One should beware of USA, it was never our friend. It did nothing to industrialize India. Is there a sinle industry or projects where USA gave its technology?
It gave ENRON, who run away with Rs.6300 Crores from the Industrial Development Bank of India.
It helped Pakistan to attach India in 1965. It was about to attack India in 1971 to save Pakistan.
It has created Muzzahidins, Talibans and Khalistanis to destroy India.
USa wants India without nuclear weapons.
This treaty is a trick to do that.
Unfortunately we have a liar, a traitor as our Prime Minister.
RE:USA was never our friend
by Prem Mohan on Aug 19, 2007 07:02 PM Permalink
Firstly, it was the Indian side that reneged on the Enron contract. Why did we not go in for arbitration as provided in the contract? We would have lost much more money.
Perhaps you don't remember that the U.S. fed India during the difficult times of the 50s and 60s. We did not eventually pay for the food grains. The U.S. has always been a large aid donor to India.
Finally, after the 1962 war with China, why did we turn to the U.S. for help? Why not to the Soviet Union, who were our great friends and allies?
RE:USA was never our friend
by Chander Malik on Aug 19, 2007 07:08 PM Permalink
US is World's sole power so it will keep playing some role in World power. Time changes, country changes, their need changes and so your policies. US might be against india but he has never acted against India on the ground. Millions of Indians work in US. So US doesnt seem to bad but yes He is opportunistic..
RE:USA was never our friend
by India Fan on Aug 19, 2007 07:15 PM Permalink
Wrong, Enron bribed their way through the contract, it is offcially shown in their account books. They played the dirty game, above all ICICI suffered the most.
Also, ask Bhopal gas victims how US has cheated them.
RE:USA was never our friend
by Chander Malik on Aug 19, 2007 06:53 PM Permalink
Mr. Dipak Bose, Dont take country to cold war time in 1960. The relations with US was diff at that time. Today post 9/11, US has seen there is nothing in Pak and its dangerous for China to support Pak. He sees an opportunity in India. May be he is an opportunistic but why india should not grab this opportunity. Russia is always a friend to India and if US also is on same level then India will have support of 2 world powers and Pak and China cant do much against India. So
Dear Friends, Do look at some things: After signing the 123 agreement it will take some time to built the reactor and start producing power, this might be close to 5 years. The deal will enforce us not to go for any nuclear test this means our scientist research will be mainly based on assumptions, super computers only do the calculations and shows near close results these results are not acceptable for nuclear activities. With China and Pakistan as neighbors our defense should be stronger. Once we stop doing research all the brains in India will start going to the USA and we will be more dependent on them for more supply of Fuel and technology. We still have lot of other sources to fulfill our Power requirements which are still untapped. And Last but not the least Can we trust the Americans. Look carefully before we make any decision, the USA will never pressurize the Chinese and the Pakistanis, WE WILL LOSE OUR SELF RELIANCE. Its not late yet%u2026.. Think twice%u2026..
Manmohan Singh has put(agreed to put) India,s foreign policy, Future Nuclear tests, Uranium based Nuclear Power technology and raw materials etc in one basket and negotiated with US. Once agreed India has to think twice before conducting Nuclear tests even in genuine neccesity in future due to the financial implications. Building of Nuclear power stations involves enormous funds and will take minimum of 5 years to Build. Even if it is agreed that US will compensate fully in case of Pullout by US, that will purely depend upon America's articulation of our tests. It only shows US is not considering India as equal partners in this deal. It will be wise to delay the deal till america agrees for 1. Nuclear testing rights should be totally delinked with 123 agreement 2. Agreement should have a firm minimum period of 20years. It is better to live in dark ages than surrendering our independece at our 60th Anniversery.
RE:Left is Right
by Chander Malik on Aug 19, 2007 07:04 PM Permalink
You think US is fool. If you work in an Organization and if it pays you then you too have to work. US is not donating to India. It also has some of its interests. When india did nuclear test then too it lost lot of US aid. So what if it does again, it will again lost the deal. It will be decided at that time when situation comes. Till then India cant stand quiet and loose such deal. Its US laws that links India's test with deal, not Indian govt links. Hyde act says deal broken if india doesnt nuclear test. OK broken then broken.. Its for Indian govt to decide at that time whether test is important or nuclear deal. Today Deal is more important and thats What govt is doing..
RE:RE:Left is Right
by Vikrant Athavale on Aug 19, 2007 08:48 PM Permalink
dear mallik, Last time we survived the sanctions (Aid from the international community) this time our internal economy is much stronger than the US. We dont require the deal they do much more than us. No compromise should be done putting our security into danger. India is much safer nation to have nuke power than Pakistan and china. Its US to decide thay need India or are happy with Pakistan or China. Regarding Fuel in the next 5 years India will be more capable than it is today to develop nuke power on its own. We dont need US Outdated technology.
RE:RE:Left is Right
by chigurupati venkateswarlu on Aug 19, 2007 11:05 PM Permalink
Mr Vikrant Athavale, can you explain us what kind of resources you have in India to fulfill the electricity needs except coal which produces hell lot of pollution? There is nothing to loose for US, only looser is India if this deal did not go thru. Man, why are you so concerned about CHINA and India if you are good. If you are bad only then they become bad. I dont understand why you all guys think stupid. U want bombs or you want electricity? Man where are u? wake up...
There is is another disturbing aspect, which does not figure in the 123 Agreement, but has profound implications for India's future nuclear energy plans.
Under the Separation Plan agreed to between India and the US on March 2, 2006, and tabled in Parliament on March 7, 2006, it was clearly stated that a civilian facility would be one that India has determined not to be relevant to its strategic programme, and that India retains the sole right to determine which future thermal power reactors and breeder reactors would be termed civilian.
Curiously, however, in his briefing last week as well as in an interview on August 2 to the Council for Foreign Relations, Nick Burns has stated that all future fast breeder reactors would be under safeguards, and that within 25 years, 90-95 per cent of India's nuclear establishment would be fully safeguarded.
What is the Indian Political parties, intellectuals, scientists response to it? As far as I am concerned, this agreement is a dangerous step, our integrity, self respect, soverignity will under attack. Be Indian first. We have our own resources within India. Try to develop it!!! Or sign treaties with other countries by not giving our self respect and soverignity and independence!!!
Obviously, this is an escape clause for India to test, should it decide to do so in response to testing by China, Pakistan or by any other country. The US can be expected to put pressure on India to desist from testing. In any case, a one-year notice for testing means that India cannot quickly decide to test in response to external stimuli.
Article 14.3 ensures that India doesn't just walk away citing a violation of the agreement by the US. It has to be either a material violation or breach as defined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties or as determined by the IAEA Board of Governors.
Article 14.4 gives a categorical right of return to the US.
Article 14.5 merely recognises that should the US exercise its right of return, this would have negative consequences for Indo-US relations as a whole, and it would upset India's ongoing nuclear energy and other projects.
Article 14.6 provides for US compensation to India. But neither Article 14.5 nor Article 14.6 gives any legal rights to India. More important, it is categorically stated in Article 14.8 that the provisions of Article 14 regarding the right of return will not affect India's obligations under Article 5.6, which envisages safeguards in perpetuity within the framework of the safeguards agreement that India would have signed with the IAEA.
Disputes: Article 15 only provides for a negotiated settlement of disputes regarding interpretation or implementation. Such negotiations could be open-ended. India has no
Consultations: Article 13.2 gives both US and India the right to seek consultations if either side feels that the other is not complying with the agreement, but this does not change the reality that the agreement will remain in force for 40 years, as envisaged under Article 16.2.
Termination clauses: Article 14 is extremely important and deserves very careful reading.
Under Articles 14.1 and 14.2, India can't just walk away from the agreement. It has to give one year's notice, and also give reasons for seeking termination of the agreement. It also has to hold consultations with the US. If there is no agreement during the consultations, then India merely gets the right to seek termination.
Article 14.2 implicitly looks at the issue of India undertaking a nuclear test. But India won't be able to take such a decision unilaterally. It is obliged, together with the US, to consider carefully the circumstances that may lead to termination or cessation of cooperation.
Discussions will take into account whether the circumstances that may lead to termination or cessation resulted from a Party's (read: India's) serious concern about a changed security environment, or as a response to similar actions by other States which could affect national security.
Obviously, this is an escape clause for India to test, should it decide to do so in response to testing by China, Pakistan or by any other country. The US can be expected to put pressure on India to desist from testing. In any case
There is silence on what would happen if the two sides do not reach agreement on these arrangements and procedures. All that is envisaged is that consultations will begin within 6 months and conclude within one year. It is not clear whether this one-year period is from the time of the request being made, or from the beginning of consultations.
So the US has at least one year, if not eighteen months, to delay reprocessing permission, during which multiple pressures would be applied on India not to go ahead with it.
But even then, there is no guarantee that reprocessing rights will in fact be given. The language does not permit India to go ahead without an agreement on the US side. On the other hand, the US has retained the right to withhold permission.
Thus, Article 14.9 provides that under exceptional circumstances (which have not been defined) the US can suspend the arrangements and procedures agreed upon. This is very disturbing, since it gives a virtual veto to the US on reprocessing.
Fallback safeguards: Article 10.4 does envisage fallback safeguards. The language is emphatic: The supplier and recipient should consult and agree on appropriate verification measures.
Consultations: Article 13.2 gives both US and India the right to seek consultations if either side feels that the other is not complying with the agreement, but this does not change the reality that the agreement will remain in force for 40 years, as envisaged under Article 16.2.
