• Sunday, December 8, 2019

India nuclear deal could trigger arms race: US lawmakers

Discussion in 'Strategic & Foreign Affairs' started by Neo, Aug 21, 2008.

  1. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0


    * Democrat legislators say arms race on the subcontinent will be more difficult to control with Musharraf gone​


    WASHINGTON: A nuclear energy deal between the United States and India could fuel an arms race with Pakistan unless it is amended to ensure New Delhi is banned from producing new weapons-grade material and from conducting nuclear test explosions, two US lawmakers said Wednesday.

    The two lawmakers called on the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group to insist on amending the agreement when it meets to consider the deal on Thursday in Vienna.

    Objections by any nation in the group — which controls the global flow of civilian atomic exports — would scuttle the pact.t.

    The nuclear energy pact “threatens to rapidly accelerate New Delhi’s arms race with Pakistan — a rivalry made all the more precarious by the resignation on Tuesday of the [former] Pakistani president, Pervez Musharraf,” Democrats Edward Markey and Ellen Tauscher wrote in a commentary published in the New York Times..

    With Musharraf gone: “This deal was foolish when Pakistan was relatively stable; with Musharraf gone, an arms race on the subcontinent would likely be more difficult to control.”

    The suppliers group “can say yes to nuclear trade with India if two simple conditions are met,” wrote the two members of the House of Representatives.

    “First, India must sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, a step already taken by 178 other countries and every member state of the Nuclear Suppliers Group,” the commentary said.

    “Second, India must agree to halt production of nuclear material for weapons.”

    Such a ban would not require India to give up the atomic weapons it has or prevent it from building more weapons with nuclear material previously produced, according to the lawmakers.

    By shutting down the manufacture of new plutonium and highly enriched uranium, India “would prove to the international community that opening up nuclear commerce would not assist, either directly or indirectly, its nuclear weapons programme.

    Markey, from Massachusetts, is co-chairman of the House Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation and Tauscher, from California, is chair of the House Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

    United States President George W Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed a framework for the nuclear deal in 2005, under which the United States will provide energy-starved India civilian nuclear fuel and technology.

    India still needs a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group and ratification by the US Congress before the deal can go through. afp
     
  2. Contrarian

    Contrarian ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,572
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Ratings:
    +18 / 10,654 / -14
    Why do they waste their time. No harm in an arms race either.
     
  3. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
    any way we will come know wht NSG says very soon.
     
  4. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    NPT and NSG is a direct result of India going nuclear. Their main purpose was to disarm the world, not encourage nuclear arms race.
     
  5. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    NSG members Australia and Japan will not go around Hyde Act, I'm curious how US will convince these nations to act in favor of India without including the Hyde Act.
     
  6. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
    Not to unarm the world but to keep an exclusive club of nation who can keep possession of such weapons
     
  7. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
    In this week we will come to know the result anyway sir:cheers:
     
  8. Contrarian

    Contrarian ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,572
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Ratings:
    +18 / 10,654 / -14
    Australia and Japan have already agreed to the draft that has been circulated by the US in NSG, that has no conditions on India. So its basically done.

    What matters is that legally, the NSG waiver should not include text that would ensure that every member of the NSG cease cooperation with New Delhi if it tests a nuke or something of the sort. If that happens, then India can do nothing. But US and India have agreed to a text that does not mention these things, and it has been accepted by a majority of nations barring a couple.

    Now if that text goes through, India will require a bilateral treaty with almost all the NSG members to allow those countries to export nuke fuel to India. That is much better than having it all written in the NSG waiver. Because even if INdia tests, Russia and France might/would still support India by giving fuel, as it is not mentioned in their bilateral treaty. Had it been a legal clause in the NSG waiver, it would be mandatory to cease cooperation in all forms.

    The countries that are creating problems are ones that are not important strategically-Ireland, New Zealand, then again, NSG works by consensus.
     
  9. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    Thats not all NPT is about. Yes, she's designed to keep the nuclear club to the original N5 but second goal was to disarm the world of nuclear weapons in time.

     
  10. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
    Sir I know that there were fissile material cut off treaty but we all know what is the situation in present.
     
  11. Neo

    Neo RETIRED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,929 / -0
    I'm unaware that Australia, Japan and Canada have agreed to accept the 123 text without same mechanism as the Hyde Act. :confused:
    Can you please provide link to support your claim?
     
  12. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
  13. nitesh

    nitesh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,261
    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 314 / -0
  14. Contrarian

    Contrarian ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,572
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Ratings:
    +18 / 10,654 / -14
    Your getting confused mate. They dont have to accept the 123 agreement. The 123 agreement is a bilateral agreement b/w India and the US.

    What Australia, Japan and Canada have agreed to is to support the draft text that has been introduced by the US in the NSG. That draft is the key to anything and everything. And it does not mirror the Hyde Act, it mirrors the 123 Agreement. It has no provisions or conditions that are set on India.

    India has advocated that instead of making the NSG waiver 'front loaded' with provisions and conditions, it should be a clean and unconditional waiver. The conditions can be attached by individual nations in their own legislature if they have to modify it for allowing trade with India in nuclear technology and fuel.

    Australia, Japan and Canada are supporting the draft waiver in the NSG in its current form, which is ideally suited to India.

    However, Austria, New Zealand and Ireland are proving to be the biggest hurdles in NSG. They dont want to give India an unconditional waiver, they want checks,clauses and conditions put in the waiver.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  15. ashfaque

    ashfaque BANNED

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 16 / -0
    Neo, Actually these three countries are fighting India's case. Ya I can agree if you see Austria, new zealand and switzerland are asking few Qs then I can agree.