N-deal with Pak could hit ties, India cautions China

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

First, They should pursue this deal if it is properly approved by IAEA and NSG other sanctions from these countries are inevitable.

No sanctions will be applied since the IAEA has nothing to do with this other than approve and implement safeguards, if approached. The NSG rules are not binding on any member state, it states that on the main page of the NSG site, so there is no direct threat of sanctions from the NSG. Where sanctions could come into play is if the US tries to force the French and Japanese to withhold supplies and investment in China's civilian nuclear power sector, a decision that would of course have a significant economic impact on the French and Japanese since they stand to make billions from the Chinese NPP industry.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan off course will object, that is what the Indians do when we even buy a single bullet.

But let me point out again that Pakistani objections were based on the arbitrary nature of the deal and how the rules were being broken for just one country. Pakistan's position was that all countries should be treated equally.

We can clearly see now that no uniform process for non-NPT States was put in place under which Israel and Pakistan might also have been able to meet set criteria and apply for exemptions. The 'India exemption' was pure and simple a discriminatory and arbitrary exemption pushed by the three countries (US, France, Russia) that stand to make billions from India's NPP market, and in the case of the US, also a move to cement strategic ties with India and bolster it as a counterweight to China.

When rules are so easily broken and discriminatory exemptions granted to one nation, arguments for others to 'follow the rules' come across as completely hollow and meaningless.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

there are only 2 fully CRITICAL reactors and one partial Critical reactor in pakistan , i have provided the link also.

How did you come up with those numbers?

Currently Critical reactors:

1. Khushab I
2. KANUPP
3. CHASNUPP I
4. PINSTECH Research reactor

Almost Critical:

1. KHUSHAB II (Some satellite images from early this year show steam emerging from the cooling towers suggesting, according to ISIS, that the reactor has gone critical)
2. KHUSHAB III
3. CHASNUPP II

Would you mind clarifying why the first four reactors are not considered 100% critical by you?

we exploded devices not bombs, unlike Pakistan did by exploding Plutonium based weapon(aqquired directly from china), which can be fitted on missile. One who has fair knowledge of Nuclear Warheads would understand the difference, so it is FRIENDLY!!!!

Pakistan's nuclear warheads were Uranium based, not Plutonium based. And the argument of 'acquired directly from China' is just a fanboy argument propagated by people with an interest in vilifying Pakistan and China. No concrete evidence exists to substantiate that claim. Otherwise China would be in serious violation of the NPT.

You said we stealed the material, sorry sir but we do not steal material nor the blueprints from ones lab like AQ Khan. The Material was produced in our reactor aqquired from Canada.

The material was 'stolen' from its original purpose (civilian use) to construct a nuclear bomb. That was not the intended purpose of the CIRUS (correction, it was not CANDU that supplied the fuel) reactor constructed by the Canadians in India.

And almost every country in the world has engaged in nuclear technology theft, Pakistan is not alone in that.

 

[karan.1970]

What's not true ?? Am talking about China, not Pakistan. Pakistan off course will object, that is what the Indians do when we even buy a single bullet. So no surprises there. I said China did not opposed the US in NSG when the US-Indo deal was being made, as NSG rules were bended / suspended / broken through the approval of the members.

I was responding to your statement about " we did no opposition", whereas you did..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I was responding to your statement about " we did no opposition", whereas you did..

Yes, and the context of the opposition has been provided in my response to TK above.

 

[mjnaushad]

there are only 2 fully CRITICAL reactors and one partial Critical reactor in pakistan , i have provided the link also.


we exploded devices not bombs, unlike Pakistan did by exploding Plutonium based weapon(aqquired directly from china), which can be fitted on missile. One who has fair knowledge of Nuclear Warheads would understand the difference, so it is FRIENDLY!!!!

You said we stealed the material, sorry sir but we do not steal material nor the blueprints from ones lab like AQ Khan. The Material was produced in our reactor aqquired from Canada.

Accusing Pakistan without any proof or evidence. Give us any proof you have. Its been discussed thousand times before. Spraklingway gave enough information about this matter to confirm that Pakistan nuclear program in indigenous and everything came from foreign was totally legal.

MODS: Please ask this person to provide proof of all the accusation he made on Pakistan. If he can't i request to delete his post and take appropriate action against him as such post only defame this forum. Most of teh information on defence.pk is counted as source because of the high class post made by mature and professional people on this forum. I hope you dont want to lose this status.

 

[karan.1970]

But let me point out again that Pakistani objections were based on the arbitrary nature of the deal and how the rules were being broken for just one country. Pakistan's position was that all countries should be treated equally.

We can clearly see now that no uniform process for non-NPT States was put in place under which Israel and Pakistan might also have been able to meet set criteria and apply for exemptions. The 'India exemption' was pure and simple a discriminatory and arbitrary exemption pushed by the three countries (US, France, Russia) that stand to make billions from India's NPP market, and in the case of the US, also a move to cement strategic ties with India and bolster it as a counterweight to China.

When rules are so easily broken and discriminatory exemptions granted to one nation, arguments for others to 'follow the rules' come across as completely hollow and meaningless.

Just 2 points here..

1. Pakistan did object and not on the discimination since there was no Talk of Nuke deal to Pakistan. The objection was on grounds of the Nuke deal creating nuclear imbalance

2. On the discrimanatory nature of the Indo US deal, well these are called discretionary powers for a reason. There are always exceptions to the rules. Thats precisely why you cant have guidelines around the same. You come to a situation of a discretionary waiver only when you have a situation where the existing norms do not fit. With India, the key NSG members decided that situation existed. With Pakistan, not so much so far.. You and I can scream all we want but discretionary exceptions are taken subjectively only.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Just 2 points here..

1. Pakistan did object and not on the discimination since there was no Talk of Nuke deal to Pakistan. The objection was on grounds of the Nuke deal creating nuclear imbalance

Pakistani statements to the IAEA and on other occasions clearly point out that discrimination and arbitrary exemptions were a primary cause of opposition. Nuclear imbalance was a legitimate concern as well, given the potential increased access to spent Plutonium India would have access to by virtue of more heavy water NPP's.

So on both counts the concerns were legitimate.

2. On the discrimanatory nature of the Indo US deal, well these are called discretionary powers for a reason. There are always exceptions to the rules. Thats precisely why you cant have guidelines around the same. You come to a situation of a discretionary waiver only when you have a situation where the existing norms do not fit. With India, the key NSG members decided that situation existed. With Pakistan, not so much so far.. You and I can scream all we want but discretionary exceptions are taken subjectively only.

All that verbiage is nothing but a restating of my point that the exemption was discriminatory, arbitrary and a violation of the NSG's own rules, and therefore makes objections to other nations making 'subjective decisions' hollow and meaningless.

 

[T-Faz]

there are only 2 fully CRITICAL reactors and one partial Critical reactor in pakistan , i have provided the link also.

we exploded devices not bombs, unlike Pakistan did by exploding Plutonium based weapon(aqquired directly from china), which can be fitted on missile. One who has fair knowledge of Nuclear Warheads would understand the difference, so it is FRIENDLY!!!!

You said we stealed the material, sorry sir but we do not steal material nor the blueprints from ones lab like AQ Khan. The Material was produced in our reactor aqquired from Canada.

Back your arguments with refrences, if you cannot do that, then there is no point in ranting about which you are not aware of.

First of all our nuclear program was Uranium based, this alone shows your lack of knowledge about the matter at hand.

Let me recap our program for the likes of you:

March 1974: Pakistan Sets up Nuclear Warhead Design Team, Facility

A team of scientists and engineers working on conventional weapons at a Pakistan army ordnance facility are transferred to a secret location to begin working on a nuclear warhead design. The team is led by Dr. Samar Mubarakmand, a founding member of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission. However, the team will not have finished its work by 1981, and a second, competing program will then be set up (see 1981). [Levy and Scott-Clark, 2007, pp. 90-91]

After May 18, 1974: A. Q. Khan Offers Services to Pakistan

After India’s first successful nuclear test on May 18, 1974, Pakistani nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan, at this time working in a centrifuge production facility in the Netherlands, begins to approach Pakistani government representatives to offer help with Pakistan’s nuclear program. First he approaches a pair of Pakistani military scientists who are in the Netherlands on business. He tells them he wants to help Pakistan’s nuclear program, but they discourage him, saying it would be hard for him to find a job in Pakistan. Undaunted, Khan then writes to Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. He sets out his experience and encourages Bhutto to make a nuclear bomb using uranium, rather than plutonium, the method Pakistan is currently trying to adopt. Pakistan will examine Khan’s idea and find it a good one (see Summer-Autumn 1974). [Armstrong and Trento, 2007, pp. 48]

Summer-Autumn 1974: Pakistan Considers A. Q. Khan’s Proposals for Uranium Bomb

Pakistani government leaders consider a secret proposal made by Pakistani nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan that it build a uranium bomb (see After May 18, 1974) and find it to be a good idea. Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto writes of Khan, “He seems to be making sense.” Siddique Butt, an employee of Pakistan’s embassy in Belgium who will go on to help Khan’s future nuclear smuggling ring, investigates Khan and finds he is a top scientist who can be helpful to Pakistan. Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, another future key associate of Khan’s, is asked to write another assessment, which finds that, if implemented, Khan’s ideas could give Pakistan enough uranium for a bomb by 1979. Based on these reports, the Pakistani government starts working with Khan, who begins to steal secrets for them (see October 1974). [Armstrong and Trento, 2007, pp. 49-50]

After February 15, 1975: Pakistan Begins Uranium Enrichment Program

Following discussions with fellow Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan, on February 15, 1975, head of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) Munir Khan proposes that Pakistan formally establish a uranium enrichment program, to go with the plutonium enrichment program it already has. The $450 million plan calls for a centrifuge plant, a uranium mine, and a facility to produce uranium gas, which would allow Pakistan to produce a nuclear weapon. The proposal is approved by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and a scientist known as Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood is placed in charge of the program. [Armstrong and Trento, 2007, pp. 52-3]

July 31, 1976: A. Q. Khan Appointed Head of Pakistan’s Uranium Enrichment Program

Pakistani nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan is appointed director of Pakistan’s uranium enrichment program, replacing Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood. The program is also separated from the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC), and Khan is to report directly to the prime minister. The changes are a result of complaints Khan made about Mahmood and PAEC chief Munir Khan. In letters to both Munir Khan and Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Khan had threatened to resign and said that progress with uranium enrichment was very slow: “Each week passing is putting the project behind by at least two to three months.” In a meeting with Bhutto, Khan calls the PAEC chief and his associates “liars and cheats,” and points out there is no way they can carry out a promised test for a plutonium bomb by the deadline they have set. The separation of the plutonium bomb project under Munir Khan and the uranium bomb project under A. Q. Khan does have a benefit for Pakistan: the world is focused on frustrating Munir Khan’s plutonium project, and for a short while A. Q. Khan can “move forward relatively unhindered.” [Armstrong and Trento, 2007, pp. 57-59]

August 1977: A. Q. Khan, Assistants Begin Traveling to Britain

Pakistani nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan and people related to him start to travel to Britain to purchase components for Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. Khan’s link to the program is already known to Western intelligence agencies, but it is unclear how closely he and his associates are followed at this time. On one trip in August 1977, Khan meets British businessmen Peter Griffin and Abdus Salam, who supply equipment for Khan. The meeting is also attended by a number of Pakistanis: Brigadier Sajawal Khan Malik, a civil engineer building a nuclear facility for Khan, Dr. Farooq Hashmi, his deputy, Dr. G. D. Alam, Khan’s computer expert, and a brigadier general named Anis Nawab. Griffin will become a key supplier for Khan, and Pakistanis will frequently visit him in London. Khan sometimes comes himself if a large order is to be placed, but most times he sends a representative, Colonel Rashid Ali Qazi, and other scientists. After each visit, Griffin receives a telex specifying exactly which parts Khan wants. Griffin also becomes friends with Khan and is invited to visit him at his home in Pakistan. [Levy and Scott-Clark, 2007, pp. 39-40]

Next time show some repect when you blurt out your garbage against anyone. We do not need to listen to you Indian government propaganda information that you are spewing over here.

 

[T-Faz]

Even Dr Abdus Salam was in on the action, he provided important equipment to AQ Khan through which he was able to enrich uranium for the first time. The whole operation was done with such sophistication and intricassy that others were up in flames with envy.

This is what AQ Khan said in 1984:

February 1984: A. Q. Khan Indicates Pakistan Has Nuclear Weapons Program

A. Q. Khan, head of Pakistan’s attempt to build a nuclear device, makes comments to a Pakistani journalist indicating the country is engaged in a nuclear weapons program: “Western countries had never imagined that a poor and backward country like Pakistan would end their [nuclear] monopoly in such a short time.… As soon as they realized that Pakistan had dashed their dreams to the ground, they pounced at Pakistan and me like hungry jackals and began attacking us with all kinds of accusations and falsehood.… How could they tolerate a Muslim country becoming their equal in this field.

 

[sam27]

Don't worry China isn't gonna back off just due to Indian factor as they have many other reasons for blaming India, same with Pakistan.

China supported the Indo-US deal when US bended/suspended/broke the NSG rules and China supported it, so China is gonna do the same to US, we did no opposition, so you also keep quiet.

And the reason for US opposition is not to stop the deal, rather more like a chest thumping exercise to show the world that it is still the boss.

Sino-Pak nuke deal and cooperation is a must, as we all know for our energy needs it is one of the most effective and efficient way.

First thing first, China never Supported Indo-US deal. It was against it. But it was compelled to accept it. Not support it. Why would you oppose it, do you think that NSG would have listen to u (or were u capable of it). But u fully used the back channel called China.

U.S is still the boss, it does not have to prove it to third world countries like ours (including China).

Thats wt my point, IMHO the deal should go thru, i m not cynical here. I have Pakistani friends. I have idea that how people r suffering there.
It would definitely help them.

But mod my only question is if this deal fails who wld u blame? Indo-US nexus. Right. Look, the deal is not certain yet. Its like 50-50. If NSG members r staunch in their opposition then China wld certainly back off. Do u think it will face embarrassment for u.?

Hence they wld convey u that dear Pakistani friends, it was because of India this deal failed. N it wld be in every newspaper of ur country n there u go, more India bashing.

However, wholeheartedly i feel that Pakistan's energy crisis should be solved, in any possible manner.

 

[schneider]

How did you come up with those numbers?

Currently Critical reactors:

1. Khushab I
2. KANUPP
3. CHASNUPP I
4. PINSTECH Research reactor

Almost Critical:

1. KHUSHAB II (Some satellite images from early this year show steam emerging from the smokestacks suggesting, according to ISIS, that the reactor has gone critical)
2. KHUSHAB III
3. CHASNUPP II

Would you mind clarifying why the first four reactors are not considered 100% critical by you?


Pakistan's nuclear warheads were Uranium based, not Plutonium based. And the argument of 'acquired directly from China' is just a fanboy argument propagated by people with an interest in vilifying Pakistan and China. No concrete evidence exists to substantiate that claim. Otherwise China would be in serious violation of the NPT.

The material was 'stolen' from its original purpose (civilian use) to construct a nuclear bomb. That was not the intended purpose of the CANDU reactor constructed by the Canadians in India.

And almost every country in the world has engaged in nuclear technology theft, Pakistan is not alone in that.

And how many of them are Power Reactors??? Because the number i gave, was for Power reactors.
Nuclear power in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
KANNUP1
CHASNUPP1

subcritical or partial critical does not mean that the reactor is not critical.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And how many of them are Power Reactors??? Because the number i gave, was for Power reactors.
Nuclear power in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
KANNUP1
CHASNUPP1

subcritical or partial critical does not mean that the reactor is not critical.

Why just consider power reactors? The whole point here is that Pakistan has constructed and operated 4 reactors, safely, for decades now. If that is not the the concern, that why raise the issue of the number of reactors Pakistan operates?

Pakistan is now in the process of increasing the number of reactors it operates to 7, possibly as early as next year.

 

[schneider]

Why just consider power reactors? The whole point here is that Pakistan has constructed and operated 4 reactors, safely, for decades now. If that is not the the concern, that why raise the issue of the number of reactors Pakistan operates?

Pakistan is now in the process of increasing the number of reactors it operates to 7, possibly as early as next year.

because the nuclear deal is not a military nuclear deal, its a civil nuclear deal. only 2 reactors are used for power generation that also because they are under IAEA scanner. So this means Military has a hold on your Nuclear Ambitions.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

because the nuclear deal is not a military nuclear deal, its a civil nuclear deal. only 2 reactors are used for power generation that also because they are under IAEA scanner. So this means Military has a hold on your Nuclear Ambitions.

Yes it is a civilian nuclear deal, and yes currently there are only two reactors used for generating electricity (with the third expected to start by next year) - that is why Pakistan is looking to construct more NPP's to generate electricity - how do you propose Pakistan have more than '2 reactors used for power generation' without such sales?

Secondly, the two reactors under IAEA safeguards were put there willingly, since Pakistan has a separate military nuclear program.