US nuclear technology to india, a threat to asian peace

[aaaditya]

From 22 only six sites which is under IAEA and IAEA safeguards are have authority/proper inspections in only two reactors at kudankulam (KKNP).
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Reports/Anrep2004/table_a20.pdf

and
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., co-chairman of a bipartisan task force on nonproliferation said,
"With one simple move, the president has blown a hole in the nuclear rules that the entire world has been playing by and broken his own word to assure that we will not ship nuclear technology to India without the proper safeguards,"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/03/MNG1IHHVKA1.DTL



May be better then Japan. But remember,

Nuclear Accident in India
August 20, 1981
Two to three tons of heavy water leaked out of an atomic reactor in western India on Aug. 5 and one of the power plant's units was shut down.

For more and complete informations about this deal read this,
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9663/usindia_nuclear_deal.html

how much was the casualty of the incident that you mentioned above and how does it compare with the nuclear accidents in japan(same type problem that they suffered) ,european union/russia(cherniboyl),and in usa and france.

heavy water leakage problem is faced by several countries.however indian reactors have primary ,secondary (active)and manual failure management systems which prevent the release of the radioactive waste into atmosphere thus contaminating a wide area.

reactor plant shutdown is carried out by all countries quite frequently for failure rectification and maintainence,you cannot carry out periodic maintainance and repair on the reactor coolant channels when the reactor is operational as it is considered as a safety hazard.

 

[n21]

From 22 only six sites which is under IAEA and IAEA safeguards are have authority/proper inspections in only two reactors at kudankulam (KKNP).

IAEA authority only comes in, if the reactor/materials are supplied by another nation, under international agreement.
Why would india want to place reactors build by herself under IAEA? Majority of them are build in india itself.
How many reactors in US/Russia/France/UK/China do you thin are placed under IAEA?

China has less reactors than India,bcoz China build them for weopon production only,while India started as a civilian purpose.

And how does building reactors for India would added to the proliferation?
I would be very interested to know how bad is India's profileration history compared to the so called non-profileration champion countries.

 

[tntsas]

Their proliferating nuclear tech for clean, efficient sources of energy what India badly needs.

Why they did not give the technolegy to Pakistan,that is aslo what Pakistan badly needs.

 

[tntsas]

Im suprised at why Pakistan are getting so edgy about the security of Asia, when their own Mr Proliferator Mr A.Q Khan was trying to sell secrets to every tom, dick and harry.

They did wrong. And this is dangerous for the world.But i think there is some reasons.India is a powerful enermy for Pakistan,they need support and money by any method.

 

[Waylander]

I think the problem is that India is a much more stable country than Pakistan.

 

[n21]

Why they did not give the technolegy to Pakistan,that is aslo what Pakistan badly needs.

Do they legitimately need it for power production? I would say that the wish to have nuclear tech more is a political than depesrate need for energy.

Moreover nuclear treaty by India with US would clear the way for the NSG to supply the badly needed fuel for the enery reactors.India expects it's reserve to go down within the next 10 years.

I think we all understand that US is "not" providing weapons refinement techniques.If I am not wrong US already has such a agreement with China for constructing nuclear reactors. So do we come to the conclusion US is helping a precieved adversery with methods to make their weapons better?

 

[Str8 Thug]

Well, last i heard there was/is a Pakistani delegation in Washington since yesterday to discuss energy co-operation...whatever that means. We will have to wait and see.

 

[XEROX]

Why they did not give the technolegy to Pakistan,that is aslo what Pakistan badly needs.

India is growing and becoming more and more industrialised, and with that requires more energy, Pakistan is not at that level of parity and does not require the civil nuclear technolgy, becouse its needs are not so great, as of yet.

Well, last i heard there was/is a Pakistani delegation in Washington since yesterday to discuss energy co-operation...whatever that means. We will have to wait and see.

The U.S will never consider Pakistan for nuclear co-op simpily becouse of Pakistans record in nuclear prolifiration.

 

[Str8 Thug]

The U.S will never consider Pakistan for nuclear co-op simpily becouse of Pakistans record in nuclear prolifiration.

Maybe so, but then again it's not as though Pakistan doesn't already have nuclear weapons. So it doesn't really make any sense. If the US was to give Pakistan a nuclear deal, it would mean the US can take a look at what Pakistan has and keep it inspected. They would know more about Pakistan's nuclear position if they did provide nuclear tech than if they didn't, to a certain extent.

I wonder what will be discussed in these so called energy talks.

 

[hovercraft]

Maybe so, but then again it's not as though Pakistan doesn't already have nuclear weapons. So it doesn't really make any sense.

dear brother, pakistan already have more then 100 nuclear weapons. And with 30 minute preparation they are ready to fire.

 

[XEROX]

dear brother, pakistan already have more then 100 nuclear weapons. And with 30 minute preparation they are ready to fire.

Nuclear weapons have nothing to do with civial nuclear technolghy

 

[gf0012-aust]

ALL​

lets not travel down the rock throwing road - I don't want to close the thread unnecessarily.

 

[hovercraft]

The US State Department said at Friday that they want quick approval of controversial nuclear deal with India but they show changes in the law may be takes effect.
This deal was also approved by Senate.

State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said: "Obviously, it has to go through some more work"

Under this deal, the US will aid the development of civil nuclear technology in India in return for India placing some of its nuclear facilities under IAEA inspections.
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_006699.php

 

[divinewind]

Nuclear Technology cooperation- the fourth dimension

Access to civilian nuclear technology implies more business for American firms, Russia helps India in either case so America's is trying tom move into Russia's strategic space with regard to weapons market/nuclaer market.

The deal implicitly acknoledges the legitimacy of carrying out nuclear trade with India, Russia has already shipped fuel for the Tarapur plant citing this deal to legitimize the transaction. Fuel/Any nuclear technology got from Russia need not be placed under sageguard!

Anyway Chinese nuclear technology to Pakistan is not much of a concern as they are not state of the art as is the case with Russian or American technologies besides a lot has happened illegally as well.

 

[kams]

Nuclear Technology cooperation- the fourth dimension

Access to civilian nuclear technology implies more business for American firms, Russia helps India in either case so America's is trying tom move into Russia's strategic space with regard to weapons market/nuclaer market.

The deal implicitly acknoledges the legitimacy of carrying out nuclear trade with India, Russia has already shipped fuel for the Tarapur plant citing this deal to legitimize the transaction. Fuel/Any nuclear technology got from Russia need not be placed under sageguard!

Anyway Chinese nuclear technology to Pakistan is not much of a concern as they are not state of the art as is the case with Russian or American technologies besides a lot has happened illegally as well.

Russian supply of Nuclear fuel to Tarapur is under the NSG guidelines and is sunject to IAEA safeguard. Russia used a saftey clause within NSG guideline which permits fuel supply if safety of Nuclear plant is at stake. While Russia technically did not break the rule...they sure bent it to the maximum extent.

 

[kams]

India's Clout in U.S. Congress Assisted by GE, Boeing, JPMorgan

Looks like Indians have atlast understood the art of doing business in The Hill and even on a shoestring Lobbying budget, made impressive gains.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aSVGFQNTru38&refer=home


Even congressmen who voted against the deal were impressed by the lobbying.

The lobbying was ``a very impressive organizational effort,'' says Representative Jim Leach, an Iowa Republican who voted against the measure because of concern it may erode limits on nuclear-weapons technology. ``The United States Congress wants to be more pro-India,'' says Leach, chairman of a House subcommittee that oversees U.S.-India relations.

Off course it helps to have a robust economy, which inturn wins you freinds in high places.

Among executives writing to lawmakers was William Harrison, chairman of New York-based JPMorgan, the third-biggest U.S. bank, says Ron Somers, head of the Chamber's U.S-India Business Council. JPMorgan has more than 7,000 employees in India, spokesman Joe Evangelisti says.

Others writing letters on India's behalf include James McNerney, chief executive officer of Chicago-based Boeing Co. -- the world's second-largest maker of commercial jets -- and James Reinsch, president of Bechtel's nuclear-power division, officials of the two companies say.

AIG, Dow Chemical, Ford

The lobbying includes executives of GE, the world's second- biggest company by market value; New York-based American International Group Inc., the world's largest insurer; Ford; Midland, Michigan-based Dow Chemical Inc.; and Lockheed Martin Corp., Somers says. Company representatives have met weekly since late last year to devise lobbying strategies, he says.

 

[XEROX]

Looks like Indians have atlast understood the art of doing business in The Hill and even on a shoestring Lobbying budget, made impressive gains.

Very much so, they have the big guns on their side but at the same time a long road ahead too, India spends ~$1.5 million lobbying, Israels spends ~$60 million, look at the results.

 

[kams]

Atoms for War? U.S.-Indian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation and India's Nuclear Arsenal -

Here is a research report by Ashley J. Tellis, which debunks Nuclear non-proliferation groups theory that India-US civilian nuclear pact will result in NewDelhi rapidly expanding its Nuclear arsenal. The author looks in to India's known Uranium reserves, its capacity to extract Plutonium from spent Uranium and how many bombs it can make (all this using only the known uranium reservers Indian has).

To begin with, the study concludes that India is currently separating about 24-40 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium annually, far less than it has the capability to produce. This evidence, which suggests that the Government of India is in no hurry to build the biggest nuclear stockpile it could construct based on material factors alone, undermines the assumption that India wishes to build the biggest nuclear arsenal it possibly can.

Further, India’s capacity to produce a huge nuclear arsenal is not affected by prospective U.S.-Indian civilian nuclear cooperation. A few facts underscore this conclusion clearly. India is widely acknowledged to possess reserves of 78,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU). The forthcoming Carnegie study concludes that the total inventory of natural uranium required to sustain all the reactors associated with the current power program (both those operational and those under construction) and the weapons program over the entire notional lifetime of these plants runs into some 14,640-14,790 MTU—or, in other words, requirements that are well within even the most conservative valuations of India’s reasonably assured uranium reserves. If the eight reactors that India has retained outside of safeguards were to allocate 1/4 of their cores for the production of weapons-grade materials—the most realistic possibility for the technical reasons discussed at length in the forthcoming report—the total amount of natural uranium required to run these facilities for the remaining duration of their notional lives would be somewhere between 19,965-29,124 MTU. If this total is added to the entire natural uranium fuel load required to run India’s two research reactors dedicated to the production of weapons-grade plutonium over their entire life cycle—some 938-1088 MTU—the total amount of natural uranium required by India’s dedicated weapons reactors and all its unsafeguarded PHWRs does not exceed 20,903-30,212 MTU over the remaining lifetime of these facilities. Operating India’s eight unsafeguarded PHWRs in this way would bequeath New Delhi with some 12,135-13,370 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium, which is sufficient to produce between 2,023-2,228 nuclear weapons over and above those already existing in the Indian arsenal.

Here is the link to full report.

Ashley J. Tellis

Many congressmen have said that this report eventually convinced them to vote for the deal.

Any opinions? (Please no non-technical/political comments...we have seen plenty of them already).

 

[radiosilence]

Ashley Tellis

hmm, Ashley Tellis is very credible considering he is indian!!! he has been pushing for this deal since clinton was in office.


here is his bio....
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/experts/index.cfm?fa=expert_view&expert_id=198
Education:
[B]B.A., M.A.; University of Bombay[/B]; M.A., Ph.D., The University of Chicago

 

[kams]

hmm, Ashley Tellis is very credible considering he is indian!!! he has been pushing for this deal since clinton was in office.


here is his bio....
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/experts/index.cfm?fa=expert_view&expert_id=198
Education:
[B]B.A., M.A.; University of Bombay[/B]; M.A., Ph.D., The University of Chicago

This is precisely what I wanted to avoid. Instead of reading the full report and commenting on the technical aspects, now we are talking about ethnicity of Author. He is an American Citizen. Please confine your comments on the technical aspects of the report. :lul . If you can not comprehend the technicality, then please do not comment.