India Nuclear News and Discussion - June 26-2007

[SaiK]

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/00 ... 291901.htm

In a break from existing norms, the chosen manufacturer will have to spend 50 percent as direct offsets on the aircraft or defence manufacturing industry in India, the official announcement said. Under current rules, there is a 30 per cent offset clause in all defence deals worth over Rs 300 crores.

Unkil has been offered carrot (F-18 ) for nuke deal. Boeing was pushing for this and its wish has been granted. Instead of 30% offset in defence industry, now it has been relaxed to 50% offset in defence and aircraft industries. Boeing, Airbus and Russia would be easy qualifiers and others (F-16, Grippen) will find it tough.

We want cheese and not carrots. We have enough carrots.. Let Uncle know that civilian deal and military deals cant be combined for scratching back arrangements.

If F-18 is what chosen by IAF, then we would need that ToT. And that is where Uncle has not opened mouth. Leave the offsets alone. Or is the offset clause is in lieu of ToT? I don't think I heard that?

Anyways, Uncle just can't carrotize our defence procurement and strategic purchase and further add to a complex dependency chain we have already made.

[svinayak]

Surajji,

So, what may happen IF Mainland goes Demo? Will their minds sync?

I am not looking for an answer.

Boss, you're looking at the wrong reason for either PRC/KMT or a theoretical unified nation syncing in that manner. Democracy doesn't necessarily equate to a move to emphasize some nationalist artifact. It'll happen if nationalist irredentism is somehow used as a unifying tool, whatever the political contours may be. Being democratic itself doesn't automatically translate to anything. Anyway that's enough diversion of this thread.

They will become nationalistic. Han Hubris and nationalism will be strong no matter what kind of govt.

[ramana]

Telugu Portal reports
6/30/2007

New Delhi:Even as India and the US hold talks Tuesday on a civil nuclear pact, there is a belated recognition in the government that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's drawing of "red lines" in parliament last year has left little elbow room for negotiations on key issues.

"We have painted ourselves into a corner," a reliable source privy to the nuclear deal negotiations told IANS.

"It's no longer diplomacy. It's English now," the source added while alluding to semantic quibbles that will be involved in finalising the text of the 123 agreement.

He was referring to Manmohan Singh's assurances in the Rajya Sabha Aug 17 last year in which he laid down "red lines" which India will not cross in the course of negotiations on civil nuclear cooperation with the US.

"Now, we can't be seen to be conceding even slightly on these assurances given by the prime minister to parliament," said the source.

The source, who was speaking to journalists on the condition of anonymity, admitted that if things were left a little open-ended, negotiations would not be so difficult now.

Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon will hold talks with Nicholas Burns, the US' chief pointman on the nuclear deal, in Washington Tuesday to iron out major differences over the text of the 123 agreement which will pave the way for resumption of nuclear commerce between the two sides.

The prime minister's assurances to parliament last year were made in the face of a combative and sceptical opposition, most notably the Leftist allies of the ruling coalition and the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, which were insisting on a parliamentary resolution on the nuclear deal.

In an important speech, Manmohan Singh assured that India would never compromise on its strategic autonomy and repudiated any attempt to impose a ban on nuclear testing and a moratorium on the production of fissile materials.

"We are not prepared to go beyond a unilateral voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing. We are not willing to accept a moratorium on the production of fissile materials," he had said.

The rigidity of New Delhi's stand on these critical issues has led to a hardening of Washington's positions as well and sparked apprehensions in some quarters that the deal itself was in danger of collapsing. The US is pushing for including a ban on nuclear testing by India that is not acceptable to the latter on grounds that it will be tantamount to sneaking a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) through the back door.

Washington has insisted on a clause that will terminate all civilian nuclear cooperation with New Delhi should the latter conduct a nuclear test.

Before he left for Washington, Menon told a parliamentary panel about the "red lines" laid down by Manmohan Singh in parliament last year and said he will go strictly by these guidelines which "command broad support across the political spectrum."

--IANS

Interesting that a govt source who wishes to be anonymous is complaing about the MMS speech in Lok Sabha! He balmes the Left and the BJP for this speech.

This again shows the depth of sellout of some people. One guess who the source is!

[ldev]

One guess who the source is!

This should be easy. Sanjay Baru?

[NRao]

Is there hope of defeating this deal?

One the one hand it says:

Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon will hold talks with Nicholas Burns, the US' chief pointman on the nuclear deal, in Washington Tuesday to iron out major differences over the text of the 123 agreement which will pave the way for resumption of nuclear commerce between the two sides.

and then:

Before he left for Washington, Menon told a parliamentary panel about the "red lines" laid down by Manmohan Singh in parliament last year and said he will go strictly by these guidelines which "command broad support across the political spectrum."

IF he follows "red line", then how can he "pave the way ......"?

Also, he forgets that the Hyde Act - itself an American Law - is very, very rigid.

MMS is trying to find an exit strategy and is unable to find one easily. Perhaps his resignation will allow everyone to reboot.

[CRamS]

MMS is trying to find an exit strategy and is unable to find one easily. Perhaps his resignation will allow everyone to reboot.

I don't know about the exit strategy part, but your suggestion that he resign is right on the money. What are the chances of that happening? I wish MMS (and of course Sonia) would just fade away. I am sure he can find a nice villa in suburban virginia and can join the South Asia 'expert' think tank circuit, a keynote speaker in SAJA conventions etc and parrot his "I have a nuke-free vision for South Asia" and "India's and TSP's destinies are linked together" balderdash.

[SaiK]

Where is the question of exit strategy when you have not even entered into one?

[NRao]

I would like to give MMS an out - let him become the Finance Mininter, perhaps. Run the other family out of town - give them a villa in Italy? Does that make sense?

Also:

The rigidity of New Delhi's stand on these critical issues has led to a hardening of Washington's positions as well and sparked apprehensions in some quarters that the deal itself was in danger of collapsing

Was'nt the J18 meant to remove the rigidity imposed by the US over the years? The Hyde Act was only a colation of all the rigidity from various US sources - easy to get at, in one place.

[vsudhir]

Quite zimbly, the two sides (US and India) are negotiating in the true spirit of sabji mandi haggling - throwing tantrums and treats alternately, testing each other's resolve and room for maneuver etc.

All well so far.

If onlee we had as much confidence in GOI sticking to its assurances as in the US acting in its own selfish interests, we'd sleep a lot, lot easier.

NRao,
MMS's exit (graceful or otherwise) would be great in more ways than one. For one, it could prove that the economy is genuinely on auto-pilot and doesn't suffer much from happening in the Delhi circus.

Who replaces MMS will be another matter altogether and markets may react negatively if a phoolproof nincompoop phamily-chamcha such as Arjun Singh or Shivraj patil take the helm (keep the seat warm for Rahul beta someday).

[NRao]

The Hindu :: June 30, 2007 :: India, U.S. looking at mid-July for 123 talks

[quote]
India, U.S. looking at mid-July for 123 talks

Siddharth Varadarajan

Narayanan, Stephen Hadley likely to lead delegations

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obstacles cannot be resolved at the purely technical level, it is perceived

India not for an artificial deadline


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


NEW DELHI: The next round of negotiations on the India-U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement — also known as the 123 Agreement — is slated for the middle of July with both sides seriously considering upgrading their delegations to the National Security Adviser level.

Though a final decision on the dates and composition of delegations will be taken over the next few days, it is likely that National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan and his United States counterpart, Stephen Hadley, will steer their teams when they meet in Washington two weeks from now to surmount the obstacles in the path of the nuclear deal.

The perception on both sides is that these obstacles cannot be resolved at the purely technical level and will require the involvement of politically-empowered officials. Indeed, India, which delayed sending several key members of its negotiating team to foreign postings in the expectation of a quick agreement, has now allowed them to rotate out. Hamid Ali Rao, Joint Secretary in the Disarmament Division of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), to Geneva as Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament and Santosh Jha, Director in MEA’s Americas Division, will take up a new assignment in Sri Lanka next week.

According to senior Indian officials, matters in the 123 Agreement remain more or less where they were when the two sides reached an impasse in Delhi earlier this month. In his meeting with Mr. Hadley at Heiligendamm on June 8, Mr. Narayanan sought to break the impasse by suggesting that India could place a purpose-built standalone reprocessing facility under IAEA safeguards for handling U.S.-origin spent fuel.

Imported reactors

Under the March 2006 separation plan, India had offered to place its existing Power Reactor Fuel Reprocessing (PREFRE) facility at Tarapur under “campaign modeâ€

[NRao]

Give clear statement on NAM, Left asks Government

[sraj]

I don't see how a deal can go through. Even if MMS made a commitment, he still has to seek the green light from Indian parliament. The same way, even if Bush made a commitment, he still needs the Comgress to give him the final go-ahead.

Thus regarless of his promise on the reprocessing rights, he cannot move an inch without Congress. His position is made more vulnerable.......

Avram

This whole drama about lame-duck Bush versus Democrat-controlled Congress is an illusion served up to extract concessions from India on top of those already embodied in J18M2 (guess who is actually being greedy - the Indians or the Americans?), in clear pursuit of the CRE agenda common to broad sections of the US political spectrum!!

Example: For 5 months in 2006, Congress "could not find the time" to take up the bills related to J18M2 -- supposedly because the Democrats, egged on by the NPAs, were upset about Bush practicing "Santa Claus style negotiating" - to quote one anguished NPA!

Once the Democrats gained control of Congress after the November 2006 elections, shouldn't they have put this whole thing in a deep freeze until after 2008 (both to address their "supposed concerns" with the deal, and to ensure that Bush does not get credit for a foreign policy breakthrough)?

But, no! On the contrary, that lame-duck Congress suddenly: i) found time among all its other pressing needs to take up the House and Senate bills for consideration; and ii) was able to develop the bipartisan consensus to pass the bills in practically one day!

Note: most of the problem issues with the Hyde Act were already there in the bills that came out of the two Committees. They were not addressed because the Bush Admn did not lobby with Congress to address them, despite MMS' Aug 17 statement to Parliament explicitly stating GoI's redlines and his G8 mtg with Bush in St. Petersburg where he raised all the issues with the draft bills!

Conclusion: The 5-month delay was meant to soften up GoI, when it was made to run from pillar to post (using lobbyists, NRIs, opposition BJP contacts, anyone -- to get a bill passed). The focus on "getting a bill passed" meant that much less focus on all the serious problems with the House and Senate Committee drafts. The lightning, 1-day passing of a flawed Hyde Act at a time when GoI had pretty much given up hope was designed to present the Indians with a fait accompli, with the expectation that GoI would have no option but to accept the inevitable and sign a 123 agreement that codified Hyde.

Here is a question for Avram:
Everyone in Washington DC knows the problems between lame-duck Bush and the Democrat-controlled Congress, as well as the strictly limited room for negotiations due to limitations imposed by the Hyde Act. Why then does the Bush Admn keep on wanting negotiations every two weeks? Why do Bush Admn officials keep on making optimistic noises about a deal definitely happening? And happening by such and such date (latest being Condi's end-2007 estimate)? Why is the White House so keen to invite MMS to the ranch this year (if July does not work, how about Sept? If Sept does not work, how about August?). Why not take a break and let everyone think about it for 6-12 months and then have another go at negotiations?

Here is my answer (I am sure there will be others):
Because a broad section of the US political spectrum knows in its heart that J18M2 is a very good deal from the US viewpoint! It also knows in its heart that if they don't lock up this deal now, the next time a deal gets done (if ever) - it will be much less favorable to the US than J18M2 is!! Which is why they will try their best to extract additional concessions on top of J18M2 (as I said earlier, look who is actually being greedy - the Indians or the Americans!) but will settle for J18M2 as a last resort!!!

I hope I am wrong and no deal happens because I believe India should wait another 10 years for a deal on its terms.

[Gerard]

xpost
U.S., Russia may announce nuclear agreement soon

Under the initiative, the report said, Washington and Moscow would guarantee countries access to nuclear power and fuel to be used for reactors that are designed to be "proliferation resistant." In return, those countries would need to give up nuclear enrichment.

[ShauryaT]

Give clear statement on NAM, Left asks Government

Yes...I demand the same. Give a clear statement that NAM IS DEAD.

But, it ain't happening.

[JCage]

Shaurya, the NAM is useful. The NAM era ties with African and other nations are allowing India to continue to remain in the negotiating space, otherwise the PRCs economy driven handouts and US etcs powerplays would have limited Indias options by far.

[ShauryaT]

Shaurya, the NAM is useful. The NAM era ties with African and other nations are allowing India to continue to remain in the negotiating space, otherwise the PRCs economy driven handouts and US etcs powerplays would have limited Indias options by far.

The last i caught the news, it was China hosting 40 African leaders in Beijing. Wonder what is the real value of all these beyond the feel good.

My point is the concept of NAM is dead and it does not serve Indian Interests to be viewed as in opposition to the US - just for the fun of it. I mean, look at the CPM statements, do these guys have any other purpose other than opposition to the US.

These buggers allign with Islamists, Gays, whoever, simply to oppose the US. Another thing is - India needs to get off this image of being a lecturer to the world. I mean, it is a real negative for India, which was a serious topic of discussion in the Strobe-Jaswant talks.

So, dump the NAM and go about doing your business.

[shyam]

Actually India should give confusing signal. Some second level leaders of few parties, may be BJP, should say that NAM is dead while left and Cong leaders say it is still relevant.

[Manne]

Does anyone else think GoI has succeeded in exposing GOTUS? Or at least twisting it up in undies?

[NRao]

Exposing GOTUS of what?

[Satya_anveshi]

When a paki slips and falls in public, he gets up and says he was doing circus. He thinks he has succeeded in entertaining the public.

Crediting GOI of calling US's bluff with this Nuke deal fiasco is a similar natak.

On a serious note, it not only gives a clean chit to the traitors, who willfully colluded to undermine India's supreme national interest but also credits them of possessing chankian brains. IMHO, public should continue to be critical and, if possible, punish those responsible so such a possibility does not arise in future.

[Satya_anveshi]

Give clear statement on NAM, Left asks Government

Why should Condi mention NAM at an Indo-US Business council event but to express her feeling that strategic alliance is a far cry?

Also, why should India obligated to sever its relations with a host of nations when US is aiding Pakistan, one abominable sorry nation, which is a clear sponsor of worldwide terrorism. If US cannot dump Pakistan to form strategic alliance with India, why is India required to dump NAM?

First Iran and now NAM. Next what, renounce UN membership and become 51st State of USA?

How phucking funny can it get with MMS being PM, who does not even feel obligated to counter such nonsense? Not even the opposition BJP feels that this should not go unanswered. It’s an irony that Left Parties, which are parties in the government, are playing the role of opposition.

It happens only in India.

[NRao]

The Hindu :: June 30, 2007 :: India aiming to become maritime power: Pranab

Not a nuke article.

Pranbda is making some serious noise. I would like to get the entire test of this speech.

[Tilak]

xpost
U.S., Russia may announce nuclear agreement soon

Under the initiative, the report said, Washington and Moscow would guarantee countries access to nuclear power and fuel to be used for reactors that are designed to be "proliferation resistant." In return, those countries would need to give up nuclear enrichment.

To add:

By denying reprocessing rights. As usual, Unkil wants to shunt India out of the proposed GNEP. So its now or another long wait, isolation, and shady agreements down the line..

[merlin]

Interesting that a govt source who wishes to be anonymous is complaing about the MMS speech in Lok Sabha! He balmes the Left and the BJP for this speech.

This again shows the depth of sellout of some people.

That's why I so wanted MMS to make a statement in parliament. Now he cannot go back on it blatantly. That does not mean he will not attempt to hoodwink Parliament, but it will not be so easy.

Sellout starts from the top, without support from the very top the mofo source would not be making these noises.

[Malayappan]

The Hindu :: June 30, 2007 :: India aiming to become maritime power: Pranab

Not a nuke article.

Pranbda is making some serious noise. I would like to get the entire test of this speech.

NR,

Here goes...

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/ ... s-and.html

[NRao]

Thanks for the teXt.

[svinayak]

That's why I so wanted MMS to make a statement in parliament. Now he cannot go back on it blatantly. That does not mean he will not attempt to hoodwink Parliament, but it will not be so easy.

Sellout starts from the top, without support from the very top the mofo source would not be making these noises.

This report is to create confusion and CYA when the ruling party has not negotiated properly.


But the more important thing is tha tactic - It is a Bait and Switch tactic.

With J18 India was baited for negotiation but using Hyde Act there was a switch.

[Tilak]

Fissile material ban talks inch towards consensus
Siddharth Varadarajan

[quote]New Delhi: The United Nations’ Conference on Disarmament ended its second session of the year in Geneva on Friday with all 65 members barring Pakistan, China and Iran indicating their willingness to begin immediate negotiations towards the conclusion of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes.

India, which remains uncomfortable with certain procedural and substantive aspects of the impending decision, nevertheless says it will not block the compromise that will allow the CD to begin drafting the fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT).

Actively working with the U.S. on the FMCT is one of the conditions of the July 2005 Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement. For the past decade, the CD, which is the U.N.’s primary arms control negotiating body, has been deadlocked because of conflicting views about its work plan. On its agenda are four items — disarmament, a fissile material ban, the prevention of an arms race in outer space (Paros) and negative security assurances (NSAs) aimed at assuring non-nuclear weapons states that they would never be attacked or threatened with nuclear weapons by states which possess them.

The U.S. has opposed the CD addressing any issue other than the FMCT, a stand which other countries had objected to. Russia and China, for example, favoured the immediate commencement of negotiations for a Paros treaty while several smaller members, including Iran, said forward movement on NSAs was essential. Under the terms of a compromise proposed last March, the CD will appoint four “coordinatorsâ€

[Prabu]

This is an artcle, from THE HINDU dt 2nd July,2007 which gives the statement of the 'nose' poker, David mulford ! !

US hopeful n-deal will be through 'as soon as possible'

New Delhi, July 2 (PTI): The United States on Sunday expressed the hope that the nuclear deal with India would be through "as soon as possible", saying the two countries were set to resume talks later this month on the agreement to operationalise the deal.

"I am confident that the two countries will see it through. Negotiations as you know are very difficult. They are very technical. If it were an easy negotiation, we would have finished a long long time ago," the US Ambassador to India, David Mulford, said.

He said the two countries were going to have a re-engagement on the deal in the week starting July 16.
(This means that the game starts all over again??? )
"We have a few issues left, that are difficult issues, that need political-level attention. (Read from India only !!) And we hope to work our way through that and complete this thing as soon as possible," he remarked when asked whether he was confident the deal would be finalised by the end of the year.

He denied there was any link between India's plans for buying 126 multi-role fighter aircraft and the progress on the 123 agreement for nuclear deal.
( This confirms the doubt that both are indeed linked !!)
Let us wait and watch !
- PRABU

[NRao]

"I am confident that the two countries will see it through. Negotiations as you know are very difficult. They are very technical. If it were an easy negotiation, we would have finished a long long time ago," the US Ambassador to India, David Mulford, said.

He said the two countries were going to have a re-engagement on the deal in the week starting July 16.

Condi's statement of 'our leaders have signed a deal and we have passed legislation' is the new starting point. Miranda rights. Mulford is parroting what has been said earlier by Burns (BTW, is he still vacationing in India?)

I was hoping that someone from India would come out and state the as is facts. The blunt talk (at Carnegie) by Jaishankar has been brushed aside by the US (Condi's speech).

The mention of the deal not any longer being technical is meant to take any techies from Indian side off the discussion table - the US does not want to hear any Indian negotiator stating that some techie in India is objecting to some point. This opens the door for the US to twist the politicians arms, a Indian politician who can no longer hide behind an Indian techie.

This confirms the doubt that both are indeed linked

Ambies lie abroad. My English teacher was teaching us puns!!!

Do not believe anything any amby states. They are there to propagate total lies.

[Laks]

Raja Mohan on opposition to USS Nimitz visit.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/203465.html
Hypocrisy is an N-letter word
[quote]People who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones. Sections of our political class that are kicking up dust over the visit of the US nuclear powered aircraft carrier, the USS Nimitz, may not see the irony of it all. Outsiders looking in, however, ask, “Is India a nuclear weapon power or what?â€

[ShauryaT]

The Hindu (English)
02 July 2007

New Delhi: The United Nations' Conference on Disarmament ended its second session of the year in Geneva on Friday with all 65 members barring Pakistan, China and Iran indicating their willingness to begin immediate negotiations towards the conclusion of a treaty banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes.

India, which remains uncomfortable with certain procedural and substantive aspects of the impending decision, nevertheless says it will not block the compromise that will allow the CD to begin drafting the fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT).

Actively working with the U.S. on the FMCT is one of the conditions of the July 2005 Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement. For the past decade, the CD, which is the U.N.'s primary arms control negotiating body, has been deadlocked because of conflicting views about its work plan. On its agenda are four items disarmament, a fissile material ban, the prevention of an arms race in outer space (Paros) and negative security assurances (NSAs) aimed at assuring non-nuclear weapons states that they would never be attacked or threatened with nuclear weapons by states which possess them.

The U.S. has opposed the CD addressing any issue other than the FMCT, a stand which other countries had objected to. Russia and China, for example, favoured the immediate commencement of negotiations for a Paros treaty while several smaller members, including Iran, said forward movement on NSAs was essential. Under the terms of a compromise proposed last March, the CD will appoint four 'coordinators' to oversee discussion on all four topics.

But though the FMCT coordinator's mandate says he will 'preside over negotiations, without any preconditions, on a non-discriminatory and multilateral treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive purposes,' the mandate for the other three coordinators only calls for them to preside over 'substantive discussions' in their respective areas.

In response to objections from many countries that the draft was unbalanced, the CD President last month came up with a 'complementary presidential statement' reflecting the Conference's understanding of how the main decision was to be implemented. This statement notes that no preconditions for the FMCT negotiations are being set, 'thus providing all delegations with the opportunity to actively pursue their respective positions and principles' during the actual negotiations including, presumably, verification.

As for the 'substantive discussions' under the other three heads disarmament, Paros and NSAs the statement says no outcome is being prescribed or precluded. 'It enables future compromises and agreement(s) and does not exclude the possibility of future negotiations". Finally, the statement also clarifies that the coordinators will work under the "CD's rules of procedures," the most important of which, from the viewpoint of many delegations, is the requirement of consensus

India wants verifiability

In a statement to the CD on June 19, India said it would like the CD's draft decision and Complementary Presidential Statement combined into one integrated text so that there was no ambiguity. But Ambassador Jayant Prasad also reiterated a substantive objection. India, he said, "very clearly indicated the importance we attach to a universal, non-discriminatory and internationally and effectively verifiable (FMCT)." Mr. Prasad urged the CD President to continue consultations 'so that we are able to arrive at a sufficient common understanding on this fundamental issue.' India's stand on verification runs counter to the official position of the U.S.

Though Washington had gone along with the 'Shanon mandate' of 1995 which envisaged verifiability, the Bush administration declared in July 2004 that it would no longer support international verification. The U.S. preference is to use its own intelligence capabilities to ensure all signatories comply with their treaty obligations.

On June 21, the CD's Swedish President asked whether there was any delegation that was not prepared to proceed on the basis of the emerging consensus. The only three countries to say yes were China, Pakistan and Iran. China said it had some 'queries and concerns' about the 'status and content' of the Complementary Statement and asked for more time to study the implications.

The Chinese Ambassador also endorsed India's remarks on the FMCT. He accepted the logic of the compromise which would enable work on the treaty to begin but said China wanted substantive work on the other agenda items as well. In a number of spirited interventions last week, Pakistan's Ambassador, Tahmina Janjua, repeatedly objected to the failure of the draft decision to include verification.

Ms. Janjua also raised the issue of existing fissile material stockpiles. Pakistan, she said, wanted a 'clear reference' to these two points. She also said there should be 'negotiations' on the other three issues. On its part, Iran said it had expected a clear commitment towards negotiations on disarmament and NSAs. Its Ambassador also said Tehran was 'uncertain about the usefulness of an FMCT with no verification system and excluding existing stockpiles of fissile material that can be used for nuclear weapons.'

As a country with the smallest stockpile of fissile material for weapons purposes, Pakistan would like the FMCT to neutralise the advantage larger nuclear weapons states like India have.

Many countries, including South Africa, Algeria, New Zealand and Brazil, share its position on stocks. However, the U.S. and Russia, oppose the inclusion of existing fissile material. China, which has concerns about the huge stockpiles of the U.S. and Russia, would prefer to secure a commitment on their reduction outside the ambit of the FMCT. India has not taken a formal position on stockpiles but supports the idea that the FMCT prohibit only 'the future production of fissile material.' The CD will reconvene for the year's last session on July 30.

No outcome is being prescribed or precluded under Paros and NSAs

India's stand on verification runs counter to the official U.S. position

Translation. FMCT will come into effect without verification. Verification would be pushed down the stream as a future "promise". What can Indian extract for herself for this future promise and for what purpose is a big question?

[NRao]

Bush and Putin 'united' on Iran

Putin must have got what he was bargaining for from the US. What is that I wonder.

India needs to buckle up before it is too late.

[SaiK]

yeah~.. a wise decision by bushmen, since any anti missile shield outside Russia or near them, without them being in the lead or partnership, would trigger things back to cold days.

Good.. the Khans agreed. I don't understand where and how we can buckle up?

[Gerard]

Thorium reactor in India soon!

[sraj]

From TOI report above on Thorium Reactor

Herein lies the rub.

India does not have sufficient uranium to build enough thermal reactors to produce the plutonium needed for more FBRs of the Kalpakkam type. The India-US civilian nuclear deal was expected to enable India import uranium and reprocess spent fuel to recover plutonium for its FBRs. But this deal has hit a roadblock.

and

Iyengar has one suggestion that he says must be acceptable to the US if it is serious about helping India to solve its energy problem.

"The US and Russia have piles of plutonium from dismantled nuclear weapons," Iyengar told IANS, adding: "They should allow us to borrow this plutonium needed to start our breeders. We can return the material after we breed enough."

No one gives you anything for free. The US (on behalf of the NSG cartel) is trying to exercise control over the strategic programme and constrain it in exchange for meeting Indian needs cited above.

The strategic programme should be non-negotiable.

An appropriate quid pro quo from India would be the positive impact on global carbon emissions of diversifying its energy sources. But it will take at least another 10 years for the West to realize and accept that this is indeed a valuable and appropriate benefit for it in exchange for the lifting of technology sanctions.

If the US can bring this process forward by 10 years, it will have: i) generated immense goodwill in India; and ii) helped Indian growth (at the margin only; India can still grow at current rates without such help for the foreseeable future).

If the US chooses not to do so, it will leave a legacy of suspicion with respect to its true intentions vis-a-vis India that will adversely affect future attempts at building a partnership.

If the above turns out to be the case, there is also a non-zero probability of future attempts by other powers to circumvent and/or break the NSG cartel for their own geopolitical reasons. The US will be most adversely affected by such a development.

[vnadendla]

No one gives you anything for free. The US (on behalf of the NSG cartel) is trying to exercise control over the strategic programme and constrain it in exchange for meeting Indian needs cited above.

The strategic programme should be non-negotiable.

An appropriate quid pro quo from India would be the positive impact on global carbon emissions of diversifying its energy sources. But it will take at least another 10 years for the West to realize and accept that this is indeed a valuable and appropriate benefit for it in exchange for the lifting of technology sanctions.

Why is India acting like NSG member from free. Why should it not proliferate to Niger in return for Uranium. We need guts to say it openly. not mumbo jumbo like "cannot be a partner and target..." stuff. No body believes mumbo jumbo.

[Laks]

VDM Gary Weiss cleverly tries to mix Nimitz protests with reprocessing issue.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/02/weiss- ... weiss.html
India's Nuclear Speed Bump

Every time I think things are settling down and relations between the U.S. and India have entered a modern, comfy, mature stage--with an India-U.S. nuclear deal and all that--something always seems to happen that jolts me back to reality.

One jolt is the continual haggling on how to implement the pact. It's a serious dispute, underscoring continued mistrust between our two countries, and it threatens to sabotage the whole nuke deal.

Yup. This nation of 1 billion that is so short of energy that blackouts in major cities have become a national scandal, this same country that is wrestling with the U.S. over implementation of a nuclear pact to deal with India's energy needs, is getting its knickers in a twist over a visit by a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. From its erstwhile nuke energy partner the U.S., no less.

India feels pretty strongly on this issue. The other day, an Indian negotiator, S. Jaishankar, was asked at a conference when gaps between the U.S. and India on all these nuclear issues will be closed. "As soon as the other side agrees with me, the gap will be closed," he was quoted as saying. That was blunt talk from an Indian diplomat engaged in delicate negotiations. "The gloves are off," said a commentator in The Telegraph.

It's hard to fathom why India feels so strongly about a side issue like spent-fuel reprocessing, particularly when its citizens are protesting an otherwise routine visit of a nuclear carrier to an Indian port. Oh, I forgot to mention: Nuclear vessels have been visiting Indian ports for several years, always without incident.

The Indian government's stance on the nuclear issue is more troubling. By going to the mat on the issue of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, purely out of national pride, the Indian government threatens to torpedo an agreement that it desperately needs and to set back relations with the United States. India should realize that the enactment of the nuclear deal on the U.S. side was something of a miracle, given the Bush administration's domestic weakness and serious concerns about the South Asian nuclear arms race. India should stop pressing its luck.

[ramana]

My beef with the Nimitz protesters is they can become the vanguard of a NPA funded and mentore brigade against the ATV deployment by IN. Now that their existence is shown they will get subverted by NPAs and Cold Warriors to form the advance guard to preclude ATV deployment. Uncle has money and these folks need as Tip O'Neill said Money is the milk for politics and can be extended to activism. India should keep an eye on the linkages of these folks.

[Rye]

From the cr@p from Gary Weiss:

The Indian government threatens to torpedo an agreement that it desperately needs and to set back relations with the United States. India should realize that the enactment of the nuclear deal on the U.S. side was something of a miracle, given the Bush administration's domestic weakness and serious concerns about the South Asian nuclear arms race. India should stop pressing its luck.

Miracle, my foot. What really was a miracle was the fact that Bush and the republicans did not bother to push through the Hyde act while the republicans were in total control of the congress.

India should realize that a "deal" of this sort with the US has never worked out well, back from the times of tarapur....nothing has changed since then as the Americans are reminding India very openly.