Abso-agree.Enough of the tired old Russian/non-aligned nexus. It has failed India for 60 years. A radical new approach beckons.
The governors are holding their cards close to their chests, except for the Canadian, who has pledged support for Amano. India claims not to have made up its mind, but South Africa will expect the Indian vote, particularly in the context of the India-Brazil-South Africa grouping that has gained momentum. But the best that India should hope for is a deadlock, which will bring back Dr El Baradei or attract another eminent personality.
We should start yelling from rooftops that proliferation is the symptom. The disease is nuclear weapons. If everybody were to give up their bums, then there is no question of proliferation. So instead of treating the symptom of proliferation, we should treat the disease of nuclear bums. AKA universal nuclear disarmament (UND).negi wrote:We welcome all such steps towards comprehensive nuclear disarmament; however logic demands that since the Pee-5 are sitting on a pile of nukes ,Obama should lead by example onlee; as it is according to NPAs and former's trusted aides evil Yindoos are SDMs with hardly few dozen bums onlee so nuclear disarmament should not be a big deal for us.
India lists issues for nuclear deal talks with US25 Mar 2009, 0210 hrs IST, Indrani Bagchi, TNN
NEW DELHI: The nuclear deal in place, India is now turning into a strong and vocal member of the global non-proliferation and disarmament brigade, which is intended to blunt a "non-pro" Obama administration's instinctive criticisms against India.
Shyam Saran, PM's special envoy on the nuclear deal, on Tuesday outlined a series of steps on everything from CTBT to fuel banks, peaceful utilization of outer space and FMCT, in a speech at Brookings Institution, an Obama-friendly think tank in Washington.
The Indian initiative comes as a pre-emptive move to a US administration that is seen to be a lot more unbending in nuclear matters than the Bush administration. Besides, Democrats have traditionally emphasized the non-proliferation aspect of nuclear cooperation in comparison to the energy and economical aspects which the Bushies focused on.
But it's clear India is willing to play both tunes - business and security - simultaneously. Saran said, "(The) security-related agenda is substantive and no less important than the follow-up on the civil nuclear cooperation agreement in terms of expanded nuclear and high tech commerce."
Saran said India was waiting to see a US elaboration of its non-proliferation objections, apart from CTBT "including the proposed summit on nuclear terrorism, the high level dialogue among declared nuclear weapons states to kick start the process of nuclear disarmament, the pursuit of an anti-satellite weapon agreement and the elimination of clandestine nuclear proliferation networks."
India is also much closer to signing the proliferation security initiative (PSI) that was such a bugbear during the Bush years. If India can sign this, it would be a big brownie point for the Obamas, since the Bushies couldn't get India on the table. Of course, CTBT is the big prize, but India will take its time over that one.
"While reserving our position on a question of principle, we would be prepared to work together with the US and other friendly countries on practical steps to discourage proliferation," Saran said.
Saran's remarks come soon after Obama appointed California congresswoman, Ellen Tauscher, as the new undersecretary for arms control and international security. A known hardliner on proliferation, Tauscher was a virulent opponent to the nuclear deal, even writing a letter to Bush before he signed the deal to lobby against it. But she will be the one India will have to deal with and this country will need several things from the US to take the nuclear deal forward.
Saran indicated clearly that India was ready to sign the international liability convention. "I understand that the inter-agency process within government has been concluded. India plans to increase substantially its nuclear power production capacity. International cooperation in civil nuclear energy will be an important means to achieve this goal. Therefore, we see joining the international nuclear liability convention as being in our interest and hope to do this soon."
India asked US for "early commencement of our dialogue on arrangements to give effect to our right to reprocess US origin spent fuel." This would make it easier for India to source US fuel and US reactors. Saran's comments also come after NPCIL signed an MoU with GE-Hitachi for advanced boiling water reactors, soon after signing a similar deal with Westinghouse for the AP-1000 reactors.
Although he left it unsaid, Saran implied that opening up nuclear business in the time of a slowdown made sound economic sense. With a delicately worded swipe at Obama's "protectionist" tendencies, Saran said, "India has already conveyed a letter of intent for up to 10,000 megawatts of US nuclear power reactors... 10,000 megawatts of nuclear energy may translate into US $150 billion worth of projects, with significant business opportunities and potential collaboration for both Indian and US companies. This would also result in significant and high quality job creation in both our countries."
He said India had proposed an ad-hoc working group in the Disarmament Conference in Geneva. "India has proposed appointing a special coordinator at the CD to carry out consultations on measures which could lead to consensus and form a basis for the mandate for an ad-hoc working group on nuclear disarmament."
But India would retain its opposition to the CTBT unless it was specifically linked to disarmament, Saran said. This is significant, given that Barack Obama has promised to seek Senate ratification of the treaty that India has not yet signed.
U.S. affirms pledge on nuclear dealBS Reporter / New Delhi March 25, 2009, 1:16 IST
With India and the US approaching another crucial phase of negotiations over implementing the civilian nuclear agreement, India has flagged key issues that it wants to be addressed.
Speaking at the Brookings Institution in Washington on Monday, the prime minister’s special envoy on nuclear issues and climate change, Shyam Saran, said: “Inter-agency process within government has been concluded” for India to join the international nuclear liability convention.
With India’s “letter of intent” to produce up to 10,000 Mw of power using US nuclear reactors, it joining this convention is necessary for US companies to build reactors in India.
As a quid pro quo, while the US is keen that India joins the international nuclear liability convention since it many translate into $150-billion worth of projects, India wants to begin negotiations so that the spent nuclear fuel can be reprocessed in India itself.
As part of the 123 Agreement, India should set up a dedicated reprocessing plant for nuclear fuel obtained from foreign sources. Saran said the new US administration “is ready to engage with us at an early date.”
Saran also highlighted some of India’s concerns. As a step towards India’s integration into the global nuclear market, the prohibitionary mechanisms on the transfer of dual-use technologies to India must go, said Saran.
With specific reference to the US “Entity List,” which details Indian companies barred from purchasing or receiving US technology, he said this list must be “scrapped, sooner rather than later.”
Another problem before the US is its access to India’s booming energy and defence industries. Saran said India’s defence spending on “medium and long-term goals of force upgradation” meant acquisition plan for the next 10 years amount to $120 billion “could be reoriented towards the US” if sticking points — such as India’s doubts about reliability of US supplies and legal issues over end-use monitoring of defence equipment that has been supplied – are satisfactorily addressed.
Also, he said while India has not signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), it would work with the US “on practical steps to discourage proliferation.” With the nuclear deal in the bag, Saran said: “If the world moves categorically towards nuclear disarmament in a credible time-frame, then Indo-US differences over the CTBT would probably recede into the background.”
Will fulfil commitments under historic agreement: official
But calls for strengthened NPT regime
Will not accept CTBT, says Indian envoy
Washington: In its first public assurance to India that there will be no turning back on the civil nuclear deal, the Obama administration has said it will fulfil the commitments under the historic agreement and has asked New Delhi to help craft a “strengthened NPT regime.”
The U.S. was committed to being a robust partner of India in developing civilian nuclear energy, said Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg at a seminar on “The U.S.-India Nuclear Agreement: Expectations and Consequences” at the prestigious Brookings Institution here.
“Our government has taken some of the steps to realise the 123 Agreement. We both need to do more. We look forward to working with India to fulfil the promise of civil nuclear energy cooperation,” he said. “The agreement not only provides a concrete platform for economic and technological cooperation between our two countries but also offers a basis for moving beyond one of our most serious barriers to political cooperation — the status of India’s nuclear programme,” said Mr. Steinberg.
He said the U.S. and India could work together to boost the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty regime. “Both the United States and India have the responsibility to help craft a strengthened NPT regime to foster safe, affordable nuclear power to help the globe’s energy and environment needs, while assuring against the spread of nuclear weapons,” he said. India, despite not being a signatory to the NPT, was “in the position to look at the kinds of commitments it can make to be part of an international approach,” said Mr. Steinberg.
Speaking at the seminar, Prime Minister’s special envoy on climate change Shyam Saran said India would not accept the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama had said he would push the U.S. Senate to ratify the CTBT — which bans all nuclear tests for any purpose — and encourage other nations to do so. Mr. Saran said India opposed the CTBT because it “was not explicitly linked to the goal of nuclear disarmament.” “For India, this was crucial since it was not acceptable to legitimise, in any way, a permanent division between nuclear weapons states and non-nuclear weapons states,” he said. Mr. Saran said India and the U.S. could start a working group at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to pursue the idea of abolition of nuclear weapons. “If the world moves categorically towards nuclear disarmament in a credible time-frame, the Indo-U.S. differences over the CTBT would probably recede into the background,” he said.
Helpful neighbour
The U.S. expected India to help and cooperate in stabilising the situation in neighbouring Pakistan and Afghanistan, Mr. Steinberg said. He hoped that India would work with the U.S. in fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan and in establishing peace and democracy in the two countries. “This week, President Obama would set out our own approach to this challenge,” he added. Mr. Steinberg also acknowledged India’s efforts in the development of Afghanistan. — PTI
India asked US for "early commencement of our dialogue on arrangements to give effect to our right to reprocess US origin spent fuel." isn't this what we all wanted from the deal ? This would make it easier for India to source US fuel and US reactors. Saran's comments also come after NPCIL signed an MoU with GE-Hitachi for advanced boiling water reactors, soon after signing a similar deal with Westinghouse for the AP-1000 reactors.
Although he left it unsaid, Saran implied that opening up nuclear business in the time of a slowdown made sound economic sense. With a delicately worded swipe at Obama's "protectionist" tendencies, Saran said, "India has already conveyed a letter of intent for up to 10,000 megawatts of US nuclear power reactors... 10,000 megawatts of nuclear energy may translate into US $150 billion worth of projects, with significant business opportunities and potential collaboration for both Indian and US companies. This would also result in significant and high quality job creation in both our countries." a clear nudge to the likes of GE/Westinghouse to lobby for India.
He said India had proposed an ad-hoc working group in the Disarmament Conference in Geneva. "India has proposed appointing a special coordinator at the CD to carry out consultations on measures which could lead to consensus and form a basis for the mandate for an ad-hoc working group on nuclear disarmament." (ha India and her envoys and committees nothing is gonna come out of itgood for us ).
But India would retain its opposition to the CTBT unless it was specifically linked to disarmament, Saran said. This is significant, given that Barack Obama has promised to seek Senate ratification of the treaty that India has not yet signed. Again a re-iteration of India's stand on this issue.
The math doesn't seem right to me.India has already conveyed a letter of intent for up to 10,000 megawatts of US nuclear power reactors... 10,000 megawatts of nuclear energy may translate into US $150 billion worth of projects, with significant business opportunities and potential collaboration for both Indian and US companies. This would also result in significant and high quality job creation in both our countries.
Abhishek you yourselves have answered your question.abhischekcc wrote: However, the deal had a provision that it would be subject to domestic US and Indian laws. That's what makes it vulnerable to the Hyde law.
I believe there was an entire thread dedicated to this ; and I believe everyone agreed that more than the payload it is the delivery system and the n-triad which need to be operationalised for achieving credible n-deterrent.There was another hoax - that India has a credible nuclear deterent.
Advertised by the tests ! what do you mean by that ?The deal was based on the premise that our nuclear bombs will work as advertised by the tests.
Why is China immune to vanilla pu bombs ?But the H-bomb probably fizzled, and that may not be enough to deter China - our primary threat.
So how big a device in terms of the yield you wish to test to compensate for India's demand for few MW of electricity ?Hence, the nuclear deal is premature in calling for a capping of our nuclear capability just to get a few MW of electricity.
India must not buy any nook reactors from outside world for its energy requirements. Instead, India must pursuit its three-tier program and go to the Thorium cycle. It should limit the use of nook deal to uranium imports.how big a device in terms of the yield you wish to test to compensate for India's demand for few MW of electricity ?
It is a known historical fact that Indians only can defeat India, here goes another example. Luckily Indian policy makers are better thinkers than this. It will be suicidal for India to sign NPT / CTBT unless India gets permanent UNSC membership with VETO and also that India achieves the conventional warfare parity or superiority with the best of the armed forces in the world.vadivelu wrote:India should sign the CTBT and actively be part of NPT.
India is the regional power and these measures ensure it is part of the mainstream global community.
Uranium from Australia, scramble to improve its infrastructure and a general upliftment of Indian middle class.
If you oppose these, you are a traitor to the Indian cause. Move to Pakistan.
Enough of the tired old Russian/non-aligned nexus. It has failed India for 60 years. A radical new approach beckons.
While I agree that Saran is right in reminding them about what India thinks about de-nuclearization, NPT/CTBT et all. But IMO, India should be more upfront, fierce and blunt in putting acceptable conditions and protecting Indian interests. This is not a charity work at progress here to put the words mildly in an adhoc manner and put conditions which India itself can find difficult to comply with at a later period of time. India's national security is at stake here, no need to please anyone and be a nice guy.ramana wrote:Interesting that the US with its Hyde Act, the 123 agreement with it signing statements and all the arsenal of bilateral pledges is not satisfied with them. It wants India to sign the CTBT no matter. So India does have an upperhand vis a vis testing despite all those polemics. Hence the pressure to sign up so that its a treaty violation if it happens.
Shyam Saran is right in reminding the US of the conditions and the timetable that India finds acceptable.
I completely agree. Not to forget that India has huge reserves of coal if need be until we get our Thorium reactors ready.RamaY wrote:India must not buy any nook reactors from outside world for its energy requirements. Instead, India must pursuit its three-tier program and go to the Thorium cycle. It should limit the use of nook deal to uranium imports.how big a device in terms of the yield you wish to test to compensate for India's demand for few MW of electricity ?
Assuming India will need ~20 years to achieve Thorium cycle perfection and mass production of that technology. India should pursuit renewable energy, such as Solar, Wind and Bio-diesel, route to meet its short term energy needs. This is something like the telecom (cell phone) revolution in the past decade directly going to 3G.
As far as I know, there are enough technology solutions available to achieve this on a large scale. If GOI offers Rs. 1 Cr for every 1MW of INSTALLED renewable energy capacity, it can encourage utility scale power plants in this sector.
JMT.
actually yes - its that simplenegi wrote:^ Yeah going by our cattle population we can effectively meet our energy demands by installing huge number of GOBAR gas plants.
More of those will happen and have happened than any energy from the nuclear deal, in past, till now in future.amit wrote:
Thank you for your comments Sanku ji.Sanku wrote:More of those will happen and have happened than any energy from the nuclear deal, in past, till now in future.
Some folks are so stuck up on the possibilities that they are blind to the obvious.
I think things are going down a pretty well thought out path which started with the 123. Along the way there were some changes and compromises made but methinks the overall goal has remained intact and things are on course.negi wrote:Nice diplomacy by India ...infact by Shyam Saran in particular.
Note superior technology in European owned facilitywow! no radiation issues for our poor worker?
Buying a newspaper this morning I asked the wallah for a second opinion regarding some surgery. He has never been in an operating theatre but has seen a picture of one in a magazine. He told me my surgeon is a moron and explained how he would have performed the procedure. He is always looking at pictures of semi-naked women and picking at his nose. I have full confidence in his knowledge of anatomy and surgery.There was another hoax - that India has a credible nuclear deterent. This one was called by the nuclear gurus on the forum
There was/is a U238 (half life in billion's of years, the radiation will not penetrate skin - though gloves are recommended for extensive handling of natural uranium or it's oxide etc.) brick in Science museum in Toronto which people could touch ..Heck there are even dinnerware glass plates which contains uranium..(with 1-2% uranium).wow! no radiation issues for our poor worker?
You got to be very desperate to ask for second opinion on surgery from newspaper walla.Gerard wrote:Buying a newspaper this morning I asked the wallah for a second opinion regarding some surgery. He has never been in an operating theatre but has seen a picture of one in a magazine. He told me my surgeon is a moron and explained how he would have performed the procedure. He is always looking at pictures of semi-naked women and picking at his nose. I have full confidence in his knowledge of anatomy and surgery.There was another hoax - that India has a credible nuclear deterent. This one was called by the nuclear gurus on the forum
Arun_S wrote:Here is the file on Nuclear Deterrent
Way To A Credible Deterrent- Rev 3C2.pdf
And the Shourya/Sagarika Missile
Shourya_missile_article_for_IDR-rev3A1a_03Jan09 Final.pdf
Feedback/critique welcome.
Indeed. But I am grateful to him for pointing out that my surgeon is a traitor to the Hippocratic oath. I would have never known this otherwise.You got to be very desperate to ask for second opinion on surgery from newspaper walla.
C. Raja Mohan Posted: Mar 25, 2009 at 1521 hrs IST
New Delhi: As the Congress Party, in the manifesto released Tuesday in New Delhi, criticised the CPM for opposing the Indo-US nuclear deal, the Manmohan Singh Government is gearing up for another round of political wrestling with America on non-proliferation issues.
In tune with India’s traditional emphasis on the middle path, the Congress leadership that stared down the nuclear opportunism of the CPM and BJP at home is now looking the non-proliferation ayatollahs, who are back in power in Washington, in the eye.
In an important speech at the Brookings Institute in Washington on Monday, the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy, Shyam Saran, extended India’s hand of cooperation on nuclear non-proliferation to the Obama Administration. But it is not clear whether the newly empowered ‘non-pro’ hawks in Washington are ready to grow out of their anti-India mindset.
Although President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton supported the Indo-US nuclear deal as Senators, many leading lights in the Democratic Party’s foreign policy establishment were absolutely opposed to the deal.
They employed every trick in the American legislative book to undermine President George W. Bush’s historic nuclear initiative towards India. One of them, Ellen Tauscher, has been nominated to become the high priest of non-proliferation in the State Department. Her nomination has reinforced the widespread speculation that nuclear tensions between India and the United States are likely to be renewed under the Obama Administration.
The conference at Brookings provided the stage for Saran to lay out a positive agenda for cooperation with the US on nuclear issues as well as draw a few red lines for the Obama Administration.
Saran underlined the convergence of views between India and the Obama Administration on a range of issues — from nuclear disarmament to atomic terrorism, and proliferation security initiative to control of anti-satellite weapons.
While offering to work together on this expansive agenda, Saran made it quite clear that India won’t be hustled into compliance with the Obama Administration’s nuclear unilateralism.
Two assertions of Saran stand out. One is that New Delhi will not sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty that Obama’s people want to push down India’s throat. Two, Saran expressed India’s strong reservations against any discriminatory regime that prevents India from gaining access to sensitive technologies relating to uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing.
If you thought the nuclear debate between India and the United States is over, think again.
(C. Raja Mohan is a Professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)
I agree with your assessmentramana wrote:I have already posted yesterday that India has the upperhand and is being pressured to give in. The US is exerting pressure which is contra to the spirit of the agreement.
BTW, SS has buy-in of all the elite and not just the UPA govt position.
Those redlines are Indian national redlines and not just Congress party redlines as CRM is alluding to.
)In addition to that Obama himself is on record that he would like to lead the disarmament efforts, besides ratifying the CTBT by the US.JE Menon wrote:Guys is there any evidence of such pressure, i.e. in the form of any report in the media or anything like that? Or is this extrapolation from Saran's speech?
..............