They say hunger for power is insatiable, and in this context no amount of testing will satisfy those who yearn for power . My point is if India wishes to test and expects others to not to react (in forms of sanctions or embargo) the only way is to become powerful both economically and politically so that NPA's have to take into consideration the implications of placing India under any such embargo.
And this deal imo is crucial step in that direction , an assured energy supply in abundance is the only way to fuel development and then things like permanent UN membership and other H&D stuff will automatically follow.
India nuclear news and discussion
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
So here is what we have then:
0. India has acquiesced to a world order marshaled largely by the US. The US has welcomed it as a non-nuclear weapons state with nuclear weapons.
1. In return, India has basically adopted a no first test policy. In an evolving geopolitical scenario in the future, this can be a liability. India must develop a series of hedges to mitigate its risk, should it need to test without approval of the US, mainly.
2. This reentry does not help accelerate India's civil 3-stage program and thus its "strategic autonomy." Note, by this we do not mean bombs. India cannot expose elements of 3-stage approach in the "Safeguarded" side. So, presumably the thorium utilization plan continues on the strategic side. There is no transfer of reprocessed fuel or fuel or technology from safeguarded to strategic side. So there is no acceleration of the 3-stage approach. India must find a way to use this deal to help its 3-stage plan and prioritize a transition to the thorium economy, where we can become a supplier to the world. The US allows India into its world order, but did not come through with the kind of strategic support that some, at least, interpreted around J18. That was a mistake in hindsight and the US was offering far less. What will forever remain a question in my mind is, was there a way where we could've connected with a US and helped our 3-stage directly?
3. India must ensure that the commercialization doesn't follow a take-make-waste paradigm. That the fuel is maximally reprocessed. India must ensure that there are adequate buffers built into its fuel supply and that in no situation will it be left with a repeat of prior experience.
4. India must ensure that robust and competitive Indian industry be allowed to grow at top levels of the nuclear food chain. It must spawn mixed commercial-govt entities, dual role commercial entities, and a large network of vendors and suppliers, whence failure won't be precipitous to the growth of nuclear industry in case of "sanctions". We must try to ensure that the nuclear industry does not become a repeat of the defense industry. Again, we have a chance of leading, rather than remaining the deer in the French, Russian and American headlights.
5. When put together, the 123 and NSG, there are still a few points that make me very nervous, that for a later day...
Some thoughts as we near closure...
0. India has acquiesced to a world order marshaled largely by the US. The US has welcomed it as a non-nuclear weapons state with nuclear weapons.
1. In return, India has basically adopted a no first test policy. In an evolving geopolitical scenario in the future, this can be a liability. India must develop a series of hedges to mitigate its risk, should it need to test without approval of the US, mainly.
2. This reentry does not help accelerate India's civil 3-stage program and thus its "strategic autonomy." Note, by this we do not mean bombs. India cannot expose elements of 3-stage approach in the "Safeguarded" side. So, presumably the thorium utilization plan continues on the strategic side. There is no transfer of reprocessed fuel or fuel or technology from safeguarded to strategic side. So there is no acceleration of the 3-stage approach. India must find a way to use this deal to help its 3-stage plan and prioritize a transition to the thorium economy, where we can become a supplier to the world. The US allows India into its world order, but did not come through with the kind of strategic support that some, at least, interpreted around J18. That was a mistake in hindsight and the US was offering far less. What will forever remain a question in my mind is, was there a way where we could've connected with a US and helped our 3-stage directly?
3. India must ensure that the commercialization doesn't follow a take-make-waste paradigm. That the fuel is maximally reprocessed. India must ensure that there are adequate buffers built into its fuel supply and that in no situation will it be left with a repeat of prior experience.
4. India must ensure that robust and competitive Indian industry be allowed to grow at top levels of the nuclear food chain. It must spawn mixed commercial-govt entities, dual role commercial entities, and a large network of vendors and suppliers, whence failure won't be precipitous to the growth of nuclear industry in case of "sanctions". We must try to ensure that the nuclear industry does not become a repeat of the defense industry. Again, we have a chance of leading, rather than remaining the deer in the French, Russian and American headlights.
5. When put together, the 123 and NSG, there are still a few points that make me very nervous, that for a later day...
Some thoughts as we near closure...
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Whats the news from the TSP press? From my cursory look, not much talk about NSG approval. Why the silence? Or is it a lull before the storm?
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
With the NSG approval, what effect will it have on India's Thorium research? Will it be halted because u can now buy Uranium? I hope that's not the case...
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
'Tests must for maintaining N-deterrence'
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 456224.cms
MUMBAI: While the jury is still out on whether, post-NSG waiver, India can conduct nuclear tests without inviting immediate NSG censure in addition to the stopping of nuclear fuel supplies from the United States, one of India's top scientists, P K Iyengar, has said that nuclear tests are absolutely necessary to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent.
Iyengar's observation — he played a key role in India's first nuclear test at Pokhran on May 18, 1974 — could ratchet up the politically sensitive issue of India's sovereign right to conduct nuclear test. Speaking to TOI, Iyengar said nuclear tests are a method to satisfy the requirements of the user which, in India's case, is the armed forces. "A test will help meet armed forces' specifications," he said.
Senior nuclear scientists maintain computer simulation is enough to test the validity of an atomic weapon and actual testing isn't needed anymore. But Iyengar strongly disagrees.
"We carry out tests of new aircraft and other products before handing it over to a user. Similarly, a nuclear bomb too must be tested before it's delivered to the user," Iyengar said, dismissing suggestions by a section of nuclear fraternity that computer simulation could substitute actual testing.
Iyengar then added that since there were doubts about the success of the first thermo-nuclear blast on May 11, 1998, he felt this particular test should be repeated.
Iyengar said there is a Stockpile Stewardship Programme in the US which ensures that nuclear weapons work properly. The US reached this stage after carrying out more than 2,000 nuclear tests, Iyengar said, and added, "In stark contrast, India has conducted mere six tests." Russia has 1,000 tests and France close to 300. Questioning the necessity of imposing a voluntary moratorium on further weapon testing by former PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee after the May 1998 nuclear weapons tests at Pokhran, Iyengar said Pakistan and China have not done anything similar. "Why should we have imposed a moratorium?" he asked. Echoing Iyengar's views, former Barc chief A N Prasad said, "We live in a neighbourhood which isn't very comfortable. We must be practical."
On computer simulation, Prasad said the issue is debatable because countries like the US have carried out several nuclear tests and obtained their data. "We have six tests and we say that all the required data is available. This is something debatable," he said, hoping the NSG approval doesn't take away India's right to carry out additional nuclear tests.
An article in the September 2008 issue of Physics Today by American nuclear weapon designer Thomas Reed says that in 1982, China's premier Deng Xiaoping began the transfer of nuclear weapons technology to Pakistan and in time to other third world countries. "These transfers included blueprints for the ultra-simple CHIC-4 design using highly enriched uranium first tested by China in 1966. It says that a Pakistani derivative of the CHIC-4 was apparently tested in China on May 26, 1990," Reed wrote.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 456224.cms
MUMBAI: While the jury is still out on whether, post-NSG waiver, India can conduct nuclear tests without inviting immediate NSG censure in addition to the stopping of nuclear fuel supplies from the United States, one of India's top scientists, P K Iyengar, has said that nuclear tests are absolutely necessary to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent.
Iyengar's observation — he played a key role in India's first nuclear test at Pokhran on May 18, 1974 — could ratchet up the politically sensitive issue of India's sovereign right to conduct nuclear test. Speaking to TOI, Iyengar said nuclear tests are a method to satisfy the requirements of the user which, in India's case, is the armed forces. "A test will help meet armed forces' specifications," he said.
Senior nuclear scientists maintain computer simulation is enough to test the validity of an atomic weapon and actual testing isn't needed anymore. But Iyengar strongly disagrees.
"We carry out tests of new aircraft and other products before handing it over to a user. Similarly, a nuclear bomb too must be tested before it's delivered to the user," Iyengar said, dismissing suggestions by a section of nuclear fraternity that computer simulation could substitute actual testing.
Iyengar then added that since there were doubts about the success of the first thermo-nuclear blast on May 11, 1998, he felt this particular test should be repeated.
Iyengar said there is a Stockpile Stewardship Programme in the US which ensures that nuclear weapons work properly. The US reached this stage after carrying out more than 2,000 nuclear tests, Iyengar said, and added, "In stark contrast, India has conducted mere six tests." Russia has 1,000 tests and France close to 300. Questioning the necessity of imposing a voluntary moratorium on further weapon testing by former PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee after the May 1998 nuclear weapons tests at Pokhran, Iyengar said Pakistan and China have not done anything similar. "Why should we have imposed a moratorium?" he asked. Echoing Iyengar's views, former Barc chief A N Prasad said, "We live in a neighbourhood which isn't very comfortable. We must be practical."
On computer simulation, Prasad said the issue is debatable because countries like the US have carried out several nuclear tests and obtained their data. "We have six tests and we say that all the required data is available. This is something debatable," he said, hoping the NSG approval doesn't take away India's right to carry out additional nuclear tests.
An article in the September 2008 issue of Physics Today by American nuclear weapon designer Thomas Reed says that in 1982, China's premier Deng Xiaoping began the transfer of nuclear weapons technology to Pakistan and in time to other third world countries. "These transfers included blueprints for the ultra-simple CHIC-4 design using highly enriched uranium first tested by China in 1966. It says that a Pakistani derivative of the CHIC-4 was apparently tested in China on May 26, 1990," Reed wrote.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Predicting what will happen to the thorium world in India is a little uncertain. What is clear is that this deal or deals will not help it in anyway, from available information and texts. Some would argue that it won't hinder it either, we are free to do what we want on the strategic side. I beg to differ. If you look at the separation plan, the competitive disadvantage that we put our methods to, and a few other factors, there is a good chance in the absence of strong leadership of attrition and dissipation.renukb wrote:With the NSG approval, what effect will it have on India's Thorium research? Will it be halted because u can now buy Uranium? I hope that's not the case...
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
On the whole question of whether ENR technology is available under this NSG waiver, and the Washington Post report which says it is not:
Perhaps the answer lies in the following? from link
Perhaps the answer lies in the following? from link
Only GoI knows whether ENR is explicitly included in the nuclear cooperation agreements it has already finalized with Russia and France.In addition, in the course of the NSG meeting, the United States confirmed that participating NSG governments expressed assurances that they did not intend to transfer enrichment or reprocessing technology to India.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
We must rid ourselves of this false hope that if we test there won't be damage. This is nonsense and a canard floated by some to minimize the impact of this issue. The US has unambiguously said that India won't test, cannot test. The NSG has relied on the assurances for the same. You can bet safely that there will most certainly and definitely be a problem, a serious problem, unless whatever we do has the tacit approval and encouragement of the players happen to control the Nuclear Industry in India. Presently that's the US, but please wait for the French and Russians to arrive. Whether we can play them against each other or they play us is moot.MUMBAI: While the jury is still out on whether, post-NSG waiver, India can conduct nuclear tests without inviting immediate NSG censure in addition to the stopping of nuclear fuel supplies from the United States, one of India's top scientists, P K Iyengar, has said that nuclear tests are absolutely necessary to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
This may be misplaced optimism.RajeshA wrote:I believe India would sooner or later, maybe in 3 years or so, become herself a member of NSG, then we wouldn't need others to do our vetoing.
What incentive does NSG have to invite India in, and thereby neutralize whatever leverage (real or illusory) they have today to influence India's decision to test?
They already have an explicit commitment from India to adhere to NSG Guidelines, even if those Guidelines do not take India's expressed views into account.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Now that the NSG radioactive sust is settling,a candid look at the entire tamasha enables us to discover a few realities.For one,the NSG meet was very welcome for just one fact alone.It exposed China's insidious machinations,aimed at derailing India's waiver to access nuclear fuel and technology.China wants India to be second to it in every sphere and having India a parole release for "good behaviour",as Pranab pleaded for in Vienna,would rehabilitate it to a large extent,something that China did not want to happen.China couldn't care less about the ability to acquire technology for nuclear power.It knows that it is going to take decades before N-power is going to have any effect upon the Indian power generatuion equation,but now with a waiver,India could stand up as an equal nation,thus demolishing the Clinton-China plot to chain India.Unfortunately,in doing so,China exposed itself and its insidious "Confusion" it was trying to sow.A democratic India is far preferable than a Communist dictatorship like China and India is sorely needed by the west to balance China's ambitions in Asia.The NSG/western alliance saw that they would also "lose" India's "good behaviour" if they did not let us out of the nuclear straitjacket.
However,if we are honest with ourselves,we will admit that we have also lost a great deal of nuclear independence.Pranab,on his "Boy Scout" honour,had to give an "obligation" to the NSG that in future we would NOT test.For all practical purposes,whatever the good doctor might say,we have "snipped" our testicular tubes,through "self-sterilisation" and are quite impotent, until these tubes are connected up again by a future government.We have now de-facto signed on to the provisions of the NPT/CTBT .Even the states that have signed on to these treaties can test if it is in their future national interest,so there's nothing wonderful about us saying that we can test.We have effectively mortgaged our will to do so and as Dr.Iyengar has said,further tests are needed to prove our designs.Why then did the US,Russia,France ,China,etc. carry out so many tests,as if computer testing was so certain?Why were Pak's Chinese designs also tested out for them?
Whatever we now import is liable to be returned if we ever test again and the $150 billion to be spent in 20 years,$7.5 per year,indicates just how much of money is going to be made by the lucky few who get the contracts and the brokers who will get their commissions! The deal is great for those who have evested interests.
The key to how much we have compromised is not what we will do in future,but what we will NOT do! What are the foreign policy implicatiuons/secret agreements we have made with the US? Joining NATO by default?Screwing Iran in diplomatic arenas? Reducing our proven friendhsip with Russia? Forget about India developing ICBMs!Earlier the US after P-2 delayed our development of Agni-3 and will we will now see a lowering/reduction in quantity and quality of our strategic deterrent as far as our sub-launched missiles are concerned? In future,our defence planning will be made to order to the US's requirements and not India's.Our defence minister is ruishing to Washington to do so right nowThe next few months will see the sercet contours of the deal emerge.It is not going to be a happy sight.
However,if we are honest with ourselves,we will admit that we have also lost a great deal of nuclear independence.Pranab,on his "Boy Scout" honour,had to give an "obligation" to the NSG that in future we would NOT test.For all practical purposes,whatever the good doctor might say,we have "snipped" our testicular tubes,through "self-sterilisation" and are quite impotent, until these tubes are connected up again by a future government.We have now de-facto signed on to the provisions of the NPT/CTBT .Even the states that have signed on to these treaties can test if it is in their future national interest,so there's nothing wonderful about us saying that we can test.We have effectively mortgaged our will to do so and as Dr.Iyengar has said,further tests are needed to prove our designs.Why then did the US,Russia,France ,China,etc. carry out so many tests,as if computer testing was so certain?Why were Pak's Chinese designs also tested out for them?
Whatever we now import is liable to be returned if we ever test again and the $150 billion to be spent in 20 years,$7.5 per year,indicates just how much of money is going to be made by the lucky few who get the contracts and the brokers who will get their commissions! The deal is great for those who have evested interests.
The key to how much we have compromised is not what we will do in future,but what we will NOT do! What are the foreign policy implicatiuons/secret agreements we have made with the US? Joining NATO by default?Screwing Iran in diplomatic arenas? Reducing our proven friendhsip with Russia? Forget about India developing ICBMs!Earlier the US after P-2 delayed our development of Agni-3 and will we will now see a lowering/reduction in quantity and quality of our strategic deterrent as far as our sub-launched missiles are concerned? In future,our defence planning will be made to order to the US's requirements and not India's.Our defence minister is ruishing to Washington to do so right nowThe next few months will see the sercet contours of the deal emerge.It is not going to be a happy sight.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
>>>However,if we are honest with ourselves,we will admit that we have also lost a great deal of nuclear independence.Pranab,on his "Boy Scout" honour,had to give an "obligation" to the NSG that in future we would NOT test.For all practical purposes,whatever the good doctor might say,we have "snipped" our testicular tubes,through "self-sterilisation" and are quite impotent, until these tubes are connected up again by a future government.We have now de-facto signed on to the provisions of the NPT/CTBT .Even the states that have signed on to these treaties can test if it is in their future national interest,so there's nothing wonderful about us saying that we can test.We have effectively mortgaged our will to do so and as Dr.Iyengar has said,further tests are needed to prove our designs.Why then did the US,Russia,France ,China,etc. carry out so many tests,as if computer testing was so certain?Why were Pak's Chinese designs also tested out for them?
Whatever we now import is liable to be returned if we ever test again and the $150 billion to be spent in 20 years,$7.5 per year,indicates just how much of money is going to be made by the lucky few who get the contracts and the brokers who will get their commissions! The deal is great for those who have evested interests.
I feel the linkage of future test is somewhat vague in the approved text. People who argue that our option for test is closed are not cent percent correct. Though in the agreed text "unilateral moratorium'' is inserted, the link to Pranab statement says "voluntary unilateral moratorium' - i.e., it is voluntary, it is unilateral and it is a moratorium, Now, moratorium only means a temporary stoppage. That word itself gives enough leverage for India (if that is what people are looking for). In jist, we can test whenever, whatever we want to.
What happens after we test? IMO, this is what we should be bothered about. Once we test, NSG naturally will hold a meeting. Ofcourse, there will be cries for sanctions and stoppage of supply. It has to be by consensus. If there is consensus, we are srew*d (again, without mentioning anything about the test or other things, NSG countries can still gang up against India and impose sanctions). That is for sure, no matter how much spin is put on by GOI. But the GOI honestly believe that they can persuade atleast one NSG country to make the consensus elusive. This is about the NSG waiver, with the belief that IAEA safeguards are as per the agreement before and no changes will be made after the vote by US Congress.
As far as I23 agreement is concerned, it is explicit that the moment India tests, the U.S will cease all co-operation in nuclear trade and santions will be automatic. This will affect all U.S supplied reactors and material. The only way to avoid is NOT to buy anything from U.S, or wait till they amend their Hyde and other domestic laws to make it in line with NSG/IAEA agreements. How far is it practical is the question..U.S won't keep quiet if we don't buy anything from them in the near future..and it is also not realistic to expect Obama to ament rules so fast.
So, Buying things from Russia / France may be manageable, but U.S is no..no, but cannot afford to do that. Prepare to waste some money on a couple of U.S. reactors with the Democles' sword of sanctions hanging over them.
Whatever we now import is liable to be returned if we ever test again and the $150 billion to be spent in 20 years,$7.5 per year,indicates just how much of money is going to be made by the lucky few who get the contracts and the brokers who will get their commissions! The deal is great for those who have evested interests.
I feel the linkage of future test is somewhat vague in the approved text. People who argue that our option for test is closed are not cent percent correct. Though in the agreed text "unilateral moratorium'' is inserted, the link to Pranab statement says "voluntary unilateral moratorium' - i.e., it is voluntary, it is unilateral and it is a moratorium, Now, moratorium only means a temporary stoppage. That word itself gives enough leverage for India (if that is what people are looking for). In jist, we can test whenever, whatever we want to.
What happens after we test? IMO, this is what we should be bothered about. Once we test, NSG naturally will hold a meeting. Ofcourse, there will be cries for sanctions and stoppage of supply. It has to be by consensus. If there is consensus, we are srew*d (again, without mentioning anything about the test or other things, NSG countries can still gang up against India and impose sanctions). That is for sure, no matter how much spin is put on by GOI. But the GOI honestly believe that they can persuade atleast one NSG country to make the consensus elusive. This is about the NSG waiver, with the belief that IAEA safeguards are as per the agreement before and no changes will be made after the vote by US Congress.
As far as I23 agreement is concerned, it is explicit that the moment India tests, the U.S will cease all co-operation in nuclear trade and santions will be automatic. This will affect all U.S supplied reactors and material. The only way to avoid is NOT to buy anything from U.S, or wait till they amend their Hyde and other domestic laws to make it in line with NSG/IAEA agreements. How far is it practical is the question..U.S won't keep quiet if we don't buy anything from them in the near future..and it is also not realistic to expect Obama to ament rules so fast.
So, Buying things from Russia / France may be manageable, but U.S is no..no, but cannot afford to do that. Prepare to waste some money on a couple of U.S. reactors with the Democles' sword of sanctions hanging over them.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
I think that to get benefit from NSG waiver and to firm up our stockpile etc, the opportunity for testing will be pushed back to 2025-2030.
But let us assume that for the time being our deterrent will be based on fusion weapon which is assumed to work reliably till 15kt-50kt range anthen the yeild may or may not be 200kt.
This will mean that we will hae to make more weapons, missiles and delivery platforms.
As our posture is minimum deterrent second (counter value?) strike therefore, the enemy has to take first strike and then "assume" that our nukes will not work.
I believe that nobody can make nukes by eating grass. Otherwise the nukes will be delivered by cows in dairy farms. So we should build up our economy and get ready to test weapons.
We will get a window between 2015-35 when the US earlier scientists start retiring and US tests to rebuild personal experience data-base.
But let us assume that for the time being our deterrent will be based on fusion weapon which is assumed to work reliably till 15kt-50kt range anthen the yeild may or may not be 200kt.
This will mean that we will hae to make more weapons, missiles and delivery platforms.
As our posture is minimum deterrent second (counter value?) strike therefore, the enemy has to take first strike and then "assume" that our nukes will not work.
I believe that nobody can make nukes by eating grass. Otherwise the nukes will be delivered by cows in dairy farms. So we should build up our economy and get ready to test weapons.
We will get a window between 2015-35 when the US earlier scientists start retiring and US tests to rebuild personal experience data-base.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
REgional and geopolitical situation will change in 2013-2018 timeframeRaj Malhotra wrote:I think that to get benefit from NSG waiver and to firm up our stockpile etc, the opportunity for testing will be pushed back to 2025-2030.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
geeth wrote:>>>So, Buying things from Russia / France may be manageable, but U.S is no..no, but cannot afford to do that. Prepare to waste some money on a couple of U.S. reactors with the Democles' sword of sanctions hanging over them.
What does the 123 agreement say about compensation if reactors are to be returned?
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
>>>What does the 123 agreement say about compensation if reactors are to be returned?
'returning of material' can be 'managed' by putting exhorbitant claim of compensation. We may even be able to manage by sourcing fuel from other, but what will we do if there is no supply of critical spares?
'returning of material' can be 'managed' by putting exhorbitant claim of compensation. We may even be able to manage by sourcing fuel from other, but what will we do if there is no supply of critical spares?
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Exactly my question! And also how is tarapore is running all these years without US support in spare parts?geeth wrote:>>>What does the 123 agreement say about compensation if reactors are to be returned?
'returning of material' can be 'managed' by putting exhorbitant claim of compensation. We may even be able to manage by sourcing fuel from other, but what will we do if there is no supply of critical spares?
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
The key takeaway of when to test is based on the negihborhood changes. If there is evidence of further proliferation that impacts India's security and it need not be in immediate neighborhood.sivab wrote:http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?news ... 6&pageid=2
The most potent argument the government is likely to put forward is that India no longer needs to test a device and its nuclear arsenal is complete. This is supported by many experts, including former president APJ Abdul Kalam and former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra.
But Kalam, in an interview to a television channel, also pointed out that in the case of supreme national interest every country had the right to do what was best and face the consequences.
Mishra had also said that when the Vajpayee government decided on a unilateral moratorium on testing, it did so not as a whim but after much thought and discussions with the scientific community and strategic experts. His take is that India does not need another test, unless the security environment in the neighbourhood changes. [/b]
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
I would also strongly recommend everyone to read that in full.sraj wrote:Thirty words that saved the day Siddharth Varadarajan's blow-by-blow account -- worth reading in full.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
I take Kalam's words with a pinch of salt, as they are intended to support the deal and intended to appease the local Indian GOI and people of India. If what he says is true, then India should test some more new nook designs before going full steam to make deals with the USA civilian nuke reactors. This would test the US intentions as well.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Other than open comments in press briefings or written statements, the rest of various journalists musings and conjectures and accounts are likely tainted with what they want to say to asked to be told often dressed up as comments by anonymous officials and unnamed diplomats.
Whether we take them to be true or not would depend on perceived intellectual honesty and perceived agendas.
Attempts to white-wash China's role, trying to blame the Americans for failure & then reluctantly acknowledging their power if only to prove the point that the big powered gun is going to be targeted the other way someday etc., tell me there are some other agendas.
Anyway all is well that ends well. We are better off than we were without this deal and if one day it is all taken back, in anger or otherwise, we may still be better off because some things learned, copied, replicated, re-engineered can never be unlearned or done away with. I was told by a very high level Taiwanese executive that whatever we see today in terms of their electronic manf. strength is because of one or two US companies (if i recall Texas Instruments etc) setting up shop in Taiwan and engineers that worked there starting small shops on their own..that was the seed. We missed all that boat because we were ruled by urine drinking morons that time.
May be we will see seeds being sown that grow into big trees, whether or not unkil likes that happening.
Whether we take them to be true or not would depend on perceived intellectual honesty and perceived agendas.
Attempts to white-wash China's role, trying to blame the Americans for failure & then reluctantly acknowledging their power if only to prove the point that the big powered gun is going to be targeted the other way someday etc., tell me there are some other agendas.
Anyway all is well that ends well. We are better off than we were without this deal and if one day it is all taken back, in anger or otherwise, we may still be better off because some things learned, copied, replicated, re-engineered can never be unlearned or done away with. I was told by a very high level Taiwanese executive that whatever we see today in terms of their electronic manf. strength is because of one or two US companies (if i recall Texas Instruments etc) setting up shop in Taiwan and engineers that worked there starting small shops on their own..that was the seed. We missed all that boat because we were ruled by urine drinking morons that time.
May be we will see seeds being sown that grow into big trees, whether or not unkil likes that happening.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Despite being vaccinated for foot-in-mouth disease, Aussies prefer to keep foot in mouth 
Australian government will not sell uranium to India despite welcoming Nuclear Suppliers Group
Australian government will not sell uranium to India despite welcoming Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) decision to end the 34-year long embargo on nuclear trade with India, official said.
"However, Labor is committed to supplying uranium to only those countries party to the NPT. Australia will therefore not be supplying uranium to India while it is not a member of the NPT," Australian trade Minister Simon Crean was quoted as saying in 'The Australian' newspaper report today.
Labor party welcomed the decision by NSG as strengthening the global security of nuclear facilities, Crean said.
However, the federal Opposition claims Labor's policy was hypocritical and said Foreign Minister should use his next visit to India to announce a new uranium policy.
"Foreign Minister Stephen Smith should use next week's visit to India to announce a new uranium export policy for New Delhi," Opposition Foreign Affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said yesterday.
While critics of the Vienna announcement said the decision would undermine the non-proliferation efforts, Robb said Canberra needed to support India in efforts to produce greenhouse gas-free electricity.
"One of the first foreign policy acts of the Rudd government was to renege on a decision by the Howard government to help India supply greenhouse gas-free electricity to its growing population by providing uranium under an agreement being negotiated between the US and India," he said.
"Since that time, the Rudd Government has been humiliated into supporting the US-India agreement at meetings of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the NSG which effectively condoned the sale of uranium to India by other countries around the world," he added.
Australian government will not sell uranium to India despite welcoming Nuclear Suppliers Group
Australian government will not sell uranium to India despite welcoming Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) decision to end the 34-year long embargo on nuclear trade with India, official said.
"However, Labor is committed to supplying uranium to only those countries party to the NPT. Australia will therefore not be supplying uranium to India while it is not a member of the NPT," Australian trade Minister Simon Crean was quoted as saying in 'The Australian' newspaper report today.
Labor party welcomed the decision by NSG as strengthening the global security of nuclear facilities, Crean said.
However, the federal Opposition claims Labor's policy was hypocritical and said Foreign Minister should use his next visit to India to announce a new uranium policy.
"Foreign Minister Stephen Smith should use next week's visit to India to announce a new uranium export policy for New Delhi," Opposition Foreign Affairs spokesman Andrew Robb said yesterday.
While critics of the Vienna announcement said the decision would undermine the non-proliferation efforts, Robb said Canberra needed to support India in efforts to produce greenhouse gas-free electricity.
"One of the first foreign policy acts of the Rudd government was to renege on a decision by the Howard government to help India supply greenhouse gas-free electricity to its growing population by providing uranium under an agreement being negotiated between the US and India," he said.
"Since that time, the Rudd Government has been humiliated into supporting the US-India agreement at meetings of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the NSG which effectively condoned the sale of uranium to India by other countries around the world," he added.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Raj: There are few silver lines that show the way forward:Raj Malhotra wrote:I think that to get benefit from NSG waiver and to firm up our stockpile etc, the opportunity for testing will be pushed back to 2025-2030.
But let us assume that for the time being our deterrent will be based on fusion weapon which is assumed to work reliably till 15kt-50kt range anthen the yeild may or may not be 200kt.
This will mean that we will have to make more weapons, missiles and delivery platforms.
As our posture is minimum deterrent second (counter value?) strike therefore, the enemy has to take first strike and then "assume" that our nukes will not work.
I believe that nobody can make nukes by eating grass. Otherwise the nukes will be delivered by cows in dairy farms. So we should build up our economy and get ready to test weapons.
We will get a window between 2015-35 when the US earlier scientists start retiring and US tests to rebuild personal experience data-base.
1) The Laser facility and computing organization will become key element of Indian weapons sector. A good facility using well paid and capable physicists can make this the second choice/preference to overt testing, but nevertheless a credible system that designs, tests and builds high yield boosted fission weapon (the low hanging fruit), and lightweight 3 stage TN weapon(s) of 100-200Kt yield range. {watch the underlying assumptions because they are not cheap and require political will).
2) To mitigate the TN weapon situation India will now be forced to mount boosted-fission warhead in tandem with each TN warhead. Thus India will to move to MIRV missiles sooner. Which is good thing in itself. But yes that will mean lesser range or fewer target per missile an increased cost. But potent deterrence nevertheless. Which enemy will relish the thought of retaliation that is assured, and also assured with very high probability that both fission and TN warheads will do full potency tandav, and in no case less painful than 50kt combined?.
And after item # 1 above is generating useful stuff, the minimum yield of the duo raises up to very painful 120+ Kt level.
3) Testing by any country (NWS or otherwise) will most likely will happen in a neighborhood and context that will directly imping India security. Thus India will have no choice but to show the steel it wields.
4) Item 1 above will IMHO require development and fielding of many TN designs of varying choices. So that all eggs are not in one design basket, and the next opportunity to test will see possibly 3 different TN design in addition to stock test of high yld boosted fission wpn. {IMHO this is from the hard lessone of Pok-II}. Thus one if not all TN will perform to required performance matrices.
5) The NSG vulnerability period is only next 20 years, after that it is Indian century. Then can eat, drink and dance tandav to hearts content.
So let us give power to both wheels of the cart (wheel of economic power and wheel of credible N deterrence).
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/st ... 0080064509
Zardari to visit China, negotiate nuclear deal.
Asif Ali Zardari, the new president of Pakistan, will visit China next week to negotiate a nuclear deal similar to the one between India and the US, an official said on Monday.
"Pakistan is already in touch with China for the nuclear deal to meet its energy crisis and the talks would start during Zardari's visit," an official said.
Zardari, who was elected president on Saturday, will be sworn in on Tuesday and has already announced that his first foreign visit will be to China. The official said that under the proposed deal, China will supply nuclear material to Pakistan to meet its energy crisis.
"This has nothing to do with the US-India deal but that has certainly provided us a way out to meet our energy crisis," he said.
"Of course it will take time to finalise the deal after going through its details but the initial talks would start during Zardari's visit and a memorandum of understanding (MoU) may be signed for reaching an agreement," said the official.
-
Neela
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4104
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
- Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
If my interpretation is correct, if India tests, the NSG will have to arrive at a consensus to stop co-operation. So if India plays its cards well, France and Russia can be made incalcitrant. Germany seems to understand India's position too.
Gurus ?
Gurus ?
-
ranganathan
- BRFite
- Posts: 277
- Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
That was my understanding too. I have a feeling even US will agree as long as we don't explode for no visible reason (meaning chinkis)
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
To be frank, they look like kids in school who beg for marks, just becoz someone else got better marks for the same question!Sean wrote:http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/st ... 0080064509
Zardari to visit China, negotiate nuclear deal.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Just a couple of optimistic assumptions:sraj wrote:This may be misplaced optimism.RajeshA wrote:I believe India would sooner or later, maybe in 3 years or so, become herself a member of NSG, then we wouldn't need others to do our vetoing.
What incentive does NSG have to invite India in, and thereby neutralize whatever leverage (real or illusory) they have today to influence India's decision to test?
They already have an explicit commitment from India to adhere to NSG Guidelines, even if those Guidelines do not take India's expressed views into account.
1. Pranab Mukherjee's reiteration of Indian intentions, which forms now a part of the waiver, as an adjunct, especially the part, “participating as a supplier nation, particularly for thorium-based fuel and in the establishment of international fuel banks, which also benefit India.”
2. An active and growing industry in nuclear components and India acting as a supplier of these.
3. Advancements in India's 3-Phase Program and bringing in new directions in nuclear commerce.
4. Psychological transformation over time among the NSG members from seeing India as a pariah to seeing India as a partner.
5. Increased cooperation with India in other spheres, especially trade, security and environment protection, contingent upon the country's friendliness towards India, e.g. with respect to support for India's membership of NSG.
6. Breakdown of international opposition to India's membership upon sustained diplomatic pressure, as it happened on 6th Sept, 2008.
But I wouldn't go so far as to claim India has a gun in hand and can start pushing international opinion around.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
^^ Good post Rajesh Ji. One has to keep chipping away slowly to get somewhere in the next few years. But India may be sooner rather than later in the NSG. The mindblocks are beginning to change. The pipsqueaks think that India will only be importing tech. They have not got an inkling in their conscious that India is way advanced in nuclear technology. There will be firms in India that manufacture nuclear components in business right away exporting stuff once this is over. There will also be countries that want 200-300MW design reactors instead of 1000 MW types and many will chose proven Indian designs. This will happen very soon.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Gentle readers
The closing lines of that Siddharth Vardarajan column is an indicator of what India needs to do from now on. It says and I quote
"Even without the textual changes introduced, NSG members were free to push for termination. Making sure such a push never succeeds will have to be a major goal of Indian diplomacy."
I would even venture to say that is the goal of India as a whole and not just its diplomacy. What needs to be done next is captured well in the post by Arun_S. It calls for an enormous amount of political will and long term sustained planning. In addition, there are some things that we have to be careful about and these have been said effectively by Dr. Prasad. Are we upto it? I think there should not be any doubt on this count. If the past is anything to go by, the challenges India has resolutely faced in terms of keeping its options open and making sure that such national challenges have been accepted and met, one can be optimistic about the future.
It calls for vigilance and committed political and scientific statesmanship buttressed by a strong articulation of enlightened self interest based foreign policy.
I had observed much to the irritation of the moderator then monitoring this thread that the US was using the NSG to backtrack on its commitment to deliver a "clean and unconditional" waiver. I was asked to define what was clean and unconditional. At that time I had posted what the NSG will attempt to do and it is exactly what happened. They have put in place wordings to ensure that all members will collaborate if a single member wants to retract waiver. To our diplomat's credit, this poison blunted has been blunted by making sure that the national interests of members can prevail and there should be a consultation before such a retraction happens.
The second prediction that I had made was on the fact if there is any changes to national laws of a member that can be used to change the guidelines and future such guideline changes have to be complied with by India. Again this has been blunted by the fact that India has to be consulted prior to such changes and only if it does not impact India's national interests will this be implemented.
As predicted, the waiver is more "clean and conditional" rather than "clean and unconditional" that India would have preferred. The saving grace is that the conditions have been blunted and can be even nullified if India plays the bilateral agreements with other NSG countries right. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I can say this now, sometime it pays to take the rambles of this commentator seriously
for I may have the luck like thupariyum shambu (sort of Inspector Cleasau of Pink Panther fame)
What is important is that India has managed to get the world to change substantially its line of thinking. For over 50 years, India has stubbornly refused to accept a discriminatory set up on nuclear non proliferation. We have not budged on the basic principles of that. Every multinational arrangement made to keep us out have been brought down substantially. Not wholly but substantially. Remember the NSG was created as a group against India. It has been dealt a body blow now.
The other important change that is difficult to appreciate but a big one is that India has learnt to sieze opportunities. It has not been a prisoner of ideology or posturing. It has learnt to fashion out a realistic position and ensure that it takes the opportunity as it presents itself. This is the liberation of the mind that is beginning to happen. India is now confident enough to know what it wants, accept the reality of the day, negotiate and get what it can now and also knows that how to get what it wants when the opportunity presents itself later.
On the minus side, what we still need to learn is the ability to build an effective consensus. This calls for insititutional changes that allows for greater transparency, better education about key national goals amongst political leadership and people at large and a clear articulation and adherence of red lines. In this whole deal negotiation, we scruplously adhered to every sequence, every agreed rules of negotiation and acted in good faith. Naively or otherwise, we expected the other side to do the same. They (the USG) did not. The sequence was changed, the commitments made were diluted (some may say completely negated, but I do not ascribe to this view) and every rule of engagement (not using the media to subvert dialogue and put pressure on Indian position was something that was violated by the US).
What is also true was that India got the deal because of the US ability to deliver as well. It goes to show that not only Pakistan, but a whole lot of so called first rate allies like the G6 are susciptible to friendly calls in the midnight from Uncle Sam. I am sure not many will agree here, but the US did that round of calling because they knew that the Indians were perfectly capable and ready to walk away doing a "Kamal Nath". It was in a way high stakes poker and India has played a near perfect hand.
Just a ramble again, take it seriously if you will.
The closing lines of that Siddharth Vardarajan column is an indicator of what India needs to do from now on. It says and I quote
"Even without the textual changes introduced, NSG members were free to push for termination. Making sure such a push never succeeds will have to be a major goal of Indian diplomacy."
I would even venture to say that is the goal of India as a whole and not just its diplomacy. What needs to be done next is captured well in the post by Arun_S. It calls for an enormous amount of political will and long term sustained planning. In addition, there are some things that we have to be careful about and these have been said effectively by Dr. Prasad. Are we upto it? I think there should not be any doubt on this count. If the past is anything to go by, the challenges India has resolutely faced in terms of keeping its options open and making sure that such national challenges have been accepted and met, one can be optimistic about the future.
It calls for vigilance and committed political and scientific statesmanship buttressed by a strong articulation of enlightened self interest based foreign policy.
I had observed much to the irritation of the moderator then monitoring this thread that the US was using the NSG to backtrack on its commitment to deliver a "clean and unconditional" waiver. I was asked to define what was clean and unconditional. At that time I had posted what the NSG will attempt to do and it is exactly what happened. They have put in place wordings to ensure that all members will collaborate if a single member wants to retract waiver. To our diplomat's credit, this poison blunted has been blunted by making sure that the national interests of members can prevail and there should be a consultation before such a retraction happens.
The second prediction that I had made was on the fact if there is any changes to national laws of a member that can be used to change the guidelines and future such guideline changes have to be complied with by India. Again this has been blunted by the fact that India has to be consulted prior to such changes and only if it does not impact India's national interests will this be implemented.
As predicted, the waiver is more "clean and conditional" rather than "clean and unconditional" that India would have preferred. The saving grace is that the conditions have been blunted and can be even nullified if India plays the bilateral agreements with other NSG countries right. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I can say this now, sometime it pays to take the rambles of this commentator seriously
for I may have the luck like thupariyum shambu (sort of Inspector Cleasau of Pink Panther fame)What is important is that India has managed to get the world to change substantially its line of thinking. For over 50 years, India has stubbornly refused to accept a discriminatory set up on nuclear non proliferation. We have not budged on the basic principles of that. Every multinational arrangement made to keep us out have been brought down substantially. Not wholly but substantially. Remember the NSG was created as a group against India. It has been dealt a body blow now.
The other important change that is difficult to appreciate but a big one is that India has learnt to sieze opportunities. It has not been a prisoner of ideology or posturing. It has learnt to fashion out a realistic position and ensure that it takes the opportunity as it presents itself. This is the liberation of the mind that is beginning to happen. India is now confident enough to know what it wants, accept the reality of the day, negotiate and get what it can now and also knows that how to get what it wants when the opportunity presents itself later.
On the minus side, what we still need to learn is the ability to build an effective consensus. This calls for insititutional changes that allows for greater transparency, better education about key national goals amongst political leadership and people at large and a clear articulation and adherence of red lines. In this whole deal negotiation, we scruplously adhered to every sequence, every agreed rules of negotiation and acted in good faith. Naively or otherwise, we expected the other side to do the same. They (the USG) did not. The sequence was changed, the commitments made were diluted (some may say completely negated, but I do not ascribe to this view) and every rule of engagement (not using the media to subvert dialogue and put pressure on Indian position was something that was violated by the US).
What is also true was that India got the deal because of the US ability to deliver as well. It goes to show that not only Pakistan, but a whole lot of so called first rate allies like the G6 are susciptible to friendly calls in the midnight from Uncle Sam. I am sure not many will agree here, but the US did that round of calling because they knew that the Indians were perfectly capable and ready to walk away doing a "Kamal Nath". It was in a way high stakes poker and India has played a near perfect hand.
Just a ramble again, take it seriously if you will.
-
amit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
- Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Renukb,renukb wrote:I take Kalam's words with a pinch of salt, as they are intended to support the deal and intended to appease the local Indian GOI and people of India. If what he says is true, then India should test some more new nook designs before going full steam to make deals with the USA civilian nuke reactors. This would test the US intentions as well.
Is there any particular reason why we need to test new designs before signing deals with the US or other countries on civilian reactors?
I think it's been pointed out here that some right moves are being made with regard to LIF etc. In such a situation what's the pressing need for a hot test?
PS: The way you say Kalam is trying "to appease the local Indian GOI and the people of India" almost makes it sound like he's a foreigner!
-
amit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
- Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Rajiv Srinivasan on Rediff, posted without comment
This deal may well mark the tipping point that causes India to collapse: Without a nuclear deterrent, India is a sitting duck for Chinese blackmail including the proposed diversion of the Brahmaputra, for Pakistani-fomented insurrections, and Bangladeshi demographic invasion. India must be the very first large State in history that has consciously and voluntarily decided to dismantle itself.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
India has not been able to nuke TSP and BD for the mentioned mischiefs. will a next-gen 'cleaner' nuke
design help, where the political joints are weak?
and nuke PRC in response to diverting the brahmaputra...thats a new tactical strategy
design help, where the political joints are weak?
and nuke PRC in response to diverting the brahmaputra...thats a new tactical strategy
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
The prospect of having $30-40 billion of tax payer funded reactors going waste is real but then as a $1 trillion economy getting bigger by 7-8% a year or higher, that is peanuts. We can defer the 8th pay commission award by a few months and get same value perhaps.
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
No offense there... they were JMT...amit wrote: Renukb,
Is there any particular reason why we need to test new designs before signing deals with the US or other countries on civilian reactors?
I think it's been pointed out here that some right moves are being made with regard to LIF etc. In such a situation what's the pressing need for a hot test?
PS: The way you say Kalam is trying "to appease the local Indian GOI and the people of India" almost makes it sound like he's a foreigner!
We need to test if we have new designs, to test the waters of this NSG deal and the US reactions. May be it might be fruitful to hold off tests until we get civilian nuke plants. But we need to let our adversaries and new look USA, know that we have not compromised on defense requirements.
Why do you think an Indian can not make appeasing statements to GOI and POI?
He might be serving GOI's interests or Sonia's interests who knows?Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
We need a separate thread to discuss post-deal new nuclear projects.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/holnus/000200809081527.htm
I hope we dont see a repeat of the telecom scene - lalas and money bags grabbing licenses and then selling them to foreign bidders after wasting a few years. Every project should have full international competitive bidding without any preference to lalas
http://www.hinduonnet.com/holnus/000200809081527.htm
I hope we dont see a repeat of the telecom scene - lalas and money bags grabbing licenses and then selling them to foreign bidders after wasting a few years. Every project should have full international competitive bidding without any preference to lalas
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Expanding on an earlier post:
Additional optimism may be derived from this statement:
Making India "full partner" in NSG is next aim for US : PTI
Additional optimism may be derived from this statement:
Making India "full partner" in NSG is next aim for US : PTI
New Delhi, Sep 8 (PTI) After working "tirelessly" for securing a waiver for India from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group for trade in the atomic energy, the US today said its next aim is to make New Delhi a "full partner" in the nuclear cartel.
"President Bush, Secretary of State and the entire administration had worked tirelessly to ensure that India reached the stage where it has today in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)," Assistant Secretary (Market Access and Compliance) in the US Department of Commerce David Bohigian said here.
Bohigian said Bush and the Congress administration would continue to work to "make India a full partner in this group (NSG) which we think is crucial... From a strategic, political, economic and energy standpoint".
He said the US administration would be working through the Congress and the Hyde Act to ensure 100 billion dollar marekt for American companies.
"The next step for the US (administration) will be working through the Congress and the Hyde Act and make sure that business opportunities will enable the US firms to stay in what is estimated to be 100 billion dollar market," the official said at a CII seminar.
He said atomic energy would play an important role for economic development of India. "When you look at the energy map of 2020 and beyond, certainly nuclear has a key role to play in India's growth which we welcome," Bohigian said.
According to industry body Assocham, about 40 companies, including Videocon, have already started talks with foreign firms to set up nuclear power plants envisaging a total investment of about Rs 2,00,000 crore in India.
"We have asked the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for amendments in the legislations to facilitate the entry of private sector in generation of nuclear power," Videocon group head Venugopal Dhoot said. PTI
-
Dileep
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5884
- Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
- Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Is it a buildup to a NWS designation?
Question: How to eat an elephant?
Answer: Slice by Slice!
Question: How to eat an elephant?
Answer: Slice by Slice!
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
if this happens it means that GOTUS has shelved wet dreams of rolling back our NW programme on or at least finds little use for NPT in our context.Bohigian said Bush and the Congress administration would continue to work to "make India a full partner in this group (NSG) which we think is crucial... From a strategic, political, economic and energy standpoint".
it boils down to whether
a) you want to recognize India as a NWS and gather legitimate civilian deals in the process
or
b)continue harping on NPT and let go of the moolah from potential deals .
also, the likelihood of US cutting off support are really slim if they really intend to put us in NSG. the only motive of this step can be to have a sure-shot veto-er in NSG meetings so that US doesn't have to do the dirty work !
industry pressure on the GOTUS of the day will be tremendous not to cut-off support. nuclear power build up won't happen in a day, any supplier nation employing sanctions would have it's companies missing out on a lot of future deals. no country would want to do that, more so because the competitors will wait to fill in the vacuum.
it remains to be seen if the next GOTUS continues this policy. there would be tremendous pressure from the industry lobbies not to change track.
if they do, the others will fall in place.
BTW, I'm curious to know about this:
Exactly my question! And also how is tarapore is running all these years without US support in spare parts?
Re: India nuclear news and discussion - 6 sep 2008
Rahul M, read this as to howRahul M wrote:
also, I'm curious to know about this:Exactly my question! And also how is tarapore is running all these years without US support in spare parts?