Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 04:46

Acharya wrote:This silence and no debate before this announcement indicates that ND had these information and has discussed. There is a lobby which actually favors this and wants to slide in this without much debate.


True.

However, even that lobby had relied on the tests being kosher?

What if that is no longer true - the lobby itself convinced it is no longer true?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 04:48

I would like to focus on (for a short while) the point N^3 made (among others) that TN is no longer needed.

Also, on Pakistanis making more nukes, that will be a greater threat to others, perhaps even more than to India, in the future.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Gerard » 16 Sep 2009 04:51

NRao wrote:He tried and seems to have failed - at the G8..


That was restricted to ENR tech. Even Condi Rice said that was US policy in her testimony to the Congress at the time.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Gerard » 16 Sep 2009 04:54

BTW, India has not yet submitted the list of safeguarded facilities to the IAEA. Not a single additional facility is being inspected. The DAE is holding its cards close to its chest and being very cautious.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby samuel » 16 Sep 2009 04:54

Actually we seem to have several versions.

1. TN is good and rest in simulation.
2. TN was actually better than advertised.
3. TN is not needed.

I'd say the three most important things are
a) Ability to delivery the "strategic" weapon to Beijing.
b) Ability to deploy tactical weapons for large but localized gains.
c) A doctrine that says tactical or not, any nuke attack will be counted as first use.
(provided of course we can match chipak conventionally on two, or more, fronts).

The question has been raised and the doubt is here. It's not going away.

S

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 05:01

Gerard wrote:
NRao wrote:He tried and seems to have failed - at the G8..


That was restricted to ENR tech. Even Condi Rice said that was US policy in her testimony to the Congress at the time.


G ji,

That is my point (should have been more explicit).

Obama is going to split this whole topic, take the ones that are the easiest to tackle first and then come back many times to tackle the rest. Salami whatever in reverse?

But, even here he did not get the cooperation from FR/RU IIRC. Correct?

Obama will never take on India frontally. He will always have his patent huge smiles, "come-on .......", two great democracies, etc and try and kill the next point. He is an extremely patient man and has a deep understanding of the problem he tries to tackle.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby svinayak » 16 Sep 2009 05:13

NRao wrote:
True.
However, even that lobby had relied on the tests being kosher?
What if that is no longer true - the lobby itself convinced it is no longer true?

This is the lobby which produced this docu. They will do anything keep India down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWIJ8tXH0I4

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby shiv » 16 Sep 2009 06:31

ramana wrote:Siddharth Vardarajan writes:

Sing NPT, accept full safeguards US want UN to tell India
But there is a sting in the tail for India: For the first time since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) entered into force, the UNSC is going to demand that all states outside the treaty sign it immediately or begin adhering to its provisions


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Tell me another one!!!!

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 994
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Guddu » 16 Sep 2009 06:32

NRao wrote:Obama will never take on India frontally. He will always have his patent huge smiles, "come-on .......", two great democracies, etc and try and kill the next point. He is an extremely patient man and has a deep understanding of the problem he tries to tackle.


I am surprised that folks at BR and apparently also the Dilli Billies, are so much in awe of what the US may or may not do. Even the hacks from Londonistan, dictate to us how we should manage our internal affairs. The US is currently very weak, NOK, Pukistan, Iran etc all thumb their nose to uncle sam. We should have enough spine to test anything we want..otherwise, its a slippery slope to oblivion.

I am surprised that you say "Obama has a deep understanding of the problem he tries to tackle"...I think he has no understanding...but I digress.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 07:27

I am surprised that you say "Obama has a deep understanding of the problem he tries to tackle"...I think he has no understanding...but I digress.


Sure.

Your conclusion is understandable.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby John Snow » 16 Sep 2009 07:36

Time to unleash BARC designed
MAHA KALI

Maximum Accentuated Hydro Actuated Kilo amplified Linear Injector

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2009 07:38

John Snow wrote:Time to unleash BARC designed
MAHA KALI

Maximum Accentuated Hydro Actuated Kilo amplified Linear Injector


You mean the Kraken from Clash of the Titans!

Maybe thats all thats left.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Gagan » 16 Sep 2009 08:01

I think that india's having deployed TN weapons is telling.
If the nuclear deal stopped india from re-testing the tweaked version of S1 in 2003-5, this move has some elements of preventing india from re-testing now at this juncture.

The west knows that India which has gone to extraordinary lengths to preserve its freedom to test will test sooner or later. This is reinforced by the assessment of the western nuclear labs of the status of India's H-bomb.

I think there is some co-relation for sure with the debate on in India on Pok-2 and this current move.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby enqyoob » 16 Sep 2009 08:46

IAEA/NSG/etc is fine BUT India NEEDS to place everything under safeguards.


No, I see the US etc. yelling at the UN that NON-NWS need to place everything under safeguards.

India has an explicit agreement with IAEA and NSG and US which says that certain facilities are under safeguards. Period. IOW, this is what NWS do. Lesson: India is NWS.

There is absolutely no grounds for US/P5 to ask P6 to place ALL under safeguards - it is up to the P6th to say :P to that. Completely legal by signed and sealed agreements. As for NPT, why should India with so many weapons, act like a Non-NWS, on the basis of some silly 1968 cut-off date? That is now 41 years in the past. All this is ludicrous. Indian Bablomats need to learn how to :rotfl: :rotfl: at such suggestions. The UN has no business going by some 1968 situation, ignoring the realities of 2008.

Do u think North Korea will CRE based on a UNSC resolution? :rotfl: They were INVADED by the UNSC, and kicked the invaders all the way back past the DMZ, but not before the invaders had killed tens of thousands of their civilians.

Meanwhile, NRaoji, did I say that TNs are not necessary? Well... maybe I did. I think TNs as in Tactical Nukes are necessary, but I do question the value of anything above, say, 50KT. Surely I do say that 1MT is a complete waste of money and more likely to cause a Bhasmasura catastrophe than anything else. The US came very very close in the 1980s when a missile silo exploded after a technician dropped a pipe wrench through the skin of the hypergolic propellant tank, and no one could find the (MIRV multi-MT) payload for a couple of days. Kansas was well on the way to becoming a glazed parking lot.

arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 347
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby arunsrinivasan » 16 Sep 2009 09:21

IMVVVHO, BO is trying to take steps to rid the world of Nuclear Weapons, in the loooooooong run, as I see it, he wants to push the needle & understands this would be a multi-decade fight at the least. While he is an idealist in the long run, this is driving his efforts re. Nuclear, Healthcare, Climate Change etc, he is a realist in the short run & will take what he gets, also by nature he is not confrontational, like the average American politician. I think we are missing the wood for the trees, if we think his recent Nuclear Initiatives are targeted at India & we will have something big to fear from his steps. One strategy we could adopt - support his strategy when convenient & ignore when inconvenient. If by chance we are put under a lot of pressure, then we can always try N^3 strategy. ;)

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1172
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby dinesha » 16 Sep 2009 09:31

No reason to doubt yield of Pokhran-II tests: Atomic Energy Commission
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news ... 015656.cms
MUMBAI: The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) has sought to put a lid on the controversy over the success of Pokhran-II saying it has no reason to cast doubts on the yield of the country's thermonuclear test in May 1998.

The AEC made this assessment at its formal meeting on September 5 to discuss issues in the wake of the controversy ignited by K Santhanam, a retired DRDO nuclear physicist and a member of the team involved in the tests, a Commission release said on Tuesday.

Santhanam had last month described the May 11, 1998 test as a `fizzle' (failure to achieve expected yield) and said India needed to conduct more tests. His claim was backed by some nuclear scientists including Dr P K Iyengar but was strongly countered by former President and missile scientist A P J Abdul Kalam.

The commission utilised the meeting to reiterate the credibility of the type and yield of the tests as the matter was already discussed several times since May 1998, AEC Secretary K Murlidhar said in the release. Meetings were held on May 21, November 12,1998 and subsequently on March 26 and November 18, 1999, in the presence of Raja Ramanna, a former AEC member and father of 1974 Pokhran-I nuclear test, he said. "The Commission had been briefed about the successful tests in May 1998 at its meeting held on May 21, 1998 wherein, details of the type of tests, estimated yields and other technical details were given," he said.

Some members of the atomic panel had felt that the media reports on whether Pokhran-II generated the expected yield could be more in the form of disinformation campaign, AEC sources said.

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby abhiti » 16 Sep 2009 09:34

narayanan wrote:There is absolutely no grounds for US/P5 to ask P6 to place ALL under safeguards - it is up to the P6th to say :P to that. Completely legal by signed and sealed agreements. As for NPT, why should India with so many weapons, act like a Non-NWS, on the basis of some silly 1968 cut-off date? That is now 41 years in the past. All this is ludicrous. Indian Bablomats need to learn how to :rotfl: :rotfl: at such suggestions. The UN has no business going by some 1968 situation, ignoring the realities of 2008.


Indian babus should have said NO to MMS statement in Egypt...did they?

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Arun_S » 16 Sep 2009 09:37

NRao wrote:
Obama has made no move to abrogate the nuclear deal and reimpose the NSG full scope rules.


He tried and seems to have failed - at the G8.

I can see him splitting the entire topic and getting what he can. Then he will repeat the process and go as far as he can. He will never threaten India (or Pak/Israel), but will constantly push.



However, the Pokhran issue is now on the back burner. India really cannot afford to test under these circumstances for some time to come.

GoI was told it was coming in the last 3-5 weeks.

Last 3 weeks was the only time available for India to do the nuclear testes and pre-empt with upper hand the Obama crap.
Now it's Panipat and Plassey. Go deal with it your manifest destiny to be "children of a lesser god".

A total failure by GoI to protect vital Indian interests.
Cry India cry on this infamous date in history.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2009 09:41

Only two posters use smileys in this thread. They are requested to desist.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby shiv » 16 Sep 2009 09:42

arunsrinivasan wrote:IMVVVHO, BO is trying to take steps to rid the world of Nuclear Weapons, in the loooooooong run,
<snip>
While he is an idealist in the long run,
<snip>
he is a realist in the short run


He is an American for life and will want advantage USA in the short term and long term. He can be expected to do nothing for the world if it is seen as harming US interests. The US will start giving up its nukes the day it is certain that the US can defeat/neutralize the advantage of anyone else's nukes.

Right now the idea is to prevent others from getting nukes because the US has no antidote to nukes other than possessing a lot more of them than anyone else and the means to deliver them. The P5 is a conclave of crooks who have agreed to share the loot among themselves and try and prevent anyone else from getting the loot. But because they are crooks in the first place they cheated on each other and proliferated.

In fact Ombaba is a sort of outsider. The US will not have another black president for a long long time and he will want to go down in history as a great guy. Hence all the babble about doing good for the world.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby shiv » 16 Sep 2009 09:43

ramana wrote:Only two posters use smileys in this thread. They are requested to desist.

Why?

I reserve the right to convey my feelings as I see fit.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2009 09:44

Its request at this time.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby samuel » 16 Sep 2009 09:57

should India do a quick 100 ton test and extrapolate? we will feel good and this is cheap -- ordinary explosive can produce that much. We'll call it the special outer taper smear test of better engineering to scare obama, the chinese and the pakis a little. that's it! that's deterrence.

ss_roy
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 15 Nov 2008 21:48

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby ss_roy » 16 Sep 2009 10:09

A treaty is only as good as it's most non-compliant signatory. Therefore, it is necessary for India to violate any treaty it signs, as it sees fit. If India does not act in it's own self interest, nobody else will.

In any case, I think the west will soon have more pressing issues with Iran and Pakistan.

arunsrinivasan
BRFite
Posts: 347
Joined: 16 May 2009 15:24

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby arunsrinivasan » 16 Sep 2009 10:15

@ Shiv, agreed, IMHVVVHO, I was making a rather limited point that we should not lose sleep over BO's nuclear efforts. If anything we should be careful not be swayed by his lofty rhetoric & shoot ourselves in the foot, by signing on to his efforts to rid the world of nuclear efforts. My 2 cents.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55054
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2009 10:16

Always hopeful some one else will bail us out! 8)

Ever heard of Aesop's tale of the farmer and the birds nesting? Everyday the farmer used to walk the fields saying "We will call our relatives and cut the field down!' Nothing happens and the birds decide to stick around. And soon enough he says "lets cut the field down ourselves tomorrow!" The birds decide to leave the nest as the farmer will do it himself. Same way unless India wants to do it themselves the world wont believe them.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby samuel » 16 Sep 2009 10:20

and we said this back when it was svraj and svdesh. but, couldn't cut mustard, ran to papa. its never really changed, why?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 18:04

I think/feel that the window to test will open after the UNSC meeting to be chaired by Obama.

I am not sure what the procedure is, can India - not a member of the UNSC - still circulate a draft of its own?

Assuming India can, India should draft a counter proposal:
1) The draft should address ALL nations as equals. India should stop, here onwards, the concept of P-anything. Once India lumps all nations in one bucket, then the rest of the arguments become more forceful
2) Everything should be verifiable, (once P-X is gone, then it becomes safeguards for everyone, no exceptions)
3) No-testing should be across the board, no sub-xxxx testing, no lasers, no testing in ANY form. Period.
4) Once the above are done, then we can start a not-so-profitable or slightly-profitable civilian effort to equitably share atomic energy
(Having said that I am still not sure why every village needs to be electrified, but I guess that is different story/thread.)

IF the idea of 'all nations are equal' is dropped, then India should exercise her option to test. At her leisure.

Just like the TN yield India should start obfuscation of the CTBT/NPT too. No better way than to drop "P-X". If the P-club does not exist, then all other rules are OK.

Engaged Chai-Biscut. Responsible Chai-Biscut. Contributive Chai-Biscut.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16887
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby NRao » 16 Sep 2009 18:16

India has an explicit agreement with IAEA and NSG and US which says that certain facilities are under safeguards. Period. IOW, this is what NWS do. Lesson: India is NWS.

There is absolutely no grounds for US/P5 to ask P6 to place ALL under safeguards - it is up to the P6th to say :P to that. Completely legal by signed and sealed agreements.


As long as there is a P-5, there can and will be a P-6, P-7, P-8 ............. Drop that P- and we have no 6/7/8. Just a thought.

Anyways, coming back to Obamaese.

He is trying to roll Bushism into NPT/CTBT. Simple. He says everything is acceptable as long as you adhere to CTBT/NPT (I am sure FMCT is coming too).

Here, IMHO, the issue is not the NSG signature, etc. It will be what support he gets from France, Russia, etc.

My gut feel is that for the time being both France and Russia are sitting on the fence. Both these nations ahev subscribed to an earlier US effort called GNEP. Within GNEP the "P-5" with the help of Canada, Australia and a few other smaller entities will control the supply of the ore. Very few nations would be responsible for handling the glowing material, but supply that to any nation that wants to gen elec from nuclear sources. Idea being that the entire system is closed and therefore controlled.

This breaks the nations into suppliers and recipients. India was supposed to be a recipient!!!!

It also does not allow newer techs or techs developed by other nations to be acceptable means of generating electricity. India's three stage will get booted out.

With the recent support of France and Russia to the deals made with India, it SEEMS they have created another category for India. BUT, they can withdraw this support at any time too (in theory).

It is my feel that Obama is hammering away at this structure - FR/RU support for India outside the mechanism he is proposing.

Furthermore, Obama will ONLY try and chip away at it. IF he gets it all - very good, else he is very content getting very small slices.

Let us see what the GoI does and what FR/RU do in the UNSC in a week or so.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Gagan » 16 Sep 2009 19:11

All such treaties get crafted as lofty ideas and ideals until they get tempered down by ground reality.
The US in not going to ratify the CTBT, the deflection of that seems to be the P-5 again regrouping to ensure the P-5 remain in perpetuity, and no P-6 emerges.

India's fault is that this obfuscation, this too much chanakya-niti is coming back to bite it. I am sure India's TN is by now rectified, India might even be capable of a deployed 1 MT TN. But in the absence of irrefutable proof, these efforts to prevent India from becoming P-6 will always continue. Once a Large TN gets proofed, P-6 is only a formality. There is a certain irreversibility to that.

If today India does not have deployed TNs, so how different is India from Pakistan / NoKo / Israel / future Iran?

Ultimately what BO is doing today is the result of the Indo-US nuclear deal. It is possible that GWB passed on a note to BO when he left office. They know India is effectively in a test ban by virtue of the treaty, Now is the time to rub it in and extend the gains of that treaty to an all encompassing one. The side dish would be India pulling out the middle finger and testing, which is fine with the US, because it wants out of the treaty itself, it will only bring more pressure on India.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby SaiK » 16 Sep 2009 20:03

IMHO, There is nothing wrong in a new test rather a retest. There is a big long term benefit in that - self reliance, since sanctions makes us a better country, especially precision engineering and strategic products.

Now, all these guys are relax-ing more. :evil:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby shiv » 16 Sep 2009 21:38

NRao wrote:I think/feel that the window to test will open after the UNSC meeting to be chaired by Obama.


My take on this is that there will be no window to test unless we create a window and test any time. But India desires to be a good boy and show the world that it is a "responsible power" hence no test.

Unless something drastic happens there will be no test. Despite all these calls that UN will ask nations to do blah blah - all these things are hogwash. If India wants to test India can test - UN or no UN, window or no window. Any anxiety we show regarding a UN demanding something or the other stems only from a desire to be called good boy and "responsible power".

We are eternally desperate to be called responsible power hoping that someone will give us status and say "OK you are big boy now". Of course that will never happen - but it's not going to sink into the Indian mindset either. Our strength is our strength. No more no less. The world sees our strength and classifies us according to what it sees - and not necessarily according to what we desire.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Arun_S » 16 Sep 2009 21:48

NRao wrote:N^3,

Although I agree with pretty much everything you state, what is your 'game plan'. What is it you would want the next move Obama makes?

Clearly Omaba has the lead (and the mike, etc). He is trying to force the issue because he has the attention.

However, everything there was very predictable - absolutely nothing new.

The good news is that India has flat 7-8 days to formulate a response. The bad news is that the Indian Amby - in past few days - trumpeted that Indo-US efforts on proliferation was very good. It seems to me that even she did not see this coming!!!! Which is very strange for a topic like this.

India's nuclear Kargil?

Absolutely its a Nuclear Kargil by USA.

The time to test was in last 15 days. If the Government had any brains it would have tested by this week. Next 7-8 days window is perhaps the last opportunity before the cost start stacking up against India.

Still GoI MUST be pressured to conduct its nuclear test series by Mid-Nov (2009). After that Indian test option will be sealed shut for now and EVER. {I.e. no more any chance to test 10 years later or 20 years later}, and all Indian can fondly keep credible deterrence on toilet paper.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby shiv » 16 Sep 2009 21:54

Let me put all down reasons why India might not want to test

1) India wants to be good boy and be called "responsible power" by others so the praise from foreigners can give Indians great joy and pride

2) India has nothing to test - we were bluffing all along

3) Government does not want to test because it is convinced we don't need to test.

4) Prime minister is looking for Nobel Peace prize

5) Government is cowardly and full of traitors

6) There will never be nuclear war.

7) India is a poor country. Economy is all that matters. We spend only 1.9% on defence - see point 1.

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Arun_S » 16 Sep 2009 21:59

NRao wrote:
India has an explicit agreement with IAEA and NSG and US which says that certain facilities are under safeguards. Period. IOW, this is what NWS do. Lesson: India is NWS.

There is absolutely no grounds for US/P5 to ask P6 to place ALL under safeguards - it is up to the P6th to say :P to that. Completely legal by signed and sealed agreements.


As long as there is a P-5, there can and will be a P-6, P-7, P-8 ............. Drop that P- and we have no 6/7/8. Just a thought.

Anyways, coming back to Obamaese.

He is trying to roll Bushism into NPT/CTBT. Simple. He says everything is acceptable as long as you adhere to CTBT/NPT (I am sure FMCT is coming too).

Here, IMHO, the issue is not the NSG signature, etc. It will be what support he gets from France, Russia, etc.

My gut feel is that for the time being both France and Russia are sitting on the fence. Both these nations ahev subscribed to an earlier US effort called GNEP. Within GNEP the "P-5" with the help of Canada, Australia and a few other smaller entities will control the supply of the ore. Very few nations would be responsible for handling the glowing material, but supply that to any nation that wants to gen elec from nuclear sources. Idea being that the entire system is closed and therefore controlled.

This breaks the nations into suppliers and recipients. India was supposed to be a recipient!!!!

It also does not allow newer techs or techs developed by other nations to be acceptable means of generating electricity. India's three stage will get booted out.

With the recent support of France and Russia to the deals made with India, it SEEMS they have created another category for India. BUT, they can withdraw this support at any time too (in theory).

It is my feel that Obama is hammering away at this structure - FR/RU support for India outside the mechanism he is proposing.

Furthermore, Obama will ONLY try and chip away at it. IF he gets it all - very good, else he is very content getting very small slices.

Let us see what the GoI does and what FR/RU do in the UNSC in a week or so.

As I said before, the way out is for India to :
    1) Protect nuclear supplies via NSG by firmly taking France and Russia on our side, by giving special access to Indian market and military contracts (recall NSG works on teh principal of unanimity and all states have to agree and even abstaining breaks unanimity).
    2) Conduct nuclear test ASAP after securing 1) above.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby svinayak » 16 Sep 2009 22:00

Arun_S wrote:
Absolutely its a Nuclear Kargil by USA.

The time to test was in last 15 days. If the Government had any brains it would have tested by this week. Next 7-8 days window is perhaps the last opportunity before the cost start stacking up against India.

Still GoI MUST be pressured to conduct its nuclear test series by Mid-Nov (2009). After that Indian test option will be sealed shut for now and EVER. {I.e. no more any chance to test 10 years later or 20 years later}, and all Indian can fondly keep credible deterrence on toilet paper.


December may be still time for some tests.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1000
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby sivab » 16 Sep 2009 22:01

Official statement from AEC. Note Raja Ramanna was a AEC member at that time.

http://www.dae.gov.in/press/nuctest.htm

(Inlined image of statement signed by AEC secretary)

http://www.dae.gov.in/press/1.jpg
http://www.dae.gov.in/press/2.jpg

M.R. Srinivasan is current member of AEC. See below for other current members
http://www.aec.gov.in/

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

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Arun_S » 16 Sep 2009 22:13

This document is signed by K.Muralidhar on 15 Sept 09, it has obviously gone through a time-warp:

"Later , at meetings of the AEC held on March 26, 1999 and Nov 18, 1999, results of radio-chemical analaysis of bore-hole samples confirming the estimated yield were presented to the Commission"


Excellent nuclear english.

Time traveling commission ! { Antar-Yaami Commission}

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby krishnan » 16 Sep 2009 22:16

I dont get it. Its a press release so was signed on 15th Sep.

Yudhajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 24 Aug 2009 11:16

Re: Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

Postby Yudhajit » 16 Sep 2009 22:24

shiv wrote:Let me put all down reasons why India might not want to test

Isn't economic sanctions one of the reasons?


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests