Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
India's Nuclear Agreement
- Thread starter nitesh
- Start date
nitesh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 0
domain-b.com : India set to sign nuclear deals with France, Russia
New Delhi: France could become the first country to conduct nuclear commerce with India under recently relaxed international norms. Both countries are likely to sign a previously initialed text for bilateral civil nuclear cooperation on 30 September during Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Paris, according to media reports emerging in the country's capital.
If it so transpires, then India may become a customer for French nuclear technology and fuel even before the United States Congress ratifies the Indo-US nuclear deal. The Indo-US deal has been responsible for India's recent emancipation from international shackles imposed on it for trade and commerce in nuclear fuel and technology in 1974, and assurances have been provided by the Indian government that it would await ratification by the US before signing deals with other countries in order that American companies were not disadvantaged.
Breathing down the neck of the French will be the Russians with a joint agreement to buy reactors and fuel due to be finalised during the New Delhi visit of president Dimitry Medvedev in December this year. This last has been confirmed by a statement made by Russian Ambassador to India, Vyacheslav Trubnikov over the weekend.
After a close vote in Vienna early on this month when the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 45-member nation cartel that controls commerce in nuclear fuel and technologies around the world, nearly blocked the exemption sought by India to be free of impositions, a rattled New Delhi may now be unsure as to the how the deal will pan out in the US Congress, where it has to pass numerous hurdles.
With reports emerging that some senior Democratic Party members have questioned the wisdom of hurrying the deal through the Congress and a communication to the US Congress by president George W Bush suggesting that Washington had made no legally binding commitments on the supply of nuclear fuel to India, New Delhi may be looking to hedge its bets.
The Indian prime minister is due to visit Washington on 25 September when both governments hope to sign the agreement, provided it has been approved by the US Congress by then.
New Delhi: France could become the first country to conduct nuclear commerce with India under recently relaxed international norms. Both countries are likely to sign a previously initialed text for bilateral civil nuclear cooperation on 30 September during Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Paris, according to media reports emerging in the country's capital.
If it so transpires, then India may become a customer for French nuclear technology and fuel even before the United States Congress ratifies the Indo-US nuclear deal. The Indo-US deal has been responsible for India's recent emancipation from international shackles imposed on it for trade and commerce in nuclear fuel and technology in 1974, and assurances have been provided by the Indian government that it would await ratification by the US before signing deals with other countries in order that American companies were not disadvantaged.
Breathing down the neck of the French will be the Russians with a joint agreement to buy reactors and fuel due to be finalised during the New Delhi visit of president Dimitry Medvedev in December this year. This last has been confirmed by a statement made by Russian Ambassador to India, Vyacheslav Trubnikov over the weekend.
After a close vote in Vienna early on this month when the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 45-member nation cartel that controls commerce in nuclear fuel and technologies around the world, nearly blocked the exemption sought by India to be free of impositions, a rattled New Delhi may now be unsure as to the how the deal will pan out in the US Congress, where it has to pass numerous hurdles.
With reports emerging that some senior Democratic Party members have questioned the wisdom of hurrying the deal through the Congress and a communication to the US Congress by president George W Bush suggesting that Washington had made no legally binding commitments on the supply of nuclear fuel to India, New Delhi may be looking to hedge its bets.
The Indian prime minister is due to visit Washington on 25 September when both governments hope to sign the agreement, provided it has been approved by the US Congress by then.
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Nuclear Supplier Group gives India unique waiver, but only after row between Delhi and Beijing
By Kranti Kumara and Deepal Jayasekera
WSWS - 17 September 2008
In the face of immense political pressure from the United States and a frantic Indian lobbying campaign, the 45-nation Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) agreed on September 6 to grant India a unique waiver exempting the South Asian country from the NSGs rules governing civilian nuclear trade.
Chinese opposition to the decision was only overcome after US President George W. Bush telephoned Chinese President Hu Jintao and a major diplomatic row had erupted between Beijing and New Delhi.
The NSG waiver lifts an over three-decade, US-led world embargo on civilian nuclear trade with India that was imposed after the country first exploded a nuclear device in 1974.
The waiver means India now has the legal right, under the world nuclear regulatory regime, to trade for civilian nuclear fuel and technology.
India is desperate to import advanced technology and nuclear fuel. Its 22 existing nuclear power plants are reportedly operating at 40 percent or less capacity and its own uranium reserves are very limited.
Even more importantly, the Indian elite have desperately sought the NSG waiver because they view it as an important stepping stone to achieving great or world power status and a privileged relationship with Washington.
The lifting of the NSG embargo, and a similar agreement with the UNs International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) finalized last month, go a long way toward legally recognizing India as a Nuclear Weapons State, a designation that the US, Russia, Britain, France and China have long reserved for themselves.
Hitherto, only states (other than the five recognized nuclear weapons states) that placed all their nuclear facilities under IAEA inspection and were signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) have been allowed, under NSG rules, to import civilian nuclear fuel and technology.
This NSG canon no longer applies to Indiaa state that developed nuclear weapons in defiance of the NPT and continues to refuse to sign the treaty.
The US, which has led the drive to create for India a special status within the world nuclear regulatory regime, claims that what has been at issue is merely civilian nuclear trade. This is trebly false.
First, a key Indian motivation in seeking access to foreign civilian nuclear technology and fuel is so that it can focus the resources of its indigenous nuclear program on developing its strategic deterrent, i.e., nuclear weapons.
Secondly, a key reason both Washington and New Delhi have joined forces to change the rules of nuclear trade in Indias favor is because the lifting of the NSG embargo and related US trade prohibitions will permit the development of a massive Indo-US trade in advanced armaments and military technology.
Last but not least, if the Bush administration has worked so assiduously, as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has put it, to help India become a world power, it is with the hope and expectation that it will be able to harness India to Washingtons predatory ambitions in the Middle East and Asia.
Incendiary implications
The action the NSG has been goaded into taking by the US has immense and incendiary strategic implications for South Asia, as it tilts the balance of power between India and its historic rival Pakistan sharply in Indias favor. It also rubbishes the basic principle of the nuclear regulatory regime the US championed in an earlier periodthat states which pursue nuclear weapons will be punished by an embargo on all nuclear trade and those that adhere to the NPT will, in return, be assisted in developing civilian nuclear energy.
And, as was foreshadowed in the events at the NSG meeting itself, it will intensify and complicate the ongoing and ever more explosive rivalry amongst the big powers for markets, raw materials, and geo-strategic advantage.
In addition to the US, Russia and France played a major role in helping to India to obtain the NSG waiver. Both these countries hope to garner a large share of the estimated $100 billion in nuclear fuel and technology purchases India is planning to make over the next decade.
This is not their only motivation however. Russia, dating back to the Cold War, has a close military and geo-political relationship with India and is anxious to prevent India from being pulled too far into the US orbit. France is also looking to India as a possible ally in a multi-polar world.
According to press reports, the US had to use every weapon in its diplomatic arsenal to persuade the NSG to give India the extraordinary waiver. US Ambassador David Mulford, who played an important part in negotiating the agreements that underpinned the USs stance at the NSG (the Indo-US nuclear accord and then the Indo-US nuclear Treaty) said, It was the biggest diplomatic effort I have witnessed in my experience since the 1980s.
In addition to deploying an army of lower level diplomats, the Bush administration sent Condoleezza Rice to lobby the NSG meeting in Vienna, in an attempt to overcome objections and concerns that has been raised by a host of NSG members at an earlier meeting in the third week of August.
While the US had lined up the other members of the G-8 behind the accord at the annual G-8 summit in early July, a half-dozen smaller advanced capitalist countriesNew Zealand, Austria, Ireland, Switzerland, Norway, and the Netherlandsargued that the waiver would undermine the nuclear non-regulatory regime, by effectively demonstrating that the rules could be rewritten for the big and the powerful.
These countries are all closely tied economically and geo-politically with the US and/or the dominant powers within the European Union and are themselves only minor players in nuclear commerce. Thus it is not surprising that they all ultimately capitulated to pressure from the US.
To secure these countries support, Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee pledged, while in Vienna on September 5, to maintain Indias decade-old nuclear-weapons testing moratorium. The waiver takes note of Mukherjees pledge and stipulates that the NSG will meet in emergency session should New Delhi carry out a nuclear test in the future. But there is no binding commitment to suspend nuclear trade with India and the stipulation for a meeting in the event of a nuclear test was already part of the NSG guidelines.
The Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janata Party, which in 1998 proclaimed India a nuclear weapons state, has denounced this limitation on Indias military might. But the Indian media and elite are by and large ecstatic over the outcome of the NSG meeting, just as they applauded the Congress Party-led United Progressive Alliance governments willingness to break with the Stalinist-led Left Front which had been sustaining it in power for four years, so to implement the nuclear treaty with the US. (See Indian parliament gives green light to Indo-US nuclear treaty.)
Chinas opposition
Chinas opposition to the waiver was much more formidable. After all, India is a longtime strategic rival and the US geo-political establishment, including figures in and around the Bush administration, has trumpeted a strategic partnership with India as a pivotal element of Washingtons efforts to contain, and if necessary, confront China.
China had repeatedly voiced reservations about the USs call for India to be given special status within the nuclear regulatory regime. But, presumably hoping the Indo-US scheme would unravel due to either domestic opposition in India or the US or because of opposition from other states concerned about non-proliferation, China did not categorically come out against the lifting of the nuclear embargo on India.
That apparently changed in the run-up to the NSG meeting. On September 1, the Chinese Communist Partys Peoples Daily published an opinion piece that denounced the Indo-US nuclear treaty. Whether it is motivated by geopolitical considerations or commercial interests, declared the article, the US-India nuclear agreement has constituted a major blow to the international non-proliferation regime.
The Indian media, reflecting the sentiments of Indian government and officials, has accused China of encouraging the smaller powers in their opposition to the waiver. What is known is that late on the evening of September 5, after the opposition from the smaller countries had crumbled, the Chinese delegation withdrew from the NSG deliberations. As decisions at the NSG are by consensus, the Chinese withdrawal threatened to prevent adoption of the waiver.
It was at this point that Bush telephoned his Chinese counterpart Hu and India reportedly sent Beijing a demarche protesting the Chinese stance.
Ultimately the Chinese negotiators returned to the NSG negotiations and, when the waiver came to a vote, abstained, thereby allowing it to be considered carried by consensus.
According to a report in the September 12 Times of India, It required considerable effort by both New Delhi and Washington to get Beijing to change its position. What perhaps forced China to withdraw the hand it had so impetuously shown was that it did not want to be seen as the only NSG member styming (sic) the waiver which would allow India to re-engage in nuclear cooperation with the rest of the world.
Chinas opposition unnerved the Indian elite to such an extent that the Indian government lashed out at China even after obtaining the waiver. Indian National Security Advisor M. K. Narayanan told a television channel Sept. 6, The (Chinese) Foreign Minister will come here and we will of course express some kind of disappointment. We will say we did not expect this from China.
Indias disappointment was reportedly one of the main subjects of discussion when
Pranab Mukerjee and his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, who began an official visit to India September 7, met up.
Sino-Indian relations have been strained since they fought a border war in 1962. Not long thereafter China emerged as a pivotal ally of Pakistan; indeed, the Pakistani elite routinely refer to China as their all weather friend.
In recent years there has been a thaw in Sino-Indian relations. Sino-Indian trade now surpasses that between Indian and the US. But the two countries are competing for foreign investment, oil and other natural resources, and influence in South, Central and South-East Asia.
Chinas overriding concern, however, is not with India per se, but rather with the emerging Indo-US partnership and Washingtons obtrusive drive to harness India to its strategic ambitions in the Middle East and Central Asia and use a rising India as a counterweight to China.
It will not have passed unnoticed in Beijing that the US has repeatedly used the prospect of the Indo-US nuclear deal to pressure India to follow its lead in IAEA deliberations about Iran. Nor that one of the major goals of the US is to develop military inter-operability with India.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain has called for Russia to be expelled from the G-8 and replaced by India.
Obtaining the NSG waiver was the last hurdle that had to be overcome by India and the US before the 2007 Indo-US Nuclear Treaty could be submitted to the US Congress for ratification.
There have been some voices within the US elite who have criticized the nuclear deal with India, particularly from the standpoint that the USs advocacy of a special status for nuclear-armed India so flagrantly contradicts the US position vis-a-vis Iran, which as signatory of the NPT has the full legal right to develop all aspects of a civilian nuclear program.
But these voices have become increasingly muted. There is a strong bipartisan consensus that the Indo-US nuclear treaty and a strategic partnership with India are of pivotal importance to US imperialisms strategy in the first decades of the 21st century.
Both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, have strongly supported the nuclear treaty. Obamas running mate Senator Joe Biden is not only strongly in favor of the deal, but as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations he has promised to start the formal hearings on the treaty this week so as to expedite its approval by the US Senate. The Bush administration is pushing for the treaty to be ratified before the current Senate session ends September 26.
Nuclear Supplier Group gives India unique "waiver," but only after row between Delhi and Beijing
By Kranti Kumara and Deepal Jayasekera
WSWS - 17 September 2008
In the face of immense political pressure from the United States and a frantic Indian lobbying campaign, the 45-nation Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) agreed on September 6 to grant India a unique waiver exempting the South Asian country from the NSGs rules governing civilian nuclear trade.
Chinese opposition to the decision was only overcome after US President George W. Bush telephoned Chinese President Hu Jintao and a major diplomatic row had erupted between Beijing and New Delhi.
The NSG waiver lifts an over three-decade, US-led world embargo on civilian nuclear trade with India that was imposed after the country first exploded a nuclear device in 1974.
The waiver means India now has the legal right, under the world nuclear regulatory regime, to trade for civilian nuclear fuel and technology.
India is desperate to import advanced technology and nuclear fuel. Its 22 existing nuclear power plants are reportedly operating at 40 percent or less capacity and its own uranium reserves are very limited.
Even more importantly, the Indian elite have desperately sought the NSG waiver because they view it as an important stepping stone to achieving great or world power status and a privileged relationship with Washington.
The lifting of the NSG embargo, and a similar agreement with the UNs International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) finalized last month, go a long way toward legally recognizing India as a Nuclear Weapons State, a designation that the US, Russia, Britain, France and China have long reserved for themselves.
Hitherto, only states (other than the five recognized nuclear weapons states) that placed all their nuclear facilities under IAEA inspection and were signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) have been allowed, under NSG rules, to import civilian nuclear fuel and technology.
This NSG canon no longer applies to Indiaa state that developed nuclear weapons in defiance of the NPT and continues to refuse to sign the treaty.
The US, which has led the drive to create for India a special status within the world nuclear regulatory regime, claims that what has been at issue is merely civilian nuclear trade. This is trebly false.
First, a key Indian motivation in seeking access to foreign civilian nuclear technology and fuel is so that it can focus the resources of its indigenous nuclear program on developing its strategic deterrent, i.e., nuclear weapons.
Secondly, a key reason both Washington and New Delhi have joined forces to change the rules of nuclear trade in Indias favor is because the lifting of the NSG embargo and related US trade prohibitions will permit the development of a massive Indo-US trade in advanced armaments and military technology.
Last but not least, if the Bush administration has worked so assiduously, as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has put it, to help India become a world power, it is with the hope and expectation that it will be able to harness India to Washingtons predatory ambitions in the Middle East and Asia.
Incendiary implications
The action the NSG has been goaded into taking by the US has immense and incendiary strategic implications for South Asia, as it tilts the balance of power between India and its historic rival Pakistan sharply in Indias favor. It also rubbishes the basic principle of the nuclear regulatory regime the US championed in an earlier periodthat states which pursue nuclear weapons will be punished by an embargo on all nuclear trade and those that adhere to the NPT will, in return, be assisted in developing civilian nuclear energy.
And, as was foreshadowed in the events at the NSG meeting itself, it will intensify and complicate the ongoing and ever more explosive rivalry amongst the big powers for markets, raw materials, and geo-strategic advantage.
In addition to the US, Russia and France played a major role in helping to India to obtain the NSG waiver. Both these countries hope to garner a large share of the estimated $100 billion in nuclear fuel and technology purchases India is planning to make over the next decade.
This is not their only motivation however. Russia, dating back to the Cold War, has a close military and geo-political relationship with India and is anxious to prevent India from being pulled too far into the US orbit. France is also looking to India as a possible ally in a multi-polar world.
According to press reports, the US had to use every weapon in its diplomatic arsenal to persuade the NSG to give India the extraordinary waiver. US Ambassador David Mulford, who played an important part in negotiating the agreements that underpinned the USs stance at the NSG (the Indo-US nuclear accord and then the Indo-US nuclear Treaty) said, It was the biggest diplomatic effort I have witnessed in my experience since the 1980s.
In addition to deploying an army of lower level diplomats, the Bush administration sent Condoleezza Rice to lobby the NSG meeting in Vienna, in an attempt to overcome objections and concerns that has been raised by a host of NSG members at an earlier meeting in the third week of August.
While the US had lined up the other members of the G-8 behind the accord at the annual G-8 summit in early July, a half-dozen smaller advanced capitalist countriesNew Zealand, Austria, Ireland, Switzerland, Norway, and the Netherlandsargued that the waiver would undermine the nuclear non-regulatory regime, by effectively demonstrating that the rules could be rewritten for the big and the powerful.
These countries are all closely tied economically and geo-politically with the US and/or the dominant powers within the European Union and are themselves only minor players in nuclear commerce. Thus it is not surprising that they all ultimately capitulated to pressure from the US.
To secure these countries support, Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee pledged, while in Vienna on September 5, to maintain Indias decade-old nuclear-weapons testing moratorium. The waiver takes note of Mukherjees pledge and stipulates that the NSG will meet in emergency session should New Delhi carry out a nuclear test in the future. But there is no binding commitment to suspend nuclear trade with India and the stipulation for a meeting in the event of a nuclear test was already part of the NSG guidelines.
The Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janata Party, which in 1998 proclaimed India a nuclear weapons state, has denounced this limitation on Indias military might. But the Indian media and elite are by and large ecstatic over the outcome of the NSG meeting, just as they applauded the Congress Party-led United Progressive Alliance governments willingness to break with the Stalinist-led Left Front which had been sustaining it in power for four years, so to implement the nuclear treaty with the US. (See Indian parliament gives green light to Indo-US nuclear treaty.)
Chinas opposition
Chinas opposition to the waiver was much more formidable. After all, India is a longtime strategic rival and the US geo-political establishment, including figures in and around the Bush administration, has trumpeted a strategic partnership with India as a pivotal element of Washingtons efforts to contain, and if necessary, confront China.
China had repeatedly voiced reservations about the USs call for India to be given special status within the nuclear regulatory regime. But, presumably hoping the Indo-US scheme would unravel due to either domestic opposition in India or the US or because of opposition from other states concerned about non-proliferation, China did not categorically come out against the lifting of the nuclear embargo on India.
That apparently changed in the run-up to the NSG meeting. On September 1, the Chinese Communist Partys Peoples Daily published an opinion piece that denounced the Indo-US nuclear treaty. Whether it is motivated by geopolitical considerations or commercial interests, declared the article, the US-India nuclear agreement has constituted a major blow to the international non-proliferation regime.
The Indian media, reflecting the sentiments of Indian government and officials, has accused China of encouraging the smaller powers in their opposition to the waiver. What is known is that late on the evening of September 5, after the opposition from the smaller countries had crumbled, the Chinese delegation withdrew from the NSG deliberations. As decisions at the NSG are by consensus, the Chinese withdrawal threatened to prevent adoption of the waiver.
It was at this point that Bush telephoned his Chinese counterpart Hu and India reportedly sent Beijing a demarche protesting the Chinese stance.
Ultimately the Chinese negotiators returned to the NSG negotiations and, when the waiver came to a vote, abstained, thereby allowing it to be considered carried by consensus.
According to a report in the September 12 Times of India, It required considerable effort by both New Delhi and Washington to get Beijing to change its position. What perhaps forced China to withdraw the hand it had so impetuously shown was that it did not want to be seen as the only NSG member styming (sic) the waiver which would allow India to re-engage in nuclear cooperation with the rest of the world.
Chinas opposition unnerved the Indian elite to such an extent that the Indian government lashed out at China even after obtaining the waiver. Indian National Security Advisor M. K. Narayanan told a television channel Sept. 6, The (Chinese) Foreign Minister will come here and we will of course express some kind of disappointment. We will say we did not expect this from China.
Indias disappointment was reportedly one of the main subjects of discussion when
Pranab Mukerjee and his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, who began an official visit to India September 7, met up.
Sino-Indian relations have been strained since they fought a border war in 1962. Not long thereafter China emerged as a pivotal ally of Pakistan; indeed, the Pakistani elite routinely refer to China as their all weather friend.
In recent years there has been a thaw in Sino-Indian relations. Sino-Indian trade now surpasses that between Indian and the US. But the two countries are competing for foreign investment, oil and other natural resources, and influence in South, Central and South-East Asia.
Chinas overriding concern, however, is not with India per se, but rather with the emerging Indo-US partnership and Washingtons obtrusive drive to harness India to its strategic ambitions in the Middle East and Central Asia and use a rising India as a counterweight to China.
It will not have passed unnoticed in Beijing that the US has repeatedly used the prospect of the Indo-US nuclear deal to pressure India to follow its lead in IAEA deliberations about Iran. Nor that one of the major goals of the US is to develop military inter-operability with India.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain has called for Russia to be expelled from the G-8 and replaced by India.
Obtaining the NSG waiver was the last hurdle that had to be overcome by India and the US before the 2007 Indo-US Nuclear Treaty could be submitted to the US Congress for ratification.
There have been some voices within the US elite who have criticized the nuclear deal with India, particularly from the standpoint that the USs advocacy of a special status for nuclear-armed India so flagrantly contradicts the US position vis-a-vis Iran, which as signatory of the NPT has the full legal right to develop all aspects of a civilian nuclear program.
But these voices have become increasingly muted. There is a strong bipartisan consensus that the Indo-US nuclear treaty and a strategic partnership with India are of pivotal importance to US imperialisms strategy in the first decades of the 21st century.
Both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, have strongly supported the nuclear treaty. Obamas running mate Senator Joe Biden is not only strongly in favor of the deal, but as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations he has promised to start the formal hearings on the treaty this week so as to expedite its approval by the US Senate. The Bush administration is pushing for the treaty to be ratified before the current Senate session ends September 26.
Nuclear Supplier Group gives India unique "waiver," but only after row between Delhi and Beijing
nitesh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 0
India's newfound nuke status may help score over China-India-The Times of India
India's newfound nuke status may help score over China
17 Sep 2008, 2223 hrs IST, Saibal Dasgupta ,TNN
BEIJING: The next round of border talks between India and China beginning on Thursday promises to be significantly different from the past 11 rounds for a variety of reasons including the recent verdict of the Nuclear Suppliers Group lifting the trade ban on India.
China appears worried that India's bitterness over the role played by China at the NSG meeting will spill over on the border talks. National Security Adviser M K Narayanan, who is the chief negotiator on the border dispute, was one of those who severely criticised Beijing for being reluctant in backing India's nuclear case.
Narayanan arrives on Thursday afternoon for talks with his counterpart, Chinese State Counsellor Dai Bingguo. The talks will be held over several sessions on Thursday and Friday.
"The border talks and the NSG issue are two different things. They must be kept separate," Hu Shisheng, a researcher at the government think-talk, the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, said.
Besides the NSG verdict, which put India on a somewhat higher nuclear plane, recent developments in Asia is also expected to influence the next round of talks. China has cause to feel comfortable after its recent success in mending fences with Japan, which it regarded with deep suspicion until a few months back.
India is expected to seek clarification from China on whether it is considering signing a nuclear agreement with Pakistan. There have been reports that the new Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari was pushing Beijing to sign a deal similar to the India-US deal.
China, which has played an important role to helping Pakistan develop its nuclear capabilities, is not expected to give India a categorical reply about its future plans on this count.
"The NSG verdict represents the end of the old order and the emergence of a new order. The Chinese leadership has always adhered to the principal of watching the situation carefully before taking a stand on a changing situation like this one," a Chinese expert on Asian affairs told this reporter. "So, it is no surprise that our representatives behaved in the manner they did. It was a responsible stance on their part, and India should have appreciated it," he said.
The expert also complained that the "sense of hysteria" in the Indian media about China's role at the NSG would have a negative impact on the relationship among the two countries. "The Indian mass media has been very negative on China. Even the reports about incursions by the Chinese military into Indian territory are false and very negative. This is going to be a big hurdle in the relationship between the two countries," he said.
Pakistan, which is always an important factor in India-China relationship, is not yet entirely out of turmoil. The Chinese leadership has little direct acquaintance with the new Pakistani president. The People's Daily , which is the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China, had recently expressed serious concerns about the major challenges facing Zardari in terms of social turmoil and terrorist activities.
Pakistani media had one stage reported that Zardari will visit Beijing on September 17 making it his first foreign destination after taking oath. But this has not turned out to be true. It is possible Zardari initially planned to visit Beijing in mid-September and then deferred it after getting signals that China was not yet ready to discuss a possible nuclear deal.
India's newfound nuke status may help score over China
17 Sep 2008, 2223 hrs IST, Saibal Dasgupta ,TNN
BEIJING: The next round of border talks between India and China beginning on Thursday promises to be significantly different from the past 11 rounds for a variety of reasons including the recent verdict of the Nuclear Suppliers Group lifting the trade ban on India.
China appears worried that India's bitterness over the role played by China at the NSG meeting will spill over on the border talks. National Security Adviser M K Narayanan, who is the chief negotiator on the border dispute, was one of those who severely criticised Beijing for being reluctant in backing India's nuclear case.
Narayanan arrives on Thursday afternoon for talks with his counterpart, Chinese State Counsellor Dai Bingguo. The talks will be held over several sessions on Thursday and Friday.
"The border talks and the NSG issue are two different things. They must be kept separate," Hu Shisheng, a researcher at the government think-talk, the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, said.
Besides the NSG verdict, which put India on a somewhat higher nuclear plane, recent developments in Asia is also expected to influence the next round of talks. China has cause to feel comfortable after its recent success in mending fences with Japan, which it regarded with deep suspicion until a few months back.
India is expected to seek clarification from China on whether it is considering signing a nuclear agreement with Pakistan. There have been reports that the new Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari was pushing Beijing to sign a deal similar to the India-US deal.
China, which has played an important role to helping Pakistan develop its nuclear capabilities, is not expected to give India a categorical reply about its future plans on this count.
"The NSG verdict represents the end of the old order and the emergence of a new order. The Chinese leadership has always adhered to the principal of watching the situation carefully before taking a stand on a changing situation like this one," a Chinese expert on Asian affairs told this reporter. "So, it is no surprise that our representatives behaved in the manner they did. It was a responsible stance on their part, and India should have appreciated it," he said.
The expert also complained that the "sense of hysteria" in the Indian media about China's role at the NSG would have a negative impact on the relationship among the two countries. "The Indian mass media has been very negative on China. Even the reports about incursions by the Chinese military into Indian territory are false and very negative. This is going to be a big hurdle in the relationship between the two countries," he said.
Pakistan, which is always an important factor in India-China relationship, is not yet entirely out of turmoil. The Chinese leadership has little direct acquaintance with the new Pakistani president. The People's Daily , which is the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China, had recently expressed serious concerns about the major challenges facing Zardari in terms of social turmoil and terrorist activities.
Pakistani media had one stage reported that Zardari will visit Beijing on September 17 making it his first foreign destination after taking oath. But this has not turned out to be true. It is possible Zardari initially planned to visit Beijing in mid-September and then deferred it after getting signals that China was not yet ready to discuss a possible nuclear deal.
Marshal
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 358
- Reaction score
- 0
Senate to hear N-deal today, critics mount pressure
The US senate is slated to hear the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement on Thursday.
However, on the eve of the hearing, non-proliferation and disarmament experts urged US Congressmen to reject the agreement for nuclear cooperation, which was sent to them for final approval by President George W Bush on September 10.
"Resist overtures to rush toward a vote without carefully considering the far reaching nuclear non-proliferation and security implications of this unprecedented and complex arrangement," said the group in a letter to the members of US Congress.
The letter also explains that India has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), meaning it has not made a legally binding commitment to achieve nuclear disarmament. Yet the arrangement would give India rights and privileges of civil nuclear trade that are more favorable than even for countries that are in good standing under the NPT.
US Under Secretary of state for Political Affairs William J Burns will take to the stand at a hearing of Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on the agreement on Thursday.
With Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden, who heads the Senate panel, and is a strong supporter of the deal busy campaigning, the hearing will be presided over by fellow Democrat Chris Dodd.
While there is skepticism about the deal among Democrats who are a majority in Congress, there is also a broad bipartisan consensus about the need for a strong bilateral relation between the world's oldest and largest democracies.
The US Congress is in a race against time to fast track approval for the deal before the present Congressional session ends on September 26 and preferably before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrives in the US to attend the UN General Assembly.
NDTV.com: Senate to hear N-deal today, critics mount pressure
The US senate is slated to hear the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement on Thursday.
However, on the eve of the hearing, non-proliferation and disarmament experts urged US Congressmen to reject the agreement for nuclear cooperation, which was sent to them for final approval by President George W Bush on September 10.
"Resist overtures to rush toward a vote without carefully considering the far reaching nuclear non-proliferation and security implications of this unprecedented and complex arrangement," said the group in a letter to the members of US Congress.
The letter also explains that India has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), meaning it has not made a legally binding commitment to achieve nuclear disarmament. Yet the arrangement would give India rights and privileges of civil nuclear trade that are more favorable than even for countries that are in good standing under the NPT.
US Under Secretary of state for Political Affairs William J Burns will take to the stand at a hearing of Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on the agreement on Thursday.
With Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden, who heads the Senate panel, and is a strong supporter of the deal busy campaigning, the hearing will be presided over by fellow Democrat Chris Dodd.
While there is skepticism about the deal among Democrats who are a majority in Congress, there is also a broad bipartisan consensus about the need for a strong bilateral relation between the world's oldest and largest democracies.
The US Congress is in a race against time to fast track approval for the deal before the present Congressional session ends on September 26 and preferably before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrives in the US to attend the UN General Assembly.
NDTV.com: Senate to hear N-deal today, critics mount pressure
nitesh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 0
N-deal before September 26, assures Rice
18 Sep 2008, 1128 hrs IST,PTI
WASHINGTON: Ahead of a crucial Congressional hearing on the Indo-US nuclear deal, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has told a high-level Indian delegation here that she would be meeting key lawmakers in a bid to secure a quick approval of the agreement before the Congress ends its session on September 26.
Rice briefed visiting MPs led by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Vayalar Ravi about the steps being taken by the Bush Administration to push the deal through Congress.
The top official is said to have told the delegation that after their meeting she was travelling to Capitol Hill to continue the efforts on the civilian nuclear initiative.
The move assumes significance as Rice is visiting Capitol Hill for a meeting with lawmakers who could play a key role in clearing the deal, just ahead of a major hearing on the issue in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee later today.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee has not scheduled a hearing and senior aides in the House have pointed out that while hearings are educational they are not mandatory but purely optional.
Still, there is no word from the Chairman of the House Panel, California Democrat Howard Berman who is a known sceptic of the nuclear deal on non-proliferation grounds.
During the meeting with Ravi, Rice expressed happiness at the present state of the depth and width of the bilateral ties, while the Indian Minister is said to have voiced satisfaction over the "right direction" of relations.
Ravi also expressed his anguish over the terrorist attack on the US embassy complex in Yemen that left at least 16 dead.
Earlier, Ravi emphasised that the civilian nuclear deal has to be seen in terms of energy and the linkages between energy security and food security.
"Energy security is the most important component of development of any country," he maintained.
N-deal before September 26, assures Rice-India-The Times of India
18 Sep 2008, 1128 hrs IST,PTI
WASHINGTON: Ahead of a crucial Congressional hearing on the Indo-US nuclear deal, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has told a high-level Indian delegation here that she would be meeting key lawmakers in a bid to secure a quick approval of the agreement before the Congress ends its session on September 26.
Rice briefed visiting MPs led by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Vayalar Ravi about the steps being taken by the Bush Administration to push the deal through Congress.
The top official is said to have told the delegation that after their meeting she was travelling to Capitol Hill to continue the efforts on the civilian nuclear initiative.
The move assumes significance as Rice is visiting Capitol Hill for a meeting with lawmakers who could play a key role in clearing the deal, just ahead of a major hearing on the issue in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee later today.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee has not scheduled a hearing and senior aides in the House have pointed out that while hearings are educational they are not mandatory but purely optional.
Still, there is no word from the Chairman of the House Panel, California Democrat Howard Berman who is a known sceptic of the nuclear deal on non-proliferation grounds.
During the meeting with Ravi, Rice expressed happiness at the present state of the depth and width of the bilateral ties, while the Indian Minister is said to have voiced satisfaction over the "right direction" of relations.
Ravi also expressed his anguish over the terrorist attack on the US embassy complex in Yemen that left at least 16 dead.
Earlier, Ravi emphasised that the civilian nuclear deal has to be seen in terms of energy and the linkages between energy security and food security.
"Energy security is the most important component of development of any country," he maintained.
N-deal before September 26, assures Rice-India-The Times of India
Lalit K Jha
Friday, September 19, 2008, (New York)
An influential Republican Senator on Thursday said that there is contradictions in the "claims" made by India and the "message" sent by the US President George W Bush to the Congress on the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal.
As such, Richard Lugar, the Republican Senator from Indiana sought explanation from the Bush Administration on the conflicting statements coming from the South Block and White House on India's right to conduct nuclear test and the US imposing sanctions on it.
"First, Indian leaders claim that the United States has agreed that India can test its nuclear weapons and obtain stocks of nuclear fuel to guard against sanctions. They also claim that the United States has conferred the legal status of a Nuclear Weapon State under the NPT on India," Lugar said in his opening statement as the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee began hearing on the Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Agreement.
The hearing has been convened by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Joe Biden, after the US President George W Bush sent the so called 123 Agreement for ratification by the Congress.
"The President's Message to the Congress transmitting the proposed agreement states that any provisions in the agreement are political commitments and not legally binding. Which explanation is factual, and how do these conflicting statements affect the operation and implementation of the agreement?" Lugar asked.
The Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns was later schedule to deliver a statement on behalf of the Bush Administration and address the concerns of the Senators during the hearing.
"Second, is the agreement fully consistent with US laws that would require termination of the proposed agreement and cessation of nuclear exports to India if it detonates a nuclear explosive device or proliferates nuclear technology?," Lugar asked.
In all Lugar sought clarifications from the Bush Administration on four issues.
Third, Lugar said are the terms of the proposed agreement regarding fuel supply from the United States to India, or supply of fuel from third countries to India, or the creation of a strategic reserve of such fuel in India consistent with the intent of the Hyde Act?
"How would the agreement work in cases in which the US decides to terminate fuel supply to India or demands the return of nuclear material and equipment in response to an Indian violation of the 123 agreement or its new safeguards agreement with the IAEA?," Lugar questioned.
"Fourth, to what extent has the United States created a new kind of 123 agreement and model for international nuclear cooperation that may benefit additional countries that have not accepted the NPT and that do not have a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA?," Lugar further asked.
Before concluding Lugar asserted: "These issues must be addressed during our hearing today. We need to establish the definitive US interpretation of this agreement. We want to avoid any ambiguity about the effect of this agreement on US law and policy."
Lugar said under existing law, the Committee would normally be in a 30-day period of consultation on the proposed agreement, after which it would have 60 days to consider a resolution approving the agreement.
"Such a resolution would be privileged and unamendable. However, if we hope to pass the resolution this year, we cannot wait until all 30 days of the consultation period have transpired," he said.
The Bush Administration and the pro-India lobby at the Capitol is pushing the Congress to ratify the 123 Agreement before September 26 when the Congress is scheduled to be adjourned.
jeypore
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2,885
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Joe Binden is very much pro-india, infact lot of NRI's have funded him for his senatorial days. My uncle is one of these big fund givers to him and one of my cousin is actually working for him. Neo this is bunch of talk, but no one is walking. Meaning no action will be taken. That is why Bush has already invited PM M. Singh of Sep 25, so he can make grand finally to the deal to the American Public.
nitesh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,261
- Reaction score
- 0
N-deal this month, assures key Democratic senator-USA-World-The Times of India
N-deal this month, assures key Democratic senator
19 Sep 2008, 0913 hrs IST,PTI
WASHINGTON: Amidst uncertainty looming over the India-US civilian nuclear agreement, the ongoing Senate's foreign relation committee has indicated "strong desire" among the top US lawmakers to get the deal approved during the current Congress session ending on September 26.
"I think like the evidence in the past, there is strong desire to reach agreement given the importance of this," acting chairman of the Foreign Relation Committee Christopher Dodd said.
"Of course some members have reservations. There is an opportunity to express and ask colleagues to approve or disapprove the idea. As the acting chairman of this committee, I want to ask my colleagues and members to do that," the Connecticut senator said.
Dodd presided over the Senate Panel on Thursday afternoon in the absence of Senator Joe Biden who is currently in the campaign trail by virtue of being the Democratic party's Vice Presidential nominee.
He questioned three witnesses from the State Department on all possible aspects of the agreement.
"... in the final analysis if the matter is brought up at the end of the session and they (lawmakers) have not gone through the process, they could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it. So, it is going to be important to try and give my colleagues with limited time, a chance to express those views," Dodd told media persons after the hearing of the Senate committee at Dirksen Building.
Dodd also appreciated the effort made by the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to get the deal finalised before the end of the tenure of the Congress.
"The Indians have wrestled with this and I have great respect for what Prime Minister Singh has gone through in order to achieve this result. There is probably a deeper appreciation of the process in India than any place else in the world," he said.
Expressing optimism about early passage of the agreement Dodd said that the civilian nuclear deal had the prospect of unravelling by way of amendments attached to it.
"We hope not," he shot back when asked if the process of passage would require the whole 30-day session of the US Congress.
The Senate panel include Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, the acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood accompanied by Richard Stratford from the Bureau of International security and Non-Proliferation in the State Department.
N-deal this month, assures key Democratic senator
19 Sep 2008, 0913 hrs IST,PTI
WASHINGTON: Amidst uncertainty looming over the India-US civilian nuclear agreement, the ongoing Senate's foreign relation committee has indicated "strong desire" among the top US lawmakers to get the deal approved during the current Congress session ending on September 26.
"I think like the evidence in the past, there is strong desire to reach agreement given the importance of this," acting chairman of the Foreign Relation Committee Christopher Dodd said.
"Of course some members have reservations. There is an opportunity to express and ask colleagues to approve or disapprove the idea. As the acting chairman of this committee, I want to ask my colleagues and members to do that," the Connecticut senator said.
Dodd presided over the Senate Panel on Thursday afternoon in the absence of Senator Joe Biden who is currently in the campaign trail by virtue of being the Democratic party's Vice Presidential nominee.
He questioned three witnesses from the State Department on all possible aspects of the agreement.
"... in the final analysis if the matter is brought up at the end of the session and they (lawmakers) have not gone through the process, they could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it. So, it is going to be important to try and give my colleagues with limited time, a chance to express those views," Dodd told media persons after the hearing of the Senate committee at Dirksen Building.
Dodd also appreciated the effort made by the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to get the deal finalised before the end of the tenure of the Congress.
"The Indians have wrestled with this and I have great respect for what Prime Minister Singh has gone through in order to achieve this result. There is probably a deeper appreciation of the process in India than any place else in the world," he said.
Expressing optimism about early passage of the agreement Dodd said that the civilian nuclear deal had the prospect of unravelling by way of amendments attached to it.
"We hope not," he shot back when asked if the process of passage would require the whole 30-day session of the US Congress.
The Senate panel include Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, the acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood accompanied by Richard Stratford from the Bureau of International security and Non-Proliferation in the State Department.
Marshal
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 358
- Reaction score
- 0
Senate committee indicates strong desire for N-deal: Dodd
By Agencies on Friday, September 19, 2008
Amidst uncertainty looming over the India-US civilian nuclear agreement, the ongoing Senate's foreign relation committee has indicated "strong desire" among the top US lawmakers to get the deal approved during the current Congress session ending on 26th September.
"I think like the evidence in the past, there is strong desire to reach agreement given the importance of this," acting chairman of the Foreign Relation Committee Christopher Dodd said.
"Of course some members have reservations. There is an opportunity to express and ask colleagues to approve or disapprove the idea. As the acting chairman of this committee, I want to ask my colleagues and members to do that," the Connecticut senator said.
Dodd presided over the Senate Panel on Thursday afternoon in the absence of Senator Joe Biden who is currently in the campaign trail by virtue of being the Democratic party's Vice Presidential nominee.
He questioned three witnesses from the State Department on all possible aspects of the agreement.
"... in the final analysis if the matter is brought up at the end of the session and they (lawmakers) have not gone through the process, they could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it. So, it is going to be important to try and give my colleagues with limited time, a chance to express those views," Dodd told media persons after the hearing of the Senate committee at Dirksen Building.
"The staff will be meeting tonight and tomorrow and try to resolve those matters with the administration. So we are going to utilise every minute of every day... with the goal in mind of going through this process fairly, equitably and simultaneously," Dodd said adding, one of the considerations of the Senate and the House could be to have the civilian nuclear agreement in the Continuing Resolution.
"Clearly it is a process that India appreciates immensely" Dodd said.
In his opening remarks to the Senate Panel, Dodd said that the agreement which was before the committee was not perfect.
However, the "approval of this agreement will still be a milestone in US-Indian relations and to approve it," he said.
"In my view, we must. We would be well advised to approve it this month, moreover, rather than waiting until next year."
"I am still very confident that we are going to end up with an agreement that is going to work to the satisfaction of both countries," said the Senator.
When asked if some members of Congress would want to introduce amendments calling for automatic cessation of nuclear trade in case of nuclear test by India, the Democrat said that he did not want to comment on the various proposals the members might have, though he would not be too surprised if someone offeres such proposal.
"Let me emphasise that there is a lot more involved in this than just the specifics of the agreement. This is a tremendously important relationship that is under distrust for a generation and a half over this issue. And I, for one, would like to see to take advantage of this opportunity to move forward in the 21st century relationship. And an awful lot rests on the outcome of this," he added.
Dodd also appreciated the effort made by the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to get the deal finalised before the end of the tenure of the Congress.
"The Indians have wrestled with this and I have great respect for what Prime Minister Singh has gone through in order to achieve this result. There is probably a deeper appreciation of the process in India than any place else in the world," he said.
Expressing optimism about early passage of the agreement Dodd said that the civilian nuclear deal had the prospect of unravelling by way of amendments attached to it.
"We hope not," he shot back when asked if the process of passage would require the whole 30-day session of the US Congress.
The Senate panel include Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, the acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood accompanied by Richard Stratford from the Bureau of International security and Non-Proliferation in the State Department.
By Agencies on Friday, September 19, 2008
Amidst uncertainty looming over the India-US civilian nuclear agreement, the ongoing Senate's foreign relation committee has indicated "strong desire" among the top US lawmakers to get the deal approved during the current Congress session ending on 26th September.
"I think like the evidence in the past, there is strong desire to reach agreement given the importance of this," acting chairman of the Foreign Relation Committee Christopher Dodd said.
"Of course some members have reservations. There is an opportunity to express and ask colleagues to approve or disapprove the idea. As the acting chairman of this committee, I want to ask my colleagues and members to do that," the Connecticut senator said.
Dodd presided over the Senate Panel on Thursday afternoon in the absence of Senator Joe Biden who is currently in the campaign trail by virtue of being the Democratic party's Vice Presidential nominee.
He questioned three witnesses from the State Department on all possible aspects of the agreement.
"... in the final analysis if the matter is brought up at the end of the session and they (lawmakers) have not gone through the process, they could very well create a perfect storm to defeat it. So, it is going to be important to try and give my colleagues with limited time, a chance to express those views," Dodd told media persons after the hearing of the Senate committee at Dirksen Building.
"The staff will be meeting tonight and tomorrow and try to resolve those matters with the administration. So we are going to utilise every minute of every day... with the goal in mind of going through this process fairly, equitably and simultaneously," Dodd said adding, one of the considerations of the Senate and the House could be to have the civilian nuclear agreement in the Continuing Resolution.
"Clearly it is a process that India appreciates immensely" Dodd said.
In his opening remarks to the Senate Panel, Dodd said that the agreement which was before the committee was not perfect.
However, the "approval of this agreement will still be a milestone in US-Indian relations and to approve it," he said.
"In my view, we must. We would be well advised to approve it this month, moreover, rather than waiting until next year."
"I am still very confident that we are going to end up with an agreement that is going to work to the satisfaction of both countries," said the Senator.
When asked if some members of Congress would want to introduce amendments calling for automatic cessation of nuclear trade in case of nuclear test by India, the Democrat said that he did not want to comment on the various proposals the members might have, though he would not be too surprised if someone offeres such proposal.
"Let me emphasise that there is a lot more involved in this than just the specifics of the agreement. This is a tremendously important relationship that is under distrust for a generation and a half over this issue. And I, for one, would like to see to take advantage of this opportunity to move forward in the 21st century relationship. And an awful lot rests on the outcome of this," he added.
Dodd also appreciated the effort made by the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to get the deal finalised before the end of the tenure of the Congress.
"The Indians have wrestled with this and I have great respect for what Prime Minister Singh has gone through in order to achieve this result. There is probably a deeper appreciation of the process in India than any place else in the world," he said.
Expressing optimism about early passage of the agreement Dodd said that the civilian nuclear deal had the prospect of unravelling by way of amendments attached to it.
"We hope not," he shot back when asked if the process of passage would require the whole 30-day session of the US Congress.
The Senate panel include Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns, the acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood accompanied by Richard Stratford from the Bureau of International security and Non-Proliferation in the State Department.
muse
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 13,006
- Reaction score
- 0
The Hindu reports:
"US has right to respond if India conducts test"
Washington (PTI): Assuring the law makers that the "strong package" sent to them based on Presidential determinations is consistent with the requirements of the Hyde Act, a top Bush administration official told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "just as how India had the sovereign right to test, the United States enjoyed the same right to respond."
"We have been asked what would happen if India conducts a nuclear weapons test, and the short answer is that while India maintains a sovereign right to test, we most certainly maintain a sovereign right to respond," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns told law makers on the Senate Panel.
"We believe the Indian government intends to uphold the continuation of the test moratorium it committed to in 2005 and reiterated in its September 5 statement.
"We also believe India will uphold its safeguards agreement with the IAEA. But Secretary Rice has noted clearly that we reserve the right to take appropriate action should India nonetheless resume nuclear testing and, as she told Congress in April 2006," the senior State Department official said.
"We've been very clear with the Indians, should India test, as it has agreed not to do, or should India in an way violate the IAEA safeguards agreements to which it would be adhering, the deal, from our point of view, would, at that point, be off," Burns pointed out.
The Bush administration official said that the US had sought a Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exception for India, consistent with the Hyde Act, and, at the same time, capable of commanding a consensus within the group.
"US has right to respond if India conducts test"
Washington (PTI): Assuring the law makers that the "strong package" sent to them based on Presidential determinations is consistent with the requirements of the Hyde Act, a top Bush administration official told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "just as how India had the sovereign right to test, the United States enjoyed the same right to respond."
"We have been asked what would happen if India conducts a nuclear weapons test, and the short answer is that while India maintains a sovereign right to test, we most certainly maintain a sovereign right to respond," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns told law makers on the Senate Panel.
"We believe the Indian government intends to uphold the continuation of the test moratorium it committed to in 2005 and reiterated in its September 5 statement.
"We also believe India will uphold its safeguards agreement with the IAEA. But Secretary Rice has noted clearly that we reserve the right to take appropriate action should India nonetheless resume nuclear testing and, as she told Congress in April 2006," the senior State Department official said.
"We've been very clear with the Indians, should India test, as it has agreed not to do, or should India in an way violate the IAEA safeguards agreements to which it would be adhering, the deal, from our point of view, would, at that point, be off," Burns pointed out.
The Bush administration official said that the US had sought a Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) exception for India, consistent with the Hyde Act, and, at the same time, capable of commanding a consensus within the group.
Marshal
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 358
- Reaction score
- 0
US will ensure a reasonable steady supply of nuke fuel: Burns
WASHINGTON, SEP 19 (PTI)
A senior Bush administration official has said that the United States will ensure that India had a "reasonable steady supply of nuclear fuel and in case of disruptions, Washington is determined to do everything it can."
"The commitments, recorded in the 123 agreement are firm and solemn commitments on the part of the president, The President had made clear in the transmittal letter, they are political commitments, but we are determined to help India to try to ensure a reasonable steady supply of fuel.
"Should disruptions arise, for example, trade disputes, a commercial firm fails to meet its requirements, then we are firmly determined to do everything we can to help in that instance," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns told the Senate's foreign relation committee when asked about the assurances on supply of nuclear fuel to India.
Burns was replying to the questions by Acting Chair of the Senate Panel Senator Chris Dodd on "what was the legal effect of including assurances in the agreement? If those have no legal effect, then why were they included in the agreement at all? What would the United States do to help India create its strategic reserve of nuclear fuel? Does the government of India agree that those assurances were not legally binding and if so, as it said so in public?"
"We are determined to meet those commitments to the fullest extent consistent with US law. And so any president would be bound by US law, just as you described, and I believe that the Indians understand the clarity of our position," Burns said when asked if the commitments were binding on the next administration taking charge on January 20, 2009.
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood replying to Senator Dodd's question if New Delhi has taken a public position reflecting the assurances of the administration.
"With regard to their understanding that our actions are going to be guided by US law and will be consistent with US law, I believe the Indians do understand that," Rood said.
"The president has made political commitments, Senator, in his statements and in the agreements that we have struck to the Indian government. And so the 123 agreement provides a legal framework. It is an enabling piece of agreement, which allows for cooperation to occur. It does not compel American firms, for instance, to sell a given product to India," Rood said answering a question on how legally binding a political commitment was.
"And so in some of the scenarios, such as a nuclear test, the 123 agreement preserves our right, as required under the Atomic Energy Act, for the US to terminate cooperation and to seek the return of materials, if we judge that to be the appropriate course of action at that time.
"There are separate pieces of US legislation which are amendments to the Atomic Energy Act that would contain requirements for any future president of administration to follow," Rood said.
Section 129 of the Atomic Energy Act does provide some flexibility for the president and the administration to determine circumstances at that time and should there be a determination by the president that a cessation of cooperation would be seriously prejudicial to our non-proliferation objectives or undermine or jeopardize our common defense and security, then the president would have the authority under the present statute to waive that restriction, Rood added.outlookindia.com | wired
WASHINGTON, SEP 19 (PTI)
A senior Bush administration official has said that the United States will ensure that India had a "reasonable steady supply of nuclear fuel and in case of disruptions, Washington is determined to do everything it can."
"The commitments, recorded in the 123 agreement are firm and solemn commitments on the part of the president, The President had made clear in the transmittal letter, they are political commitments, but we are determined to help India to try to ensure a reasonable steady supply of fuel.
"Should disruptions arise, for example, trade disputes, a commercial firm fails to meet its requirements, then we are firmly determined to do everything we can to help in that instance," Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns told the Senate's foreign relation committee when asked about the assurances on supply of nuclear fuel to India.
Burns was replying to the questions by Acting Chair of the Senate Panel Senator Chris Dodd on "what was the legal effect of including assurances in the agreement? If those have no legal effect, then why were they included in the agreement at all? What would the United States do to help India create its strategic reserve of nuclear fuel? Does the government of India agree that those assurances were not legally binding and if so, as it said so in public?"
"We are determined to meet those commitments to the fullest extent consistent with US law. And so any president would be bound by US law, just as you described, and I believe that the Indians understand the clarity of our position," Burns said when asked if the commitments were binding on the next administration taking charge on January 20, 2009.
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security John Rood replying to Senator Dodd's question if New Delhi has taken a public position reflecting the assurances of the administration.
"With regard to their understanding that our actions are going to be guided by US law and will be consistent with US law, I believe the Indians do understand that," Rood said.
"The president has made political commitments, Senator, in his statements and in the agreements that we have struck to the Indian government. And so the 123 agreement provides a legal framework. It is an enabling piece of agreement, which allows for cooperation to occur. It does not compel American firms, for instance, to sell a given product to India," Rood said answering a question on how legally binding a political commitment was.
"And so in some of the scenarios, such as a nuclear test, the 123 agreement preserves our right, as required under the Atomic Energy Act, for the US to terminate cooperation and to seek the return of materials, if we judge that to be the appropriate course of action at that time.
"There are separate pieces of US legislation which are amendments to the Atomic Energy Act that would contain requirements for any future president of administration to follow," Rood said.
Section 129 of the Atomic Energy Act does provide some flexibility for the president and the administration to determine circumstances at that time and should there be a determination by the president that a cessation of cooperation would be seriously prejudicial to our non-proliferation objectives or undermine or jeopardize our common defense and security, then the president would have the authority under the present statute to waive that restriction, Rood added.outlookindia.com | wired
Siddharth Varadarajan
New Delhi: Whether as bait or actual commitment, the United Progressive Alliance government has promised the United States that India will acquire 10,000 MW worth of nuclear power generating capacity from American firms more than what it is currently negotiating to buy from Russia and France combined.
This startling figure lay buried in the testimony or testimoney of William Burns, U.S. Under Secretary for Political Affairs, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington on September 18.
The Indian government, said Mr. Burns, has provided the United States with a strong Letter of Intent, stating its intention to purchase reactors with at least 10,000 Mega Watts (MWe) worth of new power generation capacity from U.S. firms. India, he added, has committed to devote at least two sites to U.S. firms. Until recently official U.S. expectations of contracts in the nuclear arena were pegged much lower. In testimony to Congress in 2006, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had spoken of the U.S. building only one or two reactors.
In its January 16, 2008, replies to Congress, the U.S. State Department said India indicated it planned to import at least eight 1000 MW reactors by 2012 from international sources. In a cautious vein, the State Department spoke of the employment spin-offs if American vendors win just two of these reactor contracts.
But some time between January and September, India appears to have sweetened the deal by sending across a strong Letter of Intent for the purchase of at least 10 U.S. reactors over an undefined time period.
Speaking to The Hindu on condition of anonymity, official sources familiar with Indias current plans for the expansion of nuclear power said Mr. Burnss figure indicated two things. The government appears to have dramatically scaled up both the amount of new nuclear generating capacity it wants built as well as the share within that for imported light water reactors, said a senior official.
Under the current plans of 20,000 MW worth of nuclear power by 2020, half that amount is supposed to come from Indias indigenous pressurised heavy water reactors, 2,000 MW from its fast breeder reactors, and 8,000 MW from imported LWRs. With Russia already building two 1,000 MW reactors at Koodankulam, that leaves 6,000 MW of capacity to be apportioned between Russia, France and the U.S.
But if the target is being hiked to 30,000 MW or higher, then obviously the share of imported LWRs is also being scaled up. In a recent speech, Atomic Energy Commission chairman Anil Kakodkar spoke of India importing up to 40,000 MW of LWRs by 2020. Even so, officials are surprised by the scale of the promise India appears to have made to the U.S. Even if the number of imported LWRs increases dramatically, the fact is the Americans are in third position in terms of technology, said an official, expressing surprise that U.S. companies like GE and Westinghouse which lag far behind their Russian and French counterparts in technological terms and have not built new reactors in the U.S. for decades could eventually get such a large order.
20 Sep 2008,
NEW DELHI: As the nuclear deal goes into its last lap in the US Congress, India is doing its bit to sweeten its passage.
"The Indian government has provided the US with a strong Letter of Intent, stating its intention to purchase reactors with at least 10,000 MWe worth of new power generation capacity from US firms. India has committed to devoting at least two sites to US firms, William Burns, US undersecretary for political affairs, said.
Burns emphasised the cost to US firms if the Congress did not expeditiously clear the deal. Given an economic crisis in the US, this, the administration reckons, would be a powerful incentive for a quick passage.
"International competition will, inevitably, be intense and we want to avoid exposing US firms to any unnecessary delays, Burns said.
India's preliminary negotiations was stated by the foreign ministry last week, when it said it had started talks with US, French and Russian firms on sourcing nuclear power or buying nuclear reactors.
Burns also revealed that India would adhere to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage. This is an internationally recognised convention and it is a prerequisite for the participation of foreign nuclear firms in India.
Making a strong case for the nuclear deal as being an attractive economic package for the US, Burns said, "This will open up trade and investment opportunities for US firms in the multi-billion dollar Indian nuclear energy sector for the first time in over three decades. Meeting India's demand for civilian nuclear technology, fuel, and support services holds the promise of substantial new business for the American nuclear industry, which will translate into new jobs and export income for the United States. A number of private studies of the initiative's economic impact estimate that the award of new contracts to American nuclear firms will result in the creation of thousands of new jobs. India has also announced its adherence to NSG and harmonisation with MTCR guidelines for export control lists.
However, Burns was equally candid that the deal would be off if India tested another nuclear weapon. "Just as India has maintained its sovereign right to conduct a test, we too have maintained our right to take action in response, he said. Quoting secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's testimony in 2006, Burns said, "We've been very clear with the
Indians... should India test, as it has agreed not to do, or should India in any way violate the IAEA safeguards agreements to which it would be adhering, the deal, from our point of view, would at that point be off.
NEW DELHI: As the nuclear deal goes into its last lap in the US Congress, India is doing its bit to sweeten its passage.
"The Indian government has provided the US with a strong Letter of Intent, stating its intention to purchase reactors with at least 10,000 MWe worth of new power generation capacity from US firms. India has committed to devoting at least two sites to US firms, William Burns, US undersecretary for political affairs, said.
Burns emphasised the cost to US firms if the Congress did not expeditiously clear the deal. Given an economic crisis in the US, this, the administration reckons, would be a powerful incentive for a quick passage.
"International competition will, inevitably, be intense and we want to avoid exposing US firms to any unnecessary delays, Burns said.
India's preliminary negotiations was stated by the foreign ministry last week, when it said it had started talks with US, French and Russian firms on sourcing nuclear power or buying nuclear reactors.
Burns also revealed that India would adhere to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage. This is an internationally recognised convention and it is a prerequisite for the participation of foreign nuclear firms in India.
Making a strong case for the nuclear deal as being an attractive economic package for the US, Burns said, "This will open up trade and investment opportunities for US firms in the multi-billion dollar Indian nuclear energy sector for the first time in over three decades. Meeting India's demand for civilian nuclear technology, fuel, and support services holds the promise of substantial new business for the American nuclear industry, which will translate into new jobs and export income for the United States. A number of private studies of the initiative's economic impact estimate that the award of new contracts to American nuclear firms will result in the creation of thousands of new jobs. India has also announced its adherence to NSG and harmonisation with MTCR guidelines for export control lists.
However, Burns was equally candid that the deal would be off if India tested another nuclear weapon. "Just as India has maintained its sovereign right to conduct a test, we too have maintained our right to take action in response, he said. Quoting secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's testimony in 2006, Burns said, "We've been very clear with the
Indians... should India test, as it has agreed not to do, or should India in any way violate the IAEA safeguards agreements to which it would be adhering, the deal, from our point of view, would at that point be off.
Fri Sep 19, 2008
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India and France are close to an signing a nuclear energy pact similar to a deal New Delhi has already struck with Washington, India's top diplomat said Friday.
The accord is expected to be signed during Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to France on September 30, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said.
"We are working on signing the agreement," Menon told reporters.
The text of the accord with France was finalised during French President Nicholas Sarkozy's visit to New Delhi in January.
New Delhi's plans to enter the loop of global atomic commerce received a boost on September 6 when the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which controls the trade, amended its rules to allow India to buy equipment and fuel.
The push for NSG approval, which opens the way for nuclear deals with other countries like Russia and Britain, was spearheaded by the United States.
New Delhi, which is critically short of energy to fuel its booming economy, is looking at investments worth billions of dollars in its power sector.
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India and France are close to an signing a nuclear energy pact similar to a deal New Delhi has already struck with Washington, India's top diplomat said Friday.
The accord is expected to be signed during Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to France on September 30, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said.
"We are working on signing the agreement," Menon told reporters.
The text of the accord with France was finalised during French President Nicholas Sarkozy's visit to New Delhi in January.
New Delhi's plans to enter the loop of global atomic commerce received a boost on September 6 when the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which controls the trade, amended its rules to allow India to buy equipment and fuel.
The push for NSG approval, which opens the way for nuclear deals with other countries like Russia and Britain, was spearheaded by the United States.
New Delhi, which is critically short of energy to fuel its booming economy, is looking at investments worth billions of dollars in its power sector.
