is to show the audience that you didn't fall, you just decided to :rotfl: So the June 2008 :rotfl: goes to Acharya.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

Postby shiv » 01 Jul 2008 05:58

Satya_anveshi wrote:For everytime an eebee called someone a traitor for supporting the deal, the whybees refer it 100000 times.

e.g.,

eebee: MMS is traitor to bring such a fate upon India throught this deal.

whybeees:

eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.
.
.
.
eebees are calling MMS traitor.

Just an observation. It has been ages since anyone in the deal-opposing camp called anyone names or referred anyone as such. It is only pro-deal people playing psyops on innocent bystandars giving them ideas of MMS being a traitor. :eek:


Excuse me. I recall seeing posts of MMS being called a traitor and certain nuclear scientists being recommended for being slapped on their backsides by 1 billion Indians for being liars. That business has now ended. It will not restart. But the only way it will not restart is by not forgetting that it occurred in the first place. The past will certainly be forgiven, but if you believe that it will be forgotten - you are mistaken.

Could you explain what you mean by this eebee and whybee business? This seems to be some code language that I missed.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests