Bharat Rakshak

Philip wrote:. . . the attempts at sabotaging KKM using quislings like the so-called "Christian" entities,run by clerics of dubious reputation,spearheading the movement at their white western masters' behest,are the Indian equivalent of Judas Iscariot and his betrayal of Christ-here the nation, for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver.Except that on this occasion,the "silver" is to the tune of 1000 crores! A full investigation should be undertaken,the traitors exposed and made to face the full penalty for treason.

Sanku wrote:I really think that GoI has deliberately allowed the matters to get out of hand in KK. It was very simple to solve -- there is gross crimes of omission in all respects.

So gross omissions as to be almost planned for.

gakakkad wrote:

Sanku wrote:I really think that GoI has deliberately allowed the matters to get out of hand in KK. It was very simple to solve -- there is gross crimes of omission in all respects.

So gross omissions as to be almost planned for.

Yes that is true... I called my friend who is in Nuke engg in desh and he has the same info..Not the GOI exactly...but elements within the UPA... whats actually happened is panda wants to construct thermal plants in India... and US feels that it made a fool of it-self in the N-Deal as due to the present liability law its companies will not dare venture into India ... so both have an agenda... UPA has already signed a treaty with panda for import of power equipment ..(import of panda power equipment to India is exempt from import duties)..the pandaland govt has made it tax-free for the companies to export it to India...As a result Panda's transmission and distribution equipment are cheaper than that of L&T and BHEL....

its not tough to buy "religious leaders" in India...the greens are ever ready to wreak havoc...add medha patkar and write a couple of op-eds about how "poor" Indian casevac is and how poor indian standarss are..bal bal bla.....bribe a couple of gov't officials to prevent action in the initial stages...create panic in the mango people...and bingo ...you have a protest...as the most people did not cooperate in the protests they even had to buy protestors....they expected to draw crowds in thousands...but that never happened....so they had to buy protesters...

The Tamil Nadu Bishops Council has appealed to the Centre and State government to consider the doubts and livelihood apprehensions of the people in all their dimensions before reaching a decision on the Kudankulam nuclear plant issue, and pave the way for peace.

The Church had to face the situation and it had no political motive. While it opposed nuclear weapons completely, there was a need to address some major safety issues before establishing nuclear power plants. The energy policy should be based on these issues, keeping in mind the safety of people.

As one of the most vociferous protests against nuclear power in the country during recent times enters its third month in Koodankulam, the leader of the protests S.P. Udayakumar, a 52-year-old schoolteacher turned anti-nuclear activist, remains as enigmatic as the force that propels the stir.

While the intelligence agencies and rival groups are busy probing his connections with foreign agents and the flow of funds to channel the protests, Udayakumar dismisses the claims as official propaganda.

“I am a simple school teacher and a peace activist. I have been campaigning for peace and disarmament since my early youth. This movement is a public uprising of which I am a part. It is unfortunate that I am seen as the one pushing it forward,” Udayakumar says.

Born in a small time political family in Nagercoil, Udayakumar completed his post graduation in English Literature and moved to Ethiopia 1981-87 to teach English. “In 1989, I went to the US to do another PG in Peace Studies followed by a Ph D in political science from university of Hawaii,” he said.

“For the last 10 years, my wife has been running SACCER Matriculation School where I also teach. Besides, I am also a visiting faculty in several institutions based in the US and UK and make frequent visits abroad,” he says.

Although several local politicians including former Radhapuram MLA have been fighting for two decades for banning the power project, none could gather the kind of support Udayakumar has mustered.

“I have been fighting for these people for decades but locals in Koodankulam have only scorned me,” said former DMK MLA M. Appavu. “Udayakumar and his team approached me a few years ago to lead the protests against the power plant. But, I refused,” he said.

“We are not prepared for any negotiations,” Kumar says. “Our demand to the state and central government is to stop work on the Koodankulam nuclear plant and instead look towards renewable sources of energy. The government is making a false claim that nuclear power can fill the energy gap in the country.”

However, intelligence agencies suspect the role of foreign agencies behind the activist’s involvement in the protests.

“For instance, Udayakumar and some of his associates have been on at least a few trips to Fukushima in Japan. It is uncertain as to how he could manage the funds. We are also probing the role of a retired scientist from Nagercoil in sourcing foreign funds,” a police source said.
....

Sanatanan wrote:Who is fishing in troubled KKNPP waters?

My post of 16th Octobrer in this thread refers to generic issue such as this (I was not aware of this specific problem brewing at Koodangulam at that time).

For several countries, including Russia, Pakistan, Israel and France, nuclear weapons are being assigned roles that go well beyond deterrence, says the report. In Russia and Pakistan, it warns, nuclear weapons are assigned "war-fighting roles in military planning".

The report is the first in a series of papers for the Trident Commission, an independent cross-party initiative set up by Basic. Its leading members include former Conservative defence secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, former Liberal Democrat leader and defence spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell and former Labour defence secretary Lord Browne

...In a country-by-country analysis, the report says:

• The US is planning to spend $700bn on nuclear weapons over the next decade. A further $92bn will be spent on new nuclear warheads and the US also plans to build 12 nuclear ballistic missile submarines, air-launched nuclear cruise missiles and bombs.

• Russia plans to spend $70bn on improving its strategic nuclear triad (land, sea and air delivery systems) by 2020. It is introducing mobile ICBMs with multiple warheads, and a new generation of nuclear weapons submarines to carry cruise as well as ballistic missiles. There are reports that Russia is also planning a nuclear-capable short-range missile for 10 army brigades over the next decade.

• China is rapidly building up its medium and long-range "road mobile" missile arsenal equipped with multiple warheads. Up to five submarines are under construction capable of launching 36-60 sea-launched ballistic missiles, which could provide a continuous at-sea capability.

• France has just completed deployment of four new submarines equipped with longer-range missiles with a "more robust warhead". It is also modernising its nuclear bomber fleet.

• Pakistan is extending the range of its Shaheen II missiles, developing nuclear cruise missiles, improving its nuclear weapons design as well as smaller, lighter, warheads. It is also building new plutonium production reactors.

• India is developing new versions of its Agni land-based missiles sufficient to target the whole of Pakistan and large parts of China, including Beijing. It has developed a nuclear ship-launched cruise missile and plans to build five submarines carrying ballistic nuclear missiles.

• Israel is extending its Jericho III missile's range, and is developing an ICBM capability, expanding its nuclear-tipped cruise missile enabled submarine fleet.

• North Korea unveiled a new Musudan missile in 2010 with a range of up to 2,500 miles and capable of reaching targets in Japan. It successfully tested the Taepodong-2 with a possible range of more than 6,000 miles sufficient to hit half the US mainland. However, the report, says, "it is unclear whether North Korea has yet developed the capability to manufacture nuclear warheads small enough to sit on top of these missiles".

Iran's nuclear aspirations are not covered by the report.

9. India

Nuclear Weapons and Delivery Systems

India is thought to have something in the range of 60-80 assembled nuclear weapons, of which around 50 are fully operational.108 At the moment, fighter bombers (Mirage, Jaguar and possibly MiG-27s) and short range ballistic missiles (the Prithvi I with a range of only 150km) are the only fully operational elements of India’s nuclear force. However, because all Indian nuclear delivery systems are dual-capable (they can deliver either nuclear or conventional weapons to target), it is difficult to say more about the composition and readiness of the Indian nuclear force.

Force Modernisation

What is clear is that the country continues to develop a triad of land, sea and air-based delivery systems at a rapid rate. On land, the Agni I missile has undergone successful test launches and may now be operational. It has a range of around 700km, a significant advance over the Prithvi I. A successful testing of an Agni II missile, with a range of around 2,000km, was also reported in May 2010. This is an improved version of the Agni I and is designed to be either road, or rail-mobile. A rail-mobile Agni III, with a range of over 3,000km has been test flown on a number of occasions, and has been described by an Indian Army spokesperson as a missile that ‘can even strike Shanghai.’109 The Indian Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) also announced plans in 2008 to build an Agni IV, with a range of 5,000km, sufficient to target the whole of Pakistan, and even Beijing. It is thought this might also be a technology demonstrator for the near intercontinental Agni V, which is also in development.

U.S. defence officials believe that between 2015 and 2020, the Indian nuclear force will be made up primarily of Agni III and Agni IV missiles with enhanced warheads, some possibly even with multiple warheads, though it is not clear that India will have the wherewithal to add MIRV capabilities to its missiles anytime in the near future.110

On 26 July 2009, India also launched its first SSBN, the Arihant. Four other submarines are reportedly planned. The Arihant appears to be serving as a technology development and integration platform and it is unclear whether it will become fully operational. It is thought to be equipped with 12 launch tubes for the K-15 version of the Sagarika missile which would have a range of around 300km and be capable of carrying a payload of around 500kg. This is a smaller payload than the 1,000kg plus planned for the land based missiles and might therefore indicate that India has developed a smaller warhead for deployment on its emerging SSBN fleet. India is further thought to have developed and successfully tested a nuclear capable ship-launched ballistic missile, the Dhanush, though this has a range of only around 350km, a fact which means that to reach land targets the ships carrying it would have to position themselves dangerously close to enemy shorelines before launching.111 India is developing an intermediate range (1,000km) land-attack cruise missile for deployment on land, sea and air platforms but it is not known at present whether it will be nuclear capable. To be so, India would need to develop a further small, light-weight warhead.

Declaratory Policy and Doctrine

The fundamental purpose of Indian nuclear weapons was stated in the late 1990s to be ‘to deter the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons by any state or entity against India and its forces.’112 In a statement on the operationalisation of its nuclear doctrine in 2003, it added that: ‘nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere’, and that ‘nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage.’113 India has therefore declared a no-first use policy. However, it has reserved the right to modify this, declaring in the same 2003 statement that, ‘in the event of a major attack against India, or Indian forces anywhere, by biological or chemical weapons, India will retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons.’114 Indian nuclear policy is also officially based on the desire to maintain a ‘credible minimum’ nuclear deterrent, though it has never specified what it considers the size requirement of its ‘minimum credible’ deterrent to be.

Although India has the capacity to deploy nuclear weapons on aircraft and short and medium-range ballistic missiles at relatively short notice, it does not maintain, on a daily basis, its nuclear forces on a high state of alert. According to the Indian Ministry of Defence, this position is held in contrast to some other states that follow ‘doctrines or postures of launch on warning.’115

Security Drivers

India’s nuclear forces are primarily a response to two features of its security environment.

First, they are designed to provide a deterrent in relation to two nuclear-armed neighbours that are also in alliance with one another, namely Pakistan and China. India is involved in a long-running and well known rivalry with Pakistan which has resulted in three wars between the two countries and at least one other short military engagement of note. From the Indian perspective, Pakistan supports insurgent activity in the disputed and heavily Muslim populated region of Kashmir and is also heavily implicated in terrorist attacks on Indian soil. Conflict is never very far below the surface. The Indian relationship with China has improved in recent years but long-term, China is seen as India’s main strategic threat. The initial Indian nuclear programme in the 1960s was a response to defeat in the 1962 war with China and to China’s own nuclear test in 1964. India is therefore seriously concerned about the developments in the Chinese nuclear programme described earlier in this paper. It is also well aware that China and Pakistan cooperate closely on nuclear matters.

Second, the Indian nuclear programme reflects a perceived need for India to be self-reliant in terms of its security. India is not a member of any alliance or other grouping of states to which it could turn for deterrence or defence support in the face of a crisis.

The anti-nuclear activists have slammed as "irresponsible" the allegation by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) chairman and managing director S K Jain, who had said 's allegation that foreign forces were behind the protests against the construction of the Kudankulam nuclear plant.

"The statement by NPCIL official that foreigners were behind our protests is cheap propaganda to discredit the agitating villagers. There is not even a bit of truth in it. The protests ever since it started, has been entirely by the common public residing in and around Kudankulam," said M Pushparayan, convener of Coastal People's Federation. The fuming activists demanded the NPCIL official to come out with concrete evidence to support their allegation that foreigners were behind the ongoing protest. in the coastal villages in southern Tamil Nadu.

On Friday, Jain said that "Foreign nationals who are from the Greens movement from the US, Finland, France, Australia and Germany are now at Kudankulam, opposing the project. They are backing the local population in their agitation which began towards end of August."

Pushparayan said that Jain's charge was a desperate attempt by NPCIL officials to scuttle the people's protest. "The protests are apolitical, non-religious and independent. It is the people who are funding for the expenditure incurred for each and every day. of the protest.

In fact, multi-national companies are funding the nuclear projects only," he charged.

On Jain's statement that the "the plant can't go from hot run to freeze condition," and insisting that they should proceed with operationalising of the plant, the activists said that the NPCIL officials were inconsistent in their views. "Now, they are attempting to create scare among the public by implying that there would be damage if the operations were stopped at this point. Our protests would continue irrespective of the official's statement," he said.

The activists are also awaiting the state government's nod to constitute a panel of experts to counter the expert panel formed by the Centre.

Meanwhile, the protest at Idinthakarai has entered its 12th day on Saturday. Villagers at Alandilai and Amali Nagar in Tuticorin district also observed a day's fast as part of the protest demanding shutting up of the multi-crore nuclear plant.

The villages around Koodankulam in Tamil Nadu have their own reasons for wanting the nuclear power plant closed down: Idinthakarai villagers, living less than 2 km from the Koodankulam nuclear power plant (KKNPP), are worried about a nuclear disaster like in Fukushima and want to protect their lives and their progeny; those living in fishing villages like Perumanal, about 6 km from Koodankulam, feel that the nuclear power plant would affect the marine life, and, in turn, their livelihood. As one goes further away from the power plant, the reasons for the protest against it become nebulous.

While the leaders claim that their fierce protest is homegrown, people inland surmise it could be due to the influence of the mining lobby active in the region.

According to government order M.S. No. 822 dated 29-04-1991, an area of 5 km surrounding the Koodankulam nuclear power station is a sterilised zone where no industrial or mining activity is permitted.

There is a sand mining unit of a multi-crore mineral extraction firm close to the power plant. The effluents released by the unit turns the clear blue waters of the scenic Perumanal hamlet, where just a dozen families live, into crimson red for most part of the day.

“After all, the only folks who would lose crores of rupees if the nuclear plant becomes operational are the sand-mining folks. It is anybody’s guess here in Valliyoor (nearest town) that the mining lobby is behind the anti-nuclear plant protests spearheaded by the church,” said a former MLA and senior politician from Valliyoor.

From dawn to dusk, the protesters sit under a thatched roof outside St. Anthony’s church in Idinthakarai, the hamlet closest to Koodankulam nuclear power plant, demanding that the Rs 13,000 crore nuclear power project, ready to go live with a capacity to generate around 2,000 MW of electricity, be shut down.

Anti-nuclear activist and schoolteacher S.P. Udayakumar, who has now become the face of these protests, claims that while his NGO People’s Movement against Nuclear Energy, has been campaigning against the plant for over a decade now, the most recent agitation and its massive success in grabbing the nation’s attention was the people’s uprising out of a genuine fear for the safety and well-being of around two lakh people who live in and around Koodankulam.

“Following the Fukushima nuclear accident that took place in March 2011, the fishermen have awake ving near a nuclear facility and are now demanding their right to live peacefully,” he says.

“The most recent trigger was the announcement of a mock drill when the public were asked to cover their face and mouth and run for cover following an alarm. The long list of do’s and don’ts released by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India has finally enlightened them of the perilous situation.”

In the Perumanal fishing hamlet, where around 5,000 people live, the residents also seek closure of the nuclear power station fearing it could affect the marine life and, hence, their livelihood. “The operation of the plant will affect our livelihood and we don’t want it here,” says Father Kishore, parish priest of Perumanal.

The sudden surge in protests has perplexed those managing the Koodankulam power plant. Site director at the power station, Mr Kashinath Balaji, sports a worried look these days.

“We have been spreading awareness about the plant and campaigning against the unfounded fears of some people for around a decade now. The sudden uprising is perplexing and inexplicable,” he says.

No foreign link, says strongman behind stir

As one of the most vociferous protests against nuclear power in the country during recent times enters its third month in Koodankulam, the leader of the protests S.P. Udayakumar, a 52-year-old schoolteacher turned anti-nuclear activist, remains as enigmatic as the force that propels the stir.

While the intelligence agencies and rival groups are busy probing his connections with foreign agents and the flow of funds to channel the protests, Udayakumar dismisses the claims as official propaganda.

“I am a simple school teacher and a peace activist. I have been campaigning for peace and disarmament since my early youth. This movement is a public uprising of which I am a part. It is unfortunate that I am seen as the one pushing it forward,” Udayakumar says.

Born in a small time political family in Nagercoil, Udayakumar completed his post graduation in English Literature and moved to Ethiopia 1981-87 to teach English. “In 1989, I went to the US to do another PG in Peace Studies followed by a Ph D in political science from university of Hawaii,” he said.

“For the last 10 years, my wife has been running SACCER Matriculation School where I also teach. Besides, I am also a visiting faculty in several institutions based in the US and UK and make frequent visits abroad,” he says.

Although several local politicians including former Radhapuram MLA have been fighting for two decades for banning the power project, none could gather the kind of support Udayakumar has mustered.

“I have been fighting for these people for decades but locals in Koodankulam have only scorned me,” said former DMK MLA M. Appavu. “Udayakumar and his team approached me a few years ago to lead the protests against the power plant. But, I refused,” he said.

“We are not prepared for any negotiations,” Kumar says. “Our demand to the state and central government is to stop work on the Koodankulam nuclear plant and instead look towards renewable sources of energy. The government is making a false claim that nuclear power can fill the energy gap in the country.”

However, intelligence agencies suspect the role of foreign agencies behind the activist’s involvement in the protests.

“For instance, Udayakumar and some of his associates have been on atleast a few trips to Fukushima in Japan. It is uncertain as to how he could manage the funds. We are also probing the role of a retired scientist from Nagercoil in sourcing foreign funds,” a police source said.

# 1 Australia and the Pacific
# 2 France
# 3 Germany
# 4 India
# 5 Italy
# 6 Japan
# 7 Philippines
# 8 Spain
# 9 Switzerland
# 10 Taiwan
# 11 The Netherlands
# 12 United Kingdom
# 13 United States
# 14 USSR

Theo_Fidel wrote: 5. Religious leaders protest all kinds of things. Baba Ramdev personally lead and issued fiery speeches against elected parliament.

Philip wrote:It IS incumbent upon the GOI/AEC to educate and assure the population about the dangers and safety measures being incorporated in new plants,post Fukushima in particuloar,but the KKM protests have emerged out of nowhere,there were few if any protests all along, . . .

Theo_Fidel wrote:Where to begin...

1. The Catholic Church is categorically opposed to nuclear anything globally. For them it is a moral question and they always advise their followers that they are morally opposed to it. This is similar to their opposition to abortion or family planning. Nothing the world says will make them change their mind. They frequently picket nuclear facilities and bases all over the USA. There was a protest outside the Honeywell installation near here 2 years ago. The opposition is on moral principles. The other churches have been more ambiguous.Some oppose Nuclear weapons but most are silent and not interested. No one says that we should listen to them and de-bomb. That's a decision only elected leaders can address.

2. Nowhere has it happened that the Priests have lead the protestors. They provide moral support and occasionally the use of their Churches or property for the people. You won't see them leading at any of these rallies or making fiery speeches. There was one small group of priests and nuns who joined their family member in the fasts, but I've not heard more than that from them. Besides the main organizer Mr Udaykumar is not a priest and is technically an atheist.

3. The people are NOT docile sheep. They may look trashy unkempt and SDRE to you but let me tell you that 100% of the crowd you see above is literate. A sizable chunk are school, college and even professor types. Shiv earlier called them rent a crowd types but these are not the typical interior rural 100% illiterate crowd. They will not blindly go where the priest wants them to go. In fact the Bishop will go where the crowd wants him to go. They have made up their own minds on this issue. They are not a 'incited' mob in the remotest sense.

4. What is so special about energy that it is a national security item. I can see the bomb being a security item but why a Russian provided Nuclear systems that NPCIL is completely virgin on operating. In that case what about food. This is an even bigger national security item right. 3 years ago religious groups vigorously protested the supply of 1 egg a day in the Karnataka Midday meal scheme and government had to buckle under and drop it. No doubt affecting the nutrition of countless children as doctors pointed out at the time. What about transport. Is that national security. In which case remember the Sethu agitation, for which large sums were collected outside India. Once we start thinking in cold-war terms about our country, every little thing will become beyond questioning.

5. Religious leaders protest all kinds of things. Baba Ramdev personally lead and issued fiery speeches against elected parliament. He too gets a sizable chunk of money from abroad. Don't remember the sedition argument against him. The Sankracharya too has repeatedly called for global nuclear disarmament. Don't remember any sedition claims against him. The Imam in Delhi has said some quite unpleasant things about the Indian Army but no 'severe punishment' for him either apparently. I could go on.

Finally, I have to say the level of vitriol being leveled is being taken very very personally at the local level. Both the relatives I spoke to were very bitterly disappointed in SK Jains comments. NPCIL is fouling its own nest at this point and burning many bridges. Compromise is becoming much harder. Accusations such as Jain's lead towards many a dead end. NPCIL folks are fools if they think they can operate in this area with a bitterly hostile local population through the use of suppressive force.

It's not surprising to see that you have gone from total denial of the involvement of the church and it's affiliates to now justifying the same for whatever flimsy reasons.

Theo_Fidel wrote:2. Nowhere has it happened that the Priests have lead the protestors. They provide moral support and occasionally the use of their Churches or property for the people.

It IS incumbent upon the GOI/AEC to educate and assure the population about the dangers and safety measures being incorporated in new plants . . . .

ramana wrote:Nightwatch comments

Nightwatch 31 Oct 2011

Bangladesh-Russia: Bangladesh and Russia are expected to sign agreements for the construction of Bangladesh's first nuclear power plant, Rosatom Chief Sergei Kiriyenko said in a television interview on 31 October.

Comment: Bangladesh is desperate to expand its energy supplies without increasing its dependence on fossil fuels and hydro-power. The Russians have never had much influence in Bangladesh, but this project offers the prospect of pride of place because it could enable the Dhaka government to use Russian aid to blunt Chinese pressures. A Russian option for Bangladesh would be good news.

Khya se Khya hogaya!

RamaY wrote:^ I wonder...

Imagine BD builds numerous nuke plants in the mouth of Bay of Bengal. Would a Fukushima in this area any less worrisome to tamilnadu population than a kundankulam in TN?

Sinha added that India was in talks with other countries over the export of conventional nuclear plants. He said India was looking for buyers for its 220MW and 540MW Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs). Kazakhastan and the Gulf states are known to have expressed an interest, while one source said that negotiations are most advanced with Vietnam, although Sinha refused to confirm this.

JE Menon wrote:>>What is so special about energy that it is a national security item.

Boss, intefering with the energy options of any country is the shortest cut to keeping its strategic autonomy. This is why you see these grand geo-political games about pipelines, concessions, E&P rights, you name it. Nuclear energy for India is a vitally important option (although it will not solve our demand problem). Expanding our capability to generate energy independently, limits the controls that can be exercised by powers that export or constrain/influence the exports of fossil fuels and other energy sources... which will limit economic growth and therefore our growing aggregate power.

JE Menon wrote:Incidentally, the Catholic church has been verbally opposed to nuclear weapons, issuing statements now and then, but never have I seen them complaining about the nuclear umbrella that protects them in Europe/North America/Australia. The controllers of the Church in Europe are smart enough to know the implications of playing this line in India. This is why they are distancing themselves from the local situation in Koodankulam, which appears to have materialised not (or perhaps not entirely) under their guidance.

Theo_Fidel wrote: But it is their matter of faith and moral positioning. I'll leave it at that.

Theo Fidel wrote:>>What is so special about energy that it is a national security item.

Theo_Fidel wrote:
That's sounds more like a economic interest argument. Historically cutting transport links has been the critical item for security. During the recent Libyan war the first thing NATO did was impose a transport/no fly embargo. There was no organized bombing of power, oil or refinery facilities. All of Gaddafi's oil meant nothing against a transport/communications interruption.