Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

[Rye]

NRao wrote:

I gave the various URLs only to establish a time line and the sequence of thoughts. In this case to establish that the US never intended India to acquire reprocessing techs.

The reprocessing stuff was withdrawn from the table once India refused to place all FBRs under IAEA scrutiny -- reprocessing was on the table for India only when the agreement stated that India would bring all of its FBRs under IAEA scrutiny.

[NRao]

The first one is assured explicitly, Kakodkar is referring to the second which is also a possibility but since it is a dual use nuclear technology and never been done before needs a framework.

Dual use under IAEA supervision?

The reprocessing stuff was withdrawn from the table once India refused to place all FBRs under IAEA scrutiny -- reprocessing was on the table for India only when the agreement stated that India would bring all of its FBRs under IAEA scrutiny.

Do not recall this in the equation. IF true, then why talk about a separation plan, which was there from day one?

[Prabu]

I humbly request not to add to the confusion by switching ephithets.Only KS is Bishma Pitamanha.

All others are Shakunis!

(Ramanaji, I really can't control my laugh whilel reading this and my wife came to me asking, please share the joke ! )

[Prabu]

beginning to wonder if this guy is an agent for a foreign govt.


Total nuclear disarmament of India is the aim: Pranab

http://www.hindu.com/2008/06/25/stories ... 801200.htm

This has been India's stated policy and goal since forever. This is the logic that we have used as a shield to deflect all pressure on signing CTBT, NPT etc. The Indian argument or proposal is an alternative/counter to CTBT/NPT which addresses the unfair treatment mated out to non-P5 countries. What he is stating in that article or headline has been repeated by all govts and PM's of India for decades.

Calling a federal minister a foreign paid agent, without even reading the posted article or understanding it, is unfair and uncalled for IMVHO.

Yes ! also note his words !
"quote - And, these obligations lie particularly with the nuclear-weapon states -un-quote”

[Rye]

NRao wrote:

Do not recall this in the equation. IF true, then why talk about a separation plan, which was there from day one?

The separation plan initially had no reactors in the non-civilian side when reprocessing was on the table for India, but when India changed its position and put more reactors on the non-civilian side, the US changed its stance on reprocessing....all of this was reported in one of the 250000 threads on this issue. Furthermore, one of the aims of all this geopoliticking is to give the appearance that India's non-civilian program is not assisted in any way by the P-5 -- that requires a clear separation in what the outside world sees as civilian and what is non civilian. The rules are clearly defined as to what consitutes assisting India in the "dual-use" (civilian+non civilian) tech, which is still disallowed under 123. But this not really an issue for immediate concern since the development of local capability to manufacture these items locally can work around such "dual use" sanctions.


JMTs etc.

[Amber G.]

Speaking of Shakuni .. Didn't he used the dice made out of Sage Dadhichi’s bone...
And din't Sage Dadhichi’s bones also produced Vajrayudha (The first Thermonuclear bomb - not the fizzling kind but reportedly produced more than a few thousands Tera-Jules of energy..)

So .. a game strategy with a dice -..which will always win.
And Vajrayudha for perfect national security ...

That's what we need in any nuclear agreement ...

We need Shakunis!

[Katare]

A deal that is written to placate two governments, who agree on nothing, is bound to have plenty of verbiage that is open to interpretation. I fully expect a lot of agree-to-disagree in the future.

I gave the various URLs only to establish a time line and the sequence of thoughts. In this case to establish that the US never intended India to acquire reprocessing techs. Since India insisted on "reprocessing" it got that para. Which, IMHO, is still open to interpretation ....... not much of a deal on a very important point. And, when J18 is taken into account it is a ................

And, IMHO, India will not get those techs unless ...............

Just one clarification...."never done before" - has the US never allowed another nation to import US reproc techs or is it the US has never allowed what India is requesting?

For the bold part I think you still didn't get the whole picture as I see it. India is free to develop its own reprocessing technologies (for imported fuel) or import those technologies from any other country like Russia or France if they are willing to export. That is the first part of the consent that allows India to reprocess/alter nuclear material and/or equipment.

The second part is about India importing those technologies from USofA instead of developing them itself or importing from any other country. If India wants reprocessing technologies/equipments from US that door is still open but needs lot of framework and procedures since it has never been done before.

As per my information USofA has never exported reprocessing technologies to any country bar none.

[NRao]

Thanks. I did not get that picture for sure.

Let me research that a wee bit. I think IAEA and its replacement will prevent any independence on India's part. Gerard and N^3 have got me going (on a tangent?). Will get back.

JMT tho'

Thx.

[John Snow]

enqyoob saar is never wrong. If he has approved the deal then we are done!

[Kakkaji]

Congress will go ahead with N-deal: Moily

Even as Left parties stuck to their firm opposition to Indo-US nuclear deal, the Congress on Wednesday struck an aggressive posture, saying it was going ahead with the agreement with the timing of its choice.

"We are going ahead with the deal. That is very clear. And the timing is ours. We will choose our own time," senior Congress leader Veerappa Moily told NDTV.

His remarks came soon after the UPA-Left Committee meeting failed to end the deadlock between the two sides on the issue.

However, notwithstanding the standoff, he said, "We are confident that logic and rationale will be driven home to Left parties. We will put the country's national interest foremost than their party agenda."

Suggesting that all attempts were made to bring Left parties on-board on the issue, Moily said "they have lot of apprehensions and we should also give them the space".

"Not that we bulldoze our decision like that in a coalition arrangements like this. We are taking steps one by one. We are really gaining ground to the extent that we are driving home the issues to the Left parties from the beginning", he said.

[putnanja]

N-deal: Heated meeting ends with panel getting a burial, both announce next meet is last;

PM piles deal pressure - 48-hour deadline buzz sparks Cong scramble

New Delhi, June 25: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is forcing the Congress’s hand on pursing the nuclear deal even at the cost of the Left withdrawing support and facing elections in the latter part of this year.

Singh is understood to have given 48 hours to the Congress to “make up its mind” one way or another after which he will be left free to take his course of action. The message is being construed as a veiled resignation threat.

After the meeting of the UPA-Left nuclear panel drew a blank — both sides restated their known positions and agreed to meet for one last time for form’s sake — the Congress sought to give an impression that it had bought time to take a political call.

“The next meeting of the committee, to be convened in due course, will finalise its findings,” said Pranab Mukherjee, the external affairs minister and the panel’s convener.

The announcement of another meeting created an impression that Sonia Gandhi was pondering over the wisdom of seeking a mandate against the backdrop of high inflation and the Congress’s organisational vulnerabilities in several states.

Once word was out that Singh was “upset” over such dilatory tactics and was considering not going to the G8 summit in the first week of July, the Congress panicked.

Sonia Gandhi, Mukherjee, A.K. Antony and Lalu Prasad — the principal political players — went to the Prime Minister’s residence. Later, the Congress’s core committee also went into a huddle.

The leaders also asked M. Veerappa Moily, the Congress’s chief spokesperson, to go on primetime TV and declare that the party was fully behind the Prime Minister. “We are going ahead with the deal but the timing will be ours,” Moily said.

Sources said Sonia was expected to go through the motion of consulting allies again. One source claimed that no decision on going to the IAEA had been taken yet.

The UPA-Left panel is expected to meet again on June 28 or 29, when Sharad Pawar returns from London.

The government’s main problem is it does not have enough time for manoeuvre. According to the timeline put out by official sources, 45 days are needed to get the International Atomic Energy Agency’s approval for the India-specific safeguards agreement from the day the government gives the green signal.

In case the deal is reactivated on June 30, the IAEA process will be over by mid-August.

The monsoon session begins on August 11. If the Left formally withdraws support and the BJP moves a no-confidence motion, Congress sources said, they are not sure of the Samajwadi Party bailing out the government.

If the government is voted out, Congress sources wondered whether countries in the Nuclear Suppliers Group would be interested in pushing the case for a “lame-duck” dispensation. “We will lose power and the deal then,” a source said.

But the same source conceded that if the government caved in before the Left, its authority and legitimacy would be severely eroded.

[putnanja]

Rahul adds his voice

Working quietly behind the babble of uncertain Congress voices on the nuclear deal, party general secretary Rahul Gandhi is believed to have tugged opinion in favour of going ahead with it.

Rahul’s pro-deal views are well known and stated but reliable sources close to the young Gandhi indicated today that he may have re-emphasised them pointedly in the run-up to the latest round of brinkmanship with the Left.

“He is 200 per cent for the deal and he has been speaking his mind at all forums,” a source close to him said. “He clearly can’t be counted among the ditherers in the party.”
...

It is only too well known that Sonia often relies on close family — Rahul, Priyanka and son-in-law Robert Vadra — to firm up critical decisions.

...

There is a section of the Congress which has been counselling against risking early elections, especially at a time when inflation is soaring at a record recent high. HRD minister Arjun Singh is believed to be among the senior partymen pegging this view.

Arjun is learnt to have met Sonia last week and advised her against pushing the nuclear deal at the cost of having to go for early polls — do that and you will risk the wrath of an electorate agonising under the price burden.
...

The aide stressed yet again that it wasn’t a matter of the Prime Minister’s “personal prestige” alone, India’s “international credibility” was tied to the deal.

“Elections are going to happen in a few months anyway, is it fair to sacrifice something that both the Congress and UPA think is good for the country, and stake our credibility, just to have a few more months in power?”

Rahul, who has been positioned by the Congress to play a key role in the next elections, is learnt to be of similar thinking. Sources said that Rahul “shares” the Prime Minister’s “broader worldview and policy framework” and is not inclined to see the government going back on an international commitment of “immense current and future import”.

In the words of one close adviser, Rahul believes that the nuclear deal is “not a matter limited to the shape and future of Indo-US relations, it is about India’s standing in the world”.

[John Snow]

It is only too well known that Sonia often relies on close family — Rahul, Priyanka and son-in-law Robert Vadra — to firm up critical decisions.

Cool then,
The deal is through Family Planning.

I am all for it.



I just started to learn the use emoticans , thanks to enqyoob saar

[NRao]

What? One decision per family? Or is it still two?

At the risk of violating some laws, on a more serious note, MMS is making all this noise and threats (wow), I feel, to cater to Bush, et al. I think once G-8 goes by things will pipe down.

[ManuT]

So Indian National Congress has woken up from its stupor and decided to part ways with the left.

I do think that India needs this deal, and in all likelihood has missed the boat on this because of fifth column Left and gutless Congress. I do not which kind of morons vote for Left. Communism does not work. It does not work in China. It did not work in USSR. But in India, these morons are allowed to exist.

Communists are yet to condemn China for the 1962 aggression and apologise to the people of India for the funding they received from USSR. (Records came out after the collapse of the USSR)

Everywhere I have been in India there have been power cuts everywhere without fail, but left cannot get it in its 2 cell brain. They are all for for sabotaging national interest and keeping people in poverty and ignorance.

When Rajiv Gandhi first laid out that he wanted to take India to the 21st century and bring in computers, the left made such hue and cry about it. Oooooooooooh! It will lead to unemployment. Oooooooooooh! Computers will do all the jobs. Oooooooooooh! We will have to compromise self reliance and independence. Oooooooooooh! It will be end of India’s sovereignty. We know how things would have turned out if India had not introduced computers. More unemployment. IT, Outsourcing none of this would have happened if Left had had its way then.

Everything will go in reverse India's future energy needs are not met. India does not have the luxury to wait another generation to rid of poverty.

Why object to strategic relationship with the US? Do you want Pakistan to have the free run of the ‘strategic relationship’ like they did during the Cold war, while dhotiwalas harped on self reliance and socialism. What about GoI signing an agreement and then waffling on it for so long. What about India standing on its own two feet and being a reliable partner of the Free world. Why will anyone in US bother renegotiate the deal when left makes India and US look like fools in front of IAEA and NSG.

The Naxalite problem that India faces today is again thanks to Communists who gave birth to it and allowed it to fester.

[paramu]

It is only too well known that Sonia often relies on close family — Rahul, Priyanka and son-in-law Robert Vadra — to firm up critical decisions.

How can foreign policy of a one billion country be decided by a family of three people

[Prem]

Because initially it was Bappu alone then came Chacha alone and now because of democracy 3 of same family will decide the foreign policy. Foreign policy is best when decided by Foreigners.

[John Snow]

"Brevity is the essence of communication"

Also many in BRF understand the word play, but there are still a few who take on the world through nukes and brute power , people people learn from Dr. Tim and Johann, they should be our role models to attain greater spin and variation.

I hope people get the context of this post, Its all in the family, dont take my word for that.

[amit]

I’m sorry to say this but its becoming standard practice.

Someone lobs a lollipop like this one:

Cool then,
The deal is through Family Planning.

I am all for it.



I just started to learn the use emoticans , thanks to enqyoob saar

(Aplogies Snow saar your emoticans seemed to have disappeared!)

Then someone latches on to it and then exclaims:

How can foreign policy of a one billion country be decided by a family of three people

And then finally the drum roll of chest beating and wailing starts:

Because initially it was Bappu alone then came Chacha alone and now because of democracy 3 of same family will decide the foreign policy. Foreign policy is best when decided by Foreigners.

In the midst of all this the original comment and its context is totally lost.

This is exactly what Sankarshan Thakur wrote in The Telegraph report:

Although there is nothing to indicate Rahul has overtly pushed the Prime Minister’s case in order to rid the Congress of its prevarication — Manmohan Singh is known to be increasingly upset with his party’s inability to stand up for the deal despite unanimous resolutions of the government and the Congress backing it — it is learnt that he has been arguing actively for it in “influential circles”, which may be nothing more than a euphemism for his mother and Congress president, Sonia Gandhi.
It is only too well known that Sonia often relies on close family — Rahul, Priyanka and son-in-law Robert Vadra — to firm up critical decisions.
The protracted row over the nuclear deal has pitched the UPA chairperson on the horns of a bitter dilemma: on the one side, a trusted and indispensable Prime Minister bent on pushing the deal, and, on the other, the combined prospect of a bitter break with the Left and facing polls in an economically adverse climate.

Pray can some kind soul educate me as to where exactly it is being said that the foreign policy of 1 billion people is being decided by a family of three? Bill Clinton used to depend a lot of Hillary's advice on key decisions just as Ronald Regan used to depend on wife Nancy, but no one ever said US policy was dictated by the First Wifes?

This is very similar to the gupshup in TOI about some US FIIs allegedly playing short on the Nifty Futures market to pressure India to sign the N-deal. That report was already stated as gossip by the media king of gossip, Times of India, and presented without a shred of corroborative evidence.
Yet the moment it was posted, in jest by Sraj, immediately there were cries of doom and gloom.
Heck did anyone even realize they were talking about a Futures market and not stock market? And did anyone realize that if some US FIIs going short on a Futures market can blackmail a US$1 trillion economy then we deserve it?
I really wonder if all these Sky is Falling, Sky is Falling chorus serves some other purpose or is it just folks letting out steam?
JMT

[Raju]

amit, in your opinion what do we gain out of this deal ?

thanks

[amit]

amit, in your opinion what do we gain out of this deal ?

thanks

Raju,

To be very frank I really don't as yet know if we gain or lose and I'm trying to understand that by regularly reading posts by people with more gyan than me on this forum.

However, I do know that India circa 2008 is far stronger in every sphere than is being made out to be.

As a result, all these rona dhona about how India is doomed and screwed just distracts from the central debate. That's my complaint.

Economically India is far too strong now for a few FIIs to blackmail India and they may very well be short but that would be due to the current inflation problems and hardly to pressure India to sign the deal. Heck I'm sure most BRF members who are invested in India are short too - due to the economic condition which is eeriely similar to the mid 1990s - are they also trying to blackmail the govt to sign the deal? How is it what's good for an individual is not good for an institution which is responsible to its shareholder?

And if India's foreign policy could have been decided solely by the Gandhi family, do you think the Congress would have allowed itself to get into the current mess? One may not support Sonia Gandhi - that's a personal choice - but to think she's stupid, well that's also stupid.

Hence that's why I think all these wailing posts distract from some nice debate going on between folks like NRao and Katare for example.

JMT

[John Snow]

Amit>> Some find issue with "a" Family Planning for the future of India.
While it is true that "Family Matters", there are far too many policy decisions in the hands of a family out side of the constitutionally elected PM's hands or cabinet. This situation is more analogus to Kitchen Cabinet.
Apropos Mrs.Regan and the family values pair of Clintons it is different matter. Compared to the situation that exists in the Congress I. They wer spouse of presidents, hence they dont make strange bedfellows. Do they? (ofcourse in case of clinton, slight deviant is no exaggeration)

Small group of close advisers to a prime minister or president, who informally gather to take decisions on government policy. The term was first used to describe the meetings in the White House kitchen between President Andrew Jackson and his friends to discuss government business. There is often tension between members of a kitchen cabinet, who are able to influence policy in an informal way, and those ministers who have direct and official responsibility for government departments but see themselves cut out of the decision-making process.

[Raju]

unless the govt make it public like an overt nuclear power on how many warheads we posses and how many are mated to missiles etc. There is always the risk of being denuked via coercion. This is the biggest fear and it is not centered around benefits or lack of it accrued from this deal.

When the fiscal policy of present Govt aids foreign players who are also fly-by-night operators of dubious origin a free hand in playing in our stock exchanges it heightens suspiscion on true motives. Tomorrow the administrators just raise hands and say, " we didn't know it would come to this, but now that it is here we can't do much about it. But one thing we know is that these folks are going to come back only if you sign on this and this dotted line ".

So what we are seeing is that the cards are being stacked up against us and more levers of coercion are being built up. Ofcourse we can still refuse to do anything and bear the pain, but why allow such levers of coercion to be built up in the first place. Why bear excess pain when with greatly lesser levers of coercion against us we would retain our strategic independence and suffer less in the first place. In 1999 we got off with a far lesser level of pain because the previous govt of PVN ensured that not too many 'levers of coercion' were stacked up against us.

Secondly any deal with US is not just a deal with a country, but it is a deal with the west. The US acts as a flag-bearer for the west and they behave in a cartel. But a deal should not mean preservation and advancement of western interests and subjugation of Indian interests.

[Santosh]

For the bold part I think you still didn't get the whole picture as I see it. India is free to develop its own reprocessing technologies (for imported fuel) or import those technologies from any other country like Russia or France if they are willing to export.

Can you please post a link/reference citing the above? TIA

What happens if the India and US don't come to an agreement on the specifics of reprocessing within one year.. or don't come to an agreement at all? Then we would have lost the bargaining position. India signing away the 123 without US signing away reprocessing is exactly what the deal should not be about.

[paramu]

http://newsinsight.net/archivefeatures/ ... s.asp?ctg=

‘No consensus on nuclear deal?’ - 5
But this particular thing is buried? No, no. Everything is buried. The .....More

‘No consensus on nuclear deal?’ - 4
Having made these points as to why the nuclear deal does not appeal to us, let me .....More

‘No consensus on nuclear deal?’ - 3
One, (export of) nuclear reactors and an assured supply (of fuel) for the lifetime .....More

‘No consensus on nuclear deal?’ – 2
Why are we demanding the JPC (Joint Parliamentary Committee)? (For a) simple thing .....More

‘No consensus on nuclear deal?’ - 1
Yashwant Sinha is one of the BJP’s most articulate opponents of the Indo-US civilian .....More

[sugriva]

I have a feeling that the Govt. actually does not want to sign the deal and is
using the left as a prop to that effect. I read in the other thread that Vajpayee
had used the left to publicly oppose the sending of Indian troops to Iraq. I think
similar games are being played here.

I also feel that Unkil has caught up on this. Hence Unkil's assertion a few days ago
that India has time till January 10th next year so that Unkil can use his lame duck days
to push the deal.

It is only after this that we see the urgency of MMS to sign the deal and his belligerence.
The idea is to let the Govt. of the day fall and hence kill the deal.

[Raju]

>>I have a feeling that the Govt. actually does not want to sign the deal and is
using the left as a prop to that effect. I read in the other thread that Vajpayee
had used the left to publicly oppose the sending of Indian troops to Iraq. I think
similar games are being played here.

Not entirely.
there is a strong lobby within the Govt that does not want to see the deal being signed.

[Tilak]

Antony brought into n-deal talks on PM’s request
June 22nd, 2008 - 6:59 pm ICT by IANS
By Liz Mathew

New Delhi, June 22 (IANS) Defence Minister A.K. Antony has been roped in for all political discussions over the India-US civil nuclear deal on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s request, Congress sources said Sunday. According to the sources, Manmohan Singh told Congress president Sonia Gandhi Wednesday that he wanted Antony to join the negotiations held with the Left parties, rather than enturst the task exclusively to External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

Since then, the defence minister has been present in almost all the known meetings Mukherjee has had with leaders of the Left and the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) allies over the nuclear issue.

A section of the Congress feels that Mukherjee is seemingly not eager to push the nuclear agreement, an issue close to Manmohan Singh’s heart, because the foreign minister felt he was ignored in the initial stages of the ambitious agreement. Mukherjee’s supporters deny this.

Besides, Mukherjee’s rumoured proximity with Communist leaders also has been viewed warily by some Congress leaders. When the Communists backed his name for the post of the president to succeed A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, it raised eyebrows in the Congress.

It is following the request of both the prime minister and Gandhi that Mukherjee came to head the 15-member UPA-Left committee formed to address concerns raised by the Communists over the nuclear deal.

But Antony’s presence, it seems, has not helped Mukherjee to persuade the Communists to give up their opposition to the deal — so far.

Mukherjee met Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) general secretary Prakash Karat Monday and Tuesday evenings. But he could not convince Karat into giving a green signal to the government to finalise the India-specific safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

It was after this Manmohan Singh called on Gandhi and expressed his desire that Antony should be asked to aid Mukherjee in future talks with the Left and other UPA allies.

Antony was present when Mukherjee met Karat for the third time in the week Friday and earlier with CPI-M politburo member Sitaram Yechury.

Antony also attended Mukherjee’s meetings Friday with Communist Party of India (CPI) national secretary D. Raja, Nationalist Congress Party chief Sharad Pawar and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Lalu Prasad.

The CPI-M-led Left parties, which prop up the Congress-led Manmohan Singh government, have rejected the government’s repeated pleas to allow it to finalise the IAEA safeguards agreement.

After the Wednesday meeting between the prime minister and Gandhi, the government axed a scheduled meeting of the UPA-Left nuclear committee that had been scheduled for June 25.

What happened before the key N-deal meet?
By R Prema in New Delhi | June 25, 2008 22:47 IST
Last Updated: June 25, 2008 23:18 IST

The United Progressive Alliance-Left parties may have averted a showdown at the key meeting on Wednesday, but the hours preceding the meet were dramatic, and full of suspense.

The drama began unfolding right from the morning after External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee -- back from Australia -- took command of the situation.

Here is a look at what happened during that crucial hours that Left the government's fate on tenterhooks.


0800 hrs: Defence Minister A K Antony briefs Mukherjee on the nuclear front during his absence.

0815: Mukherjee invites CPI-M general secretary Prakash Karat for a Bengali breakfast at his Talkatora Road residence. Antony was also present.

1000: Mukherjee and Antony drive down to 10 Janpath to meet Sonia Gandhi [Images].

1030: Karat drives to the South Avenue residence of Samajwadi Party MP Ram Gopal Yadav to meet his brother and SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav.

1030: CPI leader A B Bardhan receives a call from Mukherjee to brief him on his discussions with Karat and Sonia.

1100: Sonia asks Mukherjee to rush to South Block, to brief the prime minister.

1130: Bardhan says life of the government is till 5 pm (when the coordination committee) meets. Then, he gets a call from Sonia to tone down the anger.

1145: Mukherjee meets Singh to convey a special message from Sonia and brief him on the Left's stand and a compromise formula suggested to them to end the impasse.

1200: Immediately after the PM-Pranab meeting, the Special Protection Group (SPG) director is told to keep the route ready for PM for a tentative visit to meet Sonia at 1500.

1230: Pranab Mukherjee asks Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and Law Secretary TK Viswanathan to rush to him in the South Block with the draft IAEA agreement that the Left insisted to examine.

1300: Sonia's political secretary Ahmed Patel meets Union ministers Kapil Sibal and A K Antony.

1600: Karat convenes a meeting of all Left parties leaders at the AK Gopalan Bhavan, the CPI(M) headquarters, to finalise the strategy at the coordination committee meeting.

1700: The meeting begins at at Pranab Mukherjee's Talkatora Road residence.

N-deal: UPA-Left partnership on verge of collapse

Sources have told NDTV that Wednesday's meeting held at External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee's house was a very stormy one, with both sides sticking to their positions.

Sources say the Congress wants more time to talk numbers with the Samajwadi party, but the prime minister has warned that the G8 Summit for which he's scheduled to leave on July 7, is an informal deadline to sort things out.

And if they are not, he may just send Pranab Muhkerjee to the world meet instead.

[Tilak]

Tilak,

Fair enough.

However, I would have expected the BJP to articulate in a more coherent manner how they would go about renegotiating the deal.

Do you think they have set out a clear roadmap for all of us to see what they would do or not do regarding the deal once they come to power?

BJP gets in poll mode, trashes N-deal debate
Rajesh Sinha
Thursday, June 26, 2008 03:31 IST

Reiterating the BJP’s opposition to the deal “in its present form”, Naidu refuted suggestions that the party could bail out the UPA on the issue. “We have been telling the government that they should take the country into confidence. But the PM has failed to take even allies into confidence, and now he goes knocking on doors saying the deal is in the country’s interest,” he said.

[ramana]

Since India in not a part of G8 , whats wrong with sending Pranab Mukherjee or better yet P. Chidambaram the Finance minister to attend? Why send PM to chai pani sessions and lower the dignity of the office?

Or is India being offered position on G whatever as pro quid quo for the deal that all this dramabazi is going on?

[sugriva]

1300: Sonia's political secretary Ahmed Patel meets Union ministers Kapil Sibal and A K Antony.

How is it that somebody like Kapil Sibal, who was a virtual nobody till yesterday is listed
right after MMS and Pranab Mukherjee in this list of cabinet ministers, that too in the Govt
of India's official website.

http://india.gov.in/govt/cabinet.php

What is his clout? How is he so powerful? It cannot be because he is a courtier of the
Nehru-Gandhi family. There are others also like that who are much more senior than him.
And why did Ahmed Patel meet only him and A.K. Antony. Antony is a veteran politician,
but what about Sibal ? The perception, atleast is that he is a political lightweight. And is there
is more to Sibal's role in the Nuclear deal than merely using his lawyerly persuasions in the
media to sell the deal.

[amit]

Amit>> Some find issue with "a" Family Planning for the future of India.
While it is true that "Family Matters", there are far too many policy decisions in the hands of a family out side of the constitutionally elected PM's hands or cabinet. This situation is more analogus to Kitchen Cabinet.
Apropos Mrs.Regan and the family values pair of Clintons it is different matter. Compared to the situation that exists in the Congress I. They wer spouse of presidents, hence they dont make strange bedfellows. Do they? (ofcourse in case of clinton, slight deviant is no exaggeration)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not too happy with this concentration of power in one family. However, that's sort of a fiat accomplice so to speak. It cannot be denied that the Sonia Gandhi keeps the Congress together and is its biggest vote gatherer - we may not like it but its a fact of life.

And due to a combination of circumstances, to which BJP salwarts like Sushma Swaraj contributed generously, Sonia Gandhi did not become PM and instead appointed MMS. It was always known that the real levers of power would be with the Gandhis.

What is also a fact of life is that the peculiar democratic forces at work in India has ensured that a Congress-led UPA govt is at power at the Centre.

Also a fact of life is that this government has to work with other governments and try to sign up deals which it thinks are to the country's best interests. Here also one may hotly contest if these deals are actually to our best interests but one cannot argue that the Congress does not have legitimacy to sign these deal - its legitimacy will go the day it is defeated either at a voting in Parliament or at the hustings.

So lamenting the fact that one family takes all important decisions really does not serve any purpose rather than for rona dhona purposes.

Another point:

Extraconstitutional authority or concentraton of power are not just Congress' preserve.

How about RSS bosses telling Vajpayee what to do during the NDA regime? At least Sonia Gandhi is the head of the Congress party, what locus standai did the RSS have?

Please don't take this as an attempted to use one to justify the other, two wrongs don't make one right. And I'm against both.

And what do we say of Prakash Karat overrulling Buddhadev Bhattacharya, the elected representative of the people in West Bengal? Is it not extraconsitutional authority?

So let's not just paint the Congress in black - our entire politicaly system is responsible and through that indirectly the citizens of this country. In a democracy a country gets the government it deserves.

JMT and now ducking for cover!

[amit]

BJP gets in poll mode, trashes N-deal debate
Rajesh Sinha
Thursday, June 26, 2008 03:31 IST

Reiterating the BJP’s opposition to the deal “in its present form”, Naidu refuted suggestions that the party could bail out the UPA on the issue. “We have been telling the government that they should take the country into confidence. But the PM has failed to take even allies into confidence, and now he goes knocking on doors saying the deal is in the country’s interest,” he said.

The Yashwant Sinha interview is a bit old and since then Brajesh Mishra has made a few more interesting comments.

However, if we ignore that, from what I gathered after relistening to the interview is that the highlights of Sinha's comments are:

a) Congress should take political parties into confidence;
b) US has said it will not renegotiate the Hyde Act and 123;
c) BJP will not accept anything sort of renegotiation; and
d) BJP was opposed from Day1 to the deal.

Naidu again says:

a) BJP will not bail out the government; and
b) Congress should take the country into confidence about the deal.

Tilak, since your response was to my question as to whether the BJP has charted out a clear roadmap as to what it would with the deal if it comes to power can we assume this to be the roadmap:

BJP will demand renegotiation of the Hyde Act and 123 and will ensure that there are significant changes which make the act more "acceptable" to India. And through out the process will take the entire country into confidence - in that it will share all details of negotiations held behind closed doors. And if the US refuses to make dramatic concessions then the BJP will never sign any form of Nuclear deal with the US.

Please correct me if I've got anything wrong here. I think we should put into words what exactly is the BJP's stance if for nothing else to get a perspective on their past, present and future statements and actions on the Nuclear deal.

Cheers!

[Tilak]

b) US has said it will not renegotiate the Hyde Act and 123;

Can you point me to a link to such a statement, from the US govt spokesperson/senators/ambassador. TIA

Tilak, since your response was to my question as to whether the BJP has charted out a clear roadmap as to what it would with the deal if it comes to power can we assume this to be the roadmap:

BJP will demand renegotiation of the Hyde Act and 123 and will ensure that there are significant changes which make the act more "acceptable" to India. And through out the process will take the entire country into confidence - in that it will share all details of negotiations held behind closed doors. And if the US refuses to make dramatic concessions then the BJP will never sign any form of Nuclear deal with the US.

Please correct me if I've got anything wrong here. I think we should put into words what exactly is the BJP's stance if for nothing else to get a perspective on their past, present and future statements and actions on the Nuclear deal.
Cheers!

I have no, inside knowledge of what the road-map would be. What ever the steps, that are to be taken + intent have been forthrightly outlined and communicated to the US interlocuters (Yashwant Sinha's interview). If it 'comes' to the actual renegotiations and steps, I am pretty sure there will be enough media spotlight on it, for people to comment on.

[amit]

Can you point me to a link to such a statement, from the US govt spokesperson/senators/ambassador. TIA

That wasn't me saying it.

That's what Yashwant Sinha said during his interview with Karan Thapar. Please hear the audio once again. (And that's one reason, among several, which confuses me regarding what exactly is BJP's stance, other than a desire to be the one to sign the dotted line).

Personally I don't think there's any document (such as the Hyde Act, 123 etc) that can't be renegotiated given the right set of circumstances.

Creating those circumstances is another matter altogether.

I have no, inside knowledge of what the road-map would be. What ever the steps, that are to be taken + intent have been forthrightly outlined and communicated to the US interlocuters (Yashwant Sinha's interview). If it 'comes' to the actual renegotiations and steps, I am pretty sure there will be enough media spotlight on it, for people to comment on.

We will have to wait and see how it all pans out. In this context let me point out that Yashwant's bombastic claim of BJP being the party which dared to do the bomb blasts and that automatically gives it the moral guardianship of India's deterrent is disingenous to say the least.

BJP got to press the button because of the good work which was started by Rajiv Gandhi and carried forward by PVNR despite the precarious situation of the Indian economy in the early 1990s. The nuclear deterent is not BJP's sole creation and they can hardly claim to be the sole guardians of it either. All this implication of I'm (BJP) more patriotic than you (Congress) doesn't wash.

JMT and no more from me on this topic.

Cheers!

[amit]

When the fiscal policy of present Govt aids foreign players who are also fly-by-night operators of dubious origin a free hand in playing in our stock exchanges it heightens suspiscion on true motives. Tomorrow the administrators just raise hands and say, " we didn't know it would come to this, but now that it is here we can't do much about it. But one thing we know is that these folks are going to come back only if you sign on this and this dotted line ".

Raju,

If I didn't know better I would have thought you are a card carrying CPI(M) "intellectual"!

So what do you suggest, return to the days of captial controls, protectionsit markets and glorious socialism?

When you opt for liberalisation you can't cherry pick. No one's going to invest in India for altrusitic reasons not even uber patriotic NRIs. You've got to take the bad with the good!

Cheers!

[geeth]

I think the whole drama is to escape from the public wrath due to inflation..Kangress and Commies know the public is angry at the misery they are suffering due to inflation and the situation is likely to continue for the next few months. They know they will get less seats than what they got in the last election. Someone says, from now on, for every week that they are in office, they would lose 2 Loksabha seats. So they enact a drama to part ways only to unite after the elections. If not an outright victory, they want to ensure they have enough numbers to atleast stop BJP from coming to power.

JMT

[Raju]

>>So what do you suggest, return to the days of captial controls, protectionsit markets and glorious socialism?

the problem is our regulators have allowed these dubious players to enter the market in the name of removing protectionism under orders from the finance minister and planning commission. Earlier there was a ban on uncontrolled hedge funds with 'hot money' operating in our capital markets. Our regulators have allowed this new lever of coercion to be created and then quickly on its heels this nuclear deal arrives.

Even now if we can throw out these guys out of our stock markets, they will come down a bit but we remove a very important lever of manipulation. We can keep the long-term funds, the pension funds, the small cap hedge funds, genuine players and keep the markets clean of this as had happened so effectively during the pre-Chidambaram days.

[amit]

>>So what do you suggest, return to the days of captial controls, protectionsit markets and glorious socialism?

the problem is our regulators have allowed these dubious players to enter the market in the name of removing protectionism under orders from the finance minister and planning commission. Earlier there was a ban on uncontrolled hedge funds with 'hot money' operating in our capital markets. Our regulators have allowed this new lever of coercion to be created and then quickly on its heels this nuclear deal arrives.

Even now if we can throw out these guys out of our stock markets, they will come down a bit but we remove a very important lever of manipulation. We can keep the long-term funds, the pension funds, the small cap hedge funds, genuine players and keep the markets clean of this as had happened so effectively during the pre-Chidambaram days.

Raju saab,

I'm afraid you will have to be a bit more specific for a nitwit like me to understand.

For example which hedge funds are you talking about. And are there good hedge funds and bad hedge funds? And their goodliness and badliness is determined by their size? (Please no Freud here! )

Also talking about manipulation abilities, my extremely limited knowledge tells me that pension funds, especially US ones - with their huge corpus - usually have more ability to manipulate than most other funds.

And yes I remember with wonderful nostalgia the good old days of innocence pre-Chidambaram. However, for the love of me I can't seem to remember where the Sensex was sitting quietly - do you happen to remember the Sensex range at that time? Please let me know.

Alas, alack, we lost our innocence the day the damn Sensex crossed that cursed 10K figure and became the object of desire for every evil fund manager on this planet.

Finally:

We can keep the long-term funds, the pension funds, the small cap hedge funds, genuine players and keep the markets clean of this as had happened so effectively during the pre-Chidambaram days

Why does this sound so much like Babu Raj(dom) - where everything can and should be controlled and the Babu knows the best?

I wonder.

Anyway getting increasingly OT. My apologies everyone.

[nkumar]

Sonia, Karat ready with exit plan

Communist Party of India-Marxist General Secretary Prakash Karat is itching for an exit from the four-year arrangement where 60 Left MPs support the UPA government from the outside, but wants to ensure that neither his party nor he become a hate figure for destabilising the government and forcing an early general election on the country.

The Left supported the UPA mainly to keep the Bharatiya Janata Party out of power and that purpose was well served for four years. Karat wants to convey to the nation that he is not a destabiliser and would like political chroniclers to believe that he will stand up for his Marxist convictions, no matter what the pressure on him to resile from his position.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [Images] is more than a match for the stubborn Karat. He is impatient to get out of the UPA alliance with the Left parties even if his government loses power and the country heads for an election. He believes that American economic and technological assistance to India is good for the country's development. His team wants to make a beginning towards this objective through the nuclear deal.

Once Dr Singh decides that he wants to reach a certain destination he has the patience to reach the goal even if that means taking the longest possible route. He did that at many levels. The Prime Minister's Office managed the retired diplomat and scientific communities which were initially opposed to the agreement; it also convinced editors and other opinion-makers about the need for the deal.