India Nuclear News And Discussion

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 21 Jun 2010 19:16

Prabu wrote:This is disturbing news ! How GOI is going to counter it ? And put pressure on uncle to come clean on chinki-paki nexus ?

There is no alternative except to perfect ENR ourselves. We developed Missiles and MBDA wants to cooperate with new missiles. Ditto with our space program. Ditto with our PHWR and Breeder reactors. Now there are two issues

(a) Pre-approval to do ENR on imported fuel -- this is non-negotiable and India is signing contracts only those who agree to do so
(b) Import of ENR technology -- expect everyone to bicker about it.

The best way to move forward is to announce $5 billion investment in creating a new "ENR Park" to do R&D on ENR. Expect everyone to line up then.

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 22 Jun 2010 01:45

From DD News (Tuesday 22 June, 2010):
Rs 1,320 crore package for Bhopal gas victims

Instead of Union Carbide (the parent company or its Indian Subsidiary), it is going to be the Indian tax-payers who are going to bear the liability arising out of the Bhopal accident. One may also expect a lot of "leakage" of the compensation money taking place. Bigger the package, greater the leakage. In my opinion, the same may happen, in future, with imported NPPs too, with or without the Indian version of the Liability Bill.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 22 Jun 2010 02:28

Anujan: why not have 1:1 country specific ENR deals? See another article from Chindu yesterday:

India lobbying hard with nuclear partners on ENR issue

Among India's nuclear partners, only France has given a commitment to provide India ENR equipment. Though the bilateral agreement does not provide for such transfers, Indian officials say President Nicholas Sarkozy gave a verbal assurance to this effect to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Paris last year.

Sign a similar deal with Russia too. At the same time, make it clear to NSG & Unkil that since they have reneged from their agreement, we will feel free to do the same (example: on the issue of testing moratorium).

Also, do you know of any articles that talk about the kind of ENR technology that India is hoping to acquire?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 22 Jun 2010 03:09

India eyes stake in Russian uranium field
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/201 ... 700100.htm

India is evaluating the option of picking up stake in one of the world's largest uranium fields in Russia.
The possibility of a minority equity stake in the Elkon field in Russia's Yakutia province, which is estimated to hold 344,000 tonnes of uranium or about 5.3 per cent of the world's recoverable reserves, is being seen as a step towards securing long-term supplies for the country's nuclear capacity, a Government official involved in the exercise said.Russia's state-owned mining firm ARMZ Uranium Holding Company has the licence to the Elkon field, in which a stake was offered in the course of bilateral negotiations during the Russian Prime Minister, Mr Vladimir Putin's, visit to India earlier this year.ARMZ Uranium Holding, which also has licences for uranium fields in Kazakhstan and Mongolia, had earlier said it is looking for a strategic partner to help it develop the Elkon mine.

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 22 Jun 2010 16:00

China-Pakistan nuclear deal: Why the surprise?

It's highly unlikely that China will give up playing the Pakistan card vis-a-vis India anytime soon. Indian policy makers would be well advised to disabuse themselves of the notion of a Sino-Indian rapprochement. China doesn't do sentimentality in foreign policy.

The Pakistani nuclear weapons programme is essentially an extension of the Chinese one. Despite being a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, China has supplied Pakistan with nuclear materials and expertise and has provided critical assistance in the construction of Pakistan's nuclear facilities. As has been aptly noted by the non-proliferation expert Gary Milhollin, "If you subtract China's help from Pakistan's nuclear programme, there is no nuclear programme."

Although China has long denied helping any nation attain a nuclear capability, the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme, Abdul Qadeer Khan, himself has acknowledged the crucial role China has played in his nation's nuclear weaponisation by gifting 50 kilograms of weapons-grade enriched uranium, drawing of the nuclear weapons and tons of uranium hexafluoride for Pakistan's centrifuges.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 22 Jun 2010 16:06

China plans to build two nuclear reactors in Pakistan

We've known for several years that China has contracted with Pakistan for new nuclear reactors. The Nuclear Suppliers Group has been following this carefully and they know that China has been moving ahead in its commercial negotiations with Pakistan for these deals and the question is really when would China be prepared to do this. It appears to us that the commercial contacts between China and Pakistan were very, very advanced indeed at the time that the United States and India made a separate nuclear deal and the Chinese were merely waiting for an opportunity to advance this project and they have that opportunity now because the US has gone ahead with its project with India and the Nuclear Suppliers Group in 2008 has approved it. So China has had a few years to wait, they've waited and now the US-India project is going ahead and China now sees this as their opportune moment.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 22 Jun 2010 19:20

^ This will be a litmus test for international structure.

The so-called sole-superpower insisted on going thru NSG and what not when it came to India's case. But another P5 member is bypassing (unless they can grandfather-in this issue) the process to support one failing states which is also sponsoring terrorism outside its borders.

India must warn the international community that this would set a wrong precedence and work closely with Russia and France on this issue.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 Jun 2010 19:27

RamaY wrote:^ This will be a litmus test for international structure.

The so-called sole-superpower insisted on going thru NSG and what not when it came to India's case. But another P5 member is bypassing (unless they can grandfather-in this issue) the process to support one failing states which is also sponsoring terrorism outside its borders.

India must warn the international community that this would set a wrong precedence and work closely with Russia and France on this issue.

Nothing anybody is going to do will stop this.

It's a done deal, grandfather or no.

We just have to deal with it.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Jun 2010 20:11

RamaY wrote:^ This will be a litmus test for international structure.

The so-called sole-superpower insisted on going thru NSG and what not when it came to India's case. But another P5 member is bypassing (unless they can grandfather-in this issue) the process to support one failing states which is also sponsoring terrorism outside its borders.

India must warn the international community that this would set a wrong precedence and work closely with Russia and France on this issue.

Either USA would block it in NSG, in which case USA still considers itself the leader in 'nuclear non-proliferation' or the deal already has the blessings of USA, in which case it will go through, either through NSG or drive-through.

When China joined the NSG in 2004, they gave the exact scope of Chinese support to Pakistan's 'civilian' nuclear program. The present deal goes far beyond it. So it is not covered by the present arrangement. If they want a new deal, they have to either do it snubbing NSG or through NSG approval.

If they do it outside NSG, then the present system breaks down, unless China is thrown out of NSG and all Chinese suppliers in NSG block all nuclear supply to China. If they do it inside, USA loses its leadership and Iran can do whatever they want.

One take on this is that US has approved of this deal and it would go through NSG. China would not have brought this up, unless they were sure that it is possible.

So what does China give to USA: More sanctions on Iran
So what does Pakistan give to USA: OBL's head
So what does India get: Obama visit

Obama wins!

The other take is that USA has given China the go ahead to take this up, for the sake of drama, and then do an about turn and tell the Pakistanis that the international community is not yet prepared to accept it. The US is willing to let this carrot dangle in front of the Pakistanis for a time, till Pakistan is willing to give up OBL and possibly Mullah Omar.

Obama wins! China wins more Pakistani sympathy!

It is useless for India to take this up vocally. If it doesn't go through, then it would be because of Western misgivings, and if they don't have misgivings, then it would go through regardless of what India says. It is widely known, what the issues here are. India does not add anything to it.

negi · Post by **negi** » 22 Jun 2010 20:13

Guys this will go through as I posted several days back in fact the excerpt from a Q&A session with Mark Hibbs posted by 'Arun' in International nuke discussion thread sums up the whole thing.

Coming to what US can do well one can see how much pressure US can actually put on India when it comes to trade with Iran vis a vis PRC's wish to supply reactors to Pakistan. US will abstain from voting in NSG if PRC does bother to go down that route.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 22 Jun 2010 20:52

Why are we getting our chaddis in a twist?

Pak already has nukes, there is nothing that they can do more to us. On the other hand the much vaunted "Non proliferation regime" (constructed only to hold India back) will be in tatters. Let the big boys worry about it - China, US, Russies. The reactors themselves are under IAEA safeguards anyway. They are not gaining financially from the deal (the reactors are to be constructed using "soft loans"). They are not gaining diplomatically -- Pakis already GUBO to them. This is just China's way of waving its d*ck at India and the US and to make sure that all the shiny new toys and baksheesh from Unkil does not shift Pakis to the Unkil camp.

Let Pakis have their electricity.

Like I mentioned, atleast in the Nuke regime, getting ENR technology, getting the bum, getting reactors all will happen only if we give the door a hard kick. And that hard kick can be given only if we make enough progress ourselves. We have made progress in a few areas, there is still some areas left....

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 22 Jun 2010 20:57

SS-ji

there are four players of interest here; India, US, PRC, TSP

India - You are right, what India says and does will not change the outcome in this scenario. Then it will be in long-term Indian interests to run full-page ads in western media bringing NPA/PRC/TSP perfidy. Not only that India+Russia+France should put forward few future deals with countries in ASEAN and CAR regions.

US - I think you are on dot w.r.t US play. I think an acceptable compromize would be to get Al-Jawahari.

PRC - TSP factor aside; Indo-US nuke deal is not 100% sealed yet, IMO, from operational-ization perspective. We are yet to close the deal w.r.t Enrichment/reprocessing and Nuke-Liability. So PRC might be trying to delay it as far as India is concerned.

TSP - wins if heads and wins if tails. More sympathy and noise if this deal fails; perhaps more sada-mithai

My recommendation is that India aligns with Russia/France and other like minded NSG nations to come up with an alternative nuke-industry standard as a long term insurance...

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Jun 2010 23:16

I think it would it would be a little premature to conclude that the China-Pakistan axis on this particular issue does not impact India, I would say the current situation is direct fallout of the even limited traction India has managed to get in the field of international nuclear trade.

This is a direct challenge to those who would not like to see India get a single moment of peace, and the whole intent is to highlight the changes done in NSG for a possible move to let India get its rightful status.

This is a spanner in the works for India, just for that and no other purpose.

The only questions is who are the ones throwing this monkey-wrench in the machine? The Chinese alone? Or did they have US backing to precisely get out of empty promises that were made to India? After all US could tell India that blocking the Chinese move means that India must crawl into the cage and stay there?

ajit_tr · Post by **ajit_tr** » 23 Jun 2010 03:26

The Breach

China is about to break important international rules designed to prevent nuclear proliferation. Can Beijing be stopped?
China's announcement will overstep the guidelines of the 46-country Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which bar nuclear commerce between Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) members like China and nonmember states like Pakistan. It will leave U.S. President Barack Obama with two options: He can either oppose the transaction and request that China leave the NSG, or grudgingly accept the Chinese exports. As of last week, when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Chinese leaders in Beijing for the three-day U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the United States was strongly leaning toward the latter.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jun 2010 03:40

Its an Khan problem. Let them worry.

All this dramabazi to tell the Indians how US is tough on PRC. The PRC transfers are pro-quid-quo to TSP for Af-Pak cooperation. Indians are hoodwinked again.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jun 2010 06:33

ajit_tr wrote:The Breach
China is about to break important international rules designed to prevent nuclear proliferation. Can Beijing be stopped?
China's announcement will overstep the guidelines of the 46-country Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which bar nuclear commerce between Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) members like China and nonmember states like Pakistan. It will leave U.S. President Barack Obama with two options: He can either oppose the transaction and request that China leave the NSG, or grudgingly accept the Chinese exports. As of last week, when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Chinese leaders in Beijing for the three-day U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the United States was strongly leaning toward the latter.

What this means is that US thinks that the combined PRC-TSP cannot check India and they are willing to break international agreements to achieve the balance of power. The US giving the PRC-TSP nuke deal a pass while subjecting India to the many twists and turns speaks for itself and only a blind and mentally challenged can fail to see that.
Soon it will reach an inflexion point where no one can check India except its leaders.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 23 Jun 2010 08:30

I wonder if the PRC/TSP nuke deal, Anderson leak, and Nuke-Liability bill are linked to something big...

Looks like UPA2 is expected to deliver something big given the strange outcome of 2009 elections. MMS could win power despite absence of Rahul-da, 11/26, nuke-deal and so on..

Nuke-deal has financial implication to Massa. But $10B business is not more important than their strategic goals. MMS already delivered nuke deal, U-turn on Iran, Natwar Singh and so on...

Could it be on JK or is it nukes (given NPA domination over Democratic party)???

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 23 Jun 2010 08:48

Look at this way , 10 years down the road Indians can have similar deal with Vietnam or Taiwan or any other country willing to do dirty job on few not so bright fellows.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 23 Jun 2010 14:54

India to turn heat on China-Pakistan nuclear deal

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Jun 2010 17:38

I tend to agree that no amount of our wailing and breast beating is going to stop PRC giving nuke reactors to Pakbarians, if the West has decided to play ball, in exchange for whatever PRC has to offer on Iran, Yuan peg, whatever...problem is we only have long term value, no short term nuisance value, either in Afghan or anywhere. International diplomacy moves on nuisance or military power. The only nuisance we create is reams of paper.

Worse, if the deal goes thru dispite our wailings, we may be seen as even more powerless.

But the situation can be milked for what it is worth. Options include:

a) Make noise and get there kicking and screaming, so that we can turn around and say 'told you so' when something goes wrong down the road...and whatever crumbs Unkil/West throws our way as shut-up money, take it and be happy.
b) Sabotage it quietly. Given the extent of commie penetration in our decision making ranks, it is practically impossible to do this without alerting China..even otherwise it is hard as we have make moves in global capitals in open societies.
c) Take the high road and say we are perfectly happy with TSP getting as many nuke reactors as they want, provided they are under safeguard...it is hard not to say this when we are taking (if flip-floppy) pro-Iran stand on the same matter..this sends signal to TSP that they have not won something big and to PRC that the days when they can get our goat by merely giving something to TSP is long gone, now they have to deal with us in some other way...in other words, we are grown up.
d) Just hope that some Abdul will blow it up anyway so why bother...(hopefully before they load all the rods in there)

All in all the saga goes to show how far we have to travel down the road of military, economic super-power status...learn that lesson and move faster..

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 23 Jun 2010 17:54

Lacking more directly effective levers, India only likes to boast of its "soft power" - typical reflex of trying to portray a vice as a virtue - while allowing the situation to deteriorate.

More reactors means more opportunities for Taliban to seize stuff, too.

Meanwhile,

China-Pakistan n-deal must satisfy IAEA: EU

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 23 Jun 2010 18:13

Nuclear Rights (BBC)

shaunb · Post by **shaunb** » 24 Jun 2010 18:14

From the article in BBC posted by SanjayM

The country - like India - has never signed the NPT. It too has a small nuclear arsenal. And, more worryingly, proliferation experts say it has a terrible record of selling nuclear technology and knowhow to third countries.

What sort of baltant lies does BBC churn out these days? Can we ask them to remove the sentence on proliferation?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Jun 2010 21:05

Reacting to reactors by K Subramanyam garu.

The real issue before the forthcoming NSG meeting is getting increasingly obfuscated. It is sought to be portrayed as China building two more reactors in Pakistan getting around the NSG guidelines, and Pakistan claiming a kind of parity with India’s exceptionalism, but this is a superficial view. If Pakistan gets two more power reactors under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that alone should not worry India and the international community. The more reactors are built in Punjab, the more vulnerable Pakistan will become to retaliatory strikes to their threatened India-specific first strike. Progressively, this posture will lose credibility. India wants Pakistan, which is short on energy, to develop economically. Therefore, the additional Chinese reactors by themselves cannot be an issue.

and

The real issue is the following. According to US nuclear scientists Thomas Reed and Danny Stillman who wrote The Nuclear Express, Deng Xiaoping took a decision to proliferate to selected Marxist and Islamic countries in the early ‘80s including Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. Dr A.Q. Khan’s revelations have disclosed the entire saga of Chinese proliferation to Pakistan and the US looking away as a price for Islamabad’s support to the jihad against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. These disclosures stand vindicated as the Pakistani judiciary has exonerated Khan of all wrongdoing. It stands to reason that the Chinese proliferation to Pakistan and proliferation by both countries to Iran were deliberate state-led acts. All subsequent Pakistani proliferation attempts to Iran and Libya were state-sanctioned, and Khan was acting with full approval of successive governments and army chiefs in Pakistan. One of the mysteries about Khan not discussed in the Western media is his CIA link. Former Dutch Prime Minister Dr.Rudd Lubbers has revealed on more than one occasion, including at a conference in the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, that the Dutch authorities that detained Khan twice in 1975 and 1986 had to set him free on CIA’s intervention.
....

The core issue before the NSG is whether they will allow China to get away with it.

I think we are seeing the fracturing of the Western architected power system after WWII. And need to hedge as needed. Relying on a bankrupt West : financial, political and moral is suicidal. The analysis by KS garu shows that its not a coincidence. One has to conculde that Us led West is conniving with the PRC strategy to acquire power at cost of India.

VenkataS · Post by **VenkataS** » 25 Jun 2010 04:05

The power of nightmares

China’s proposed sale of nuclear reactors to Pakistan will intensify nuclear rivalry with India. But the damage will go far wider

Another one of those whiny pieces from the Economist about how India got off lightly in its nuclear deal with the US and how it set such a dangerous precedent for China and Pakisthan. It never ceases to amaze me that they do not realize that the (UK) is not the global power that it was earlier and that treaties such as the NPT and by extension NSG are inherently discriminating.

This was my comment to their article (I hope that they do not delete it)

Why should a self-respecting sovereign nation such as India sign up to the NPT as a non-nuclear power. NPT discriminates and divides the world into haves that is the P5 (US, UK, France, Russia, and China) and have nots (Rest of the world).

The P5 are allowed to build and keep their arsenal, and engage in free nuclear trade amongst themselves and with others for eternity while the rest of the world is allowed to watch this helplessly from the sidelines. I should also point out that the NSG allows the P5 to engage in nuclear commerce freely and their nuclear reactors even if they are acquired through a trade from other countries are not subject to the safeguards that the rest of the world's reactors are subjected to.

Also, why should a comparatively smaller nation such as the UK with only about 60 million citizens be allowed to be a nuclear power (keep its arsenal) and sit in the security council as a permanent member and not India with its 1.2 billion citizens (more than 1/6th of humanity) and a rapidly growing emerging economy.

Why shouldn't an emerging nation such as India with its huge demand for electricity be allowed to increase its nuclear power generation capacity and engage in civilian nuclear commerce and reduce its dependence on coal based power plants. Isn't it better for the world in general to not have the additional pollution from coal based power plants in India.

As a side note, Professor Raj Krishna made this excellent quote in 1965:
"It is an illusion to suppose that military weakness rather than military power makes a nation more influential in pressing for disarmament…. Virtue is respected only when it is backed by power; power without virtue is disastrous; but virtue without power is helpless. The fate of the merely virtuous is often decided in the assemblies of the powerful without reference to and at the expense of the virtuous."

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 25 Jun 2010 04:15

shaunb wrote:From the article in BBC posted by SanjayM

The country - like India - has never signed the NPT. It too has a small nuclear arsenal. And, more worryingly, proliferation experts say it has a terrible record of selling nuclear technology and knowhow to third countries.
What sort of baltant lies does BBC churn out these days? Can we ask them to remove the sentence on proliferation?

When has the beeb ever written a positive article on Indians?

VenkataS · Post by **VenkataS** » 25 Jun 2010 04:23

shaunb wrote:From the article in BBC posted by SanjayM

The country - like India - has never signed the NPT. It too has a small nuclear arsenal. And, more worryingly, proliferation experts say it has a terrible record of selling nuclear technology and knowhow to third countries. [/b]
What sort of baltant lies does BBC churn out these days? Can we ask them to remove the sentence on proliferation?

Such horrible blatant lies. It seems like, they can get away with anything. It has gone from bad to worse now.
BBC does not even allow comments for these kinds of articles.

Its just not the BBC too, it seems like many british publications (BBC, Economist etc) have nothing good to say about India and Indians. I think, they cannot get past the fact that their former subjects are doing well now.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 25 Jun 2010 05:34

VenkataS wrote:Another one of those whiny pieces from the Economist about how India got off lightly in its nuclear deal with the US and how it set such a dangerous precedent for China and Pakisthan. It never ceases to amaze me that they do not realize that the (UK) is not the global power that it was earlier and that treaties such as the NPT and by extension NSG are inherently discriminating.

But on the greater scale of catering to the many over the few, Pakistan has a wider family that it matters to - yet who does India matter to?

No, really - it's a question worth asking.

(Perhaps in the future, as UK's international stature continues to drop, while SNP's popularity continues to rise, we'll have the luxury of asking who Britain matters to.)

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 25 Jun 2010 07:20

ramana wrote: I think we are seeing the fracturing of the Western architected power system after WWII. And need to hedge as needed. Relying on a bankrupt West : financial, political and moral is suicidal. The analysis by KS garu shows that its not a coincidence. One has to conculde that Us led West is conniving with the PRC strategy to acquire power at cost of India.

The question is not what the US/West do to accommodate China, the question is what are Indian leaders doing to protect Indian interests? After this, how does MMS justify the hoops the country had to go through and to get what?
All of this after clear evidence that AQK was proliferating Chinese designs. This equal-equal of TSP/India is not stopping with these two reactors, wait for a few more years and you may just find some "clean" exemptions for TSP coming through. Now wait for the post facto rationalizations, from "respected" analysts on why this is not a major concern for India. It is depressing to read all of this now. All the worst fears of the skeptics of the deal are coming true. It is not something that I wanted to be right about.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Jun 2010 07:31

The BBCs greatest strength was established by Macaulay who ensured that Indians still go there 150 years later to have crap smeared on their faces and come out crying. We need to get off the BBC.

Look how peaceful we are in our ignorance of what is being said about us in say Chinese or Spanish?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Jun 2010 07:42

ShauryaT wrote: After this, how does MMS justify the hoops the country had to go through and to get what?

Shaurya the hoops that India went through broke down the old world order. That was a "triumph" for India, but an unintended consequence was that the weakened "world order" will now allow other previously disallowed entities to get in.

I think we need to view this as:
1) We are on our own and it has always been that way.
2) Our own clout is rising and the risks we face will rise along with that. We cannot depend on the "powers" we admired to keep others down
3) We were the biggest threat to those powers. Once we broke open the door there is no longer the stamina to hold anyone back.

I realise you may not have meant it that way but your statement sounds like India wanted the door opened by the powerful, warm nations to let India out of the cold into their living room and we now want them to close that door.

That is not how the story goes. India broke open that door. The powers do not have the will or power to close it now. We have to manufacture new doors using our innovation. If those powers really have power - it means they can continue to hold us down. If they do not have the power, their current weakness will allow us to move ahead later. We need to begin to start thinking bigger if this is the case.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 25 Jun 2010 07:51

shiv wrote:
ShauryaT wrote: After this, how does MMS justify the hoops the country had to go through and to get what?
Shaurya the hoops that India went through broke down the old world order. That was a "triumph" for India, but an unintended consequence was that the weakened "world order" will now allow other previously disallowed entities to get in.

I think we need to view this as:
1) We are on our own and it has always been that way.
2) Our own clout is rising and the risks we face will rise along with that. We cannot depend on the "powers" we admired to keep others down
3) We were the biggest threat to those powers. Once we broke open the door there is no longer the stamina to hold anyone back.

I realise you may not have meant it that way but your statement sounds like India wanted the door opened by the powerful, warm nations to let India out of the cold into their living room and we now want them to close that door.

That is not how the story goes. India broke open that door. The powers do not have the will or power to close it now. We have to manufacture new doors using our innovation. If those powers really have power - it means they can continue to hold us down. If they do not have the power, their current weakness will allow us to move ahead later. We need to begin to start thinking bigger if this is the case.

Good post. Only comment is that we are being held back by our own leadership, rather the lack thereof. Most of the nation's resources are misappropriated leaving the bulk of the population in squalor.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Jun 2010 08:36

Alstom teams up with NPCIL & BHEL for PHWR turbines

Alstom Power, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and BHEL have entered into a tripartite agreement for supplying turbines for the 700-MWe pressurised heavy water reactors that will be built in four locations in India.

Excavation is under way for building two reactors of 700 MWe each at Kakrapar, 80 km from Surat. Six more Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors of 700 MWe each will come up in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana, with two reactors for each State.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 25 Jun 2010 12:36

India should promote itself as being a hub for the manufacture of nuclear reactor parts for all of Asia.

If the US is unwilling to cooperate, to heck with them. Start the cooperation with France and/or Russia.

I don't know if Asian countries would be interested in Russian reactors but they sure will consider French reactors. India could be a supplier of parts and turbines in a joint venture with France and/or Russia.

India has the economy of scale for this kind of stuff so put it down in the contract ahead of time.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 25 Jun 2010 14:35

A easy fix would be for India to call US and ask them to veto this in NSG, if they dont, no signatures on any nuke thingy with US.

Quite simple. Lets spin the wheel and see where it ends spinning.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 25 Jun 2010 15:11

Japan, India to Start Treaty Talks for Nuclear Sales

Imminent Canada-India nuclear pact heightens tensions

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 25 Jun 2010 15:16

Chinese firms sign nuke reactor deals with Pak despite international outcry

The deal was signed on June 8, said the website- cnfc.net.cn.

Prabu · Post by **Prabu** » 26 Jun 2010 00:54

India, Japan to talk about nuke pact from Monday

TOKYO, New Delhi: In a major breakthrough in its quest for nuclear technology, India will launch talks with Japan from Monday to seal a civilian atomic cooperation pact that will pave the way for sales of advanced technology by Japanese majors like Mitsubishi and Hitachi.

A welcome move indeed !

Vashishtha · Post by **Vashishtha** » 26 Jun 2010 14:40

India pleased yet guarded on nuke group's stand

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 26 Jun 2010 14:59

Prabu wrote:India, Japan to talk about nuke pact from Monday

Wow! They sure have come a full circle in regards to India's Nuclear status.. Memories of Japan cutting off its billion-dollar official development assistance (ODA) in '98 after India's tests are still fresh. They coming around to, not just 'accepting' but talking about 'co-operation' is just amazing and equally heartening at the same time. Thats great news for India in more than one respect. Now all eyes on the Nuclear liability bill... This will be UPA2's acid test.