India nuclear news and discussion - 1 sep 2008

[enqyoob]

This means that desi Babu expertise has been called in to "refine" the NSG draft. The Six-Pack will be mired in gibberish for the next 6 months trying to decipher it.

For an example try to read through the Instructions for OCI application at the Ministry of Foreigners, and then at the Consulate of India Houston website, and try to figure what is a

photograph showing head and shoulders against LIGHT background

[ShauryaT]

There is nothing there about grid connectivity defining what is military.

Precisely. It is not there because connecting to the grid has nothing to do with civilian designation. It is India's sole discretion to classify them. Military reactors can connect to the grid. But, you know, what is the real source of my fear behind this word "civilian".

[ShauryaT]

This means that desi Babu expertise has been called in to "refine" the NSG draft. The Six-Pack will be mired in gibberish for the next 6 months trying to decipher it.

For an example try to read through the Instructions for OCI application at the Ministry of Foreigners, and then at the Consulate of India Houston website, and try to figure what is a

photograph showing head and shoulders against LIGHT background

What will I not give in the world to meet you some day.

[amit]

This means that desi Babu expertise has been called in to "refine" the NSG draft. The Six-Pack will be mired in gibberish for the next 6 months trying to decipher it.

For an example try to read through the Instructions for OCI application at the Ministry of Foreigners, and then at the Consulate of India Houston website, and try to figure what is a

photograph showing head and shoulders against LIGHT background

It could also mean, methinks, that the desi Babu deliberately leaked the draft?

That would imply that our paan chewing, chai sipping Babus have become wise in ways of the dark suited and dark sunglass wearing "phoren" negotiators?

[Kakkaji]

Revised NSG draft for Sept. 4/5

http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files ... -5+Mtg.pdf

NPA's don't like it. Hence letter leak by Berman.

Sivab,

That document is typed in old typewriter than photcopied in an old machine and than scaned with hand written date which means it came from the Indian babudom not from US babuland.

The handwritten date looks like 01/03/08.

Doesn't look like the correct date by either Indian or American date system.

[sivab]

^^^ That scrible is 09/03/08, The body of the draft refers to IAEA agreement on August 1, 2008.

[ramana]

By Email...

We should all thank Chariman Berman for releasing the State Department communication to the HFRC. For the first time, I have achieved complete clarity on the issue. So far, I have been looking up to people like you and others for guidance. I am now personally resolved to oppose this deal, not that it matters.

Any deal with such divergence in the interpretations of the parties is not worth the paper on which it is printed. From the day 123 agreement was made public, I was taken aback with the water-tight commitments India has made, getting in return only hopes and exprectations from the US.

[Arun_S]

Revised NSG draft for Sept. 4/5

http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files ... -5+Mtg.pdf

NPA's don't like it. Hence letter leak by Berman.

Sivab,

That document is typed in old typewriter than photcopied in an old machine and than scaned with hand written date which means it came from the Indian babudom not from US babuland.

To prevent cyber detectives tracing back the source of the document I can clearly see that it is not typewritten, but instead it went through few iteration of digital laundering to introduce set pattern of distortion and noise, to a limit to preserve readability ( all image processing s/w have such laundry features) . The black scratching on top is IMHO a red herring.

So "Naam Badnaam" Indian babudom is misplaced.

[Sean]

Excellent analysis Katare.

How much strategic fuel reserve is India allowed under the NSG waiver? Can India import Pu for its FTBR program?

[pradeepe]

Irrespective of whether Berman's leaked letter adds anything new or not, its impact is that it has to be addressed by GoI right now. National dailies are screaming bloody murder. It doesn't matter of course if what was killed was possibly the neighborhood rat, twice over by now, but the headlines still scream - "Betrayal & Murder Most Gruesome!!!"

It just shows how crafty the NP Ayotullahs really are. Fattened over the years by all the Chinese grease and energy lobbies, they are putting up quite a fight. This ones going to be quite close.

[jerry]

By Email...

We should all thank Chariman Berman for releasing the State Department communication to the HFRC. For the first time, I have achieved complete clarity on the issue. So far, I have been looking up to people like you and others for guidance. I am now personally resolved to oppose this deal, not that it matters.

Any deal with such divergence in the interpretations of the parties is not worth the paper on which it is printed. From the day 123 agreement was made public, I was taken aback with the water-tight commitments (can someone elobrate on the watertight commitments )India has made, getting in return only hopes and exprectations from the US.

Ok lets put it this way the deal is not worth the paper it is put on. So we come back to square one i.e. POK1 & 2
But now we can buy plants from outside, there are international commercial players involved (who can put pressure if supply is stopped etc.., just as after POK2 after a few years we shall carry more weight arround the world.
Morever we have a chance to create a strategic reserve from outside which we did not have earlier.
But the moot point is will we be allowed to create a reserve.

[Dileep]

Revised NSG draft for Sept. 4/5

http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files ... -5+Mtg.pdf

NPA's don't like it. Hence letter leak by Berman.

Sivab,

That document is typed in old typewriter than photcopied in an old machine and than scaned with hand written date which means it came from the Indian babudom not from US babuland.

Where can I get an "old typewriter" that can type in proportionally spaced times roman font?

This text is typical MSWord produced, most probably from a plain text e-mail message. The date scribble is american 'pen pointing down' cursive in american date format. Someone took a photocopy of the original text, which was later scanned into PDF.


Don't read too much into it.

[amit]

Sivab,

That document is typed in old typewriter than photcopied in an old machine and than scaned with hand written date which means it came from the Indian babudom not from US babuland.

Where can I get an "old typewriter" that can type in proportionally spaced times roman font?

This text is typical MSWord produced, most probably from a plain text e-mail message. The date scribble is american 'pen pointing down' cursive in american date format. Someone took a photocopy of the original text, which was later scanned into PDF.


Don't read too much into it.

Since it's pretty obvious that the draft is not the asli one we can ignore its contents.

However, can we ignore the fact that it's hosted on the ACA website? What's the significance of that, any ideas?

Or is it the web address of the letter also a spoof address?

[Nitesh]

count down begins

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Will ... 442808.cms

Will NSG finally seal N-deal in India's favour?
4 Sep 2008, 0934 hrs IST,Times Now

NEW DELHI: The fate of the Indo-US nuclear deal will be sealed today, at the all important Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) meeting at Vienna.

Ahead of the crucial meeting TV channel TIMES NOW has accessed the revised India specific waiver draft, which maintains that, India has voluntarily committed itself to continuing its unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing and its readiness to work with others towards the conclusion of a Multilateral Fissile Material Cut-off treaty.

This essentially means, India will refrain from testing nuclear missiles and committing to sign and adhere to an Additional Protocol with respect to India's nuclear facilities.

India is also deciding to separate civilian nuclear facilities in a phased manner and to file a declaration with the IAEA in accordance to the separation plan.

The draft also highlights India refraining from transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to states that do not have them and supporting international efforts to limit them.

It also focuses on harmonising its export and control the list of guidelines with those of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and committing to adhere to the NSG guidelines.

However, what seem like specific waivers for India also lists that the governments can transfer nuclear technology to India for peaceful purposes and for use in IAEA safeguard civil nuclear facilities satisfying clauses.

The participating government may transfer nuclear related dual use of equipment materials, software and related technology to India for peaceful purposes and for the use in civilian nuclear facilities, under the IAEA safeguards provided transfer satisfies clauses.

Although those opposing the N-deal will continue to maintain that the changes in the NSG Draft are cosmetic, the revised India-specific waiver draft, which will be considered by Nuclear Suppliers Group today makes it incumbent on the grouping's head to hold regular consultations over New Delhi's adherence to its guidelines on global atomic trade.

The draft, which has been changed after demands by a number of NSG countries to address non-proliferation concerns, falls short of the demand made by some NSG countries. The demands made are for periodic review of India's adherence to the grouping's guidelines as a condition for granting the waiver, which has been opposed by New Delhi. A final decision on these concerns will be taken today.

[RajeshA]

Separation agreement directly and indirectly in the IAEA approved draft.

There is nothing there about grid connectivity defining what is military.
As sivab has already pointed out, reactors such as MAPS 1-4 and TAPS 3+4 which are connected to the grid have been classified as military.

Thanks Gerard, Sivab,

During the formulation of the Separation Plan, this was an issue of discussion and there were demands to define civilian reactors as all those which are attached to the power grid. I thought that definition had stuck. I am glad, that it is not so.

As far as IAEA Safeguards Agreement is concerned there is no definition of what is civilian and what is not, except that the Indian Govt. would designate as such.

[Sanatanan]

RajeshA (@ 03 Sep 2008 10:45 pm , 11:09 pm , 10:45 pm, and 04 Sep 2008 06:56 am ):
Gerard (@ 04 Sep 2008 01:07 am):
sivab (@ 03 Sep 2008 11:18 pm, and 11:26 pm): and
ShauryaT (@ 04 Sep 2008 01:20 am):

Regarding grid connectivity and designation of a nuclear power plant as "civil" or "military":

I believe, paragraph 8 of the separation plan presented to the Parliament by the PM on 08/03/2006 (which I believe is considered applicable up to now) throws light on this issue. I would imagine that this same document might have been filed with IAEA recently.

From The Hindu:
Implementing India's separation plan

. . . .
"8.Concepts such as grid connectivity are not relevant to the separation exercise. Issues related to fuel resource sustainability, technical design and economic viability, as well as smooth operation of reactors are relevant factors. This would necessitate grid connectivity irrespective of whether the reactor concerned is civilian or not civilian.
. . .

I believe that insertion of this clause into the separation plan is the second of Mr Kakodkar's biggest positive contributions in this deal, the first one being the spotlight shone by him on the US's goal-post-shifting game.

[RajeshA]

Analysis of the 2nd Draft of NSG Waiver, as approved by USA and India.

NSG meets amidst rumblings of uncertainty by Siddharth Varadarajan: Hindu

Vienna: The Nuclear Suppliers Group is meeting again here on Thursday to review a fresh American proposal to exempt India from the 45-nation cartel's requirement of full-scope safeguards as a condition for nuclear exports.

Full-scope safeguards means each and every nuclear facility in a country must be placed under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, something India refuses to do since it has a nuclear weapons programme.

An earlier United States proposal was shot down at a special plenary of the NSG in Vienna on August 21 and 22, with many countries demanding the imposition of stricter conditions on India. The new draft, which was finalized by the U.S. in consultation with India on Friday night and made available to NSG members the next day, was meant to reflect those demands but several countries have told The Hindu the fresh provisions are inadequate.

"This is a very disappointing text from the point of view of the three major issues raised by us last time on testing, transfer of sensitive technology and review", said a diplomat from a country which had raised strong objections in the previous meeting. "I can't see how they expect us to accept this".

The belief of diplomats from the hold-out states is that the September 4-5 meeting will also prove inconclusive and that India will have to make further compromises if it hopes to win approval for the proposed exemption.

The 'leaking' of the U.S. State Department letter containing a strong elaboration of the Bush administration's approach to nuclear cooperation with India has also queered the pitch with several countries preparing to arm themselves with passages from it for Thursday's NSG meeting. "I think it is fair to say we will be quoting from bits of the letter", one diplomat told me on Wednesday. "When Washington is clear about its own benchmarks for [nuclear] trade with India, why should the NSG be asked to settle for something less?" said a diplomat from another country.

On the other hand, diplomats from countries broadly supportive of India's position say they will press for adoption of the waiver the way it stands. "But the main battle has to be waged by your principal partner, the U.S.", a diplomat from a former Soviet Bloc state said. He added that the principle of consensus meant even one country with objections could hold up the process.

Asked whether the leaked State Department letter -- with its unambiguous language on the termination of both nuclear cooperation and all fuel supply assurances in the event of an Indian nuclear test -- might serve to allay fears in the NSG that Washington was being too "soft" on India, one diplomat said the letter was indeed reassuring. "I think the assurances contained in the State Department's response are very positive", he said. "But our concern is that they apply only to the United States. What we would like is for Russia and France to be also held to the same assurances and understandings."

The bottom line for that diplomat's country, and others with which it is consulting, he said, is that "we have to tie [the exemption] to the moratorium – that's the minimum". "If that's not there, I can't see us making headway", said another diplomat.

The new draft adds more explicit language on consultations, including a reference to "acting in accordance with Paragraph 16 of the NSG guidelines" if one or more members "consider that circumstances have arisen which require consultations".

This paragraph specifes a procedure and range of measures, including termination of supplies. 16(c) of the guidelines say, inter alia, "In the event that one or more suppliers believe that there has been a violation of supplier/recipient understanding resulting from these Guidelines, particularly in the case of an explosion of a nuclear device, or illegal termination or violation of IAEA safeguards by a recipient, suppliers should consult promptly through diplomatic channels in order to determine and assess the reality and extent of the alleged violation ... Upon the findings of such consultations, the suppliers, bearing in mind Article XII of the IAEA Statute, should agree on an appropriate response and possible action, which could include the termination of nuclear transfers to that recipient".

But critics within the NSG are not satisfied. "Proposing more consultations is not enough. Because of the requirement of consensus, there is every likelihood of lack of action in the event of [a test by India] happening", said one diplomat. "So we feel the waiver should clarify that there will be disincentives for India to testing … The consequences should be clear and upfront".

The critics are also not very pleased with the 'compromise' formula in which their concerns will be reflected in a chairman's statement. "There was a version of a chairman's statement that was circulating when it was pulled at the request of the Government of India", one diplomat said. "But from our point of view, this is not a runner. We want an unambiguous, clear waiver in one text".

These countries feel the State Department disclosure has strengthened their hands, even though its full import was still being digested. "I think there is room for improvement on both sides. There is scope for compromise, also by India", one official said.

Assessment of new NSG draft

The changes in the draft waiver may be "minor" in terms of volume -- as non-proliferation critics have charged -- but the addition and subtraction of key words in key places shows a serious attempt has been made to grapple with the more than 50 amendments which were demanded the last time the NSG met.

In paragraph 1(a), what was earlier a reiteration of the NSG's desire to contribute to the widest possible implementation of the objectives of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty has become "objectives and provisions" of the NPT. This is a concession by India, since the "provisions" are what spell out the distinction between nuclear and non-nuclear weapon states, with the latter expected to have full-scope safeguards.

Paras 1 and 2 also remove references to the NPT as the "traditional" non-proliferation regime and drop the idea of Indian being a "contributing partner" in the non-proliferation regime. These changes essentially are meant to allay concerns of NSG members that the NPT itself is in some way old or obsolete.

Also Para 1 (b) now speaks of the NSG seeking to "avert" the further spread of nuclear weapons, rather than "limit" it. Though several NSG states wanted a formal review mechanism -- a red line for India which said this might jeopardize billions of dollars worth of investment -- the new draft provides for NSG members to notify each other of transfers to India and the details of their bilateral agreements with India. But consultation now shall be, inter alia, about matters connected with implementation of the "statement" rather than the "Guidelines" as it was in the earlier draft, thus more tightly highlighting the centrality of India's non-proliferation commitments.

There are two other changes in the waiver which are significant. First, the link between India's commitments and the NSG's decision has been tightened. Earlier, the link was simply "In view of the above", i.e. India's commitments, the NSG was deciding to waive it guidelines. Now, it says, "Based on the commitments and actions mentioned above", i.e. in the paragraph outlining India's obligations, the NSG was acting. Though the connection is more direct, this wording also falls short of the demand made by some to make the waiver decision explicitly conditional on India's implementation of its commitments.Second, the paragraph requiring consultation with India by the NSG prior to the adoption of any changes to its guidelines has been diluted somewhat to the country's {India's} detriment.

The issue is important because one of India's commitments is "adherence to NSG guidelines" despite not being a member of the group. This commitment could expose India to being compelled to adhere to policies it did not play a role in formulating and which it might even oppose. The earlier draft had spelt out a mechanism for consultation with India and said "participation of India in the decisions regarding proposed amendments will facilitate their implementation by India". The new draft drops the word "effective". It also drops the earlier requirement that the NSG consult with India "on a non-discriminatory basis and solicit such comments on the amendments as [India] may wish to make".

Should India become a significant exporter of nuclear technology in the coming years, NSG would not be able to ignore India, and may need to make India a full card-carrying member, in which case controversial issues such as India's adherence to future NSG Guidelines, may not hold much water. As of now, it is a reason for worry.

Somewhere India really needs to draw the Lakshman Rekha.

[Philip]

MMS."We can act and they can react".He is speaking a half-truth here,because under MMS's sterling defence of the nation's security,he and future Congress governments will NEVER act,beacuse they do not or will not have the balls to do so! The mindboggling amount to be spent on importing nuclear fuel and technology along with massive defence deals with the US and the vested interests who hope to beenfit, will keep any good Congressman happy.Why should he rock the boat now or in the future?

[RajeshA]

NSG decision may get suspended: Brahma Chellaney

Round two of the crucial NSG (Nuclear Supplier’s Group) meet in Vienna begins today. The topic of discussion is the India-specific waiver on the nuclear trade. This comes after a bombshell was dropped in Washington, sending the Manmohan Singh government scurrying for cover. A confidential letter said the US would terminate the nuclear trade with India in the event of a nuclear test. The Washington post published the secret letter between the US state department and the US congress. The letter says that the deal could be called off, and all supplies would be stopped, if India conducts any nuclear tests.

Speaking on the deal, Brahma Chellaney, Professor of Strategic Studies at The Centre For Policy Research feels the Indian government position stands contradicted by the Bush administration’s letter. He said the final outcome of the NSG might have to be in conformity with the Hyde Act and that India's leverage is low due to the absence of domestic consensus. He sees a possibility of the NSG decision getting suspended.

Excerpts from CNBC-TV18’s exclusive interview with Brahma Chellaney:

Q: What have you made of the letter from Mr. Howard Berman to Ms. Condoleezza Rice which is now in the public domain?

A: Actually it’s a letter from the State department stating the Bush administration's official stands on the 123 Agreement and the letter was sent to the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs in January and released two days ago.

It contradicts the assurances made to the Prime Minister in the Indian parliament. So this a very embarrassing development for the Indian government that on the eve of the NSG meeting in Vienna, the Chairman of the Committee was forced to publicly reveal the contents of this 26-page letter; of course, he has his own motive. He wanted to put pressure on the NSG meeting because he is a critic of the deal. But the fact is that the Government of India’s publicly-stated position on various contentious issues stands contradicted by the Bush administration's letter to the US Congress Committee.

Q: Does it bring into question the US’s motives and stance and does it suggest that it is speaking in multiple voices and what bearing could it have on the final NSG waiver over the next two days?

A: If one sees the game that the US is playing at the NSG, it is playing a good cop-bad cop game versus India. It is a good cop but it has roped in some of its Western allies, six countries in particular to be the bad cops at the NSG. The whole idea is to mount pressure and to bring in some addition conditions into the NSG’s waiver and this is a way to ensure that the final outcome of the NSG process is an outcome that comes with some conditions; conditions that are sync with the Hyde Act because the Hyde Act itself specifies that the final NSG waiver for India ought to reflect the conditions that that legislation incorporates.

Q: If indeed the contents of the letter and the conditions as you pointed out will have to hold, what are the options ahead of India- will they have to walk away from this deal or will they have to accept it with the additional conditions being laid out?

A: We are reaching the moment of truth on this deal because this deal has divided India like no other issue since Independence. It has become a very divisive issue domestically. Unfortunately because it’s such a divisive issue and the way the deal has been mismanaged domestically, it has undercut India’s leverage internationally. Had India built domestic consensus, our negotiators would have had much more leverage vis-à-vis the Americans or vis-à-vis the internationally community that is represented in the NSG.

Now we are faced with a choice of either accepting the NSG waiver as it comes with all the conditions - it’s inevitable that the NSG waiver will come with conditions; they will not give us a clean unconditional waiver - so either we accept that waiver or we say thanks but no, thanks.

Q: What are the chances that there would be no clear outcome post this meet because now there are reports indicating that if indeed there is a dissatisfaction amongst a couple of the other member countries, the talks may just get suspended and perhaps go on the backburner for a bit longer?

A: I think that’s a real possibility because of the fact that once you play this game of bad cop and good cop and you try to use some of your allies to bring in additional conditions against India, then this game goes out of your hands.

It's quite possible that Americans might realise at the meeting today and tomorrow, at the latest meeting of the NSG that things are not actually under their control - that some of the smaller countries that are not nuclear exporters but are very staunch non-proliferation advocates - they have hijacked the agenda and ensured that there is no successful outcome in the NSG process.

If this meeting gets postponed then we are in for trouble because then we do not know when the next meeting will take place and there is also a Congressional calendar which is ticking away because the Bush administration wishes to clinch the deal while it remains in the office and if the meeting today is not going to progress satisfactorily, then it will become very difficult for Washington to ensure that this entire process of Congressional ratification is completed before Bush leaves office sometime in the third week of January.

Q: If it is not a clean waiver or even postponement, how do you think it will go down closer home - politically what could it mean for the Government- for the government which put its neck out and staked being in power on this issue?

A: There are two things - one, is that this deal has become linked with the Prime Minister; it has become a matter of prestige for him and if there is no successful outcome, he loses face domestically and that actually is his weak spot.

Secondly, it is clear already that this waiver by NSG is not going to be unconditional or clean; when the government of India now talks about the word clean, what it means is that the conditions should not be obtrusive. If the conditions are hidden, if they are cloaked in a way that the Government of India can save face in public, then such an outcome might be acceptable to the Government. But the fact is that as far as our opposition in the country is concerned, they have already rejected such a conditional outcome.

We already know from the letter that the Bush administration wrote to the Congressional Committee that the 123 Agreement comes with important conditions and infact the 123 Agreement is anchored in the Hyde Act and if the NSG waiver comes with hidden or explicit conditions, it will make the government's task at home much more difficult.

[jash_p]

deleted

[Gerard]

N-deal: We can test, assures Govt

[Philip]

US makes mockery of PM's claims
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.as ... nter_img=1

Shobori Ganguli | New Delhi
Manmohan knew American conditions but misled nation

The Bush Administration's well-kept secret of nine months is now in the public domain, reflecting how successfully President George Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh managed to hoodwink the Indian public into believing the India-US nuclear agreement was a dream deal....

MMS's Doublespeak exposed.

PM in Parliament

India wants removal of restrictions on all aspects of cooperation and technology transfers pertaining to civil nuclear energy, ranging from nuclear fuel, nuclear reactors, to reprocessing spent fuel. We will not agree to any dilution that would prevent us from securing the benefits of full civil nuclear cooperation.

Bush Administration letter

The United States rarely transfers dual-use items for sensitive nuclear activities to any cooperating party.

PM in Parliament

Detailed fuel supply assurances by the US for the uninterrupted operation of our nuclear reactors are reflected in full in the 123 Agreement.

Bush Administration letter

Should India detonate a nuclear explosive device, the United States has the right to cease all nuclear cooperation with India immediately, including the supply of fuel.

The fuel supply assurances are not...meant to insulate India against the consequences of a nuclear explosive test or a violation of non-proliferation commitments.

PM in Parliament

I confirm that there is nothing in these agreements which prevents us from further nuclear tests if warranted by our national security concerns. All that we are committed to is a voluntary moratorium on further testing.

There is nothing in the Agreement that would tie the hands of a future Government or legally constrain its options to protect India's security and defence needs.

An elaborate multi-layered consultation process has been included with regard to any future events that may be cited as a reason by either party to seek cessation of cooperation or termination of the 123 Agreement.

Bush Administration letter

Article 14 of the proposed US-India agreement for cooperation provides for a clear right for the US to terminate nuclear cooperation and a right to require the return of equipment and material subject to the agreement in all of the circumstances required under the Atomic Energy Act, including if India detonated a nuclear explosive device.

PM in Parliament

India's right to take 'corrective measures' will be maintained even after the termination of the Agreement.

Bush Administration letter

Until India has completed its safeguards agreement with the IAEA and the parameters of 'corrective measures' are known, we will not be in a position to speak definitively to the potential effect on other provisions of the proposed agreement.

[joshvajohn]

These interpretations of the agreement were there from the beginning to work within eachone's constituency. It is essential to get NSG's nod clear and quickly.

[raji]

As a complete novice in nuclear affairs, may I ask someone to clarify this in simple language.

What are the implications if the NSG doesnt grant India a waiver and the Indo-US nuclear deal doesnt go through at all.

1) Will India be worse off than when negotiations on the deal started three years ago ?

2) Will India's strategic nuclear deterrent be negatively impacted by the deal not going through ?

3) Will it only affect the civil nuclear program ?

4) Without the nuclear deal, will India be able to maintain its deterrent vis-a-vis China and Pak over the long run ?

Thanks.

[RajeshA]

UPDATE 1 - US says nuclear states nearing deal on India trade by Mark Heinrich: Reuters

VIENNA, Sept 4 (Reuters) - The United States said on Thursday nuclear supplier nations were making progress towards agreement on lifting a ban on trade with India, after Washington revised a proposal for the move to meet a raft of objections.

U.S. officials, scrambling to finalise a U.S.-India atomic energy deal, have been lobbying others in the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group for a one-time waiver to its rules against doing business with states outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Ahead of a two-day NSG meeting that began on Thursday, some members said changes made to the U.S. waiver draft were cosmetic and did not allay concerns the deal could subvert treaties meant to stop the production or testing of nuclear weapons.

In a sign of its desire to save a major Bush administration initiative, Washington sent its No. 3 diplomat, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, to Vienna to head the U.S. NSG delegation.

"We are making steady progress in this process and will continue to make progress," he said outside the closed meeting.

"And while a number of representatives here have raised important questions that need to be addressed, our discussions have been constructive and clearly aimed at reaching an early consensus," Burns told reporters. He took no questions.

Two diplomats in the meeting said a six-nation bloc that had spearheaded demands for explicit conditions on trade with India was splintering and other significant nations that had expressed reservations, such as Japan and Canada, had now dropped them. But another diplomat said the "like-minded" bloc of Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, New Zealand, Norway and the Netherlands was holding firm, with backing from China.

CLOCK TICKING ON DEAL

With the outcome still unclear and likely to require consultations in capitals for a final decision, diplomats said another meeting might have to be held later this month.

Without NSG action in early September, the U.S. Congress may run out of time to ratify the deal before it adjourns at the end of the month for autumn elections, leaving the matter to an uncertain fate under a new president.

India has ruled out major conditions on an NSG exemption in order to protect its strategic nuclear sovereignty.

Washington and some allies assert the U.S.-India deal will move the world's largest democracy towards the non-proliferation mainstream and fight global warming by furthering the use of low-polluting nuclear energy in developing economies.

Critics fear India could use access to nuclear markets abroad to boost its atomic bomb programme and drive nuclear rival and fellow NPT outsider Pakistan into an arms race.

To forestall this, they demanded clauses specifying no trade in the event of another nuclear test explosion, no transfers of fuel-enrichment technology that could be replicated for bomb-making, and periodic reviews of the waiver. Some diplomats said U.S. insertions into the revised waiver text suggesting, though not spelling out, that trade with India would be cut off if it tested another nuclear weapon had swayed most hold-outs in the secretive nuclear cartel.

The changes also indicated India was "voluntarily committed" to NSG guidelines against exporting "dual use" enrichment equipment that can yield peaceful nuclear energy or bomb fuel.

[NRao]

NSG waiver has to fit PM's word to parliament: Pranab

[NRao]

NSG nod must for PM to avoid domestic wrath

[John Snow]

C part will be operational now
R part soon to be announced
E part to follow soon
Jai Hind (sight)

[Nitesh]

C part will be operational now
R part soon to be announced
E part to follow soon
Jai Hind (sight)

ameen, but can't trust the chinkis

[Philip]

Some media reports.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... urpg-2.cms

Left, BJP want PM to quit; govt defends N-deal
4 Sep 2008,

NEW DELHI: Amid uncertainty over India getting NSG waiver for nuclear commerce, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee has made it clear that Government cannot go "beyond" its commitment to Parliament on the Indo-US nuclear deal.

As tough negotiations were held in Vienna at the meeting of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) on Thursday to consider waiver for India, the minister was unwilling to prognosticate on the outcome which is expected to be known on Friday.

"There is no room for speculation," he told All India Radio adding Government will have to wait for the outcome.

"We cannot go beyond our commitment to Parliament, commitment made by the Prime Minister and commitment made by ourselves. Therefore, whatever we have committed to it, it will have to be achieved within that," he said.

His comments come close on the heels of the controversial disclosures of the US position on the nuclear deal which gave ammunition to the BJP and the Left to attack the Government.

The minister said Government has seen the US draft for which amendments were sought. "The draft if it is agreed by the NSG is OK (for us)," he said.

The UPA government has rejected the BJP’s charges that it surrendered its right to conduct nuclear tests to the US. ( Watch )

Congress spokesperson Anand Sharma said India reserved its right to nuclear tests under the 123 agreement.

Left attacks PM on nuke deal

Accusing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of "lying to people and Parliament" on Indo-US nuclear deal, the CPM on Thursday demanded his resignation and said it would join hands with other parties to bring a no-confidence motion against his government.

"The only option left to them (UPA) is that the Prime Minister should quit. But neither will they convene Parliament session nor will they quit. .. It is a shameless government," party General Secretary Prakash Karat told reporters here.

He alleged the government has been "lying" to Parliament and people on the nature of the bilateral agreement reached with the US for civilian nuclear cooperation.

"It is evident that the Indian government was fully aware that the fuel supply assurances did not cover a termination of the 123 agreement and they have deliberately misled the country," he said.

The Left parties, BSP, TDP, JD(S) and parties which opposed the deal would jointly meet President Pratibha Patil in the next couple of days to demand immediate convening of the monsoon session of Parliament.

"They are trying to even change the seasons of the country. Have you heard of monsoon in October?" he said referring to the government's decision to convene the next session from October 17.

Karat indicated that the government was trying its best not to allow tabling of a no-confidence motion, saying it had not prorogued the previous session so far and had only adjourned it sine die.

As per parliamentary norms, if a session is a continuation of the previous one, then the same motion cannot be brought in the House again. The opposition had brought a no-confidence motion in the budget session. ( Watch )

Accusing the Prime Minister of misleading Parliament, the CPI also joined the CPM in asking the government to abandon operationalisation of the Indo-US nuclear deal following revelations in correspondence between the Bush administration and US Congress.

"It is abundantly clear that all the assurances regarding India's right to conduct tests, supply of fuel in perpetuity and chance of getting sensitive technology for reprocessing and enrichment were baseless," the party's Central Secretariat said in a statement.

It said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's assurance to Parliament on the issue "had no legal basis. Prime Minister willingly or otherwise has misled the Parliament."

Maintaining that the 26-page letter made public in the US had said the 123 agreement was "just a bye-product of Hyde Act", the CPI said India had "surrendered its nuclear autonomy" and it has to "follow whatever the US Administration dictates."

While there was no assurance on fuel supply in perpetuity, "what is more shocking is the fact that the US has acquired the right to force India to abandon its future R&D projects."

"With these revelations and the ongoing debate in NSG for imposing further restrictions on India, it is in the interest of the country that the Manmohan Singh government abandons the process of operationalising the 123 agreement," the CPI said.

PM misled Parliament: BJP

Earlier, the BJP accused the Prime Minister of “misleading” Parliament and the country on the nuclear deal issue. ( Watch )

"The Manmohan Singh government has no business to continue in office and should leave immediately," senior BJP leader Yashwant Sinha told a press conference here.

The former external affairs minister said in view of the "gross breach" of privilege of both the Houses of Parliament, an immediate session should be convened "within the shortest possible time" to enable BJP to move a privilege motion against the Prime Minister if the UPA did not quit.

The BJP made the demands following of the disclosure of a secret letter on Wednesday, sent by the Bush administration to US Congress that the pact would be off if India conducted a nuclear test.

Sinha said the government's statement in Parliament on the nuclear deal and what the US administration has told its lawmakers were "diametrically opposed to each other".

The BJP leader said if there were so many differences on the interpretation of the deal right from the beginning, then various problems would crop up in the later stages.

"This is a sure recipe for spoiling the Indo-US bilateral relations," he said, adding that BJP's "worst fears" had come true.

On the Hyde Act, Sinha said it is not only relevant but it is binding on the agreement.

"It is binding on the country. We cannot escape the rigours of the Hyde Act," he said.

The correspondence, which was made public by the US, vindicate BJP's stand, he said, adding "the position of India and US is poles apart"

BJP leader Arun Shourie said "the lies of the government and the Prime Minister in person have been nailed.

"It is a blot on us that we have to rely on disclosure by some other people rather from the government here. Once again the falsehood of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has been exposed," he said.

Shourie said there is a huge difference between what the government here is saying and what the United States administration is saying.

He also claimed that the United States has clearly said that if India conducts nuclear tests, it will terminate the agreement.

"Not only that but they have said they can also terminate the agreement on other grounds. Testing is just one of the items," he said.

India has so far been claiming 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, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had told Parliament, “The agreement does not in any way affect India's right to undertake future nuclear tests, if it is necessary.”


http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Sep42008/update.asp
NUKE DEAL
BJP demands resignation of UPA govt

Accusing the Prime Minister of "misleading" Parliament and the country on the nuclear deal issue, main opposition BJP on Thursday demanded the resignation of the Manmohan Singh government.

UPA government cheated people: Karat
With the United States making it public that the nuclear deal would be off if India conducts nuclear tests, CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat on Thursday accused the UPA government of cheating the people of the country on the issue.
NSG mulls revised draft amid scepticism


http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?news ... 1&pageid=3

Critics slam new US draft on India waiver

...."Contrary to the Orwellian claims of its proponents, the deal would not bring India into the non-proliferation mainstream," he said.

Asking the NSG to flatly reject the new US proposal as "unsound and irresponsible", Kimball said to be effective, NSG guidelines must establish clear and unambiguous terms and conditions for the initiation and possible termination of nuclear trade.

ACA also circulated an Aug 5 letter from Howard Berman, Democratic chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urging "the president should withhold support from any proposed exemption from India in the NSG guidelines that is not fully consistent with the Hyde Act."

The letter warned Rice that "any effort to consider the (US-Indian nuclear cooperation) agreement outside of the requirements of current law will be impossible if the administration accepts an NSG exemption that fails to include the Hyde Act conditions".

The Bush administration has claimed that the implementing 123 agreement initialled last year is fully consistent with the contentious Hyde Act, the US enabling law passed in December 2006.

[sivab]

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/00 ... 041742.htm

US document takes nothing away from India: Kakodkar

New Delhi (PTI): Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar on Thursday said the US disclosures on the nuclear deal do not take away anything India wanted and there was "adequate protection" for its strategic programme in the civil nuclear deal with Washington.

He said India knew about the letter written by the US State Department in January to Tom Lantos, the then Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but was caught unawares by its release.

"But now they have released the document.... A quick reading tells me that it actually doesn't take away anything whatever we have been saying here in India before," he told NDTV.

Asked about the right to conduct nuclear tests, he said "in terms of consequences, of course, when we decide to do that, we need to factor in possible consequences."

The top nuclear scientist indicated that there was "adequate protection" for India's strategic programme in the civil nuclear deal with the US.

"I also knew that this (US State Department letter to the Congress) has been asked to be kept classified. But I did not know that this will be released at this juncture," Kakodkar said.

"The most important thing is that whatever programme we have started... we should be able to continue operation of these reactors and adequate protection for that purpose has been built into the 123 Agreement," he said.

Kakodkar confirming the obvious...

[Philip]

Mulayam in a dilemma!
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/357284.html

'Secret’ N-letter: Mulayam in ‘dilemma’, Cong says don’t panic

New Delhi, September 4:: In the wake of the disclosure of correspondence between the Bush administration and the US Congress, Samajwadi Party, a key ally of UPA, reacted cautiously on the issue.

Party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav said, “there are a lot of contradictions in the External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s stand and the content of the letter.”

“I am in a dilemma right now,” he said speaking to reporters. Meanwhile, the Congress party said that there is no need to panic adding that there is nothing new in the letter.

“There is no cause of alarm or apprehension in view of the letter,” Congress spokesman Manish Tiwari said.

[Manny]

IMO, Georgia invasion by Russia and Bush traveling to China at this time...had lot more to do with this outcome.

Manny

[svinayak]

It is not about interpretations of the agreement but the reality which is going to hit.

[RajeshA]

Revised NSG draft for Sept. 4/5

http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files ... -5+Mtg.pdf

NPA's don't like it. Hence letter leak by Berman.

Actually it is a great boon for India, that the Revised Draft has been put online. India has given its assent to this version. At least now USA cannot change the draft to suit its will, and India is forced to concede that the changes were approved by India beforehand.

At least we will know the exact changes that take place on Sept 4 and 5 during the NSG Plenary Meeting.

[RajeshA]

US agrees to changes in nuclear trade waiver for India: Earthtimes

Vienna - The United States has pledged to change its proposal for exempting India from international export control rules, sources close to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) said Thursday, in order to find a consensus among nuclear-exporting countries soon. Sources close to the NSG, which sets international nuclear export control standards, said several members were still critical of US drafts for a trade exemption tabled so far, as they did not include a provision for measures in case India tested a nuclear weapon.

"I believe that we are making steady progress in this process, and we will continue to make progress," US Undersecretary for Political Affairs William Burns told reporters.

"And while a number of representatives here have raised important questions that need to be addressed, our discussions have been constructive and clearly aimed at reaching an early consensus," he said.

Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland are among the most vocal of the 45 NSG members in calling for amendments, as they seek to balance an exemption for India with strengthening the global non-proliferation regime.

One source close to the negotiations said the flexibility shown by the US was "a great success."

"It seems the Americans understand that we still have work ahead of us," he said.

Lobbying for the export exemption is part of Washington's 2005 nuclear deal with New Delhi, which is seen as a cornerstone in improving relations between the two countries.

The Bush administration is pushing for an NSG decision this week, so that the US Congress can ratify the bilateral agreement before it goes into recess ahead of the presidential election.

While some participants at the meeting said they were confident they could reach a consensus this week, others said it depended on whether Washington and New Delhi were prepared to take steps to accommodate countries seeking amendments.

Indian officials have said that mentioning nuclear testing in the NSG exemption was a red line that should not be crossed.

New Delhi is demanding an unconditional exception from current nuclear trade rules, which deny exports to countries like India that have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The US was putting "great pressure" on the six most critical countries to agree quickly to a trade exemption, a source said.

As of Thursday morning, the US draft incorporated only two of the more than 50 amendments proposed by 20 NSG members at a first meeting on India in August.

A clause on transparency about trade with India, and a provision for NSG consultations if "circumstances have arisen which require consultations," were added to the original draft, according to a copy of the text published Wednesday by the Arms Control Association in Washington.

Meanwhile a fresh political row has broken out in India over the nuclear deal, with the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party and left-wing parties demanding the resignation of Premier Manmohan Singh for misleading parliament on the agreement with the US.

The BJP made the demand after Wednesday's disclosure of correspondence between the Bush administration and Congress, which said the US had no intention of selling sensitive nuclear technology to India, and nuclear commerce would be immediately halted if Delhi tested a nuclear weapon.

In a reaction to the outcry from the political parties, the Indian Foreign Office said New Delhi would be guided "solely" by the terms of the bilateral nuclear agreement, the India-specific inspection agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the waiver from the NSG.

Now the F**** Yankees have started to make changes on their own, without the approval of India.

Siddharth Varadarajan wrote:

The bottom line for that diplomat's country, and others with which it is consulting, he said, is that "we have to tie [the exemption] to the moratorium – that's the minimum". "If that's not there, I can't see us making headway", said another diplomat.

The new draft adds more explicit language on consultations, including a reference to "acting in accordance with Paragraph 16 of the NSG guidelines" if one or more members "consider that circumstances have arisen which require consultations".

This paragraph specifes a procedure and range of measures, including termination of supplies. 16(c) of the guidelines say, inter alia, "In the event that one or more suppliers believe that there has been a violation of supplier/recipient understanding resulting from these Guidelines, particularly in the case of an explosion of a nuclear device, or illegal termination or violation of IAEA safeguards by a recipient, suppliers should consult promptly through diplomatic channels in order to determine and assess the reality and extent of the alleged violation ... Upon the findings of such consultations, the suppliers, bearing in mind Article XII of the IAEA Statute, should agree on an appropriate response and possible action, which could include the termination of nuclear transfers to that recipient".

But critics within the NSG are not satisfied. "Proposing more consultations is not enough. Because of the requirement of consensus, there is every likelihood of lack of action in the event of [a test by India] happening", said one diplomat. "So we feel the waiver should clarify that there will be disincentives for India to testing … The consequences should be clear and upfront".

Any language, which is stronger than this is virtually going over the red line.

India should break off diplomatic relations with the Pipsqueak, throw out their embassies, take over the land and build a museum there of all the proliferation that has taken place in the world, when the Pipsqueak did not speak out. This regardless of whether the NSG Waiver is given today or not.

[RajeshA]

Labor won't budge over India anger The Age (Australia)

AUSTRALIA is likely to again stare down Indian anger over a controversial decision to back down on a deal to sell it uranium.

The Indian Government is upset that the Rudd Government has turned its back on a decision by the former Howard government to sell uranium to the emerging world power.

Labor reneged because Delhi is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith is expected to make his first official visit to India next week as a separate Indian deal with the United States to share nuclear technology struggles to gain international approval.

What is he coming here for???

[John Snow]

Earlier under the sanctions regime of 1998 and earlier we had a 30yr conventional mortgage, now with this J18 123 MMS made deal we have now a sub prime mortgage on which the interest payments are Beta (manmohan ka) + spread + our own (dis) credit rating.


If there is nothing that is going to chanage, What is this show and tell now when PM could have called for major party nominated leaders and disclose the fine print.

SO based on N guru anology, The selected leader was pissing in the chai being served to one and ( N guru did not disclose what the Mone ( == Kuttan == Chotu) was doing to the biscoots and Samosas) all in anticipation of malafides of the nation(al)leaders and aam janta.

So does this mean MMS will never be the PM next time around there fore this parting shot as a subprime mortgage signee a gift from the economiser?

****
Ok reading Herr Rajesh garu's posting of earth times.
Looks like AmeriKhans are going for scorched earth policy.
First fall out is MMS goes
Next Credit rating of India goes down slope
Next Discredit India for walking away
Next elections are held
Next Amerikhans make sure that a unstable coalintion leads GOI
Next back to apply genteel persuasion, Bijlee nahi.

Next Andhere ke raath may diya there hath may! (Marathi bawdy comedy of 1979)
show continues.

[svinayak]

Now the F**** Yankees have started to make changes on their own, without the approval of India.

India should break off diplomatic relations with the Pipsqueak, throw out their embassies, take over the land and build a museum there of all the proliferation that has taken place in the world, when the Pipsqueak did not speak out. This regardless of whether the NSG Waiver is given today or not.

Either way it is a loose - loose situation for India

[ShauryaT]

Am I the only one here, who feels that the new draft has found a way to apply the Hyde act to the NSG exemption?