What's new

Seeds of Indian Proliferation

Flintlock

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 7, 2007
6,176
0
750
Ohh please, cut the "I'm holier than thou" rhetoric! Ask half the 45 member strong NSG body how they were bullied by Uncle Sam to "put faith" in India, its not a secret.
The nuclear waiver is immoral, corrupt and politically motivated. It has nothing to do with India's socalled clean proliferation record. Rest is BS! :usflag:
Please....you can't simply bully 45 nuclear powers into signing an agreement. The notion itself is ludicrous.

Most of the NSG had agreed to grant India the exemption, barring a few countries.

Sure, there were prolonged negotiations and discussions. However, India had to demonstrate its commitment to non-proliferation and nuclear safety before the deal was agreed upon.
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Please....you can't simply bully 45 nuclear powers into signing an agreement. The notion itself is ludicrous.

Most of the NSG had agreed to grant India the exemption, barring a few countries.
We just saw that happen, so no, its not ludicrous.
Sure, there were prolonged negotiations and discussions. However, India had to demonstrate its commitment to non-proliferation and nuclear safety before the deal was agreed upon.
A verbal commitment, and this report would argue against any 'demonstrated record' of non-proliferation.

Double standards - that much is clear, but then we always knew that.
 

neelvick

BANNED

New Recruit

Sep 19, 2008
6
0
Senator Christopher Dodd, the acting chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee that held a crucial hearing on the US-India civilian nuclear deal awaiting ratification by the Congress, said that while he would like to expeditiously move this 123 Agreement forward for action before the scheduled adjournment of Congress on September 26, it was imperative that the process be allowed to take its course or it 'could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it'.

Coverage: Indo-US Nuclear deal

Speaking to media persons after the hearing where senior Bush Administration officials led by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns testified on the agreement, Dodd, asked the first question by rediff.com as to the bottom line vis-a-vis the possible approval of the deal by Congress by September 26, said, "The evidence in the past has been that there is a strong desire to reach agreement, and a clear understanding of the value and importance of this."

India engaged in illicit nuclear trade: US report

But, he asserted, "That does not minimize of course, that some members here have some reservations they had like the opportunity to express and to ask their colleagues to approve or disapprove of those ideas."

Dodd said, "As the acting chairman of this Committee, I want to, if I can, give my colleagues and members and opportunity to do that, and I say that to you only because I think that's the right thing to do, but also in the final analysis, if the matter were then brought up at the end of the very session that has not gone though the process, it could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it."
 

neelvick

BANNED

New Recruit

Sep 19, 2008
6
0
Mr. Alb(right) is all Alb(wrong)
This articles proves to b nothing more than the last attempts by anti India lobby to derail the approval process. Someone must have sold the Indian parlaiments toilet designs to mr Albright.:rofl:
 

Flintlock

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 7, 2007
6,176
0
750
We just saw that happen, so no, its not ludicrous.

A verbal commitment, and this report would argue against any 'demonstrated record' of non-proliferation..
Well, we can't help it if you saw it through green-and-white tinted glasses.

We agreed to nuclear safeguards and safety inspections. Apart from that, our record speaks for itself.

Countries like China openly trade nuclear tech even after signing the treaty, so that itself proves that ultimately it depends on the country whether it wants to follow the agreement that it signed.
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
We agreed to nuclear safeguards and safety inspections. Apart from that, our record speaks for itself.
Your record is being questioned here, by this report - and I am willing to see your point of view if you can attempt to factually argue why the report is flawed and therefore does not constitute double standards (other than ROFL smmiley's).
 

dr.umer

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 11, 2008
1,460
0
369

Joby Warrick in Washington
September 20, 2008

IN JANUARY 2006 an Indian Government agency placed newspaper advertisements seeking help to build an obscure piece of metal machinery. The details of the project, available to bidders, were laid out in a series of drawings that jolted nuclear weapons experts who discovered them.

The blueprints depicted a centrifuge, a machine used to enrich uranium for nuclear bombs. In most Western countries, such drawings would be secret, but the Indian diagrams were available for a nominal bidding fee, said David Albright, a former United Nations weapons inspector.

"We got them for about $US10," said Mr Albright, who called the incident a "serious leak of sensitive nuclear information".

The incident has fuelled concerns among opponents of a US-Indian civilian nuclear deal that the US Congress is expected to consider in the coming weeks.

The accord, first announced in 2005 by the Bush Administration, would lift a decades-old moratorium on nuclear trade with India, allowing US companies to share sensitive technology despite that country's refusal to ban nuclear testing or sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Backers of the deal say it will cement US ties with India and reward a country that has been a responsible steward of nuclear technology since it first joined the nuclear weapons club in 1974.

But opponents say India's record on non-proliferation is not as unblemished as claimed by the White House, which regards the nuclear pact as one of the foreign-policy highlights of the Bush Administration's second term. Critics accuse the White House of rushing the agreement through Congress without considering the long-term implications.

"This deal significantly weakens US and international security," said the retired Army Lieutenant-General Robert Gard, the chairman of the Washington-based Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. On Wednesday, a group of arms-control advocates and former government officials urged Congress to reject the deal.

Administration officials have lauded India's efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear technology, contrasting its behaviour with that of Pakistan, the home base of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the acknowledged nuclear smuggler who delivered weapons secrets to Libya, Iran and North Korea.

Likewise, India's Government says it deserves the trust of the world's nuclear gatekeepers. "India has an impeccable non-proliferation record," the External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, said last week.

Opponents point to what they call decades of deceptive practices India has used to acquire nuclear materials. A draft report by Mr Albright and his Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington non-profit group that monitors the spread of weapons technology, cites recent incidents in which it says India engaged in "illicit nuclear trade".

A State Department spokesman declined to comment on Mr Albright's report, saying it had not been reviewed.

Other opponents have cited transfers of sensitive weapons technology by individual Indian scientists. Such incidents underscore concerns about the possible transfer of India's nuclear knowhow by rogue scientists and businessmen, said Henry Sokolski, a former Defence non-proliferation official.
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
A State Department spokesman declined to comment on Mr Albright's report, saying it had not been reviewed.
The US government does not know?

Rigghhhhhhtt....

No two ways about it - double standards when it comes to proliferation ..
 

jeypore

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 18, 2008
2,885
0
658
Country
India
Location
United States
The US government does not know?

Rigghhhhhhtt....

No two ways about it - double standards when it comes to proliferation ..

US is very motivated for this deal, that is why it is being rush throught the congress before the september session ends.

In regards to double standards, yes, but I might add that the rise of India's economy has help it for this deal, and that is why all the rule are being broken.

Mr. agnostic you live in the States, you should know very well that when has US paid any attention to the UN. Infact, atleast the conservative people consider this organization to be corrupt and useless.
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
US is very motivated for this deal, that is why it is being rush throught the congress before the september session ends.

In regards to double standards, yes, but I might add that the rise of India's economy has help it for this deal, and that is why all the rule are being broken.

Mr. agnostic you live in the States, you should know very well that when has US paid any attention to the UN. Infact, atleast the conservative people consider this organization to be corrupt and useless.
Jeypore ji,

I am quite aware of what makes the world tick - I have no issues with accepting the argument that strategic and economic reasons have made the US adopt double standards and give India a 'free pass'.

What I do have issues with are pious platitudes about how India has 'a proven track record in non-proliferation' - hogwash as this report indicates - and the dismissal of legitimate Pakistani efforts, to ensure that such concessions are offered and applied in a fair and equitable manner, by ridiculing those efforts as 'me too'.
 

jeypore

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 18, 2008
2,885
0
658
Country
India
Location
United States
Jeypore ji,

I am quite aware of what makes the world tick - I have no issues with accepting the argument that strategic and economic reasons have made the US adopt double standards and give India a 'free pass'.

What I do have issues with are pious platitudes about how India has 'a proven track record in non-proliferation' - hogwash as this report indicates - and the dismissal of legitimate Pakistani efforts, to ensure that such concessions are offered and applied in a fair and equitable manner, by ridiculing those efforts as 'me too'.

I probably could not prove to you how India track record in non-proliferation, since i do not have great knowledge on this specific subject. But in terms of concessions of "me too", wouldn't there be prerequisite for stable gov't or aleast not a dual gov't system.
 

Goodperson

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 26, 2005
2,860
0
471
Jeypore ji,

I am quite aware of what makes the world tick - I have no issues with accepting the argument that strategic and economic reasons have made the US adopt double standards and give India a 'free pass'.

What I do have issues with are pious platitudes about how India has 'a proven track record in non-proliferation' - hogwash as this report indicates - and the dismissal of legitimate Pakistani efforts, to ensure that such concessions are offered and applied in a fair and equitable manner, by ridiculing those efforts as 'me too'.
Many countries are worried about Proliferation, NSG was created only after India's Pokhran detonation. India took extra steps and Japan, Austria, Canada etc pondered a lot prior to approving the deal.

The fact is our neighbours find it difficult to accept or digest. But its now a reality even if Congress does not approve the bill (highly unlikely) India can go ahead and do business with other countries France and Russia have already initiated the buisness.

There is no use of calling India's proven track record in non-proliferation' a hogwash has no takers.

"mee too" is bit quite apparent and has been used for arguing for similar deal. However it does not affect India as such.
 
Last edited:

SU 30 MKI

BANNED

New Recruit

May 25, 2008
59
0
2
Jeypore ji,

I am quite aware of what makes the world tick - I have no issues with accepting the argument that strategic and economic reasons have made the US adopt double standards and give India a 'free pass'.

What I do have issues with are pious platitudes about how India has 'a proven track record in non-proliferation' - hogwash as this report indicates - and the dismissal of legitimate Pakistani efforts, to ensure that such concessions are offered and applied in a fair and equitable manner, by ridiculing those efforts as 'me too'.
US always use double standards, When China supplied Magnetic Rings to PAK then also US didnt acted. So its nothing new

Even US from long know about PAK nuclear proliferation after from so long but didnt acted. Then also it adopted double standard ;)
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I probably could not prove to you how India track record in non-proliferation, since i do not have great knowledge on this specific subject.
You could do so by countering this report - if not then the argument of India not having a good record on non-proliferation is fair.
But in terms of concessions of "me too", wouldn't there be prerequisite for stable gov't or aleast not a dual gov't system.
It isn't 'me too' - its asking for equal applications of trade and investment conditions in a particular field.

Whatever the requirements, the only ones raised so far by the US has been 'nuclear proliferation', on which count India fails as well, not the ones you raised.
 

AgNoStiC MuSliM

ADVISORS
Jul 11, 2007
24,421
77
32,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
There is no use of calling India's proven track record in non-proliferation' a hogwash has no takers.
Its not me, rather a well respected institution and analyst who is calling India's claim of 'record of non-proliferation' hogwash.

"mee too" is bit quite apparent and has been used for arguing for similar deal. However it does not affect India as such.[/QUOTE]

'Me too' isn't apparent at all - any agreement on trade and investment in any field is based on certain base parameters normally implemented in preceding agreements between other entities.

It would be 'me too' if Pakistan did not have a legitimate requirement for energy, nor a pre-existing nuclear program. Since it has both of those, it is a fair and necessary demand based on Pakistani energy requirements.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom