He is basically an imminent economist and in 1-2-3 deal there is also a sound economic rationale.
India's fast breeder reactor is in the cutting edge of nuclear technology. It is based on thorium. The problem is that this technology is still in its developmental stage. In 10 years time, we could emerge as a major nuclear supplier. For this we need NSG membership.
So the 1-2-3 deal is a foundation to getting a seat in the NSG. During the interim we put obsolete nuclear plants under IAEA inspection. In return we get imported uranium that enables us to up capacity utilization from current 50% levels. We preserve our scarce uranium reserves to be used at a time where the world experiences a severe energy crunch.
This is a visionary decision. ManMohan Singh should go ahead. The Left has no vision except protect China's interest. The BJP has no vision except return to power.
1. The agreement clearly limits its application to civilian nuclear facilities and excludes military nuclear facilities. It includes only civilian facilities, designated as so by GoI at the time of signing of the agreement and do not cover future civilian facilities. 2. In the event of the agreement proving unfavorable to India, we can opt out by terminating this Agreement by giving just one year's written notice to the US.
3. There is even an over-riding provision for the Hyde Act in the 1-2-3 agreement: At a time of our choosing, we can pass a law to specifically negate it.
RE:ManMkeohan's Master Stro
by TheOneAndOnly on Jul 01, 2008 03:08 PM Permalink
These CANs IFs And BUTs are meaningless.
When Huge Money And Security & Sovereignity are at Stake, Letter And Spirit of the Agreement Document are very very Essential.
Deal Supports are just trying divert the Attention of the people from Critical Words of the 123 Agreement.
Nuke Deal is Clearly Not about just power, The Idea behind to Bailout the US Economy from Crisis in Short Term And Cap Indian Nuclear Research and Weapons in the Long Term.
India should Never Sign any Agreement which even Remotely means or aims at capping India Nuclear Weapon Capabilities. Untill All the Countries in the world Destroy their Own Nuclear Weapons.
RE:ManMkeohan's Master Stro
by Hate Who divides on Jul 01, 2008 03:13 PM Permalink
Peopel never think why US urging so deperately ...........anyways IF PM signs deal no problem ........But it shouldnot curb our Millitary Nuclear Programme
RE:ManMkeohan's Master Stro
by All Right on Jul 01, 2008 03:20 PM Permalink
Lack of uranium has already capped our military program. The deal enables us to ensure local supplies to be utilized for entirely military programs. This the Left never wants. They always advocate a nuclearless India as it suits China
RE:ManMkeohan's Master Stro
by Hate Who divides on Jul 01, 2008 03:26 PM Permalink
Are you sure that we can use domestic stock for testing .......then we can go with deal ...but I doubt ..coz the Hyde Act Text I have is of 2007 ....... I dont have the current one with amended clause ...thats why?? .............Did US given us the final deal???
RE:ManMkeohan's Master Stro
by Hate Who divides on Jul 01, 2008 03:05 PM Permalink
Can we accomplish millitary Nuclear Prograame with Domestic stcok of uranium???? I think If this is true we can go for deal ............. other problem we can handle
Left never promised Cong.,they will support for anything Manmohan wish. They have their stated policies, the attitude towards nuclear deal is not new.
If the Cong wants their support, they should stick to common minimum program which is Coalition dharma.Otherwise they have to deal without left support
RE:Different Policies
by All Right on Jul 01, 2008 02:57 PM Permalink
Which clause in the CMP states categorically that the UPA cannot enter into a nuclear deal with the US?
Read this Novel, You will under stand how Surjeet Singh made Congress to come to Power in 2004. Even he paid crores to TV chennels to convert NDA's India shining Campaign to a Joke. Darshan Singh is close fallower of Surjeet Singh for a long time.
RE:Darshan Singhs Novel Bhaau
by kiainth on Jul 01, 2008 02:59 PM Permalink
Chandigarh: One day in 2004, at a house on Safdarjung Road in New Delhi’s Lutyens area, a venerable Sikh Marxist leader counsels a European lady who heads one of India’s largest parties on the coming general elections. With a picture of Vladimir Lenin watching over proceedings, he tells her how to edge ahead of the ruling party that seems to be leading in the electoral race. “Call the Dravidian party,” he says. “Talk to the Maratha leader who questioned your Indianness....” That incident, which could well be an encapsulation of events leading to the Congress’ surprise win in 2004, isn’t a non-fiction retelling of the same by someone involved in the victory. Instead, it is from a Punjabi work of fiction titled Bhaau that hit the stands less than a fortnight ago. Insider’s view: Darshan Singh, author of Bhaau. (Harikrishna Katragadda / Mint)Written by Darshan Singh, 80, who has known Harkishan Singh Surjeet—the ailing Communist Party of India (Marxist) stalwart whom many consider to be the architect of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance’s ride to power in 2004—for a long time, Bhaau, which means elder brother in Punjabi, is a unique work of literature in a country where inside stories in politics are rarely written out—even if only as works of fiction. It is also a book that is likely to kick up a storm within the CPM with its not-so-kind references to current CPM chief Prakash Karat and hi
RE:RE:Darshan Singhs Novel Bhaau
by kiainth on Jul 01, 2008 03:01 PM Permalink
The protagonist of Bhaau is Karam Singh Kirti and the book tells the story of how he manages the inherent contradictions within the communist movement and his own party to create a secular alternative to a Hindu nationalist party in the 2004 elections. Darshan Singh refuses to admit that his work is a retelling of the life and times of Surjeet, who is 92. “It’s virtual reality,” is his cryptic remark. The blurb on the book talks of the protagonist as “an imaginary politician”. The novel also talks about Kirti’s differences with the then shadow general secretary, PR, a hardline communist leader, who is all set to replace him. It also speaks of how PR’s wife is all set to become a politburo member. On Sunday, Singh, once employed by the local information department of the erstwhile Soviet Union, responded to questions posed to him at a literary meet as to why he had taken the trouble by giving fictional names to characters that could be easily identified by saying that many “novels have been written about American presidents without naming them.” In the book, the European lady is simply called Madam and her Indianness is questioned by a man called Salve from Maharashtra who comes from a region where there are a lot of sugar mills (a reference to Sharad Pawar and Baramati). There’s another character called Bal Gopal who, when it becomes clear he will lose his chief ministership, gets his wife to replace him (a reference to Lalu Prasad). And there’s Pehlwan, another ch
RE:RE:Darshan Singhs Novel Bhaau
by All Right on Jul 01, 2008 03:06 PM Permalink
So it is fiction as admitted by you.
At least the old guard Comrade Harkishan Singh Surjeet, Jyothi Basu were pragmatic. They had polcies based in pragmatism. This is unlike Prakash Karat. He not only prevented Jyothi Basu as the first Left PM but now determined to ensure the Left into the path of oblivion.
From 59 MPs, if elections are held today, they will be hard-pressed to even retain one-third of these. Then a year from now, they will lose both Kerala and West Bengal.
RE:Darshan Singhs Novel Bhaau
by All Right on Jul 01, 2008 03:00 PM Permalink
Yes, all knickerwallahs are morons who think their rumor mongering would be lapped up by others. They think everyone else are morons.
he Indo-US nuclear deal is being called the biggest breakthrough in years. The 123 agreement that will make the deal operational, was finally made public earlier on Friday.
This, after months of tough negotiations between Indian and American diplomats that took place, even as the deal battled its way through Parliament in Delhi and the US Congress.
Many have consistently raised concerns that this make-or-break deal might be bad for India but here is a look at more of the fine prints of the deal that has a life span of 40 years.
The 123 agreement is a civil nuclear deal, therefore, it will have no bearing on India's strategic and military programme and India can make a bomb. It is completely out of the ambit of the deal.
In the text of the deal there is a clause that says that the agreement will in no way be a hindrance to India's strategic programme. Therefore, India can continue to make a bomb with its own fuel.
What is clear from the draft of the 123 agreement is that there is no legal binding commitment on India to never test again. India, if it wants to, can choose to conduct a nuclear test.
If India does conduct a nuclear test, it will not be violating any international treaty or agreement because there is no mention of testing or detonation in this bilateral agreement.
RE:RE:Left is a ant nation party
by Hate Who divides on Jul 01, 2008 02:55 PM Permalink
Did you read the text of Hyde Act??? I think no ............... Once I posted the Dangerous clause of Hyde ACt ..............You Must go through it ........ as per my knowledge 123 Agreement is part or dependent on Hyde Act .........If you are in a veiw that India should Not Test further or Dont want India Iran pipeline or Energy Crisis is the big problem and only problem......... you may support it
RE:Left is a ant nation party
by Pappu on Jul 01, 2008 02:47 PM Permalink
Essentially, what the controversy has been over is whether if India conducts a test the Americans under their own laws would have the right to take back all the fuel that they give us.
Right of return
The deal interestingly says that the right of return that the Americans have does not automatically comes into effect. It is something the US administration chooses to do. They would have to stop cooperation with India.
But whether or not they take back fuel is something they would have to choose to do.
Even after the US chooses to do that, there are about seven to eight barriers before the right of return actually comers into play.
What the agreement says that that it will take into account the circumstances in which India conducts a nuclear test.
These include a ''changed security environment'' or action, which could impact national security. Essentially what it boils down to is that the right of return may not be invoked if Pakistan or China conduct nuclear tests and India responds to that by conducting a test of its own. In a way, this is the first international agreement, which would justify the circumstances in which a nuclear test is conducted.
So India is not giving up its right to test and right of return of nuclear fuel does not automatically comes into play. Apart from this there are certain assurances given by US President George W Bush to the Indian side. Those have been verbatim repeated in the text of the agreement.
RE:Left is a ant nation party
by ASHRAF NATHER on Jul 01, 2008 03:02 PM Permalink
Dear Pappu,
So far i dont know what is 123 agreement, now i have understand, not fully. may be it will take some time. becoz i dont have that much knowledge. las but not least, what is your opinion. whether PM must sign the agreement or not.
RE:Left is a ant nation party
by Pappu on Jul 01, 2008 02:47 PM Permalink
These assurances are that the US would ensure that there is a lifetime supply of fuel for India's nuclear reactors and that they help India build its strategic fuel reserve.
If the US is unable to fulfill this commitment, it will convene a group of countries like Russia, France and the UK to ensure supply.
Even if, for some reason, they were to take back nuclear fuel, India retains the right to seek alternate sources of fuel for itself. India will have to build strategic reserve so that it does not go out nuclear fuel.
