India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16420
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby NRao » 03 Sep 2008 20:32

When does one think India will test or need to test? Round it of to the nearest year.

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3332
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby rsingh » 03 Sep 2008 20:32

****Indian Govt in emergency meeting,main negotiator called back to Delhi****

As per Times of 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 20:35

NRao wrote: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.


OK, I think it is very daring theory, that this letter was reproduced just to assure the Pipsqueak, because the consequences for the MMS Government are horrendous to say the least. With this letter, the most important and most rare of quantities between India and USA, TRUST, is gone, is evaporated, just like Siddharth Varadarajan said. If USA wanted to assure the Pipsqueak, there would have been other ways, using less dynamite.

If of course, the Waiver is accepted on acceptable terms to India, then the USA would be and can be excused.

US companies can go through any other companies, they like. They could build joint-ventures with Indian companies as well. No problem with that.

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 20:38

sits out the sanctions and accusations of illegal behavior.


There is no "illegal behavior" as long as the specific fuel supply agreement does not say: "This fuel will be returned to sender within (x) days if India conducts a nuclear test". As long as the test is not conducted with that fuel, they have no case. EVEN if it says that the fuel must be returned, u know, the parcel service can be pretty slow, so many forms to fill, strikes by Mazdoor Union, inspections needed, etc. etc. Maybe someone will file a lawsuit in the Allahabad High Court and get an Injunction against Removal of Pu. And you don't expect the Court to take a case out of sequence, do you? They have to rule on the Ayodhya case...

NOT that this will keep them from :(( :(( , as seen in the Ossetia-Georgia case. But hey, one cannot be a P-6 member and worry about "accusations".

Look at France with its 6 megaton tests in 1998, at a time when no one was threatening them with anything.

If India is not willing to get to that level of thick-skin India is far better off doing unilateral disarmament and forgetting about nukes. Get patted on the head as "nice-boy".

Obviously in the case of a nuclear test, India will argue overwhelming national security imperatives. So it will be case of "U r with us or against us". Well... every nation will decide then which suits them....

.... as long as this NSG thing does not command certain behavior on their part.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 20:42

Yesterday I had said US has to assure the reluctant six that they will enforce the Hyde and not be limited to the Presidential notings on the bill. And that was understood by India.

Looks like US was going more than that and had deceived the GOI when they made those inconsequenctial notings while they gave a secret assurance to the US congress. Thats the perfidy to be taken into account. But thats par for the course. As braudel says India was self conquered. Bush had to paly this game as there is no power on earth that can subdue India without Indian help.

They "Arichetulu swargam choopin cheru" (They showed heaven in the palm of the hand) and fooled the GOI.

It doesnt matter how much was deposited in the Swiss banks by the business lobby. A good move will be to transfer the stuff back to India and put it for LIF facitility. All will be forgiven. Indians futreis with India and not in Swiss banks.

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 20:42

When does one think India will test or need to test? Round it of to the nearest year.


Day after China or Pakistan tests again. Which will probably the week after the US tests again. Which will be the week after Russia tests again.

(Maybe this year..) 8)

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 20:43

Media campaign has been accelerated for the gullible aam aadami.

Rediff message board has been shut down to prevent the be-pardaisation of MMS govt.

India should walk away from this deal or test asap (preferably before the deal passes through cartel).

That way the NSG draft is through and we have tested before the deal is finalised.

India should not cower of what NPAs are capable of. If they were worth caring then lizard would never have open "nuclear bum burger joint".

What can maximum happen:
1. Deal is dead (what can be better than this)
2. some more sanctions (We have faced these sanctions is harder times we can face them now). The important thing is not to shy away from taking hard decisions by being afraid of hardships.

But ...........alas! this is kangress......and I remember J&K 1948, I remember Tibet 1955, I remember Aksai chin 1956, I remember NEFA 1962, I remember Haji Pir pass in 1965, I remember ........ I remember..........
Last edited by ksmahesh on 03 Sep 2008 20:49, 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 20:45

Nothing new in letter; we kept India informed: US: PTI

NEW DELHI: The US on Wednesday down play the disclosures made in the US State Department document which triggered a controversy here and said there was nothing new in it which has not been shared with India or the US Congress.

"This letter contains no new conditions and there is no data in this letter which has not already been shared in an open and transparent way with members of the Congress and with the Government of India," US Ambassador David C. Mulford said in a statement.

In controversial disclosures on the eve of the meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in Vienna, the US has made it clear that it will stop fuel supplies and other nuclear cooperation if India conducts a nuclear test.

The US position, which appears at variance with New Delhi's interpretation of some key clauses of Indo-US nuclear deal, was made public just before the two-day meeting of the 45-nation NSG which will consider a waiver that will enable India do nuclear commerce.

A 26-page document released by a well-known opponent of the deal, Howard Berman, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, contains an assertion by the Bush Administration that its assurances of nuclear supplies to India are not meant to insulate it against the consequences of a nuclear test.


So the accusation will not be misplaced trust, naivety, but rather complicity in sellout, the gravest of charges.

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 20:47

NRaoji:

I would add a counter-pooch to yours:

How many times (meaning instances separated by at least 2 weeks) more does India need to test?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 20:48

NRao wrote: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.


NRao, The US NPA are the otherside of the coin of the arms control people and they work in unison. Unfortunately Indians are the only ones who silo their minds and turn the proverbial Nelson's eye to overt gaddari.

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 20:49

narayanan wrote:There is no "illegal behavior" as long as the specific fuel supply agreement does not say: "This fuel will be returned to sender within (x) days if India conducts a nuclear test". As long as the test is not conducted with that fuel, they have no case. EVEN if it says that the fuel must be returned, u know, the parcel service can be pretty slow, so many forms to fill, strikes by Mazdoor Union, inspections needed, etc. etc. Maybe someone will file a lawsuit in the Allahabad High Court and get an Injunction against Removal of Pu. And you don't expect the Court to take a case out of sequence, do you? They have to rule on the Ayodhya case...

If India is not willing to get to that level of thick-skin India is far better off doing unilateral disarmament and forgetting about nukes. Get patted on the head as "nice-boy".

Obviously in the case of a nuclear test, India will argue overwhelming national security imperatives. So it will be case of "U r with us or against us". Well... every nation will decide then which suits them....

.... as long as this NSG thing does not command certain behavior on their part.


I thought this NSG Waiver was supposed to do away with all of India's problems of sanctions. If it does not solve that but only creates further ones, then what is the use of this NSG Waiver.

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 20:51

RajeshA wrote:I thought this NSG Waiver was supposed to do away with all of India's problems of sanctions. If it does not solve that but only creates further ones, then what is the use of this NSG Waiver.


It is useful for Unkill

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 20:55

Unlce not only has Lawyers but also liars very very skilled called "Spinners and Shakers" in his contigent of negotiaters, we did not have lawyers in ours because we thought we can read english! :rotfl:

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby sivab » 03 Sep 2008 20:56

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/st ... 07:00%20PM

Secret N-deal note leaked in US, PM holds meeting
NDTV Correspondent
Wednesday, September 03, 2008, (New Delhi)

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is holding a Congress core group meeting on the N-deal issue and Chairman of Atomic Energy Commission Anil Kakodkar has been flown in urgently to Delhi for consultation.

Defending the N-deal, the government has said that the document is non-binding and an internal US document.

Meanwhile, BJP has slammed the UPA government on the N-deal saying it has misled the country.

Just a day before the Nuclear Suppliers Group meeting in Vienna on the Indo-US nuclear deal, the US House Foreign Relations Committee led by a congressman who has been staunchly against the deal, has released a secret note that empowers the US to stop selling nuclear technologies to India and terminate nuclear trade if New Delhi conducts a nuclear test.

The 26-page note was sent to the committee by the State department way back in January in reply to queries sought on the 123 Agreement.

In one of the answers the note says a clause in the 123 Agreement, which assures fuel supply to India by other friendly nations will no longer be valid in the event of a test.

Ultimately, it's up to each individual country but this indicates that the US will not lobby for nuclear fuel on India's behalf.

Given the timing of this note, other countries at the NSG meet may ask why they should agree to give a waiver to India, when the US itself is so tough on India.

While these answers to committee are not an official agreement nor binding on New Delhi, they do reveal a difference in perception on the agreement.

Senior Congressman Howard Berman who heads the House committee has spoken out against the deal before and so the timing of this leak is no coincidence.

But US Ambassador to India David C Mulford has said that there's nothing secretive about this letter. In a statement released on Wednesday he said, "This letter contains no new conditions and there is no data in this letter which has not already been shared in an open and transparent way with members of Congress and with the Government of India."


Mulford is right. I will be surprised if AK was flown in for this purpose.

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 21:02

Has anyone (except postor "berman") seen the actual letter, since it has been "released to the public"?
Rediff is reporting that Washington Post is quoting Berman as having seen the letter sent to Lantos.....

Anyway, this letter is the answer to "How are US govt. officials going to explain how the deal they sign is in conformance with US law?"

Pls post actual letter, not annotated excerpts. Thx.
Last edited by enqyoob on 03 Sep 2008 21:05, edited 1 time in total.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby sivab » 03 Sep 2008 21:05

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/i-dont-thin ... 725-2.html

India's Ambassador to the United States, Ronen Sen, held discussions with the two Presidential candidates – Barack Obama and John McCain - and says there is bipartisan support for the deal.

“I don't think it's a question of running out of time. I don't think we should set deadlines, artificial deadlines. Democratic processes take their own time and we should respect that. I would say there is recognition, this is good for India, good for the United States and good for the world as a whole. So, it's not a question of any time frame, I'm confident that would be done, it'll be realised,” Sen said.

“I'm not a spokesman for either Senator Obama or Senator McCain but they've already both categorically, clearly endorsed the agreement,” he added.

Joe Wilson, Co-Chair of the India Caucus in the US Congress, too, is hopeful that the nuclear deal will finally come through.

“I'm still hopeful that even in September, with the Nuclear Suppliers' Group acting this week, I'm very hopeful Democrats and Republicans will work together this month to have it passed. If it does not, I'm very pleased to find out we may have a lame duck session. I think it will be very good for the American Congress, it'll be very good for the civilian nuclear agreement,” Wilson said.


More evidence of done deal...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 21:08

So Mulford is quick of the ground to get his rebuttal out while the MMS govt is holding party meetings and not Cabinet meetings.

Sivab, There is a reason that AK is being flown back. If he is still there after the letter is leaked it means gullibility and at worse connivance.

I suggest folks stop saying MMS knew about the secret letter to the US Congress as he needs the support more than anything else right now.

----------------
Narayanan, The letter is linked a few posts earlier in this thread. Its 26 pages long.

kshirin wrote: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

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby nkumar » 03 Sep 2008 21:17

Answers to Q18, Q19 and Q20 makes it amply clear that our $$$$$$$$$$$ investments will be duds if we test. There are no fuel supply guarantees. Answer to Q19 also imply that strategic reserve will be consistent with Hyde and the "parameters" of strategic reserve are to be developed over time.

In response to Q3, it is claimed that 123 is consistent with the legal requirements of not just with Hyde Act but with the Atomic Energy Act.

Since we are the customer party, so our interpretations doesn't matter. What matters is the interpretations of the supplier party, especially when the supplier party has all the power.

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 21:21

ramana wrote:I suggest folks stop saying MMS knew about the secret letter to the US Congress as he needs the support more than anything else right now.


Ramana saar,
The chances are 50:50.

MMS may become complacent enough to accept more stringent NSG lingo (if he feels confidant that their is support enough).

Or

Finding outright rejection by all sound making sectors he may backout a non-sellable deal and paint a brave picture (by saying -- US changed assurances which in National Interest I cannot accept).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 21:23

Typical news story from Indian media. Looks like govt is hiding and burying its head in mud. In sand atleast you breathe.

Stunned by letter bomb, Govt runs for cover

Agencies
Published on Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 20:48, Updated on Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 21:00 in Nation section

NEW CLEAR DANGER: A letter written by Bush admin says the US will end deal if India conducts N-test.

Deepa Balakrishnan

New Delhi: India on Wednesday refused to comment over a letter from the US State Department that is embarrassing both Washington and New Delhi.


Just a few hours to go before the Nuclear Suppliers Group meets in Vienna to discuss waivers for India, a letter written by the Bush administration to its Congress has spelt it out clearly the US will terminate nuclear trade if New Delhi conducts a nuclear test.


The letter written nine months ago was kept under wraps all these months.


"I have read the statement. But I will not comment," External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee was quoted as saying by agencies.


However, Government sources said the letter was an internal document of the US State Department and was not binding on India. India is bound only by the 123 Agreement, the sources said


Asked to comment on the outcome of the Nuclear Suppliers'Group (NSG) meeting beginning in Vienna tomorrow, Mukherjee said he would keep his fingers crossed.


"I will not comment tomorrow, day after tomorrow. After that you ask me," Mukherjee said.


The Congress party too chose to play down the "disclosures" on the Indo-US nuclear deal as "internal communication" between the American administration and the legislature.


"What the US administration and or the US President communicates with the US Congress or a member of the US Congress is entirely their problem," Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari said. :eek:


He said India is bound only by the terms of the 123 Agreement which does not prohibit the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology which is integral to the civil nuclear cooperation.


In curiously-timed disclosures, the US has made it clear that its assurances of nuclear fuel supplies to India are not meant to "insulate" it against the consequences of a nuclear test.


Tiwari said there was no need to relook or re-examine the nuclear cooperation agreement with the US as both the countries have gone through various steps before concluding the document.


The Congress leader pointed out that in case India conducts a nuclear test, the 123 Agreement has provision for launching consultations before taking any action.


"No precipitate action will be taken till the completion of the consultation process," Tiwari noted


Yes the 123 allows the ENR but the letter assures the US Congress that they will never approve such transfers. Its not just about the tests.

One question about Mulford's statement. If this was all shared with MMS govt then why did SD ask the US Congress to keep it secret? Was it from Indian public?

Are the opinion makers in India for the deal also in the know about this secret letter? the real kicker is not that US will invoke all the portions of the Hyde Act if India tests, but that it will not ever allow the ENR transfers, fuel supply stockpile and all such measures before such a test. And all this was conveyed to GOI as part of the process? And GOI continued negotiations?

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby arun » 03 Sep 2008 21:31

kshirin wrote: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


The letter from Jeffery T Bergner,Assistant Secretary of Legislative Affairs to then Chairman of the US Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Lantos, is interesting.

If there was any expectation in India that pursuant to the agreement the US will release dual use technology to India, forget it.

The letter clearly articulates that its technology denial regime insofar as India is concerned will continue.

The so called “Trinity Issues” that India was pressing upon is dead. See the last sentence of answer to question 4 and more particularly the last two lines of the answer.
Last edited by arun on 03 Sep 2008 21:34, edited 2 times 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 21:33

The Govt needs to fall or do a quick round of tests soon. A few 100 kiloton nukes ought to do it. It ould put an end to the deal once and for all.

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 21:36

OK, thanks, so now I have read the entire letter.

I agree that there is absolutely nothing new here, no "hidden surprises" etc.

It basically says 4 things:

1. US is not planning to transfer stuff to make bums, since it "rarely" has done so to any country (UQ comes to mind..) and "has no such transfers in place now". IOW, this is not about US-India nuclear weapon development collaboration, period. Nothing new here.

2. US retains the right to stop all collaboration if India violates the agreement, including testing nuke weapons again. Nothing new here - this was exactly what was revealed before.

3. The size of the strategic fuel reserve has not been determined, but the US does not anticipate that it is going to get so large that India can just say :P and go ahead and test. Nothing new here.

4. Better not use US-supplied fuel in breeder reactors unless these are breeder reactors that are in the civilian sector and under IAEA safeguards. Nothing new here.

So I confirm my faith tha the hype is politically motivated, and probably paid by the NPAs and the Chinese owners of the Indian media... and others who shall not be named.

I was wrong. Berman being Berman, did not reveal this letter now to assuage the H&D of the Six-Pack.

He revealed it now for the benefit of the Indian Opposition, because that is his last hope to derail a deal that India needs. And he's right on the money in his estimate there.
Last edited by enqyoob on 03 Sep 2008 21:38, edited 1 time in total.

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3332
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby rsingh » 03 Sep 2008 21:37

Strange....... "world community media" is not reporting this.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby nkumar » 03 Sep 2008 21:39

ramana wrote:One question about Mulford's statement. If this was all shared with MMS govt then why did SD ask the US Congress to keep it secret? Was it from Indian public?


They wanted to keep it secret because the the interpretations of US runs contrary to the assurances given by MMS to the Parliament. It would be politically infeasible to move ahead on 123 especially when Left and BJP were lambasting the GoI for the deal.

So what happens now? My reading is that Pranab Mukherjee or someone from GoI will make a statement that - "Unless the NSG waiver is clean and unconditional, India will walk away from the deal." Thus they will effectively put the ball in the US court.

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 21:45

So looks like AK is making this trip to say to the pawn chewing Mantri " Js , We already are aware of this Ji" and fly back tomorrow?

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 21:48

I was wrong:
No need to test for India (as a bum of 20kt is deterring enough if the delivery means are nice ones).

However the problem lies with the restriction on fuel supplies could be used to hold our policies to ransom.

This is worse than Porkis having control over oil pipeline. (Not that I am in favour of that either).

If uranium is so much important then who-o-why we donot pass strict laws and start mining in Meghalaya?

Look how India is being befooled:
Unkil said
(July18) No probs for advanced tech, fuel if identification/separation of civilian reactors, test/no-test voluntary and no tie ups of testing with tech/fuel etc.
Next tech was out and pressure on India to accept the safeguards for infinity. MMS bartered this with assured fuel supplies, test/no-test voluntary.
Next assured supplies are out, test out.

Progressively the noose is being tightened. I guess soon we shall hear that kashmir was also to be given to porkis (another secret understandings)

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby sivab » 03 Sep 2008 21:52

narayanan wrote:

4. Better not use US-supplied fuel in breeder reactors unless these are breeder reactors that are in the civilian sector and under IAEA safeguards.


Minor issue. It is not that US origin fuel cannot be used in breeder reactors or bums. India can use it as it sees fit, as long as accounting is done per iaea i.e. give equivalent material after accounting for processing losses. I for one would love to see it used in bums just for the heck of it :mrgreen:

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 21:54

While it is interesting to see all the :(( I am constrained by the P-5 Adminullahs from making any remark which may be (mis)construed as being indicative of intentionalities or proclivities that may be interpreted as effectively causing :(( to any postor, so I will just point to one small aspect:

No tech.


No. No BUM tech.
No point in explaining anything else that, as MMS said, any reasonable person can read for themselves and interpret according to Hyde, Seek, MMS, Advani, Berman, Karat or Kendall.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ranganathan » 03 Sep 2008 22:00

Is there some law regarding how soon a no-confidence motion can be called after first one has failed?

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3246
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Kakkaji » 03 Sep 2008 22:21

ranganathan wrote:Is there some law regarding how soon a no-confidence motion can be called after first one has failed?


IIRC, not for six months after the first one.

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 22:51

That is why I suggested a complete confidence motions be tabled.

If the GOI loses it then its ok to form new govt no?

*****
Aadded later

It's now clear from both President Bush's and Prime Minister Singh's postures that they each choose to interpret the nuclear deal in a way that is most palatable to their critics and constituents. Shorn of complexities and legislative and bureaucratic gobledy-gook, Bush has told critics of the deal, ''If India tests, we will punish, except may be if..." Singh's line: "We don't need to test, but if need to we will, no matter the cost."


Chiddu Uvacha

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NPT_lobby_uses_Bush_letter_to_question_deal/articleshow/3441549.cms

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 23:16

sivab:

U r rite. The US had noooo problem with US-origin fuel being used in breeder reactors, except that the fuel will come with the equivalent of the Orloff Curse that accompanied the Orloff Diamond: US NPA Inspecteurs.


Inspecteur: Why is the (Cooum) river a glowing green?

Ans: That is only Pu, saar!

Inspecteur: VOILA! A VIOLACION!


This is why I said "India better not use US fuel in breeder reactors" - in order to safeguard breeder technology and anything else there from prying eyes, noses etc.

Once breeder technology is common, India can build a few out in the civilian sector, and then any fuel can be used, and the Inspecteurs and Inspect to their hearts' content.

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Arun_S » 03 Sep 2008 23:16

So the last sheet covering the sanctity of "Trust US" (sic) has also fallen off and the nakedness of serving only national interests of US is self evident, and needs no further proof or debate (I hope). Perfidy galore.

Some arguments were earlier made on how much fuel should be purchased for the Nuclear Fuel Reserve, and if it should be for the lifetime of reactor or shorter:
Viz.
    1.) 100 years fuel reserve for new design reactors, or
    2.) 60 years fuel reserve for old design reactors), or
    3.) just 10 years fuel reserve will be enough and fly with the wings of faith in US and friendly NSG 'birathars' (sic).

I would like to know if someone now thinks that 10 year reserve will be enough?

I have earlier conclusively shown that amount of uranium needed to power the 40GWe imported LWR per year and the cost of that Uranium fuel is $3 Billion or more per year (repeat per year). Thus importing new technology long life LWR reactors for the 40GWe power will entail buying lifetime fuel reserve requires import of $300 Billion (repeat billion) or more worth of Uranium fuel.

narayanan wrote: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.

Interesting argument. If I am also ask since when has the private club called NSG become the UN or UNSC to prohibit "all" other countries of the world from trading with India?

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 23:19

Spinster: More like the story of the Kerala Medical College students who decided one day to end their bullying and harassment of the tea-shop waiter:

Medico:

Eda, Kuttan, we have decided that in future we won't make fun of you. Shows you that we are really nice guys.

Kuttan: Saare: If y'all stop harassing me, then I won't "P" in your tea any more either, Saar!


Win-win.

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 23:21

since when has the private club called NSG become the UN or UNSC to prohibit "all" other countries of the world from trading with India?


In effect, since the Soviet Union ended and the Noo Whirled Odor came into peeing. Do you have many examples of countries that are trading with India WITHOUT NSG approval on stuff that the cartel is interested in? Apparently the list of those who bow to the NSG now includes Russia and France.

Maybe Pakistan will sell us nukes! :idea: :mrgreen:

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby Virupaksha » 03 Sep 2008 23:27

Arun_S wrote:So the last sheet covering the sanctity of "Trust US" (sic) has also fallen off and the nakedness of serving only national interests of US is self evident, and needs no further proof or debate (I hope). Perfidy galore.

Some arguments were earlier made on how much fuel should be purchased for the Nuclear Fuel Reserve, and if it should be for the lifetime of reactor or shorter:
Viz.
    1.) 100 years fuel reserve for new design reactors, or
    2.) 60 years fuel reserve for old design reactors), or
    3.) just 10 years fuel reserve will be enough and fly with the wings of faith in US and friendly NSG 'birathars' (sic).

I have earlier conclusively shown that amount of uranium needed to power the 40GWe imported LWR per year and the cost of that Uranium fuel is $3 Billion per year (repeat per year). Thus importing new technology long life LWR reactors for the 40GWe power will entail buying lifetime fuel reserve requires import of $303 Billion (repeat billion) worth fuel.


Interesting argument. If I am also ask since when has the private club called NSG become the UN or UNSC to prohibit "all" other countries of the world from trading with India?

"All" here indicates the NSG only, there are not even pipsqueak useful ones outside the NSG (except niger) and trade here indicates nuke trade I guess.

What the 26 page thing present on rediff, I read through it and found out nothing new. It was always the NSG draft which is important. If the NSG draft is clean and unconditional, I say, let US 123 die, who cares? there are countries like Russia, France which will be there. Remember the 123 is US specific only, yes, US will take away if we test, but will Russia, France take away? That is decided by this NSG draft.

All the efforts of 123 are on one side, this NSG draft is another. If we can get this draft right, we can happily pi*s in the direction of US 123 with nothing to lose. I expect that for the sake of the "heavy load" which US has done (not even sending a junior of junior of junior adminstrator) for the first round, we will give 1-2 nuke reactors to them and stop at that.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby ramana » 03 Sep 2008 23:32

The problem is there aren't enough kuttans around.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16420
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby NRao » 03 Sep 2008 23:53

I am not sure what is new in this "secret" stuff, or what is surprising, but here is the Wash Post article:

In Secret Letter, Tough U.S. Line on India Nuclear Deal

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 3, 2008; Page A10

The United States will not sell sensitive nuclear technologies to India and would immediately terminate nuclear trade if New Delhi conducted a nuclear test, the Bush administration told Congress in correspondence that has remained secret for nine months.

The correspondence, which also appears to contradict statements by Indian officials, was made public yesterday by Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, just days before the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group meets again in Vienna to consider exempting India from restrictions on nuclear trade as part of a landmark U.S.-India civil nuclear deal.

The NSG, which governs trade in reactors and uranium, poses a key hurdle for the U.S-India pact. The group operates by consensus, allowing even small nations to block or significantly amend any agreement. The United States has pressed the NSG to impose few conditions on India, even though it has tested nuclear weapons and has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

A significant group of nations balked at the proposal when the NSG first discussed it two weeks ago. Berman's release of the correspondence could make approval even more difficult because it demonstrates that U.S. conditions for nuclear trade with India are tougher than what the United States is requesting from the NSG on India's behalf.


About 20 nations offered more than 50 amendments to the U.S.-proposed draft text, focusing on terminating trade if India resumes testing and bans on the transfer of sensitive technologies.

The correspondence released by Berman is "going to reinforce the views of many states," said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, which opposes the U.S.-India agreement. "There is no reason why this should not be an NSG-wide policy."

The correspondence concerned 45 highly technical questions that members of Congress posed about the deal. In 2006, Congress passed a law, known as the Hyde Act, to provisionally accept the agreement. But some lawmakers raised concerns about whether a separate implementing agreement negotiated by the administration papered over critical details to assuage Indian concerns. The questions were addressed in a 26-page letter sent to Berman's predecessor, the late Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), on Jan. 16.

The answers were considered so sensitive, particularly because debate over the agreement in India could have toppled the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, that the State Department requested they remain secret even though they were not classified.

Lynne Weil, a spokeswoman for Berman, said he made the answers public yesterday because, if NSG approval is granted, the U.S-India deal soon would be submitted to Congress for final approval and "he wants to assure that Congress has the relevant information."

In India, Singh and his aides have insisted that the deal would not constrain the country's right to nuclear tests and would provide an uninterrupted supply of fuel to India's nuclear reactors. In August 2007, Singh told Parliament, "The agreement does not in any way affect India's right to undertake future nuclear tests, if it is necessary."

The State Department's letter to Lantos gives a different story. It says the United States would help India deal only with "disruptions in supply to India that may 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 makes clear that terminating cooperation could be immediate and was within U.S. discretion, and that the supply assurances made by the United States are not legally binding but simply a commitment made by President Bush.

The letter also stated that the "U.S. government will not assist India in the design, construction or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies," even though the Hyde Act allowed transfers of such technology under certain circumstances. The U.S. government had no plans to seek to amend the deal to allow sensitive transfers, the letter said.

The administration is eager for NSG approval this week because there is a narrow window for final congressional action before lawmakers adjourn this month, although many of them say the prospects for quick action remain dim.

Reflecting the importance of the U.S.-India deal to Bush's foreign policy legacy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is dispatching two top officials -- William J. Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs, and John Rood, acting undersecretary of state for arms control and international security -- to the NSG session.

Concerns about the deal have been raised by a group of mostly smaller states, led by Ireland and New Zealand. But this week China also publicly urged caution, saying in a foreign ministry statement that the NSG must "strike a balance between nuclear nonproliferation and peaceful use of energy."

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

Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

Postby kshirin » 03 Sep 2008 23:58

Can anyone tell me what the US hoped to achieve with this? I hope I am wrong, but I never stopped wondering why the US reconciled itself to the very obvious possibility that India could buy from others - why were they going through all this trouble so that others could benefit - the current letter mentions the US aspired to only 2 reactor sales post deal and Berman's original letter specifically asked 'what's in it for us' (the US I mean)? I therefore find Varadarajan's logic hard to refute, which means this was mala-fide on the part of the entire US establishment, and explains their cooling off on Aug 21. Extensive reliving of our past experience with this most interesting country has made me rethink the value of entering into a stranglehold of a relationship with them unless it is not completely on our terms.

S. Varadarajan:"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."

For the sake of all that energy which has been poured into negotiating the 123 Agreement, which is an excellent one, it is still hoped we get that waiver.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests