Bush signs nuclear deal with India</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The agreement means American businesses can sell nuclear fuel, technology and reactors to India. In return, India will allow international inspections of its civilian -- but not military -- nuclear power plants.<b> It also promised not to resume testing of nuclear weapons</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Achariaji,
Just to refresh your memory, an important quotation from the earlier postings ''Should I read this, Shame of India is saying Bush punked him.
Fool always get fooled. Fool is written all over Moron Singh. Now Bush gave him excellent certificate.
Babus of India should be ashamed of themselves. slap on MEA fools. ''
<!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM-->QUOTE(ravish @ Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Achariaji,
Just to refresh your memory, an important quotation from the earlier postings ''Should I read this, Shame of India is saying Bush punked him.
Fool always get fooled. Fool is written all over Moron Singh. Now Bush gave him excellent certificate.
Babus of India should be ashamed of themselves. slap on MEA fools. ''
[right][snapback]88986[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Oct 9 2008, 11:01 PM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Oct 9 2008, 11:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ravish @ Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Achariaji,
Just to refresh your memory, an important quotation from the earlier postings ''Should I read this, Shame of India is saying Bush punked him.
Fool always get fooled. Fool is written all over Moron Singh. Now Bush gave him excellent certificate.
Babus of India should be ashamed of themselves. slap on MEA fools. ''
[right][snapback]88986[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which posting .
Please provide the links
[right][snapback]88990[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its my comments, people are getting giddy reading your pro UPA guy paid article.
relax. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The post Nuclear deal India â West particularly US relations will be in a rather different settings. In the case of the United States, apart from the expected export of equipment for the proposed nuclear plants what else are expected to be in the pipeline?
It is expected that the United States will now try hard to sell its products to our defence forces. The wish list of the entire three Services look impressive and it is also expected that India will also be keen to decrease its dependence on Russia and CIS for its supplies. The purchase of the maritime reconnaissance aircrafts from Boeing and the purchase of some avionics and radar etc is also expected from the United States. Orders for C-130 J has already been placed with the manufacturers.
What will be the reaction in the Pakistani establishment of this development. Narshji your considered views please
The Indian Express reports
Quote
Washington, October 10: India and the US operationalised the "path-breaking" bilateral nuclear deal as they signed the 123 Agreement in Washington on Saturday, with New Delhi insisting that the accord is "legally-binding" on both sides.
External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice put the final seal on the agreement at an impressive ceremony held in the Benjamin Franklin Room of the State Department, culminating a crisis-ridden process initiated on July 18, 2005 in Washington during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit for talks with US President George W. Bush.
"Both India and the US Administration have now completed all our internal procedures to be able to sign this path breaking agreement," Mukherjee said after signing the agreement, paving the way for entry of American companies into the Indian nuclear market after three decades.
"Today is an important day for India-US relations, for global energy security and for our common endeavour to promote sustainable development while addressing environmental challenges," he said at the ceremony held at the State Department.
Noting that the agreement reflects a "careful balance of rights and obligations", he said "its (agreement's) provisions are now legally-binding on both sides once the agreement enters into force."
This comment assumes significance since the US had said that the contents of the 123 Agreement were a political commitment and not legally binding, triggering concerns in India over aspects like promises on nuclear fuel assurances.
He said the importance of the Agreement is that it was the first step to civil nuclear cooperation and trade between India and the US.
"It is also the first step to India's cooperation with the rest of the world in civil nuclear energy," he said.
He said the signing of the agreement has brought to fruition three years of "extraordinary effort" by both India and the US and it was "one more visible sign of the transformed relationship and partnership" that the two countries are building.
"We now look forward to working with US companies on the commercial steps that will follow to implement this landmark agreement," Mukherjee said.
The External Affairs Minister described the agreement as the first step to India's cooperation with the rest of the world in civil nuclear field.
By reinforcing and increasing the nuclear element in the country's energy mix, which is vital to sustain India's growth rate, nuclear power will directly boost industrial growth, rural development and help expand every vital sector of the country's economy, he said.
"It enables India to respond with her global partners to the challenges of climate change and global warming by strengthening her own economic growth and sustainable development," he said.
Mukherjee said the wide-ranging initiatives announced by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W Bush in July 2005 and March 2006 have led to a transformed relationship between the two countries.
Praising Bush, Rice and the American Congress besides the Indian-American community for making the agreement a reality, the External Affairs Minister said New Delhi looks forward to working with Washington in other fields as well.
He listed these as combating terrorism, containing and fighting pandemics, climate change, ensuring food security, cooperating in disaster relief operations and other regional and global initiatives.
Earlier, Rice said that the 123 Agreement was unprecedented and demonstrates the vast potential for strategic partnership between India and the United States. She said the nuclear deal is not just nuclear cooperation.
"Today we look to the future, a shared future. Let us use the partnership to fight against terrorism, to try a new socialist agenda for the 21st century."
"India and the US can do all these together. Now there is nothing we cannot do," the Secretary of State said. Prime Minister Singh "literally risked his political future" for the Indo-US nuclear agreement and remade his government again with the support he needed, Rice said, referring to the withdrawal of support to the NDA government by the Left parties.
The formal signing ceremony of the bilateral agreement could not take place during Rice' visit to New Delhi last week due to India's concerns on certain riders in the US Congressional legislation on the nuclear deal, is being held after US President George W. Bush assured New Delhi that the new law makes no changes on fuel supply assurance commitments or the terms of the 123 agreement.
India's Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs also gave the go ahead to Mukherjee to sign the agreement after approving the pact initiated by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Bush in 2005.
The signing ceremony was attended among others by India's Ambassador to the US, Ronen Sen and senior State Department officials.
Describing the 123 Agreement as "unprecedented", Rice said it demonstrated the vast potential partnership between India and the United States.
"The world's largest democracy and the world's oldest democracy joined together by our shared values and increasingly by many shared interests now stand as equals closer together than ever before," she said.
Rice said that US President Bush first saw the potential for the need for transforming the US-India partnership in 1999 when he was still the Governor of Texas and he made it one of his highest priorities.
"That's what democratic leaders do. They deal with the world as it is but they lay out a vision of a world as it could be. A vision of a new better reality and they lead their nations to expand the scope of the possible," she said.
"I know I speak for my friend foreign minister Mukherjee when I say how honoured we are to serve such leaders and to play the roles we have in hoping to shape this diplomatic triumph for both our nations. Let no one assume though that our work is now finished. Indeed, what is most valuable of this agreement is how it unlocks a new and far broader world of the potential for strategic partnership in this 21st century," the top US diplomat said.
"Let us share this partnership to shape an international order in which all states can exercise their sovereignty securely, responsibly and in peace," Rice said.
"Let us use this partnership to tackle the great global challenges of our time-- energy security and climate change, terrorism and violent extremism, she said.
"Let us use this partnership to protect and promote our common values, human rights and human dignities, democracy, liberty and the rule of law for people who are diverse in background but joined together in spirit and aspirations."
"India and United States can do all of these, and more together. There is so much that the two great nations will achieve in this new century," Rice added.
With the conclusion of the civil nuclear agreement, US-India partnership will be limited only by will of the two countries and their imagination, she said. "India and the United States have taken on an extremely difficult challenge. We have made it. We have succeeded together. Now I believe there is nothing that we cannot do together," she added.
10-12-2008, 01:26 AM (This post was last modified: 10-12-2008, 01:27 AM by Naresh.)
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Oct 9 2008, 11:01 PM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Oct 9 2008, 11:01 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ravish @ Oct 9 2008, 04:12 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Achariaji,
Just to refresh your memory, an important quotation from the earlier postings ''Should I read this, Shame of India is saying Bush punked him.
Fool always get fooled. Fool is written all over Moron Singh. Now Bush gave him excellent certificate.
Babus of India should be ashamed of themselves. slap on MEA fools. ''
[right][snapback]88986[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which posting .
<b>*Please provide the links</b>
[right][snapback]88990[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do promises made to Parliament have no sanctity? With the government hastily signing the flawed 123 Agreement with the US last weekend, <b>it is important to recall Prime Minister Manmohan Singhâs assurances that after having completed the negotiation process, he would bring the nuclear deal to Parliament and "abide" by its decision.</b> But no sooner had the process been over than Dr Singh proceeded to sign the 123 Agreement while sidelining Parliament.
This is what Dr Singh had pledged in the Lok Sabha during the brief July session marred by the cash-for-votes scandal: <b>"All I had asked our Left colleagues was: please allow us to go through the negotiation process and I will come to Parliament before operationalising the nuclear agreement. This simple courtesy which is essential for orderly functioning of any government worth the name, particularly with regard to the conduct of foreign policy, they were not willing to grant me".</b>
Earlier, at a June 30 book-release function at his official residence, Dr Singh had elaborated on his pledge: <b>"I have said it before, I will repeat it again, that you allow us to complete the process. Once the process is over, I will bring it before Parliament and abide by the House".</b>
Lest there be any ambiguity, he expanded: <b>"I am not asking for something that the government should not be doing. I am only saying you allow me to complete the negotiations. I agree to come to Parliament before I proceed to operationalise. What can be more reasonable than this?" He then added: "All that I want is the authority to proceed with the process of negotiations through all the stages⦠If Parliament feels you have done some wrong, so be it".</b>
Dr Singh had repeatedly promised to take Parliament into confidence before formalising the deal. For instance, way back on March 10, 2006, he said in the Lok Sabha: <b>"There should be no reason for anyone to doubt that anything will be done at the back of Parliament, or that we will do anything which would hurt the interests of the country as a whole".</b>
But that is precisely what he did â <b>sign the 123 Agreement behind Parliamentâs back, to the extent that he skipped its traditional monsoon session</b>, setting a precedent that could be detrimental to the future of Indian democracy. Now any future government can skip a session of Parliament â or two â besides turning its back on the solemn promises it made to the legislative body.
The contrast between Dr Singh and President George W. Bush in the way they handled the deal could not have been starker. From the time he intr<b>oduced a legislative-waiver bill in March 2006 to last weekâs signing ceremony, Mr Bush worked in a spirit of bipartisanship, forging an impressive political consensus at home.</b>
The Hyde Act was the product of such consensus-building and political co-option, with the administration holding closed-door briefings for lawmakers and allowing its three-and-a-half-page bill to be expanded to a 41-page litany of India-specific conditions. Bipartisan support also was the key to the recent passage of the ratification legislation, the "US-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Non-Proliferation Enhancement Act", which imposes Hyde Act-plus obligations on India.
After the Senate approved this Hyde Act-plus legislation on October 1, Mr Bush said: "I commend the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for their leadership in crafting this important bipartisan legislation".
By contrast, Dr Singhâs approach was blatantly partisan, subordinating national interest to personal agenda. Although the deal has divided India like no other strategic issue since Independence, <b>Dr Singh did not hold a single all-party meeting on the subject ever since he sprung the accord as a surprise on the nation in 2005</b>.
However, he was quick to hold more than one all-party meeting on the parallel summertime agitations that wracked Jammu and the Kashmir Valley.
Just two days after signing the agreement-in-principle on July 18, 2005, he said: "It goes without saying that we can move forward only on the basis of a broad national consensus". On August 17, 2006, he told the Rajya Sabha: "Broad-based domestic consensus cutting across all sections in Parliament and outside will be necessary".
Subsequently, he reassured Parliament that he will "seek the broadest possible consensus within the country to enable the next steps to be taken".
Instead of any attempt at consensus-building, the nation witnessed a polarising single-mindedness. The zealous partisanship only helped undermine Indiaâs negotiating leverage.
The upshot was the progressive US attachment of tougher conditions at every stage. That partly resulted from US bipartisan efforts to make the deal more palatable to the non-proliferation constituency.<b> But the gradual attachment of more and more conditions also flowed from the belief in Washington that a deal-desperate Dr Singh would accept such a final product, especially if its mortifying terms were cosmetically couched</b>.
The US was so right. Just as Dr Singhâs government had blithely picked on Mr Bushâs December 2006 Hyde Act signing statement to claim relief from that Actâs grating conditions, it has now cited Mr Bushâs statement signing the Hyde Act-plus legislation into law to assert an illusory reprieve.
But Mr Bushâs statement last week could not have been clearer in underpinning the primacy of US law: <b>"The bill I sign today approves the 123 Agreement I submitted to Congress â and establishes the legal framework for that agreement to come into effect. The bill makes clear that our agreement with India is consistent with the Atomic Energy Act and other elements of US law".</b>
It also makes plain that <b>New Delhi has only a theoretical right to reprocess spent fuel and that the actual right "will be brought into effect upon conclusion of arrangements and procedures", to be negotiated in the years ahead</b>. And to help <b>Dr Singh spin reality at home, Mr Bush said the new legislation "does not change the fuel assurance" as "recorded in the 123 Agreement" â without citing either his earlier statement that such a commitment is political, not legally binding, or the new legislationâs fuel-restrictive provisions, including Section 102(b)(2) that mandates limiting supply to "reasonable reactor operating requirements" and Section 102(b)(1) that requires that if the US terminates cooperation with India, it will ensure New Delhi does not secure supplies from "any other source".</b>
<b>Put simply, India has no legally binding fuel-supply assurance; no operational reprocessing right; no permission to build strategic fuel reserves; no entitlement to take corrective measures, whatever the circumstance; and no escape hatch from the legal obligations it is assuming</b>. <b>All the key assurances Dr Singh made in Parliament on August 17, 2006, thus stand jettisoned. Yet today he celebrates a deal that cannot survive the light of parliamentary scrutiny and sets a treacherous legacy.</b>
History has a way of catching up with the truth. As a well-known proverb goes, "The mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small".
<b>Bhopal's Ghosts May Impede U.S.-India Nuclear Trade </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The opponents are turning to the ghosts of Bhopal for help. They are invoking the December 1984 leak of poisonous methyl isocyanate gas at a Union Carbide Corp. factory in that Indian city, which killed 3,800 people, to argue against ratifying a separate accord that would shield U.S. suppliers from liability in the event of a nuclear accident.
``We think it's immoral and unethical for any company or any government to even suggest'' that suppliers of nuclear plants and technology be granted a legal safeguard, said Brinda Prakash Karat, a leader in Parliament from the Communist Party of India (Marxist). ``India has a very bad experience already with a disaster caused by the Union Carbide factory.''
The public resonance that Bhopal still holds in India may add months or years to Indian ratification of the international nuclear-liability treaty. That threatens to make GE and other<b> U.S. suppliers laggards in the race for at least $175 billion </b>that India plans to spend on nuclear energy production in the next 30 years
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Time to share loot. Raise issue so that can get high reward and union control.
Will US extend the ballistic missile shield to India?
`
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->NEW DELHI: Even as India prepares to test its own fledgling ballistic missile defence (BMD) system for the third time "within a month or so'', New Delhi and Washington are moving towards signing a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in the BMD arena.
Sources told TOI on Thursday that some rounds of talks on "possible collaboration on BMD or missile shield systems to enhance cooperative security and stability'' have been held between India and US in recent times.
"Most of these discussions have taken place under the Joint Technical Group, a sub-group of the overall Indo-US Defence Policy Group architecture. The US is very keen to work with us in the missile defence arena. A formal MoU is now on the cards,'' said a source.
But the MoU does not mean that India is signing up for a proposed American missile defence shield programme on the lines of Poland and the Czech Republic, which has led to a major diplomatic row between US and Russia in recent months.
Instead, the plan is to seek some missile defence technical know-how from the US. As part of this, Indian officials and scientists have already witnessed some simulations and a couple of live tests of the US missile defence system. The US, of course, has even offered to sell the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) system to India.
Incidentally, both Russia and Israel have also made similar technical presentations -- on their anti-tactical ballistic missile systems `S-300V' and `Arrow-2', respectively â to India in the past.
Faced with missile threats in the immediate neighbourhood, India certainly requires an effective BMD system, with an overlapping network of early-warning sensors, command posts and anti-missile land and sea-based missile batteries.
But the thrust as of now is on fully developing DRDO's two-tier BMD system, capable of tracking and destroying incoming hostile missiles both inside (endo) and outside (exo) the earth's atmosphere, which has been tested twice till now.
The first test was in November 2006 when an `exo-atmospheric' hypersonic interceptor missile successfully destroyed a `hostile' Prithvi missile at an altitude of around 40-50 km, demonstrating a capability akin to the Israeli Arrow-2 BMD system.
Then, in December 2007, an `endo-atmospheric' interceptor successfully took on the `enemy' missile at a 15 km altitude, on the lines of the American PAC-3 system.
The aim now is to test both the "exo'' and "endo'' interceptor missiles together in an integrated mode. "Simulation tests are now being undertaken. The third test should take place within a month or so,'' said a source.
As per DRDO plans, a BMD system capable of taking on a 2,000-km-range missile is being developed in Phase-I. If all goes well â BMD capabilities are extremely complex â this system should ready for deployment by 2011-2012.
The Phase-II, in turn, will be geared towards tackling threats from missiles up to 5,000-km. "The development of IIR (imaging infra-red) seekers, for instance, will require international collaboration,'' said a source.
With both China and Pakistan fielding a wide variety of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, BMD capabilities are a crucial necessity. But, at the same time, it must be remembered that a BMD system can be overwhelmed by a flurry of ballistic missiles. Moreover, it's quite vulnerable to cruise missiles since they evade enemy radars by flying at low altitudes, virtually hugging the terrain.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>India soon to get first uranium supply in 34 years from France</b>
pioneer.com
PTI | New Delhi
After the end of its 34-year nuclear isolation, India will receive its first consignment of uranium from abroad shortly from France, a country which is also proposing to build six future generation atomic plants in this country as soon as possible.
<b>French company Areva will sell 300 tonnes of uranium to India's fuel-starved nuclear plants and the delivery is expected in a few months</b>.
"Negotiations have advanced to a point where we expect delivery within the next few months," French President's Diplomatic Adviser Jean-David Levitte told reporters in New Delhi.
This will be the first consignment of nuclear fuel that India will receive from abroad in 34 years.
India was barred from having nuclear cooperation with the international community since it conducted first atomic tests in 1974. The ban ended in September last year when the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), a group of 45 countries governing global nuclear trade, gave a one-time waiver to India for civil nuclear cooperation<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Even without the Indo-US nuclear deal, at least 40 million more homes could have been lit up for an entire year in power-starved India if the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) had mined and used the extensive uranium reserves lying untapped for years</b>.
On Friday, the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India hammered home that point in a damning audit report that peels off the DAEâs sheen. It faulted the all-powerful department for the fuel crisis that is causing Indiaâs nuclear reactors to run at half or less of their capacity.
<b>This âdenied the nation the full benefits of clean nuclear energy to the extent of 21,845 million units corresponding to Rs 5,986 cores,â the report said. One person uses an average of 553 units of electricity in India every year</b>.
âThis (estimation of financial losses) can only be a theoretical exercise which leads to misleading conclusions,â the DAE told the auditor in response. It accepted the facts stated by CAG but added: âDue to (the) mismatch in demand and supply of fuel for (reactors) since 2003-4, these were being operated at lower levels to conserve fuel.â
But the DAE itself is responsible for that mismatch.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Babu can move pen only after getting some hafta. No hafta , no work.
Let private industry run Nuclear plant, reduce government Babu from daily life of Indians.
Ive heard that Thorium nuclear power is still experimental meaning that it cant be use as a source of power an least for the next decades.
Is this true?
<b>THE TEST... </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea claimed it carried out a powerful underground nuclear test Monday - much larger than one conducted in 2006 - in a major provocation in the escalating international standoff over its rogue nuclear and missile programs.
Pyongyang announced the test, and Russia's Defense Ministry confirmed an atomic explosion at 9:54 a.m. (0054 GMT) in northeastern North Korea, estimating the blast's yield at 10 to 20 kilotons - comparable to the bombs that flattened Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Earthquake magintude was 4.7
Date-Time Monday, May 25, 2009 at 00:54:43 UTC
Monday, May 25, 2009 at 09:54:43 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
<b>Location 41.306°N, 129.029°</b>E
Depth 0 km (~0 mile) set by location program
Region NORTH KOREA
Distances 70 km (45 miles) NNW of Kimchaek, North Korea
95 km (60 miles) SW of Chongjin, North Korea
180 km (115 miles) SSW of Yanji, Jilin, China
375 km (235 miles) NE of PYONGYANG, North Korea
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->