India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

[svinayak]

In fact, the US has got both France and Russia to agree not to deal with India until the 123 is passed by the US Congress - even if NSG provides a clean waiver!!!

This may change in light of what is happening in Georgia. (India may owe a big tandoori dinner to that Georgian Prez!!)

More problems among the major powers better is for India

[RajeshA]

In fact, the US has got both France and Russia to agree not to deal with India until the 123 is passed by the US Congress - even if NSG provides a clean waiver!!!

This may change in light of what is happening in Georgia. (India may owe a big tandoori dinner to that Georgian Prez!!)

I believe that assurance by Russia and France to not go for the deals before Congress reviews the 123 Agreement is for a limited duration only, possibly as long as the US Administration is in power. There is no hard-coded requirement that an NSG Waiver would have to wait US Congress Review of 123 Agreement and US President's Determinations before going into effect, as Mulford had earlier indicated. It is only a political understanding. In fact, it would be in the interests of George W. Bush's Legacy that the assurance remains limited, because otherwise US Congress could have in fact killed the deal, which now can't happen as Russia and France could proceed regardless of how COTUS decides.

The events in Georgia, I believe, would have only a marginal influence on the NSG plenary meeting. If MMS calls on Medvedew before the NSG meeting, then Russia, which is looking for some support, could adopt a hard liberal pro-India line on the NSG Waiver.

The Russia-West conflict coming into the open is however not in India's interests, as China gains much higher importance as a balancer of power to the detriment of India. Secondly a Russian-Iran axis, which could now get stronger, also decreases India's importance to Iran, unless USA makes an about turn and starts coddling Iran, which would indeed look sort of out of place, but who knows. In any case, the pressure is off Iran now. Israel wouldn't be too happy either at Michael Sakhashvili for that. In Georgia crisis, I would say, India and Israel are net losers.

[Katare]

In fact, the US has got both France and Russia to agree not to deal with India until the 123 is passed by the US Congress - even if NSG provides a clean waiver!!!

This may change in light of what is happening in Georgia. (India may owe a big tandoori dinner to that Georgian Prez!!)

More problems among the major powers better is for India

And why is that?

[Sanatanan]

Statement on Civil Nuclear Cooperation with India
[Text of Draft U.S. Proposal to NSG, August 2008]

. . .

4. In order to facilitate the efforts of non-member adherents to Infcirc/254 Parts 1 and 2 to remain current in their implementation of the Guidelines, the NSG Chair is requested to review proposed amendments to the Guidelines with all non-member adherents on a non-discriminatory basis and solicit such comments on the amendments as a non-member adherent may wish to make. Participation of India in the decisions regarding proposed amendments will facilitate their implementation by India.

. . .

In my post on 14 Aug 2008 (at page 19 of this thread), I had wondered who the "non-member adherents to INFCIRC 254" might be, from whom NSG was supposed to solicit comments on the proposed US Draft on a non-discriminatory basis. At the time RajeshA had indicated that the reference would be to India.

Since then, from Siddharth Varadarajan's article Short takes: Reactions to the NSG draft and the Comments there to, it appears that the non-member adherents might refer to Israel and Pakistan.

If so, it might be interesting to know what their stand might be on the proposed amendments and what they may indicate in their comments to the NSG. I have not come across any articles published covering this aspect, yet.

[Gerard]

This is the first paragraph of INFCIRC254

The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency has received Notes Verbales, dated 1 December 2005, from the Resident Representatives to the Agency of Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, relating to transfers of nuclear-related dual-use equipment, materials, software and related technology

I think non-member adherents refer to any of the above states who are not NSG members

[RajeshA]

This is the first paragraph of INFCIRC254

The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency has received Notes Verbales, dated 1 December 2005, from the Resident Representatives to the Agency of Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, relating to transfers of nuclear-related dual-use equipment, materials, software and related technology

I think non-member adherents refer to any of the above states who are not NSG members

As far as I can tell, there are no states in the above list of 37, who are not members of the NSG, a 45 member body. There can of course be several other states, who may adhere to NSG Export Guidelines, but they are not in the above list.

India has promised to adhere to NSG Guidelines.

Sanatanan,
Pakistan being a NSG Non-Member Adherent would indeed be a funny coincidence. Perhaps A.Q. Khan was their point-man to the NSG.

Sorry, this is no criticism against your comment.

[sraj]

From the link of ABV's UN speech posted by sraj above"

These tests do not signal a dilution of India’s commitment to the pursuit of global nuclear disarmament. Accordingly, aftar concluding this limited testing program, India announced a voluntary moratorium on further underground nuclear test explosions. We conveyed our willingness to move towards a de jure formalization of this obligation. In announcing a moratorium, India has already accepted the basic obligation of the CTBT. In 1996, India could not have accepted the obligation as such a restraint would have eroded our capability and compromised our national security.

The following points can be summarized from this sentence:

1.ABV and the NDA government acknowledges that the testing program is limited.{actually, he is just referring to the 5 tests as 'this limited testing program', which is factually correct}

2.Willingness for a dejure formalization of the voluntary moratorium.{"willingness" is subject to the successful conclusion of discussions with key interlocutors; these were never 'successfully' concluded. Pls see subsequent paragraph of Vajpayee's speech quoted below}

"India is now engaged in discussions with our key interlocutors on a range of issues, including the CTBT. We are prepared to bring these discussions to a successful conclusion, so that the entry into force of the CTBT is not delayed beyond September 1999. We expect that other countries, as indicated in Article XIV of the CTBT, will also adhere to this Treaty without conditions" {US Senate threw out CTBT on October 13, 1999}

3.Accepted the basic obligations of the CTBT.{actually, Vajpayee is stating that his announcement -- not "commitment" -- of the voluntary moratorium constitutes acceptance of the basic obligation of CTBT. A voluntary moratorium, by definition, can be withdrawn at any time by the party announcing it.}
..................

So why all the angst? {Until the final NSG waiver language is available, the risk remains that the voluntary announcement is converted into a multilateral legality with 45 countries which would be worse than actually signing the CTBT. Also, some posters believe that the current draft already converts this voluntary moratorium into a multilateral legality}.

[Katare]

Suraj predicted this is how the future discussion on NSG waiver would shape in coming months. He tried to help set some definitions and ground rules but was accused of ‘though policing” and bring his non-scientific “economic” stuff on this very scientific discussion.

The facts of the matters are -
No one knows what the term "clean and unconditional" means

The term is so broad that it can almost mean anything or nothing within the scope of NSG waiver

Everyone has there own definition of it

So everyone is arguing on their own distinct universe

No constructive debate is possible unless we have a clear definition of the "clean and unconditional"

AK has not done that to allow negotiators maximum head room to get favorable waiver

If AK says the waiver meets his expectation than it is 'clean and unconditional" everything else is maya

AK’s one term has somehow monopolized the entire discussion on NSG waiver which may or may not be a good thing

[Gerard]

Since then, from Siddharth Varadarajan's article Short takes: Reactions to the NSG draft and the Comments there to, it appears that the non-member adherents might refer to Israel and Pakistan.

It does indeed seem so. So Pakis have managed to insert themselves in the process.

[Gerard]

Hitting reply in this thread is bringing up a username/password box for Doordarshan?

[RajeshA]

Since then, from Siddharth Varadarajan's article Short takes: Reactions to the NSG draft and the Comments there to, it appears that the non-member adherents might refer to Israel and Pakistan.

It does indeed seem so. So Pakis have managed to insert themselves in the process.

Hi Gerard,
would you be knowing whether there have been any interactions between Pakistan and the NSG on the question of NSG Export Guidelines? Or for that matter between Israel and NSG?

Thanks.

[Arun_S]

Date:18/08/2008
India may make policy statement at crucial NSG meeting in Vienna

Siddharth Varadarajan

New Delhi: With less than four days to go before the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) meets to discuss granting India an exemption from its restrictive export rules, the government is still weighing the pros and cons of directly presenting its case before a plenary session of the 45-nation cartel.

On Monday, National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan will chair a high-level meeting to decide on what strategy India should follow in Vienna, where the NSG will convene on August 21 and 22.

With the quiet encouragement of the United States, the NSG’s current chair, Germany, has asked India to take the floor at the NSG meeting on the morning of August 21 to brief its members about the country’s non-proliferation commitments and policies.

New Delhi has informally conveyed its assent but is not enthusiastic. There are two reasons for this, senior officials told The Hindu. First, the NSG is not extending or offering membership to India and, as a matter of principle, the country would like to participate in the group’s meetings only as a full-fledged member and not as an observer or special invitee. Second, any briefing to the plenary session is bound to lead to questions and requests from participating governments for clarifications about Indian policy and the language of the proposed NSG waiver. “Before we know it, 45 countries will be negotiating with us.” said one official on condition of anonymity. If pressed by the Germans to make its case at the plenary, India would ideally like to confine itself to reading out a prepared statement.

Thus, India is keen to clarify beforehand the precise parameters and protocols of any briefing session so as to avoid being confronted at the plenary with demands for changes to the draft exemption.
Non-proliferation record

India, the officials insist, is more than willing to stand by its “excellent non-proliferation record” and allay any fears or doubts the NSG members may have about the resumption of nuclear commerce with it. Indeed, the country’s high-level delegation -- to be headed by Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon -- will hold a formal meeting with the NSG troika of Germany, South Africa and Hungary on August 20, one day before the group’s plenary consultations begins. An Indian team had briefed the troika earlier as well, on the sidelines of the NSG’s last plenary in Berlin in May. But engaging with the NSG en masse is seen here as an entirely different cup of tea.

Right from July 2005, New Delhi’s understanding has always been that lobbying with individual NSG members is one thing but making the case for the India exemption inside the group itself is the sole responsibility of the United States. Once the negotiations over the 123 agreement concluded last July, however, U.S. officials began publicly to push the line that convincing the NSG would have to be largely an Indian effort with the Americans providing only back-up support. “In a sense, the U.S. will act as India’s sherpa at the NSG,” said Nicholas Burns, who was Washington’s point man for the deal at the time, last August. In remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations, he added, “the Indians will need to convince the Nuclear Suppliers Group ... that it should give the same kind of international treatment in terms of civil nuclear trade to India that the United States would have just given bilaterally.”

Vienna will be a test for deciding who has to do the convincing — India or the United States — though the bottom line has already been clearly been spelt out by Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) chairman Anil Kakodkar. He was quoted by PTI on Sunday as saying India expected the NSG to approve the exemption “without any change to the draft that was circulated to them recently.”

In Vienna, Mr. Menon will be accompanied by the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy, Shyam Saran, the DAE’s R.B. Grover and D.B. Venkatesh Varma from the Indian mission in Geneva. Apart from meeting with the NSG troika — composed of the current, previous and next chairs of the group — the Indian team also intends to brief those individual member States which still have concerns about the proposed exemption for India from the NSG’s “full-scope safeguards” export rule.

India might also make available to Germany for circulation to all the NSG members a written statement outlining the country’s export control regulations and its non-proliferation record more generally.

[Gerard]

would you be knowing whether there have been any interactions between Pakistan and the NSG on the question of NSG Export Guidelines? Or for that matter between Israel and NSG?

I am as much in the dark as you are. Perhaps NSG meeting will bring nukular light to this darkness. Then again, maybe not...

[awagaman]

There's an interesting discussion on India and the NSG exception and CTBT etc at armscontrolwonk, especially the comments section:

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1997/ind ... er#comment

[svinayak]

#

The current rethink over Russia will mean that the US-India deal will drop to the bottom of the Administration’s priority vis-a-vis reassessing the relationship with Russia.

From the US perspective, the core justification for the India gambit is to counter China’s rising power by driving a wedge between India and China.

That worked fine when Russia is out of the picture. But with the return of Russia, the logical question is whether or not this ends up strengthening an old Russian ally even as India mouths off the obligatory non-Aligned boiler plate speech.

Fate will probably have it that the US-India nuclear deal with now get lost in EU capitals while bigger fish are fried, and before you know it, the Bush Administration mandate will expire. An incoming administration will probably be fully occupied with dealing with Russia, and a sideshow like an Indian nuclear deal will….be quietly shelfed.

In the mean time, detente between Taiwan and China lowers tensions in Asia.

The Japanese and Chinese can be deployed to keep Russia occupied.

The only thing that would upset this renewed focus on Russia is if war broke out between Pakistan and India.

Don’t forget, in the midst of all this mess… will any Administration be willing to expend precious capital (whatever Bush has left) to passing this deal through the senate?

Not if noisy wonky critics make enough of a stink over India resuming nuclear testing.

India could have had this deal on a platter a few years ago when the stars aligned. By insisting on the perfect deal from the Indian perspective, India may have bargained away its greatest advantage —- timing. Time was not on India’s side.

— Lao Tao Ren · Aug 18, 10:15 AM ·

[Gerard]

I think Uranium from OZ is near...
Australia to import Indian mangoes

[Katare]

#

The current rethink over Russia will mean that the US-India deal will drop to the bottom of the Administration’s priority vis-a-vis reassessing the relationship with Russia.

From the US perspective, the core justification for the India gambit is to counter China’s rising power by driving a wedge between India and China.

That worked fine when Russia is out of the picture. But with the return of Russia, the logical question is whether or not this ends up strengthening an old Russian ally even as India mouths off the obligatory non-Aligned boiler plate speech.

Fate will probably have it that the US-India nuclear deal with now get lost in EU capitals while bigger fish are fried, and before you know it, the Bush Administration mandate will expire. An incoming administration will probably be fully occupied with dealing with Russia, and a sideshow like an Indian nuclear deal will….be quietly shelfed.

In the mean time, detente between Taiwan and China lowers tensions in Asia.

The Japanese and Chinese can be deployed to keep Russia occupied.

The only thing that would upset this renewed focus on Russia is if war broke out between Pakistan and India.

Don’t forget, in the midst of all this mess… will any Administration be willing to expend precious capital (whatever Bush has left) to passing this deal through the senate?

Not if noisy wonky critics make enough of a stink over India resuming nuclear testing.

India could have had this deal on a platter a few years ago when the stars aligned. By insisting on the perfect deal from the Indian perspective, India may have bargained away its greatest advantage —- timing. Time was not on India’s side.

— Lao Tao Ren · Aug 18, 10:15 AM ·

Lao tao ji,

Whay does it has to be some sort of geo-political great game conspiracy? Why it can't simply be a civilian nuclear cooperation deal which helps everyone?

[kshirin]

There's an interesting discussion on India and the NSG exception and CTBT etc at armscontrolwonk, especially the comments section:

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1997/ind ... er#comment

Thanks, S Varadarajan is flying the flag on that one.

[RajeshA]

I think Uranium from OZ is near...
Australia to import Indian mangoes

Australia softens stand on uranium sales

So the answer to your question is yes, we can see uranium supplies to (India)

Not my words!

[putnanja]

Roll up your sleeves, PM, deal needs a push

K.P. NAYAR

Washington, Aug. 18: The Indo-US nuclear deal may go into a coma in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) unless Prime Minister Manmohan Singh rolls up his kurta sleeves and launches a personal diplomatic blitzkrieg to neutralise opposition within the group to a “clean exemption” for New Delhi from NSG guidelines for nuclear commerce.

The UPA government’s current strategy of relying on the Bush administration to deliver the goods for India appears unlikely to produce the results that New Delhi is seeking for a variety of reasons.

A majority of NSG members are resentful that the US is trying to pressure them into a second meeting of the group in the first week of September even before the outcome of their first meeting on August 21 is clear.

Most members want a second NSG meeting regarding India, if one were needed, between September 21 and 29, not in the first week of September as proposed by the Bush administration.

A meeting towards September-end will upset the Bush administration’s time-table to send the nuclear deal package back to the US Congress as soon as it reconvenes here on September 8.

Sources in Vienna said the dominant view there was that it makes better sense to have a second NSG meeting planned around the regular session of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors on September 21 and the 52nd IAEA general conference, also to be held in Vienna from September 29 to October 4.

Most NSG members feel this will give doubters within the group over the India-specific exemption enough time to discuss the issue threadbare in their capitals.

The two IAEA meetings will also bring the heads of atomic energy agencies of major countries to Vienna in the last 10 days of September.

These agency heads are more “competent” to deal with the India-specific exemption than resident ambassadors in Vienna who would otherwise represent their countries at any special meeting of the NSG in early September.

Diplomats in Vienna said the stalemate that is building over a second NSG meeting can only be broken if the Prime Minister picks up the phone and personally talks to his counterparts in a majority of NSG states, especially the ones that have reservations about the US draft that will be considered by the group on August 21.

India has sent a number of envoys around the globe to lobby its case with NSG member states for a “clean exemption”. But these are mostly secretaries in South Block and, in some cases, retired secretaries who have been contracted to see the nuclear deal through.

Sources in Vienna said such an initiative falls far short of the political intervention that is required if New Delhi wants to see the exemption for India quickly approved by the NSG.

One source in New Delhi compared the current state of Indian lobbying in the NSG to the half-hearted South Block effort to get Shashi Tharoor elected in 2006 as UN secretary general.

Like now, New Delhi’s inability to launch an all-out diplomatic push at the Prime Minister’s level sank Tharoor’s candidacy.

There is bewilderment in Vienna that the UPA government is not using the services of the last two Indian governors to the IAEA in the effort to lobby the NSG. More so since the incumbent governor, Saurabh Kumar, is content to merely play second fiddle to the US permanent representative to the IAEA, Gregory Schulte, in seeing the nuclear deal through at the IAEA and the NSG.

Although T.P. Sreenivasan, who was Kumar’s predecessor once removed, has retired, he maintains excellent contacts with the non-proliferation world, visits Vienna regularly as part of Track II diplomacy and his book was released in the Austrian capital recently by IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei.

Kumar’s immediate predecessor, Sheel Kant Sharma, now secretary general of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation, has equally good contacts in Vienna that date back to his disarmament work in Geneva from 1983, his six years on deputation to the IAEA, his direct involvement in nuclear issues as joint secretary for disarmament in South Block and subsequent tenure as India’s IAEA governor until recently.

[RajeshA]

I do hope that not using T.P. Srineevasan and Sheel Kant Sharma does not have to do with egos and credit and laurels distribution.
Secondly, the article above was somehow disturbing, that it shows more of a bureaucratic mentality and not political tiger mentality.
There are still a couple of days to correct it.

[ramana]

Looks like hatchet job on Sri Kumar.

[NRao]

From the US perspective, the core justification for the India gambit is to counter China’s rising power by driving a wedge between India and China.

That worked fine when Russia is out of the picture. But with the return of Russia, the logical question is whether or not this ends up strengthening an old Russian ally even as India mouths off the obligatory non-Aligned boiler plate speech.

Ouch. Someone could be/is living in the past ........... return to the cold war.

During the cold war India did not have the worlds largest middle class with funds to spend. It was just a few weeks ago that the "West" was doing its best to get to this Indiaian middle class to revive their economic slump!!!!!!!!!!!!

Imagine. While MMS is "mouths off the obligatory non-Aligned boiler plate speech", Bush/UK/FR want access to Indian middle class!!!!!

Fate will probably have it that the US-India nuclear deal with now get lost in EU capitals while bigger fish are fried, and before you know it, the Bush Administration mandate will expire. An incoming administration will probably be fully occupied with dealing with Russia, and a sideshow like an Indian nuclear deal will….be quietly shelfed.

[/quote]

It really does not matter IMHO. IF Indian middle class is reality, which US/EU business would place any thing else on top of the list?

[Gerard]

India, Germany hopeful of NSG clearance in one shot

[NRao]

NSG will vote to make India happy.

I really do not think they have an option!!

[awagaman]

While going through the armscontrolwonk comments, I found this interesting link:

http://nukesofhazard.blogspot.com/2008/ ... xempt.html

where the following interpretations are offered in order to exaplain why the NSG draft is so "weaK":

1. The Bush administration actually believes that the exemption is absolutely consistent with U.S. law.

2. Cognizant of the significant opposition to the deal within Indian domestic politics, the Bush administration is hesitant to do anything (e.g. insist that the terms of the exemption comport with the Hyde Act) that could compromise Prime Minister Singh’s tenuous hold on power or otherwise derail the deal.

3. According to diplomats from certain NSG member states, the Bush administration is circulating a weak proposal as “a tactical U.S. move to overcome India's aim to win a ‘clean and unconditional’ waiver by prompting resistance from NSG states.” Varadarajan also sees such a strategy at work.

4. The Bush administration is pushing for a clean exemption at the NSG as a way to force Congress to undo the conditions contained in the Hyde Act. The idea here, says Center for American Progress National Security Analyst Andy Grotto, is that “by getting the NSG to approve an exemption devoid of conditions, the administration sets up the Congress as the obstacle standing before American industry doing business with India while the French and the Russian nuclear industries go on a feeding frenzy there.” Thus, “there is no way the U.S. Congress will allow French and Russian companies to get all the contracts-and the Bush administration knows it.”

Interesting....

[amit]

4. The Bush administration is pushing for a clean exemption at the NSG as a way to force Congress to undo the conditions contained in the Hyde Act. The idea here, says Center for American Progress National Security Analyst Andy Grotto, is that “by getting the NSG to approve an exemption devoid of conditions, the administration sets up the Congress as the obstacle standing before American industry doing business with India while the French and the Russian nuclear industries go on a feeding frenzy there.” Thus, “there is no way the U.S. Congress will allow French and Russian companies to get all the contracts-and the Bush administration knows it.”

I posted this point, I think a couple of pages back, also quoting the ACW. IMHO, I think this may very well be the Bush Admin's strategy - blessed by the US industry, of course - to un-Hyde the US Congress just ahead of the elections. No Senator - Democrat or Republican - can really afford to go against the money bags can they?

[Sanatanan]

Nuclear Power short-lists 4 suppliers for reactors[quote]Westinghouse Electric Company (AP1000 series of reactors), GE-Hitachi (ABWR reactor series) , Areva (1,000 MW European pressurised reactors) and the Russia’s atomic energy agency Rosatom (VVER 1,000 reactors) are among the frontrunners for new projects planned across the country.

State-owned Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) – the monopoly nuclear power generator – has tentatively short-listed these four major reactor manufacturers based on “suitability” of technical parameters for placement of orders that will form the first phase of the Centre’s plan to build 40,000 MW of nuclear capacity by 2020, Government sources indicated.

Once nuclear trade commences, NPCIL hopes to set up “Nuclear Parks” or reactor clusters, for which four coastal sites have been identified across Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal.

These “parks” are being envisaged with a capacity of housing up to eight reactors of 1,000 MW each at a single location. The orders would initially be placed for around two reactors of 1,000 MW at each of the locations, following which more reactors could be added .

[/quote][/size]

It seems that "import-LWR" lobby in India has gained the upper hand in decision-making. Note that the Canadian designs that have proven successful not only in India but also elsewhere, have not even been mentioned in the shortlist. What are the unsuitable technical parameters for placement of orders, in the Canadian designs?

Looks like Canada will have only itself to blame and may regret its decision to find comfort in staying within the shadow of US's nuclear diktats.

[ramana]

Sananthan, The PHWR technology from Canada is not proliferation resistant. It can be run on low burn to get fissile material. So CANDU stuff is passe.

[RajeshA]

Sananthan, The PHWR technology from Canada is not proliferation resistant. It can be run on low burn to get fissile material. So CANDU stuff is passe.

Do NSG Guidelines not allow the export of PHWR technology?
Does it mean, the Canadians do not export it anymore?
Why would Indians not want to buy technology, which is not proliferation resistant?

[RajeshA]

4. The Bush administration is pushing for a clean exemption at the NSG as a way to force Congress to undo the conditions contained in the Hyde Act. The idea here, says Center for American Progress National Security Analyst Andy Grotto, is that “by getting the NSG to approve an exemption devoid of conditions, the administration sets up the Congress as the obstacle standing before American industry doing business with India while the French and the Russian nuclear industries go on a feeding frenzy there.” Thus, “there is no way the U.S. Congress will allow French and Russian companies to get all the contracts-and the Bush administration knows it.”

I posted this point, I think a couple of pages back, also quoting the ACW. IMHO, I think this may very well be the Bush Admin's strategy - blessed by the US industry, of course - to un-Hyde the US Congress just ahead of the elections. No Senator - Democrat or Republican - can really afford to go against the money bags can they?

Amit, that makes it two of us.

[Nayak]

EconomicTimes

TOKYO: Japan on Tuesday signalled it would approve a nuclear energy deal between India and the United States, raising the chances that the controversial pact will come into force.

The 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, which controls the global flow of civilian atomic exports, is expected to meet Thursday in Vienna on the nuclear deal. Objections by any nation would scuttle the pact.

Japan, the only nation to have suffered atomic attack, had been one of the holdouts as it pressed for India to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

But Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka Machimura said: "It may be biased to view the deal as going against nuclear non-proliferation efforts."

"For example, the issue of global warming has been getting serious in recent years and C02 emissions from emerging nations such as China and India are becoming a problem," said Machimura, the government's spokesman.

"It is important that India proceeds with nuclear power generation as clean energy," Machimura said. The deal would give India access to international nuclear technology after being shut out for decades for refusing to sign the NPT.

Anti-nuclear campaigners have petitioned Japan to block the pact, a key priority for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who nearly faced the collapse of his government over the issue.

The UN's atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has approved an agreement to inspect some Indian facilities. Singh's former communist allies had argued that inspections would violate Indian sovereignty.

Machimura said the IAEA's supervision of Indian nuclear facilities "can lead to the strengthening of the NPT." Japan, like the United States, has been seeking a closer alliance with India.

Australia, another country seen as a potential opponent of the India-US nuclear deal, said last week that it would "not stand in the way."

But the Nuclear Suppliers Group also includes a number of European countries, particularly in Scandinavia, that are strongly committed to the NPT.

[amit]

Amit, that makes it two of us.

Just common sense!

That is probably the only valuable commodity which you can get for cheap - provided you look for it in the first place!

[Sanatanan]

Sananthan, The PHWR technology from Canada is not proliferation resistant. It can be run on low burn to get fissile material. So CANDU stuff is passe.

But I thought the whole exercise of IAEA's intrusive inspections which include both the pursuit and perpetuity concepts apart from atom counting, was to take care of all proliferation concerns! The PHWRs at Rajasthan 1 & 2 are successfully under IAEA safeguards. Does the NSG postulate India attempting to hood-wink the IAEA inspectors? (For me, that idea itself would be unthinkable!)

It is one thing if the NSG were to tell India "thou shalt not buy Canadian reactors, because we think they are not proliferation resistant" but altogether another matter for India to say to itself, "we will not buy Canadian reactors because we believe they are not proliferation resistant".

[NRao]

I posted this point, I think a couple of pages back, also quoting the ACW. IMHO, I think this may very well be the Bush Admin's strategy - blessed by the US industry, of course - to un-Hyde the US Congress just ahead of the elections. No Senator - Democrat or Republican - can really afford to go against the money bags can they?

Amit, that makes it two of us.

On what basis do you guys state that? The Hyde Act is not up for a vote!! It is the 123.

Besides, Andy Grotto did not get the memo from the US Amby to India? He clearly stated that both teh Hyde Act and the 123 stand, which is why the NSG does not have to place additional conditions - when there are these, why place more? All the concerns of all the NSG members - per him - are answered in the Hyde Act/123/IAEA.

There is no time to undo the Hyde Act in this US Congress as far as I can see - there are enough problems for just the 123 to pass, how can they take up both the 123 and then the Hyde Act?

Besides that FR and RU have both agreed not to deal with India until the US Congress passes the 123 and BOTH have subscribed to GNEP already!!!

On the flip side, even if RU + FR get $100 billion, the US will get access to the greater share of the Indian middle class - a few Trillion dollar market. What does Russia OR France have to compare to the US or Japan when it comes to selling consumer products? Also, on the "strategic" front, what has Russia done outside of selling arms - France to a much lesser extent. The US is getting a ton done on that front.

All said and done, the US seems to be in a better position as we post?

[RajeshA]

So last evening I did a bit of lobby work.

I sent all the Greens in Austria an honest letter why they should let the NSG Waiver go forward. The Greens have significant influence over the policies of the Govt there.

Green Parliamentarians in the Austrian National Assembly

[RajeshA]

On what basis do you guys state that? The Hyde Act is not up for a vote!! It is the 123.

Besides, Andy Grotto did not get the memo from the US Amby to India? He clearly stated that both teh Hyde Act and the 123 stand, which is why the NSG does not have to place additional conditions - when there are these, why place more? All the concerns of all the NSG members - per him - are answered in the Hyde Act/123/IAEA.

There is no time to undo the Hyde Act in this US Congress as far as I can see - there are enough problems for just the 123 to pass, how can they take up both the 123 and then the Hyde Act?

Besides that FR and RU have both agreed not to deal with India until the US Congress passes the 123 and BOTH have subscribed to GNEP already!!!

On the flip side, even if RU + FR get $100 billion, the US will get access to the greater share of the Indian middle class - a few Trillion dollar market. What does Russia OR France have to compare to the US or Japan when it comes to selling consumer products? Also, on the "strategic" front, what has Russia done outside of selling arms - France to a much lesser extent. The US is getting a ton done on that front.

All said and done, the US seems to be in a better position as we post?

Hi N,

Consider a scenario, where the NSG Waiver does not have hard-coded conditions of no nuclear testing. In this case:

There are two constraints, which US Business and US Nuclear Industry could face in a post NSG Waiver-Phase.
1) The Freedom to do business with India like other countries. (123 Agreement)
2) A level playing field as other countries like France and Russia in the Indian Nuclear Market. (Hyde Act)

Once the NSG Waiver is there, there will be tremendous pressure on Congress to pass 123 Agreement, which then allows US Nuclear Industry to do business with India.

For US to be on a level playing field with France and Russia, either the NSG Waiver also needs to have a condition of "No nuclear testing, otherwise NSG countries will be required to terminate their bilateral agreements with India" just as in the Hyde Act. Only then would France and Russia have the same constraints as USA. Hyde Act is not directly applicable to Russia and France. Or if NSG does not have such a provision, and thereby Russia and France do not insist on such conditions in their bilateral agreements with India, then USA is at a disadvantage. To level the field, Congress would have to soften up the Hyde Act somewhat.

If NSG insists on the hard-coded condition, then India will probably walk out of the deal, and there is no deal.

As far as access to Indian market is concerned, Kamal Nath has his own ideas and I like his methods.

[Gerard]

How many CANDU reactors are there in the world?

There are 17 operating CANDU reactors in Canada and 12 abroad (four in South Korea, two each in China, India, and Romania, and one each in Argentina and Pakistan). There are also 13 operating "CANDU-derivatives" in India, which are based upon the CANDU design sold to India before it detonated a nuclear device and hence was removed from further nuclear trade with Canada. (Note: The plutonium for India's early weapons program was created in its Canadian-designed research reactor, not its CANDU power reactor – see related FAQ.)

[RajeshA]

Nuke deal: N Zealand sounds alarm bells for India

New Zealand minister for disarmament and arms control Phil Goff said that some of the conditions New Zealand is looking at include the end of the deal in case of any further nuclear test by India which is in keeping with the Hyde Act.

Here is the hidden Daryl Kimball's soldier: Honorable Phil Goff


He is MP from Mt. Roskill, Auckland, NZ.

In Auckland, there are around 20% Asians. Indians form the second biggest group after the Chinese. Perhaps one might contemplate some campaign by the ethnic Indians to ask Phil Goff to moderate his pronounced anti-India stance at the NSG.

Here is one Indian Association in Auckland.

[Gerard]

New Zealand minister for disarmament and arms control

They have a minister for disarmament and arms control?