India nuclear news and discussion

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Oct 2008 00:01

No comment.

(CNN) -- Austrian politician Joerg Haider, a champion of the far-right who drew criticism for perceived pro-Nazi comments, died in a car accident Saturday, Austrian police said. He was 58.
Haider was driving alone in his official state car on the road out of Klagenfurt, in southern Austria, when the car went off the road early Saturday. Police said Haider had just passed another car when he veered off the road, hit a concrete post, and rolled over several times before coming to a stop in the middle of the road.

The woman driving the car that Haider passed called for help and rescue teams were on the scene immediately, said Johann Melischneg of the Carinthia state police.

Haider suffered head and chest injuries, police said. He was taken to the hospital but was dead on arrival, Melischneg said.

Police said it is too early to say what caused the accident, but that Haider appeared to have been traveling at a high rate of speed.

"For us it's like the end of the world," Haider spokesman Stefan Petzner told the Austria Press Agency.

Haider was governor of the southern Austrian state of Carinthia and chief of the BZO party (Alliance for the Future of Austria).

He had been en route to Baerental in the Black Forest, where his family was going to celebrate his mother's 90th birthday over the weekend, the APA reported.

"With his death, the republic loses a great politician," said Heinz-Christian Strache, head of the Freedom Party, told the APA.

Austrian President Heinz Fischer told Austrian broadcaster ORF that Haider's death is "inconceivable" and a "human tragedy."

Haider was the former leader of the conservative Freedom Party. His first stint lasted from 1986 to 1989, and he was elected again in 1992.

A politician who projected youth and style, Haider appealed to many working-class Austrians, promising to cut their taxes and give money to those with children. Some older Austrians responded to his demands for strict law and order.

But he drew widespread criticism for his anti-immigrant stance and remarks considered anti-Semitic, and in 1991 he publicly praised Nazi Germany's employment policy.

During a parliamentary debate, Haider said, "An orderly employment policy was carried out in the Third Reich, which the government in Vienna cannot manage."

Asked in 2000 about the statement, Haider told CNN the quote was taken from a long speech and that he never praised the Third Reich.

"I apologize (for making) such statements, which hinder me (fulfilling) my obligations for the people," Haider told CNN. He called the statement a mistake and publicly denounced Nazism.

Haider continued to draw attention for his controversial remarks, however. They included an address to veterans of the Waffen S.S., Adolf Hitler's elite soldiers, in which he praised their character.

The address created an uproar after it was broadcast on German television. Haider said he had been speaking to elderly citizens of Carinthia who included some former Waffen S.S. members.

Despite the controversy, Haider said he was not racist: "You will not find any anti-Semitic position in our party program, and you will not find any anti-Semitic speech or statement by me."

The policies of the Freedom Party drew international attention during the 1999 elections. Party campaign posters urged voters to stop the flood of immigration and used the word "over-foreignization," the same word used by Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels in 1933 to criticize what he called Jewish influence in Germany.

Haider told CNN he favored restricting immigration simply because of Austria's small size, but that he wanted to keep an open border for refugees.

It was his family background, Haider said, that kept singling him out for criticism.

Haider's parents were activists in the Nazi Party long before Austrian-born Hitler annexed Austria to Germany in 1938. Haider's father, Robert, volunteered for the S.A., the notorious brown shirts who terrorized Jews and others before the war. He then served in the German army.

His biographer, Melanie Sully, said Haider felt a strong sense of loyalty to his parents and those in the war generation.

"He feels that what they sacrificed after the war in rebuilding Austria in very difficult circumstances needs to be honored and that they weren't all criminals," Sully told CNN in 2000.

Under Haider's leadership, the Freedom Party made a strong showing in the 1999 elections, winning 27 percent of the vote and shaking up the traditional two-party system that had ruled Austria since World War II.

After months of negotiations, however, the two main parties could not agree on terms to form a government together, so the Freedom Party was invited to share power.

Haider retired as party leader after that but remained governor of Carinthia.

In 2005, Haider formed the BZO party, taking with him a number of Freedom Party lawmakers. Haider was credited with helping the BZO make significant gains in last month's general elections alongside the Freedom Party, though Austria's two largest parties, the Social Democrats and the People's Party, came out on top.

The vote reflected reflected public dissatisfaction with the two largest parties as well as support for the social populism, anti-European Union and anti-immigrant rhetoric of the BZO and Freedom Party.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 12 Oct 2008 00:06

Arun_S Ji,

Somehow I find it difficult to imagine all that we have seen in Indian Politics going on in the last two and a half years, all a PART OF A MASTER PLAN hatched by Manmohan Singh, Lal Kishan Advani and Prakash Karat sitting around a table over some chai-biscuit, and then letting the plan unfold itself so late in the hour, with the certainty of wise men served by able-minded astrologers, that the deal goes through IAEA, NSG, House of Representatives (guarded by His Honorable Gatekeeper Tom Lantos and then Howard Berman), US Senate and lands on George W. Bush's table just before he leaves office, absolutely astonishing. The possibility of that is absolutely dim to minuscule to non-existent (even though the nuclear deal ultimately happened). The chances of that are slimmer than the possibility of 911 being all a Jewish Conspiracy and Osama bin Laden being a product of Industrial Light and Magic studios, so I'll hang on to my reservations about the Good Cop, Bad Cop Theory.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 Oct 2008 00:10

RajeshA wrote:Arun_S Ji,

Somehow I find it difficult to imagine all that we have seen in Indian Politics going on in the last two and a half years, all a PART OF A MASTER PLAN hatched by Manmohan Singh, Lal Kishan Advani and Prakash Karat sitting around a table over some chai-biscuit, and then letting the plan unfold itself so late in the hour, with the certainty of wise men served by able-minded astrologers, that the deal goes through IAEA, NSG, House of Representatives (guarded by His Honorable Gatekeeper Tom Lantos and then Howard Berman), US Senate and lands on George W. Bush's table just before he leaves office, absolutely astonishing. The possibility of that is absolutely dim to minuscule to non-existent (even though the nuclear deal ultimately happened). The chances of that are slimmer than the possibility of 911 being all a Jewish Conspiracy and Osama bin Laden being a product of Industrial Light and Magic studios, so I'll hang on to my reservations about the Good Cop, Bad Cop Theory.

I know some political analysis which I cannot reveal it right now. In some 5-10 years it will become apparent why things turned out to be like what it has now in the last 3 years.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 12 Oct 2008 00:15

Narayanan Ji,

Didn't know Haider had been active on Indian nuclear issues?

.

It may be perhaps of significance to note, that Vienna has been the place where the Armies of Ottoman Empire were stopped twice, in 1529 and 1683. So Vienna (Austria) has played a very important role in stopping the expansion of Muslim (read foreigner) influence in Europe, and some there still feel attached to that proud legacy also.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 12 Oct 2008 00:16

Acharya wrote: I know some political analysis which I cannot reveal it right now. In some 5-10 years it will become apparent why things turned out to be like what it has now in the last 3 years.

I'll be waiting for you right here!

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Oct 2008 01:45

Rajesh:

In fact many things should be apparent to you TODAY, which I could not reveal to you 5-10 years ago, but which of course I knew then.

Like I said, no comment on Haider or on general Austrian mentality. Could have happened to humans and nice guys too.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Oct 2008 04:52

Argh.. I believe Pranab Mukharjee went a bit overboard in advocating a similar nuclear deal for Pakistan .
India ‘encourages’ U.S. nuclear cooperation with Pakistan
Such comments send out conflicting and confusing message to the world community.Pranab Mukharjee has in one way legitimized the Pakistan's claim for an equal equal consideration .
While from a third person's perspective he is right when he says every country should have access to civilian use of the nuclear energy, but he should know better this has far more strategic implications apart from the civilian use.In any case it is for the US and the NSG to examine Pakistan's case, GOI imo should better take a neutral stance on this one and concentrate on working out on the our deal first.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Oct 2008 04:57

How India’s New Nuke Deal Might Set Off an Arms Race

Israel, meanwhile, has a better arms-control record than India and would love to open a civilian nuclear program

Israeli-South African nuclear weapon cooperation is apparently unknown to Newsweek editors...

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Oct 2008 04:59

Sweden offers a lesson in handling nuclear waste

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 12 Oct 2008 05:02

Such comments send out conflicting and confusing message to the world community.Pranab Mukharjee has in one way legitimized the Pakistan's claim for an equal equal consideration

Actually this is a comment akin to "I don't mind Pakistan landing on Neptune to stake a claim to it". In as much as the speaker and the audience all know the two are about as likely to come to fruition.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 12 Oct 2008 05:06

All credit to Pres. Bush and the current US administration and PM Dr. MMS and the current GoI for taking the 123 to a successful conclusion -- all this whining about Shri Pranab's statement is pretty silly. It was also a signal to everyone that India has no plans to stop any country from civilian nuclear power (as narayanan stated earlier), including Iran and Pakistan, which is consistent with GoI's policy...whether these countries earn the trust of other countries to provide them with nuclear tech is a different matter, a topic that was not broached by the statement made by the Mr. Pranab. What's not said (among things that you would expect to be said in a given context) is as important as what is said.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 12 Oct 2008 05:50

GoI ain't got time to whine.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/one-n ... up/372306/

Looking beyond, India has extended an invitation to Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev to be the chief guest at this year’s Republic Day Parade. Kazakhstan has 15 per cent of the world’s uranium reserves and is an important prospective seller for India. Negotiations are also underway with Niger for uranium, shortage of which is currently hampering the Indian programme.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 12 Oct 2008 06:33

Rye wrote:GoI ain't got time to whine.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/one-n ... up/372306/

Looking beyond, India has extended an invitation to Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev to be the chief guest at this year’s Republic Day Parade. Kazakhstan has 15 per cent of the world’s uranium reserves and is an important prospective seller for India. Negotiations are also underway with Niger for uranium, shortage of which is currently hampering the Indian programme.

Kazakhstan, Niger. Nice use of the NSG exemption. Is non NSG uranium also to be safeguarded, under the deal?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Oct 2008 06:35

Kazhakstan also has (had?) a gazillion ex-Soviet nuke warheads which provide instant source of fizz stuff at any level of enrichment that the dear dictator would agree to send over. I doubt if the Americans have managed to take away all the fizz to downblend into fuel for US reactors. As I understand, this rate was limited by the need to provide price support for the indigenous US uranium production industry - there was so much of the stuff in K'stan.

Good move, but I wonder what is the chance of getting some of that quickly... both in the "safeguarded" regime and elsewhere...

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 12 Oct 2008 06:41

Kazakhstan had - would have been correct.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Oct 2008 06:48

Shame. I hope they squirrelled some away in the Presidential garage.

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 12 Oct 2008 07:49

negi wrote:Argh.. I believe Pranab Mukharjee went a bit overboard in advocating a similar nuclear deal for Pakistan .
India ‘encourages’ U.S. nuclear cooperation with Pakistan
Such comments send out conflicting and confusing message to the world community.Pranab Mukharjee has in one way legitimized the Pakistan's claim for an equal equal consideration .
While from a third person's perspective he is right when he says every country should have access to civilian use of the nuclear energy, but he should know better this has far more strategic implications apart from the civilian use.In any case it is for the US and the NSG to examine Pakistan's case, GOI imo should better take a neutral stance on this one and concentrate on working out on the our deal first.

I agree, unfortunate statement from Pranab M. Total nonsense. He could have simply said something like "I am sorry I cannot comment on such a hypothetical possibility" instead of thinking on his feet and making an instantaneous policy statement.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Oct 2008 07:59

Quoted from the best source there is - MOI (Like Acharya, I am learning to quote myself, because that's the only person who agrees with me). Unfortunately I posted this on the TSP thread, where no one reads.

When I read Pranab M's statement, the Gong went off in my head. It's silly to think that is about Pakistan.

Think how it appears when viewed from the Eyeran-US-Israel Hyde angle. India just made it clear that there will be no Indian support to bully Iran on PEACEFUL use of nuclear energy. Iran after all has been that that is all they are doing, so now they have no reason to complain that India is ganging up against them.

It's the first Indian to the Hyde Act, coming minutes after signing the 123.

It was the paparrazzi's stupid interpretation that this was all about Pakistan (yeah, yeah, question would have been phrased that way). As they said on NPR, a US-Pakistan 123 is "less than likely, given that Pakistan's record in these things is rather interesting".

For the US and NSG, it comes down to the "Do Not Smoke In Bed" caution again:

Do not supply fissile material or technology to Pakistanis. The ashes floating down from the sky may be your own

Besides, I am trying to imagine 41 (India +1) 100OMW reactors coming up in Pakistan, all funded by international $$$$$, like the "Grand Pisslamic Teton" multiplied 10 times. I can see the sky above full of flying pigs.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 12 Oct 2008 13:34

Rye wrote:GoI ain't got time to whine.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/one-n ... up/372306/

Looking beyond, India has extended an invitation to Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev to be the chief guest at this year’s Republic Day Parade. Kazakhstan has 15 per cent of the world’s uranium reserves and is an important prospective seller for India. Negotiations are also underway with Niger for uranium, shortage of which is currently hampering the Indian programme.

So my guess just bounced. I was expecting, that Manmohan Singh would invite Taro Aso to be our chief guest, when he visits Japan on Oct 21-23.

renukb · Post by **renukb** » 12 Oct 2008 20:07

India to focus on time-bound projects with Russia, France & US
http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.ns ... enDocument

Mumbai, Oct 12 (PTI) With the historic signing of 123 agreement with the US, India now will focus on time bound projects with that country as well as France and Russia under the technical cooperation for the expansion of its nuclear power.

The signing of 123 agreement with the US is an enabling step to move forward in the expansion of nuclear power in the country. But India along with these three countries has to carry out a lot of diplomatic and technical procedures concurrently to operationalise the agreements, Chairman, Atomic Energy commission, Dr Anil Kakodkar, who returned from US last night, told PTI.

Several steps, including ratification of these agreements, commercial negotiations and IAEA safeguards, have to be carried out, he said.

India will first put Tarapur units 1 and 2, Rajasthan units 1 and 2 and Koodankulam units 1 and 2 that are already under separate safeguards agreement with IAEA under the single umbrella of India specific safeguards agreement, Kakodkar said.

"Of course, before placing the Indian reactors under IAEA safeguards as per the separation plan, it is important to kick-start the nuclear cooperation and that is very crucial," he said.

Meanwhile, the American and the French companies are expected to begin their serious discussions shortly with Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), a government of India undertaking that deals with nuclear power. PTI

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Oct 2008 22:04

NPCIL to order 2,000 tn uranium by yr-end

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), the country’s monopoly atomic energy generator, plans to place orders for as much as 2,000 metric tonnes of uranium, equal to almost a fifth of Japan’s annual demand, before the end of 2008 to ensure fuel supplies

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Oct 2008 00:09

[urlhttp://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=255677]Buffett Could Reshape Nuclear Power Industry
[/url]

9/26/2008 7:58:00 AM

EDF and Areva have a lot riding on UniStar, their sole vehicle for U.S. development. Areva has applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for certification of its evolutionary power reactor, a next-generation reactor that it hopes to build at sites in the U.S.

Once the NRC certifies a new reactor, it designates a "reference plant" which typically is the first project built with that reactor. All the engineering work done for that plant must be shared with subsequent projects to save time and expense for developers and the NRC. The reference plant for the Areva reactor is Constellation's Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland.

If Berkshire pulled the plug on the additional reactor at Calvert Cliffs, it would be a set back Areva, as well as other companies planning on using Areva's design, such as Missouri-based Ameren Corp., and Pennsylvania-based utility, PPL Corp.

.......................................

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 13 Oct 2008 02:33

link

Mr Brzezinski worries it will also indirectly aid India’s nuclear programme, tempting China to develop its nuclear arsenal beyond its current stance of “minimum deterrence”.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 13 Oct 2008 02:34

Singur passe, Bengal to house nuke park

Mamata will be more effective than Boron.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Oct 2008 06:56

fanne wrote:Ramana garu,
You are in the nuclear field and you have read a lot on both the side of the story. Why don't you post a 10 liner (not 1 liner), an honest post (not cryptic or politically correct) and spell out the details. Feel free to point out the grey area that even you do not know/understand either because of lack of knowledge or because it has been deliberately kept that way. That way it would be helpful for all of us.
Thanks,
fanne

fanne, you put a great burden on me. Firstly I am no in that line of work. As far as I can tell fission and boosted are under control and within reason can be scaled. As for the rest I am seeing what does the UK test data mean? Thats why I asked N^3 to post it. The option to test is preserved. Yes there is a cost but then India wont test frivously as the NPA think. That gives incentive for those who need to ensure India doesnt have to test by ensuring her supreme national interests are not affected.

The eight reactors in non civil side means there are sufficient reactors but it also troubles one that such a large number are there. But then all are not fizzing way. Some are due to proximity to non civil research institutes. Once a new govt comes in India they will have to come to grips with how muchis needed for that will be the next phase of the campaign. If Obama wins there will be pressure on that count. McCain I dont know.

As I said its for future govts to make lemonade and lassi. This deal makes sure India is close to US that they wont lower the damocles sword. But at same time it gives them great latitiude to do things to grow the economy with strength. The old guns or butter is no longer valid. Its butter with guns.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 13 Oct 2008 07:03

I don't think it is correct to assume that all "non-civilian" reactors are just churning away to make Pu for bums. There are many other problem areas involving nuclear reactions and fast particles and rays, which one does not really want others to see. For instance, many interesting materials can be generated, and the properties of existing materials can be modified in interesting ways. There is also a need to know radiation effects on any number of things, plus develop measurement techniques.

And then of course there may be experiments on other things such as how to change the rate of nuclear reactions using other things. Not to forget the development of the Djinn to fly over the ISI HQ a few times and zap them all.

amit · Post by **amit** » 13 Oct 2008 07:54

ramana wrote:The old guns or butter is no longer valid. Its butter with guns.

Wow! Ramana ji, in two sentences you've explained the whole rationale behind this deal! Thank you for this concise formulation.

IMHO, the disconnect we've seen on BRF and elsewhere has been because it was always thought to be a choice between butter or guns.

But as you say the correct way to look at is butter with guns.

Or in other words: Strong economy results in strong military which results in the protection of the strong economy.

You can't have one without the other - something which the Soviet Union found out to its cost and (hopefully) our dear Western neighbours are in course to finding out, Inshanallah!.

JMT

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 13 Oct 2008 08:29

Well, naturally, man. It also results in more social stability and less internecine warfare. It's more "organic", as Indians love to say.

Strong economy also results in more "soft power" and all that related stuff.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 13 Oct 2008 08:46

Gerard wrote:Singur passe, Bengal to house nuke park

Mamata will be more effective than Boron.

Not even that useful, IMVHO she is spent Boron.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 13 Oct 2008 11:27

Civilian nuclear cooperation between India and the 'international community' can have its downsides in the Indian politics too.

Once LWRs are set up by the nuclear reactor suppliers in the West in the various states, e.g. West Bengal, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, etc., and industrial parks, etc are set up around those reactors, the govts. of these states come under huge amount of pressure to see to it, that these reactors keep on working without any disruption.

Knowing that today politics in India has become fragmented and coalition politics is the rule of the day, and even marginal regional groups in India can exert disproportionally high pressure on Central politics, one could assume, the regional groupings would not allow the Central Govt. to do anything, which could rock the boat, i.e. stop the reactors from producing power.

As such, whichever Govt. comes in the Center may find it a difficult proposition to really make use of that Right to Test.

I am not saying TEST, TEST, TEST. I merely want to point out, that there exist certain pressure points in India, as far as testing celibacy is concerned.

amit · Post by **amit** » 13 Oct 2008 12:22

RajeshA wrote:Civilian nuclear cooperation between India and the 'international community' can have its downsides in the Indian politics too.

Once LWRs are set up by the nuclear reactor suppliers in the West in the various states, e.g. West Bengal, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, etc., and industrial parks, etc are set up around those reactors, the govts. of these states come under huge amount of pressure to see to it, that these reactors keep on working without any disruption.

Knowing that today politics in India has become fragmented and coalition politics is the rule of the day, and even marginal regional groups in India can exert disproportionally high pressure on Central politics, one could assume, the regional groupings would not allow the Central Govt. to do anything, which could rock the boat, i.e. stop the reactors from producing power.

As such, whichever Govt. comes in the Center may find it a difficult proposition to really make use of that Right to Test.

I am not saying TEST, TEST, TEST. I merely want to point out, that there exist certain pressure points in India, as far as testing celibacy is concerned.

Rajesh good points.

However, IMO, your argument rests on the assumption that industrial parks etc will only come up around nuclear power plants.

Now if the Indian economy grows at its expected pace over the next decade, industrial parks will come up around sources of assured power, that is 1,000 MW + type power plants and not just necessarily nuclear power plants.

And mind you if there's demand for power (there already over demand) power plants will come up, the question is whether these will be dirty coal powered plants or nuclear plants.

What the deal does IMHO is to transfer the burden of generating the huge amount of power we need over the next few decades, at least partly, to relatively cleaner (in terms of emissions) nuclear power plants over coal. Coal will still be the major source of energy the next two decades at least but even if there's a 5 per cent less dependency on coal due to nuclear power, then that's that much less pollution for our children to grow up in.

And the pain you talk about if we break our nuclear "celibacy" (I like that since on thread nuclear bombs have become intertwined with cojones and other Manly stuff!) there's going to be economic pain whether or not we signed this deal or not. More factories, more industrial parks etc directly translate to more economic activity, more exports and more integration of the Indian economy with the global economy.

IMO as this occurs (again I emphasise this would have occurred even if we had walked away from the N-deal) the pain would be considerable if we test within the next 20 years or so. After that who gives a sh!t, the Indian economy would be much bigger - for example will the British, with their economy less than half the size of the (then) Indian economy sanction us? It's like Bangladesh saying we will impose economic sanctions against India because they are not giving us Farraka waters!

JMT

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 13 Oct 2008 14:00

amit wrote: for example will the British, with their economy less than half the size of the (then) Indian economy sanction us? It's like Bangladesh saying we will impose economic sanctions against India because they are not giving us Farraka waters!

Sigh....

Britain is extremely unlikely to sanction us alone; if sanctions come it will at least include US, Britian, Japan and Australia (or no country will sanction) would you still say that it would be inconsequential? Anyway will UK::India 20 years will be like BeeDee::India today? There are problems with taking these extremely simplistic analogies; they just don't scale up to serious scrutiny.

There was never a question of Yes effect and no problem or test and doomsday; its never 0 and 1; its about extent of the pressure.

PS> It has happened and its real; that doesn't mean we have to like it or it is good.

satya · Post by **satya** » 13 Oct 2008 14:27

wrong thread .Post deleted

amit · Post by **amit** » 13 Oct 2008 14:30

Sanku wrote:
amit wrote: Sigh....

Britain is extremely unlikely to sanction us alone; if sanctions come it will at least include US, Britian, Japan and Australia (or no country will sanction) would you still say that it would be inconsequential? Anyway will UK::India 20 years will be like BeeDee::India today? There are problems with taking these extremely simplistic analogies; they just don't scale up to serious scrutiny.

There was never a question of Yes effect and no problem or test and doomsday; its never 0 and 1; its about extent of the pressure.

PS> It has happened and its real; that doesn't mean we have to like it or it is good.

Ah dear Sanku, as usual you miss the crux of the argument and clutch on to the peripherals.

Let me try again:

1) As long as the economy grows the way it has been over the past few years there will be demand for power. And as long as there's a demand for power 1,000 MW+ power plants will come up and the industrial parks Rajesh mentioned will come up the periphery of these plants. The question is whether these plants will be coal fired plants or nuclear plants. During the next 20 years IMO a majority will be coal fired power plants. However, even a five per cent N-plant substitution reduces pollution to some extent at least.

2) As more industrial parks come up along with more power plants the Indian economy will expand and as it does that it will become more integrated with the global economy. As that happens in the short to medium term any sanctions on the country will be more painful - several orders of magnitude more than what we experienced in 1998. That's because the Indian economy would be much bigger and more integrated with the global economy but not sufficiently large enough to give as much pain to the sanction givers as it gets itself.

[However, this pre-supposes there will be sanctions. The geopolitical scenario may be such that there is no sanctions at all if we test sometime in the next 20 years but that's crystal ball gazing onlee.]

3) After 20 years or so, which I'm taking as arbitrary time by which the Indian economy will, hopefully, be among the top 4-5 in the world (in GDP terms not PPP), it's not going to matter whether it's the UK or the US or Australia and even Bangladesh, or all of them together. They will not sanction India because such sanctions would hurt them just as much as they would hurt India.

For example if China were to test nukes today do you think anything but cosmetic sanctions would be applied to that country? Do you see the Ameri Khans foregoing their cheap Wal Mart goodies in these times of recession just to teach the Chinese a lesson, if it were to test nukes? (Please note I've added this last para just for effect, its very peripheral to my central argument.)

To sum up 123: The threat of economic sanctions is real and stays irrespective of whether we had signed this deal or not over the medium term if we test nukes. I don't think the threat profile will rise dramatically with the signing of the deal as in the next 20 years only a limited number of nuke plants will come online. IMHO the threat horizon is 20 years max.

I hope I've explained my POV adequately. If not please feel free to nitpick.

Cheers!

PS: Incidentally in a previous page of this thread, again in response to a very informative post by Rajesh, I had written something to the effect: In India opposition never fades away, it just morphs into something else.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 13 Oct 2008 15:09

What if the economy tanks? (as it is doing right now...)

Everyone assumes exponentially rising demand for energy, consumer goods, etc. etc. "from the strong domestic market", paraphrasing what I read somewhere yesterday. But is this real?

The rupee has gone from Rs. 39 to the US dollar in April, to Rs. 48.50 on Friday. And seems to be heading down so fast that MMS asked the head of the RBI to cut short his junket in the US and return to India immediately. Apparently a lot of banks in India are under severe stress, like ICICI, but not limited to it.

Coupled to the tight/non-existent credit in the world market, what does this do to the grand plans? Will the GOI have enough money to implement the Separation Plan and the Safeguards?

Will the outside vendors remain capable of delivering, given such tight credit?

Will oil prices drop so much that we go back to importing from the Islamic world and go back to Bhavitavyam Bhavedeva?

amit · Post by **amit** » 13 Oct 2008 15:14

narayanan wrote:What if the economy tanks? (as it is doing right now...)

Why if the economy tanks then we'll be importing less number of expensive nook plants, right?

BTW if the economy tanks would we test and thus help to fill the tank with a lot of unmentionable stuff?

Every argument presupposes you know what: Test, Test, Test and some more Test!

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 13 Oct 2008 16:09

With the US economy tanking, there is only one way out, as u know..... A good, solid shooting war, with thousands of SLCMs, ALCMs, JDAMs ( I mean Boeing kind, not Islamabad kind) used up in a couple of days, plus wear and tear on the jet engines, a few choppers to be replaced....

Now attacking Eyeran is not good ... it would choke up the oil supplies in the Straits of Hormuz and basically shut down the Persian Gulf.

North Korea anyway was a non-starter due to Panda threat, and now NoKo is Non-Terrorist, all lovey-dovey.

Georgia.... welll... after some sane reconsideration it was figured that this would not be very smart either. It would shut down oil to Oirope, among other things.

What does this leave?

Marine General says: We are NOT losing the war in A'stan

Christina Lamb has leaked an article saying that Paki Military IDs have been found on the pest-e-sha'eed aphsars of the "Taliban" in A'stan. Not in 2001. NOW.

Seems like a good, solid reason to go in, and win a great victory, kill Osama etc. that will have the double advantage of boosting Republican chances by a huge margin.

So what happens when the lonely Predators are replaced by nice big squadrons of FA-18s and B-2s, and the Hellfires by nice JDAMs and Daisy Cutters and MOABs?

TSP tests chinese nukes, because it's a use-em while u can situation. Maybe China tests nukes. And then India will probably respond in kind.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Oct 2008 17:00

Dear Leader Kim,has kept the US mystified as he runs circles round Uncle Sam over his nuclear weapons prgramme!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -deal.html

North Korea 'won't keep nuclear deal'
The decision by Washington to remove North Korea from its terrorism blacklist is a triumph for a regime in Pyongyang that has played a weak hand well, according to analysts.

By Julian Ryall in Tokyo
Last Updated: 11:02AM BST 13 Oct 2008

Kim Jong-il has no need to concern himself with elections or the state of the national economy Photo: AFP/GETTY
More significantly, there is little expectation that North Korea will keep its side of the bargain, with even Washington admitting that it does not expect inspectors to get full and free access to nuclear sites.

"Verifying North Korea's nuclear declaration will be a serious challenge," Patricia McNerney, acting US assistant secretary of state for international security and non-proliferation, told reporters in Washington on Saturday.

"This is the most secret and opaque regime in the entire world."

Pyongyang reacted to the announcement by stating that it would immediately resume work to disable its nuclear plants, including the Yongbyon complex, and grant access to inspectors from the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"The agreement looks on the surface to be opening up quite a lot, but this does beg the question of whether North Korea will actually come completely clean or not," said Aidan Foster-Carter, an expert in Korean affairs at the University of Leeds.

"We know that Yongbyon is expendable to North Korea but equally that for decades they have been putting many of their installations underground, including airstrips," he said.

Pyongyang is also expected to quibble over facilities that have already been identified as nuclear sites and those that might be located in the future.

"I think North Korea will violate the agreement to the extent that it is in its interests," said another Japan-based analyst. "The deal is not very demanding and I feel that North Korea knows that even if it violates the rules at the margins the US will not go back and re-list it.

"The Bush administration is on its last legs; what is it going to do if it finds out that Pyongyang has been lying?" Mr Foster-Carter asked.

"Nothing that the leaders there have done since the armistice in 1953 suggests to me that North Korea does not know where the lines that it must not cross are.

"But will they cheat? Of course they will cheat," he added.

The big factor in Pyongyang's favour is time, points out Mr Foster-Carter, as Kim Jong-il has no need to concern himself with elections or the state of the national economy.

"This one could run and run," Mr Foster-Carter said. "I expect North Korea to raise objections to the verification process, reserve the right to not have all sites inspected, claim it has not received all the oil it has been promised and so on to slow down the progress.

"At some point they will also demand a light-water reactor and possibly even equivalent inspections in South Korea," he said. "It is up to the next U.S. administration whether they will engage Pyongyang."

PS:"...of course they will cheat".It sums the situ up perfectly and given the Dear Leader's embrace of Pak,the LTTE and China for starts,why on earth should India castrate itself so demeaningly as MMS has done to us with the insidious deal?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 13 Oct 2008 17:02

amit wrote:not sufficiently large enough to give as much pain to the sanction givers as it gets itself.

Thank you makes it easy for me--

Absolutely no data to back up that central assumption.

And no comparison with China does not count --
1. China was not sanctioned when it could have been purely from economic perspective.
2. China is far more willing to suffer sanctions (under a different banner) to do what it needs to do -- yesterday today and tomorrow
3. China always had other geopolitical irons in the fire (N K for one) the threat to Japan Taiwan other. It has a hostile position to Western block allies and a power project and demonstrated will to back that position.

In all ZERO GROUNDS FOR INDIA === CHINA.

This economic theory is just a article of faith without any logic or prior examples to justify it!!

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 13 Oct 2008 17:08

Sanku wrote:

Absolutely no data to back up that central assumption.

Umm..the claim is about something 10 years from now? What kind of data do you want from the future that would satisfy you?

This economic theory is just a article of faith without any logic or prior examples to justify it!!

Unlike Pakis, Indian leaders do not pray daily for a good economy and then watch TV for the rest of the day. It all depends on how India handles its own affairs -- what kind of "logic" would you provide for the claim "if we play the cards right on the economy, we could be in a good place" That is a conditional statement, not a statement of fact or certainty. You, OTOH, seem to be very certain that the GoI is incompetent and therefore all such claims are meant to fool the public. I think you are being heard loud and clear.

Just randomly yelling, "where is your logic? I don't see it in your hand, you suck" explains nothing and reveals nothing.