India's Nuclear Agreement

[nitesh]

U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Accord: An 'Epochal' Agreement - Council on Foreign Relations

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, INTERVIEW

U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Accord: An ’Epochal’ Agreement

Interviewee: Ashley J. Tellis, Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Interviewer: Bernard Gwertzman, Consulting Editor

October 10, 2008

Ashley J. Tellis, an expert on South Asia, who served as a consultant to the State Department in negotiating the just signed U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement, says the pact was a "significant achievement" for President Bush. He foresees an improvement across the board in U.S.-India relations, although he warns that there has to be careful diplomacy in the future to ensure cooperation.

You were involved in planning and execution of this U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement from its earliest stages. It was finally signed into law by President Bush this week. How important is this agreement, do you think, for the Bush administration?

It is a very significant achievement. The president came into office hoping that he would be able to put in place a new relationship with India, an idea which has turned out to be elusive through the years. Administrations have tried, since the 1980s, beginning with President Reagan, to set the India relationship on a new footing. The most recent effort was led by President Clinton, just before he left office. That breakthrough eluded us for a variety of reasons, among the most important of which was of course the disagreement with India on its nuclear weapons. And Bush has, in a sense, managed to take this devil by the horns and exorcise it. Get rid of it entirely. And I think this is simply epochal. I mean, there’s no other way to describe it.

Epochal?

This is epochal. This is one of those moments, when we look back a couple of years or decades from now, it will prove to be one of the turning points in forging the U.S.-India relationship for the new century.

That’s interesting. It was signed almost without any Americans taking notice.

The bill was signed into law on Wednesday. The Senate actually voted on it last week.

Voted on it almost between votes on the rescue program. And as a result the American press virtually ignored it. But in India, this was a major, major story, wasn’t it?

Absolutely, because it’s a multilayered phenomenon in India. First, it was a symbol of the United States doing something that it did not have to do for India, but nonetheless did, in order to forge this new relationship. This went to the heart of the American commitment to assisting India in its growth toward the coming of great power. So there was a powerful symbolism that transcended the specifics of the agreement. That was the first item. Remember, this comes against a backdrop of an Indian complaint that goes back fifty years, which is that the United States has always seen India within the context of its relationship with Pakistan, that it has always given India short shrift because of the exigent necessities for Pakistan over the years. So, the civil nuclear agreement exorcises the demons that the Indians believed always put India within the context of Pakistan. This agreement has nothing to do with Pakistan. It was a pure bilateral U.S.-India initiative. And it was the best way the United States could convey its commitment to helping India’s development, to helping India’s growth and power. The symbolism here was extremely profound.

The second element is simply that this meets an important Indian need, which is the need for energy. India is in the takeoff stage of its economic development. It’s looking at a point where it has enormous energy requirements. The one thing they want to look at more closely is civilian nuclear energy, for all the environmental benefits and because it lessens dependency on foreign oil. These are pretty much the same kinds of concerns that we have in the United States. But they couldn’t get to this point because of this enormous set of rules that was constructed for the last thirty-five odd years that kept India out after 1974 [when India conducted its first nuclear test].

You mean the Nuclear Suppliers Group?

Yes, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, for one. There’ve been a whole series of things that the United States put in place since 1974 in an effort to isolate India and to get the Indians to roll back their weapons program. The Bush initiative basically brings the curtain down on those U.S. efforts of the last thirty-five years. It transforms India from the target to now the partner. This is, from the Indian point of view, extremely profound. It helps India meet its energy targets, but it also changes the character of the bilateral relationship. The Indians recognize that the one thing that the Chinese have had since the 1970s is access to American and European dual-use technologies, because those were not barred to China as they were to India.

Can you give me an example of such a technology.

A very simple technology, for example, is instrumentation. Sophisticated instrumentation that you can use, for example, in mining, in oil exploration. These are technologies that, in some conceivable circumstances, could be used to advance a nuclear program. The Indians didn’t want this for their nuclear program because they had enough technology for their weapons program indigenously. They, for example, are trying to do resources exploration in very difficult geographic terrain. They need access to this quality of instrumentation but it was simply denied to India on nonproliferation grounds. Now, this technology becomes available given the Bush initiative.

India used to be a leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, and always kept running up against U.S. foreign policy because it was seen as tilting toward the Soviet bloc. Does this accord open up new vistas in cooperation on foreign policy issues?

It does, but one needs to be careful about what that will mean in practice. It will certainly change the India worldview about how it sees the United States. Throughout the Cold War and at the height of the Non-Aligned Movement, India always had a very suspicious view of the United States because the United States was seen as a country that was attempting to restrain India’s growth. The ties that the United States enjoyed first with Pakistan and then with China were seen as objective constraints on India’s freedom of action. And there was enough there in the relationship that allowed the Indians to look at the relationship with the United States through very jaundiced lenses. This deal puts all that behind us, because if nothing else, it communicates to the Indians that the United States is a friend. But, what does this mean for actual cooperation? We’ve got to remember even if the Indians change their view of the United States there are challenges that India is going to face because of the disparities in Indian and American power.

Our interests often diverge. And these interests can be reconciled through diplomacy and through a great deal of energy and investment on both sides. But, that convergence may not be automatic, or it may not exist a priori. So there is work that will have to be done. The deal takes away some of the preconditions that prevented cooperation. But this will not automatically assure cooperation unless both sides can bring to the table good diplomacy, deep engagement, and continued cooperation.

India’s very worried about terrorism right now, particularly Islamic terrorism. The United States has been fighting this now for some time. Is there any cooperation going on now in this field?

There is cooperation, but I must confess that we have not found the right level of cooperation. It is still in its infancy. And until a year ago, it was a very discordant cooperation because there were real differences about Pakistan. A year ago, that began to change because the U.S. expectation that Pakistan would deliver on terrorism slowly started dissipating. We began to become more realistic about what the Pakistanis could and could not do. And in the last year there has been a much better convergence on U.S. and Indian positions with respect to terrorism, especially the need to help Pakistan kick the cancer that consumes it from within.

I think we are on the cusp of a new relationship with respect to cooperation on terrorism. We can do much better than we have so far done in terms of intelligence cooperation. The Indians have very good local intelligence on what is happening in respect to terrorist movements in Pakistan. We need to be able to better share with the Indians our own intelligence. We started doing it, but we need to accelerate this. Second, we need to have at least a common view on what the challenges facing Pakistan are, and how we can both help Pakistan to defeat terrorism. This is not an issue to divide us anymore, because I think the United States has realistic expectations of Pakistan’s limitations today. The third area is in respect to Afghanistan. India, the United States, and Pakistan have a real interest in Afghanistan coming out right. We have not been able to coordinate our strategies with respect to Afghanistan. The next administration has a great opportunity to have that conversation. I hope now that we have opened the door to a new relationship with India, the stage is set for a cooperative engagement with respect to Afghanistan.

What is India’s relationship to Afghanistan?

The Indians have always wanted a close relationship with Afghanistan but they have never pushed for one because, other than the civilization ties, the relationship with Afghanistan has been driven more by what happens in Kabul than what happens in New Delhi. Afghanistan’s relationship with Pakistan has always been a very troubled one. And because it has been a troubled relationship, successive Afghan governments of every stripe, going back to the days of the monarchy in the 1950s, through the Communists in the 1980s, have looked to New Delhi for help in containing what they see as the Pakistani threat to Afghanistan.

There has been a good relationship, but it’s been a relationship with many limitations because India does not share the land frontier with Afghanistan. Access to Afghanistan has historically been very difficult because the relationship with Pakistan has been troubled. Even to this day, the Indians are unable to assist the Afghans in ways that they would want simply because they don’t have land transit rights to be able to move food, to move construction materials and things like that, which they need to support their humanitarian efforts in Afghanistan.

The United States looks upon China with sort of mixed feelings. How does India come out on this?

It comes out of it in exactly the same way as we do. There is a fundamental disquiet about China, about its growing power, about its military modernization, and about the many things that the Chinese have done over the last fifty years to undermine Indian security. But the Indians are extremely cagey about articulating that disquiet. And so, what you’ve got is essentially a situation that is analogous to that which confronts the United States, a desire to maintain a good working relationship with China and to have the economic dimensions expand to the maximum degree possible. But the Indians are going to continue to keep their powder dry, and there will be a certain distance which will not be bridged because Chinese power exists on Indian doorsteps. There is a certain degree of discomfort with China and the strategic directions it has pursued. In India, that is not going to disappear anytime soon. [This is] one of the things that drives the Indian strategy of improving its relations with third parties. Here the United States is critical; its relations with Russia become very important; Indian relations with Japan and Southeast Asia become very important. All these relations are driven in part by the calculation that because the Sino-Indian relationship will never be one of complete transparency and amity, the Indians feel compelled to build up these other relationships as insurance. The key thing though is it’s all going to be very polite, very Asian. Everyone is going to do this with a lot of smiles on their faces, but they’re not going to let down their guard.

 

[nitesh]

The Hindu : Front Page : Nuclear pact with Kazakhstan likely during PM’s visit

Nuclear pact with Kazakhstan likely during PM’s visit

Sandeep Dikshit
“There will be no obstacles on uranium supply”
India can enter into swap arrangements
with Tehran

ASTANA: Kazakhstan is prepared to supply India uranium for its existing and future civil nuclear power plants and in return expects greater intensity in economic ties, including assistance in joining the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

An agreement to promote nuclear cooperation between the two countries could be agreed upon during a summit meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev.

Kazakhstan was the world’s third largest producer of uranium last year after Canada and Australia and expects to achieve the top position in a year or two. With Australia turning down India’s request for uranium and negotiations with Canada in the initial stages, Kazakhstan hopes to ensure steady supply.

“Kazakhstan supported India at the Nuclear Suppliers Group as a friendly gesture to an important partner. We are very open to discussing different forms of cooperation [in the nuclear field]. We can develop this idea as soon as we get a concrete proposal from the Indian side,” Kazakh Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Nurlan Yermekbayev told journalists from India and China here on Wednesday.

Summit meeting

Foreign Offices of the two countries are discussing dates for a summit meeting between the two leaders and Mr. Nazarbayev may be the chief guest at next year’s Republic Day celebrations in New Delhi. “It [the meeting] is not confirmed. We are talking to the Indian Ministry for External Affairs. An agreement on nuclear cooperation is up to the leaders. We are working on organising a meeting at the highest level,” Mr. Yermekbayev said in response to a question.

“When we have negotiations in the nuclear assistance, they will be very effective. There will be no obstacles on the supply of uranium or the price. Both countries would make a profit. I am sure India would be a good partner in this sector,” predicted Sanat Kushkumbayev of the Kazakhstan Institute of Strategic Studies, an institution considered close to the government.

“India plays an important role and could help Kazakhstan join the WTO. India has been a good negotiator at the WTO and could like to promote this process. Our access to WTO is important. Our economy needs access to high tech sector. We can’t depend on energy resources all the time,” he added.

“In general terms we consider India as a strategic partner. The next summit meeting could better characterise our relations, one of which would be to develop business ties. We know of Indian successes in space, information technology and other new technologies, oil exploration and education. We regard cooperation in all these fields as promising,” Mr. Yermekbayev said. “In addition, there are lots of opportunities at our special economic zones for those who like tax preferences and other special arrangements.”

In case India arrives at a nuclear cooperation pact, it would gain in both up and downstream nuclear-related activity. Kazakhstan has already entered into a multi-billion dollar pact with Japan to modernise its uranium extraction process and has developed close ties with Europe, the U.S. and Russia in various sectors of the nuclear field.

Astana even has a 12 per cent stake in Westinghouse, the nuclear reactor powerhouse, and has struck an alliance with Russia to supply state-of-the-art nuclear rectors.

Mr. Yermekbayev also noted the energetic presence of Indian companies in the energy sector and the ongoing negotiations for some oil fields.

 

[nitesh]

India Today - India?s most widely read magazine.

Raj Chengappa
October 10, 2008

As George W. Bush stepped briskly into the White House for the signing ceremony in the afternoon of October 8, the gathering that included Ronen Sen, India's ambassador to the US, was aware that they were witnessing a rare and historic moment.

Bush looked much the cat that got the cream as he signed the hard-fought US Congress legislation enabling civilian nuclear trade with India after a hiatus of 34 long years. He had plenty of reason to look pleased.

Even as the walls of the US economy seemed to be crumbling around him, he was ending his two-term tenure as President with a signal foreign policy success-a bright ray of sunshine amid the gathering gloom.

In India it was just past the midnight hour and as the country slept, its giant nuclear establishment, to paraphrase Jawaharlal Nehru, was stepping out from the old to the new and waking up to new life and freedom. As a senior Indian diplomat observed, "We're out of the doghouse and on the high road again."

For years after India's 1974 nuclear test, the country was treated like a pariah, especially by the US. America had erected an entire architecture of laws and multinational groupings meant to isolate and punish India for being a rogue nuclear power.

Sanctions were heaped on India and US firms were prevented from selling hi-tech that was even remotedly connected to the word nuclear. America put pressure on the world to ostracise India and formed the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to prevent other countries from conducting nuclear trade with India. Indian nuclear scientists were made unwelcome at international seminars in their field.

Now with the Indo-US nuclear deal, the huge boulder that was blocking India's nuclear path had been lifted. For excited Indian nuclear scientists, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Bush had made the impossible happen.

Not only had India ended the apartheid it faced with regard to civilian nuclear trade, but the country was also incredibly allowed to carry on with its nuclear weapons programme unhindered. It was a privilege only the so-called P5 nations-the US, Russia, France, UK and China-enjoyed.

India has now joined the exclusive club of the nuclear haves. As M.R. Srinivasan, a former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, put it: "For all practical purposes we are now recognised by the world as a nuclear weapons state."

To achieve that, the US had to expend voluminous political capital that began on July 18, 2005 with Bush and Manmohan signing a landmark agreement to remove the nuclear obstacle from bilateral relations.

The Bush administration got the US Congress to pass the Hyde Act, amending the Atomic Energy Act that had prohibited American entities from trading with countries that didn't sign the NPT or had done a nuclear test-India fitted into both categories.

Meanwhile, the US negotiated a bilateral 123 Agreement with India that laid the framework for their civilian trade. It was agreed that India would place in phases 14 of its 22 power reactors under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. Delhi then negotiated an India-specific safeguards agreement with the IAEA, after Manmohan won a trust vote in July this year.

The biggest breakthrough came last month when the US got the NSG countries to make an exception to trade with India. It meant that India could conduct civilian trade with not just the US but with the entire world.

Last month's battle in the US Congress to get the 123 ratified was Bush's final salvo to push the deal through that culminated with him signing it into law. It was to be followed by External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice inking the 123 Agreement in Washington DC.

Typically, the opposition to the deal from the BJP and the Left came thick and fast. Both parties had bitterly opposed it and denounced the signing as a sellout of India's nuclear sovereignty. In Parliament later this month they would once again haul Manmohan over the coals by going over the fine print of the deal.

But nothing they would say or do would rob Manmohan of his moment of glory. Like Bush, he too is credited with pulling off a foreign policy coup that has not only defined his prime ministerial tenure but has also set the agenda for the nation and possibly for the next election.

So why is it such a big deal for India and for its nuclear establishment? Few know that India's nuclear power reactors are running at 50 per cent of their capacity because of a crippling shortage of uranium fuel. Four of its new reactors cannot be commissioned because there is no fuel available to start them up.

Fewer know that the main reason for India's nuclear power sector stagnating at 4,100 MW-when it should have been 10,000 MW eight years ago-was because of the ring of sanctions against the industry. And that India has only fuel enough to support 10,000 MW of nuclear generated power when it has plans for over 60,000 MW.

There were far more important reasons than just bailing out India's flailing nuclear industry. India had become chronically short of energy-the power cuts that most cities experience is testimony to that. With an energy shortage of 10 per cent, India needs to add 10 power plants of 1,000 MW capacity this year alone to meet its current demand.

It is still heavily dependent on thermal power fired mainly by coal to help ease the energy shortage. Thermal power now accounts for 51 per cent of the electricity generating capacity of 1,45,000 MW.

But apart from dwindling coal reserves it comes with the disadvantage of high carbon emissions that will put India on the mat for global warming.

Hydro-electric generation is credited with another 25 per cent but with environmental activism and the damage to forest resources being enormous, they are not seen as the best alternative.

In renewable energy, like solar and winds, efforts haven't met with the kind of success they should have and they now contribute barely 8 per cent of the share. Enter nuclear power.

Nuclear power is enjoying a remarkable comeback across the world-after major improvements in safety of reactors following Chernobyl and Three Mile Island-and is once again being touted as the clean fuel of the future.

France is the leader with nuclear power accounting for 75 per cent of its electricity generation. Japan is at around 30 per cent. Even European countries like Germany, who are rethinking their opposition to nuclear plants, have begun making enquiries.

In the US, there has been a surge of interest-John McCain promised that if he became President he would sanction a hundred new nuclear plants. Nuclear energy now accounts for 23 per cent of the total world electricity production while in India it contributes only a paltry 3 per cent.

The deal is certain to change that. Soon after his New York and Washington visit, Manmohan flew into Paris for a bilateral summit with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. As they looked on, Anil Kakodkar, Atomic Energy Commission chairman and Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, signed an umbrella Indo-French nuclear cooperation agreement.

Details of it have still not been made public but from the look on Kakodkar's face it was apparent that India had got what it wanted from France-nuclear fuel, reactors, reprocessing rights for spent fuel and possibly enrichment technology as well. Later he told India Today, "It's a perfect agreement."

Meanwhile, the French nuclear power giant, Areva, has already been having meetings with the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL). The two have homed in on a site in Jaitapur in Maharashtra to set up a nuclear park that would have possibly six top-of-the-line French reactors of 1,600 MW each in the first phase.

Costing close to $2 billion each, it could add 9,600 MW of power in the next five years alone and bring into India some of the latest nuclear technology. For the French, the business would be worth close to $12 billion. But Indian firms would benefit too.

S.K. Jain, NPCIL chairman and managing director, points out that there is a huge capacity constraint across the globe for nuclear power. That would mean that companies like Areva would outsource manufacturing of equipment to Indian companies like Larsen & Toubro and Bharat Forge. Jain says India is pushing for a steady indigenisation of imported plants with the vendors and it could go up to as much as 80 per cent for future plants.

By December, when the new Russian President Dmitry Medvedev makes his maiden visit to India, the NPCIL would be signing a similar agreement with its counterpart Rosatom for the supply of four reactors of 1,000 MW each to be set up in Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu.

Under an earlier agreement, the Russians are building two giant 1,000 MW reactors at a cost of Rs 14,000 crore, expected to be commissioned by 2010. An agreement with Russia will bring in fuel as well as reactor and reprocessing technology.

American companies who believe they have first right over India's imported nuclear pie are already champing at the bit. Both GE and Westinghouse, the big two of the US nuclear industry, are making major bids for nuclear reactors and could win as many as four reactors in the next couple of years.

GE is promising an astonishing 40-month completion if India chooses its 1,500 MW plants. Says Ron Somers, president of the US India Business Council, "We are looking at $150 billion of business in the nuclear industry alone."

Canada, which angrily cut off its nuclear agreement with India after the 1974 test, is talking about restarting trade. "It's a good feeling," says an Indian negotiator.

Meanwhile, with fuel now expected, India is expanding its own indigenous capacity. It has just mastered the 700 MW type of reactors and is building four of them within the next five years. It is also perfecting its Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRS), so called because they generate as much plutonium as they consume.

This, if successful, will give a major boost to power generation plans. Under the deal, India is creating a National Technical Facility to store spent fuel from its reactors it designates as civilian. With permission to reprocess such fuel, the spent plutonium could be used as fuel in FBRS. That would put India streets ahead in the business.

Its also on its way to using abundant thorium reserves as a fuel. Most importantly, India will be allowed to export its own reactors, especially in the market for smaller reactors of 220 MW and 540 MW.

The downsides: Issues like the safety of reactors are a major concern. The world nuclear industry has strived hard to make their plants almost error free and in the event of an accident to ensure that all leaks would be contained and there would be no need for evacuation.

With so many reactors being built and run at a short time, India needs to beef up its regulatory board and safety standards.

On the strategic side, the big question is what happens if India tests a nuclear weapon? Under its deal with India, the US would terminate the agreement and could even demand the return of reactors and fuel supplied by it.

But while negotiating the agreement, the Indian side pushed the Americans to soften the whole breakaway clause by ensuring no sudden deaths or withdrawals. There would be a protracted negotiation and the circumstances that led India to test would become a factor.

This would mean that if say China and Pakistan tested, India would have good enough reasons to test. The US President would then have waiver power to prevent the provisions of the Act from being enforced.

Learning from the Tarapur experience, where the US reneged from the agreement to supply fuel to it after the 1974 tests, India will insist that all the vendors give cast-iron guarantees of fuel supply and the country would maintain a strategic reserve of fuel to meet such exigencies.

So the right to test remains with India but as Mukherjee told India Today, "Other nations have the right to react." Exasperated by the constant nagging over whether we can test or not, a senior official said, "Look, it's like asking a woman to prove her virginity. She can only do it by losing it."

And if Barack Obama comes to power and he gets the US to ratify the CTBT, India could be pressured into signing the document. Right now India and Pakistan are the main holdouts.

So would it crimp India's weapons programme as the Opposition has been charging? Under the deal, India has so far identified eight reactors that it would designate as military-four at Kalpakkam near Chennai, two at Kaiga in Karnataka and two at Tarapur.

It also has two research reactors Dhruva and Cirrus. (Cirrus is to be decommissioned in 2010). These would provide as much fissile material as India needs for its credible minimum deterrent.

Since India would be allowed to import fuel, it can conserve its domestic mines to build bombs. While India has agreed to join negotiations for a Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty, it is unlikely to sign till it is satisfied that it has a large enough stockpile.

India is pressing ahead with its triad of missiles, aircraft and nuclear power submarines to deliver its weapons (see chart). Those programmes are proceeding at full speed. Agni, with its many variants, can now threaten most of China's major cities apart from the whole of Pakistan.

India's top secret nuclear submarine is on its way to completion, giving it the ability to strike from the sea. And it is building a state-of-the-art antiballistic missiles system. On all these programmes, the deal allows India to proceed at a fair trot without hindrance. In some areas like missiles, it could even collaborate and get the much-needed high technology for them.

More importantly is the deal's impact on India's self-confidence and its image abroad. India is clearly recognised as a power that has arrived on the world stage. It can shed its baggage of nonalignment and go for what Lalit Mansingh, former foreign secretary, calls co-alignments with all the major countries whether the US, Russia, France, China, South Africa, Brazil, the UK, Australia.

India has already entered into strategic partnerships with all of them. It can push for a seat in the UN Security Council now with greater vigour. A new world has opened for India. It's up to us to go out and make the best use of the opportunity.

Nuke numbers

* 4,100MW is the current nuclear power capacity.
* 22 reactors India has right now.
* 10,000MW reactor capacity to be imported in five years.
* 30,000MW is the target to be achieved by 2020.

Nuclear arsenal

India is developing a range of nuke weapons and delivery systems.

* Fissile stock: India has retained 8 reactors for military use to add to its fissile material stock for bombs.
* Missiles: Agni variants are the workhorse for the country’s nuclear missile delivery systems.
* Nuke sub: India is in the process of building an indigenously designed nuclear submarine.
* Fighters: The Sukhois are India’s main nuclear strike aircraft apart from the Mirages.


What the deal means to India

* The deal allows India to conduct civilian nuclear trade with the world.
* India can import much needed fuel for its plants.
* 8 reactors to be imported in five years.
* $100 billion worth of nuclear commerce in the next 20 years.
* India's weapons programme can develop unhindered.
* Sensitive technology for reprocessing and enrichment of fuel can now be imported.
* India can now export its indigenously designed nuclear reactors to other countries.

 

[p2prada]

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in ...ned nuclear reactors to other countries. [/b

The writer forgot to mention that it affects other fields too, like super computers, chemical industries, space tech. In other words all dual use tech that have been denied to India the last 40+years.

 

[nitesh]

The writer forgot to mention that it affects other fields too, like super computers, chemical industries, space tech. In other words all dual use tech that have been denied to India the last 40+years.

nope he has not forgotten, check this from article

Sanctions were heaped on India and US firms were prevented from selling hi-tech that was even remotedly connected to the word nuclear. America put pressure on the world to ostracise India and formed the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to prevent other countries from conducting nuclear trade with India. Indian nuclear scientists were made unwelcome at international seminars in their field.

 

[p2prada]

nope he has not forgotten, check this from article

Oh! I must have missed that.

 

[Imran Khan]

Oh! I must have missed that.

we will read these articles at day off because today we don't have 10 hours free

 

[p2prada]

we will read these articles at day off because today we don't have 10 hours free

Yea I did not even try to read the article until now(except for the bold lines).

More importantly is the deal's impact on India's self-confidence and its image abroad. India is clearly recognised as a power that has arrived on the world stage. It can shed its baggage of nonalignment and go for what Lalit Mansingh, former foreign secretary, calls co-alignments with all the major countries whether the US, Russia, France, China, South Africa, Brazil, the UK, Australia.

India has already entered into strategic partnerships with all of them. It can push for a seat in the UN Security Council now with greater vigour. A new world has opened for India. It's up to us to go out and make the best use of the opportunity.

We might have a chance now for the seat now.
It would probably be better for us to wait atleast 2 or 3 more years before we start pitching in for the seat unilaterally.

 

[p2prada]

Not only had India ended the apartheid it faced with regard to civilian nuclear trade, but the country was also incredibly allowed to carry on with its nuclear weapons programme unhindered. It was a privilege only the so-called P5 nations-the US, Russia, France, UK and China-enjoyed.

This is probably the most important point the article made.
It further strengthens our claim for a security council seat permanently. But US and China will still be uncomfortable unless a few years pass.

 

[nitesh]

India goes uranium hunting in Namibia - Metals & Mining-Ind'l Goods / Svs-News By Industry-News-The Economic Times


India goes uranium hunting in Namibia
18 Oct, 2008, 0058 hrs IST,Debjoy Sengupta & Manisha Choudhury, ET Bureau

KOLKATA: The ink is yet to dry on the Indo-US nuke deal, but the UPA government has already started scouting for uranium mining assets abroad. The first place being explored is Namibia, which caters to 6-8% of the world's uranium oxide requirement.

This was confirmed to ET by a senior member of the Union Cabinet associated with the process. From India's point of view, the development is historic in the sense that this will be the country's maiden entry as a buyer in the world uranium market after the Pokhran test of May 2004 {horribly wrong here}, following which all kinds of procurement sanctions were slapped vis-a-vis nuclear technology and fissile materials.

Simultaneously, the government is also considering a policy change in order to facilitate the acquisition of foreign mines to procure uranium abroad.

The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) has asked the external affairs ministry to arrange a trip to Namibia along with officials from the ministry of mines to scout for uranium mining assets in the uranium-rich African country.
"The government is also considering a policy change in order to facilitate the acquisition of foreign mines to procure foreign uranium. Although a final decision is yet to be taken, the necessary process has already begun," Cabinet sources said.

Officials from the Department of Atomic Energy said: “Such visits will now become quite regular since the deal has already been signed. India is now free to acquire mining assets from other countries, process the fissile material and bring it back to India for consumption in nuclear power reactors."

Namibia was chosen for its vast reserves of uranium and its long standing relation with India. India had, in fact, been at the vanguard of Namibia's liberation movement. Now, it seems, it's payback time for Namibia.
India took the lead in supporting the Namibian liberation struggle and provided all possible moral, material and diplomatic support to the Namibian leadership in exile.

The Indian assistance covered training, medicines, humanitarian relief. Besides implementing the Africa fund, India also contributed to the Special NAM Fund for Namibia, the NAM Solidarity Fund for Namibia and the Commonwealth Special Training Programme for Namibia.

Namibia, which borders South Africa, Botswana, Angola and the South Atlantic Ocean, is one of the world's key uranium producers. The country offers uranium mines on 100% ownership basis. The fissile material constitutes about 10% of the country's exports.

Interestingly, the Namibian government recently licensed its third uranium mine to French nuclear reactor builder Areva. According to reports, Areva will produce between 2.3 million and 3.6 million kg of uranium oxide a year over nine years.

 

[nitesh]

http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/198F5295B8D4F2E5652574E40054DCD9?OpenDocument

N-deal with India "net gain" for non-proliferation regime: US

Sridhar Krishnaswami
Washington, Oct 16 (PTI) India's enhanced non- proliferation commitments under the landmark Indo-US civil nuclear deal constitute a "net gain" for the global non- proliferation regime, the Bush administration said today, adding there were "powerful" strategic, political, economic, and environmental reasons" to support the Initiative.

Detailing the benefits of the Initiative launched by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President George W. Bush on July 18, 2005, the State Department in a Fact Sheet said the steps taken by India, a non-signatory to the NPT, would enhance the global non-proliferation regime and prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

"India's enhanced non-proliferation commitments strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation framework and constitute a net gain for the global nonproliferation regime," it said on the "unprecedented three-year effort" by the two governments to get all the necessary approvals, including that of the IAEA and the NSG for the deal as it welcomed New Delhi to the non-proliferation "mainstream." "Together, they constitute a dramatic change in moving India into closer conformity with international non-proliferation standards and practices, and form a firm foundation for the U.S. And India to strengthen our efforts in the future to prevent WMD proliferation and to combat terrorism," the Fact Sheet said, nearly a week after New Delhi and Washington completed all formalities on the deal.

"There are powerful security, political, economic, and environmental reasons to support this Initiative," it said. PTI

 

[nitesh]

The Hindu News Update Service

Lavrov to finalise nuclear deal with India
Moscow (PTI): Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will embark on a one day visit to India during which the two countries will discuss the nuclear trade and construction of two nuclear reactors at Kudankulam.

During his visit starting tomorrow, Lavrov will hold talks with his Indian counterpart Pranab Mukherjee over a wide range of bilateral and international issues.

He is also scheduled to call on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his visit.

Finalisation of the agreement on the construction of four more VVER-1000 nuclear reactors in Kudankulam will be among the issues of Lavrov's talks, first since the IAEA and NSG waivers and clearing of 123 Agreement by the US Congress on nuclear trade with India.

Diplomats here widely believe the agreement will be signed during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's India visit in early December.

According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko lifting of international curbs on civilian nuclear commerce would allow Russia and India to translate their existing agreements into practical ones and move ahead in deepening cooperation in nuclear sector to boost bilateral economic interaction.

Lavrov is also expected to discuss bilateral and multilateral efforts in tackling the current global financial crisis and creation of a new financial system reflecting the realities of a multi-polar world.

 

[nitesh]

The Hindu : Front Page : India to ink pact with Russia for more reactors

India to ink pact with Russia for more reactors

Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI: India and Russia on Monday agreed to further cooperation in the nuclear sector during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s maiden visit to the country in December. The Foreign Ministers of both countries also signed a protocol outlining consultations between diplomats over the next year.

At a joint news conference, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov said the main purpose of their interaction was to prepare the grounds for Mr. Medvedev’s visit. Mr. Mukherjee expressed the hope that the visit would be a “landmark” in Indo-Russian ties.

The additional cooperation in the nuclear sphere relates to building of more reactors at the ongoing site of India-Russia nuclear collaboration at Koodankulam in Tamil Nadu. Both sides discussed the prospects of signing an agreement during the Russian President’s visit. The pact, initialled in February this year, will enable Russia help build four more reactors at the Koodankulam nuclear power plant.

Mr. Mukherjee described the discussions with Mr. Lavrov as “very useful” and said they covered bilateral, regional and international issues as well as the reviewed the progress made in specific areas since the last summit meeting in November last year. “We are satisfied with the overall development of our strategic partnership and the joint cooperative efforts in areas such as trade and investment, science and technology, energy and defence,” Mr. Mukherjee said.

He conveyed India’s gratitude and appreciation of Russia’s support at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and also discussed prospects for greater bilateral cooperation in the nuclear field.

Before statements by Mr. Mukherjee and Mr. Lavrov, the two leaders signed a protocol on consultations between the foreign offices in various areas. “These exchanges are useful for sharing views about development worldwide and promoting mutual understanding and trust,” Mr. Mukherjee said.

Both Foreign Ministers noted the holding of a wide range of programmes to celebrate the ‘Year of Russia in India.’ Mr. Mukherjee observed that such a large series of bilateral programmes were being held for the first time in almost 20 years.

Mr. Lavrov, in his statement, spoke about his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and was confident that both countries were pursuing an “intensive agenda of foreign policy cooperation in all possible formats,” including the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Russia-India-China, Brazil-Russia-India-China and many others.

Russia also reiterated its support for India’s membership at the world high table, including the G-8 and the United Nations Security Council.

 

[Black Stone]

This is probably the most important point the article made.
It further strengthens our claim for a security council seat permanently. But US and China will still be uncomfortable unless a few years pass.

It depends what India want as a permanent member. If India wants veto rights aswell then it is very unlikely as none of the current P5 would want to dilute their veto power. Not to mention that the other three members of the "Group of 4" would want the same treatment (should India apply for it as a group again).

If India just wants a permanent seat with no veto power then the chance is higher than with veto rights but would face a challenge. That would be the "United for Consensus" group. Those comprises regional rivals of the "group of 4" would be against their application.

Then the whole cycle begins again.

 

[p2prada]

It depends what India want as a permanent member. If India wants veto rights aswell then it is very unlikely as none of the current P5 would want to dilute their veto power. Not to mention that the other three members of the "Group of 4" would want the same treatment (should India apply for it as a group again).

If India just wants a permanent seat with no veto power then the chance is higher than with veto rights but would face a challenge. That would be the "United for Consensus" group. Those comprises regional rivals of the "group of 4" would be against their application.

Then the whole cycle begins again.

Actually, only US and China are opposed to India with Veto powers.
France, Russia and Britain have no problems as such.

Putin backtracked once. But, he was brought in line by a foreign ministry visit.

We actually lost our chance of entering the P5 by joining the group of 4. Alone, we had a better chance.