India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23755
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby SSridhar » 03 Sep 2008 13:29

Manny wrote:You know.. India used to an empty moral pontificator once ...During the cold war, we used to be like what NZ and Austria and Switzerland are today.

Oh..the Irony!



That shows that we are maturing in the art of realpolitik.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3632
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Neela » 03 Sep 2008 14:12

Secret letters say US will pull out of deal if India tests
http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/sep/03ndeal1.htm

day before the Nuclear Security Group meets in Vienna [Images] to consider exempting India from restrictions on nuclear trade as part of the India-United States nuclear deal, secret � but not classified � correspondence between the US State Department and the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee reveals that Washington, DC, will immediately halt nuclear trade with India if New Delhi [Images] conducts a nuclear test.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16404
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby NRao » 03 Sep 2008 15:22

What else is new?

With a "clean" NSG waiver and the Hyde Act conditions, it is still a P-5 + 1, granted not the "clean" P-6 India wanted in J-18. 6-packs are only trying to postpone the inevitable.

I am not sure what would be the stress placed for the need to test in the future - I think it would really depend solely on Chicom's behaviour and expectations. However, it is very childish on the part of NPAs and X-packs to not recognise this dynamic or even worse to know it and bury their heads and pretend that this dynamic is somehow reversible if India de-nukes.

Finally, only from an Indian PoV, it is amazing to note that the NPAs and X-packs have not figured out that they will not have a better partner when it comes to nonproliferation than India.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 15:47

Nuclear states mull U.S.-India deal again, clock ticks by Mark Heinrich: Reuters

But a revised U.S. waiver draft circulated ahead of the meeting glossed over demands for conditions on such an unprecedented concession raised at a two-day session last month, diplomats from concerned countries said.

Barring U.S.-Indian openness to more than "cosmetic" revisions to minimise damage to the NPT, they said, the second two-day conclave could again end inconclusively, shunting the bilateral deal towards the verge of indefinite limbo.

Without NSG action in early September, the U.S. Congress may run out of time for final ratification of the accord before it adjourns at the end of the month for autumn elections.

"The U.S. will not achieve consensus approval for a text presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, and it will certainly not achieve consensus on the text currently on the table," said one diplomat, who like others asked for anonymity as NSG deliberations are confidential and politically delicate.

"The U.S. (may) finally have to enter into real negotiations with countries who put forward amendments, rather than negotiate exclusively with India as it has done up to now," he said.

"We will have to find a way in between (the red lines) of India and concerned states. I'd be surprised if we can do this by Friday," said another diplomat. Some spoke of needing another meeting well into September.


These diplomats think of themselves as the ones, who will in the end decide the future of this NSG Waiver. Mulford mentioned that these diplomats were not in consonance with the thinking of their political bosses. Hope is that the communication between the diplomats and their political bosses should have improved by now.

John Rood represented US at the first NSG Plenary Meeting on August 21-22. John Rood is acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security so he was looking at the picture from the non-proliferation prism and muddled the first NSG meeting. William Burns is US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, so the political aspects of the deal will take center stage. He will be making the political argument in favor. He has had extensive talks with Shivshanker Menon in Washington during the last two weeks, so he should be well aware of India's red lines and have come prepared.

This time Rood will sit in a corner, and Bill Burns will do the talking. Now it is his neck on the line. Question is, would he have made preparations by having asked Condi and Dubya to make the necessary calls. One will soon get to know if all of a sudden Netherlands, Switzerland, Norway and Sweden start showing additional flexibility or their foreign ministries make some announcements of support. On the other hand, if Bill Burns has to wrestle each diplomat one at a time, then it is a lost cause.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby amit » 03 Sep 2008 16:07

Indian N-orders will boost US industry

Washington: India plans to import eight 1000 MW nuclear reactors by 2012 and the US hopes to win at least two contracts, which it feels will significantly boost its atomic industry.

The envisaged sale of at least two reactors, to what it calls "lucrative and growing Indian market," would create 3000-5000 direct jobs and 10,000-15,000 indirect jobs in the US nuclear industry, the US Department of State has said.


The interesting bit is this one:

Though the replies to searching spate of queries raised by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were delivered in October last year, they were made public today by the new Chairman of the panel Howard Berman just ahead of the Nuclear Suppliers Group plenary in Vienna to consider a waiver for India from its guidelines enabling atomic trade.
Last edited by amit on 03 Sep 2008 16:10, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 16:08

India banking on ‘Big 4′ ahead of NSG meet: IANS

With sceptics unconvinced about a clean waiver ahead of the NSG’s meeting Thursday, India is banking on the “Big 4″ in the nuclear cartel - US, Britain, France and Russia - to use their clout to ensure an exemption that does not contain deal-breaking conditions like testing. India is also hopeful that the second two-day India-specific meeting of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in Vienna will be a final one.

“We are hopeful that this meeting will be decisive. We are not expecting another meeting that could dim chances of the deal going through this year,” a highly-placed source, privy to the government’s thinking on the nuclear deal, told IANS in New Delhi.

“We are not part of the NSG. But we are confident that the ‘Big 4′ will be able to convince sceptics about the merits of bringing India inside the non-proliferation tent,” the source said speaking on condition of anonymity.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20148
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Philip » 03 Sep 2008 16:12

So the secrets are outing and it is clear that MMS has been "economical with the truth"!

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 16:17

Philip wrote:So the secrets are outing and it is clear that MMS has been "economical with the truth"!


Hyde matters far less than the NSG Waiver. I consider it, a tactical acceptance of Congressional reality.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby enqyoob » 03 Sep 2008 16:34

it is still a P-5 + 1, granted not the "clean" P-6 India wanted


IOW, Superpower status is not going to be granted by acclaim and adulation and the kindness of others. I am trying to recall the UN resolution that said "France should test nuclear weapons" or "China can test hydrogen bombs in Tibet any time, we are all happy and will continue to buy purses made in the Hwang Ho Le-Education Centel".

Not exactly the grounds for overthrowing the government, IMHO.
The rest comes incrementally, guys, if the nation has a resolute vision and a plan.

shetty
BRFite
Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby shetty » 03 Sep 2008 17:30

I was not so worried about whether US will continue supporting India if we did test after the deal. I always assumed the worst from them. But now the question is how does that scenario spin for our "Plan B" aka NSG (France and Russia) if we got a clean waiver and if we didn't get a clean waiver (assuming we still sign the deal).

Did Bush mislead India on nuclear deal?

Barely a day ahead of Nuclear Supplies Group's meeting on the Indo-US nuclear deal, a secret letter by US President George W Bush addressed to the US Congress, has come out in open, sending shockwaves across India.

According to Times Now , the letter appears to contradict statements by Indian officials and was made public on Tuesday by Rep. Howard L. Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The letter says, "The United States will not sell sensitive nuclear technologies to India and would immediately terminate nuclear trade if New Delhi conducted a nuclear test."

What is even more shocking is the revelation by Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post Staff Writer, that the UPA government knew about the letter written by Bush. He, however, is not sure whether the Manmohan Singh government knew about the details of the letter.

This has come barely a day after the statement by US that it is not ready to "give up the ship" on the India-US nuclear deal. "We are going to continue to work within the group and work with individual states to try to move it forward," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack had said on Tuesday ahead of the Sep 4-5 meeting of the nuclear cartel in Vienna.

awagaman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 13 Aug 2008 16:27

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby awagaman » 03 Sep 2008 17:37

http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com/2008/09/stake-has-been-driven-through-nuclear.html

03 September 2008

A stake has been driven through the nuclear deal
An initial reaction to the latest evidence of American bad faith

Siddharth Varadarajan

Vienna: On May 22, 2008, I wrote about HR711 and the "secret" clarifications the State Department had provided the House Foreign Relations Committee on the provisions of the 123 Agreement between the United States and India.http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com/2008/05/diplomatic-notebook-india-nsg-and.html

The "clarifications" were provided in January this year but kept under wraps for nine months at the request of the State Department, given the obvious sensitivity involved.

Well, two days before a crucial meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group where the terms of India's nuclear engagement with the rest of the world are to be set, those clarifications have been made public. If you don't have the patience to plow through them, Glen Kessler has a report in today's WaPo.

The clarifications cover a lot of ground but essentially emphasise the Bush administration's stand that:

1. All fuel supply assurances built in to the March 2006 separation plan and the 123 agreement become null and void for any disruption of fuel supply caused by an Indian nuclear test.
2. The U.S. will not work with friends and allies to make good any shortfall of fuel which results from US termination of cooperation following a test and actually intends to get all NSG states to end their cooperation as well.
3. Reprocessing consent rights are not permanent, as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had said, but allow for termination. This will be spelt out in the yet to be negotiated "arrangements" to bring effect to the consent rights.
4. The U.S. has no intention of transferring dual-use items for any enrichment and reprocessing related facility in India.
5. The U.S. will press its "right" to fall-back safeguards even if the IAEA does not make a determination that safeguards on American supplied facilities or fuel are no longer in place.

In May, I wrote this about the 'secret' answers:

What does this mean for India, assuming the nuclear deal is able to pass the gauntlet of Left opposition and move on to the next stage? For one, that the U.S. will likely attempt to claw back the concessions it made in the 123 agreement and close the window on India getting at the international level what U.S. vendors are unable to provide under domestic law. India, for example, does not need enrichment and reprocessing technology from others but would like to import components for safeguarded fuel cycle facilities. The 123 agreement excludes this but the NSG at present has no separate bar on the sale of such components. Second, the Indian interpretation of many of the 123 agreement’s provisions — especially on the right of return — differ significantly from the American one. Since it is this deliberate ambiguity of language which allowed the 123 text to be sold by the two governments to their respective publics, any attempt to resolve these “differences of interpretation” could well lead to the agreement itself unravelling.

Until now, India was willing to swallow some of the unpleasant provisions of the 123 agreement because it knew that what mattered in the final analysis were the NSG guidelines. After all, the 123 agreement gets “operationalised” only when India buys nuclear equipment and fuel from the U.S. And so long as the NSG guidelines allow India to buy what it wants from other countries, a prudential strategy would be one which postpones this operationalisation for a few years. It is precisely this sequencing loophole in the nuclear deal that the U.S. is now trying to plug by denying India the "clean exemption" it wants from the NSG. All indications are that the NSG hurdle will be the hardest of all. But India will always have the option of walking away from the table if the nuclear cartel seeks to impose unreasonable restrictions on the country.


I think that moment is now upon us.

Was the releasing of the State Departmen's answers on September 2 an act of unilateral disclosure by the HFRC's Howard Berman (a known critic of the India-US agreement) or a bilateral provocation by Berman and the State Department to ensure the NSG does not approve terms more favourable than what the US has accorded to India? Either way, the consequences are devastating -- for India's chances at the NSG, for the political standing of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and for the bilateral relationship between New Delhi and Washington.

Why? Because the answers/clarifications show there is such a huge gap between the Indian and American perception of the 123's provisions that no Indian government can afford to buy even one cent's worth of nuclear equipment from the United States without first resolving these differences. The only insurance still left in India's hand if the Americans push ahead with their interpretation on fuel supply assurances is to build a strategic reserve (of non-American fuel) to guard against supply disruptions caused by U.S.-led sanctions.

At a minimum, it is clear that the bilateral aspect of the US-India nuclear agreement is dead. Repeat. Dead. But if the bilateral part is dead, what chance is there for the multilateral part to survive?

In a nutshell, there are two scenarios from now.

Scenario 1: The NSG will demand a third draft waiver be produced in line with the formulations of the State Department document. An essential feature of this document will be automatic termination of all supplies by all NSG members if India were to break its testing moratorium. Plus other things that India also will be unwilling to accept. Result: Sudden death of the deal.

Scenario 2: The NSG approves the second draft as it stands (with perhaps minor changes) but India will not be able to proceed with the 123 agreement unless the conflicting interpretations are sorted out. Result: India will not buy American.

Scenario 3: NSG approves second draft, Congress approves 123 but India will simply not buy American because of the restrictions and dangers involved in developing a dependence on U.S. supplies.

Of these three scenarios, #1 is the most likely. If India likes, it can choose to make the deal's 'sudden death' a more slow and painful process. But let us also be clear that there is politically no space in India for the Manmohan Singh government to engage in a third round of negotiations with the U.S. over the NSG draft waiver. Levels of distrust of the Americans are running incredibly high in political and bureaucratic circles as a result of the August 21-22 NSG fiasco. I had described that event as a double-cross. What has happened this time is the mother of all double-crosses. I mentioned this assessment to a senior Indian minister who phoned me from Delhi to find out what had happened. He agreed with my assessment, and that this denouement means major trouble for the bilateral relationship across the board.

Even the pro-American business community in India is likely to run for cover since the State Department's answers show at best that India and the U.S. are on a different page altogether and at worst, that Washington has been negotiating in bad faith.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby John Snow » 03 Sep 2008 17:45

There Will Be Blood

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 18:09

Based on what Siddharth Varadarajan says in his blog,

I would say, Scenario 2 is the optimistic possibility.

These have always been the contentious issues: nuclear testing, ENR technology transfer and assured fuel supply.

I would not call it betrayal by America, because that is what stands in the Hyde Act and Bush Administration is simply adhering to it.

I would not call it a betrayal by MMS either, because the 123 Agreement is the best he could have got considering the shadow of Hyde. What India is looking from USA is not necessarily nuclear technology but rather US muscle to get a deal, which does not cross India's red lines, through NSG. If USA does that, then USA has done its part of the bargain. The bilateral deal between India and USA was worthless anyway.

Secondly one should not discount the possibility, that this could have been State Dept. trying to assuage the doubts of the Congress by possibly giving them dishonest assurances, in other words trying to screw Congress while claiming to be acting within the law (Hyde Act).

Imagine India buying nuclear reactors from USA, which do not offer ENR cycles, which can be disassembled and taken away when India conducts nuclear testing, where the fuel supplies are not assured, and where there are liability issues concerned. That wasn't going to happen. I would agree with SV, that the bilateral deal is dead.

So the latest disclosures do not matter, if USA pushes through the draft, as it is, through NSG.

jerry
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Jul 2007 20:40
Location: DXB

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby jerry » 03 Sep 2008 19:02

IMHO the most important thing is assured fuel supplies.
Then now one can do much even if we test at any time.
and for a civil nuclear deal with private players involved,
without assured fuel supplies it would be a non starter.

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby kshirin » 03 Sep 2008 19:04

Will the waiver go through now? Then we can buy from Russia and France anyway. Was this doen to kill it before we could do so?
The letter is here:
The answers to questions on the N deal given to the foreign affairs committee is here:

http://www.hcfa.house.gov/110/press090208.pdf

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Lalmohan » 03 Sep 2008 19:11

I think whatever happens India will 'not be allowed to test' anymore - we will have to show good behaviour and get our (fuel) reward, because that will be used to keep Iran and No.Ko in check - which to the west is far more terrifying. Whilst testing is desirable to us, our stance of ambiguity may be sufficient to keep our enemies guessing and therefore deterred. unkil may be willing to let us have more supercomputers too... and perhaps other interesting toys... we'll have to see

nkumar
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 06 Jul 2007 02:14

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby nkumar » 03 Sep 2008 19:15

jerry wrote:IMHO the most important thing is assured fuel supplies.
Then now one can do much even if we test at any time.
and for a civil nuclear deal with private players involved,
without assured fuel supplies it would be a non starter.


Totally agree, I raised it immediately when 123 was made public. Non-guarantee of assured fuel supplies gives a big degree of leverage to US over Indian strategic decisions. But this was side stepped by some folks, who were shouting their lungs out that Hyde doesn't apply to India.

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby kshirin » 03 Sep 2008 19:17

But I do hate to see Karat with her Bindi gloating on NDTV and Yashwant Sinha also - thought he was a bit pedestrian and never strategic in his approach at the Finance Ministry. I would prefer to hear B Mishra or Arun Jaitley.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby John Snow » 03 Sep 2008 19:25

our stance of ambiguity may be sufficient to keep our enemies guessing and therefore deterred.


Exactly that is what is detering our own armed forces and make them guessing too!

Actually our enimies have already guessed we will never use even in second strike, because we ourselves dont know because of the very same ambiguity.

Deterence works when one has demonstrated capability for sure, and the will to use the capability based on certain doctrine.

We have MND but no MUD... (Must Use Doctrine in case red lines are crossed)

Or shall we say WUD (Would Use DOctrine)?

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 19:34

Lalmohan wrote:I think whatever happens India will 'not be allowed to test' anymore - we will have to show good behaviour and get our (fuel) reward, because that will be used to keep Iran and No.Ko in check - which to the west is far more terrifying. Whilst testing is desirable to us, our stance of ambiguity may be sufficient to keep our enemies guessing and therefore deterred. unkil may be willing to let us have more supercomputers too... and perhaps other interesting toys... we'll have to see


That depends on what happens on Sept 5. If the Waiver fails, all bets are off.

Then MMS may not have another choice other than to go for Pokhran III, in order to win back some of his credibility. There is no time left for another NSG Meeting after this one, as the acrimony and distrust would grow too much for MMS to proceed.
Last edited by RajeshA on 03 Sep 2008 19:34, edited 1 time in total.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby enqyoob » 03 Sep 2008 19:34

Varadarajan is loud and frantic, but neither he nor this "secret letter" reveals anything new.

Whatever anyone says, if India tests nuclear weapons, many countries will refuse to trade nuclear anything with India. Period. No NSG guideline or IAEA agreement is going to change that, because internal laws of the trading nations will govern their actions.

But as even Varadarajan admits somewhere in his hyperventilation, the deal allows India to build a strategic reserve. Also, as far as "return of materials" etc., all that the US "secret but not classified" letter says is that the US can "request" (and presumably use other positive and negative incentives to encourage that).

So this is all very interesting, but it's a non-event. What matters is whether the NSG prohibits all countries from trading with India in the event of a test.

What the US-India agreement says is that in the event of a test etc., the POTUS will make a determination as to whether it was justified. So there is the part about "intentions".

If India can't stand the consequences of a "test" today, well, that isn't going to change by the rest of the world agreeing not to put in any consequences without clear knowledge of precisely why the test was done.

Varadarajan disappoints. If he was this whiny, how come he has not been more supportive of the BJP in the past? Or is he just commie?

The 'business community' is not going to run for cover, as the deal is, again, on CIVILIAN NUCLEAR COOPERATION. Of course, they will see that some changes are needed in US law to improve their ability to compete with other nations.

So the NSG waiver still matters, unless the NSG can be disbanded, and countries like Russia and France can make their own decisions. But revealing this letter now, is the US way of getting the NSG to pass a "clean waiver" since this is the "assurance from the US" that they have been seeking. India's insistence is that no such stuff be written into the NSG waiver, so that other countries can write their own bilaterals with India on whatever terms make sense to them.

"Going for Pokhran 3" etc., would of course be a fine way of proving the NPAs right and removing all doubt about the intelligence of the Indian government.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 19:42

The disclosure of this secret letter is not dramatic for its technical content, but rather

- because of the timing of the disclosure on the eve of the NSG Meeting,
- non-supportive attitude of USA with respect to India's ambitions, and
- most importantly, the wide gulf between American and Manmohan Singh's clarifications to their domestic constituencies respectively on the nature of the deal

The issue of assured fuel supplies or lack of it is the most volatile of all, because that goes against the grain of the Separation Plan.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Kanson » 03 Sep 2008 19:45

I agree with what Siddharth Varadarajan is saying now. In fact, I know the likely outcome by last week when every major actor in the Indian contingent where making bold statements. But dont know what makes Siddharth Varadarajan or others to be more confident that the deal will pass this time on 2nd round as they said earlier.

I never belong to the non-pro deal camp. But my understanding is that NSG is not going to pass the waiver as per the Indian expectation and deal is going to fail.

So what can be done to break the logjam ? There are two options.

1. India has to use N-weapon. (Using some model i estimate the N war in the subcontinent will happen sooner or later and on worst scenario it is few years away)

2. India has to find a way to break the NSG cartel. I think Iran will be a pawn.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 19:50

narayanan wrote:"Going for Pokhran 3" etc., would of course be a fine way of proving the NPAs right and removing all doubt about the intelligence of the Indian government.


BJP, the Left Front are going to pounce upon Manmohan Singh if he does not bring home a "Clean and Unconditional" Waiver from the NSG on Sept 5, and there will be little that Manmohan Singh would be able to say in his defense. He will be attacked for his misplaced trust in America's will and ability to deliver (Waiver) and his naivety in dealing with a devious superpower (disclosure of letter) and may be even for his complicity in selling out on India's national interests (right to test, assured fuel supplies).

Pokhran III is his and Congress's only way out!
Last edited by RajeshA on 03 Sep 2008 19:53, edited 1 time in total.

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ranganathan » 03 Sep 2008 19:53

Amen to that...

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Kanson » 03 Sep 2008 19:54

Carrying out Pokhran - 3 is like handing out the stick to others to beat us. We should find way and choose options to HURT others than us.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 19:57

Kanson wrote:Carrying out Pokhran - 3 is like handing out the stick to others to beat us. We should find way and choose options to HURT others than us.


There is a saying (at least in German): What doesn't kill you, makes you tougher!

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Victor » 03 Sep 2008 19:59

narayanan wrote: revealing this letter now, is the US way of getting the NSG to pass a "clean waiver" since this is the "assurance from the US" that they have been seeking. India's insistence is that no such stuff be written into the NSG waiver, so that other countries can write their own bilaterals with India on whatever terms make sense to them.

This is the only thing that makes sense of the timing of release. It is a restatement of Hyde for the lazy and simple minded (the 6-pack and COTUS). US has already been citing lack of "liability laws" to prepare GE & Westinghouse to sit it out for the first few years. However, one thing is certain--because of the smoke & mirrors, MMS has no political space left for a third meeting and this Friday is probably it. These "unnamed source" opinions are just pressure tactics on India upto the last second.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby enqyoob » 03 Sep 2008 20:03

Rajesh: The solution to "assured fuel supply" is the clause that says that India can accumulate a Strategic Reserve of fuel up to that needed for the reasonable lifetime of the foreign-supplied civilian reactors.

No one in their right mind would be satisfied with an "assurance" that can be negated, like all such things, by the next POTUS or COTUS or Lok Sabha or desi Cabinet. The only "fuel assurance" that matters is a reserve.

To see that, just think through this "assured fuel supply" dream. Say I agree to "send you Highly Enriched hashish in perpetuity". What good is that unless the price and delivery terms are agreed on? Would you be happy if Hyde and Seek agreed that the US would supply fuel to, say, Tarapur "in perpetuity", but India must agree to buy fuel ONLY from the US? Then next year the US price would rise by 10 times....

OTOH, if India escapes with the "strategic reserve" clause intact, this becomes a non-issue. The supplier nations are also happy with it, because they see that India is not going to do a Test the day after the agreement, because India will be smart to wait until the strategic reserve is good and ready and India would be smart to accumulate that reserve while the price is low. This is why the clause in the 123 and (maybe) in the IAEA is about "strategic reserve".

In the event of a test, the suppliers will DEMAND "their" Poo back, but whether they can make that demand stick depends on the circumstances.

Now see what happens when the Recycling is done in India, maybe for the whole region (see my posts on the shaheed thread).

The consequence of a fuel and nuke collaboration cutoff is that India will kick out all the representatives of those countries in the nuke industry in India, and they will lose all influence over what happens to the recycling plant, stored fuel rods, and any Pu recovered from there. So such a cutoff would be as (forbidden word, let's say"counterproductive") for those countries as India rushing to "test" would be for India.

Countries don't craft deals without thinking through the interests of each other. And deals are no good if they depend on "expressed intentions" at any point.

Like I said, this "secret letter-now-revealed" is the fig-leaf to save the H&D of the Six-Pack.

Anyway, I guess it will be all over by this time tomorrow.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby John Snow » 03 Sep 2008 20:09

Now we need complete confidence motions.

ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ksmahesh » 03 Sep 2008 20:15

Let me also attempt in becoming Jyotishi.

NSG will pass this waiver with some terrible but softly worded amendments.

Kangress will shout victory (Telling lies is old habit and they die hard).

Aam aadmi will hear shouts of Bijili coming (curtsey elections and Kangress).

World (US, china, and company) will be happy to finally succeed in cutting Indian nuclear balls.

US will claim its pound of flesh by demanding f18 and other contracts. Also every time India will think of saying free-foreign-policy US will threaten to stop supplies of nuclear fuel.

By that time more than 150$ billion of "Indian Piggy Bank of aam aadmi" would have been used in building nuclear reactor.

India will become effectively a puppet state of US.


End result: No bijli for aamaadmi but
1. plenty of $ for ameri khan and chamcha
2. first phase of CRE starting by reducing the rate of nuke bum making.
3. Foreign policy of India shall truly become Made by USA

I seriously am thinking of taking Kamandalam and start my padyatra towards himalayas.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby enqyoob » 03 Sep 2008 20:18

A fine sentiment, but you mean: "Himarayas" because it will be owned by PRC.. :mrgreen:

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby RajeshA » 03 Sep 2008 20:18

Narayanan: A strategic reserve is a theoretical insurance policy but MMS has not been able to make it de-jure, even though he has language in both 123 and IAEA for that. If the de-jure part stays this way, and USA and other countries are allowed legally to demand a return of the fresh fuel supplied by them, sitting in the strategic reserve, upon nuclear testing by India, the Strategic Fuel Reserve loses its meaning. Then either India sticks to its agreements and returns the fuel or India breaks those agreements and sits out the sanctions and accusations of illegal behavior.

In this context by assured fuel supply, I mean
a. Right to Strategic Fuel Reserve +
b. No return of fresh fuel to the country of origin upon nuclear testing.

These aspects are in doubt (at least to me) especially after going through the letter to Lantos.

ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ksmahesh » 03 Sep 2008 20:20

OMG may be I should go towards Rameshwaram. :( :((

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16404
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby NRao » 03 Sep 2008 20:22

The real question is why was the letter revealed at this point in time. I feel it was for the benefit of the NSG members - to let them know 'we have the conditions', so, you provide a 'clean' waiver (whatever that means).

The issue is whether the 6-packs will accept this logic.

If they do not, then the deal is dead. IF they do, then India builds her strategic reserve for everything.

Could India not out source testing? Just curious. To Russia perhaps, IF someone else tests that is?

My gut feel is that testing is not an Indian issue. I suspect Iran will test way before India does.

RA,

Go through the game leaving the US out.

I suspect the US companies will go thru' others.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 20:23

The best option is to walk away if there is even an extra comma on the coordinated draft. This way MMS keeps his credibility. No need to test yet.

Mrs. Gandhi got mad at President Radhakrishanan for calling Nehru gullible and credulous and did not offer him the second term.

I think its a disease of the Indian elite including the WMI and DIE that they get taken by sweet talk. However this is a age old problem of Indian elite as the Panchatantra tale of the "Brahmin and the Tiger" shows.

narayanan I request you to not provoke people. Thanks, ramana

ksmahesh
BRFite
Posts: 209
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 17:55
Location: Mt Everest - its the coolest one

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ksmahesh » 03 Sep 2008 20:27

RajeshA wrote:Narayanan: A strategic reserve is a theoretical insurance policy but MMS has not been able to make it de-jure, even though he has language in both 123 and IAEA for that. If the de-jure part stays this way, and USA and other countries are allowed legally to demand a return of the fresh fuel supplied by them, sitting in the strategic reserve, upon nuclear testing by India, the Strategic Fuel Reserve loses its meaning. Then either India sticks to its agreements and returns the fuel or India breaks those agreements and sits out the sanctions and accusations of illegal behavior.

In this context by assured fuel supply, I mean
a. Right to Strategic Fuel Reserve +
b. No return of fresh fuel to the country of origin upon nuclear testing.

These aspects are in doubt (at least to me) especially after going through the letter to Lantos.



Are bhai do you seriously believe US will look at the assured fuel supply

at rediff Brahma Chellaney has written this

# The US has given no binding fuel-supply assurance to India. The prime minister told the Lok Sabha on August 13, 2007 that 'detailed fuel supply assurances' by the US for 'the uninterrupted operation of our nuclear reactors' are 'reflected in full' in the 123 Agreement. But the Bush administration has denied this. Its letter to the House Committee states that the US will render help only in situations where 'disruptions in supply to India... result through no fault of its own,' such as a trade war or market disruptions. 'The fuel supply assurances are not, however, meant to insulate India against the consequences of a nuclear explosive test or a violation of nonproliferation commitments,' the letter said. The letter also reveals that the US has given no legally binding fuel-supply assurance of any kind.


With cat really out of bag their is no chance that US or cartel (which either includes most of the Uranium suppliers or countries that can be pressurised to follow the dictats) will allow India to buy enough fuel for reactor's life time.

More over the claim to access the reprocessing tech by MMS was a kala Sachch.

Where is my kamandalam........
Last edited by ksmahesh on 03 Sep 2008 20:33, edited 1 time in total.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby enqyoob » 03 Sep 2008 20:27

ramana, thanks, but right now you are the one who is very obviously and very gratuitously provoking postors in a perfectly calm and friendly discussion:

narayanan I request you to not provoke people. Thanks, ramana


What is the provocation that you imagined now?
Last edited by enqyoob on 03 Sep 2008 20:29, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby John Snow » 03 Sep 2008 20:28

I suspect the US companies will go thru' others.


Like USAF Tanker deal to European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co.(EADS) through Northrop Grumman Corp.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby John Snow » 03 Sep 2008 20:30

N guru, you are already donating the entire range of himalays to PRC.
At least on maps we own them, dont we?


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests