India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 20 Jun 2016 12:24

srin wrote:A question - what's the relative advantage of reserving sites for specific countries/companies (like Jaitapur for Areva) instead of auctioning sites for nuclear parks with competing bidders ? For solar parks, the auctioning system has resulted in good price discovery, so wondering what prevents us from doing that for nuclear sites too ?

At some level, every international agreement is about money. We have to give baksheesh to the gatekeepers.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 20 Jun 2016 12:27

Aditya_V wrote: I think you are just pulling our leg and trying to get us worked up with these lines.

Only win for us if we exponentially increase our capabilities that no one should be ignoring our sensitivities.

I honestly am not pulling anyone's legs. Where is the sensitivity in this? They already have nukes. They already have aircraft-based delivery and missile based delivery. They have tactical nukes. They are arming ships with nukes (probably to strike our ports or carrier battle groups, US had a "sanction" against them for modifying anti ship missiles). They are probably going to rent or buy a nuke sub from China. How does Pakis getting into NSG make it worse?

Think about it this way, if India has a chance to supply Pakistan with ICBMs and help them with integrating nuke warheads to it, India should do it. For free.

Pakis are already a headache to India. We should encourage them to become a headache to the world.

member_29172 · Post by **member_29172** » 20 Jun 2016 22:06

Anujan, your viewpoint is very misguided. NSG and MCTR is for responsible countries. Existence of a basketcase like china is already a travesty, inclusion of pakistan, even more so. pukistan has access to reactors and nuke tech, agreed, but NSG would give a greater and easier access to piggistan to all that sweet sweet uranium spread across the world. Those nukes are specifically pointed at us and given the condition of those ****** and their joke of a country, the larger the supply of nukes and uranium, the greater the chance of it falling into the hands of local terrorist gangs.

Think a little before passing these off easily. India has pretty much given easy access to these two basketcases while completely ignoring the national interests in various international organisations and forums, its about time that practice is discontinued.

India should rightfully veto and block basketcases like china and piggistan from entering organisations that can be potentially dangerous to the civillians of India and the world at large.

In the end, neither china, nor pakistan is run by their respective citizens. Its run by egomaniac cartoons sitting at the top who are more worried about their H&D than about their own people. The hold of the deepstate and national religion (islam and communism) is quite strong in both the countries.

kit · Post by **kit** » 20 Jun 2016 22:26

Anujan wrote:
Aditya_V wrote: I think you are just pulling our leg and trying to get us worked up with these lines.

Only win for us if we exponentially increase our capabilities that no one should be ignoring our sensitivities.
I honestly am not pulling anyone's legs. Where is the sensitivity in this? They already have nukes. They already have aircraft-based delivery and missile based delivery. They have tactical nukes. They are arming ships with nukes (probably to strike our ports or carrier battle groups, US had a "sanction" against them for modifying anti ship missiles). They are probably going to rent or buy a nuke sub from China. How does Pakis getting into NSG make it worse?

Think about it this way, if India has a chance to supply Pakistan with ICBMs and help them with integrating nuke warheads to it, India should do it. For free.

Pakis are already a headache to India. We should encourage them to become a headache to the world.

this is a version of Nehru s mentality when he gave away the NSG status to china as well as a permanent seat in UNSC

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jun 2016 03:29

NaMo to meet XI Jinping at Tashkent on sidelines of SCO meet.

NSG meet is later in Seoul.

In end its India and China to resolve.
Others will pretend to make pleas etc.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 23 Jun 2016 05:37

WTF with this misinformation on Al-retard-jaljeera??

India's embarrassing North Korean connection

....
On Monday, the NSG begins a week-long meeting in Seoul, South Korea, to decide on the membership of both India and Pakistan.
...

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 23 Jun 2016 07:59

That is a hatchet job. India and NoKo are not allies. In fact, if Noko were nearby, they'd be enemies.

Noko transferred their ding-dongs to Pakistan. AQ Khan, in return, transferred nuke technology to NoKo. (Without state knowledge they claim, using military C130, which surprisingly, nobody asked why it was flying to NoKo).

On top of that Korean scientists were present in the Chagai hills test and there are strong indications that NoKo shared plutonium designs with Pakistan (tested in NoKo) and Pakis are building their plutonium stockpile now. There are also strong indications that Paki scientists are involved in TN tests in NoKo (recall that Pakis only tested a U bum.). As recently as 1 year back, 2 NoKo diplomats in Tehran made repeated trips to Pakistan, and Pakistan "re-exported" nuke materials from China to NoKo

Given all these, it takes a special kind of stupid to think India and NoKo are allies. Especially when we have commercial and defense tie ups with SoKo and Japan (two countries directly threatened by NoKo).

habal · Post by **habal** » 23 Jun 2016 14:01

that is ISI propaganda piece and everyone is faithfully reproducing it repeatedly. Kindly ignore such hit jobs and it wilk die it's own death.

Screambowl · Post by **Screambowl** » 23 Jun 2016 14:23

habal wrote:that is ISI propaganda piece and everyone is faithfully reproducing it repeatedly. Kindly ignore such hit jobs and it wilk die it's own death.

Correct!
ISI while stealing and assembling nuclear tech. diverted the attention towards Chinese nuclear program by giving some fissile material to Chinese, intentionally to avoid any detection of their activities by the west.

I remember since the day India tested Agni last months, Pakistan started playing it's propaganda game of destabilisation in Indian subcontinent. That was actually not because of Agni test, but they were trying to create hurdles for India's NSG ambition. Now the NoKo. Its ISI's Infowar.

Screambowl · Post by **Screambowl** » 23 Jun 2016 16:18

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 764078.ece
NATIONAL

SEOUL, June 23, 2016
Updated: June 23, 2016 17:22 IST
NSG to hold unprecedented special session to discuss India's membership

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Jun 2016 16:36

That im itself is a blow to China because it constantly claimed India was not on the agenda. But, China would claim that it was not a 'regular' but a 'special' session and its claim was correct ! China is repeatedly making a fool of itself.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 23 Jun 2016 17:50

Last night shyam saran and another arun shourie LOOK ALIKE retired diplomats were criticizing NaMo govt. :

a.) saran ~ "The govt should push it and its ok, but not push so much that it becomes make or break. Gradually we will get there it takes time.

b.) Second diplomat ~ We never allowed PM to be directly exposed to such intense lobbying like the govt. is doing now; if it fails it will be big blow to country's image.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 23 Jun 2016 17:55

They are Congress era relics. Used to laid-back chalta hai. Will have egg on their face if India makes it to NSG after MTCR.

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 00:15

Chinese stooges: Brazil, NZ, Austria, Ireland and Turkey are said to be obstructing India's entry on the basis of signing NPT.

IMVHO I did expect NZ here. It is playing second fiddle to Aus. and the chinese influence on Aus is immense. So NZ is the trojan here. Same with Turkey., a chinese trojan and ummah birader.

But why Brazil, Austria and Ireland? Will they change stance at last minute for isolating China/Turkey?

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 00:16

Either way - China CPC stands nanga. Completely.

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 00:18

Picklu wrote:While importing is ok with waiver and every seller will compete for hard cash, exporting is not possible without full membership of NSG.

That is where the game is and we are being myopic pooh-poohing ...

The whole strategy of China is to delay our entry while it masters the manufacturing of low level high volume components and get a strong foot hold in the nuclear market ahead of us.

That is why India needs to create its own marketplace. NCG.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Jun 2016 00:20

>>1. 'cause we are dharmik

We weren't when we tested...

>>More importantly,
2. breaking rules need both buyer and seller to be on the same page. No buyer within NSG will buy from us voiding all warranty jeopardizing all finance if we are outside and our items are not NSG certified

What about non NSG states?

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 02:42

^^^ Non NSG states will be more than happy to deal with us. There are several and world is a big place., look at my list on the NCG thread. Several Africa/LatAm countries are there., which are not in NSG currently.

Those countries will be more than happy to join the NCG and some of them will be more than happy for Indians to come and start 'manufacturing' (see Namibia).

India is like a baal-Hanuman with no knowledge of its own strength!

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 02:44

Classic Modi play., turns out China is the last holdout. Even Brazil turned around and started supporting and NZ was never in picture. Turkey stated that it will support both India and Bakis candidature as well - except that Bakis were not on table.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 24 Jun 2016 05:01

Chinese stooges: Brazil, NZ, Austria, Ireland and Turkey are said to be obstructing India's entry on the basis of signing NPT. IMVHO I did expect NZ here. It is playing second fiddle to Aus. and the chinese influence on Aus is immense. So NZ is the trojan here. Same with Turkey., a chinese trojan and ummah birader.

btw austria!=australia...austria happens to be among the most racist countries in existence..hitler was in fact an austrian..they don't even give token sh!t about political correctness...post ww2 people were so busy defanging the germans that forgot about Österreich... they even have contempt towards Hungarians...its funny how such insignificant little country dares to bark against an incipient superpower..

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 24 Jun 2016 05:29

disha wrote:Classic Modi play., turns out China is the last holdout. Even Brazil turned around and started supporting and NZ was never in picture. Turkey stated that it will support both India and Bakis candidature as well - except that Bakis were not on table.

It's about cornering the dragon India/US tag team. That was the diplomatic game plan.

disha · Post by **disha** » 24 Jun 2016 06:12

gakakkad wrote:
Chinese stooges: Brazil, NZ, Austria, Ireland and Turkey are said to be obstructing India's entry on the basis of signing NPT. IMVHO I did expect NZ here. It is playing second fiddle to Aus. and the chinese influence on Aus is immense. So NZ is the trojan here. Same with Turkey., a chinese trojan and ummah birader.
btw austria!=australia...austria happens to be among the most racist countries in existence..hitler was in fact an austrian..they don't even give token sh!t about political correctness...post ww2 people were so busy defanging the germans that forgot about Österreich... they even have contempt towards Hungarians...its funny how such insignificant little country dares to bark against an incipient superpower..

Without the austro-hungarian empire as a chip on the soldiers., you can pretty much say the same about Australians

.

And I do always feel that all Australian PMs are manchurian candidates! Just look at K. Rudd.

No - I did NOT confuse between Austria and Australia. I just was speculating on NZ. Why is NZ amping up but Aussies are quiet on the nookular front?

Screambowl · Post by **Screambowl** » 24 Jun 2016 08:23

disha wrote:Chinese stooges: Brazil, NZ, Austria, Ireland and Turkey are said to be obstructing India's entry on the basis of signing NPT.

IMVHO I did expect NZ here. It is playing second fiddle to Aus. and the chinese influence on Aus is immense. So NZ is the trojan here. Same with Turkey., a chinese trojan and ummah birader.

But why Brazil, Austria and Ireland? Will they change stance at last minute for isolating China/Turkey?

Inclusion of Brazil to me looks like misinformation.
Another link says this : http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... sjTOI.html

Contrary to initial reports, Brazil and South Africa were strong backers of India’s membership.

habal · Post by **habal** » 24 Jun 2016 08:45

turkey is not chinese trojan, turks are very anti-china because they consider the uighurs as eastern turkistan. turks are munna birader. turkey is also a USA munna through and tbrough. If unkil asks them to stand, they stand .. if unkil asks them to unzip they drop their pants ...

srin · Post by **srin** » 25 Jun 2016 20:08

Other than supply of uranium, do we still need to master reprocessing technologies ? Is that the barrier to the three stage nuclear power ?

shyamoo · Post by **shyamoo** » 25 Jun 2016 23:47

I'm not sure where we stand with regards to MSR ( molten salt reactors ). They are more efficient.

Once we have sufficient reserves of U-233, we can build the 3rd generation reactors in earnest. Then we can tell everyone to kiss our musharaff.

arun · Post by **arun** » 21 Aug 2016 14:19

X Posted from the “Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)” thread.

I hope that this PR Chinese foot dragging on the issue of India’s membership of the NSG does not stay our hand if PR China’s flouting of the South China Sea arbitral award comes up at the early September G20 summit at Hangzhou, :

Question: Foreign Minister of China was here. NSG issue was raised during the meeting. Does India feel that it has made any progress in bringing China around to its view on this issue?

Official Spokesperson, Shri Vikas Swarup: As I had already mentioned after the meeting that H.E. Mr. Wang Yi had with the External Affairs Minister, the NSG issue was discussed in considerable detail by the two sides.

We once again underlined the importance that we attach to India’s membership in light of our clean energy requirements which were reinforced through the INDC’s in COP21. The Chinese side explained their perspective, but at the end both sides agreed that we must continue discussions so that we can narrow down the areas of divergence. And in this context, the head of Disarmament Affairs of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who was their lead negotiator in Seoul at the time of the NSG Plenary, would be visiting India to meet our Joint Secretary (Disarmament and International Security Affairs) Mr. Amandeep Gill. And we look forward to those discussions and to reaching better understanding with China on this very important issue.

From here:

Transcript of Weekly Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (August 18, 2016)

arun · Post by **arun** » 15 Sep 2016 10:14

X Posted from “Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)” thread.

Official statements put out by our Ministry of External Affairs and Foreign Ministry of PR China regards meeting on India joining Nuclear Supply Group (NSG). PR Chinese procedural foot dragging evident via expedient of claiming that NSG must look at issue of membership of Non-Signatories to the NPT rather than membership of India:

Visit of Chinese delegation for talks on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation
September 13, 2016
A Chinese delegation led by Director General Wang Qun of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs visited India on 13 September 2016 for talks with an Indian delegation led by Amandeep Singh Gill, Joint Secretary (Disarmament & International Security) in the Ministry of External Affairs. The talk covered issues of mutual interest in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation.

As agreed by the EAM and the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in their meeting on 13 August, the two sides focused in particular on an issue of priority for India - membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

The discussions were candid, pragmatic and substantive. The two sides agreed to meet for the next round on a mutually convenient date.

New Delhi
September 13, 2016

Clicky

China Supports the Notion of Two-Step Approach within the Nuclear Suppliers Group to Explore a Non-Discriminatory Formula Applicable to all Non-NPT States

2016/09/13

On September 13, 2016, China and India held a fresh round of arms control consultation in New Delhi. The consultation was co-chaired by Ambassador Wang Qun, Director-General of Arms Control Department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, and Mr. Amandeep Singh Gill, Joint Secretary for Disarmament and International Security of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs. The two sides exchanged views on issues of common concern in this field.

On the question of non-NPT states' participation in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), given that it is an issue of major concern to India, China, for its part, shared with India the recent developments as it sees within the Group in relation to the question. China also shared with India its principled positions and views on the above question. In the meantime, China listened to and had the inputs from India on this issue, and indicated that it will bring such views and inputs back to the Group for its consideration. China hopes the above inputs will help facilitate the relevant discussions within the Group.

The two sides realized that the question of the non-NPT states' participation is, in essence, a multilateral issue, and can only be subject to multilateral solution by the Group. Bilateral exchanges should serve to facilitate the relevant discussions within the Group.

China pointed out that the issue of the non-NPT states' participation in the NSG raises new questions for the Group under the new circumstances, and the crux of the above question is how to address the gap between the existing policies and practices of the non-NPT states and the existing international non-proliferation rules and norms based on the NPT as the cornerstone. China wishes to see early commencement of an open and transparent inter-governmental process to undertake, in accordance with the mandate adopted by the NSG at its Seoul Plenary meeting, a comprehensive and thorough study on the question of the non-NPT states' participation in the NSG in various aspects. China has hitherto not yet taken a position on any country-specific membership in the category of the non-NPT states. And China supports the notion of two-step approach within the Group to address the above question, i.e., at the first stage, to explore and reach agreement on a non-discriminatory formula applicable to all the non-NPT states, and to proceed to take up country-specific membership issues at the second stage. China, for its part, expressed its readiness to actively participate in the above process within the Group.

The two sides also had in-depth discussions on issues related to cyber security and the work of the Conference on Disarmament.

The two sides believed that the consultation is positive, candid, pragmatic and constructive. The two sides expressed the wish to intensify their exchanges on the relevant issues. They also agreed to hold the next round of consultation in China in due course, to be decided through diplomatic channels.

Clicky

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Sep 2016 13:13

arun wrote:
China Supports the Notion of Two-Step Approach within the Nuclear Suppliers Group to Explore a Non-Discriminatory Formula Applicable to all Non-NPT States
Clicky

That is a very unfortunate title. the two-step process is China's creation based on frivolous principles and non-existent membership conditions just in order to stall India's admission and/or pave the way for its protege, Pakistan's admission, something that is unthinkable otherwise. the title connotes as if the two-step approach was a unanimous decision taken at the plenary and somehow China is supporting it.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 16 Sep 2016 08:01

IMO, no matter what China does, twists or turns, try to play by "principals", it is loose loose for China and win-win for India (and its friends like US and others)... For all practical purposes India already benefits from all it can benefit as it can do business with all which it is interested doing business in - in current setup... China may turn and twist and some how save face but it has shown itself as Paki supporter out in open and lost quite a bit of its clout in the group. It could no longer stay in background and let someone else do it's dirty work to oppose India. IMO Modi played these cards very well to show that it is not the majority which wants to exclude India it is virtually China only.

Now let us see how long China supports terrorists like Hafiz out in open after learning this.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 16 Sep 2016 09:24

Amber G. wrote:IMO, no matter what China does, twists or turns, try to play by "principals", it is loose loose for China and win-win for India (and its friends like US and others)...

A little premature to go that far don't you think?

arun · Post by **arun** » 16 Sep 2016 11:06

X Posted from “Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)” thread.

Continuing from my earlier post of Sept 15 10.14 am a few posts above.

PR Chinese Foreign Ministry on Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) membership of India. The usual PR Chinese duplicitous prevarications on display:

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on September 14, 2016

2016/09/14 ……………..

Q: China and India held a new round of arms control consultation in New Delhi yesterday, discussing the accession of India into the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG). Can you give us more details?

A: On September 13, China and India held a fresh round of arms control consultation in New Delhi. The consultation was co-chaired by Wang Qun, Director-General of the Arms Control Department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, and Amandeep Singh Gill, Joint Secretary for Disarmament and International Security of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs. The two sides exchanged views on issues of common concern.

On NSG enlargement, given that it is an issue of major concern to India, China shared with India the relevant discussions within the Group, as well as its principled positions and views on that. In the meantime, China listened to India's opinion on the accession into the NSG by countries that are not signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and promised to bring such views back to the Group for its consideration. China hopes the above inputs will help facilitate the relevant discussions within the Group.

The two sides realized that non-NPT states' participation is, in essence, a multilateral issue, and can only be subject to consensus of all NSG members through consultation. Bilateral exchanges should serve to facilitate the relevant discussions within the Group.

China pointed out that the issue of the non-NPT states' participation in the NSG raises new questions for the Group under the new circumstances, and the crux of it is how to address the gap between the existing policies and practices of the non-NPT states and the existing international non-proliferation rules and norms with the NPT as the cornerstone. In accordance with the mandate given to the NSG at its Seoul Plenary meeting, China supports an early commencement of an open and transparent inter-governmental process to undertake comprehensive and thorough discussion on issues relating to non-NPT states' participation in the NSG in various aspects. China has yet to take a position on the accession into the NSG by any specific non-NPT country. China supports the notion of a two-step approach, which means that at the first stage, exploring and reaching agreement on a non-discriminatory formula applicable to all non-NPT states, and proceeding to take up country-specific membership issues at the second stage. China is willing to actively participate in the above process within the Group.

The two sides also had in-depth discussions on issues related to cyber security and the work of the Geneva Conference on Disarmament.

The two sides believed that the consultation is positive, candid, pragmatic and constructive. The two sides expressed the wish to intensify their exchanges on the relevant issues, agreeing to hold the next round of consultation in China in due course, to be decided through diplomatic channels.

From here:

Clicky

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 Oct 2016 21:49

Intenational Court to Deliver Judgment on Marshall Islands Versus India Tomorrow :

The Wire

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will give its verdict on Wednesday, on whether it has jurisdiction to deliberate on the suit brought by the Pacific nation of Marshall Islands against India, Pakistan and the UK, for not taking steps to end the nuclear arms race.

The UN’s top judicial body will deliver judgments on the three cases at the Hague’s Peace Palace building at 10 am local time (1.30 pm IST). This is the first time that India has been involved in an ICJ case in 15 years, since Indian government’s lawyers successfully argued that the world court had no jurisdiction in cases filed by Pakistan over the shooting down of its naval aircraft by the Indian Air Force.

In April 2014, the Republic of Marshall Islands had sued all the P-5 countries, as well as India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea for failing “to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion, negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament”.

However, the ICJ only accepted cases against India, Pakistan and the UK as the other six countries had never acceded to the world court. The oral proceedings were held over four days in March this year.

India’s argument objecting to the ICJ’s jurisdiction, as presented by its lawyers in their written and oral proceedings, was four-fold.

First, that there is no dispute between the parties; second, even if the court finds that there is a dispute, it could only be settled if at least, all the states possessing nuclear weapons and certainly more than one, were parties to the proceedings; this not being the case, the court can only decline to exercise jurisdiction. Third, several reservations to India’s optional declaration under Article 36 (2) bar the court’s jurisdiction; and fourth, that any judgment rendered in these circumstances would be devoid of any concrete practical effect. .............

disha · Post by **disha** » 04 Oct 2016 22:51

arun wrote:Intenational Court to Deliver Judgment on Marshall Islands Versus India Tomorrow :

A damp squib raised to stinking high heaven by presstitutes. US conducted several nuclear tests in the Pacific Proving Grounds located at Marshall Islands. The famous being Bikini Atoll., from where the word "Bikini" comes for the swim wear that was meant to be a bombshell.

Now now., if the marshall islands can sue US/UK/France for copyright on Bikini and they make money of it., that is something to talk about. Even a $1 a bikini copyright for marshall islands will do them wonders.

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Oct 2016 14:58

arun wrote:Intenational Court to Deliver Judgment on Marshall Islands Versus India Tomorrow :

The Wire

ICJ rules in India's favour and agrees with India's contention that they, the ICJ, have no jurisdiction to look at the case.

Shocking that the verdict was such a close run thing given that India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Verdict was 9 in our favour with 7 Against:

‘No jurisdiction in India nuke case’: UN top court rejects Marshalls suit

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 Oct 2016 19:52

Why shocking??

The court is filled with a majority of white skinned folks, most of whom think that India is uppity in the nuke and nuke weapons arena.

brown skinned natives with nukes?? Brown skinned natives with the highest growth rate today, brown skinned natives who have rebuffed the EU crowd on economic terms??

the correct question would be, which fool Indian submitted the country to the jurisdiction of the ICJ, in the first place??

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 05 Oct 2016 20:46

http://indianexpress.com/article/world/ ... a-3066621/
Top UN court throws out Marshall Islands’ nuclear case against India, others

The court upholds the objection to jurisdiction raised by India... and finds that it cannot proceed to the merits of the case," judge Ronny Abraham told the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Oct 2016 17:33

Russia may supply uranium enrichment technology to India

On 13 October, in an interview with Russian and Indian news agencies leading up to his visit to the BRICs summit in Goa, President Putin of Russia outlined areas of nuclear cooperation with India. Along with building nuclear power reactors, President Putin announced that

Technological cooperation in the field of uranium enrichment is being established.

No further details were given by either Russia or India, but the two countries had signed on 24 December 2015 a "Programme of Action Agreed Between The Department of Atomic Energy of India And The Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation "Rosatom" for Localization of Manufacturing in India for Russian-Designed Nuclear Reactor Units." India plans to have 12 Russian-supplied reactors, of which up to eight reactors may be in the Kudankulam area.

It is not known if the 2015 Programme of Action mentions uranium enrichment. In March 2016, India's government told parliament that it "covers localisation in India for major equipment and spares as well as fuel assemblies for future Russian-designed reactors in India". Mr. Putin's comments seemed to suggest that along with nuclear reactor and fuel assembly technology transfer, Russia may be planning to supply India with uranium enrichment technology. This could be in the form of a centrifuge plant to provide low enriched uranium for fuel assembly fabrication in India for the Russian supplied reactors. Indeed, in 2010, Sergei Kiriyenko, the chief of Rosatom announced that "We plan to set up joint facilities for enrichment and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel in India ... In China we already have such facility."

Russia previously has built centrifuge enrichment plants in China with a total capacity of 1.5 million SWU, which are Chinese operated.

It is possible that Russian transfer of enrichment technology to India, which is not a party to the NPT, would not be compatible with June 2015 Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines.

These guidelines on special controls on sensitive exports state that

Suppliers should exercise a policy of restraint in the transfer of sensitive facilities, equipment, technology and material usable for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, especially in cases when a State has on its territory entities that are the object of active NSG Guidelines Part 2 denial notifications from more than one NSG Participating Government.

(a) In the context of this policy, suppliers should not authorize the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing facilities, and equipment and technology therefore if the recipient does not meet, at least, all of the following criteria:

(i) Is a Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and is in full compliance with its obligations under the Treaty;

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Oct 2016 17:33

https://twitter.com/DarylGKimball/statu ... 0754138112

Daryl G Kimball
‏@DarylGKimball

Daryl G Kimball Retweeted IPFM

Transfer of this type of sensitive nuclear technology would violate Nuclear Supplier Group guidelines. @mfa_russia needs to explain itself.

kit · Post by **kit** » 20 Oct 2016 17:41

China has transferred reprocessing tech for Uranium and Plutonium to Pakistan ..what happened to NSG then ?