Indian Nuke News & Discussion Thread-June 18 2008

[CRamS]

Non proliferation is good for you (as long as india is an insider in the club), maybe you should learn to like it!!

Yes, either that, or if US is really serious about this proliferation BS, completely, veriafiably, and publicly de-nuke UK, France, China, Israel, and TSP as first step towards eventual nuke nude world. This will also demonstrate to the world that US doesn't adopt the racist double standard that it doesn now that nukes are allowed only in the hands of white boys (and honorary white status bestowed on Chincoms). Plus the verification process of de-nuking France/UK must involve Indian inspectors and other inspectors of color to ensure there is no hanky panky. Eniugh dreaming.

[shiv]

If I have time I will discuss that but only if I have freedom on this forum to rip the farce of RC and his cabal on Indian nuclear weapons tests and capability, and if I have more time on my hand.

Arun even if you get all the time on earth I am requesting you not to do this on BRF (i.e. on the forum) merely because harsh derisive language in the name of patriotism can be used by anybody and everybody to trash his favorite personality. And it can be equally used against the very person who chooses to use such language and immunity cannot be granted to a single member against that.

I hope you will understand that - for whatever reason, good or bad, you are directly hurting the sentiments of people ON THIS FORUM, and people who value this forum and are honest and open and who choose to stay on here and speak their mind.

I believe it would be wrong not to recognize that and not bend to that in an uncontrollable urge to trod on the feelings of the very people who still support BRF.

Since we are trying to revive BRM/SRR why don't you do an article expressing your views with all the technical data that give rise to your feelings? As a peer reviewed article it would carry more weight and would not be subject to the drawbacks of forum posts.

Thanks

[John Snow]

We often take conspiracy as matter of Laughing stock, so here I offer my self to laugh about ( and I think timely too when things are getting hot with run away neutrons... as shiv ji post indicates)

Allied With France, the Enemy of Our Enemy
America needed the French to defeat the Brits, but it was Paris that lost in the end
By Alex Kingsbury
Posted June 27, 2008


It the outbreak of the American Revolution, England and France had been waging almost uninterrupted war with each ot her for nearly a century. From King William's War in 1689 through the Seven Years' War that wrapped up in 1763, it was a century of bloodletting and territorial trading that played out like a colossal game of Risk. It was little surprise that the French saw the nascent American insurgency, which came to a boil in 1775, as a new front in their battle for world dominance with London.

.........................................
The roots of the American Revolution lay in the Seven Years' War, when England was forced to raise taxes to pay off war debts. Raising more tax money from distant colonies was a reasonable solution, achieved by levying various duties on tea, stamps, and other staples of commerce. Most New England merchants didn't take too kindly to the idea, and they were some of the first to rebel. When the war began, the colonists found themselves with an ill-equipped army and a nearly empty treasury. Enter the French, who provided assistance to the Colonies in the form of military advisers, ammunition, and coin to keep the fledgling government afloat. Fearing a British response, however, the French funneled their aid through a front company called Rodrigue Hortalez et Cie.

What was then conspiracy is now histroy!
Our own PM is creating histroy by roaring to go to G8 where everybody is called G like Bush G, Brown G Singh G.

So where is the power to roar coming for MM Singh G to sign ji you may ask fondly ji?

Its from another duet called Sing(h)ers Dua namely Mulayam Singh G and Amar Singh G.

Now,in all its Singh along concerted effort onlee.


The tune is
"Happy little children, Happy little children, how are this morning ? how are you this morning?

Allez Vous a Allez vous, allez vous" Ossibisa Hit song of 1970s.


If you think this is beating of retreat thats fine too!

[Vick]

Enlightened Mulayam, Amar sing paeans of nuclear deal

Govt engaged in talks with NSG countries for waiver: Menon

Money sings paeans of nuclear deal

And money didn't play a role in the denunciation of the deal?

[John Snow]

Money is neither announced nor denounced, it only changes hands and drops some Jaws!

[shiv]

Money is neither announced nor denounced, it only changes hands and drops some Jaws!

Money is a low-viscosity opinion. It flows into places other opinions don't reach.

[NRao]

I happen to agree that Non Proliferation is bad and fully support the attempt to restrict it to the hands of a few. All I ask is that India be considered as a nuclear weapon state or equivalent (that is all, and no I dont see any hypocrisy on why few and not everyone.. sorry that is the way it is). It is in India's national interest to see that nukes are only in the hands of a few. We should support America's Non Proliferation attempts and I hope they succeed. Think over it. Defanging North Korea makes it one rogue less (esp to trade with the Pakis..) same with Libyans and Iranians. Does India's security get better if North Korea, Iran,Libya and a lot of others have nukes or does it get worse ? ..

Those of us that are old enough know that India actually authored the concept of non proliferation. However, the US - even today - does not really think of it as universal non proliferation. They confuse it with unilateral non proliferation and one that is meant for the "other".

123 does exactly this - Indian unilateral non proliferation.

What we all need is a two axis non proliferation. On one axis all freeze and reduce FM - verifiably. On the other axis all need to own up and destroy all forms of simulations, including computers, to design any use of FM - verifiably. All have to do it at the same time, in proportion to the quantity of FM. So, phase I - say, as an example - all destroy 25% of their FM. Nuke accounting would be in high demand.

[Arun_S]

If I have time I will discuss that but only if I have freedom on this forum to rip the farce of RC and his cabal on Indian nuclear weapons tests and capability, and if I have more time on my hand.

Arun even if you get all the time on earth I am requesting you not to do this on BRF (i.e. on the forum) merely because harsh derisive language in the name of patriotism can be used by anybody and everybody to trash his favorite personality. And it can be equally used against the very person who chooses to use such language and immunity cannot be granted to a single member against that.

I hope you will understand that - for whatever reason, good or bad, you are directly hurting the sentiments of people ON THIS FORUM, and people who value this forum and are honest and open and who choose to stay on here and speak their mind.

I believe it would be wrong not to recognize that and not bend to that in an uncontrollable urge to trod on the feelings of the very people who still support BRF.

Since we are trying to revive BRM/SRR why don't you do an article expressing your views with all the technical data that give rise to your feelings? As a peer reviewed article it would carry more weight and would not be subject to the drawbacks of forum posts.

Thanks

Shiv saar, I get your point and understand, sorry about that.

[Sanatanan]

do you expect him to blow away the deal at a delicate time by grandly announcing "we will test come what may" . .

Maunam sarvartha sadhakam -- in the context of the n-deal, Dr Kalam had been wisely and largely following this strategy, at least in the public domain, until a few days ago. I have not come across any reports of anyone asking him to announce "we will test come what may".

Nevertheless, while respecting others' right to hold a contrary view, I maintain that this deal needs to be "blown away" -- in fact, should never have been struck in the first place.

OK, please back up this allegation . . .

From Economic Times, 5 Jul, 2008:

• Enlightened Mulayam, Amar sing paeans of nuclear deal
  
  Armed with former President A P J Abdul Kalam’s strong advocacy of the Indo-US nuclear deal, Samajwadi Party leaders Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar Singh on Friday met prime minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi and affirmed their party’s backing to the agreement and, as a corollary, to the UPA government.

It may be interesting to refer to two instances of what President Kalam is reported to have said earlier:

1) In Feb 2006, (The Hindu, 04/02/2006) while delivering a speech in the Philipines, referring to the sanctions imposed after the May 1998 nuclear tests he observed:

• "No nation should control what India is doing. . . . . . . the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies."

To me, generation of electricity in our country, through indigenous nuclear reactor technology is certainly classifiable under "critical technologies" (I mean no pun here).

2) Again in June 2007, while dedicating Insat-4b satellite to the Nation he said:

• . . . All these four cases {relating to marketing rocket / space craft launch services from India referred to by him in an earlier paragraph} bring out the need for Indian scientific and technological establishments to launch an integrated national mission for building national technological strength backed by basic science research. Unique products of India thus realized would be sought after by many nations, even the nations who deny technology and the products. It is indeed a great challenge for the ISRO young scientists. Dear young friends, who are in front of me, remember always "Strength respects Strength" (PIB Release, June 08, 2007. {emphasis, mine}

[Rahul M]

A true scientist would not subscribe to a premise that current theoretical models and parameters of extrapolation to be immutable for all time to come and that full-scale (or at least sufficiently near full-scale) confirmatory experimental verification, henceforth, is never required. If Dr Kalam, as reported in the media, has indeed claimed that further testing of strategic nuclear devices by India is not required -- he has not cared to refute these reports so far -- it is not possible to accept him as a true scientist.

Even if He thinks that we need to test sometime in the future, should he announce that publicly and jeopardise the deal He thinks in in India's favour ?

Maunam sarvartha sadhakam -- in the context of the n-deal, Dr Kalam had been wisely and largely following this strategy, at least in the public domain, until a few days ago. I have not come across any reports of anyone asking him to announce "we will test come what may".

This is not the answer to my question.

Nevertheless, while respecting others' right to hold a contrary view, I maintain that this deal needs to be "blown away" -- in fact, should never have been struck in the first place.

None of the deal opponents have come up with a coherent piece on why he/she opposes the deal, inspite of the many iterations of this thread.
My take :--
Case 1) we get the deal ---> best case: we get U and some reactor tech from the US and other countries. If US creates problems, we can go to countries like russia and china.
worst case : The US exerts pressure on us to give up nukes, we walk out on the deal and come back to square one.
Case 2) we don't get the deal : we blow away the energy security of future India and get stuck in the place we are now, and the situation would only deteoriate with time.

OK, please back up this allegation . . .

From Economic Times, 5 Jul, 2008:

• Enlightened Mulayam, Amar sing paeans of nuclear deal
  
  Armed with former President A P J Abdul Kalam’s strong advocacy of the Indo-US nuclear deal, Samajwadi Party leaders Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar Singh on Friday met prime minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi and affirmed their party’s backing to the agreement and, as a corollary, to the UPA government.

It may be interesting to refer to two instances of what President Kalam is reported to have said earlier:

1) In Feb 2006, (The Hindu, 04/02/2006) while delivering a speech in the Philipines, referring to the sanctions imposed after the May 1998 nuclear tests he observed:

• "No nation should control what India is doing. . . . . . . the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies."

To me, generation of electricity in our country, through indigenous nuclear reactor technology is certainly classifiable under "critical technologies" (I mean no pun here).

2) Again in June 2007, while dedicating Insat-4b satellite to the Nation he said:

• . . . All these four cases {relating to marketing rocket / space craft launch services from India referred to by him in an earlier paragraph} bring out the need for Indian scientific and technological establishments to launch an integrated national mission for building national technological strength backed by basic science research. Unique products of India thus realized would be sought after by many nations, even the nations who deny technology and the products. It is indeed a great challenge for the ISRO young scientists. Dear young friends, who are in front of me, remember always "Strength respects Strength" (PIB Release, June 08, 2007. {emphasis, mine}

The allegation was :

It is indeed regrettable that on the strength of these statements attributed to Dr Kalam, our politicians are getting ready to pawn off India's hard-won technological gains

I'm not sure how the above proves this allegation.
regards.

[amit]

Maunam sarvartha sadhakam -- in the context of the n-deal, Dr Kalam had been wisely and largely following this strategy, at least in the public domain, until a few days ago. I have not come across any reports of anyone asking him to announce "we will test come what may".

Nevertheless, while respecting others' right to hold a contrary view, I maintain that this deal needs to be "blown away" -- in fact, should never have been struck in the first place.

Sanatanan,

Just as you have very generously said that others (including President Kalam) have the right to hold a different view, you too off course have the right to hold on to your views about the nuclear deal and I for one respect that.
However, since you have chosen to espouse your views in this debate, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind if I ask for clarifications:

It may be interesting to refer to two instances of what President Kalam is reported to have said earlier:

1) In Feb 2006, (The Hindu, 04/02/2006) while delivering a speech in the Philipines, referring to the sanctions imposed after the May 1998 nuclear tests he observed:
"No nation should control what India is doing. . . . . . . the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies."

To me, generation of electricity in our country, through indigenous nuclear reactor technology is certainly classifiable under "critical technologies" (I mean no pun here).

Could you please explain how this nuclear deal, which would pave the way for the import of uranium and also reactors for civilian power generation be against the just idea of being self reliant?

How, for example, would our three stage program be hit if commercial civilian reactors were imported, as long as our research reactors and military ones remained in a totally seperate grid outside the purview of inspectors? No one can predict the future but as of now everyone seems to think that the military reactors would remain off limits and the grouse is that if we conduct a nuclear test, the cost (in terms of cut off of the civilian reactors) would become very high once we sign the N-deal.

If we consider your concept of self-reliance, then I must say - extrapolating your arguments - the GoI and Indian Air Force made a grave error in importing and using, for example the Su-30MKI planes.

After all, if we didn’t do that we would have eventually been able to build a big heavy Sukhoi category plane right? We do have some hard won expertise in plane design don’t we?

(It’s off course another matter that, without outside collaboration, by the time we did manage to build our very own indigenous Sukhoi equivalent, the US would be phasing out its Raptors and probably test flying its Death Stars).

Taking the aeronautical example, most people think that the LCA program has actually benefited from the technologies that were absorbed and tried out on the SU-30MKI and other “foreign” planes in IAF’s inventory. The same is the case with the Navy and Army.

Hence what makes you think what works for the military, doesn’t work for civilian nuclear power generation?

Heck when we’re talking about power generation, we shouldn’t, going by your argument, even import a single gas turbine since that would mean our “indigenous” gas turbine technology would be hit. Better to start building from scratch rather than be dependent on foreign technology.

Sorry to say but this sly snipping at President Kalam, ever since he openly declared his support for the nuclear deal (it should be remembered that many folks on this forum used to interpret his “silence” before that to be a sign of his unhappiness) bears striking similarity to how AK went from being the last defender of the N-establishment from the evil babus and politicans to becoming a puny civil servant following orders of his political masters in order to keep his job and pension intact, once he too became a votary of the deal.

2) Again in June 2007, while dedicating Insat-4b satellite to the Nation he said:
. . . All these four cases {relating to marketing rocket / space craft launch services from India referred to by him in an earlier paragraph} bring out the need for Indian scientific and technological establishments to launch an integrated national mission for building national technological strength backed by basic science research. Unique products of India thus realized would be sought after by many nations, even the nations who deny technology and the products. It is indeed a great challenge for the ISRO young scientists. Dear young friends, who are in front of me, remember always "Strength respects Strength" (PIB Release, June 08, 2007)

Boss, unless you can prove that the nuclear deal will result in stoppage of nuclear research, especially into the fast breeder technology, then this kind of arguments would be considered a strawman.

I would humbly suggest you have a look at AK’s slide presentation, posted a couple of pages back to get a sense of why this deal is so terribly important. Read that with Ldev's excellent presentation of the actual logistic nightmare that the thermal route would present to meet India's rising energy demands.

JMT

[NRao]

How, for example, would our three stage program be hit if commercial civilian reactors were imported, as long as our research reactors and military ones remained in a totally seperate grid outside the purview of inspectors?

It is NOT imported reactors that will provide benefits to India. It is the reprocessed materials from these reactors that will help India. IF at the end of 2020 India has 40 GWe and no reprocessing from them, India will suck her thumb. And, as far as I can see India has not been given the rights to techs in this 123.

Will the US give it? I doubt it. The US cannot afford India to go on her own from counting atoms. The US I think will want one way to account for atoms - her or the US way.

My feel is that efforts in other nations "failed" due to US pressure. The US certainly wanted Indian FBRs under IAEA - AK got away by saying it is too early. The reason the US has not committed to reprocessing is to make sure that India does not go off on a tangent with civilian FBRs - tangent being another atom accounting system.

In 2020 I can see a tussle with the US - US saying India should import 10X reactors - and India demanding reproc techs.

[Gerard]

Diplomats: UN nuclear agency sets India meeting

Diplomats say the International Atomic Energy Agency has scheduled a July 28 board meeting to approve the agency's nuclear rules for India.

[SaiK]

While moving forward, looking back should give you the thoughts of the right choice made. Somethings are hidden, and those are the ones one might want to forward and look back to see what it is?.

We have already a big list of it., discussing over years. It should not be a cyclical discussion if the gist is not carried forward. (la the right history of discussion as well).

[enqyoob]

A very good thought. Can you make a bulletized list? Some1 else can write it up if you don't want to take on the prose job. This is a #0.5 priority for SRR and BRF in general, I think, at least to minimize the number of postors who get banned because they blow up and tell someone to go **** because they are regurgitating same old nonsense. It would be nice to say: "Pls read XYZ for answer to that. " Or, better, "Answer #234,984." A list of negatives cited by ppl would be very good too. Please.

[Avinash R]

Portugal assures support to India at NSG

http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20080707/81 ... ia-at.html

Mon, Jul 7 07:28 PM

New Delhi, Portugal has said that it will support proposal to allow nuclear trade with India at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

'We (will) support India in the NSG. I had the opportunity to say to the Indian (External Affairs) minister that this is the Portuguese position,' portuguese Minister for Foreign Affairs Luis Amado told reporters here Monday.

'We understand India's concerns to meet its strong demand of energy,' he said.

The minister pointed out that Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates had made a similar announcement of his country's position during his visit to India in December 2007 to attend the India-EU summit.
...
The next step for India would be to sign a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for its civilian nuclear plants - the draft has reportedly been finalised, but not signed yet.
...
Thereafter, the US, supported by Britain and France, would shepherd a proposal in the NSG for modifying its guidelines to allow trade in nuclear fuel and technology with India, a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
...
Once the NSG allows trade with India, the bilateral agreement for civilian nuclear cooperation will go to the US Congress for an up-and-down vote.

The portuguese minister began his three-day visit to India Monday, accompanied by a delegation of top business leaders with diverse interests ranging from banking to infrastructure.

After his meeting with External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, he addressed Indian business leaders at the Indo-Portuguese Business Council.

[svinayak]

And money didn't play a role in the denunciation of the deal?

That is a conspiracy theory

[NRao]

Once the NSG allows trade with India, the bilateral agreement for civilian nuclear cooperation will go to the US Congress for an up-and-down vote.

[svinayak]

1. February 10. Ambassador Mulford says 'it is now or never'
2. February 20. Senators Biden, Kerry and Hagel tells Manmohan Singh [Images] that the deal must conclude by May. Or else
3. February 26. Defense Secretary Gates warns that 'the clock is ticking'
4. February 28. Retiring Under Secretary of State Burns says 'the IAEA agreement must be made within a week or so', so that 'India is to be given this great victory' (sic). Victory against what Burns was not clear about
5. March 1. Former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott says that the BJP government would have been prepared to accept 'half' of what Bush is offering the UPA
6. March 3. State Department spokesman Casey says the US wanted the agreement 'concluded as quickly as possible.'
7. Mar 4. Assistant Secretary of State Boucher arrives in India to mount further pressure



This, in just four weeks, and the mating dance has continued well into March, with more worthies crawling out of the woodwork and offering their advice. Where have you seen this sort of high-pressure sales tactics before? Yes, among snake-oil salesmen. Does this sound like the kind of thing you'd do to a friend? Not at all, this is the moral equivalent of 'I'll break your knees if you don't do xyz'.

Indians have an unfortunate tendency to be easily flattered and the Americans are using that to the hilt. All the American nostrums about the deal would suddenly lead to a new Millennium, and India would be 'an important power in the 21st century', and how this deal would be 'India's passport to the world' -- all these sound a little excessive when it is just lip service. But, as they say, 'it's all sizzle and no steak'. As in the movie, Jerry Maguire, "Show me the money!". Yeah, then we can talk.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/may/05rajeev.htm

[Katare]

I happen to agree that Non Proliferation is bad and fully support the attempt to restrict it to the hands of a few. All I ask is that India be considered as a nuclear weapon state or equivalent (that is all, and no I dont see any hypocrisy on why few and not everyone.. sorry that is the way it is). It is in India's national interest to see that nukes are only in the hands of a few. We should support America's Non Proliferation attempts and I hope they succeed. Think over it. Defanging North Korea makes it one rogue less (esp to trade with the Pakis..) same with Libyans and Iranians. Does India's security get better if North Korea, Iran,Libya and a lot of others have nukes or does it get worse ? ..

Those of us that are old enough know that India actually authored the concept of non proliferation. However, the US - even today - does not really think of it as universal non proliferation. They confuse it with unilateral non proliferation and one that is meant for the "other".

123 does exactly this - Indian unilateral non proliferation.

What we all need is a two axis non proliferation. On one axis all freeze and reduce FM - verifiably. On the other axis all need to own up and destroy all forms of simulations, including computers, to design any use of FM - verifiably. All have to do it at the same time, in proportion to the quantity of FM. So, phase I - say, as an example - all destroy 25% of their FM. Nuke accounting would be in high demand.

What is the basis of that bold statement? This is simply not true, the deal in question has nothing to do with (non)prolifiration.

[Katare]

How, for example, would our three stage program be hit if commercial civilian reactors were imported, as long as our research reactors and military ones remained in a totally seperate grid outside the purview of inspectors?

It is NOT imported reactors that will provide benefits to India. It is the reprocessed materials from these reactors that will help India. IF at the end of 2020 India has 40 GWe and no reprocessing from them, India will suck her thumb. And, as far as I can see India has not been given the rights to techs in this 123.

Will the US give it? I doubt it. The US cannot afford India to go on her own from counting atoms. The US I think will want one way to account for atoms - her or the US way.

My feel is that efforts in other nations "failed" due to US pressure. The US certainly wanted Indian FBRs under IAEA - AK got away by saying it is too early. The reason the US has not committed to reprocessing is to make sure that India does not go off on a tangent with civilian FBRs - tangent being another atom accounting system.

In 2020 I can see a tussle with the US - US saying India should import 10X reactors - and India demanding reproc techs.

Why do you think imported uranium would not provide benefits to india and only reprocessing would?

Rest assured India would get reprocessing rights similar to any P5 country. India also has its own reprocessing technologies which can be scaled up. All 123 requires is sepration of imported fuel from domestic one to ensure imported fuel is not diverted to stretegic program.

US doesn't manufacture reactors, private companies in USA do and India wouldn't import reactors Indian comapnies would. All the business would happen on the open world tender basis as is the norm and law of the land.

[Katare]

Sanatanan,

Nuclear deal doesn't affect India's 3-stage program in any adverse way. It only strenghens it and improves our self-reliance in many ways.

Deal or no deal 3-stage program would need to be completed indigenously for many strategic, commercial and technological reasons.

[enqyoob]

I don't remember India co-authoring "Non-PROLIFERATION". India co-authored DISARMAMENT.
There is a small difference:
"Disarmament": Everybody disarms.

"Non-Proliferation". I keep weapons, everyone else disarms.

[NRao]

What is the basis of that bold statement? This is simply not true, the deal in question has nothing to do with (non)prolifiration.

From an Indian PoV you are absolutely right. From a US PoV that is what they are after. IMHO. I seriously think that the US is doing the best it can without allowing India to go off on her own. The more I read and think about it even the FBRs will be a stretch. Frankly, I do not see any value in this deal outside of getting some Uranium. Like I posted earlier, in 2020 India will face the biggest challenge. IMO of course.

K, I think we differ on the reproc techs. IMO India will not get the techs she wants ....unless........ 123 does not provide the techs.

narayanan,

The US does not understand "disarmament", they only understand "proliferation" - because of their insecurities. The US is not scared of others having nuclear bombs or missiles, however, they are scared of the wrong groups getting the same techs. That is the language they understand.

[NRao]

Sanatanan,

Nuclear deal doesn't affect India's 3-stage program in any adverse way. It only strenghens it and improves our self-reliance in many ways.

Deal or no deal 3-stage program would need to be completed indigenously for many strategic, commercial and technological reasons.

AK slides clearly state that the FBRs will rely on imported LWRs, which implies reproc techs. No reproc, no FBR growth as envisioned by AK.

We differ on if India has been granted the techs.

[NRao]

I have done quite a bit of research and hav'nt had the time to collate all of it into something sensible, but here (feb, 2006) is something:

QUESTION: I'm Chida Rajghatta from the Times of India. How does the GNEP fit in with the bilateral nuclear deal which the Administration is trying to arrive at with India? And also, the President goes to India in less than a fortnight and the proposed deal is nowhere in sight. Is the safeguards issue over fast breeder reactors a deal breaker and if it is, how does one get around this?


DEPUTY SECRETARY SELL: Last year, the President and Prime Minister Singh jointly agreed to move out on nuclear cooperation, provided India met a number of nonproliferation commitments. And we would anticipate that once India has met its nonproliferation commitments, (1)that in addition to expanded civil nuclear cooperation, which was originally talked about, (2)we would also look forward to expanding our cooperation and our partnership with India on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

Please check out the GNEP URL I posted earlier.

123, IMHO, is a mear stepping stone to keep India in a delusional mood for a while. That is my guesstimate.

I had said this long back ..... India should sign 123 and HOPE that they have a stronger leader down the road. Having said that I agree that India needs to import some reactors. I also see the talk given by AK as part of this tug of war.

[rajrang]

Maunam sarvartha sadhakam -- in the context of the n-deal, Dr Kalam had been wisely and largely following this strategy, at least in the public domain, until a few days ago. I have not come across any reports of anyone asking him to announce "we will test come what may".

Nevertheless, while respecting others' right to hold a contrary view, I maintain that this deal needs to be "blown away" -- in fact, should never have been struck in the first place.

Sanatanan,

Just as you have very generously said that others (including President Kalam) have the right to hold a different view, you too off course have the right to hold on to your views about the nuclear deal and I for one respect that.
However, since you have chosen to espouse your views in this debate, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind if I ask for clarifications:

It may be interesting to refer to two instances of what President Kalam is reported to have said earlier:

1) In Feb 2006, (The Hindu, 04/02/2006) while delivering a speech in the Philipines, referring to the sanctions imposed after the May 1998 nuclear tests he observed:
"No nation should control what India is doing. . . . . . . the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies."

To me, generation of electricity in our country, through indigenous nuclear reactor technology is certainly classifiable under "critical technologies" (I mean no pun here).

Could you please explain how this nuclear deal, which would pave the way for the import of uranium and also reactors for civilian power generation be against the just idea of being self reliant?

How, for example, would our three stage program be hit if commercial civilian reactors were imported, as long as our research reactors and military ones remained in a totally seperate grid outside the purview of inspectors? No one can predict the future but as of now everyone seems to think that the military reactors would remain off limits and the grouse is that if we conduct a nuclear test, the cost (in terms of cut off of the civilian reactors) would become very high once we sign the N-deal.

If we consider your concept of self-reliance, then I must say - extrapolating your arguments - the GoI and Indian Air Force made a grave error in importing and using, for example the Su-30MKI planes.

After all, if we didn’t do that we would have eventually been able to build a big heavy Sukhoi category plane right? We do have some hard won expertise in plane design don’t we?

(It’s off course another matter that, without outside collaboration, by the time we did manage to build our very own indigenous Sukhoi equivalent, the US would be phasing out its Raptors and probably test flying its Death Stars).

Taking the aeronautical example, most people think that the LCA program has actually benefited from the technologies that were absorbed and tried out on the SU-30MKI and other “foreign” planes in IAF’s inventory. The same is the case with the Navy and Army.

Hence what makes you think what works for the military, doesn’t work for civilian nuclear power generation?

Heck when we’re talking about power generation, we shouldn’t, going by your argument, even import a single gas turbine since that would mean our “indigenous” gas turbine technology would be hit. Better to start building from scratch rather than be dependent on foreign technology.

Sorry to say but this sly snipping at President Kalam, ever since he openly declared his support for the nuclear deal (it should be remembered that many folks on this forum used to interpret his “silence” before that to be a sign of his unhappiness) bears striking similarity to how AK went from being the last defender of the N-establishment from the evil babus and politicans to becoming a puny civil servant following orders of his political masters in order to keep his job and pension intact, once he too became a votary of the deal.

2) Again in June 2007, while dedicating Insat-4b satellite to the Nation he said:
. . . All these four cases {relating to marketing rocket / space craft launch services from India referred to by him in an earlier paragraph} bring out the need for Indian scientific and technological establishments to launch an integrated national mission for building national technological strength backed by basic science research. Unique products of India thus realized would be sought after by many nations, even the nations who deny technology and the products. It is indeed a great challenge for the ISRO young scientists. Dear young friends, who are in front of me, remember always "Strength respects Strength" (PIB Release, June 08, 2007)

Boss, unless you can prove that the nuclear deal will result in stoppage of nuclear research, especially into the fast breeder technology, then this kind of arguments would be considered a strawman.

I would humbly suggest you have a look at AK’s slide presentation, posted a couple of pages back to get a sense of why this deal is so terribly important. Read that with Ldev's excellent presentation of the actual logistic nightmare that the thermal route would present to meet India's rising energy demands.

JMT

Couple of observations:

First the Sukhoi deal has limited analogy to the nuclear deal. The nuclear deal involves India putting its signature accepting an inferior status to the 5 NWS. This may be fine for the 180+ small and medium countries in the world. For India, which is destined to become an economic superpower in the (near) future, this is a strategic loss, and I am afraid future generations of Indians will face the consequences. There are other losses such weapons testing.

Second, from AK's presentation (Slide 12), by 2050 about 600 GW is fron non-nuclear sources compared to about 150 GW today. What is baffling is why the non-nuclear portion is only quadrupling during the 40 years from 2010 to 2050 (implies a growth rate of 3.5% per annum). In the past 40 years (1970 to 2010), India's non-nuclear power production has gone up 8-fold (from about 20 GW to about 150 GW today) and tyhat too in an era of much slower economic growth - recall the famous Indian 3.5% per annum growth ratefor the first part of this 40 yr period. This MAY (I don't for sure I am only guessing) be the crucial flaw in AK's assumptions/projections (with deep respects to AK). If this assumption is corrected then India will have 1200 GW from non-nuclear and this deal will not be needed.

It is also not impossible to generate such large amounts of power from non-nuclear sources. Currently, in the US more 800 GW is non-nuclear.

[amit]

Couple of observations:

First the Sukhoi deal has limited analogy to the nuclear deal. The nuclear deal involves India putting its signature accepting an inferior status to the 5 NWS. This may be fine for the 180+ small and medium countries in the world. For India, which is destined to become an economic superpower in the (near) future, this is a strategic loss, and I am afraid future generations of Indians will face the consequences. There are other losses such weapons testing.

Boss you need to look at the context of my response to Santanam.

Let me explain. Santanam wrote:

It may be interesting to refer to two instances of what President Kalam is reported to have said earlier:

1) In Feb 2006, (The Hindu, 04/02/2006) while delivering a speech in the Philipines, referring to the sanctions imposed after the May 1998 nuclear tests he observed:
"No nation should control what India is doing. . . . . . . the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies."

To me, generation of electricity in our country, through indigenous nuclear reactor technology is certainly classifiable under "critical technologies" (I mean no pun here).

He's quoting our former honourable President as saying "the country must be self-reliant in critical technologies" and using that quote out of context to question Kalam's stand that the nuclear deal is good for the country.

As per my understanding (and I could be wrong and, if corrected, I will humbly accept my mistake) the operating phrase is "critical technologies".

That's where the Su-30MKI analogy came in. Surely it's not your case that the technology behind such a awesome fighting machine is the not "critical"? And surely it's not your case that India should not at some point aspire to have the expertise in such "critical technologies"?

As to your contention of India accepting an inferior status to the 5 NWS, fair enough. But since you've raised the point can you suggest an alternative that allows India to engage in nuclear commerce and import uranium?

Remember nothing's permanent and once the door is open things can change once India becomes one of the biggest economies of the World. As Vina, very perceptively pointed out a while back, a per capita income in the US$5,000-US$7,000 region will change a lot of things.

We could off course wait till this per capita range is reached and then sign a nuclear deal, but the time spent for that to happen is simply an opportunity wasted. AK's slides suggest we don't really have the luxury of time on our side.

Also, saying we will not go for anything that's inferior to a full fledged NWS, given our present status is akin to saying: "I will not buy a Japanese car (that I can afford) because I will not ride anything less than a Mercedes since five guys in my block have a Merc."

We will at some point of time become rich (that is influential) enough not only to afford a Merc but also a Ferrari but the time is not now. IMVHO off course.

As to weapons testing, sorry don't agree with you. Testing will involve a cost Nuclear deal or no Nuclear deal. I'm sure if a situation arises when the supreme national interest dictates we test, we will do that and damn the consequences. We did that in 74 and we did that in 98. We will do that in future too.

If India has a leadership (in the future) which would rather count the dollar losses of testing, despite the urgent need to test, then that leadership is not going to test, deal or no deal. (A caveat here: I do not think we will ever have such a leadership).

The way the loss of testing rights - the moment we sign the deal - is being bandied about, one would think that the US will send in the Seventh Fleet to cart away all our PU and bomb-making maal after we sign on the dotted line.

This MAY (I don't for sure I am only guessing) be the crucial flaw in AK's assumptions/projections (with deep respects to AK). If this assumption is corrected then India will have 1200 GW from non-nuclear and this deal will not be needed.

It is also not impossible to generate such large amounts of power from non-nuclear sources. Currently, in the US more 800 GW is non-nuclear.

I'm sure you have the funda to find fault in AK's presentation and so I've no issues on what is your personal opnion. However, since my own funda is extremely limited, I'll just go by what the chairman of the DAE says, since not only is it his opinion but also the position taken by the GoI.

JMT

[Avinash R]

N-deal opens window of opportunities
Tuesday, July 8, 2008

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Jul ... 877619.asp

Bangalore: The Indo-US nuclear deal would open enormous opportunities, Union Minister of Science and Technology Kapil Sibal said on Monday, adding that it would open up the flood-gates not only in terms of cooperation in the energy sector, but also benefit the education sector and result in tie-ups between universities of the two countries.

Speaking to reporters at the side-lines of the inauguration of the ‘China-India-US Science, Technology and Innovation Workshop’ at the National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS) here, Mr Sibal said, “The deal is in our interest.”

“We will be able to export more reactors. There will be an increase in investment. The apprehensions of dual-use technology does not arise. There is no scope of misuse” he said.

The minister added the opportunities between India and the US would only increase in future.

[Avinash R]

New Jharkhand mill to meet N-fuel shortage
From Kalyan Ray,
Tuesday, July 8, 2008

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Jul ... 777551.asp

New Delhi: Much before the arrival of imported uranium, 17 existing Indian reactors are expected to start producing electricity almost full to their normal level once the second processing plant in Jharkhand becomes operational by the end of 2008.

India currently has two mining sites in Jadugoda and Turamdiah, but the sole functional processing plant is in Jadugoda. Though the plant works overtime, the total production is about 210 tonnes per year, which is inadequate to meet the demand of all reactors.

Though the Turamdiah processing plant was scheduled to become operational in 2006, it could not start due to teething problems related to poor-quality equipment.

“After we solved those problems, Jharkhand witnessed unprecedented rains, which washed away our motors and transformers. It delayed our trial production which was to start in June-July,” S K Jain, chairman and managing director of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCLI) told Deccan Herald.

Kaiga working well
Doing away with apprehensions on the recently commissioned third and fourth units (each of 540 MW) at Tarapur and the 220 MW third unit in Kaiga, Jain said while Tarapur units will work to half of their capacity by December, Kaiga-3 is working well.

When contacted Dr J P Gupta, station director of Kaiga said, “The third unit produces 165 MW on Monday.” It is close to 80 per cent of the plant’s capacity of 220 MW.

NPCIL hopes that if the Turamdiah plant starts production by September, it will be able to manage the current level of shortfall, which is known to the department of atomic energy (DAE) at least for the last four years.

According to closely guarded DAE data – in possession of Deccan Herald, the total production capacity of the Jadugoda plant is 175 tonnes per year, while the Turamdiah unit is expected to produce 190 tonnes of nuclear fuel every year. DAE has shared this information with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The two units jointly can produce 365 tonnes of fuel, which is still short of the required 600 tonnes but good enough for NPCIL to run the existing units because at any given point of time some of the units are shut down for maintenance reasons. For instance four reactors — two 220 MW units in Narora and Kalpakkam and the first two units at Rajasthan — are not operational at the moment.

[Raju]

BREAKING NEWS:

Left to announce withdrawal of support to UPA shortly.

Formal announcement is expected shortly.

Formal withdrawal on July 10 after PM returns from Japan to be presented to President Pratibha Patil.

[Raju]

& the left has done it.

They have withdrawn support to UPA.

They have pulled out of Govt.

LAL SALAAM

[A Arun]

So long, cold war era retrards! Buh bye!

[Raju]

So long, cold war era retrards! Buh bye!

ha ha

Well this Govt now is a minority Govt and a minority Govt shall go to IAEA to seek approval for safeguards.

this is welcome news.

[A Arun]

So long, cold war era retrards! Buh bye!

ha ha

Well this Govt now is a minority Govt and a minority Govt shall go to IAEA to seek approval for safeguards.

this is welcome news.

SP+Gowda+Ajit Singh will help UPA sail past 280. There are reports that the Akali Dal might support the deal. Shiv Sena has already expressed the same. I don't see these NDA members voting for the governemnt in the no-confidence motion, they might just abstain.

[Raju]

Ofcourse a lot of parties are lining up to the Congress doorstep to 'help them'.

You should know why they are doing it.

but you should also know that muslim MP's from SP are going to split and defect to BSP and vote against this deal.

[amit]

SP+Gowda+Ajit Singh will help UPA sail past 280. There are reports that the Akali Dal might support the deal. Shiv Sena has already expressed the same. I don't see these NDA members voting for the governemnt in the no-confidence motion, they might just abstain.

Ah well, maybe Comrade Karat(e) Chop, forgot this old adage:

A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush!

The government stays and it's the Left that gets booted out?

(BTW The word bush - used as a noun - has a lot of interesting possibilities for CPI(M) sloganeering, Na? )

[amit]

but you should also know that muslim MP's from SP are going to split and defect to BSP and vote against this deal.

I wouldn't jump to such a hasty conclusion, you know. Mulayam may be an opportunist of the worst kind but he's nobody's fool.

[Raghavendra]

Deleted.

[Raju]

this is welcome news.

SP+Gowda+Ajit Singh will help UPA sail past 280. There are reports that the Akali Dal might support the deal. Shiv Sena has already expressed the same. I don't see these NDA members voting for the governemnt in the no-confidence motion, they might just abstain.

Shiv Sena has just announced that it will vote against the deal.

HAR HAR MAHADEV