US objects to China-Pakistan nuclear deal

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Hypocrisy..no hypocrisy is not the point here...the US-Indo deal was approved by everyone including China. If China does not have the clout to do the same that is not a US problem.

China is willing to do the same for Pakistan (lack of clout notwithstanding) but the US is not i.e hypocrisy and double standards on the part of the US, and therefore the justified criticizm of the US.

 

[Guynextdoor]

China is willing to do the same for Pakistan (lack of clout notwithstanding) but the US is not i.e hypocrisy and double standards on the part of the US, and therefore the justified criticizm of the US.

But that's the point isn't it? The US & China in their judgement felt it fit to support that exemption. But the US doesn't feel it fit to support pak for XYZ reasons. Why should their be hypocrisy? Why should an approval for India atomatically mean an approval for Pak? We both are two different countries with very different histories as far as nuclear issues are concerned. Why should the americans not consider it?

 

[Ras]

But if there is no 'consensus' on censuring China and Pakistan over this nuclear deal, that both claim does not need NSG approval since it is grandfathered, then there is no action that the NSG will take.

True...but I do not think the deal was "grandfathered"..you can't "grandfather" multiple reactors just by saying you need to develop a "complex". If that is the case what is to prevent an infinite amount of reactors all grandfathered in.

 

[RollingStones]

China is willing to do the same for Pakistan (lack of clout notwithstanding) but the US is not i.e hypocrisy and double standards on the part of the US, and therefore the justified criticizm of the US.

I think the correct word is "interests". If its in the US' interests to let China do a deal with Pakistan, it will support. Otherwise, it wont. Simple as that.

 

[Ras]

China is willing to do the same for Pakistan (lack of clout notwithstanding) but the US is not i.e hypocrisy and double standards on the part of the US, and therefore the justified criticizm of the US.

Countries are not treated the same and have never been..

 

[IceCold]

Countries are not treated the same and have never been..

You are right, its just that Pakistan does not seem to get a hold of this reality and is living in a delusion.

 

[Hafizzz]

Hypocrisy..no hypocrisy is not the point here...the US-Indo deal was approved by everyone including China. If China does not have the clout to do the same that is not a US problem.

You think China had the guts to oppose the deal ????

---------- Post added at 11:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 PM ----------

You are right, its just that Pakistan does not seem to get a hold of this reality and is living in a delusion.

Pakistan should wake up and let the American fight the Talibans themselves.

 

[Ras]

You are right, its just that Pakistan does not seem to get a hold of this reality and is living in a delusion.

I don't know about that but when I hear people talking about discriminatory policies and what not I mean it is so naive..the whole NSG is discriminatory,the UN is discriminatory,the IMF,World Bank everything has certain nations above the rest.

 

[Ras]

Pakistan should wake up and let the American fight the Talibans themselves.

It is not just America's fight...the Taliban will destroy Pakistan as you know it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Countries are not treated the same and have never been..

And when the US and others blatantly support and promote double standards and discriminatory policies against certain countries, you wonder why the US is not liked in many places?

Stamping this behavior as 'real politic' or 'the way the world works' does not change the fact that US policies are hypocritical and discriminatory, and the man on the street is not going to buy that line of argument either, nor for that matter some governments. Justification of double standards and hypocrisy only highlight further the ethical and moral bankruptcy of the US in global affairs.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But that's the point isn't it? The US & China in their judgement felt it fit to support that exemption. But the US doesn't feel it fit to support pak for XYZ reasons. Why should their be hypocrisy? Why should an approval for India atomatically mean an approval for Pak? We both are two different countries with very different histories as far as nuclear issues are concerned. Why should the americans not consider it?

If there certain metrics have been established as part of the NSG charter that govern exemptions to NPT non-signatories, and India meets those metrics and Pakistan does not, then I agree with you that there is no hypocrisy.

On the other hand, if there are no metrics for exemptions established as part of the NSG guidelines, then the Indian exemption was itself a violation of the NSG charter and an arbitrary decision. All country's are 'different', every nation has its pros and cons - so you cannot just use a general and pointless argument of 'India is different from Pakistan' to justify US double standards and hypocrisy, since every nation is different.

Now if India is 'different' in the sense that it met certain established criteria set by the NSG (that Pakistan does not meet), then and only then does your argument have any validity.

Can you show me where such criteria for NSG exemptions has been introduced in the NSG charter and guidelines?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think the correct word is "interests". If its in the US' interests to let China do a deal with Pakistan, it will support. Otherwise, it wont. Simple as that.

That is just diplo-speak for 'discrimination, double standards and hypocrisy'.

If you are to use this argument, then every country discriminated against by the US and other world powers should set up black market operations and trade with every other nation in similar situations, to obtain technology each may want, and everything is justifiable under 'interests'.

If on the other hand you are to argue that 'non-proliferation', international agreements, treaties are to be honored and international behavior is to be governed by certain standards, then you must have a set of standards that applies to everyone, not just those one nation prefers over another. Otherwise you yourself have opened the door to ignoring agreements, treaties and set 'standards of international behavior', as the US has done by arbitrarily lobbying to grant India an exemption from the NSG in violation of its guidelines, instead of introducing a standard criteria that all nations would have to meet to qualify for exemptions.

 

[RollingStones]

That is just diplo-speak for 'discrimination, double standards and hypocrisy'.

If you are to use this argument, then every country discriminated against by the US and other world powers should set up black market operations and trade with every other nation in similar situations, to obtain technology each may want, and everything is justifiable under 'interests'.

If on the other hand you are to argue that 'non-proliferation', international agreements, treaties are to be honored and international behavior is to be governed by certain standards, then you must have a set of standards that applies to everyone, not just those one nation prefers over another. Otherwise you yourself have opened the door to ignoring agreements, treaties and set 'standards of international behavior', as the US has done by arbitrarily lobbying to grant India an exemption from the NSG in violation of its guidelines, instead of introducing a standard criteria that all nations would have to meet to qualify for exemptions.

Well..the key words are the US lobbied, meaning it had to present its case to a bunch of nations and all those nations said "yes, we are with you". That means no international treaties were violated. Hey, if you can get China to do that for you, go ahead. If China can convince the US and the rest of the NSG countries to say "yes, we are with you", then no international treaties would be broken. But expect India to lobby against this vote and expect India to dangle carrots to China and try to somehow scuttle this deal. If you can get through all that, then power to Pakistan, But if you cannot, then the lesson is for you as a nation to become more powerful and hold better cards before negotiating. Arguments like "hypocrisy" wont get you too far, I am afraid.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well..the key words are the US lobbied, meaning it had to present its case to a bunch of nations and all those nations said "yes, we are with you". That means no international treaties were violated. Hey, if you can get China to do that for you, go ahead. If China can convince the US and the rest of the NSG countries to say "yes, we are with you", then no international treaties would be broken. But expect India to lobby against this vote and expect India to dangle carrots to China and try to somehow scuttle this deal. If you can get through all that, then power to Pakistan, But if you cannot, then the lesson is for you as a nation to become more powerful and hold better cards before negotiating. Arguments like "hypocrisy" wont get you too far, I am afraid.

The key words are in fact 'arbitrary exemption in violation of the NSG guidelines'.

There is no provision in the NSG for 'exemptions to NPT non-signatories', nor was any criteria introduced to govern such exemptions, and therefore the Indian exemption, consensus or not, is a violation of the NSG and against 'non-proliferation' efforts.

With such blatant double standards and disregard for agreed to guidelines, Iran is justified in pursuing nuclear weapons, as is Pakistan in re-activating black market networks to fulfill technological gaps denied her due to double standards.

And given the clout of the US globally, the need for consensus in the NSG, and the blatant double standards and hypocrisy on the part of the US, it is obvious that lobbying on the part of Pakistan and China will not work, even if everyone other than the US is convinced. But since the US led the way in violating the NSG guidelines in any case, why should any other nation adhere to guidelines and treaties?

Pointing out US hypocrisy, deceit and double standards is therefore essential to expose the US for the duplicitous State it is and to build a case for not adhering with NSG guidelines or for that matter other treaties or agreements governing proliferation.

If the US can waltz around, violate rules and do what it wishes, then other nations will attempt to do the same.

 

[karan.1970]

If there certain metrics have been established as part of the NSG charter that govern exemptions to NPT non-signatories, and India meets those metrics and Pakistan does not, then I agree with you that there is no hypocrisy.

On the other hand, if there are no metrics for exemptions established as part of the NSG guidelines, then the Indian exemption was itself a violation of the NSG charter and an arbitrary decision. All country's are 'different', every nation has its pros and cons - so you cannot just use a general and pointless argument of 'India is different from Pakistan' to justify US double standards and hypocrisy, since every nation is different.

Now if India is 'different' in the sense that it met certain established criteria set by the NSG (that Pakistan does not meet), then and only then does your argument have any validity.

Can you show me where such criteria for NSG exemptions has been introduced in the NSG charter and guidelines?

As I said earlier, there is a difference in discriminatory and discretionary decisions. How about trade... Tomorrow if one country has trade with India and decides not to trade with Pakistan, will that also become discreminatory?? At the end of the day its a group of nations who are deciding who to deal in nuclear trade with and who not. Deciding not to trade with one country and trade with another does not require anyone to publish a set of metrics based on which they took that decision.

There is an exception process requiring consensus they followed for India and every one agreed. Now if some nations in the same consensus process dont think Pakistan deserves that exceeption, you cant force them to justify their stand thru publishing a set of metrics..

Now if Pakistan doesnt get an opportunity to ask for that exception, then yes, you can call it discriminatory.. But not getting that exception because some of the members dont think Pakistan deserves it, is not. Thats discretionary.


THe same works for every single vote in UNSC. Its a decision of 5 countries.. There are no metrics published to justify every vote and why the 5 members went a particular way