i had started the last thread by saying:
I will add to that: Please stop insulting each other.No politics
No whines or celebratory lungi dances
Wonleee nook noos pliss.
I will add to that: Please stop insulting each other.No politics
No whines or celebratory lungi dances
Wonleee nook noos pliss.
I wonder why only a few days before the NSG meeting the Panda is coming out so hard for the the first time? Is it because it has got a sense that the pipsqueaks have finished their squeaking and are ready to fall in line?"Whether it is motivated by geopolitical considerations or commercial interests, the U.S.-India nuclear agreement has constituted a major blow to the international non-proliferation regime," said the commentary by a researcher from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a leading state think tank.
"Irrespective of the fate of the U.S.-India nuclear agreement, the United States' multiple standards on non-proliferation issues have met with a sceptical world."
Perhaps Comrade Karat should talk to the Panda and assuage its fears?Whatever wording the US will make in a revised draft, as in the case of the 123 agreement and the IAEA safeguards agreement, the NSG waiver too will be in conformity with the unacceptable conditionalities of the Hyde Act. The whole attempt is to see that a text of the waiver is so drafted that will allow the Indian government to claim that it has virtually got a clean waiver.
Rajesh,RajeshA wrote: We offered the NSG an honest Voluntary Unilateral Moratorium on Nuclear Testing. It was not sufficient for them. They wanted a lot more than that. They want India to sign the CTBT. In order, to come up to their expectations, it was necessary to do sufficient testing on par with other nuclear powers, so as to prepare ourselves for CTBT, as the others have done. A minimum deterrent is found to be necessary because of the excessive proliferation in the neighborhood, which NPT members were not able to control. We hope, that in future rounds of NSG discussions on a Waiver, we will be able to offer the NSG, something more than our unilateral moratorium.
Amit,amit wrote:Rajesh,RajeshA wrote: We offered the NSG an honest Voluntary Unilateral Moratorium on Nuclear Testing. It was not sufficient for them. They wanted a lot more than that. They want India to sign the CTBT. In order, to come up to their expectations, it was necessary to do sufficient testing on par with other nuclear powers, so as to prepare ourselves for CTBT, as the others have done. A minimum deterrent is found to be necessary because of the excessive proliferation in the neighborhood, which NPT members were not able to control. We hope, that in future rounds of NSG discussions on a Waiver, we will be able to offer the NSG, something more than our unilateral moratorium.
IMO you and the others who are advocating a policy of test as a reaction to NSG non-waiver crowd are overlooking something very fundamental.
And that is the NSG may work by consensus but it's not one monolithic bloc. In the event that India has to say "No, thank you" there will be some really unhappy folks within the NSG tent who will see potential business worth severl XX billions going up in smoke. And nobody likes that.
If, however, India were to say "What the hell, let's test" and sets off a few new clear bums then all the countries will be forced to close ranks.
France and Russia will have to issue mandatory statements condemning the tests and go through the motions of sanctions. Moreover the really nasty issue of people like the Kiwis who have no stake in the potential billions India may spend and who are denying legitimate business to France, Russia, US and even Canada will be not be "punished" because the big five will feel the need to give the appearance of a united front against Indian "provocation". In effect it will give these pipsqueaks an opportunity to have their cake and eat it too.
Also, apart from showing how cheesed off we are, what will a few tests prove? Will it comprehensively prove we have a megaton category deliverable bum which we can deliver to all parts of China, Europe and the eastern or western seaboard of the US of A?
Showing our petulance is not going to help. What will help is if we show our displeasure in more subtle ways and then use the undoubted unhappiness that the NSG non-waiver would create within NSG to drive even further wedges in that stupid organisation.
Boss we have to use our heads not our hearts to chalk out our next course of action.
PS: Please note signing CTBT is not going to get us the NSG waiver. It's all a game of see how far India is willing to bend backwards. If we indicate we want to sign the CTBT, they will just up the ante and then demand the India destroy all its new clear bums and open all its facilities for intrusive inspections. Don't be under the illusion that this is about just meeting expectations. This is a classic case of playing hardball to see how much can be extracted. India will eventually have to draw a line in the sand. And its better we do it now than later.
JMT
I agree with the heads over hearts argument, every step has to be analysed for its implications, but RajeshA has a point -those who behave badly are being rewarded with talks and sops -North Korea and Iran and the sheer chutzpah ofthe Pakistani proliferation - and goody-two-shoes like us are being taken compeletely for granted, given unnecessary lectures on good behaviour from those who have sinned the most and jerked around. Anyway, let us wait for the NSG outcome. Perhaps a few hints that we can also sell reactors to countries like Malaysia etc. (not seriously, just hints) may help them conclude they are better off with us in the tent.amit wrote:Rajesh,RajeshA wrote: We offered the NSG an honest Voluntary Unilateral Moratorium on Nuclear Testing. It was not sufficient for them. They wanted a lot more than that. They want India to sign the CTBT. In order, to come up to their expectations, it was necessary to do sufficient testing on par with other nuclear powers, so as to prepare ourselves for CTBT, as the others have done. A minimum deterrent is found to be necessary because of the excessive proliferation in the neighborhood, which NPT members were not able to control. We hope, that in future rounds of NSG discussions on a Waiver, we will be able to offer the NSG, something more than our unilateral moratorium.
IMO you and the others who are advocating a policy of test as a reaction to NSG non-waiver crowd are overlooking something very fundamental.
And that is the NSG may work by consensus but it's not one monolithic bloc. In the event that India has to say "No, thank you" there will be some really unhappy folks within the NSG tent who will see potential business worth severl XX billions going up in smoke. And nobody likes that.
If, however, India were to say "What the hell, let's test" and sets off a few new clear bums then all the countries will be forced to close ranks.
France and Russia will have to issue mandatory statements condemning the tests and go through the motions of sanctions. Moreover the really nasty issue of people like the Kiwis who have no stake in the potential billions India may spend and who are denying legitimate business to France, Russia, US and even Canada will be not be "punished" because the big five will feel the need to give the appearance of a united front against Indian "provocation". In effect it will give these pipsqueaks an opportunity to have their cake and eat it too.
Also, apart from showing how cheesed off we are, what will a few tests prove? Will it comprehensively prove we have a megaton category deliverable bum which we can deliver to all parts of China, Europe and the eastern or western seaboard of the US of A?
Showing our petulance is not going to help. What will help is if we show our displeasure in more subtle ways and then use the undoubted unhappiness that the NSG non-waiver would create within NSG to drive even further wedges in that stupid organisation.
Boss we have to use our heads not our hearts to chalk out our next course of action.
PS: Please note signing CTBT is not going to get us the NSG waiver. It's all a game of see how far India is willing to bend backwards. If we indicate we want to sign the CTBT, they will just up the ante and then demand the India destroy all its new clear bums and open all its facilities for intrusive inspections. Don't be under the illusion that this is about just meeting expectations. This is a classic case of playing hardball to see how much can be extracted. India will eventually have to draw a line in the sand. And its better we do it now than later.
JMT
Rajesh,RajeshA wrote: Amit,
What I too am not advocating is thinking with our hearts and not with our heads. There are two questions here:
1. Do we need further testing to improve our minimum nuclear deterrent?
2. Would we be able to find a more conducive environment in the future for testing?
It is certainly not a case of trying to prove something to others. It is a case of a credible minimum nuclear deterrent.
We have been carrying several burdens. We have carried the burden of NPT Pressure without the benefits of weaponization till 1998. We are also carrying the burden of CTBT Pressure without the benefits of a sufficiently tested credible deterrent.
The costs of testing can be assumed to be substantial. There will be economic sanctions and there will be loss of mainstream respectability. I am saying, that these sanctions and costs would be substantially lower now, when we have an excuse, that of righteous indignation over rejection of NSG Waiver, then at some point later on.
What I would wish is, that after this Nuclear Deal Process, there ought to be a net profit for India, either full civilian nuclear cooperation with the world or a tested credible minimum deterrent.
I don't buy the argument of people, who say, we should not provoke the world community by testing. Indian Nuclear Deal with Separation Plan is being discussed at the NSG Table, because of Pokhran II. Otherwise they would have been discussing Full Scope Safeguards for India.
The sanctions and excommunication regime would not last any longer than the time it lasted after Pokhran-II, i.e. 2-4 years. Mainstream respectability would be restored by 2012. We will get 2 years of abuse, and then business as usual. The benefits will be a tested credible minimum deterrent in 2010, and political flexibility on CTBT.
In case, we get the NSG Waiver, there is no need to go down this road {not just as yet anyway}.
Kshirin,kshirin wrote: I agree with the heads over hearts argument, every step has to be analysed for its implications, but RajeshA has a point -those who behave badly are being rewarded with talks and sops -North Korea and Iran and the sheer chutzpah ofthe Pakistani proliferation - and goody-two-shoes like us are being taken compeletely for granted, given unnecessary lectures on good behaviour from those who have sinned the most and jerked around. Anyway, let us wait for the NSG outcome. Perhaps a few hints that we can also sell reactors to countries like Malaysia etc. (not seriously, just hints) may help them conclude they are better off with us in the tent.
Amit,amit wrote:Rajesh,
If we need to further tests to improve our minimum credible deterrent then we need to do that irrespective of the NSG waiver or not. There can't be we can afford to wait if we get a waiver and we cannot afford to wait if we don't get the waiver.
You seem to think of the NSG waiver is a zero sum game. I don't think you noticed the point that I made in my previous post. That is there will be a lot of heart burn within the NSG regime among the countries which would be denied billions of dollars of potential revenues. And that IMO will make the NSG regime a lot more weaker.
An Indian test right after a walk out would deter that process. You gotta to remember that the meta objective is to bury all these stupid three and four letter treaties and what better way than to get the treaty members quarreling among themselves?
One point about sanctions. It's been explained time and again on this thread why this time around the sanctions would have a more severe repercussions on the Indian economy - just see Arnab's post(s) in the previous discussion thread.
Your point about just two years of abuse is just a personal opinion. I would postulate the effects would last far longer.
And also can you postulate how many tests we would need to be assured that we have a credible deterrent (assuming we don't have one now)? And how many kiloton tests, how many megaton tests do we need? What about weaponisation, delivery systems etc?
How many tests, spread over how many days, months or years do we need for that? Have you calculated all that?
Do note I also happen to believe that we'll have to test again, sooner or later and that we'll have to keep on testing till such time that we are satisfied. But that testing has to be done when we are ready and we know that we need to test - not because we're unhappy with the reaction at NSG and want to teach some pipsqueaks a lesson. That's what head over heart means IMO.
This could mean that the revised draft has only "cosmetic changes" and China will play its last card - one that it was hoping not to play. It used a number of easy cards before, namely:Chinese take
Adding to the international pressure is a commentary in Monday's People's Daily, the ruling Chinese Communist Party's official paper.
The Chinese newspaper has called the nuclear agreement between India and the United States a "major blow" to non-proliferation. It reads:
"Whether it is motivated by geopolitical considerations or commercial interests, the US-India nuclear agreement has constituted a major blow to the international non-proliferation regime."
Why, we can send more students to enroll in the few NZ universities to sustain themselves, encourage import of chocolates and we can encourage more Mozart appreciation among Indians.Hersh wrote:Can we also discuss any 'carrots' that we could offer [other than NSG stuff] in business or otherwise terms to make these countries amenable....it maybe a case-by-case affair?
Let's also mandate more Bollywood movies being shot in the same scenic setting as Lord of the Rings (we can have an infinite number of sheep as extras) and also in the same mountains where Julie Andrews ran among the trees (albeit over clothed and in bright sunlight and not when it was pouring ) while signing: Do, Re, Me...SSridhar wrote:Why, we can send more students to enroll in the few NZ universities to sustain themselves, encourage import of chocolates and we can encourage more Mozart appreciation among Indians.Hersh wrote:Can we also discuss any 'carrots' that we could offer [other than NSG stuff] in business or otherwise terms to make these countries amenable....it maybe a case-by-case affair?
Mona Lisa is not the only one with an enigmatic smile. Others like smiling also. Lächeln ist gesund!Six countries in the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group have remained opposed to a “clean waiver” to India ahead of its meeting here this week and some of them have said they were under pressure to reach a “constructive conclusion” to allow global nuclear commerce with New Delhi.“We are under pressure to agree to an acceptable compromise at the Sep 4-5 meeting,” a western diplomat, whose country is one of the six NSG members opposed to a ‘clean waiver’, told IANS here Monday.
The six countries - Austria, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland - made it clear that changes in the new draft for waiver were “minimal” and “cosmetic” and fail to address their concerns on non-proliferation.
They met Monday to decide whether they can take a common position to register their concerns on the new draft the US has circulated and wanted to be passed at the NSG meeting.
“My government received the revised draft from the US last Saturday. There was no business over the weekend. The government had its first look at the draft on Monday morning,” the diplomat said on condition of anonymity.
The diplomat added that the draft has the government’s “full attention” at the moment but it was still “unsure” over an unconditional waiver.
When the 45-member NSG met here last month, the member countries were unable to decide on the India-specific waiver without first bringing in provisions that would specify that all trade with India would end if it conducted further nuclear tests.
After its series of nuclear tests in May 1998, India has announced a voluntary moratorium on testing. But it has so far not signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty that prevents countries from conducting further nuclear tests. Nor has it signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
India needs all the NSG members to agree to the “waiver” as all decisions in the Group are taken by consensus.
An Austrian diplomat studying the draft described the changes in the new draft as “minimal”.
“This is too important an issue for us to be pressured into taking a quick decision,” he said.
Diplomats asking not to be quoted by name or country said that hectic consultations among NSG members continued all Monday and some like-minded countries had an informal meeting in the afternoon.
The process was described as “fluid” three days before the NSG meet.
“We are not being difficult. We are not hardliners. We consider our nonproliferation concerns very legitimate. We respect and admire the steps taken by India in the past over nonproliferation but we are concerned about the future,” yet another western diplomat said.
The NSG waiver is essential for India so that the nuclear deal it plans to sign with the US can be put before the American Congress by this month for its final approval.
Though the six countries have taken the lead against a “clean waiver” for India, there are about 20 others that also have their reservations on granting the special concession to New Delhi without getting any firm commitment from it.
India has made it clear that it will not allow any “prescriptive” conditions in the waiver.
The new draft that the US has prepared was approved by India only after days of negotiations and consultation to ensure that its language does not contain anything that can be construed as interfering with the country’s sovereign rights.
Naryananan guru,"If the US threatens to cut visas for daddy-Os vijiting their pyaree baccchee and parivar in the US, the guvrmand will immediately sign CTBT and NPT and FMCT. So I wouldn't be so cocky about the modern Indian ability to shrug off sanctions etc. The world has of course changed since 1998 - but the Consumer economy is built on a foundation of cards. Take away the exports because of sanctions, and everything collapses. At least in 1974 we only had a short way to fall, to hit the stable bottom.
There is a difference between "FEAR" of sanctions, and STUPIDITY in inviting them. It's like - I don't live in FEAR of the Adminullahs here, but I agree that it would be STUPID to invite being banned.
But should I let that deprive me of "testing" on some deserving candidates once in a while??? Clearly the Deterrent is being called into question....
BTW, I fully agree with Manny that
Quote:
India is outside the NPT, CTBT and NSG. It has no obligation to any of its rules! Period!
BUT... u don't need to vaporize the good soil of Mother India to prove that. You can just SAY it..... Maybe present Lotas saying that to every NSG member."
Wah Wah! Jaisy ko Taisa Uttar. Amrut to the vish of VishadJohn Snow wrote:Naryanan Vishada yogam>
Naryananan guru,"If the US threatens to cut visas for daddy-Os vijiting their pyaree baccchee and parivar in the US, the guvrmand will immediately sign CTBT and NPT and FMCT. So I wouldn't be so cocky about the modern Indian ability to shrug off sanctions etc. The world has of course changed since 1998 - but the Consumer economy is built on a foundation of cards. Take away the exports because of sanctions, and everything collapses. At least in 1974 we only had a short way to fall, to hit the stable bottom.
There is a difference between "FEAR" of sanctions, and STUPIDITY in inviting them. It's like - I don't live in FEAR of the Adminullahs here, but I agree that it would be STUPID to invite being banned.
But should I let that deprive me of "testing" on some deserving candidates once in a while??? Clearly the Deterrent is being called into question....
BTW, I fully agree with Manny that
Quote:
India is outside the NPT, CTBT and NSG. It has no obligation to any of its rules! Period!
BUT... u don't need to vaporize the good soil of Mother India to prove that. You can just SAY it..... Maybe present Lotas saying that to every NSG member."
There are three things at work in this world that you have espoused time immemorial.
Prarabdha( that which is past and we have only to reference but cant be done anything about).
Purushardha(the righteous path to action),
Dharmardha (dharmardha meaning here for the sake of righteous cause, and the duty to which the rulers is bound to).
The prarabdha is 1964 when PRC thermo nuke tests were conducted,
In 1968 the formation of NPT,
In 1974 Nuclear test,
In 1974 NSG formation,
In 1987 TSP device cold test ,
In 1998 TSP Gauri test, .
The Purushardha was
In 1998 Indian tests, unilateral moritorium,
In 2003 123 J 18 in good faith.
If the good faith of 123 J18 NSG waiver do not come through, then the
Dharmardha would be to destroy the false (adharma) world order of P-5 and its 100 brothers at NSG as it ushers testing times for dharma.
Now based on your worry about retribution of Grand ma and Grand pa not getting visas, or Payare ladla not going to bidesh toget Ms degree is Prarabdha of testing times.
Imagine a world ( in the vien of John Lenon) where Gandhi stopped Salt Satyagraha on fears that the British Umpire would rain stones and Lathis on Indians!
There fore leave despondency of Vishaad yoga to us mere mortals like Arjunas and be the Naryanan who woul uvahca
"Give peace a chance, destroy TS Pakistan"
Namonamaha Naryanan jagadgurum. Get into your viswarupam not a mere shadow of it.
Lawd God will have mercy and sort (separate) them out .Our duty ought to be to show them the righteous path .RajeshA wrote:NRao Ji,
Have some mercy on the poor Kiwis, Sir. After all, there should be some difference between Indians and Ahmedinejad, right!
Cost is a dependent on plenty of factors, including, I would assume the relationship between the US and RU. Assumes that Indian politicians are clueless all through the curve.Sean wrote:Does the 1988 agreement with Russia put any cap on the number of reactors/fuel it can supply India?How does the Russian list price of $2 billion per 1000MW reactor compare to western reactors?
Sound observation. However, it does have a totally different concept (extracting O2 from air as it flies), right? A complex one at that.sanjaykumar wrote:These space planes are theoretical, the last time I checked one was supposed to fly in 2005. Flight by 2009? You be the judge.
The only prediction I can make based on this report is that no Indian hyperplane will fly by 2009.
Janab, testing? I was talking of testing FAE. I mean, since it gens O2 on-board, why not test a FAE? Simple thinking I would think.harbans wrote:N Rao Ji was thinking along the similar lines. If this is a success then we would'nt need conventional ICBMs. What difference do these planes make to testing options?
I second that, a Vladimir Putin to deliver on self respect and national strength and a Deng Xiao Ping to further liberate the potential of the economy. I must say I cant seem to find any politician except JP in post Independence India to inspire and revere and he was untested in the executive. Can anyone correct me? We need heroes.Philip wrote:India needs a Vladimir Putin to restore its independence and self respect.Under no circumstances must we even gvie the NSG/US the impression that we "voluntarily" stopped our nucear tests,or will "voluntarily" do so if the NSG gives us the nod.This is a non-negotiable principle,the violation of which will be tantamount to treason.But we have displayed sadly the style and service of a 5* butler,in attendence within and without the "presidential" suite.We wait for his kindly word of thanks like a loyal retainer,ever ready to serve at his lord and master's table instead of sitting down and dining with him as an equal! Why have we not openly revealed the changes made in the text of the earlier agreed draft unless we have compromised?