International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Sweden gives green light to new nuclear reactors
Sweden's parliament voided a 30-year-old ban on building new nuclear reactors on Thursday after a debate pitting the country's need for low-carbon energy sources against environmental concerns over atomic energy.
UK Government cancels Forgemasters' nuclear press loan
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander told parliament that Sheffield Forgemasters would no longer be granted a £80m loan that was promised by the Labour government in March this year to help buy and install a 15,000-tonne forging press for developing large steel components for next generation nuclear reactors.

The capability to make such components on an industrial level is only available at Japan Steel Works.
Chinese Nuclear Plant Experienced a Small Leak Last Month

Kingdom may enrich uranium for nuclear plants
Saudi Arabia may mine and enrich uranium to fuel power plants if it embarks on a civilian nuclear energy program, a consultant preparing a draft nuclear strategy for the Kingdom said on Wednesday.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by arun »

Excerpt from a Q&A by Mark Hibbs dealing with PR China’s threatened supply of the CHASHMA 3 & 4 nuclear reactors to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:
China, Pakistan, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group

Mark Hibbs
Q&A, JUNE 17, 2010

The possibility that China will export two nuclear power reactors to Pakistan looms over the annual meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group—a 46-nation body that sets global rules for nuclear trade—scheduled to begin next week in New Zealand.

In a Q&A, Mark Hibbs analyzes the importance of the meeting and significance of the China–Pakistan deal. Hibbs says that “in the aftermath of the 2008 U.S.–India deal and the NSG’s decision to allow it, the NSG will have to perform a delicate balancing act to find the least unsatisfactory solution to meet China’s challenge.” ………………….

China wants to export reactors to Pakistan. Is this a violation of NSG guidelines? Will this issue be on the agenda for the NSG meeting?

This is not on the agenda. But China, which joined the NSG in 2004, is now expected to make a statement about the matter in New Zealand. China might disclose its intentions during the plenary meeting on the last two days, when NSG members plan to discuss their activities with non-NPT countries.

If China aims to export the reactors, Beijing has three options: to follow the example of the U.S.–India deal and formally request an exemption from the NSG guidelines for its trade with Pakistan; to claim that the export of the reactors is “grandfathered” by a pre-2004 Sino-Pakistan nuclear cooperation agreement; or to exercise its sovereign right and ignore the guidelines, which are voluntary and non-binding. According to diplomats, as of mid-June, Beijing had not yet decided which of the three options it would choose.

China might argue that the exports could be justified by the need for regional balance in South Asia in the aftermath of the NSG’s lifting of sanctions against India. But some in Beijing may instead assert that the commerce was grandfathered by the bilateral pact with Pakistan, thereby obviating any political justification by China for making an exception to the NSG rules.

However, when China joined the NSG it told the group that the Sino-Pakistan nuclear cooperation agreement permitted China to export the Chashma-2 reactor to Pakistan, small research reactors, and the fuel for these units. On the basis of previous Chinese statements, the United States will come to the meeting in New Zealand understanding that the supply of additional power reactors would not be grandfathered.

The United States is not in favor of such a deal, but because Washington pressed the NSG—and China—to exempt India from NSG trade sanctions in 2008, it is now more difficult to complain about China’s desire to export reactors to Pakistan.

Will we see resolution on the China-Pakistan deal in New Zealand?

If China spells out that it intends to export the reactors, it will then be up to the NSG’s members to decide whether they will accept this, and if so, on what terms. A quick decision appears unlikely as NSG members on the eve of the meeting did not agree on how the body should respond.

This week, a spokesman for the U.S. State Department told reporters that China should request a formal exemption from the guidelines to export the reactors. Some other NSG states, however, disagree and fear that this route could lead to a protracted debate over whether the NSG should dilute the guidelines to accommodate China. A request for an exemption by China could also expose individual NSG states to pressure from China to get the exemption and if China failed, it could threaten to leave the NSG.

In the aftermath of the U.S.–India deal and the group’s decision to accommodate it, the NSG will have to perform a delicate balancing act to find the least unsatisfactory solution to China’s challenge. In the view of some NSG states, an agreement permitting China to grandfather the exports under the 2004 nuclear cooperation agreement with Pakistan would be the least damaging outcome, but it may not be credible. If China seeks an exemption, NSG countries could urge Beijing to provide nuclear security and non-proliferation benefits in exchange for limited commerce with Pakistan.

But NSG members must weigh the risks carefully. Pushing Beijing out of the NSG would be dangerous given China’s fast-growing share of global nuclear trade. Beijing may ignore objections of other NSG states and it might even react to a rebuke by threatening to leave the NSG. NSG states, however, have leverage over China in nuclear matters as Beijing knows that it needs to import uranium from Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan to keep expanding its nuclear power program. It also needs support from vendors in France, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and the United States to keep building and exporting reactors.

Clicky
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Abnormal radiation detected near Korean border
On May 15, however, the atmospheric concentration of xenon -- an inert gas released after a nuclear explosion or radioactive leakage from a nuclear power plant -- on the South Korean side of the inter-Korean border was found to be eight times higher than normal, according to South Korea's Science Ministry.
Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1130
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Hiten »


Extreme DIY: Building a homemade nuclear reactor in NYC



could also Google the Radioactive Boy Scout
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Sanjay M »

Vietnam plans eight nuclear power plants by 2030

Now here's a country to whom we should try to sell nuclear technology.
Perhaps China will learn to respect our feelings on their nuclear exports to Pak, once they see us exporting nuclear tech to Vietnam.

more:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj
Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1130
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Hiten »

Thrashing out nuclear deals a juggling act for New Zealand
New Zealand has found itself between a rock and a hard place as it chairs a meeting trying to juggle competing superpower positions on who gets enriched uranium and nuclear technology that could encourage the proliferation of nuclear weapons.....

......In 2008 the Bush Administration proposed in Vienna that the NSG should approve the large-scale transfer of enriched uranium and nuclear technology to India, a move that would contribute to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. :| This infuriated Pakistan, which pointed out that it would help India to secure an even greater military advantage....

....Since 2008 Pakistan is known to have stepped up its production of enriched uranium in a bid to keep up with India{The fact that they may've already surpassed India's stockplie is conveniently forgotten by the author}. The Obama Administration has seen that the Bush policy of focusing on India would cost it the support of Pakistan, deemed essential for the escalating US war effort in Afghanistan. THIS has dismayed India which now, like Pakistan, feels jilted. Pakistan had approached the Obama Administration with a request for a nuclear deal along Indian lines, and was turned down. At the same time Israel has toyed with requesting the NSG to approve a comparable arrangement......

Bob Rigg is a former chairman of the New Zealand National Consultative Committee on Disarmament.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by arun »

X Posted. National Security Advisory Board member T.P Sreenivasan on PR China’s proposal to supply two nuclear reactors to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan that flouts NSG guidelines in the Wall Street Journal.

Deplores the silence of the NSG membership in preventing its rules being broken by one of its very own:
JUNE 28, 2010

The Nuclear Suppliers Group's Shameful Silence

Not one of 45 nations could muster the nerve to condemn China's sales to Pakistan

By T.P. SREENIVASAN

Non-nuclear New Zealand was an unusual chairman to guide the 46 nuclear bigwigs at the contentious meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Groups this weekend in Christchurch. An army of nonproliferation enthusiasts descended on the event to press for nuclear-trade guidelines to be observed by all concerned. Yet China's blatant violation, in the form of two new nuclear reactors to Pakistan, was on everyone's mind, but on nobody's lips.

China didn't elaborate publicly on its plans to provide new reactors to Pakistan, having announced its intention to have a nuclear deal by proxy with Islamabad earlier this month. Two state-owned firms agreed to build two more reactors at the Chashma atomic complex in Punjab.

Beijing justified the deal on historical grounds, citing its grandfatherly obligations to Pakistan, and also on the logic of restoring nuclear balance in South Asia. The only assurance the Chinese gave was that its nuclear commerce with Pakistan would be in accordance with China's international obligations............................

Wall Street Journal
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by arun »

X Posted. The US on the proposed supply of two nuclear reactors by PR China to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan that flouts NSG guidelines:
Philip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
June 28, 2010 ………………………..

QUESTION: Last week’s NSC meeting – are you satisfied by the clarification given by China to you on its agreement of selling two nuclear power plants to Pakistan?

MR. CROWLEY: Are you talking about Nuclear Suppliers Group?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. CROWLEY: We did raise the issue during last week’s Nuclear Suppliers Group. And we continue to seek information from China regarding its future plans.

QUESTION: So you have not – they haven’t given you full details yet? Do you need more information from them before you take a decision on it?

MR. CROWLEY: We – as a first step, we’re looking for more information from China as to what it is potentially proposing. We have a view that this initiative, as it goes forward, would need the agreement of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.

Yes. ………………………………………

US State Dept
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by arun »

X Posted. Extract from the transcript of PR China Ministry of Foreign Affairs press briefing of June 29th dealing with the proposed supply of the Chashma 3 and 4 nuclear reactors in defiance of NSG rules by the PRC to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Qin Gang's Regular Press Conference on June 29, 2010

2010/06/30 ………………………..

Q: A follow-up question on Pakistani President Zardari's visit to China and China-Pakistan relations. Will leaders of the two countries talk about nuclear energy cooperation? What's more, China used to express concern over the connections between terrorist organizations in Xinjiang and those in Pakistan. Is China satisfied with the Pakistani Government's efforts to crack down on terrorism?

A: On President Zardari's visit to China, the two sides will exchange views on promoting their friendly cooperation in various fields and international and regional issues of mutual interest. The "three forces" have posed common threat and done harm to both countries and others in the region. China appreciates the firm efforts of the Pakistani Government to fight the "three forces" including terrorism and we are ready to continue to maintain close communication and cooperation with Pakistan in this regard. …………………………

Q: Will President Zardari discuss its civilian nuclear energy cooperation with the Chinese side during his visit? Will the two sides sign a new agreement on the expansion of Chashma nuclear power plant? Second, yesterday the DPRK said it will step up its nuclear deterrence. Does China think such a statement will help the situation on the Korean Peninsula?

A: On China-Pakistan relations, I am not able to tell you what specific issues will be discussed and what agreements will be signed during President Zardari's visit. The two sides will have broad and in-depth exchange of views on further promoting friendly cooperation in all fields. But I want to point out here that China-Pakistan civilian nuclear energy cooperation is completely in line with their respective obligations of international non-proliferation totally for peaceful purposes and subject to the safeguard and supervision of the IAEA. ……………………..

Q: On China-Pakistan nuclear energy cooperation, last week at the Nuclear Suppliers Group Meeting in New Zealand, several member states asked China to provide details of the cooperation project and said that China should obtain the organization's waiver before going ahead with relevant plans. Does China think it should submit the details and obtain a waiver from the Group?

A: I don't have the information about the NSG Meeting in New Zealand. But on non-proliferation and China-Pakistan civilian nuclear energy cooperation, I have already made our principle and position clear.

Clicky
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Sanjay M »

New Muon Detector Could Find Hidden Nukes
By detecting the signature of heavy elements that could be used to build nuclear weapons, the new machine could someday find nuclear contraband hidden in shielded vehicles.

The new prototype uses detectors called GEMs, or Gas Electron Multipliers, to trace muons’ trajectories before and after they hit a bit of heavy material. The detectors are thin plates filled with gas that were originally developed for particle physics experiments at places like CERN and Fermilab. When a muon plows through the detector, it rips electrons from the gas, leaving a distinctive trail readable by electronics on the detector’s surface.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19338
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by NRao »

Now here is something that could impact India (too):

Nudge on Arms Further Divides U.S. and Israel
At a meeting to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in May, the United States yielded to demands by Arab nations that the final document urge Israel to sign the treaty — a way of spotlighting its historically undeclared nuclear weapons.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

worst proliferators turn aggressive

In a statement to the US media, the embassy’s spokesman Wang Baodong told the US media that Beijing was convinced the reactor agreement “goes along well with the international obligations China and Pakistan carry in relation to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime”.

A US expert, Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, endorsed the Chinese position but urged Beijing to be careful.

“The US doesn’t really have any options.....the Nuclear Suppliers Group’s guidelines are voluntary. There is nothing the US can do to prevent China from going ahead with this deal,” he said.

“Unless Washington comes up with a very, very attractive offer, the history of Chinese-Pakistani relations is such that it is unlikely that this deal will not go through,” Heritage Foundation researcher Dean Cheng told the US media.

A State Department official disagreed with the suggestion but did so rather meekly.


{snip}


“The United States has reiterated concern that the transfer of new reactors at Chashma appears to extend beyond cooperation that was ‘grandfathered’ when China was approved for membership in the NSG,” US State Department spokesman Noel Clay said.

Mr Clay said if the new reactors did not fall under the ‘grandfather exception’ then Beijing needed a waiver from the nuclear export body, similar to the 2008 allowance that has allowed India — another nuclear-armed, non-NPT country — to sign atomic trade deals with the United States and other nations.

The Nuclear Suppliers Group operates on consensus so all member nations must agree on granting the exemption.

“We are still waiting for more information from China to clarify China’s intended cooperation with Pakistan, in light of China’s NSG commitments,” Mr Clay said.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Anne Lauvergeon, CEO of the French nuclear energy company Areva interview available at

http://www.charlierose.com/

She says that they would never sell their reactors to Pakis :rotfl: :rotfl:
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Mitt Romney's dumb critique of Obama's New START nuke treaty.

http://www.slate.com/id/2259779/
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Nuclear treaty debate expands outside the Beltway

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts ... he_beltway
Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Suppiah »

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... kistan-870
Moreover, in private, Chinese analysts are quite clear that this is a strategic tit-for-tat (in response to US-India nuclear deal
At least the Chinese analysts are clear what the game is, sad our own stalinist rapist goon yellow puppets are trying to obfuscate and make the matter seem inconsequential...
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19338
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by NRao »

North-South rift over China journalists
Menon’s trip comes days before Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari’s six-day state visit to China. Menon broached the issue of China-Pakistan nuclear co-operation, but only briefly.

“It (the Sino-Pak nuclear deal) took less than two-and-a-half sentences in the whole visit. This is not the whole point of the visit, even though some stories tried to make it (appear so). We have a relationship which is not externally driven,” Menon told Indian reporters in Beijing.

Sources said the Indian side was satisfied with China’s assurance that it would adopt all safeguards while setting up two nuclear reactors in Pakistan.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Nuclear plant re-opens after more than a year of repairs
Nuclear facility at Chalk River, Ont. will resume medical isotope production by the end of the month
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

Israeli Official Cites U.S. Nuclear Technology Offer
The U.S. is willing to cooperate with Israel on civilian nuclear technology, Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz said today, calling it a major achievement of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Washington visit.
White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton, when asked about a possible deal, said on Air Force One that “there’s no nuclear cooperation agreement with Israel.”
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

The Fear Factor

A new film aims to be the Inconvenient Truth for the nuclear danger. But is terrifying people the only way to get the message across?

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ear_factor
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

New Analysis Triples U.S. Plutonium Waste Figures

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/scien ... onium.html
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

What's behind the U.S-South Korea nuclear flap

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/201 ... clear_flap
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19338
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by NRao »

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

DOE Plan Would Reduce Nuclear Arsenal By Up To 40 Percent But Would Result in Few Cost Savings or Reductions In Size Of Weapons Complex

http://www.fas.org/press/news/2010/nnsa_plan.html
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Gerard »

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

Solutions of problems in Pakistan our priority: Clinton: Reuters
Pakistan is also seeking a nuclear deal with China, a topic that came up in Clinton's meeting, where she was asked about lukewarm US support for any nuclear agreements.

Clinton said the United States would continue to look into broadening civil nuclear cooperation, but said Pakistan's chequered history on proliferation issues “raises red flags” and concerns that need to be addressed.

Washington has already sought clarification from Beijing on the deal to build two new 650-megawatt reactors in Pakistan's Punjab province, saying it must be approved by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

“We believe that the NSG, which has recently met to examine the sale that you are referring to has posed a series of questions that should be answered because as part of any kind of transaction involving nuclear power, there are concerns by international community, Pakistan knows that,” said Clinton.

“We have conveyed them (concerns), other members of the NSG conveyed them and we look forward to answers of those questions posed,” she told reporters in the Pakistani capital.
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11251
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Amber G. »

South Africa's 'dirty bomb' mystery

South African police are investigating what the five mokes busted with a Cesium-137 device at a Pretoria gas station last week were up to.
All of them are South African citizens, but not much else is known about them, police said.
Indeed, much about the July 9 incident is a mystery.

Authorities said the "industrial nuclear device" found with the men contained a small amount of radioactive material. The men intended to sell the device to parties unknown for 45 million Rand, the equivalent of $6 million to $7 million. Police said the men were also planning to sell a larger nuclear device, which police are searching for, according to South African reports.

“We don’t know what these suspects’ intentions were, and we need to find the device quickly,” police said, according to Canada's online Digital Journal.


South African reporter Graeme Hosken says the substance was of a type of Cesium used in South Africa’s mining industry. Cesium is also used in nuclear medicine and is manufactured in significant quantities at the Pelindaba nuclear plant near Pretoria.

Pelindaba was involved in another mysterious incident in 2007, when its highly guarded operations center was broken into by two armed gangs. One official was shot during the attack, which some believe was aimed at stealing highly enriched uranium. The case remains unsolved.
....
In 2002, U.S. intelligence sources, backed by Bush administration officials, reported in 2002 that al Qaeda had designs for a “dirty bomb.”
<snip>
Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11251
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by Amber G. »

Also meanwhile - (for those who remember c0-60 in Delhi)
Enough Cs-137 for a 'large dirty bomb'

Found / removed a cesium-137 source that's been in storage at St. Vincent's Hospital in Lower Manhattan, New York City..also from an old irradiator..
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

What are the consequences if START ratification fails?

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts ... tion_fails
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Will the rise of a new class of Cold Warriors doom Obama's nuke treaty?

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _the_zeros
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by arun »

Two excerpts dealing with the US Secretary of State’s reaction to P.R. China’s attempt to supply the Chashma 3 and 4 nuclear reactors to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in violation of NSG guidelines.

Firstly an excerpt from US Secretary of States Town Hall at the Pakistan National Council of the Arts (PNCA) in Islamabad on July 19th:
QUESTION: Madam Secretary of State, welcome to Pakistan once again and I am meeting you for the second time. My name is Sameer Cader and I’m a business man from Islamabad. My question to you is that you have announced hydropower projects amongst others for Pakistan, which are commendable and laudable, but nothing on the civil nuclear power plants. As we expand our nuclear ties with China, you have reservations to have these deals closely inspected and monitored.

There seems to be a mistrust in your mind about an energy-hungry country like ours. How can we remove these mistrusts to benefit from your civil nuclear technology accessible to India and not to ours? (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first of all, we recognize the desperate need that Pakistan has for more energy. And we support a comprehensive approach to meeting those energy needs. With regard to civil nuclear power, there is a process that everyone has to go through to obtain the support of the international community, the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Everybody, including India, had to go and get permission to go forward. And our view is that Pakistan does as well. There was a recent meeting in New Zealand where a number of questions were asked of both the Chinese and the Pakistani officials who were there and people are looking for those answers.

Now, I just want to be very candid with you, because that’s the nature of our relationship, and I want to be sure that we are openly communicating. The request by the Pakistani Government that we explore civil nuclear power was received and we are beginning the kind of intensive discussions that are necessary that we carried on with India over many years. And there are certain issues that will have to be addressed. They cannot be overlooked or put under the carpet. They have to be addressed. Export controls, and just very frankly, the problem with Mr. A.Q. Khan raises red flags for people around the world, not just in the United States, because we can trace the export of nuclear information and materiel from Pakistan through all kinds of channels to many different countries. That is an issue. So anyone who is dealing with Pakistan as we are, with the hope of reaching an agreement that could support civil nuclear power, has to answer these questions.

Pakistan right now is the only country standing in the way of the Conference on Disarmament of the World pursuing something called the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty – even to get into the negotiations. And it’s an international body that acts by consensus, which means everyone has to agree. Pakistan’s the only country not agreeing. So people say, “Why? Why would Pakistan be the only country not agreeing?” So I just want you to understand that we are fulfilling our commitment to pursue this and we are doing it with great seriousness. We’ve already teed up our team of experts to meet with their Pakistani counterparts.

But it is not a one-way street, as most of life is not. And therefore, there has to be some awareness on the part of not only the Pakistani Government, but the Pakistani people that certain questions that people have in their minds – not just Americans, but others as well, and the IAEA, which would have to be satisfied, must be answered. And now, we are going to do everything we can to try to facilitate those answers, but ultimately, the decision lies with the government and people of Pakistan.

Town Hall

Secondly an excerpt from US Secretary of State’s remarks with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi following the U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue once again in Islamabad on July 19th:
MODERATOR: Mr. Jay Solomon of Wall Street Journal, please.

QUESTION: Thank you. This question is for both of you. Secretary Clinton, today, you outlined the push to help Pakistan meet its energy needs, but at the same time, I know the State Department is concerned about an impending sale of nuclear reactors from China to Pakistan. What message are you telling the Pakistanis about the U.S. position on this sale? And how are you sort of marrying the desire to help Pakistan’s energy needs, but these concerns about proliferation and the nuclear question?

And for you, Minister, as well, what is Pakistan telling the U.S. as far as its plans of going ahead with this purchase of nuclear reactors from China? And what does Pakistan need to do to get greater support internationally for its use of nuclear technologies? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Jay, we are constantly talking with Pakistan about its energy needs, including the role for nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. We believe that the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which has recently met to examine the sale that you’re referring to, has posed a series of questions that should be answered, because as part of any kind of transaction involving nuclear power, there are concerns by the international community. Pakistan knows that. We’ve conveyed them. Other members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group has conveyed them. And we look forward to the answers to those questions that were posed at the meeting just recently held in New Zealand.

FOREIGN MINISTER QURESHI: The energy needs of Pakistan are obvious. The people of Pakistan are facing outages, six to eight hours in the urban areas and 10 to 12 hours in the rural areas. Our economic growth has been impacted. Our agriculture production has suffered on account of that. So this government, under the leadership of President Zardari and Prime Minister Gillani, have set forth a very clear target on bridging the energy deficit.

Now, how do we propose doing that? We are doing it through an energy mix. We are tapping on the indigenous sources that we have – that’s coal. We are trying to undertake new hydro projects because there’s a huge capacity for hydro generation. We are looking at other sort of renewables like solar and wind energy. And we are sort of making advances there.

We are trying to make our existing system more responsive and more efficient, and of course, in this mix, there is a component of nuclear energy. Pakistan has 35 years experience of generating nuclear energy. And fortunately, and because of the precautions that we have taken and the systems in place, there has been no untoward incident.

Now, this is part of our bag, but our policy on nonproliferation is very clear. And in the nuclear summit that we had, which was led by President Obama in Washington, Pakistan’s position was very obvious and very clear and endorsed by the international community that how Pakistan’s program is not only safe; it is responsible. So I see there is – there should be no fear on that account. And these projects that we intend to undertake will be open to IAEA inspection. So we will satisfy the international community and their concerns and we will address them to their satisfaction.

Remarks
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

Post by amit »

US to vote against Sino-Pak nuclear deal at NSG

The US has said it would vote against an exemption for China to sell two civil nuclear reactors to Pakistan at the Nuclear Suppliers Group meeting, in a new move to step up pressure to get the controversial deal annulled.

Making it clear that the US would oppose the recent decision of China to sell two nuclear reactors to Pakistan, a top Obama administration official told lawmakers that Washington would vote against the Sino-Pak deal when it comes before the Nuclear Suppliers Group.

This is for the first time that such a clear statement has emerged from the Obama Administration, days after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Pakistan that US would work with it on civil nuclear energy, during her just concluded Islamabad visit.
Post Reply