Pakistan should persuade world to sign nuclear deals

[gpit]

The establishment of NSG is initiated by US and other western powers, triggered by India nuclear test in 1974. It is obviously aimed at containing India and other developing countries, and is a part of the world order that US was intended to create. The purpose of the establishment was to maintain Western nuclear power up-hand, also in fear of nuclear proliferation, though the latter has been much propagandized by developed countries. Many developing countries view NSG (as well as NPT, CTBT) as a tool to hamper their nuclear development after nuclear proliferation has already and sufficiently saturated among the developed countries.

Now the US, mainly for its own interest, has substantially subverted the establishment founded by itself, the consequence could be profound and yet to see. While India’s need of energy must be recognized, the way of implementation is however controversial.

One option that GoP probably can exercise is to signed NPT and to lobby China, US and other NSG members to get footage on the nuclear market. This is based on the following considerations:

1)NPT doesn’t have a reason to exist, as it recognizes that people who refuse to participate in NPT won’t proliferate. So why should it be there?

2)By signing NPT, GoP will stand on higher moral ground and make the lobby easier.

3)It will not stop Pakistan to develop or improve nuclear weapons. People can use both computer simulation and subcritical nuclear test to achieve that goal. I guess this is precisely why the US and China signed CTBT in the first place, because they possess both technologies and don’t have to explode nuclear devices in CTBT terms. Actually I can vaguely remember that US might have detected one or more subcritical “explosions” in Western China after China signed CTBT. The catch here is that Pakistan needs large computers for simulation and subcritical explosion technologies that probably not many countries have. The reason behind the fact that India doesn’t want to join NPT and CTBT is probably just because it doesn’t have both means yet.

Only economically sound, can Pakistan be truly strong. And energy is the fuel to economy.

 

[Neo]

Nuclear deal likely with China during Zardari's visit ​

ISLAMABAD (September 11 2008): Pakistan and China have 'developed an understanding to enhance nuclear co-operation' sources in Xinhua, Chinese news agency, confirmed to this scribe. It is expected that a deal will be signed during the scheduled visit of President Asif Ali Zardari to China on the 17 of this month.

This will be Zardari's first foreign visit after taking oath as President of the country. Pakistan's growing nuclear energy needs are becoming an important incentive for China to act as a global player in the nuclear power industry, sources added. China has already completed a 300 MW nuclear power plant in Chashma, and is setting up another one there.

There is also an understanding that Beijing will sign a deal with Pakistan to build six nuclear power plants with an installed capacity of 300 MW each, sources added. Analysts see Sino-Pak understanding in light of Indo-US deal on civilian nuclear co-operation not going through, as nuclear supplier group will not support this deal.

The conviction is based on Pakistan non-proliferation record, which will be a roadblock in signing the deal and mustering support of nuclear supply group or International Atomic Energy Agency. They believe that the statement by the US and India is considered to be in the wake of Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari's proposed visit to China next week to negotiate a similar deal as the one signed by the US and India.

Pakistan is already in touch with China for the nuclear deal to meet its energy shortage and talks would start during Zardari's visit, an official said on condition of anonymity. Under the proposed deal, China will supply nuclear material to Pakistan to meet its energy needs. Describing the United States' nuclear pact with India a "bad idea from the start," an influential US newspaper on Tuesday urged Congress to resist the Bush administration pressure to quickly sign the deal.

"Congress should resist that pressure," The New York Times said in an editorial as the Bush administration faces the final hurdle in the implementation of the landmark agreement with India - convincing lawmakers that the deal has adequate safeguards as prescribed by the US law.

When India and the US surprised the world with nuclear pact in 2005, Pakistan and China had no problem seeing its political significance by willing to change the US law only in favour of India. Bush administration is signalling that it no longer treats Pakistan and India on level playing field.

 

[IceCold]

Nuclear deal likely with China during Zardari's visit ​

ISLAMABAD (September 11 2008): Pakistan and China have 'developed an understanding to enhance nuclear co-operation' sources in Xinhua, Chinese news agency, confirmed to this scribe. It is expected that a deal will be signed during the scheduled visit of President Asif Ali Zardari to China on the 17 of this month.

This will be Zardari's first foreign visit after taking oath as President of the country. Pakistan's growing nuclear energy needs are becoming an important incentive for China to act as a global player in the nuclear power industry, sources added. China has already completed a 300 MW nuclear power plant in Chashma, and is setting up another one there.

There is also an understanding that Beijing will sign a deal with Pakistan to build six nuclear power plants with an installed capacity of 300 MW each, sources added. Analysts see Sino-Pak understanding in light of Indo-US deal on civilian nuclear co-operation not going through, as nuclear supplier group will not support this deal.

The conviction is based on Pakistan non-proliferation record, which will be a roadblock in signing the deal and mustering support of nuclear supply group or International Atomic Energy Agency. They believe that the statement by the US and India is considered to be in the wake of Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari's proposed visit to China next week to negotiate a similar deal as the one signed by the US and India.

Pakistan is already in touch with China for the nuclear deal to meet its energy shortage and talks would start during Zardari's visit, an official said on condition of anonymity. Under the proposed deal, China will supply nuclear material to Pakistan to meet its energy needs. Describing the United States' nuclear pact with India a "bad idea from the start," an influential US newspaper on Tuesday urged Congress to resist the Bush administration pressure to quickly sign the deal.

"Congress should resist that pressure," The New York Times said in an editorial as the Bush administration faces the final hurdle in the implementation of the landmark agreement with India - convincing lawmakers that the deal has adequate safeguards as prescribed by the US law.

When India and the US surprised the world with nuclear pact in 2005, Pakistan and China had no problem seeing its political significance by willing to change the US law only in favour of India. Bush administration is signalling that it no longer treats Pakistan and India on level playing field.

problem is Zardari isnt going to China anymore. He'll visit his daddy in UK first who has called upon him like some sort of stooge to visit UK so that they could have a disucssion on the new strategy rather i should say telling him to remove the COAS and keep some one in line with the US demands.

 

[Marshal]

One option that GoP probably can exercise is to signed NPT and to lobby China, US and other NSG members to get footage on the nuclear market. This is based on the following considerations:

1)NPT doesn’t have a reason to exist, as it recognizes that people who refuse to participate in NPT won’t proliferate. So why should it be there?

2)By signing NPT, GoP will stand on higher moral ground and make the lobby easier.

3)It will not stop Pakistan to develop or improve nuclear weapons. People can use both computer simulation and subcritical nuclear test to achieve that goal.

The reason behind the fact that India doesn’t want to join NPT and CTBT is probably just because it doesn’t have both means yet.

1) These two statements in Red are contradictary two each other : any country who is signetury to NPT can not develope nuclear devise
Official text of NPT with back ground
NPT: background
Quote from the text of NPT

Article I

Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.

Article II

Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.
*Here India and Pakistan can not be classify as N wepon state as they did not test their wepons before 1967. so refer to article 2 *

2)By signing the NPT the signaturey country has to put all its reactor under the IAEA safegaurd.
3)signatury country has to negotiate for the general disarment or for the total disarment of the N-wepon.

and these are the three reason why India is refusing to sign the NPT.......
as far as CTBT is concerned India is reluctunt to sign it because of the political reason......as it wont be possible for the GOI to sell this deal to the people of India....


I didnt get your logic.....accourding to your post pakistan should sign the NPT.......but After signing the non proliferation treaty If a country start proliferating by developing N devices then what is the meaning of signing the Non proliferation treaty or NPT it self .......otherwise every single country who are signetury to NPT would be N wepon state....

 

[muse]

Signing NPT does not mean that the ability to develope nuclear technology and explosive devices is given -- developing nuclear tech is not the same as proliferation - it were, Big 5 would be considered proliferators.

 

[Marshal]

Signing NPT does not mean that the ability to develope nuclear technology and explosive devices is given -- developing nuclear tech is not the same as proliferation - it were, Big 5 would be considered proliferators.

Read the NPT text carefully........
1) what you are saying is only applicable to NPT recognised N wepon state.........not to India and Pakistan ....
2) I was refering this in the context of the gpit's argument....that after signing the NPT, pakistan can develope or improve the N devise..wht does he mean by this.....(a) If he was talking abt only improving the technology of existing N devices.then its ok ...though there is still a confussion in the NPT text it self ...it says all the signtury countries or the countries who want to sign the NPT must negotiate general or total n-disarmament in good faith...If it suggest that NPT signed country must go for total disarmament then where is the question of improving the technology of N-devise.......but (b) if he was talking abt produsing more no. of wepons after signing the NPT then the NPT wont allow it to do that......
3) Technology which are developed for civillian use if a non nuclear wepon NPT signatury state trnsfer it for its wepon program ..this is also called a proliferation........

 

[Marshal]

Signing NPT does not mean that the ability to develope nuclear technology and explosive devices is given -- developing nuclear tech is not the same as proliferation - it were, Big 5 would be considered proliferators.

NPT is different for recognised N wepon state and for non N wepon state..Dont try to see India and pakistan through the glass of N5....India is not willing to sign it because.....India belive that it is discreminatory to the member states.....the rules for every country must be same .......

 

[gpit]

self deleted

 

[gpit]

Marshal,

1. NWS (Nuclear Weapon States) are supposedly not to transfer control over nuclear weapons to NNWT ( Non-Nuclear Weapon States), (Article I) yet there is US-NATO nuclear sharing.

2. If NPT already has no credit, as has been further exacerbated by the Indo-US deal, people can do anything, be them signatories or not.

 

[Marshal]

Marshal,

1. NWS (Nuclear Weapon States) are supposedly not to transfer control over nuclear weapons to NNWT ( Non-Nuclear Weapon States), (Article I) yet there is US-NATO nuclear sharing.

2. If NPT already has no credit, as has been further exacerbated by the Indo-US deal, people can do anything, be them signatories or not.

Gpit.....
Everything you have said is absolutely right ......US-NATO weapon sharing is a clear violation of the NPT............but not accourding to US .... US pressents the argument that all the weapons are under complete controll of the US govt and forces.......during the peace time the US soldiors guard these weapons on european territary and during the war time the NPT itself is irrelevant (unbelivable argument)........so there is no breach of NPT.......
The other thing is NATO US weapon sharing aggreement was signed before the NPT come in to existance......Interestingly US and NATO did convince the soviet union for not considering the NATO US agreement as proliferation at the time of negotiation of NPT.

As for your second point ....I can only say that US and Soviet Union both have had used NPT as a tool and as per their liking because.......You know it.......

 

[Marshal]

Marshal,

2. If NPT already has no credit, as has been further exacerbated by the Indo-US deal, people can do anything, be them signatories or not.

well what you have said is easier said than done...........

 

[IceCold]

The establishment of NSG is initiated by US and other western powers, triggered by India nuclear test in 1974. It is obviously aimed at containing India and other developing countries, and is a part of the world order that US was intended to create. The purpose of the establishment was to maintain Western nuclear power up-hand, also in fear of nuclear proliferation, though the latter has been much propagandized by developed countries. Many developing countries view NSG (as well as NPT, CTBT) as a tool to hamper their nuclear development after nuclear proliferation has already and sufficiently saturated among the developed countries.

Now the US, mainly for its own interest, has substantially subverted the establishment founded by itself, the consequence could be profound and yet to see. While India’s need of energy must be recognized, the way of implementation is however controversial.

One option that GoP probably can exercise is to signed NPT and to lobby China, US and other NSG members to get footage on the nuclear market. This is based on the following considerations:

1)NPT doesn’t have a reason to exist, as it recognizes that people who refuse to participate in NPT won’t proliferate. So why should it be there?

2)By signing NPT, GoP will stand on higher moral ground and make the lobby easier.

3)It will not stop Pakistan to develop or improve nuclear weapons. People can use both computer simulation and subcritical nuclear test to achieve that goal. I guess this is precisely why the US and China signed CTBT in the first place, because they possess both technologies and don’t have to explode nuclear devices in CTBT terms. Actually I can vaguely remember that US might have detected one or more subcritical “explosions” in Western China after China signed CTBT. The catch here is that Pakistan needs large computers for simulation and subcritical explosion technologies that probably not many countries have. The reason behind the fact that India doesn’t want to join NPT and CTBT is probably just because it doesn’t have both means yet.

Only economically sound, can Pakistan be truly strong. And energy is the fuel to economy.

But in any case we are better off then this moral high grounds. Signing or not signing NPT will not reduce this discrimination for Pakistan for the very obvious reasons. The only thing that it will do however is jeopardise our nuclear program.
We will have to work on our own or perhaps with the assisstance the chinese could offer us but nothing more then that. If we have had better relations with Russia perhaps we would have had another country to develop nuclear relations with, however since that is not the case, its useless to even think about going for the kind of deal similar to the one offered to India, because frankly its not going to happen, and second if for one reason one might assume that it might happen, it will come with so many strings attached to it and that if we accept it, it will be like handing over our nuclear program. The sooner the Pakistanis realize this, the sooner we will get out of this wet dream of ours and will start working with what we have got.

 

[Marshal]

China mum on possible nuke deal with Pak

Amid reports that Pakistan may ink a nuclear deal with China next week during President Asif Ali Zardari's maiden visit in Beijing, China on Thursday kept mum on the issue but said all countries were entitled to make peaceful use of atomic energy.

China will continue to conduct nuclear energy cooperation with "relevant countries", Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said ahead of the visit of the new Pakistan President to Beijing from September 17.

"All countries are entitled to make peaceful use of nuclear energy," she said when asked to comment on media reports of a Sino-Pakistani nuclear deal, similar to the Indo-US agreement which Beijing apparently tried to scuttle at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) meeting in Vienna.

Jiang said she had "no information" on whether Pakistan was seeking a new pact on trade in nuclear material.

China is "prudent and responsible" about its military exports, she pointed out. It has taken "strict administrative measures" to ensure that the necessary international standards relating to exports of military material are observed in China's trade with all countries, she said.

She said China welcomes the visit by Zardari, who assumed the post on Tuesday. Zardari's visit will coincide with the closing ceremony of the Paralympic Games, which he is expected to attend.

Incidentally, India's National Security Adviser M K Narayanan is also expected to visit Beijing around the time of Zardari's visit for the next round of India-China boundary talks.
NDTV.com: China mum on possible nuke deal with Pak

 

[Neo]

Pakistan's all weather ally​

As the controversial nuclear deal between India and the United States moves toward a final review in the U.S. Congress, Pakistan appears to be pushing for a similar deal with China. The Bush administration won approval for the India arrangement before the Nuclear Suppliers Group earlier this month, and both Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have been actively lobbying for it at home and abroad.

But Washington has ruled out any possibility of cutting a similar deal with Pakistan. Many now expect China to step into the void.

Critics of the Indian nuclear deal worry that it may spark a nuclear arms race in South Asia. Michael Krepon of the Stimson Center says international proliferation experts already view past proliferation problems in Pakistan with concern. The country formed the center of the most notorious of all proliferation rings, led by the founder of Pakistan's nuclear program, A.Q. Khan. Some experts also express concerns about the China's proliferation record, though it's a signatory to the NPT and the Chinese government says it opposes proliferation. Patricia McNerney, the State Department's top official on nonproliferaton policy told Congress in May that ""a number of Chinese entities continue to supply items and technologies useful in weapons of mass destruction"" to regimes of concern. Chinese state-owned corporations have been accused of proliferating technology to Pakistan, North Korea, and Libya in the past.

Now closer relations between the United States and India, and particularly the potential nuclear deal, may force Islamabad to seek a counterbalance in Beijing. Souring relations between Washington and Islamabad over unilateral U.S. military action inside Pakistan's tribal areas seems to have reaffirmed Pakistan's longheld belief that the United States is an unreliable ally. As this interactive timeline explains, Pakistan and China grew closer in the 1960s as Washington and Islamabad began to part ways over handling regional issues. In particular, Pakistan felt betrayed after the United States cut off aid during its war with India in 1965. Pakistanis also felt spurned in the early 1990s, after Washington ceased using the country as a conduit for arming the anti-Soviet Afghan mujahedeen.

Since then, China has been the cornerstone of Pakistan's foreign policy ""because it was the only country that fully identified with its anti-India goals"" (YaleGlobal), writes Willem van Kemenade, a visiting scholar at Johns Hopkins' School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. As this Backgrounder details, Pakistan relies on China for major military and economic assistance, nuclear and ballistic missile technology, aircraft, and small arms. According to Thomas C. Reed, a former U.S. Air Force secretary, China probably helped Pakistan test a nuclear weapon inside China in May 1990. Reed adds that this weapon was most likely based on a Chinese design.

China, however, has its own concerns about increasing extremism inside Pakistan, particularly given evidence that Uighur separatists from the Xinjiang province in western China seek sanctuary and training in Pakistan's tribal areas. Recent kidnappings of Chinese citizens by Pakistani militants have added to tensions between the allies. Pakistan's questionable record on nonproliferation may also hinder such a pact. Krepon says ""there will still be great reluctance on the part of nuclear suppliers to treat Pakistan on the same footing as India."" In a recent press conference in New Delhi, U.S. Ambassador to India David C. Mulford ruled out a possible nuclear deal between China and Pakistan.

 

[nitesh]

China to help Pak set up 10 nuke power plants-Pakistan-World-The Times of India



China to help Pak set up 10 nuke power plants
24 Sep 2008, 1640 hrs IST,PTI

ISLAMABAD: In an apparent bid to counter the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, Pakistan plans to seek fuel technology from China for 10 new atomic power plants it intends to set up over the next two decades.

During a high-level meeting, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani approved the construction of two new nuclear plants at Chashma in Punjab province, sources said, adding that these plants are expected to be built with Chinese assistance.

The September 19 meeting attended by top officials of the military and Strategic Plans Division, the body that oversees the country's nuclear arsenal, had drawn up plans to acquire new nuclear plants and a satellite communications system.

The Chashma complex, located about 200 kilometre southwest of Islamabad, already has two atomic power plants one that is functional and other that is expected to be completed in 2011.

Pakistan plans to build 10 nuclear power plants at six sites across the country in the next 22 years and President Asif Ali Zardari will seek fuel technology from China for future atomic plants during his forthcoming visit to that country, The News daily reported on Wednesday.

The plants are aimed at generating 8,800 MW of nuclear energy in the next two decades, a senior government official said.

The six sites selected for the new plants are Qadirabad-Bulloki link canal near Qadirabad Headworks, Dera Ghazi Khan Canal near Tuansa barrage, Taunsa-Punjnad canal near Multan, Nara canal near Sukkur, Pat feeder canal near Guddu and Kabul River near Nowshera, the report said.