Everyone is for improving U.S.-India relations (historically on the cool side), especially considering India’s growing economic and strategic importance to America.
But President Bush’s recently announced nuclear deal with India must also pass the national security test, and on that point, there are a lot of questions.
Bush would grant India access to U.S. civilian nuclear fuel, technology and know-how in exchange for putting 14 of India’s 22 nuclear reactors under international safeguards.
But the deal would also violate the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that restricts nuclear commerce to treaty signatories (India never signed, and it has the bomb).
Would this give the green light to other nations to ignore the rules and pursue their own side-alley nuclear deals? Shouldn’t the United States be enforcing nonproliferation right now, not loosening the rules?
Congress, which must approve this deal, should weigh these serious risks against the benefits.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
17 Comments
The administration has been hypocritical in every aspect up to this point, why not this, too? It’s just more of the same BS we’ve had to endure since Dubya took office. Why would it be any different when it comes to equally applying the rules of the non proliferation treaty? Is anyone really surprised? It’s just business as usual.
Bush is following the PNAC Plan for American { Israeli } global leadership ans does not care or consider what the American People want or think.
Therefore you will find inconsistencies as the PNAC Plan adapts to “facts on the ground.”
You keep on treating this thing as though Bush is trying to do the right things as though he’s following a moral compass. The compass he’s following is leading to a sinister goal, nothing the United States should be doing. And certainly nothing we should be proud in doing.
As a strong advocate of nuclear power this tends to place me in a quandry. I’d like to see us find a way to get both India and Pakistan to “de-nuclearize” militarily but I also want to see them both use much more nuclear to displace carbon-based energy. That sentiment also applies worldwide.
It’s my understanding, India produces all their electricity using coal and their motor vehicles using fossil fuel. So why do they need Nuclear energy?For a weapon of course.
The zionists want to use India as a bullwark aginst China and Pakistan, if(when) that country falls to the radical Islamists.
V.L.R.B!!
Bush brings nuclear technology deal to India, and brings back mangoes. This guy is definitely an MBA.
Corporate America may have bigger plans for outsourcing to India, and want a stable energy source. “FACTS
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has about 6,500 stores world-wide, including 56 in China, but it still has no stores in India. India prohibits foreign direct investment in general-merchandise stores.
A telephone operator makes less than $1 an hour in India and about $12 an hour in the U.S. A medical transcriptionist makes about $2 an hour in India, and about $14 an hour in the U.S. An accountant makes as much as $10 an hour in India, and $23 an hour in the U.S.
Microsoft Corp. has a team of researchers in India devoted entirely to conducting patent research. General Electric Co. has a team of lawyers and paralegals there devoted to drafting contracts and legal documents. A Dallas law firm has a team of lawyers in India to scan and code legal files.
About 19% of China’s population lives on less than $1 a day. In comparison, about 44% of India’s population lives on less than $1 a day. China’s per capita GDP is $6,200; India’s is $3,400; the U.S.’s is nearly $42,000.
The average salary of a computer programmer in India is as much as $11,000; $9,000 in China; $6,500 in the Philippines; $29,000 in Canada; $38,000 in Israel and $80,000 in the U.S.
There are about 94 million Internet users in China, compared with about 18 million in India. The literacy rate in China is 91%, compared with 60% in India.” Maybe Bush could swing the same deal with China, do you think?
Lou Dobbs…..no liberal he, was LIVID about this.
bush looks forward to Americans eating Indian mangoes.
bush realizes that outsourcing jobs to India will cause pain, but cautions against building walls around our economy.
Folks, bush is no more no less than a full on corporate shill! This guy is no American! He is just as he was elected to be. The super rich get ever richer and Americans be damned. Under the guise of elevating the circumstances for the populations of India and China he has Americans on a full on race to a 3rd world standard of living.
Nuclear reactors for mangoes? This is insanity!
And Hey Ben Hule? Nuclear power is not carbon polluting, but it does have some rather long term nasty bi-products. And this is INDIA! Remember Bhopal and the Dow chemical disaster?!
Bush allowed lifting of restrictions as to nuclear weapons and technology for Pakistan……so we could get Bin Laden. But Bin Laden is still at large…..IN PAKISTAN!
Now ease off India TOO!
Bush is a fundamentalist. He feels “god” has chosen him at this time. Is he trying to FULFILL Armageddon?
Bush is not stupid but he is evil. I would be willing to wager that he does not even believe in my Christian God. There is a sinister agenda at play and I feel that America is being intentionally sacrifice.
Any leader that truly cared for THIS country would not leave our borders wide open, or engage in destructive trade policies or take part in a destructive, expensive, unwinnable and unecessary war!
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
Come on now, nobody seriously thinks Dubya really knows much of that teaty other than the name. When you have a 2000 years old Donnie talking to him about stuff like an old europe versus a new one, those comments about when the time when the treaty was signed don’t come as a surprise.
He is quick to talk against isolationism when it concerns trade where he and his cronies are the beneficiaries.
Pick a subject: forming the DHS, the office of the DCIand many others and this guy is the epitome of hypocrisy, but thanks to the apt political strategists around him,the very labels that he rightfully owns are what he is sticking on people’s faces. now that is a master at diverting attention. But we will see how long that can last.
Heh, steve.
All those facts and statistics! You think the conservatives can understand all that?
That’s why they listen to Rush “I Do Drugs and Divorce” Limbaugh–to skip the evidence and go right to the outrage and the anger. “How have we right-wingers been outraged, let us count the many ways: First . . . ”
They’re like a “wronged wife.” They never tire of reciting the litiny.”
We’re all gonna die anyway, might as well go out with a bang, yeah?
LOLOLOLOL!
“It’s my understanding, India produces all their electricity using coal and their motor vehicles using fossil fuel. So why do they need Nuclear energy? For a weapon of course.”guy from up north
Wouldn’t that be an argument for India expanding the nuclear energy program?
“It’s my understanding, India produces all their electricity using coal and their motor vehicles using fossil fuel. So why do they need Nuclear energy? For a weapon of course.”
India currently imports 70% of its oil chiefly from the persian gulf. In addition with the economy growing annually at 7-8% the energy deficit is going to go increase not decrease.So the nuclear deal is a good for the US because (1) US companies have invested too much in the country and can see greater profits if the Indian econnmy continues to grow and (2) Security – India is the only non-muslim democracy in the region and can also act as a counterweight to China.
“It’s my understanding, India produces all their electricity using coal and their motor vehicles using fossil fuel. So why do they need Nuclear energy? For a weapon of course.”
India currently imports 70% of its oil chiefly from the persian gulf. In addition with the economy growing annually at 7-8% the energy deficit is going to go increase not decrease.So the nuclear deal is a good for the US because (1) US companies have invested too much in the country and can see greater profits if the Indian economy continues to grow (not to mention that US investment in the civilian nuclear industry itself is worth quite a bit)and (2) Security – India is the only non-muslim democracy in the region and can also act as a counterweight to China.
As India and the US have now reached agreement on the historic nuclear deal, there has been a huge public debate on it. At the moment, Indian opponents are reacting very strongly. They think the agreement will constrain India’s future nuclear development and national freedom & dignity have been sold out.
But personally I welcome this Indo-US nuclear deal. Because this deal will help India to reap a lot of economic benefits. Through the deal, the US, strategically, accepts India’s nuclear prowess, thus strengthening India’s geopolitical position. Not only this, the deal is also bound to boost India’s chances to make it to the United Nations Security Council.
India is the largest democracy in the world that requires capital to build its infrastructure and manufacturing base and also nuclear energy for its development. With assistance of US and Europe, India can attain 8 per cent economic growth over the next decade.
According to the Planning Commission, India needs to increase its power supply five to seven times to sustain a steady growth of eight per cent per annum till 2031. It is reasonably unlikely that the options available will see India through. The nuclear deal that will help India import Uranium ore and civilian nuclear technology from the developed countries, including the US, can just solve the puzzle of “How to meet India’s growing power needs?”So, I think India will get triangular benefits by this deal i.e. Economical, Political, Military
I would like to suggest a nuclear deal related article here >> http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?articleID=123348&catID=2&category=Nation&rtFlg=rtFlg
Just a few quick points to show the flaws, though I utterly oppose the deal as a security hazard to India for complex economic reasons:
/*Bush brings nuclear technology deal to India, and brings back mangoes. This guy is definitely an MBA.*/Like you wouldn’t know judging by his Iraq fiasco – you hit the nail despite the obvious sarcasm. THIS deal will create 10,000 plus jobs in the US market if the Americans sell just 2-3 reactors to India. The large markets are China (of course) and India. A single nuke plant in India may have clusters of mega-sized reactors. If Westinghouse got to build two such “stations” that is 6 reactors to sell – this at a time when there are no American orders. The whole deal was orchestrated with this financial gain in mind, the US business mandarins were behind the Senators’s unfortunate (for India) judgment call.
So it is not “mangos for nuke power” but “MULTI BILLION $$ for nuke power”. The new energy grid is projected to cost a $100 BILLION, the most conservative estimate I have seen is 50 BILLION. You can bet that Westinghouse & Co. will be pushed by Nicholas Burns to get a big piece of that pie.
/*It’s my understanding, India produces all their electricity using coal and their motor vehicles using fossil fuel. So why do they need Nuclear energy?For a weapon of course.*/You are UNAWARE of power outages in India, and the lack of infrastructure to keep up with economic investments. With those reactors the Indian economy can be sustained at much higher growth rates, roughly 8%. Moreover nuke power is clean and cheap over the long-run.
You are doubtless UNAWARE that Indian scientists have developed unique THORIUM-fueled reactors that can be scaled up, and India had huge thorium reserves. It will take a while to scale up the design and go into production, and this would slow our economic growth hugely – but it’s manageable for the India to grow at 4% instead of 8%, and use Iranian gas as an alternative source until the thorium reactors are in place. (The American govt. tried to kill the infamous Indo-Iranian gas pipeline project using this deal as a sweetener)
As for nuclear weapons, there is enough plutonium to make at least a 100 devices as of now. That would more than suffice: say 50 12-13 kiloton pure fission bombs and another 50 devices in the 20 kiloton region (based off the boosted atomic device tested within the H-bomb primary) are a good deterrent. The Indian doctrine is not “MAD”/mutually assured destruction but “MCD” or minimum credible deterrent. Say 50 bombs for China, 30 for Pakistan, and 20 for the Middle East can protect us effectively by causing enough economic catastrophe and destruction in these regions so nobody would want to attack us without second thought.