China leads resistance to India joining NSG, unless Pakistan is also included
- Thread starter Devil Soul
- Start date
RIP Pak LAW
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,784
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Thank you China. We appreciate and fully endorse your efforts regardless of any result yet.
Thəorətic Muslim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 5,006
- Reaction score
- 17
- Country
- Location
You're talking about every country that developed Nuclear technology.
There are plenty of countries that handed out nuclear reactors to anyone wanting one.
Resistance to India joining nuclear suppliers group softens
REUTERS
A U.S.-led push for India to join a club of countries controlling access to sensitive nuclear technology made some headway on Thursday as several opponents appeared more willing to work towards a compromise, but China remained defiant.
The 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group aims to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons by restricting the sale of items that can be used to make those arms. It was set up in response to India's first nuclear test in 1974.
India already enjoys most of the benefits of membership under a 2008 exemption to NSG rules granted to support its nuclear cooperation deal with Washington, even though India has developed atomic weapons and never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the main global arms control pact.
But China on Thursday maintained its position that the Non-Proliferation Treaty is central to the NSG, diplomats said.
The handful of other nations resisting India's admission to the group, including South Africa, New Zealand and Turkey, softened their stance somewhat, opening the door to a process under which non-NPT states such as India might join, diplomats said.
"There's movement, including towards a process, but we'd have to see what that process would look like," one diplomat said after the closed-door talks on Thursday aimed at preparing for an annual NSG plenary meeting in Seoul later this month.
Opponents argue that granting India membership would further undermine efforts to prevent proliferation. It would also infuriate India's rival Pakistan, an ally of China's, which has responded to India's membership bid with one of its own.
Pakistan joining would be unacceptable to many, given its track record. The father of its nuclear weapons programme ran an illicit network for years that sold nuclear secrets to countries including North Korea and Iran.
"By bringing India on board, it's a slap in the face of the entire non-proliferation regime," a diplomatic source from a country resisting India's bid said on condition of anonymity.
Washington has been pressuring hold-outs, and Thursday's meeting was a chance to see how strong opposition is.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wrote to members asking them "not to block consensus on Indian admission to the NSG" in a letter seen by Reuters and dated Friday.
Most of the hold-outs argue that if India is to be admitted, it should be under criteria that apply equally to all states rather than under a "tailor-made" solution for a U.S. ally.
Mexico's president said on Wednesday his country now backs India's membership bid. One Vienna-based diplomat said it had softened its stance but still opposed the idea of India joining under conditions that did not apply equally to all.
(Editing by Catherine Evans and Hugh Lawson)
REUTERS
A U.S.-led push for India to join a club of countries controlling access to sensitive nuclear technology made some headway on Thursday as several opponents appeared more willing to work towards a compromise, but China remained defiant.
The 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group aims to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons by restricting the sale of items that can be used to make those arms. It was set up in response to India's first nuclear test in 1974.
India already enjoys most of the benefits of membership under a 2008 exemption to NSG rules granted to support its nuclear cooperation deal with Washington, even though India has developed atomic weapons and never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the main global arms control pact.
But China on Thursday maintained its position that the Non-Proliferation Treaty is central to the NSG, diplomats said.
The handful of other nations resisting India's admission to the group, including South Africa, New Zealand and Turkey, softened their stance somewhat, opening the door to a process under which non-NPT states such as India might join, diplomats said.
"There's movement, including towards a process, but we'd have to see what that process would look like," one diplomat said after the closed-door talks on Thursday aimed at preparing for an annual NSG plenary meeting in Seoul later this month.
Opponents argue that granting India membership would further undermine efforts to prevent proliferation. It would also infuriate India's rival Pakistan, an ally of China's, which has responded to India's membership bid with one of its own.
Pakistan joining would be unacceptable to many, given its track record. The father of its nuclear weapons programme ran an illicit network for years that sold nuclear secrets to countries including North Korea and Iran.
"By bringing India on board, it's a slap in the face of the entire non-proliferation regime," a diplomatic source from a country resisting India's bid said on condition of anonymity.
Washington has been pressuring hold-outs, and Thursday's meeting was a chance to see how strong opposition is.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wrote to members asking them "not to block consensus on Indian admission to the NSG" in a letter seen by Reuters and dated Friday.
Most of the hold-outs argue that if India is to be admitted, it should be under criteria that apply equally to all states rather than under a "tailor-made" solution for a U.S. ally.
Mexico's president said on Wednesday his country now backs India's membership bid. One Vienna-based diplomat said it had softened its stance but still opposed the idea of India joining under conditions that did not apply equally to all.
(Editing by Catherine Evans and Hugh Lawson)
Post Colonnial
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2015
- Messages
- 1,330
- Reaction score
- -15
- Country
- Location
Thanks for the accurate response. It is indeed mysterious that an Indian would know more about the situation in Pakistan than most Pakistanis themselves.
it is not as if this is a secret. Many Pakistanis actually know this. They just won't admit it. Even those who admit won't do anything about it. It is a vicious cycle.
are you so naive or dont want accept the ultimate
everytime somebody puts up this bald headed man's picture a few angels get their wings in Islamabad
VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,460
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
Is there any Chinese source for corroboration or not?
Much of the Middle East was united under the Ottoman Empire too. Was that any different?
Turingsage
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,304
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
South Asian dynamics
By Shahzad Chaudhry
June 10, 2016
Narendra Modi addressed the US Congress this Wednesday. He is not the first Indian prime minister to do so but at a moment when India’s own profile is rising for the better in South Asia, it could be propitious for India’s global status.
In a month’s time the Nuclear Suppliers Group will convene to consider both India and Pakistan’s requests for membership. Despite the technical and resource facilitations that such membership accrues to a nation pursuing a nuclear programme, civil and military, it is more a reflection of aspiration for global recognition; and the competitive nature of things between India and Pakistan.
The US supports India’s membership but 47 other members, including China, must also agree before India can accede to the mantle of de jure acceptance of its nuclear status, however indirect. Pakistan holds a certain influence over the Chinese vote which may be its saving grace. The US does not as vividly support Pakistan as it does India but it has been at the US’s bidding that Pakistan too has applied with the understanding that NSG members will consider each application on merit. With American domination of most international security and economic regimes, the chances of the merit working in India’s favour are far greater.
Pakistan will again fall back on China, but till when? One day China too will submit to the international consensus. Even if India fails to rise to the NSG this time round, it will have gained significantly greater space in moving towards that objective. Modi has agreed to begin the process of acquiring six American nuclear reactors giving meaning to why the Indo-US nuclear deal between the two was first signed.
Were both China and Pakistan to resort to a continued stonewalling of this or any other international or regional effort towards a security or an economic initiative, over time both will begin to isolate themselves from the international fraternity. For China, it is an unacceptable eventuality. China’s center of gravity in its strategy to rise beyond the middle income status of its economy lies in its trade and economic policies. To that end it will not compromise or bid on another’s behalf were isolation to become a real possibility.
In Pakistan it is a fallacy to imagine that China is tied to it by bonds which will last forever. China judges its available space for Pakistan and acts within its domain. The day it senses a challenge to its own interests, even tertiary, it will have no qualms about advising Pakistan to accede to a certain norm.
While it may be difficult for even a combined US-India foray to isolate China – both dependent for their respective economies on a vibrant relationship with the country – turning the screws on Pakistan will be rather easy for lack of significant interdependencies. Pakistan failed miserably to use the space available during the Afghan war years to convert the advantage into a more durable set of bargains in regional politics.
With Afghanistan alone being its object of attention, Pakistan failed to develop supporting planks of regional and international alignments that could support its intended objectives. Instead, our confrontations with regional players increased. Miscalculations and a faulty assessment of its own space in the obtaining conditions have rendered us irrelevant in our own environment. As things stand, the tables have turned on Pakistan instead. Afghanistan is fast receding as a factor of space for Pakistan’s relevance.
Come the new American president, there will be a review of the US’s Afghan policy; a clean slate may just be what the new president may begin his or her tenure with. This will open up space for others. Where the US may have to-date depended on Pakistan for delivering on Afghanistan others may well fill in instead. Note the growing evolution of consensus between Iran, India and Afghanistan; or the refreshed Afghan vitriol against Pakistan. That closes space for Pakistan not only on Afghanistan but implicitly on the region.
Pakistan has Iran, Afghanistan, China and India as its immediate neighbours. And, except for China, Pakistan has a broken relationship with all. If that is not failure, what is? We need to stop blaming everyone else in the world and accept that our conception and assessment of our potential were always misplaced and exaggerated. More importantly, our emplacement of a failing strategy caused us to lose the moment – and we are poorer for it. At best we will now only play catch up; that too only if there is a serious course correction. There hasn’t been a worse example of someone losing the hand with the best cards at their disposal.
Iran may be seen to be leading this rapprochement and India would have happily ceded the lead role as long as the three can align together and bypass Pakistan geographically. Use it or lose it, they say. Has Pakistan lost the benefit of its ‘strategic location’ by losing the moment? Recovery may still be possible but will be long-winded and always short of optimal. Losing opportunities force a lag which in a competitive environment becomes difficult to cover.
How India has moved in recent months is far more impressive than how Pakistan has assessed its position. Iran first came to Pakistan and offered that all-important olive branch, which sadly Pakistan rebuffed with an ill-thought, ill-timed and ill-managed disclosure of the Yadav episode. Was it again on someone else’s bidding that Pakistan gave up on its most opportune moment to resurrect its regional eminence? Pakistan continues to lose its potential because of incompetent leadership and an entirely inadequate conception of how the world has moved in recent years.
Modi has stretched Pakistan with a clearer vision and a smarter strategy. He has also reinforced India’s position globally. Efficient policies result in strategic gains. In stark contrast, Pakistan’s fallback remains a honed military which can only deliver tactical responses but cannot make for strategic lethargy. What Pakistan needs are forces of good. And that is where it remains desperately short.
The writer is a retired air-vicemarshal, former ambassador and a security and political analyst.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print/126712-South-Asian-dynamics
By Shahzad Chaudhry
June 10, 2016
Narendra Modi addressed the US Congress this Wednesday. He is not the first Indian prime minister to do so but at a moment when India’s own profile is rising for the better in South Asia, it could be propitious for India’s global status.
In a month’s time the Nuclear Suppliers Group will convene to consider both India and Pakistan’s requests for membership. Despite the technical and resource facilitations that such membership accrues to a nation pursuing a nuclear programme, civil and military, it is more a reflection of aspiration for global recognition; and the competitive nature of things between India and Pakistan.
The US supports India’s membership but 47 other members, including China, must also agree before India can accede to the mantle of de jure acceptance of its nuclear status, however indirect. Pakistan holds a certain influence over the Chinese vote which may be its saving grace. The US does not as vividly support Pakistan as it does India but it has been at the US’s bidding that Pakistan too has applied with the understanding that NSG members will consider each application on merit. With American domination of most international security and economic regimes, the chances of the merit working in India’s favour are far greater.
Pakistan will again fall back on China, but till when? One day China too will submit to the international consensus. Even if India fails to rise to the NSG this time round, it will have gained significantly greater space in moving towards that objective. Modi has agreed to begin the process of acquiring six American nuclear reactors giving meaning to why the Indo-US nuclear deal between the two was first signed.
Were both China and Pakistan to resort to a continued stonewalling of this or any other international or regional effort towards a security or an economic initiative, over time both will begin to isolate themselves from the international fraternity. For China, it is an unacceptable eventuality. China’s center of gravity in its strategy to rise beyond the middle income status of its economy lies in its trade and economic policies. To that end it will not compromise or bid on another’s behalf were isolation to become a real possibility.
In Pakistan it is a fallacy to imagine that China is tied to it by bonds which will last forever. China judges its available space for Pakistan and acts within its domain. The day it senses a challenge to its own interests, even tertiary, it will have no qualms about advising Pakistan to accede to a certain norm.
While it may be difficult for even a combined US-India foray to isolate China – both dependent for their respective economies on a vibrant relationship with the country – turning the screws on Pakistan will be rather easy for lack of significant interdependencies. Pakistan failed miserably to use the space available during the Afghan war years to convert the advantage into a more durable set of bargains in regional politics.
With Afghanistan alone being its object of attention, Pakistan failed to develop supporting planks of regional and international alignments that could support its intended objectives. Instead, our confrontations with regional players increased. Miscalculations and a faulty assessment of its own space in the obtaining conditions have rendered us irrelevant in our own environment. As things stand, the tables have turned on Pakistan instead. Afghanistan is fast receding as a factor of space for Pakistan’s relevance.
Come the new American president, there will be a review of the US’s Afghan policy; a clean slate may just be what the new president may begin his or her tenure with. This will open up space for others. Where the US may have to-date depended on Pakistan for delivering on Afghanistan others may well fill in instead. Note the growing evolution of consensus between Iran, India and Afghanistan; or the refreshed Afghan vitriol against Pakistan. That closes space for Pakistan not only on Afghanistan but implicitly on the region.
Pakistan has Iran, Afghanistan, China and India as its immediate neighbours. And, except for China, Pakistan has a broken relationship with all. If that is not failure, what is? We need to stop blaming everyone else in the world and accept that our conception and assessment of our potential were always misplaced and exaggerated. More importantly, our emplacement of a failing strategy caused us to lose the moment – and we are poorer for it. At best we will now only play catch up; that too only if there is a serious course correction. There hasn’t been a worse example of someone losing the hand with the best cards at their disposal.
Iran may be seen to be leading this rapprochement and India would have happily ceded the lead role as long as the three can align together and bypass Pakistan geographically. Use it or lose it, they say. Has Pakistan lost the benefit of its ‘strategic location’ by losing the moment? Recovery may still be possible but will be long-winded and always short of optimal. Losing opportunities force a lag which in a competitive environment becomes difficult to cover.
How India has moved in recent months is far more impressive than how Pakistan has assessed its position. Iran first came to Pakistan and offered that all-important olive branch, which sadly Pakistan rebuffed with an ill-thought, ill-timed and ill-managed disclosure of the Yadav episode. Was it again on someone else’s bidding that Pakistan gave up on its most opportune moment to resurrect its regional eminence? Pakistan continues to lose its potential because of incompetent leadership and an entirely inadequate conception of how the world has moved in recent years.
Modi has stretched Pakistan with a clearer vision and a smarter strategy. He has also reinforced India’s position globally. Efficient policies result in strategic gains. In stark contrast, Pakistan’s fallback remains a honed military which can only deliver tactical responses but cannot make for strategic lethargy. What Pakistan needs are forces of good. And that is where it remains desperately short.
The writer is a retired air-vicemarshal, former ambassador and a security and political analyst.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print/126712-South-Asian-dynamics
Tripoli
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2016
- Messages
- 742
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Could please clarify what you meant by that?
Adonis
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,681
- Reaction score
- -30
- Country
- Location
World knows that foreign policies of Pak for US/India/China and S Arabia r heavily influenced or controlled by your army...these r which mostly impact your country in terms of Aid,Commerce and Weaponry (lest India, which is your obsession).....so what really left for your democratic govt in terms of running F policy is irrelevant and negligible.
Nilgiri
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 24,797
- Reaction score
- 81
- Country
- Location
Precisely. I am not singling out China....but the person I was quoting was making it sound like somehow China's fingers are not dirty somehow.
BRAVO_
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2015
- Messages
- 1,785
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Through out 80s and 90s Usama Bin Ladan was also a american supported tool in Afghanistan to full fill the american agenda but when their purpose solved how they treated him ??????? he was also banned in america frankllyTwo Years ago Who would have thought of such a Transformation of India's image at International Forums
Chaiwala Zindabad
Now Mr. Modi is a need of Americans to serve the american purpose (thought his entry was also banned in america) , lets see what will be the conclusion... but yes on diplomatic front indian lobby played very well they organized regular briefing for american politicians and members and mobilize so many things proactively
Papa Dragon
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,540
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Well I guess I did mention Common Indian Civilians but not politicians and people in the govt. nor some political goons who end up saying they want to break Pakistan into 40 pieces for their own political goodwill. In that case, I can quote you lots of cases where many Pakistanis give anit-India speeches publicly
Laozi
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2016
- Messages
- 4,293
- Reaction score
- -27
- Country
- Location
Do Watch 9th June episode of 'Live with Dr. Shahid Masood' where he compares Modi with OBLThrough out 80s and 90s Usama Bin Ladan was also a american supported tool in Afghanistan to full fill the american agenda but when their purpose solved how they treated him ??????? he was also banned in america franklly
Now Mr. Modi is a need of Americans to serve the american purpose (thought his entry was also banned in america) , lets see what will be the conclusion... but yes on diplomatic front indian lobby played very well they organized regular briefing for american politicians and members and mobilize so many things proactively
You and Dr Shahid Masood are on the same page about Modi.
But I guess many Pakistani will not have a soft corner for Modi and hardly anyone will consider him a Hero
Bless your lucky stars that China is still on your side. Otherwise Indian diplomacy has completely isolated Pakistan.
India now shares the high table at International Diplomatic scene. Therefore meeting resistance and Winning or losing will continue.
First either Pakistan or China become a member of MTCR then tell us to buzz off
New World
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,895
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
yes sure quote some political leader in Pakistan that threaten india in their public speeches and during election campaign..
its really irritates when they first interfere in our discussion and later they say they don't care about Pakistan..
I FLY HIGH
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,116
- Reaction score
- 0
what will a foreign minister do if govt does not have any control on foreign policy? It is run by establishment .
Similar threads
- Article
