India Nuclear News and Discussion 23 July 2008

[amit]

Amit,
I didn't say, they should postpone a decision on ENR, but rather delay the supply of ENR, in case something must give.

GoI/US can agree on some date, after which ENR will AUTOMATICALLY be allowed to India, 2 years, 3 years, or on completion of the Separation Plan in 2014 or earliear.

Point taken Rajesh. My bad, missed the word automatic in your sentence.

However, I do think that even that would be a step back for India as it would keep the door open a crack for future hanky panky. The US wants to eat the cake and have it too - in the sense it wants to play to the gallery to the NPA lobby (with Hyde) and at the same time it wants to ensure that such play does not put it's business lobby at a disadvantage.

India needs to keep that big picture in view when discussing ENR, IMO. Let's hope it doesn't become a case of "so near, yet so far" for MMS and Co, especially after they played the game rather well, till now.

[Neela]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4666633a11.html

One of Washington's top foreign policy officials said today he had renewed the pressure on New Zealand to approve a nuclear pact between India and the United States.

American stance is pretty clear

"Its too important given the size of India's economy, given the size of its nuclear infrastructure, and its aspirations in nuclear generation, we need to find a way to embrace them in bring them into the tent."

The kiwis seem to take pride in this:

New Zealand's stance over the deal has won front page headlines in the Indian media who clearly do not know what to make of having their nuclear dream frustrated by what headlines tag "hardline non-proliferationists".

[Katare]

Arunji,

What is the point you are trying to make by showing domestic uranium reserve figures under different assumptions? There are ton of interactive uranium maps of the world where you can change the price a little bit higher and it makes Indian reserves large enough to support entire uranium demand of the world. Uranium reserves in India are like oil sands of Canada/America, huge potential but large scale commercial technologies don't exist to exploit them. For commercial exploitation what counts is concentration level, once concentrations fall below certain threshold it is just not a cost matter alone but also a technological challenge to exploit the mineral.


Your other comment about India being able to import uranium from non-NSG countries sounds rather naive. If it was so simple why are our reactors running at 50% capacity for want of fuel? Why are we not importing from these countries? Why all the scientists, NDA and the left that are opposing the deal are noy shouting from roof-tops that we don’t need evil USA we can get our fix of uranium from friendly African countries. Even if there is a technical possibility, you can make this argument only because unkil is on your side right now, once you dump the deal, NSG led by unkil would make sure, as it has for last so many years, we get no uranium from any country. All those non-NSG countries with surplus uranium are NPT signatories and would not find it lucrative to do commodity trade in uranium with a NPT violator. Exporting uranium is considered as helping a violator in enlarging its weapons cache by freeing up its domestic supplies for strategic program. This argument has always been used as violation of first pillar of NPT to restrict non-NSG countries from exporting to India.

Also Indian existing requirements of uranium are economically miniscule (may be $100MM/year at best?) for any country to take risk of breaking away from the NSG/NPT cartel. Unless we create a large enough market for uranium import we’ll not see many countries willing to do business with us and risk sanctions by US/west. We can’t create a large market quickly unless we have access to uranium so it is a classic ‘chicken-egg’ situation IMO.

[RajeshA]

The take of an ex-Indian Governor to IAEA BoG

NSG: Do not discard the baby with the bath water by T P Sreenivasan: Rediff

The dichotomy between the moratorium and the freedom to test is something the world does not understand. Since many of the NSG countries are signatories of the CTBT, which prohibits trade with those who test, they would want an assurance that we would abide by the moratorium, if not subscribe to CTBT. Our right to test is not affected by the deal, but it is illusory to think that there will be no international consequence to testing in the future, whether there is a deal or not.

He is saying India should allow "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver. That is all Bathwater.

Has GoI started making the case for a sell-out?

[RajeshA]

Govt briefs BJP about deliberations at NSG: ZeeNews

External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee held a meeting with BJP leaders Jaswant Singh and Arun Shourie for over an hour and apprised them about the deliberations at Vienna where India held special briefings for NSG countries on the sidelines of the meeting of the 45-nation grouping.

Is UPA asking BJP for permission for the sell-out?

[RajeshA]

Is India possibly being asked to choose:

Access to ENP Technology
..............vs........................
No No-Nuclear Testing Clause?

[amit]

The take of an ex-Indian Governor to IAEA BoG

NSG: Do not discard the baby with the bath water by T P Sreenivasan: Rediff

The dichotomy between the moratorium and the freedom to test is something the world does not understand. Since many of the NSG countries are signatories of the CTBT, which prohibits trade with those who test, they would want an assurance that we would abide by the moratorium, if not subscribe to CTBT. Our right to test is not affected by the deal, but it is illusory to think that there will be no international consequence to testing in the future, whether there is a deal or not.

He is saying India should allow "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver. That is all Bathwater.

Has GoI started making the case for a sell-out?

Not too sure how your are jumping to that conclusion Rajesh?

I think the important point in Sreenivasan's article is this:

But if the NSG is suggesting inclusion of new conditionalities such as signing of the NPT or CTBT even in the distant future, they should be rejected outright.

I'm no sure how you can read that as sell-out? I'm not sure how you're reading Sreenivasan as being OK with: "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver."?

Was there ever any doubt that deal or not deal, if we test in future there's going to consequences? I think the author is just stating the obvious.

IMO Sreenivasan is thinking out aloud on what could be an acceptable compromise deal. And its true no point in walking away at this point before seeing what transpires on Sept 5, don't you agree?

[Rahul M]

I'm no sure how you can read that as sell-out?

amit, how can you say it is not ??
it is diwali bumper sale as far as I'm concerned !

[amit]

I'm no sure how you can read that as sell-out?

amit, how can you say it is not ??
it is diwali bumper sale as far as I'm concerned !

Rahul,

I think Sreenivasan is just thinking out aloud of what could be the contours of a possible and acceptable compromise formula.

The central point, no mention of CTBT or FMCT in the deal remains.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Rajesh. What do you read in Sreenivasan's article which seems to suggest he is advocating: "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver?

[amit]

Govt briefs BJP about deliberations at NSG: ZeeNews

External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee held a meeting with BJP leaders Jaswant Singh and Arun Shourie for over an hour and apprised them about the deliberations at Vienna where India held special briefings for NSG countries on the sidelines of the meeting of the 45-nation grouping.

Is UPA asking BJP for permission for the sell-out?

Damned if you do and damned if you don't!

All this while the Congress was being hauled over the coals for not taking the national opposition party into confidence. And when they do then it's: Is UPA asking BJP permission for the sell-out?

Well there's a bright side to all this. If the BJP agrees then there'll be a national consensus on the sell-out. (The Left doesn't count since they've already sold out: to the Panda, that is)

[RajeshA]

The take of an ex-Indian Governor to IAEA BoG

NSG: Do not discard the baby with the bath water by T P Sreenivasan: Rediff
He is saying India should allow "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver. That is all Bathwater.

Has GoI started making the case for a sell-out?

Not too sure how your are jumping to that conclusion Rajesh?

I think the important point in Sreenivasan's article is this:

But if the NSG is suggesting inclusion of new conditionalities such as signing of the NPT or CTBT even in the distant future, they should be rejected outright.

I'm no sure how you can read that as sell-out? I'm not sure how you're reading Sreenivasan as being OK with: "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the waiver."?

Was there ever any doubt that deal or not deal, if we test in future there's going to consequences? I think the author is just stating the obvious.

IMO Sreenivasan is thinking out aloud on what could be an acceptable compromise deal. And its true no point in walking away at this point before seeing what transpires on Sept 5, don't you agree?

Amit,
Sreenivasan is making a case that since India supported the enactment of the Hyde Act through lobbying, India agrees to a "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the NSG Waiver also, just as in the Hyde Act. Since then a lot of political water has flown down the Ganga. BJP was up in arms. In response, India and USA drafted a 123 Agreement which was silent on the no-nuclear testing condition, and tried to bring 123 Agreement closer to J18, despite the shadow of the Hyde Act. Since then the Left Front and BJP have been shouting SELL-OUT. The situation in India has changed between Hyde Act, and Now. India wants the assurances made in J18 and not in Hyde Act.

Through this whole political drama, Sreenivasan seems to have been sleeping, as if it had never taken place. It is true he is saying out loud, what the NSG Pipsqueak think, but he does not mention the short rope MMS has at the moment.

Secondly he says,

Since many of the NSG countries are signatories of the CTBT, which prohibits trade with those who test, they would want an assurance that we would abide by the moratorium, if not subscribe to CTBT.

CTBT does not prohibit trade as such.

Obligations

(Article I):

1. Each State Party undertakes not to carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion, and to prohibit and prevent any such nuclear explosion at any place under its jurisdiction or control.
2. Each State Party undertakes, furthermore, to refrain from causing, encouraging, or in any way participating in the carrying out of any nuclear weapon tests explosion or any other nuclear explosion.

We don't need to accept a "Termination of Waiver upon Nuclear Testing by India" Clause in the NSG Waiver, in order to prove to the NSG pipsqueak, that we are indeed a net gain for the non-proliferation in the world, as he subscribes.

Amit, that is my reading. It may be flawed, but that is how I interpret it.

[amit]

Amit, that is my reading. It may be flawed, but that is how I interpret it.

That's fair enough Rajesh.

I don't want to get into an argument or anything because, after all, we're batting on same side and so is Sreenivasan.

My reading, which also could be wrong, it that the article was a sort of trial balloon to guage reactions. And Sreenivasan has been writing on and off on the subject so not exactly sleeping.

Anyway let's see how the cookie crumbles...

[Sanatanan]

NZ finds support for its concerns over Indo-US nuclear deal
3 News
Mon, 25 Aug 2008 8:37p.m.



New Zealand is finding that other countries share its concerns over a proposed nuclear power agreement between India and the United States, Prime Minister Helen Clark said today.

The agreement will allow the US to supply India with nuclear material and technology for civilian use.

Before it can go ahead, it requires the agreement of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), of which New Zealand is a member.

New Zealand, and other countries within the NSG, want conditions written into the agreement because India has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The NSG reaches decisions by consensus, and a meeting in Vienna on Friday ended inconclusively.

Further talks have been scheduled for September 4 and 5.

Miss Clark said New Zealand's representatives were working with "a number of like-minded countries, large and small" on conditions which might be added to the agreement.

"What we're finding is that there are quite a lot of countries ... which share very much the same kind of concerns New Zealand has raised," she said at her post-cabinet press conference.

"We're continuing to work those issues through with the others."

Disarmament and Arms Control Minister Phil Goff told NZPA last week, before Friday's meeting of the NSG, that New Zealand was not being needlessly obstructionist.

Because India has not signed the NPT it needs an exemption to be able to receive the technology it wants.

Mr Goff said countries wanting that sort of technology would normally be required to sign the NPT before being able to receive it.

"We acknowledge that India does have a good track record of non-proliferation but nevertheless it remains outside of the NPT, it has developed, tested and possesses nuclear weapons," Mr Goff said.

"What we would like to see ideally are a range of conditions which would apply to India if the exemption is given."

One is that the exemption should cease if India conducts nuclear tests.

Another is that India signs the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) additional protocol that provides for broader inspection and access powers.

New Zealand also wants limits on the scope of the technology that can be given to India and which could relate to nuclear weapons.

Mr Goff said India had said it had decided not to hold tests, and that it intended signing the IAEA's additional protocol.

"We don't think that anything we are asking for is unreasonable," he said.

"We're not trying to obstruct India's ability to receive supplies of material and technology for a civilian nuclear capacity, and therefore should not be objectionable to either India or the US."

He said the position of India and the US was that they did not want any conditions written into the agreement.

"The sorts of things we are talking about would give us greater confidence that the net result of the exemption would be supportive of non-proliferation rather than damaging to it."

NZPA

[amit]

Hypocrisy in the nuke game

This is where hypocrisy begins. Austria, Ireland and New Zealand have never faced hostile neighbours. After 1945, they have not faced wars on their territory. They are free from terrorism. In addition, as part of the Western alliance, led by the US, they have informal security guarantees from the US in case of aggression by non-Nato non-OECD countries. This peace dividend has blinded them to the needs of other nations.
India could have wrapped up the waiver last week itself had it gone to NSG earlier. There are internal divisions within NSG. Many countries feel that India can gain access to ER technologies if the waiver gets through. Countries such as France and Russia that are eyeing the lucrative Indian market may throw these technologies as “sweeteners” to get nuclear power plant contracts. This is the peacenik dilemma: On the one hand, they want to say no to India to further non-proliferation goals, but, on the other hand, they don’t want to lose nuclear commerce. It’s also called hypocrisy.

I think we're going to see a lot more articles like this one or the NYT article which Manny posted a while back.

This is the part of the pressure on the pipsqueaks to fall in line IMO.

I say: The more the merrier. Let's compile all such article on this thread for easy reference.

[RajeshA]

Amit,
I think what I wanted to say, was that it is not just the Baby in the Bathwater, but also the Rubber Duck.

BJP has said, that the Rubber Duck stays. Sreenivasan is probably not so enamored by the Ugly Duckling.

Other than that, feel free to argue.

[Rahul M]

amit, please check PM.

[amit]

amit, please check PM.

Boss kothay? Payini.

[Rahul M]

forgot to click the send button !

[Philip]

To be fair to New Zealand,it has for decades had a prinicipled stand against nuclear proliferation,even years ago enraging the US by banning US warships (PM David Lange banned the USS Buchannan) from entering NZ ports if they carried nukes.

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/nu ... -free-zone
The United States decided to test the new government's resolve in late 1984 when it requested a visit by the guided missile destroyer USS Buchanan. The Buchanan was an older ship, and the Americans hoped that public suspicions that it was not nuclear armed would be enough for it to slip under the political radar. 'Near-uncertainty was not now enough for us,' David Lange recalled. 'Whatever the truth of its armaments, its arrival in New Zealand would be seen as a surrender by the government.' He hoped that the Americans might offer to send something less ambiguous, but it was the Buchanan or nothing.

On 4 February 1985 the government said no. Within a matter of days Washington severed visible intelligence and military ties with New Zealand and downgraded political and diplomatic exchanges. George Schultz confirmed that the United States was no longer willing to maintain its security guarantee to New Zealand, although the ANZUS treaty structure remained in place.

The Oxford Union debate

One of the concerns of the United States over the ships row was that other countries might follow New Zealand's lead. David Lange had effectively become the 'pin-up boy for nuclear disarmament', and this was demonstrated on 2 March 1985 during the widely televised Oxford Union debate. David Lange competed against the right-wing evangelist Jerry Falwell, and his performance in arguing the proposition that 'nuclear weapons are morally indefensible' was masterful. The quick-witted David Lange drew thunderous applause with his now famous reply to a young conservative: '... hold your breath just for a moment. I can smell the uranium on it as you lean toward me!' Briefly, New Zealand had taken the centre stage.

In 1987 Labour passed the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act. In a largely symbolic act, the United States Congress retaliated with the Broomfield Act, downgrading New Zealand's status from ally to friend. David Lange stated that if the security alliance was the price New Zealand must pay to remain nuclear-free, 'it is the price we are prepared to pay'. In 1989, 52% of New Zealanders indicated that they would rather break defence ties than admit nuclear-armed ships. By 1990 even National had signed up to anti-nuclearism.

[RajeshA]

Philip,
That may be so with NZ. They fought for their sovereignty to decide their Nuclear Policy. How can they now encroach upon India's sovereignty to decide ours?

We too do not want New Zealand's HMNZS Non-Proliferation Maximus Ship docking at Indian ports.

[enqyoob]

Make up your mind in the line of reasoning.

Thank you, Arun_S, for that advice (or maybe it's an order, depending on whether it's coming from ADmin Arun or postor Arun..)

I reason first and THEN make up my mind, I don't "make up my mind in the line of reasoning" and invent reasons later. (I know, I know, strange concept to many folks here ). The reasoning still holds, but I doubt that repeated explanation can have any effect on those who have already "made up their minds" long ago.

If China occupies large swaths of Arunachal Pradesh (and how much do you think they have ALREADY occupied??) it is DEFINITELY still going to be below India's "nuclear threshold". At most, India will order another patrol to "go and bring them down by the scruff of the neck" as the infamous Briagadier Clueless Singh ordered his brave men to do in April 1999. Most probably, Delhi will continue to pretend not to notice, as they have been doing for a long time.

NOTHING about that will change if India rushes in and tests a 1MT or 10MT or 100MT weapon. Well, maybe it will, I can't make up my mind... If India does NOT do anything that stupid, India may continue to build up a conventional air force etc. that will really deter a Chinese incursion, but if India follows the course that Arun_S and others have been clamoring for, and conducts tests of MT-level weapons, then the consequences will ensure that India has NO conventional deterrent to China, or Bangladesh, or to Bhutan, for that matter.

BUT... hey, who knows... certain political parties may come to "power" ( a loose use of the term, since they won't have much ELECTRIC power or ECONOMIC power.. or PETROL power for their imported cars, or money to pay the soldiers..) so I guess this course is fine and dandy to those who continue to advocate it despite the realities staring them in the face..

OTOH, AFTER India gets into the nuclear gang officially, any escalation of tensions with countries like China will mean that there is an established path towards declaring a National Security Imperative, while staying well within the bounds of the signed agreements. There will still be all sorts of economic pressures, but India will have the same access as China to the world media and legal structures, so it's a net advantage.

Sorry to have to cite logic that interferes with already-made Conclusions...

[Gerard]

India Wants Unconditional Exemption on Nuclear Deal

India expects unconditional exemption from the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group to buy fuel and technology for its energy plan, Anil Kakodkar, chairman of the country's Atomic Energy Commission, said today. ``The NSG exemption should be clean and there should be no additional condition,'' Kakodkar told reporters in Mumbai. ``They may want to push, but India can't be pushed. Civil nuclear cooperation is important, but that doesn't mean at any cost.''

[Gerard]

Japan-Australia nuclear group to look at India deal

:Japanese and Australian politicians said on Monday that a new nuclear body would meet for the first time in October and discuss a controversial India-US atomic energy pact

The International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament will gather up to 16 members from around the world. It hopes to lay the groundwork for the next review conference of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 2010.

Kawaguchi said the group would first meet in October, although she declined to name the exact date, location or the membership.

The commission will discuss "issues of what to do with countries that are developing nuclear programmes while violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty or who are not members of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty," she said.

[awagaman]

Potpourri:

'Block Indian nuclear trade bid' says SA NGO
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1 ... 767C939090

Manoj Joshi, 'Running aground at NSG'
http://mjoshi.blogspot.com/2008/08/runn ... t-nsg.html

[RajeshA]

Menon doing the rounds:

Menon, Burns discuss strategy for clean NSG waiver: IANS

India’s Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon Monday plunged into a day of hectic diplomacy here to fine-tune a waiver acceptable to the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) without adding any new conditions.Shortly after his arrival here this morning, Menon accompanied by Indian ambassador to the US Ronen Sen went straight into a session with US Undersecretary of State William Burns, who has taken place of Nick Burns, Washington’s former key negotiator on the India-US nuclear deal.

Menon is also meeting President George W. Bush’s acting National Security Adviser James Geoffrey in the afternoon.

[Gerard]

India and the NSG

Looking beyond the NSG debacle

[Gerard]

The 800lb gorilla has spoken

`They may want to push, but India can't be pushed. Civil nuclear cooperation is important, but that doesn't mean at any cost.''

[RajeshA]

Don't Worry Yaar Operation:

Nothing that impinges on national interest would be acceptable: Congress PTI

With some countries suggesting amendments to the draft NSG waiver, Congress today said that nothing in the Indo-US nuclear deal that impinges on national interests would be acceptable.
"Nothing which impinges or seem to impinge on India's national interest will be acceptable," party spokesman Manish Tewari told reporters.
Asked whether he hoped that India will get a clean waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group, he said he wished that questions concerning complex international negotiations could be replied in black and white.
"There is no need to panic," he said when asked about NSG meeting inconclusively in Vienna, adding that this is something which is expected.
He said that External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee has already made it clear that India will not accept any "prescriptive conventionalities" attached to the exemption.

[Gerard]

Mulford getting worried?

US Ambassador to India, David C Mulford, said that Washington is committed to working with New Delhi to rapidly complete the remaining steps necessary to conclude the Indo-US civil nuclear deal for which clearance from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) is a key step.

"The US and India stand shoulder-to-shoulder in their desire for a clean exception and we will continue to work with our Indian partners to persuade the NSG countries that such an exemption is in the international community's best interests," he said in a statement in New Delhi.

[ramana]

I dont like the TPSreenivasan article. He seems to be batting for the other side. The fgist of his arguement is India didnt object to hyde Act so why should it object to the NSG waiver having similar language.
Well Hyde Act is local legislation and NSG waiver is a multilateral agreement/paper. So it could be utrta vires to India.

He is not battng for India. please do a search of all his article sin ReDiff. He usually starts out initally batting for India and then slips in stuff under the arguement of reasonablensss ideas that are contrary to India's postion. Its alaways arguing the internationals case to India instead of other way round.

[ramana]

There is something to worry about for Mulford when INC talks to BJP.

[Gerard]

T.P. Sreenivasan served as executive director for the IAEA project on implemenatation of UNSC resolution 1540

[RajeshA]

Roll up your sleeves, PM, deal needs a push by K.P. Nayar: The Telegraph

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.

No wonder he has good contacts.

[RajeshA]

US knew NSG meet would fail: Bardhan: Hindu

Dramatic Disclosure

[RajeshA]

Don't Worry Yaar Operation:

India hopeful of getting through at next NSG meeting: NSA: PTI

India today said it is hopeful of getting the waiver for doing international nuclear commerce at the next meeting of Nuclear Suppliers Group next month.
"We are hopeful India would get through," National Security Advisor M K Narayanan told reporters here after meeting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi.

"Why should you antipicate and speculate"? he said replying to a question whether India would get the waiver at the next meeting of the NSG in Vienna on September 4-5.

[Arun_S]

Make up your mind in the line of reasoning.

Thank you, Arun_S, for that advice (or maybe it's an order, depending on whether it's coming from ADmin Arun or postor Arun..)

narayanan: What prompted you to write the text highlighted above? And what do you mean by that?

[Gerard]

Army General to take command of nuclear arsenal

[RajeshA]

I would suggest, in the next Sept 4-5 Meeting at NSG World, India should not send any representation. There is no need to send Kakodkar, Sharan, Menon, Grover, et al. The last time India sent our high-powered delegation it was interpreted as our willingness to negotiate, a sign of weakness.

This time, by not sending anybody above our man in Vienna, we say there is nothing more to negotiate. It should be: Take it or leave it.

[Gerard]

Kakodkar rules out compromise on India's nuclear stance

[RajeshA]

India anxious on N-deal despite US promise by Nidhi Razdan: NDTV

As India waits anxiously for a new US draft for the Nuclear Suppliers Group, Washington has hinted that President Bush himself will intervene.

Sources say that the biggest point of concern is on testing. New Delhi is arguing that NSG countries should frame own domestic laws on issue of testing and that NSG guidelines already deal with violations.

The arguments are:

# Those who want to end the sale of nuclear fuel and technology, if India conducts a test should frame their own domestic laws for that, like America's Hyde act.

# The NSG guidelines already state that if any country violates the rules, the NSG will sit and meet to decide on action. So why should India accept a clause that automatically terminates nuclear cooperation.