India Nuclear News And Discussion

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 26 Jan 2011 07:43

Pakistan blocks Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, warns against nuclear support to India
(Published: Wednesday, Jan 26, 2011, 0:44 IST, Place: Geneva | Agency: PTI )

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 26 Jan 2011 07:48

Sanatanan wrote:Pakistan blocks Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, warns against nuclear support to India
(Published: Wednesday, Jan 26, 2011, 0:44 IST, Place: Geneva | Agency: PTI )

Widely expected, that has been Pak's policy for some time now - was India's too before the nuke deal!

But more critical is how Pak is jumping and down over India's expected membership of the multilateral institutions governing nuke environmtn, most critically, the NSG...India's membership of NSG will mean sayonara for Pak to get any sort of deal from anyone, including one sponsored by China...Those who criticise the nuke deal should note the collateral (and real) advantages of the same.......

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 26 Jan 2011 10:51

somnath wrote:Those who criticise the nuke deal should note the collateral (and real) advantages of the same.......

Not so fast. It ain't over until Sanku-ji has had his say

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Jan 2011 11:17

Guru Prabhu, Other than potshots what do you contribute?

I am asking not questioning.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 26 Jan 2011 11:31

apologies saar, I will refrain from contributing potshots.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Jan 2011 11:39

Thanks, Lets not be divisive today.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 26 Jan 2011 12:12

yes saar, today let us together celebrate the removal of ISRO and DRDO from entities list! No time for being divisive on this day of ultimate victory over unkil.

Maram · Post by **Maram** » 26 Jan 2011 16:26

As Prime Minister Nehru said on the ramparts of the Red Fort... India has "a tryst with destiny"

Here is the speech in full :-

"Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will arise to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance.

It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity.

At the dawn of history India started on her unending quest, and trackless centuries are filled with her striving and the grandeur of her success and her failures. Through good and ill fortune alike she has never lost sight of that quest or forgotten the ideals which gave her strength. We end today a period of ill fortune and India discovers herself again.

The achievement we celebrate today is but a step, an opening of opportunity, to the greater triumphs and achievements that await us. Are we brave enough and wise enough to grasp this opportunity and accept the challenge of the future?

Freedom and power bring responsibility. The responsibility rests upon this assembly, a sovereign body representing the sovereign people of India. Before the birth of freedom we have endured all the pains of labour and our hearts are heavy with the memory of this sorrow. Some of those pains continue even now. Nevertheless, the past is over and it is the future that beckons to us now.

That future is not one of ease or resting but of incessant striving so that we may fulfil the pledges we have so often taken and the one we shall take today. The service of India means the service of the millions who suffer. It means the ending of poverty and ignorance and disease and inequality of opportunity.

The ambition of the greatest man of our generation has been to wipe every tear from every eye. That may be beyond us, but as long as there are tears and suffering, so long our work will not be over.

And so we have to labour and to work, and work hard, to give reality to our dreams. Those dreams are for India, but they are also for the world, for all the nations and peoples are too closely knit together today for anyone of them to imagine that it can live apart.

Peace has been said to be indivisible; so is freedom, so is prosperity now, and so also is disaster in this one world that can no longer be split into isolated fragments.

To the people of India, whose representatives we are, we make an appeal to join us with faith and confidence in this great adventure. This is no time for petty and destructive criticism, no time for ill will or blaming others. We have to build the noble mansion of free India where all her children may dwell.

The appointed day has come - the day appointed by destiny - and India stands forth again, after long slumber and struggle, awake, vital, free and independent. The past clings on to us still in some measure and we have to do much before we redeem the pledges we have so often taken. Yet the turning point is past, and history begins anew for us, the history which we shall live and act and others will write about.

It is a fateful moment for us in India, for all Asia and for the world. A new star rises, the star of freedom in the east, a new hope comes into being, a vision long cherished materialises. May the star never set and that hope never be betrayed!

We rejoice in that freedom, even though clouds surround us, and many of our people are sorrow-stricken and difficult problems encompass us. But freedom brings responsibilities and burdens and we have to face them in the spirit of a free and disciplined people.

On this day our first thoughts go to the architect of this freedom, the father of our nation, who, embodying the old spirit of India, held aloft the torch of freedom and lighted up the darkness that surrounded us.

We have often been unworthy followers of his and have strayed from his message, but not only we but succeeding generations will remember this message and bear the imprint in their hearts of this great son of India, magnificent in his faith and strength and courage and humility. We shall never allow that torch of freedom to be blown out, however high the wind or stormy the tempest.

Our next thoughts must be of the unknown volunteers and soldiers of freedom who, without praise or reward, have served India even unto death.

We think also of our brothers and sisters who have been cut off from us by political boundaries and who unhappily cannot share at present in the freedom that has come. They are of us and will remain of us whatever may happen, and we shall be sharers in their good and ill fortune alike.

The future beckons to us. Whither do we go and what shall be our endeavour? To bring freedom and opportunity to the common man, to the peasants and workers of India; to fight and end poverty and ignorance and disease; to build up a prosperous, democratic and progressive nation, and to create social, economic and political institutions which will ensure justice and fullness of life to every man and woman.

We have hard work ahead. There is no resting for any one of us till we redeem our pledge in full, till we make all the people of India what destiny intended them to be.

We are citizens of a great country, on the verge of bold advance, and we have to live up to that high standard. All of us, to whatever religion we may belong, are equally the children of India with equal rights, privileges and obligations. We cannot encourage communalism or narrow-mindedness, for no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or in action.

To the nations and peoples of the world we send greetings and pledge ourselves to cooperate with them in furthering peace, freedom and democracy.

And to India, our much-loved motherland, the ancient, the eternal and the ever-new, we pay our reverent homage and we bind ourselves afresh to her service. Jai Hind [Victory to India]."

Truly inspirational speech.. Nehru had his defects and all, but he was visionary... here was his vision for India on that momentous occassion.... Hope our corrupt politicians will be voted out and development will replace mandal and masjid as an issue which will garner votes! Permanant member of security council, NSG membership... onwards and upwards ...

One small step at a time. we will eventually get there...

Man mein hain vishwaas
hum honge kaamyaab ek din !

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 26 Jan 2011 17:18

Maram-ji, inspiring speech - thanks for pulling it out..IMO, the best speech ever by any Indian (Vivekananda's Chicago address probably comes a close second)...

small nitpick - the speech was made in the Constituent Assembly, not from the Red Fort..

Maram · Post by **Maram** » 26 Jan 2011 20:40

I stand corrected Somnath ji. It was delivered in the Consitutent Assembly. I compare Nehru's "Tryst with Destiny" speech to Abraham Lincoln's "Gettysburg speech" (But I digress). It is a speech of a visionary. Like I said, Nehru had many deficiencies, his policy on kashmir and his policy vis a vis China were naive at best and dangerously negligent at worst in my view.

But, calling dams and engineering plants as "temples of modern India", establishing schools, collges, universities, appointing Homi Bhabha to harness nuclear energy,5 year plans etc... made an Emerging India possible. This speech exemplifies his visonary zeal for modern India.

Using phrases like " soul of a nation long suppressed finds utterance", "The achievement we celebrate today is but a step, an opening of opportunity, to the greater triumphs and achievements that await us" & "It is a fateful moment for us in India, for all Asia and for the world. A new star rises, the star of freedom in the east, a new hope comes into being, a vision long cherished materialises. May the star never set and that hope never be betrayed!", He knew of India's rightful place in the world and that we would be there in the near future even on that day 15/8/47 is truly visionary!

I use the tryst with destiny speech every 26/1 and 15/8 to understand if we are realising his vision and how far we are from it.That speech is unifying. There are many politicians who want to divide us on basis on religion,caste, language and every possible way... there are few unifiers. Nehru was a unifier of people.

I have no inside sources. I am an ordinary "praja" who is confident of MEA and its ability to suceed in getting the SC permanant membership and NSG membership.I don't subscibe to the view that phoren leaders and dignitariea are leading us poor injuns up the garden path! Our babus+ netas are equally aware too.

See the land scape in 10- 15 years and you will see a very different India, a very powerful, stable and a Happy India. I have lived in the UK over the past 12- 13 years. Yet, I am most optimistic of India, despite its many obvious problems. It is th spirit of Indian People that will get us there in the end, DESPITE OUR POLITICIANS. My obligatory visit of Guntur every year and seeing joe bloggs on the road only makes my optimism more certain. India is confident,certain of its future. Compare it to joe bloggs on the streets of Manchester/Liverpool or any place in America... The glaring difference in optimism is bery bery bery obvious. JMT

wig · Post by **wig** » 27 Jan 2011 23:09

The 'integrity test' of the reactor containment of Unit 1 of Kodankulam Nuclear Power Project as well as complete instrumentation tests have been successfully carried out to ensure that it would operate for the next 40 years, a top project official said here today.

"The integrity test, prior to the reactor startup to demonstrate its strength, as also the primary and secondary systems and containment tests was successfully completed on January 25 to our satisfaction to ensure the reactor will operate for the next 40 years," Project Site Director Kasinath Balaji said today.

Other significant milestones like 'hydraulic testing of primary and secondary circuits of NSSS (nuclear steam supply system)' were successfully carried out recently, he said.

http://www.ptinews.com/news/1304554_Int ... -completed

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 27 Jan 2011 23:34

Sanatanan wrote:Pakistan blocks Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, warns against nuclear support to India
(Published: Wednesday, Jan 26, 2011, 0:44 IST, Place: Geneva | Agency: PTI )

So the nuclear deal is a self goal! Getting the FMCT and CTBT through should have come before the deal. I'm now even more puzzled as to why MMS would support the deal seeing how the 1998 tests were similarly thought to have provided Pakistan with the excuse to test. Maybe the idea is that since Pakistan will have to be given a deal someday anyhow, why make India wait for that day?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Jan 2011 08:10

vera_k wrote:So the nuclear deal is a self goal! Getting the FMCT and CTBT through should have come before the deal. I'm now even more puzzled as to why MMS would support the deal seeing how the 1998 tests were similarly thought to have provided Pakistan with the excuse to test. Maybe the idea is that since Pakistan will have to be given a deal someday anyhow, why make India wait for that day?

How? In fact Pakistan has no option BUT to oppose FMCT because of the whole issue around "existing stock" and the nuclear deal to India, which frees up all of India's "existing stock" potentially for the strategic programme..

The bigger bugbear for Pak is India's impending membership of institutions like the NSG, which would mean sayonara for Pak getting anything similar ever!

About CTBT, we had anyway said (just after Pok II) that we will abide by the "provisons" of the treaty..But we didnt sign then (Talbot-Jaswant talks), and we are not signing anytime soon........

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 28 Jan 2011 08:42

Pakistan is increasing its stockpile of weapons, that have only one destination - India. Eventually they will have built enough that even India's geographical size won't prevent it from ruin. This increasing stockpile would not be possible if the FMCT was in force. India will have to drop its opposition to Pakistan's membership of the NSG simply because of this vested interest in survival. On the other hand if India had built up a sufficient number of weapons and then signed up to the four letter treaties, Pakistan would have had no leverage over India, and would have been under pressure to sign the treaties too.

habal · Post by **habal** » 28 Jan 2011 09:44

vera_k wrote:Pakistan is increasing its stockpile of weapons, that have only one destination - India. Eventually they will have built enough that even India's geographical size won't prevent it from ruin. This increasing stockpile would not be possible if the FMCT was in force. India will have to drop its opposition to Pakistan's membership of the NSG simply because of this vested interest in survival. On the other hand if India had built up a sufficient number of weapons and then signed up to the four letter treaties, Pakistan would have had no leverage over India, and would have been under pressure to sign the treaties too.

Pakistan's weapons are low-yield and at the most scare army formations. No country will risk giving an Islamic country high-yield weapons. So now Pakistan is reduced to blackmail on most international fora to make its voice heard, the implicit premise being that they will develop high-yield weapons if they are treated as pariahs. But then they would also need to test those. So no one is listening.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Jan 2011 09:52

habal wrote:Pakistan's weapons are low-yield and at the most scare army formations.

???

vera_k wrote:Pakistan is increasing its stockpile of weapons, that have only one destination - India. Eventually they will have built enough that even India's geographical size won't prevent it from ruin. This increasing stockpile would not be possible if the FMCT was in force. India will have to drop its opposition to Pakistan's membership of the NSG simply because of this vested interest in survival. On the other hand if India had built up a sufficient number of weapons and then signed up to the four letter treaties, Pakistan would have had no leverage over India, and would have been under pressure to sign the treaties

FMCT is not in force, and would not have been in force even if we didnt sign the nuke deal...Pak production of fissile material is a function of only its (and maybe China's) enrichment capacities..And Pak's membership of NSG (why should we allow that?) is not goin to change the situation...And today, regardless of whether we join FMCT or not, Pak wont sign, as India (like other "legacy" countries like the Us and Russia) has large reserves of fissile material - in our case, reactor grade Pu that can be theoretically all be processed to weapons grade...

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 28 Jan 2011 11:12

The FMCT would have exlcuded the reactor grade material, which was India's problem with signing that particular treaty. In any case, we will never know now if the treaties stand any chance, but commitments by Pakistan towards that would be worth NSG membership just as they were for India.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Jan 2011 13:41

Pka threatens us with a new N-race.What should be or response?

Pakistan threatens nuclear arms race over India deal
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -deal.html

Pakistan has threatened a new nuclear arms race in south Asia after Washington supported a move that Islamabad claims will allow it to develop its weapons programme.

Vikram Sood, former head of India's Research and Analysis Wing intelligence service said he believed Pakistan was using India's civilian nuclear power deal as an excuse to resist international pressure on disarmament and to build its nuclear weapon stock.

"This is blackmail. India's membership [of the NSG] would work the other way, we will be bound by rules and treaties, to ensure the non-Proliferation Treaty is followed. This is a Pakistani cover-up," he said.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 28 Jan 2011 18:15

Philip wrote:Pka threatens us with a new N-race.What should be or response?

Nothing out of the ordinary! Pak is grandstanding on the issue...

vera_k wrote:The FMCT would have exlcuded the reactor grade material, which was India's problem with signing that particular treaty. In any case, we will never know now if the treaties stand any chance, but commitments by Pakistan towards that would be worth NSG membership just as they were for India.

Not sure what you mean by this..India is not getting NSG membership by signing up to FMCT..Though after the nuke deal, India has good reasons to not oppose its signing..

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jan 2011 18:56

India has always maintained that it is in favor of a "universal and verifiable" FMCT. Universal will be difficult and verifiable would be impossible. So why worry, have curry.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jan 2011 20:05

GuruPrabhu wrote:India has always maintained that it is in favor of a "universal and verifiable" FMCT. Universal will be difficult and verifiable would be impossible. So why worry, have curry.

Well India walked away from its long stated stand of a Nuclear power with all the same rights as any other Nuclear power. Willing accepting second class citizen status (of course for all the Chankian reason of salami slicing onlee) it would be foolish to be sanguine about anything anymore.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jan 2011 20:28

Sanku-ji,

Which right has India walked away from? When? Proof?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jan 2011 20:42

Please read what I wrote once again:

Well India walked away from its long stated stand

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jan 2011 20:52

Sir-ji,

Pardon my ignorance. I do not know the fine difference between "rights" and a "stand of having rights". Are the rights more important or some nebulous "stand" about those rights? So, it appears that India still has all the "rights" but has lost a "stand" on those rights. Right?

By the way, where was this "stand" stated? I recall reading the stand on FMCT somewhere and recently I believe Nirupama-ji stated it again. Is the stand on nuclear power also in the record?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jan 2011 21:03

India never had rights, so it could not lose it. Obviously.

The question was whether India was willing to take part in global trade with full rights or partial.

And the above was a stand.

I hope that helped.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jan 2011 21:11

Sanku wrote:India never had rights, so it could not lose it. Obviously.

The question was whether India was willing to take part in global trade with full rights or partial.

And the above was a stand.

I hope that helped.

Unfortunately not, Saar. Please spell it out more clearly for me to be able to grasp this.

Firstly, what do you mean India never had rights? India, as a sovereign nation, has all the the rights. Who has the power to deny India its "rights"?

Secondly, let us look at "take part in global trade with full rights". By definition, *trade* implies give and take, bargaining, negotiations ityadi. Of course, India entered global trade with full "rights". You are stating that India's bargaining position was a "stand". And the stand was that it would not give up any rights. Correct thus far?

So, I infer that you are stating that India gave up some "right" in a particular bargain. Please point any flaw in my reasoning above.

If not, then we are back to the same question, viz, what "right" did India bargain away?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jan 2011 21:13

Knock it off you two. The debate is stelled with the IUCNA deal And we all know what happened.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Jan 2011 21:15

Thanks Sir.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 28 Jan 2011 21:15

yes Saar, I will knock it off but it was an honest question about India giving up a "right". Perhaps you can answer it. I will take my answer "off-line" as they say on NPR.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jan 2011 21:16

No you will not. No means no.

Boos, you are not interested. There are reams in the archives. If really interested you can wade through them.

What you want is create a scene where some one gets warned and better banned so you can be happy having scored one for the cause.

If I do a search on your name, I never seen any post longer than a para. Someone in search of truth will be more expressive.

LINK

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 28 Jan 2011 21:29

somnath wrote:Not sure what you mean by this..India is not getting NSG membership by signing up to FMCT..Though after the nuke deal, India has good reasons to not oppose its signing..

I mean that the NPAs were right after all. The sequence of events should have been India building up a stockpile, followed by entry into force of CTBT, FMCT with China+Pakistan on board, and then opening up of nuclear trade with India. With the latest news from Pakistan, it is hard to see how they can't be given a free pass in return for commitments on the FMCT front. The nuclear deal is another 1998 testing type event when it comes to providing justification for a Pakistani buildup.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 29 Jan 2011 09:26

ramana wrote:Boos, you are not interested. There are reams in the archives. If really interested you can wade through them.

Saar, You are mai-baap and all powerful. I will not argue with you but just lie prostate. It is Indic tradition to just listen to elders and shut up.

I will only say that I did follow the long discussion and it was inconclusive with other legends like Gerard, JEM ityadi taking an opposite view. The reams in the archives are essentially useless because they are repetitive point-scoring rather than incisive analysis.

What you want is create a scene where some one gets warned and better banned so you can be happy having scored one for the cause.

Sir-ji, I do not wish to be banned or cause ban on others. I am surprised that my honest question caused such reactions. But then, I accept your wise judgment and will not ask such questions again. We have to uphold the fine standards of fair and balanced debate on BRF and I will do my part by shutting up.

If I do a search on your name, I never seen any post longer than a para. Someone in search of truth will be more expressive.

Kshama keert, Saar, but my Guru-ji taught me that a truth seeker talks less and listens more. The gayatri is only two lines but contains all the wisdom of the Upanishads, which are terse compared to the reams of the Vedas.

My apologies for causing troubles.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2011 10:29

vera_k wrote:I mean that the NPAs were right after all. The sequence of events should have been India building up a stockpile, followed by entry into force of CTBT, FMCT with China+Pakistan on board, and then opening up of nuclear trade with India. With the latest news from Pakistan, it is hard to see how they can't be given a free pass in return for commitments on the FMCT front. The nuclear deal is another 1998 testing type event when it comes to providing justification for a Pakistani buildup.

Veraji, there is abosolutely nothing to relate commitments on treaties and a nuke deal of the sort India negotiated...India's problem was never about fissile material..We have about 12 tons of reactor grade Pu...china/Pak have had no incentive to sign on to FMCT, not now, not ever..So entry into force of FMCT is as much a mirage today as it was 5 years back...Nothing's changed..Of course the nuke deal means that Pak does some grandstanding...But thats nothing but "neighbour's envy"!

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 29 Jan 2011 18:13

Indian problem with FMCT will stem from the 12 tonnes of reactor grade PU that would not be grandfathered in as fissile material under the proposals. That PU has to be reprocessed for it to be retained for weapons purposes.

FMCT

According to a proposal by the United States, fissile material includes high-enriched uranium and plutonium (except plutonium that is over 80% Pu-238). According to a proposal by Russia, fissile material would be limited to weapons-grade uranium (with more than 90% U-235) and plutonium (with more than 90% Pu-239).

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2011 19:18

vera_k wrote:Indian problem with FMCT will stem from the 12 tonnes of reactor grade PU that would not be grandfathered in as fissile material under the proposals. That PU has to be reprocessed for it to be retained for weapons purposes.

Says who? There are bigger questions to be solved - agreement of all countries is the primary one...As for Us proposals, well there are also counter proposals on nuclear material recovered out of decommissioned weapons that US has to contend with...Net net, FMCT is a dead duck, has been, is, and will be in the foreseeable future...No one takes it with too much seriousness anymore...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2011 23:31

GP, OK. Am no guru. Only another seeker.

thanks for clarification.
ramana

Sanatanan · Post by **Sanatanan** » 30 Jan 2011 19:58

India has n-retaliation capability: Army Chief (January 29th, 2011)

. . .

Speaking to this newspaper in an exclusive interview, the Chief of Army Staff, Gen. V.K. Singh, said, “Even if there is a (nuclear) strike in a particular area, we have developed a capability to move a certain force level through that, which will not get affected by this (nuclear contamination). Once the area is contaminated, (even then) we can move through contaminated areas.”

. . .

arun · Post by **arun** » 31 Jan 2011 08:16

The Washington Post reports that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s nuclear weapon arsenal is larger than India’s:

After years of approximate weapons parity, experts said, Pakistan has now edged ahead of India, its nuclear-armed rival.

URL here:

New estimates put Pakistan's nuclear arsenal at more than 100

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 31 Jan 2011 08:41

arun wrote:The Washington Post reports that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s nuclear weapon arsenal is larger than India’s:

After years of approximate weapons parity, experts said, Pakistan has now edged ahead of India, its nuclear-armed rival.
New estimates put Pakistan's nuclear arsenal at more than 100

This is not about south asia any more. It is about entire ASIA now since China is involved in the Pak program and also
China is active in its strategic anti-India activities. This south asia thing is misnomer now for nuclear arms race. It is not about any "two rivals now".

An escalation of the South Asian arms race poses a dilemma for the Obama administration, which has worked to improve its economic, political and defense ties with India, while seeking to deepen its relationship with Pakistan as a crucial component of its Afghanistan war strategy.

These estimates for Pak are low. They may not be correct estimates.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 31 Jan 2011 08:47

arun wrote:The Washington Post reports that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s nuclear weapon arsenal is larger than India’s:

It has been a recurring theme now for some time - it was first reported by FAS...Relative numbers are a bit dodgy to comment on, but it is undoubtedly true that Pak has really cranked up nuke weapons construction in the last few years...

Though absolute numbers are only part of the story - "quality" plays a role as well - the US for example had a vastly lower number of nukes compared to the Soviets throughout the Cold War...

More important should be data on our delivery platforms...Bharat Karnad commented (in 2008) in his book tht India's missile production is lower than Pak's...Agni production does not seem to have been shifted to a production agency yet (?)