India nuclear news and discussion

[ShauryaT]

It would be interesting to know, whether Dubya strikes down any of the provisions.

The US President has no such right on these type of bills, except for some budgetary bills, where the President enjoys a line item veto.

All, the President can do (apart from signing or a veto) is write down some Presidential signing statements, which have no validity in US law and usually do not survive Presidential terms.

[Prem]

I think that's going to be a let-down. Better close down the thread b4 the starts.

. So time is on India's side, and I think India should move right on and knock down the remaining walls - like CTBT. Sign it, and be done with it, then do what India wants.

No need and rush to throw this card for nothing .

[Arun_S]

Govt to build N-buffer stocks, overseas assets
Oineetom Ojah

Posted: Oct 03, 2008 at 0212 hrs IST

With the US Congress ratifying the 123 Agreement on Indo-US civilian nuclear co-operation on Wednesday, the UPA government is modifying its integrated energy policy (IEP) to factor in the changes in India’s nuclear status. Drafted two years ago and cleared by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the eve of his recent visit to New York and France, the IEP will now be amended to specify the country’s need to acquire uranium assets overseas as well as create buffer stocks of the fissile element.

The IEP, which envisions acquiring oil and gas assets abroad to reduce the country’s dependence on imports, will also include uranium assets. “We will certainly mention acquiring uranium assets abroad, like all other energy assets,” said Kirit Parikh, member (energy) in the Planning Commission. At the full plan panel meeting on September 20, where the Singh cleared the IEP, Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar also suggested exploring the possibility of acquiring uranium assets overseas.

The draft IEP had suggested a three-stage process, which includes extensive use of uranium, tapping India’s vast thorium resources and becoming energy independent beyond 2050. With limited domestic uranium deposits, the IEP suggested imports to ensure 10,000 mw of power generation in Phase-I of the nuclear energy programme, should NSG restrictions be lifted.

The IEP will also call for creating buffer stocks of uranium, just like other imported energy sources. “Like we say that India should worry about having a buffer stock of oil, we need to add the need to create a buffer stock of uranium,” Parikh said.

The Centre is also considering opening up the nuclear energy sector to private players. “We should really open it up for private sector participation. The exact mechanism has to be worked out. But unless we have private sector participation, the full benefits of the nuclear deal will not accrue to us,” Parikh said.

“We permit 100% FDI in the power sector. So, maybe we can do it in nuclear power, too. I think we will relax the conditions that restrict nuclear energy projects to the public sector,” Parikh said, indicating that the prospect of India allowing 100% FDI in the nuclear energy sector cannot be ruled out.

The modalities for allowing private players to enter the business still need to be thrashed out, but there are some clear options. “Private sector nuclear plants can be set up if we use tariff-based bidding procedures or the public-private participation route. Nuclear Power Corporation of India could also own the plant, but contract private players to set them up on a build-operate-transfer basis. These things are conceivable and can be worked out,” he said.

“The nuclear deal opens up different possibilities. But in the foreseeable future, the contribution that nuclear energy will make depends on how much we are able to import. In any case, it will be of modest proportions compared to our total needs,” Parikh pointed out.

Parikh, who is in charge of giving final touches to the IEP, said apart from changes to include nuclear energy in India’s energy basket, a few minor modifications are needed to stress the “emphasis and nuances” of the policy. The final version of the policy is expected to be placed before the Cabinet by the end of October.

The US Congress stamp of approval to the controversial Indo-US nuclear deal came on Wednesday after the Senate overwhelmingly approved the 123 Agreement with bipartisan support, rejecting killer amendments moved by two Democratic senators and paving the way for the implementation of the historic initiative between the two countries.

The Bill, which has already been cleared by the House of Representatives, will now head to the White House, with President Bush signing it into law. The Indo-US agreement on nuclear commerce will then be ready for initialling by external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee and US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice when she arrives in New Delhi on her rescheduled trip on Saturday.

[ramana]

Seems to be a hitch in signing the deal

google cache

[Sean]

It would be interesting to know, whether Dubya strikes down any of the provisions.

The US President has no such right on these type of bills, except for some budgetary bills, where the President enjoys a line item veto.

All, the President can do (apart from signing or a veto) is write down some Presidential signing statements, which have no validity in US law and usually do not survive Presidential terms.

The US congress did give the President line item on budgets, but it was struck down by the Supreme court.

Presidential signing statements may not have validity in law, but can be important for a future President to draw upon for political/administrative purposes if he/she so chooses. Clearly, any interpretation by a future President that is not in strict accordance with the law will be challenged in a court. So if Bush were to note that fuel supplies in the event of an Indian test will be governed by the 123 treaty, it may provide enough cover for the next President to ignore domestic laws. However, it will be challenged in the courts.

[RajeshA]

Four steps to 123 Agreement: IANS

WASHINGTON: Amid the suspense whether US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would sign or not sign the India-US civil nuclear deal during her vis
it to New Delhi on Saturday, the US has outlined four steps before they can start nuclear trade.

"Before civil nuclear trade can commence with India, some procedural actions must occur," a State Department spokesman said on Friday when asked to outline the process for implementing the 123 Agreement following its Congressional approval.

1. The United States and India must sign the US-India Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (123 Agreement). This text has been finalised and initialled since July 2007.

2. President George W Bush must sign into law the legislation recently passed by Congress approving the 123 Agreement.

3. After it becomes law, the President will make two certifications required under the law:

....(1) that conclusion and implementation of the agreement by its terms is consistent with US obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; and

....(2) that it is the policy of the United States to work with members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group to further restrict transfers of equipment and technology related to uranium enrichment and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.

4. Following the certifications, India and the United States will exchange diplomatic notes pursuant to Article 16(1) of the 123 Agreement, thereby bringing the agreement into force.

[Philip]

Well Done Prime Minister!

http://epaper.newindpress.com/NE/NE/200 ... ndex.shtml

Wi th the scene being set for a formal signature on the nuclear deal with the United States, there has been a spate of accolades and self-congratulatory proclamations all entirely without basis in fact. The cardinal principles enshrined in the joint statement of July 2005 have been sacrificed at the altar of expediency and realpolitik in the UPA government’s relentless pursuit of an unequal partnership in the nuclear field. There are a number of deeply disturbing provisions in the final approval that bind India to what can be best described as humiliating. Each and every little spin that New Delhi has put out now stands utterly exposed in the passage of the bill through the US political system. Thus the American interpretation of the 123, which seeks to robustly address the domestic non-proliferation lobby , has been upheld to be supreme.
There will be an automatic cut-off should New Delhi ever feel the need to test again. The American ambassador now claims that his government cannot compel private firms to supply critical equipment. The truth is this is because this has been explicitly prohibited by the law and as per the guidelines of their regulatory commission, which controls technology and equipment transfers. Not because of anything else. The reprocessing aspect has deteriorated as well. Now at every stage the administration has to go to the Congress. It is now tied up with the question of testing as well. Thus if the US decides we should not be allowed reprocessing technology, we won’t get it. This is not the case with Japan and Euratom. So much for the pious intention in the July statement on equality in the proposed scheme of things. Further the United States has committed itself to see to it that we do not have adequate fuel supply assurances and the wherewithal to build a strategic reserve. Yet, our spin masters in New Delhi continue to present a sanguine face.

There is a fond hope that if the United States proves intransigent we could turn to other quarters notably Russia and France for technology succour. The fact is the US carries enormous clout in the international arena; abundantly clear from the way and speed the nuclear deal has been stitched up. Can other members of the NSG ignore the US if it wants to further nonproliferation goals?

There is now a clear and imminent danger that in the pursuit of 10,000 MW of American nuclear energy which we have made a commitment to, a commitment like many other aspects of the deal not initially made known to the Indian electorate, combined with the overall thrust of imports that our energy policy is bound to take as a result of the deal, we stare at the abyss of overdependence and atrophy of indigenous capabilities. If this is the kind of full civil nuclear co-operation of which we have been offered tantalising visions this is what we have to say: “Well done, Prime Minister!”

[enqyoob]

No need and rush to throw this card for nothing .

Prem, I want to thank you for setting me straight with that BRILLIANT one-liner. May I add that this is exactly the kind of well-reasoned post that exemplifies the New BRF?

[rajrang]

Well Done Prime Minister!

http://epaper.newindpress.com/NE/NE/200 ... ndex.shtml

Wi th the scene being set for a formal signature on the nuclear deal with the United States, there has been a spate of accolades and self-congratulatory proclamations all entirely without basis in fact. The cardinal principles enshrined in the joint statement of July 2005 have been sacrificed at the altar of expediency and realpolitik in the UPA government’s relentless pursuit of an unequal partnership in the nuclear field. There are a number of deeply disturbing provisions in the final approval that bind India to what can be best described as humiliating. Each and every little spin that New Delhi has put out now stands utterly exposed in the passage of the bill through the US political system. Thus the American interpretation of the 123, which seeks to robustly address the domestic non-proliferation lobby , has been upheld to be supreme.
There will be an automatic cut-off should New Delhi ever feel the need to test again. The American ambassador now claims that his government cannot compel private firms to supply critical equipment. The truth is this is because this has been explicitly prohibited by the law and as per the guidelines of their regulatory commission, which controls technology and equipment transfers. Not because of anything else. The reprocessing aspect has deteriorated as well. Now at every stage the administration has to go to the Congress. It is now tied up with the question of testing as well. Thus if the US decides we should not be allowed reprocessing technology, we won’t get it. This is not the case with Japan and Euratom. So much for the pious intention in the July statement on equality in the proposed scheme of things. Further the United States has committed itself to see to it that we do not have adequate fuel supply assurances and the wherewithal to build a strategic reserve. Yet, our spin masters in New Delhi continue to present a sanguine face.

There is a fond hope that if the United States proves intransigent we could turn to other quarters notably Russia and France for technology succour. The fact is the US carries enormous clout in the international arena; abundantly clear from the way and speed the nuclear deal has been stitched up. Can other members of the NSG ignore the US if it wants to further nonproliferation goals?

There is now a clear and imminent danger that in the pursuit of 10,000 MW of American nuclear energy which we have made a commitment to, a commitment like many other aspects of the deal not initially made known to the Indian electorate, combined with the overall thrust of imports that our energy policy is bound to take as a result of the deal, we stare at the abyss of overdependence and atrophy of indigenous capabilities. If this is the kind of full civil nuclear co-operation of which we have been offered tantalising visions this is what we have to say: “Well done, Prime Minister!”

Nice summary - a humiliating and unequal agreement - a future generation of Indians will have to undo this. The US has India tied up in knots.

If the US Gov cannot "compel private firms to suppy critical equipment", how can India's Gov compel Indian businesses - whether private or state owned (involving tax money) - to buy reactors from the US? It is not only shameful but maybe also illegal for PM MMS Gov to make such an offer - after all even state owned companies have the commitment to Indian tax payers to do honest business.

India should pass a law that prevents Indian companies (private or state owned) from buying reactors from any country that has domestic laws requiring cut off of nuclear trade and return of nuclear materials, in the event of an Indian test. Maybe if there is change of Gov, the new Gov will do so.

India should also state clearly that if the US (or for that matter the P5) or Pak tests a nuclear device, then India will follow suit.

India's PM belongs to the Sikh community - a community that has repeatedly saved Indian civilization. I am afraid he will have the opposite distinction of doing harm through this nuclear adventure.

[enqyoob]

I think the problem is that the Prime Minister is not smart, experienced and courageous like we are. Yessir! That MUST be it.

[svinayak]

India, US unable to sign 123 agreement


U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, addressing a joint press conference at Hyderabad House, in New Delhi on Saturday. Photo: V. Sudershan.

New Delhi (PTI): India and the US were unable to ink the pathbreaking civil nuclear agreement on Saturday with New Delhi making it clear that it would do so only after President George W Bush signs it into a law, an occasion when it expects certain misgivings to be cleared.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Bush's signing of the legislation, which was approved by the US Congress earlier this week, into law had got delayed due to "administrative" reasons and there were "no open issues" involved.

After over 90-minute talks between Rice and External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee here, the two sides expressed the hope that the 123 agreement will be signed soon.

"The President will sign the legislation very soon. He wants to do it very soon. There are administrative details," Rice said at a joint press conference with Mukherjee.

Sources said the President might sign the legislation next week after which Mukherjee may travel to the US.

"Let me be clear, the 123 agreement is done. It is a matter of signing and so I don't want anyone to think that we have open issues. We, in fact, don't have open issues," said Rice, who also met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during her day-long visit.

Mukherjee said that "after the signing by the (US) President (of the legislation into law), the process will be complete. And after the process is complete, we will be in a position to sign (the 123 agreement)."

"A mutually convenient date of signing the agreement will be determined and I hope it will be signed shortly", he said.

The Indian position apparently caused disappointment in the American side which was keen on making Rice's visit a substantive one by signing the 123 agreement and wrapping up the civil nuclear deal.

[John Snow]

I think the problem is that the Prime Minister is not smart, experienced and courageous like we are. Yessir! That MUST be it.

N guru I am compelled to agree with your logical deduction.

[p_saggu]

OK, How important is the file notings issue? The american spin is that its value usually doesn't survive a change of presidency.
Or is GOI looking for a H&D / face saving thing just like the Preamble issue earlier?

Or is it just a case of old Bania haggling. I get my bargain, but want respect too

[awagaman]

http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/04/stories ... 181000.htm

Uncertainty over signing of 123 agreement during Rice visit

Siddharth Varadarajan

India ‘ok’ with draft Bush statement, will contest U.S. interpretations later

U.S. is keen for the 123 to be formally concluded during the visit

India wants all legal formalities to be concluded on the U.S. side first

New York: Even as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wends her way across to New Delhi, there is uncertainty over whether the bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement passed by Congress earlier this week will be ready for signing during her two-day visit to India.

Days after the House of Representatives acted to approve the ‘123 agreement,’ the Senate, on October 1, passed an identical version of the United States-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act. However, an ‘engrossed’ copy of the Act — an official copy certified by the Secretary of the Senate — had yet to be sent across to the White House at the time of going to press on Friday.

The U.S. is keen for the 123 to be formally concluded during Dr. Rice’s visit and had suggested to India that the two sides could always sign the text even before President Bush signs it into law. However, the Indian government insisted that all legal formalities, including the release of a presidential signing statement, be concluded on the U.S. side first.

According to sources, the White House has shared the text of the statement Mr. Bush will make when he signs the Act, known as the HR 7081, into law with the Indian side and the latter are “basically OK with it.” The statement is intended to address Indian concerns by seeking to “improve the atmospherics” and stressing the importance of nuclear commerce with India rather than by undoing the riders Congress has attached to the 123.

While India fully intends to place its own understandings about the 123 Agreement in the public domain — thereby contesting these American reservations — the sources said this would be done at the time of India’s own choosing. Though a final decision has yet to be taken, one of the options being considered is the handing over of a Note Verbale to the U.S. at the time when diplomatic notes are formally exchanged for the 123 Agreement to enter into force.

Assurances

The sources said the presidential statement would not repudiate any of the Act’s legal provisions such as those which provide for an India-specific procedure for Congress to approve the yet-to-be-negotiated reprocessing arrangements. Nor will it repudiate the provision that the 123 Agreement shall be “subject to the provisions” of the Hyde Act, the Atomic Energy Act and “any other applicable U.S. law.”

The sources said that even as far as the ‘declaration of policy’ part of HR 7081 are concerned, Mr. Bush’s statement will not repudiate section 102(a) which stipulates that the 123 Agreement’s provision “have the meanings conveyed in the authoritative representations provided by the President and his representatives to the Congress and its committees prior to September 20, 2008, regarding the meaning and legal effect of the Agreement,” i.e. that the fuel supply assurances in the 123 will not be legally binding.

[enqyoob]

OK, How important is the file notings issue?

OK, I asked NSN nyew klear experts and they referred to the 123, 456, 789 and 000 agreements, and the H.K. for the authoritative answer.

VERY IMPORTANT.

It's like this:
Say you buy this used car from AAA All American Ace Pre-Owned Luxury Automobiles Inc.
Whole deal is concluded and Sales Manager has gone back several times to confer with The Big Boss, and returned with Best Offer. You accept.

Now the official Invoice comes out, and you are delighted that they got it done with only seconds to go for closing time on Thursday before the long 4-day weekend, because you were planning to drive the heap to the mountains on Saturday.

But ... your nagging bibi says to read all the fine print on the back.
One thing there bothers you:

All Sales Are Final and Items Once Sold Will Not Be Taken Back Or Repaired

You wonder about this, and the Sales Manager says, "Oh! that's just standard language, don't worry about it. WHY would you want to bring this baby back HERE? You will be too busy driving it around the mountains!"

This seems fine and dandy 2 u but ur Bibi is obnoxious. She says there has to be Signing Statement that overrides this in case the heap develops some problems.

Well... the issue is, will a Signing Statement by these charlies make a whole lot of difference to your fortunes with The Heap?

The reason why you want The Heap is that this ******* also controls the Drivers License Bureau in town, and he has just convinced them to give you a license - provided you are going to use it to drive a jalopy bought from the *******.

So your plan is that once you get the license, you can sell The Heap to the first junkyard, take the soaking, and go buy a real car from someone else, so you can get to work at that job where they asked you how you were going to come to work. So you can make some money, so you can ..... (u c the point?)

So the Signing Statement is important, sure, but I tend to doubt the value of the whole thing anyway because its PRETTY UNLIKELY that you are going to buy anything from this dealership if there is any way around it, and you know that if you HAVE to buy it, they are gonna soak you anyway.

But you gotta get that license...

[ramana]

N does everything have to be reduced to a farce? If it wasnt important MMS would have signed the deal in a trice. So suggest folks wait till they hear from GOI. Its not about H&D but realism.

[enqyoob]

ramana: I can't figure you out on this. You don't seem to be bothered by the hordes of postors posting such brilliant analyses as the ones above where MMS is just so stupid that he can't see anything, India is ruled by traitors, etc. etc...? But you are quick to get the "burr in the bu**" so to speak, at everything I post. What gives?

NOTHING that I post is farcical (OK, the Khabar thread is in its own class). The language may differ, the tone may differ, the analogies may vary, but the intent is always the same. For those who can't see that, well.. but YOU?

You know 400% that NO SIGNING STATEMENT is going to make the naysayers happy, because they are determined to be unhappy, and frankly, no signing statement is going to go "in ur face" to what the COTUS has voted in by such a majority.

Bottom line is that India must and will chart India's own course, and India MUST NOT act like a vassal of the US. So the writing is on the wall already if you read it - India will hand over a "note verbale" which I suppose is a declaration of India's position, when INDIA signs the 123.

The US will be bound by US law on its side of the 123.

Now the issue is whether the OTHER nations in the NSG will agree to be bound by what COTUS says. That is also up to India, as in what India negotiates with Russia and France.

For the rest, every business deal with the US must be approved per US law, in any event, whatever any signing statement says. The US Dept. of Commerce etc. must approve the export aspects, and they will take orders from the White House of that time, not from what is in this signing statement. The WHOTUS will then be subject to US internal pressure to do what is good for US businesses.

There is, and will be, no explicit provision for Indian "testing". Period. US law on that is still that the US will cut off cooperation, unless the President finds after 60 days that it is not in the US interest to do so. So it is up to India to make sure that it is not in the US interest to do any such thing, if India needs to test.

I can't see what is so hard to understand about all this. People seem to expect Rice or Burns or Bush to come out and say: "We allow India to test any time!" They simply cannot do that under US law.

If they do that, should you believe them? It will be like an "official who prefers to remain anonymous because he was giving out secret information". Will McCain or Obama be bound by that if it is not in the US interest to do so?

The Deal exists because of a fundamental decision that US and Indian long-term interests are coincident in many fundamental ways, enough that there can and should be long-term trust. Period. By the same token, the Deal will not survive the asccent to power in either the US or India, of parties that fundamentally disagree with the above. NO treaty language or signing statement will alter any of that.

So I say phooooeeey to any Signing Statement. And India should say the same to the Hyde Act. It's not Indian law. But you don't have to say phoooeey! NOW, it can be conveyed in the Note Verbale.

[p_saggu]

File notings and Preambles don't have much value except later for propaganda.
GOI is going to come around and say, that the Preamble says that the deal will be done in all honesty, and the provisions say otherwise.
Similarly file notings were probably agreed to upon earlier, as being a way by the president to somehow mitigate the poison provisions (I don't see how that is practically possible).

In the final analysis, it seems Indian bania negotiators have really driven the message home in washington that as far as negotiating is concerned, our babus are second to none. Leadership may be an altogether different issue - may be plilable or ultra rigid.
I don't think that 95% of nations in the world could have negotiated a deal as prolonged and technical and as legally worded as this with the US, and international bodies like the IAEA. That our team has done this with reasonable ability, avoided most minefields, and kept the focus intact, speaks a lot for the nation as a whole and portends well for the future.
So who says that India is not ready for big power status?

[Sanjay M]

Because Congress doesn't have a monopoly on power, they know that their ability to win elections in the future would be severely compromised if India's security environment were to deteriorate. After all, it is the forces unleashed by the deterioration of security in India which led to the rise of the BJP, the main rival to the Congress. If India lands in a situation where it is trapped between security pressures from the neighbors and threats from the international nuclear mafia, then Congress will have to kiss any future election victories goodbye.

Thus, MMS is going to have to at least get a signing statement, to keep his party afloat. I feel he's doing it more for his Kangress-wallahs than for India.

[rajrang]

ramana: I can't figure you out on this. You don't seem to be bothered by the hordes of postors posting such brilliant analyses as the ones above where MMS is just so stupid that he can't see anything, India is ruled by traitors, etc. etc...? But you are quick to get the "burr in the bu**" so to speak, at everything I post. What gives?

NOTHING that I post is farcical (OK, the Khabar thread is in its own class). The language may differ, the tone may differ, the analogies may vary, but the intent is always the same. For those who can't see that, well.. but YOU?

You know 400% that NO SIGNING STATEMENT is going to make the naysayers happy, because they are determined to be unhappy, and frankly, no signing statement is going to go "in ur face" to what the COTUS has voted in by such a majority.

Bottom line is that India must and will chart India's own course, and India MUST NOT act like a vassal of the US. So the writing is on the wall already if you read it - India will hand over a "note verbale" which I suppose is a declaration of India's position, when INDIA signs the 123.

The US will be bound by US law on its side of the 123.

Now the issue is whether the OTHER nations in the NSG will agree to be bound by what COTUS says. That is also up to India, as in what India negotiates with Russia and France.

For the rest, every business deal with the US must be approved per US law, in any event, whatever any signing statement says. The US Dept. of Commerce etc. must approve the export aspects, and they will take orders from the White House of that time, not from what is in this signing statement. The WHOTUS will then be subject to US internal pressure to do what is good for US businesses.

There is, and will be, no explicit provision for Indian "testing". Period. US law on that is still that the US will cut off cooperation, unless the President finds after 60 days that it is not in the US interest to do so. So it is up to India to make sure that it is not in the US interest to do any such thing, if India needs to test.

I can't see what is so hard to understand about all this. People seem to expect Rice or Burns or Bush to come out and say: "We allow India to test any time!" They simply cannot do that under US law.

If they do that, should you believe them? It will be like an "official who prefers to remain anonymous because he was giving out secret information". Will McCain or Obama be bound by that if it is not in the US interest to do so?

The Deal exists because of a fundamental decision that US and Indian long-term interests are coincident in many fundamental ways, enough that there can and should be long-term trust. Period. By the same token, the Deal will not survive the asccent to power in either the US or India, of parties that fundamentally disagree with the above. NO treaty language or signing statement will alter any of that.

So I say phooooeeey to any Signing Statement. And India should say the same to the Hyde Act. It's not Indian law. But you don't have to say phoooeey! NOW, it can be conveyed in the Note Verbale.

I agree with Ramana's observation.

N: I think you are stating obvious facts and thereby trying to keep it simple.

Experience shows that there is a lot of hidden agendas and fine print in real life. What some of the others are trying to do is to do some critical thinking -in which the logic of India's Gov making a mistake is discussed. Even great leaders can make monumental mistakes.

[fanne]

It is sad that some members can browbeat others when there argument fall weak. Sometimes one wonder, is there something personal in this deal for few people?

rgds,
fanne

[enqyoob]

Speaking for myself, I have been assured that at least one reactor will be named after me, and I am expecting to hear about the $400,000,000,000 deposit being confirmed in my Bank Geneve account. (if the bank is still around tomorrow.. )

[Rye]

Many Enrons in the making? Hope not.

[p_saggu]

Many Enrons in the making? Hope not.

In the end Enron did turn out fine after renegotiations and the parent company going underground didn't it?
Meanwhile some politicos and Babooz had a hell of a froliking time with foreign money (and in the process spared the state coffers a bit).

[Rye]

I guess there were other larger problems with Enron that caused it to fall on its face, as we now find out...

[enqyoob]

N: I think you are stating obvious facts and thereby trying to keep it simple.

Experience shows that there is a lot of hidden agendas and fine print in real life. What some of the others are trying to do is to do some critical thinking -in which the logic of India's Gov making a mistake is discussed. Even great leaders can make monumental mistakes.

Thank you kindly. Of course I cannot see beyond the obvious unlike the brilliant postors here, who can see into the deep dark recesses of the minds of Prime Minister (aka "traitor" here to some) ManMohan Singh, and all his retinue of stupid and corrupt assistants. Please do continue to elucidate the intricate points of international negotiation on nuclear affairs. I'll try to see if I can watch the color pictures in the posts.

[enqyoob]

In the case of ENRON, the whole focus was on "fast-track license approval" to impress the foreign investors. The technical and economic advisors appear to have also been run over by the Mantris in their rush to demonstrate Fast-Track Raj.

But this is of course the big case study that must be drilled into anyone dealing with megadeals. That ENRON collapsed was, in my opinion, Divine intervention. The Almighty may reason that it is better to leave it to Darwin if such follies persist.

You can be sure that ex-ENRON and ex-Arthur Anderson scam artists will now be coming in as high-paid experts experienced in negotiating with Indian entities. In the US I can see the Chambers of Commerce and all such beginning to gather like cats around a fish market, tongues hanging out already.

Its your money and mine, any way you look at it. The NRI savings deposited in Indian banks, the IT professional's earnings made by working brutal hours in faraway lands, the Indian school teacher and white-collar worker with the direct tax deductions. The "whoosh sucking sound" of it all going to Texas or Marseilles or Moscow will soon get louder.

[Prem]

No need and rush to throw this card for nothing .

Prem, I want to thank you for setting me straight with that BRILLIANT one-liner. May I add that this is exactly the kind of well-reasoned post that exemplifies the New BRF?

Glad to know i was helpful
The idea is we have not yet tasted the fruit of the current deal. I agree, in due time India can give consent this Four Letter Treaty after extracting due price like UNSC seat with Veto etc.

[rajrang]

N: I think you are stating obvious facts and thereby trying to keep it simple.

Experience shows that there is a lot of hidden agendas and fine print in real life. What some of the others are trying to do is to do some critical thinking -in which the logic of India's Gov making a mistake is discussed. Even great leaders can make monumental mistakes.

Thank you kindly. Of course I cannot see beyond the obvious unlike the brilliant postors here, who can see into the deep dark recesses of the minds of Prime Minister (aka "traitor" here to some) ManMohan Singh, and all his retinue of stupid and corrupt assistants. Please do continue to elucidate the intricate points of international negotiation on nuclear affairs. I'll try to see if I can watch the color pictures in the posts.

This is not "looking into the deep dark recesses" etc. This is known as critical thinking.

Please also control your sarcasm.

[Suraj]

Rajrang: just make your point clearly.

On that note, it would be far better is people just stated their positions properly, without alluding to hidden agendas, conspiracies and 'psyops', all of which are stated with sufficient ambiguity that the posters can then retract or change tack with a 'that is not what I meant' disclaimer.

When one poster does bother to describe the situation as a broader picture, people jump on it claiming there are 'hidden agendas' and that the poster is 'simplistic'. That will not do. Explain why, providing your own alternative perspective, or just attribute it specifically lack of trust/belief in some person or institution and thereby make your position clear.

[NRao]

MMS, (like McCain?) is tech illiterate, I am told. Else he would be using emoticons to control the crowds. (eg: , , , etc)

On a more serious note, hopefully, two events should dictate the future: return of MMS to PMship (sounds like a frightful sequel) (and perhaps even Munna "I am ready" replaces him?) and when the time comes (in a few more years) to build the glitzy, world renowned, leading edged ENR center - for which, currently, he has only in-house ENR techs.

On people's thoughts on MMS, his lack of transparency has been responsible for anyone thinking the way they do. All he had to do, and, as a well educated man should have done in a meaningful "democracy", is been a lot more transparent. And, as long as things are going to be the way they are, I do not expect the "read" on MMS to change. It will range from a great hero to a sell out. the fact that the deal at every step has slid further from J18, and is still sliding, is proof enough that India has done most of giving.

On the flip side, I am not too sure that Bush will get his foreign policy crown jewel. Just yet. Bush has been foolish enough to think that this is an achievement of any kind. I am fairly confident that Indian Scicom is not ready to allow outsiders to count atoms in India. And, that MMS has exhausted his life lines.

Either way the political ball game has pretty much ended. It is now - to a great extent - in the court of the Scicoms. As long as a PM/FinMin funds a project the control goes to another B'crat who deals with building and making atoms. And, I suspect no matter what we ALL think, it is that what THAT Scicom thinks and DOES that matters. MMS + Bush can yell and scream, but if the Indian Scicom thinks this is lousy deal, that is the end of it.

We, perhaps, need a new emoticon for that!!! And, educate MMS on that.

[rajrang]

Suraj

Your point is understood. Clarity is always better than ambiguity. I wonder if sometimes ambiguity may result from not having read each and every posting on a thread due to simply lack of time - or maybe not wanting to make a decision about some item. Sometimes when you are trying to use diplomatic language or be polite - that may also have ambiguity.

I did refer to "hidden agendas" but did not use expressions or suggest "conspiracies" or "psyops" or "simplistic". I meant often people have agendas - especially politicians - not BRF posters as you may have assumed. Usually for re-election purposes, investments or jobs in their consituencies etc. So when I refer to hidden agendas I am not refering to something terribly devious - simply stating something that happens "normally" all the time. It was not a lack of trust in a specific leader - maybe the democratic process itself is not perfect.

For clarity, the punch line or the spirit of what I said had to do with - even great leaders can and have made monumental mistakes, happens often. For instance, a lot of intelligent people believe that President JFK's decision to go into Vietnam was a blunder, though he is still one of the most highly regarded presidents of all time. There are a lot more examples. When one makes such a suggestion, it does not imply that I am more intelligent than the PM of India or I am more intelligent than Pres JFK. Sometimes, there is response from posters using rude language and I resent that.

Thanks,

[Arun_S]

You know 400% that NO SIGNING STATEMENT is going to make the naysayers happy, because they are determined to be unhappy, and frankly, no signing statement is going to go "in ur face" to what the COTUS has voted in by such a majority.

Narayanan, that is highly presumptions of you to KNOW what is in the head of naysayers and what will make them happy or unhappy. I would suggest not to assume that please.

For I know that only the omnipresent Narayan KNOWS because He lives in every soul, and I KNOW that the narayanan who lives in flesh here on earth in Kaliyug does NOT.

Just a request.

[Muppalla]

On people's thoughts on MMS, his lack of transparency has been responsible for anyone thinking the way they do. All he had to do, and, as a well educated man should have done in a meaningful "democracy", is been a lot more transparent. And, as long as things are going to be the way they are, I do not expect the "read" on MMS to change. It will range from a great hero to a sell out. the fact that the deal at every step has slid further from J18, and is still sliding, is proof enough that India has done most of giving.

The best and polite description ever about MMS.

MMS has no guts to call Lok Sabha because of abundance of "naysayers" in the house. They barely bought the vote last time and there is no gaurantee that they will survive the next vote. First time in Indian parl history that a session has been postponed for such a longtime.

Least ethical government ever in India.

[AnantD]

There are a lot of BRFites hung up on the no testing and return of fuel BS. Do you really think this is something that is enforceable? Well only if India is as weak kneed as one thinks it is.

Lets get real, the Chinese proliferate OPENLY. What is anyopne doing about it? Anything at all?

What makes you think that some other countries laws a enforceable in India. What is gained by the NSG approval and 123 is truly remarkeable that India has been broken free from the discrimination and mistrust that lasted 30 years, and that is about it. What is wrong with that?

So if India tests, for whatever reason, and the other countries disagree and sanction, we really won't be any worse off than today, but a hell of a lot better off, since not all NSG countries will line up to sanction India, as long as India does it for the right reasons, if there is one, adn I can't really see one. The POTUS is required to pressure NSG members, but it may or may not work, as long as India plays it right.

Personally, I think a 15 MT nuke is just as bad as a 100 MT nuke, the effect will be about the same as far as deterrent is concerned. Israel is the smartest in this regard, and their nukes are untested, but yet a huge deterrent, IMHO. The damage from a 15 KT Hiroshima Nuke will cause most stock markets to cave in and we will all be eating grass for a long time.

BTW, if any country nukes another, it will start a chain reaction from the US, and you better believe it. Last time it happened was when the Russians wanted to nuke China over the Issuri river war.

[kit]

Rice : 123 = Hyde ; Hyde = 123 , So deal = Hyde
MMS : 123@# Hyde 123+Bush=Hyde

Rice:Great power status=Nuke emasculated India+US
MMS:Great power status=123+INDIA

Bottom line:
Nuclear weapons negates all varieties of military technological superiority .. conventional and strategic present and future .The Brahmastra that IS.

India-nuke s = a pacifist feminist Japan in the making, An underling for uncle as replacement for Union Jack

[AnantD]

India-nuke s = a pacifist feminist Japan in the making, An underling for uncle as replacement for Union Jack

Union Jack Nukes are all controlled by Unkil. Are India's??? The UK begged US to come to its help in WWI, WWII, and the Falklands. Did we ever?? OK.halfheartedly in 62!

Did Unkil say we can keep our Military Nuke Facilities outside the 123/Hyde? Yes or No?

Did India get to where it is in the last 15 years opening up its markets and and increasing trade with who? China - No? Russia - No? who else?

It took Japan and Germany 20 years to re-build from total destruction and become world economic power-houses.

We have been at it for 61 years and are just starting to see some light. Why don't we see what went wrong? Why do we have power cuts and 3rd rate infrastucture?

Why are we no where in the world when it comes to a lot of key areas? Is testing Nukes the only status symbol without much of anything else?

Answers: Too much isolationism (remember Krishna Menon ?), resistance to change of any sort, and poor choices because of short-sightedness.

Now that things are changing, a lot of us want to go back to the way it was. And the reason is we don't want to be a poodle to anyone. Who the F*** is asking for poodle-dom anywhere.

This is the closest thing that India has to becoming P-6, something that has happened, without signing the NPT, CTBT etc. I think its a first step, in 10 years, who knows what could happen, Security council, P6, it all depends on how India runs its show.

[NRao]

Lets get real, the Chinese proliferate OPENLY. What is anyopne doing about it? Anything at all?

What makes you think that some other countries laws a enforceable in India. What is gained by the NSG approval and 123 is truly remarkeable that India has been broken free from the discrimination and mistrust that lasted 30 years, and that is about it. What is wrong with that?

So if India tests, for whatever reason, and the other countries disagree and sanction, we really won't be any worse off than today, but a hell of a lot better off, since not all NSG countries will line up to sanction India, as long as India does it for the right reasons, if there is one, adn I can't really see one. The POTUS is required to pressure NSG members, but it may or may not work, as long as India plays it right.

What am I missing?

Those ALL are very good points to declare India a NWS. Which is pretty much what J18 was ALL about! !!!! Equal status with the US - for instance - it said.

"broken free from the discrimination and mistrust that lasted 30 years" of what? Who in this world did NOT trust India? IAEA has been schooled for years on nuclear safety, etc by DAE in India!! IAEA has conducted classes on nuclear safety, etc, etc, etc. in India.

The discrimination you mention is because India did not dance to the tune of the P5 and ALL those yahoo NPA countries - some who do not even have a nuclear program. Now, IF India does not dance and ALL these countries will continue nuclear trade - then why should not declare India a NWS? And, if they do not trade IF India does not dance to their tune, then India is where she was - so what is the use of all this tamasha?

"since not all NSG countries will line up to sanction India", says who? NSG, as we JUST witnessed is the US only. There is NO NSG outside the US. The tune is the US. Dance and you will get yearly bakshis from US Prez. I have already posted the support from BOTH RU and FR on this matter, so I do not see ANY NSG country that will support India. No way. Let us see if France gives ENR - AK has already stated that India has her own (at the signing of the FR deal), after he stated that he expects ENR from all vendors. That is a huge back step. But, based on the past I think it the political pressure that spoke, certainly not the scicoms.

The old ways are over. the haves see a huge potential for making money. India has plenty of money - so far.

I do not think India needs to fear about testing. India needs to fear having podunk political leaders. MMS did a good job - perhaps, I just feel that he could have got a LOT more and that he settled for a few cents. India deserves a LOT more - the Scicom.

I still feel that what India got was because of Indian scicom - NOT MMS. MMS has only presided over a continuous decline from J18.

The true value of these deals should be felt outside of the nuclear area. Let us see where all those fields go. Universities should get the best computers, space sciences should benefit from the latest, medical sciences should also similarly benefit. There should be others - perhaps even defense.

The argument is not about if what has been gained is remarkable or not. It is if much, much more could be gained - if enough has nto been gained. India did nto gain enough.

[NRao]

Union Jack Nukes are all controlled by Unkil. Are India's??? The UK begged US to come to its help in WWI, WWII, and the Falklands. Did we ever?? OK.halfheartedly in 62!

But the UK took Indian gold to pay the US. The US never declined that - did they?

Did Unkil say we can keep our Military Nuke Facilities outside the 123/Hyde? Yes or No?

Bush certainly tried. Perhaps not the nukes, but he did want the FBRs. AK put his foot down. Not MMS.

On eco, apples and oranges.

[AnantD]

But the UK took Indian gold to pay the US. The US never declined that - did they?

And African gold, Chinese Gold and every other countries gold where the British had their empire. But the Indian Gold was special and stamped to clerly identify it. Who let the British come and set up in India? Unkil? They had only kicked them out a 100 years ago, so maybe Unkil encouraged them, NO?

You forget that Roosevelt hated Churchill and actually made fun of their "Empire". He looked down upon such activities, and held up any assistance till the very last minute, and that too after Pearl Harbor, that the British conveniently forgot to tell the US about the plan after they had already broken the Japanese military code.

Bush certainly tried. Perhaps not the nukes, but he did want the FBRs. AK put his foot down. Not MMS.

The FBR's were civilian, NO? Looks like Bush didn't try too hard and MMS made the mistake of getting AK involved.