N-deal with Pak could hit ties, India cautions China

[TechLahore]

Keep repeating that and you will someday learn about logic.

Although the poor guy may have to go through a proof by contradiction process, "If the other party adhered to logic then..." ending up in an explosive contradiction. Why wish that on him

The only medicine you could think off is to ban everyone who does not belong to Pakistan. In that way everyone will be from the land of the "Pure"
Great!

You haven't been banned despite all the above. Have you? I think its quite unfair you keep mentioning the "ban" as if you are not being allowed to voice your opinion here. I don't think any of us Pakistanis could expect to say one tenth of what you say about Pakistan and stay unbanned for more than 5 minutes on an equivalent Indian defence forum. So be fair for once.

 

[FreekiN]

N-deal with Pak could hit ties, India cautions China

We already have Nuclear Weapons thanks to Chinese help, what the hell else are they expecting? Kind of late on the 'threats,' dont ya think?

India doesn't want Pakistan to have civil nuclear energy?

"LOL DID HE JUST THREATEN ME? ROFL. As if I give a sh1t." - China

 

[foxbat]

Shoulda, woulda, coulda... didn't! The point is that you are betting that it will not go through. Ultimately that is the only position of consequence. Supposed moral or legal justifications for this position are, ultimately, inconsequential because neither you (India), nor I (Pakistan) care two hoots about each others opinions on this subject. So as I said, let's wait and see.



Ok. Glad to have that clarification. So you are saying that the grandfathering approach will fall apart - ultimately going back to #1 above - which is that the deal won't go through. Well, let's see.



Wonderful. So that was the three point argument you were making. Now it's clear and we can move on. There is only one thing of consequence in all the above; in sum, you think Pakistan and China won't be able to move forward with this deal and we think they will. We will revisit this in a couple of years and see where we stand.

and.. dont take this to PMs. Lets all of us in the true spirit of betting and satta in the subcontinent decide which way to go on this..

Unfortunately, I in this case will have to bet against Ramu.. (sorry dude). There is nothing that will stop China from going ahead. As a matter of fact it has been going ahead with nuclear trade (called proliferation by the west, IAEA and NSG) for some decades now.

The actual activities are already happeneing. The deal will be announced more as a political statement aimed at Pakistani public for a perceived status parity with India. Nothing changes in terms of ground realities. NSG exception will not be saught. China will stay the sole supplier of technology and fuel. Life will go on. Hopefully with lesser power cuts in Pakistan.

 

[foxbat]

I appreciate your honesty re India's knee jerk opposition. But you are incorrect re Pakistan's objections... Pakistan didn't object to the US-India deal. It objected to discrimination. We are very happy India has the deal. No one should stand in our way either. Discriminating against countries and preventing access to technology - specially technology of such monumental importance - is a colonial, exploitative practice and we thought India, of all countries, would understand this and take a principled position on this issue. However, that, we have come to discover, is not to be and India cannot get beyond its petty Pakistan-centricism.

But Pakistan never asked the Americans to deny this tech to India. We said these exchanges should happen on a level playing field and we should not be excluded. Contrary to the views you are expressing here, we really don't care how much nuclear technology you acquire. We both have enough nuclear weapons to flatten each other, so what does it matter now? Now the issue is civilian technology and India should have not played into the discriminatory, exploitative colonial mindset.

So not true TL. Pakistan was one of the 6 countries that opposed the IAEA go ahead on the safeguards to India. Pakistan gave it a good shot to try and block the Indo US deal and I dont blame Pak for that. Because unlike the Sino Pak deal, the Indian deal changed the ground realities for us. India now has access to technologies that we didnt earlier. Not true in case of Sino Pak deal since Pakistan already has access to the nuke competence of China


Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pakistan opposes Indo-US Nuclear Deal, Indo-US deal, Pakistan, India, International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear power | Movies, News, Photos, Gossip, Videos - Searchandhra.com

 

[TechLahore]

So not true TL. Pakistan was one of the 6 countries that opposed the IAEA go ahead on the safeguards to India. Pakistan gave it a good shot to try and block the Indo US deal and I dont blame Pak for that. Because unlike the Sino Pak deal, the Indian deal changed the ground realities for us. India now has access to technologies that we didnt earlier. Not true in case of Sino Pak deal since Pakistan already has access to the nuke competence of China


Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pakistan opposes Indo-US Nuclear Deal, Indo-US deal, Pakistan, India, International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear power | Movies, News, Photos, Gossip, Videos - Searchandhra.com

This is a snapshot of the Pakistani position. We have said:

1) Don't discriminate - India should not be the only developing South Asian economy to benefit from a deal
2) Nuclear technology is key for energy security - if we are saying this for ourselves, how could we not say the same for India? Our position has implicit in it that access to nuclear energy for development should be everyone's right.

Please see from The Hindu:

The Hindu : News / International : Pakistan seeks civil nuclear deal with atomic powers

We do oppose arbitrary exclusions for one country without a clear and defined criteria and that is the basis for sending the letters you refer to - such "exclusions" should have been not made just for India. We do oppose discrimination against ourselves and others. But we do not seek to get in the way of India obtaining nuclear technology.

 

[foxbat]

But there are no specific, defined rules that Pakistan can look at and say, 'OK, we have to accomplish X, Y and Z, and apply for an exemption'. The whole point here is that in arbitrarily granting India an exemption that appears to violate the NSG's own principle of not trading with non-NPT signatories, it has undermined the entire NSG nuclear trade regime.

Had it granted India an exemption by first outlining certain rules such as 'stable political system (can't have democracy as a condition because of China), stringent export control rules, comprehensive domestic safeguards, cooperation on proliferation' etc. then I might be inclined to agree with your POV since a process had been defined. But the manner in which India was granted an exemption was pretty much a 'we want X to get an exemption and we don't give a darn about NSG principles and we will armtwist you into granting that exemption'.

That is no manner to induce other nations to follow the rules.

@AM, Its not a scientific experiment or qualification for a club. Its plain and simple democratic election. Its left to the understanding of the member nations and the degree of confidence they have in the country for which they are discussing the exemption. There is a place where rules give way to judgement and the biggest example of that is the democratic elections. A candidate can never be certain to win by doing A, B and C. He/She wins in on the day of election, the voters have confidence in his/her ability to deliver. Same applies here.

No rules are absolute. When even Constitutions can be changed by majority vote, this is miniscule compared to that. In some areas, Argumentum ad populum is not a fallacy

 

[foxbat]

This is a snapshot of the Pakistani position. We have said:

1) Don't discriminate - India should not be the only developing South Asian economy to benefit from a deal
2) Nuclear technology is key for energy security - if we are saying this for ourselves, how could we not say the same for India? Our position has implicit in it that access to nuclear energy for development should be everyone's right.

Please see from The Hindu:

The Hindu : News / International : Pakistan seeks civil nuclear deal with atomic powers

We do oppose arbitrary exclusions for one country without a clear and defined criteria and that is the basis for sending the letters you refer to - such "exclusions" should have been not made just for India. We do oppose discrimination against ourselves and others. But we do not seek to get in the way of India obtaining nuclear technology.

This stand TL is post India getting the deal. Prior to that Pakistan made a determined but unsuccessful effort to scuttle the same for the reasons I mentioned.

 

[schneider]

New Delhi
As Pakistan Army chief Ashfaq Pervez Kayani steps up pressure on the Chinese leadership to formalise a nuclear deal similar to the Indo-US civil nuclear initiative.
[/url]

What is the role of an Army Chief in this Civil Nuclear Deal?? Is it so Civil, if yes, then why Gen. Kayani is involved???

 

[Hulk]

Although the poor guy may have to go through a proof by contradiction process, "If the other party adhered to logic then..." ending up in an explosive contradiction. Why wish that on him



You haven't been banned despite all the above. Have you? I think its quite unfair you keep mentioning the "ban" as if you are not being allowed to voice your opinion here. I don't think any of us Pakistanis could expect to say one tenth of what you say about Pakistan and stay unbanned for more than 5 minutes on an equivalent Indian defence forum. So be fair for once.

RAMU I second that, you should not use word ban so often. Tech has been very objective in discussion. So does AM.

My request leave the ban word.

 

[Fighter488]

Dangerous parity​

Posted: Sat Jun 19 2010, 03:48 hrs 10 MP Sony Digital

At a time when India is trying to deepen its partnership with China and rebuild trust with Pakistan, it would seem counterproductive for Delhi to raise objections to Beijing’s sale of two power reactors to Islamabad. After all, as Beijing says these reactors are meant to produce electric power, so badly needed in an energy-starved Pakistan, and will be under international supervision. Yet, we believe Delhi is right in expressing its concerns to Beijing. That it was done quietly through diplomatic channels underlines the seriousness of Indian purpose as well as its good faith in wanting to build a partnership with China on the basis of an honest discussion of divergence when it arises.


The Chinese decision to expand its previous nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, in violation of the guidelines of the 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, raises three important issues for Delhi. First, although the proposed cooperation is ostensibly for peaceful purposes, India has reasons to be wary given the past record of clandestine military nuclear cooperation between China and Pakistan. India would want to be sure that China is not furthering its collaboration with Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme under the guise of civilian cooperation. Second, those who compare the Sino-Pak deal with the India-US civil nuclear initiative miss an important difference. India and the US had to go through a tortuous process of revising the NSG rules and the US domestic law; China is now offering a similar benefit to Pakistan without any due process or international debate on the merits of nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, whose record as a proliferator is so disturbing. Finally, if the deal is motivated by Beijing’s strategic consideration to maintain nuclear parity between India and Pakistan at all levels, Delhi is duty bound to contest this hostile proposition in Beijing.


In the last few years India has sought to build a relationship with China without a reference to Pakistan. Beijing should not take that positive Indian approach as a license to do what it pleases with Islamabad. Beijing’s unwillingness to respect Delhi’s security concerns will severely limit India’s domestic political space to expand mutually beneficial engagement with China. Beijing often complains about the widespread and what it sees as an unreasonable perception of a “China threat” in Delhi. Beijing should recognise that its proposed nuclear deal with Pakistan without an explicit approval of the NSG cannot but reinforce its image as as an “irresponsible” power. When combined with the potentially inescapable conclusion in Delhi that Beijing will remain forever insensitive to India’s security concerns in Pakistan, the theory of a “China threat” can only gain ground in India and undermine the promising possibilities of a Sino-Indian partnership.

Dangerous parity

 

[PakSher]

Dangerous parity​

P


The Chinese decision to expand its previous nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, in violation of the guidelines of the 46-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, raises three important issues for Delhi. First, although the proposed cooperation is ostensibly for peaceful purposes, India has reasons to be wary given the past record of clandestine military nuclear cooperation between China and Pakistan. India would want to be sure that China is not furthering its collaboration with Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme under the guise of civilian cooperation. Second, those who compare the Sino-Pak deal with the India-US civil nuclear initiative miss an important difference. India and the US had to go through a tortuous process of revising the NSG rules and the US domestic law; China is now offering a similar benefit to Pakistan without any due process or international debate on the merits of nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, whose record as a proliferator is so disturbing. Finally, if the deal is motivated by Beijing’s strategic consideration to maintain nuclear parity between India and Pakistan at all levels, Delhi is duty bound to contest this hostile proposition in Beijing.


In the last few years India has sought to build a relationship with China without a reference to Pakistan. Beijing should not take that positive Indian approach as a license to do what it pleases with Islamabad. Beijing’s unwillingness to respect Delhi’s security concerns will severely limit India’s domestic political space to expand mutually beneficial engagement with China. Beijing often complains about the widespread and what it sees as an unreasonable perception of a “China threat” in Delhi. Beijing should recognise that its proposed nuclear deal with Pakistan without an explicit approval of the NSG cannot but reinforce its image as as an “irresponsible” power. When combined with the potentially inescapable conclusion in Delhi that Beijing will remain forever insensitive to India’s security concerns in Pakistan, the theory of a “China threat” can only gain ground in India and undermine the promising possibilities of a Sino-Indian partnership.

Dangerous parity

Stop winning. You have several dozen nuclear reactors and crying about 2 civilian reactors. We do not want o discuss this with Indians because none of you damn business.

Stooop Whininnnnnnnnnnnnng dude.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Back to the topic.

This news is rather inflated B.S with no sense..
If we dont give a DOUSHE wat USA says in this reguard... whos india?
And even if it threatens the economic relation it(india) will be effected as well maybe more.... so can india afford to lose a trade of billions just to go against Pakistan?

I think they will be ignorant to do so.

Or maybe in this case ignorance is a bliss?
Time will tell.... but surely nothin will happen coz of this whinning from indian govt.

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

Open a separate thread, With Atmost pleasure I would, No intention to troll.....

You are now rendered as a non-credible Indian propaganda specialist. No big surprise here.

 

[Ras]

So do you believe that Pakistan should if it wishes transfer technology to Bangladesh for example as it is having an energy crisis by the same token of reasoning ?

If you say "yes" then all hell will break loose and every state will line up for a deal for fear or favour.

If you say "no" then there needs to be a understanding of which country can be exempt and which country cannot be on a case to case basis. I am all for Pakistan getting the deal as they are a nuclear power and the use of civil technology will bring prosperity to the country. However, doing the deal in a bilateral fashion is setting a wrong precedence IMHO.

Bangladesh can get all the nuclear technology she can afford as a NPT member.

I don't understand the Indian concerns here...it looks petty.After all Pakistan has nuclear plants already so if the fear is that something will gets stolen or given to non-state actors then that possibility already exists so what does another couple of reactors do?

India and Pakistan have nothing much to do with this deal...if US makes a deal with China in a quid per quo offer like for example no new F-16's for Taiwan in place of withdrawing from the nuclear deal then there will be no nuclear deal.

 

[Star of David]

This is a snapshot of the Pakistani position. We have said:

1) Don't discriminate - India should not be the only developing South Asian economy to benefit from a deal
2) Nuclear technology is key for energy security - if we are saying this for ourselves, how could we not say the same for India? Our position has implicit in it that access to nuclear energy for development should be everyone's right.

Please see from The Hindu:

The Hindu : News / International : Pakistan seeks civil nuclear deal with atomic powers

We do oppose arbitrary exclusions for one country without a clear and defined criteria and that is the basis for sending the letters you refer to - such "exclusions" should have been not made just for India. We do oppose discrimination against ourselves and others. But we do not seek to get in the way of India obtaining nuclear technology.

You do realize that Pakistan was denied such a treaty because of its non proliferation activities....yo know that right? The whole would knows this, you know this right?