Ever since China occupied Tibet in 1959, the homeland of the Dalai Lama has remained a festering wound in the body-politic of the communist giant.
Let me share with you a video, shot sometime in 2006, capturing the killing of the unarmed Tibetans by soldiers of the Red Army.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
India submits Safeguards Agreement to the IAEA
The Indo-U.S. Civilian Nuclear Agreement has hogged considerable time and space amid intense media scrutiny. The Left parties have withdrawn support; good riddance, I would say.
From the day the agreement was signed between India and the U.S. (July 18, 2005), I have been one of its biggest votaries. I believe the deal is strongly loaded in India's favour and we stand to gain immensely by gaining access to till-now denied dual use nuclear technology.
The deal is not with the U.S. alone; once we get a clearance from the NSG, we are free to trade with any nuclear state for purchase of fuel for civilian nuclear reactors. Basically, the deal is a commercial transaction where India would be a buyer in a market with many suppliers.
The skeptics are shouting from the rooftop that India will become a stooge of the "imperialist" U.S. I can understand this when the Commies, fossilised as their ideology is, say this; however, what is sad is that some nuclear scientists have joined the Commie chorus.
Critics of the deal allege that India, rather than depend on external suppliers, should ramp up its domestic capacity to generate fuel by harnessing thorium and to a limited extent, uranium.
While self-reliance is a great thing, it should not blind our eyes to the immense benefits that the transfer of dual technologies will bring in. And also, harnessing thorium reserves and bringing them to fuel stage will take another couple of decades. Why wait when we have got the money to buy stuff that we require so badly?
Now there is another nagging doubt: what if the U.S. stops supply of fuel? First, in what circumstances could that happen? Here, the provisions of the much-dreaded Hyde Act relate to the U.S. only; it is a piece of domestic legislation governing the U.S. administration's conduct in the case of India testing a nuclear device.
In case, the U.S. stops supply of fuel, then the 2005 agreement has an in-built provision which imposes an obligation on the U.S. to ensure uninterrupted supply of fuel from OTHER members of the nuclear club. This provision will help India build a strategic fuel reserve.
Today, the Government of India submitted the draft Safeguards Agreement to Board of Governors of the IAEA, finally. In the draft Safeguards Agreement, the objectives & purposes of the Agreement are laid down clearly:
• India will place its civilian nuclear facilities under Agency safeguards so as to facilitate full civil nuclear cooperation between India and Member States of the Agency and to provide assurance against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time;
• An essential basis of India’s concurrence to accept Agency safeguards under an India-specific safeguards agreement (hereinafter referred to as “this Agreement”) is the conclusion of international cooperation arrangements creating the necessary conditions for India to obtain access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continuous access to fuel supplies from companies in several nations, as well as support for an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of India’s reactors; and
• India may take corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies;
WHEREAS India is desirous of expanding civil nuclear cooperation with other Member States of the Agency;
WHEREAS the conclusion of this Agreement is intended to facilitate the broadest possible cooperation between India and Member States of the Agency in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and ensure international participation in the further development of India’s civilian nuclear programme on a sustained and long–term basis.
What has got the goat of the anti-deal and pro-non-proliferation lobby in the U.S. are the following words:
"India may take corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies."
The anti-deal and pro-non-proliferation lobby wants India to specify what "corrective steps" will it take in case of disruption of fuel supplies. In fact, the provision reflects the care with which the GoI has framed the Safeguards Agreement.
You can read the complete text of the draft Safeguards Agreement here.
Watch this space for my next write-up on the contentious nuclear deal.
From the day the agreement was signed between India and the U.S. (July 18, 2005), I have been one of its biggest votaries. I believe the deal is strongly loaded in India's favour and we stand to gain immensely by gaining access to till-now denied dual use nuclear technology.
The deal is not with the U.S. alone; once we get a clearance from the NSG, we are free to trade with any nuclear state for purchase of fuel for civilian nuclear reactors. Basically, the deal is a commercial transaction where India would be a buyer in a market with many suppliers.
The skeptics are shouting from the rooftop that India will become a stooge of the "imperialist" U.S. I can understand this when the Commies, fossilised as their ideology is, say this; however, what is sad is that some nuclear scientists have joined the Commie chorus.
Critics of the deal allege that India, rather than depend on external suppliers, should ramp up its domestic capacity to generate fuel by harnessing thorium and to a limited extent, uranium.
While self-reliance is a great thing, it should not blind our eyes to the immense benefits that the transfer of dual technologies will bring in. And also, harnessing thorium reserves and bringing them to fuel stage will take another couple of decades. Why wait when we have got the money to buy stuff that we require so badly?
Now there is another nagging doubt: what if the U.S. stops supply of fuel? First, in what circumstances could that happen? Here, the provisions of the much-dreaded Hyde Act relate to the U.S. only; it is a piece of domestic legislation governing the U.S. administration's conduct in the case of India testing a nuclear device.
In case, the U.S. stops supply of fuel, then the 2005 agreement has an in-built provision which imposes an obligation on the U.S. to ensure uninterrupted supply of fuel from OTHER members of the nuclear club. This provision will help India build a strategic fuel reserve.
Today, the Government of India submitted the draft Safeguards Agreement to Board of Governors of the IAEA, finally. In the draft Safeguards Agreement, the objectives & purposes of the Agreement are laid down clearly:
• India will place its civilian nuclear facilities under Agency safeguards so as to facilitate full civil nuclear cooperation between India and Member States of the Agency and to provide assurance against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time;
• An essential basis of India’s concurrence to accept Agency safeguards under an India-specific safeguards agreement (hereinafter referred to as “this Agreement”) is the conclusion of international cooperation arrangements creating the necessary conditions for India to obtain access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continuous access to fuel supplies from companies in several nations, as well as support for an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of India’s reactors; and
• India may take corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies;
WHEREAS India is desirous of expanding civil nuclear cooperation with other Member States of the Agency;
WHEREAS the conclusion of this Agreement is intended to facilitate the broadest possible cooperation between India and Member States of the Agency in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and ensure international participation in the further development of India’s civilian nuclear programme on a sustained and long–term basis.
What has got the goat of the anti-deal and pro-non-proliferation lobby in the U.S. are the following words:
"India may take corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies."
The anti-deal and pro-non-proliferation lobby wants India to specify what "corrective steps" will it take in case of disruption of fuel supplies. In fact, the provision reflects the care with which the GoI has framed the Safeguards Agreement.
You can read the complete text of the draft Safeguards Agreement here.
Watch this space for my next write-up on the contentious nuclear deal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
