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 » 01 Jul 2008 18:01

Your sarcasm is verging on a flamebait.
Not very smart.
Last edited by Rahul M on 01 Jul 2008 18:59, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Flamebait.

Rishi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 746
Joined: 29 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: Maximum City

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

Postby Rishi » 01 Jul 2008 18:12

http://www.covert.co.in/brahma.htm

Cirus is Testament to PM’s Double Talk

Brahma Chellaney

One of the great mysteries still begging for illumination is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s embrace of nuclear energy. No week or month passes without Singh alluding to the benefits of nuclear power for India. But as Finance Minister during the 1991-95 period, Singh starved the nuclear programme of funds, disabling new projects and halting uranium exploration. The uranium crunch India confronts today is rooted in the fact that the actions Singh set in motion were not reversed until several years after he left office. The nation today has a right to know whether Singh’s new-found interest in nuclear power is centred on imports — a concern reinforced by his government’s 2008-09 Budget, which slashes the Department of Atomic Energy’s funding by $529 million.

Another mystery is Singh’s decision, as part of the controversial nuclear deal with the US, to permanently shut down by 2010 one of the country’s two bomb-grade plutonium-production reactors. The PM has offered no explanation to the nation for overruling the nuclear establishment and agreeing to shut down the Cirus research reactor, located at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. Much of India’s cumulative historic production of weapons-grade plutonium has come from Cirus, operating since 1960. Cirus had been refurbished at a cost of millions of dollars and reopened for barely two years when Singh made the surprise announcement to close down the reactor. Speaking in the Lok Sabha on 10 March 2006, the PM claimed that “while the Cirus reactor was refurbished recently, the associated cost will be more than recovered by the isotope [production] and the research we will be conducting before it is closed”. But he still hasn’t answered the key question: Why did he succumb to US pressure over a reactor that remains crucial to India’s strategic programme? Not only does the country still lack a credible minimal nuclear deterrent against its main challenge, China, but also current international estimates of India’s weapons-grade fissile material stockpile put its quantity just marginally higher than Pakistan’s. Given that Singh is now committed to “work with the US” for the early conclusion of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT), India needs to sharply accelerate its rate of weapons-grade plutonium production as it doesn’t have time on its side. Singh’s action throws a larger spanner in the works. The shutdown of Cirus two years from now, if the nuclear deal goes through, will deprive the nuclear military programme of almost one-third of its current supply of weapons-grade plutonium. Of course, India could build a replacement reactor. But the long lead time needed to build a research reactor, and the government failure thus far to sanction such a facility, will leave a major production shortfall.



The fuel burn-up in large, electricity-generating reactors produces plutonium of a quality far less desirable for weapons. Therefore, for military-grade plutonium, India has relied on its research reactors, Cirus and Dhruva. But Dhruva faced major start-up problems that took several years to rectify. That is why the 40-MWth Cirus has contributed the larger share of India’s cumulative historic production of weapons-grade plutonium — a point noted by Paul Nelson et al in a 2006 paper funded by the US Department of Energy. In having insisted that New Delhi dismantle Cirus, America’s aim was to crimp India’s nuclear-deterrent plans.

Cirus — the source of plutonium for the 1974 nuclear test — was built with Canadian technical assistance and received US heavy water under two separate 1956 contracts that predated the 1957 establishment of the IAEA and the 1968 finalisation of the NPT text. Because the concept of international “safeguards” (inspections) had not yet been devised, India gave no explicit undertaking to abjure nuclear-explosive uses. Indeed, just after Cirus came on line, Jawaharlal Nehru openly declared, “We are approaching a stage when it is possible for us … to make atomic weapons”. Decades later, the shutdown decision has given the non-proliferation lobby in the US and Canada much to celebrate: India is tacitly conceding its 1974 test was born in sin and, to atone for it, it will shut down Cirus. Singh’s action, besides compromising the strategic programme, mocks various international (and even official American) legal opinions clearing India of any Cirus-related wrongdoing.

Brahma Chellaney is Professor of Strategic Studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

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 18:22

Dear Sirs and sirjis
The time has come for our nation to collectively take deep breath and quickly act I me, enact No Hide act as a safeguard against all Hyde acts. The mother of all acts. Allbthe MPs and MLAs should pass a. Counter act called INDUS ( pronunced IN DOES). Under this act India becomes FATA of USA. Think of the many benefits, - leave most of it your imagi nation. I will only touch two or three which weigh
Heavy on the top leadership.
India becomes automatic super power full of vibrant energy, or shall we say India unplugged or unleashed. Next in one stroke Rs achieves parity with dollar, wow that's the mind of an economistry working. Ahh those chanikyans of chanikya poori, after this who needs Saink Poori?
Finally no more H1 B1 visitor visa, after all we have played our Master Card strategy!
Oh those poor half brights and their tubelight citi.
What a country where anybody can be somebody just buy agreen card I mean ration card you can be PM of posterity.
Jai Indoes

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 18:30

In this whole discussion, another side of the issue has been ignored, like the "Cirrus Reactor".

Have u considered what happens when there is an accident (or a major theft) at any Indian "civilian" reactor facility? The shutdown of Cirrus is perhaps related to this concern. It is, what... 50 years young? Way too young to be elected Prime Minister, but older than the airplanes which are encountering severe fatigue failure problems. When Cirrus was built, did people know enough to design for 100-year lifetimes?

One of the effects of being isolated and left out of world scientific/ engineering data on such things is that safety modifications / design will be lagging. Much worse concerns apply to the theft/ sabotage problem.

The standard response to these will be that "India is following all accepted standards of international safeguards, we have excellent safety record!" But so are the terrorists, and accidents continue to be a threat. If the number of plants is sharply increased, the probability of a major accident (or theft) also increases even more.

On at least two occasions, people have been caught inside India with big balls of what was described as highly enriched nuclear fuel. Not clear to me what was the life expectancy of those carrying these, or whether they were shielded, but the news items disappeared with no follow-up. Were they false alarms, or is there really an issue with disappearance of such stuff from Indian facilities?

What I can predict with certainty is the sheer joy of all the anti-India lobbies if there is any accident or major theft (not to mention "use", Houristan haraam! :shock: ) involving fissile stuff that is then traced to less-than-adequate processes (or even Acts of Allah) at Indian facilities.

This is really the biggest reason why I want India to join the IAEA/NSG cartel, and adopt "fullscope safeguards" and "technology" before it is too late.

Space Law basically says that the responsibility for any damage etc. caused by something is strictly on the country launching it and/or owning it. No excuses, no "that was very low probability onlee" and no "chalta hai". Same or worse will apply, I am sure, to nuclear stuff, which is why no one is surprised at nuclear doctrines that promise annihilation to those from whom the fissile stuff ORIGINATED, regardless of who actually fires it.

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 » 01 Jul 2008 18:31

It has finally dawned on me that unwittingly, all my questions have been answered, as per the conclusions reached from the very recent threads.

India doesn't need any testing. POK2 should have never involved a Thermo, as decided here under the "neo-doctrine" the case and groundwork for CTBT has already been prepared, so if NSG has any such ... You've already been forewarned, after all its 11% economic growth rate and 2000000000 gWatts that matters.. And India should by the way sign NPT and FMCT towards a "safe world", as we have enough plutonium and nuclear weapons are never meant to be used. Now India should not miss out at the high seat at "Climate Change Conferences".

PS: I humbly withdraw from this thread.. And thanks to all, for posting relevant information on this thread (its been quite an "experience"... to say the least..), for the past ~3 years :shock: .

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2008 18:37

Rahul M wrote:step back and think for a moment what you are saying here.

You can most certainly disagree with his way of taking India forward but you can't question his/her's motive without irrefutable evidence supporting the same.

BTW, if you are really convinced that Your PM/Minister etc is acting against India's interests intentionally , what the hell are you doing producing storms on a keyboard ??

You should be out in the streets trying to bring about a revolution against him/her !!
On the other hand, one can argue, BRFites also have to abide by a code, but that code's responsibility goes only as far as enabling a fruitful and structured discussion on the forum.

As an anology: the demands of security in a country should not go as far as throttling the very feature of the country, that needs to be secured, i.e. life and freedom.

Similarly the code of conduct on a forum should not go so far that any fruitful discussion is made difficult, because of such a code.

what the code is has already been decided and it's current form should be clear from shiv's posts and mine.
Double-standards cannot always be avoided. In politics, these "public figures" have bigger roles to play, than the common man. That is a double standard. On Forums, the members too ought to be able expect a double standard, where public figures motives, character, etc. are questioned, but the member's are not.

sorry, not going to happen here anytime soon.
Just my two eurocents.

:roll:


I think, you mistake me for someone else. I am referring to "public figures" in general. I have nowhere in my posts (few as they are) cast any aspersions on the Prime Minister. Why should I, considering that I do not have any doubts about his integrity or his motives, and belong to his fandom.

But the above policy would, for example, stop me from questioning Mr. Karat's motives and patriotism. Of course, I would not disobey the reigning code of BRF, but one can discuss a further improvement in its formulation, which would allow me to do the above.

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 18:40

RajeshA wrote:As an anology: the demands of security in a country should not go as far as throttling the very feature of the country, that needs to be secured, i.e. life and freedom.

Similarly the code of conduct on a forum should not go so far that any fruitful discussion is made difficult, because of such a code.

.



Thanks but no thanks. Your rhetoric is attractive but "fruitful discussion" does not require vilification of anyone.

On this, the nuclear discussion thread personal vilification of various public figures was the main crutch on which a large number of arguments rested. That crutch is unnecessary.

Period.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 01 Jul 2008 18:52

I think, you mistake me for someone else. I am referring to "public figures" in general. I have nowhere in my posts (few as they are) cast any aspersions on the Prime Minister. Why should I, considering that I do not have any doubts about his integrity or his motives, and belong to his fandom.

my mistake. but my points apply to many posters here.
and yes, also to general "public figures". even karat.

If you allow karat to be called a traitor, that would just open the flood gates.
But the above policy would, for example, stop me from questioning Mr. Karat's motives and patriotism. Of course, I would not disobey the reigning code of BRF, but one can discuss a further improvement in its formulation, which would allow me to do the above.

I repeat, you can call karat's (or anybody else's for that matter) policies anti-national but not his intent.
after all what one calls anti-national depends a lot on his/her political views.

The line b/w criticism and political correctness is very thin. but BRFites would have to use their own judgement to decide where the line lies. unfortunately, mods will interfere when the line is crossed.
An improvement to the contrary policy is not going to happen.

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 19:47

John Snow wrote:Dear Sirs and sirjis Counter act called INDUS ( pronunced IN DOES). Under this act India becomes FATA of USA. Think of the many benefits, - leave most of it your imagi nation. I will only touch two or three which weigh
Heavy on the top leadership.
India becomes automatic super powe
r full of vibrant energy, or shall we say India unplugged or unleashed. Next in one stroke Rs achieves parity with dollar, wow that's the mind of an economistry working. Ahh those chanikyans of chanikya poori, after this who needs Saink Poori?

They only want unlimited power. For that they want to become the FATA under US domestic law. They are not interested in shuper power shipper power.

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 20:32

Acharya wrote:
John Snow wrote:Dear Sirs and sirjis Counter act called INDUS ( pronunced IN DOES). Under this act India becomes FATA of USA. Think of the many benefits, - leave most of it your imagi nation. I will only touch two or three which weigh
Heavy on the top leadership.
India becomes automatic super powe
r full of vibrant energy, or shall we say India unplugged or unleashed. Next in one stroke Rs achieves parity with dollar, wow that's the mind of an economistry working. Ahh those chanikyans of chanikya poori, after this who needs Saink Poori?

They only want unlimited power. For that they want to become the FATA under US domestic law. They are not interested in shuper power shipper power.


Acharya,

Electricity is only a small but significant part of the nuclear cooperation deal. The deal is about legalizing India's nuclear status and removing trade and technology barriers in all the high technology sectors.

The nuclear deal would give us tremendous advantages over China by allowing our companies access to western technologies and market that were out of bound until now for both India and China.

If push comes to shove we always have a legal option to back out with a year's notice. A weak, poor starving India had enough resolve to stand up to world for so long why do you think we'll be nailed by west in our prime? It is our resolve and unflinching desire to be a nuclear power which has made west realize that India can't be caped and rolled back. This is the dividend of all that hard work; I for one do not see the point in keep fighting the battle that we have already won.

Kati
BRFite
Posts: 1419
Joined: 27 Jun 1999 11:31
Location: The planet Earth

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

Postby Kati » 01 Jul 2008 20:34

Letter to the Editor, The Statesman, Kolkata, July 1, 2008

Sir, ~ This is with reference to Dilbag Rai`s letter “It’s a now or never situation for the Prime Minister”. I humbly question his judgment.
In the first place, the Indo-US nuclear deal will put India in a bind for generations to come as a second rate power dictated by countries who have stockpiled a huge nuclear arsenal and under threat from neighbouring countries. Secondly, this will discourage our scientific community from developing a deterrent for protecting us from external aggression.
Lastly, nuclear power plants will require a huge capital layout, the unit cost of power generation will be more, and there will be danger of leakage and problem of waste disposal. On the other hand, non-conventional energy like power from sea-waves along the coastal belt, wind power, utilisation of solar energy etc. will be cheap and safe. No government has the right to take such a drastic step without seeking public opinion and or having a debate in Parliament.
~ Yours, etc., Raj Chakrabarti,
Kolkata, 28 June.
================================================================

Editorial, The Statesman, Kolkata, July 1, 2008

Last stand?

Congress’s hardening on N-deal a sign of desperation

Against all conventional wisdom, it appears that the Congress has finally decided that the nuclear deal with the US is too important to sacrifice and that it is preferable to go ahead with it at the cost of the government falling. Whatever the virtues or otherwise of the deal, and certainly there can be arguments on both sides, it must be said that the Congress is well within its rights to go ahead with the deal on two counts. One, as many have argued, an international commitment has been made and to now renege on it would entail considerable loss of face both for the government and the country as a whole. Moreover, the Congress would be within its rights to argue that the Prime Minister has staked his prestige on the deal and to submit to arm-twisting by the Left would undermine his authority. One factor, however, gives all these arguments a ring of disingenuousness. If the Congress was to have stuck to a matter of principle, it should have done so from the very beginning, when the Left had raised its objections to the deal. To have played ball for all these months and now suddenly take a stand would in the normal course have seemed inexplicable. The only explanation that makes sense is that the Congress now reckons that its electoral prospects can only get worse over the coming months, despite the fact that they are in very poor shape now. Oil prices are unlikely to move southwards and inflation does not show any sign of weakening.

That having been said, the Congress’s calculations remain mysterious. If the government does fall ~ and given the Left’s adamant stand it will ~ the deal won’t go through anyway, at least in the near future. The next dispensation will have to take a fresh call as will the new dispensation in Washington. That is, unless the Congress survives as a caretaker government and passes the deal somehow in the next few months. As a caretaker government that would be an unethical thing to do ~ but then politics and ethics don’t really go that well together. As for the Left, it has shown considerable consistency, whether one agrees with it or not. The only criticism is that it should not have played along with the Congress for as long as it did.

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 20:47

Katare wrote:
Acharya,

Electricity is only a small but significant part of the nuclear cooperation deal. The deal is about legalizing India's nuclear status and removing trade and technology barriers in all the high technology sectors.

The nuclear deal would give us tremendous advantages over China by allowing our companies access to western technologies and market that were out of bound until now for both India and China.

If push comes to shove we always have a legal option to back out with a year's notice. A weak, poor starving India had enough resolve to stand up to world for so long why do you think we'll be nailed by west in our prime? It is our resolve and unflinching desire to be a nuclear power which has made west realize that India can't be caped and rolled back. This is the dividend of all that hard work; I for one do not see the point in keep fighting the battle that we have already won.


I was commenting on John Snow. The Hyde act is the major problem in this deal. It is an internal law and not soverign country would attach to an internal law. If there was no connection to the internal law it would get many supporters. There was/would surely be some way they could have done it in such a way that there is no reference to the internal law.
This is not a deal to go back after a year and apply clauses for rollback.

Some people are saying that the deal went thru checks and balance even when there is no joint parliamentary discussion or the opposition has been left out of the details. This is the most important deal and major parties are being ignored.
The govt is about to fall and is already a minority and the deal is more important here. Indian govt and stability is more important than anything else. That is the mandate and enshrined in the constitution.

This is not just about the deal alone but is about the future of the country and the vision. Vision which is worthy of the civilization and large population. This is not about comparing with Japan and other countries.
Last edited by svinayak on 01 Jul 2008 20:53, edited 2 times in total.

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 20:48

A weak, poor starving India had enough resolve to stand up to world for so long why do you think we'll be nailed by west in our prime?


I was all the time hearing that it hurts more when you are in Prime ( ardhath, economy blooming would be whilting if we dont sign or note the signs of not doing it) and that when we were poor and starving It would be hurting as we know full well that hunger hurts more, and new pain is a gain? no?

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

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

Postby CRamS » 01 Jul 2008 21:05

Rahul M,

Does that article by Brahma Chellaney pass your 'no personal attack on public figures' filter? After all, he is insinuating some sinister motive on MMS's part for embracing the nuclear deal so vigorously now, when similar indigenous were scuttled by him in the past. Now, I am not saying that Brhama Chellaney's word is gospel truth, but surely he raises legitimate concerns about MMS does he not?

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 21:12

Honestly BC is outdated (remember with this deal we are in AD as in Attention Deficit) and out witted. He is strictly speaking, an anti internationalist. He is living in a cacoon powered by low voptage LED devices. What does he know about Giga whats or Mega whats? Notice how he always ends up What if insted of Watt if we had it?
Cant wait for him to be banished like MJ Akbar. Then lights will go off in his own Lead lights or is it Head lights?

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 21:44

In all this fine "no criticize intent" it is useful to remember 5 examples:
1. Morarji Desai's cabinet with the many bottles of Johny Walker exchanged for national secrets.
2. The CPI(M) and CPI leaders and their purchase by Russia (and very fairly presumable, by China).
3. Tehelka
4. The worthy who was finally convicted and removed for being part of the pogroms against Sikh Indian citizens.
5. Fodder scam.

(Just pointing this out.....). I agree that wild and automatic "that is beecauj they are all corrupt onlee yaar" speculations are stupid and have the effect of destroying the speculator's credibility. But let's now fail to provide a decent hearing for honest conspiracy theory.

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 01 Jul 2008 22:17

Katare wrote: The deal is about legalizing India's nuclear status and removing trade and technology barriers in all the high technology sectors.
...


In real terms could you please elaborate on what trade and technology barriers will be removed, and how? We know we are not going to get reprocessing technology. So the bar is lower than that. Question is how much lower?

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 01 Jul 2008 22:23

I was trying to recollect the list of personalities who were removed ostentatiously for the threat they posed to the Nuclear deal.
1. Natwar Singh
2. Mani Shankar Iyer
???


PS. I am no fan of the above mentioned personalities, just trying to collate a list

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 22:30

I have read several times that Natwar Singh was "removed" because of American pressure, but if that is true, then my respect for the Americans goes up. Doesn't anyone remember what a complete disaster Natwar Singh was as foreign mantri (or whatever he was?) He was the one who went to South Korea and apologized for POK-2 tests and claimed that India had no business having nuclear weapons.

Eventually some American Congressperson called him "dense" and that was a sort-of wake-up call for his even denser colleagues and superiors. They probably got envious, being of far greater density.

Also, IIRC, Natwar Singh eventually was pushed out because of some major blowup involving his disagreeing with Mohterma SoniaG (PBUH).

As for Mani Shanker Iyer, that was another person with rather rabidly anti-NDA views. So, if anything, I would say that MMS shunted out both NS and MSI because of Anti-BJP views held by these ppl, not Anti-American views.

Why should Americans get all the credit for ridding the GOI of these two major embarassments, I wonder.. didn't anyone in India have enough common sense to push them out without US advice?

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 01 Jul 2008 22:36

N^3,

Would you know what is the life left of Cirrus? I believe it was refurbished not long ago. I understand crux of your post was on new 'safety' technologies. But the post also comes out as if stating not much operational life left for Cirrus.

IMVHO even if life left is 10 years and say it produces 12KG of weapons-grade plutonium, that is 120 KG, that would be sufficient for 24 pits as per below

http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/200 ... chive.html

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

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

Postby rocky » 01 Jul 2008 22:49

N^3, it doesn't matter what Notwar said or did or didn't, he was an official Indian representative, and his being removed at the behest of a foreign power is the height of sychophancy.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 01 Jul 2008 22:57

CRamS wrote:Rahul M,
Does that article by Brahma Chellaney pass your 'no personal attack on public figures' filter?
After all, he is insinuating some sinister motive on MMS's part for embracing the nuclear deal so vigorously now, when similar indigenous were scuttled by him in the past. Now, I am not saying that Brhama Chellaney's word is gospel truth, but surely he raises legitimate concerns about MMS does he not?


he does ??

OK, let's see.
The current govt has shown it is extremely incompetent.
most of its decisions lack direction and/or long term planning. The same, can however be said about most govts of independent India, including the NDA one.

take that into perspective and you will find BC hasn't shown us anything else.
regards.

p.s. how does what BC says relate to my 'no personal attack on public figures' filter ? (whatever that is)
didn't know he was a BRF member.

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 01 Jul 2008 22:58

enqyoob wrote:Also, IIRC, Natwar Singh eventually was pushed out because of some major blowup involving his disagreeing with Mohterma SoniaG (PBUH).


N^3, I totally agree with you on the descriptions you have given. I used to cringe each time respected foreign minister opened his mouth on Television. But thats not the point, he was removed and for a long period of time, when major nuclear deal discussions were going on, there was no foreign minister. Even today, government feels the need to add defense minister in discussions with left.

Besides, folks were there any more personalities who were removed?

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 23:01

Aryavarta wrote:
Katare wrote: The deal is about legalizing India's nuclear status and removing trade and technology barriers in all the high technology sectors.
...


In real terms could you please elaborate on what trade and technology barriers will be removed, and how? We know we are not going to get reprocessing technology. So the bar is lower than that. Question is how much lower?


Read those lines again my friend, I wasn't talking about nuclear technology. It is your beleive that reprocessing technologies will not be exported to India which is incorrect as per my understanding.

Raju

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

Postby Raju » 01 Jul 2008 23:10

enqyoob wrote:I have read several times that Natwar Singh was "removed" because of American pressure, but if that is true, then my respect for the Americans goes up. Doesn't anyone remember what a complete disaster Natwar Singh was as foreign mantri (or whatever he was?) He was the one who went to South Korea and apologized for POK-2 tests and claimed that India had no business having nuclear weapons.

Eventually some American Congressperson called him "dense" and that was a sort-of wake-up call for his even denser colleagues and superiors. They probably got envious, being of far greater density.


although it tickles you no end .. Indian politicians removal or appointment should not be prompted by americans. Though they did have very unmemorable role in the past their continued presence would have ensured that India would not tilt to any direction esp at this juncture. Here was an opportunity for them to redeem themselves. Even at the height of right-wing politics leftist leaders have not been sidelined in this manner.

and what is more shameful is that their exit had to be masterminded by the same old hitman named Volker. The same group for which he acted as an economic hitman is the driving force behind this deal.

but that is not the scary part. As the communists have speculated rightly this deal is not about technology (US and its western allies have ensured that there is no risk of that), it is not about nuclear energy. Instead this deal is about formalisation of what is already an existing informal arrangement between key western players, financial institutions, western elite and a small clique in India. The flurry of takeovers of western corporations by Indian companies is a result of this informal deal. Without backing of western capital markets that are controlled by a few key players these takeover would not have happened. This group cannot sign an agreement openly on the terms agreed to by the Indian players. So this so-called nuclear deal is the closest that there is to formalisation of an overarching agreement between Indian super elite and Western super elite.

this deal is like a registered marriage between a couple which has been in a live-in relationship for 5 years.

Initially post this agreement there will be some financial dividends for Indian companies and also there shall be investment into Indian capital markets from surplus lying around in western capital markets. But once this deal has strengthened this alliance between these two blocs, everyone else including common man shall become secondary. Because then there shalll be no need for the common man. In fact this deal shall spell the end of free market in India and rest of the world. There will be no financial or capital move that will be taken without these key players being consulted and as a result their risk coefficient goes down considerably.

On the other hand if this deal is not formalised then there is a sliver of a chance that a future nationalist Indian govt shall be able opt out of this overarching alliance with western players controlling key market activities and capital flows. What awaits us in future is an orwellian slave society if this bond with the west is allowed to be formalized. What ails the communists no end is that this orwellian slave society shall not be managed by them but shall be managed by their hated enemies the capitalists.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 01 Jul 2008 23:14

enqyoob wrote:In all this fine "no criticize intent" it is useful to remember 5 examples:
....
2. The CPI(M) and CPI leaders and their purchase by Russia (and very fairly presumable, by China).
.....
(Just pointing this out.....). I agree that wild and automatic "that is beecauj they are all corrupt onlee yaar" speculations are stupid and have the effect of destroying the speculator's credibility. But let's now fail to provide a decent hearing for honest conspiracy theory.


Around the fag end of kargil war, I had read a report in leading bengali daily 'bartaman' that during and after the 1971 war, KGB had provided Indian intelligence with information of CIA penetration in the communist parties of India, particularly CPI(M) .

Now bartaman is a vehemently anti CPI(M) newspaper but they usually don't carry reports w/o supporting facts.
And whenever they goof up, CPI(M) issues public warnings and threatens them with lawsuits.

The fact that nothing of the kind came up in spite of the extremely serious nature of the allegation probably means that there is some fire associated with the smoke.

Raju

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

Postby Raju » 01 Jul 2008 23:18

Rahul M wrote:
enqyoob wrote:In all this fine "no criticize intent" it is useful to remember 5 examples:
....
2. The CPI(M) and CPI leaders and their purchase by Russia (and very fairly presumable, by China).
.....
(Just pointing this out.....). I agree that wild and automatic "that is beecauj they are all corrupt onlee yaar" speculations are stupid and have the effect of destroying the speculator's credibility. But let's now fail to provide a decent hearing for honest conspiracy theory.


Around the fag end of kargil war, I had read a report in leading bengali daily 'bartaman' that during and after the 1971 war, KGB had provided Indian intelligence with information of CIA penetration in the communist parties of India, particularly CPI(M) .

Now bartaman is a vehemently anti CPI(M) newspaper but they usually don't carry reports w/o supporting facts.
And whenever they goof up, CPI(M) issues public warnings and threatens them with lawsuits.

The fact that nothing of the kind came up in spite of the extremely serious nature of the allegation probably means that there is some fire associated with the smoke.


CPI(M) is infiltrated by both KGB and CIA. It just fluctuates with the times.
Also there is a strong section in CPI(M) that supports Reliance Industries.
Probably they are talking from this angle.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 01 Jul 2008 23:20

this is the first time I'm hearing that natwar singh was removed on US pressure.

There were massive corruption charges against him related to the food for oil programme and that was the reason I got from mainstream media.
Don't remember a single report citing US pressure as the cause.

also, the fact that his worldview was stuck in the cold war and that he wanted to make NAM the centerpiece of India's foreign policy, didn't help either.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 01 Jul 2008 23:20

Tilak wrote:PS: I humbly withdraw from this thread.. And thanks to all, for posting relevant information on this thread (its been quite an "experience"... to say the least..), for the past ~3 years :shock: .
Please do not move away. The only way, you can shape an argument is by participation and you have participated in a worthy manner and I (and others) have benefited from your participation. It can be frustrating at times but please do come back.

Give some galis, if you like, to the communists and Pakis, it is still allowed on BRF :)

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 01 Jul 2008 23:22

Raju wrote:CPI(M) is infiltrated by both KGB and CIA. It just fluctuates with the times.
Also there is a strong section in CPI(M) that supports Reliance Industries.
Probably they are talking from this angle.

uh oh!
sorry for continuing this this line of posts.

Raju

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

Postby Raju » 01 Jul 2008 23:25

Yes, you will get politically incorrect answers.
that is the risk of such discussions.

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 23:42

Aryavarta wrote:
enqyoob wrote:Also, IIRC, Natwar Singh eventually was pushed out because of some major blowup involving his disagreeing with Mohterma SoniaG (PBUH).


N^3, I totally agree with you on the descriptions you have given. I used to cringe each time respected foreign minister opened his mouth on Television. But thats not the point, he was removed and for a long period of time, when major nuclear deal discussions were going on, there was no foreign minister. Even today, government feels the need to add defense minister in discussions with left.

Besides, folks were there any more personalities who were removed?


Natwar Singh was kicked out of the govt and congress party when his and his son's name figured in the "oil for food" scam with Saddam Husain's regime. The independent investigation by UN (Volcker committee) was concluded after Saddam’s over throw based on confiscated documents and evidences provided by ex-Saddam officials. The list included several American, UN officials and citizen’s of other nations.

Manishankar is a self confessed leftist who was sports minister but opposed to commonwealth games because he believed a poor country like India should not waste such large amount of money on games. No wonder he lost that ministry. When he was petroleum minister and ONGC was competing (actually loosing) all the bids to Chinese companies he went to China asking for cooperation and got zilch in return. He lost that ministry too.

Anyone who believes that American’s have enough influence on India to force a change in a federal minister’s portfolio is deluding himself.

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

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

Postby Arun_S » 01 Jul 2008 23:46

sugriva wrote:Meanwhile in a fictional country, the capital of which is Lutyenabad, there appear to be rumblings in the pro-deal contigent itself. Calculated media leaks are the order of the day.
Witness the following http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... nd+the+gap
written by Maulan Neel-al-esh in the official akhbaar of the ruling jamaat.
Article questions why mines weren't operationalized over the years. Meanwhile the qazis at the rival akhbar seem to be egging on/instigating the enemies of the deal, to junk the pact with the jamaat and force a vote in the
majlis -e -aam, with inflammatory stuff life
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 182712.cms
NSN Lutyenabad asks, who benefits from this posturing.


Very eloquent. I liked the refreshing and intellectual "Lutyenabad" term. Some will recall that Edwin Lutyenwas the architect of New Delhi including what is today Rashtrapati Bhavan, Sansad, North-South Block and buildings around Rajpath.

This IMVHO needs full quote:
Mind the gap: Neelesh Misra, Hindustan Times
June 30, 2008
It is almost as if the Titanic was going down, and the passengers were watching TV. India’s atomic energy programme has been subjected to a stunning managerial disaster over the past two decades, the results of which are visible now. We have known through the 1990s that India has all the uranium needed to run its nuclear power plants, currently running at half their capacity, wasting Rs 16,000 crore of taxpayers’ money. India’s atomic energy establishment has also known for a decade-and-a-half that there was a huge uranium crisis coming the country’s way. But the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) has sat on it, with no emergency button pushed and no sense of urgency. Through the last two decades, little was done to get mines up and working at uranium sites, located as far back as 1991. Instead, the government set up new nuclear power plants knowing there was little uranium to run them.

So now we have to go knocking on the doors of the United States for a civilian nuclear deal. Anil Kakodkar, chairman of the DAE and secretary of the Department of Atomic Affairs, rightly acknowledged recently that “India was facing the short supply of uranium due to the slow process in opening up of new uranium mines.” But the DAE, and the all-powerful Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), presided over that slow process.

So who is accountable? Where does the buck stop? Questions of accountability are finally being asked regarding the DAE, possibly the most pampered arm of the Indian government, and one which has rarely faced criticism.


Perhaps there is something common that binds Kakodkar and other scientists with P. Venugopal, one of India’s finest heart surgeons who rightfully won back his director’s seat at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences after his sacking — but still faced a lot of criticism over the way he ran the hospital. They are all very talented, well-meaning men but the truth is that good scientists and good doctors need not necessarily be good managers.

The nuclear fuel shortage saga has cast a shadow on atomic energy bosses including Kakodkar, who otherwise has an impeccable and unquestionable reputation as a pioneer in developing new reactors — including the ‘fixed-deposit’ that hopefully holds the key to India’s long-term energy security, using thorium, the alternative material that India has in abundance.

The saga also shows up India’s nuclear tragedy. Look at the protagonists on both sides of the nuclear debate: on one side, the Left’s farcical opposition to the nuclear deal, and on the other, the lethargy and mismanagement of the atomic energy establishment that has brought us to this state. India’s huge shortage of nuclear fuel — despite the availability of uranium that wasn’t mined — is, as one official put it, “a colossal management failure” and an indictment of the AEC, which has direct access to the Prime Minister and sweeping powers under an Act of Parliament.

The fuel shortage, officials say, has been known since the mid-1990s. It takes 12 to 15 years from the time of uranium exploration to the time when production begins. The right decisions, taken in the 90s, would have changed the picture of nuclear power in India today, officials say.

So why wasn’t the setting up of mines put on a fast-track even as fuel-strapped nuclear plants bled thousands of crores of taxpayers’ money? If the nuclear fuel wasn’t there, why were permissions to set up new nuclear plants sought — and received — from the Prime Minister? Why were no efforts made to retain young scientists and workmen, leaving the sector by the dozens? And were analyses of fuel demand and projections done every year? And why is it that the atomic energy establishment — used to adulation from political parties across the board — was not been subjected to any accountability over this succession of blunders?

Officials bristle at the mention of the lack of accountability. “Absolutely wrong. In eastern India, where we have all the mineral resources, at least we were able to start five new projects, despite all the land still not being handed over to me — it is absolutely wrong to say that there is a lack of accountability,” said Ramendra Gupta, chairman and managing director of the Uranium Corporation of India Ltd.

But many — including those within the establishment — disagree. “It is simple managerial logic,” said an official
who declined to be named.

You have ample stocks. You don’t plan ahead and use them, and instead want to go and buy far more expensive stocks from someone else. What does that say?

Prabu
BRFite
Posts: 423
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: In the middle of a Desert

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

Postby Prabu » 02 Jul 2008 00:27

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


Is it possible ? Does India have any say after going to IAEA ?

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 02 Jul 2008 00:33

Katare wrote:Read those lines again my friend, I wasn't talking about nuclear technology. It is your beleive that reprocessing technologies will not be exported to India which is incorrect as per my understanding.


Sir, for a moment let us leave aside what I believe or not. Would you be able to list the technology and trade barriers that will be removed? What steps will need to be taken for their removal?

For instance, all the restrictions to PSLV launches, will they be removed? That is just one example. You did make a blanket statement that it is about removal of barriers, would you be able to enumerate 5 such trade and technology barrier that will be removed, and how?

Related to this I have one question for N^3 as well. Will the safety and new technologies be transferred to India? Or they may offer a build and operate basis. Will this require and NSG approval? Will NSG give a blanket approval, or will we need to get approvals on tech by tech basis.

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 » 02 Jul 2008 00:33

“You have ample stocks. You don’t plan ahead and use them, and instead want to go and buy far more expensive stocks from someone else. What does that say?”

That you are smart. Because the price of uranium is rising very fast, and getting to buy on the open market while you can, and conserving your own resources, is extremely good policy. Especially when there is hope that in future, you will be able to recycle your own stuff (and JUST maybe the imported stuff..) to have an essentially infinite supply.

If you use up your stuff today, before your 3rd stage cycle technology is ready, and when the price that you can get for it is still very low, you just use it up and suck your thumbs wishing you hadn't.

Aryavarta: I have no clue about the status of CIRRUS or why there was so much pressure to close it down. Did the decision to close it down actually cut India out of a lot of weapons production, or just delay it? My sense is that those who take pride of ownership on CIRRUS will object strenuously to closing it, but there must be some good reason why the guvrmand decides to close it anyway. And I don't think I am going to get that from reading articles of the type above, which ignore elementary reason and just shrilly push their :(( :(( imagining that all readers will be amazed by their "expert credentials" or by just an allegation of deep, dark conspiracies.

BTW, Raju, your explanation of the REAL reason why this deal is bad, is extremely illuminating. So this all about a super-conspiracy between the Yale Skull & Bones Club and the Dun School Alumni Association?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 02 Jul 2008 00:35

BTW, Raju, your explanation of the REAL reason why this deal is bad, is extremely illuminating. So this all about a super-conspiracy between the Yale Skull & Bones Club and the Dun School Alumni Association?

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Aryavarta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:29

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

Postby Aryavarta » 02 Jul 2008 00:41

Katare wrote:
The independent investigation by UN (Volcker committee) was concluded after Saddam’s over throw based on confiscated documents and evidences provided by ex-Saddam officials. The list included several American, UN officials and citizen’s of other nations.


US investigations also found WMD with Saddam's Iraq, and openly stated that as a reason for the attack? Question is do you believe that?

Raju

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

Postby Raju » 02 Jul 2008 00:44

BTW, Raju, your explanation of the REAL reason why this deal is bad, is extremely illuminating. So this all about a super-conspiracy between the Yale Skull & Bones Club and the Dun School Alumni Association?

I knew you would like it. By the way if you simply include "ce" to the first word of Indian side we can also be part of this grand alignment.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 02 Jul 2008 00:47

No need to discuss CIRRUS. Yes there was useful life left after refurbishment. Closing it was right thing to do to remove the stigma of diversion for PNE. Besides its not relevant after POKII.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest