India set to join NSG

Anikastha

DEEP STATE
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
5,005
Likes
8,881
Country flag
India signing NPT will push pak in NSG? :crazy:
FYI, NSG was formed because of Indian Atomic Weapon tests. So, it's India key role.
For pakistan, new generation of Indian kids don't know what's pakistan, nobody cares but you guys keep whining. :rofl:
Even if we take away Nukes from pakland and give them stones....they will find out different ways "How to create atomic fussion with stones" or "How to explode ourself with stones"...:rofl:
Never Underestimate ghazia paki...They have world's oldest civilization.
And one more...Hulk, Ultron , winter soldier , Cap . America , vision , wanda were products of paki ...later they were sold to Avengers and Hydra. :biggrin2:
 

Flame Thrower

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,676
Likes
2,731
I think we'll test our nuclear weapons again only after we perfect our thorium reactor and have it running for few years.

then we'll sign NPT.

I may be wrong also.....


Reason for thinking in this way.

  1. We know our thermo nuke functioned improperly i.e., got less yeild than expected.
  2. We need Uranium for our reactors.
  3. Testing Nuke weapon can be disastrous for Civil nuclear deal and we can kiss good bye for Uranium deals.
  4. Once we perfect our design in Th reactors, we don't need Ur anymore.
  5. Build more Th reactors for electricity needs.
  6. It takes more than a decade or so for generating power from Th reactor and add 5 more years for getting multiple Th reactors online.(I may be wrong about time line)
  7. By that time we'll be in good economic position and no western power willing to stop trade just because of nuke test.
  8. Yes they'll be angry for sure, we'll have two weapons to counter the anger. As soon as the NW tests sucess, signing NPT and worst case share our Th reactor knowledge with US, UK and Russia(I hope we don't share with China).
Gurus please shed light if i am mistaken for assuming that Indian reluctance to sign NPT even to get in NSG. I believe signing NPT might get us a step closer to UNSC(I may be wrong on UNSC part).

Third nuclear test is yet to come but not anytime sooner. We'll also get into NSG but not before we perfect Th reactor(I believe).

Please let me know if there is any special reason for not signing NPT. Any logical explaination is fine by me as hard to get GoI's real intentions for not signing NPT.
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,168
Likes
55,534
Country flag
I think we'll test our nuclear weapons again only after we perfect our thorium reactor and have it running for few years.

then we'll sign NPT.

I may be wrong also.....


Reason for thinking in this way.

  1. We know our thermo nuke functioned improperly i.e., got less yeild than expected.
  2. We need Uranium for our reactors.
  3. Testing Nuke weapon can be disastrous for Civil nuclear deal and we can kiss good bye for Uranium deals.
  4. Once we perfect our design in Th reactors, we don't need Ur anymore.
  5. Build more Th reactors for electricity needs.
  6. It takes more than a decade or so for generating power from Th reactor and add 5 more years for getting multiple Th reactors online.(I may be wrong about time line)
  7. By that time we'll be in good economic position and no western power willing to stop trade just because of nuke test.
  8. Yes they'll be angry for sure, we'll have two weapons to counter the anger. As soon as the NW tests sucess, signing NPT and worst case share our Th reactor knowledge with US, UK and Russia(I hope we don't share with China).
Gurus please shed light if i am mistaken for assuming that Indian reluctance to sign NPT even to get in NSG. I believe signing NPT might get us a step closer to UNSC(I may be wrong on UNSC part).

Third nuclear test is yet to come but not anytime sooner. We'll also get into NSG but not before we perfect Th reactor(I believe).

Please let me know if there is any special reason for not signing NPT. Any logical explaination is fine by me as hard to get GoI's real intentions for not signing NPT.
NPT will make us US doll.
They have thousands, we have few, NFU is enough for us.
Getting inside UNSC powerless will be stupidity.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
In this age and geo political environment, India will never test a nuclear bomb - ever. And that's for sure. So the question is:

Why doesn't India sign the NPT thereby pulling the rug from under the feet of the Pakis? This way it would be a cinch for India to get membership of any nuke club like the NSG etc.
The NSG is not a real club, it's a phony blackmail tactic conjured up by the US to coerce India into a corner, hoping that once the tunnel thinking sets in, Indians themselves will start doing their enemy's bidding. It's a classic negotiating tactic of opening a second front, a false one, just to use as a bargaining chip as a leverage against something else. It's nothing short of stupid to fall for it. Even China does it to us. First they capture Aksai Chin, then, to divert Indian attention, they open up a second front and claim Arunachal Pradesh. The intended effect? they expect the conversation to go this way :

China : If you accept Aksai China as Chinese territory, we will relinquish our claim on Arunachal

Indians : WoW, that's awesome! You're so generous. Let's do it.

All the while China never really had any plans to take Arunachal military anyway, but they posture themselves to make you feel as though they were planning to, and thereby did a big favor to you by relinquishing their claim. And Indian people start celebrating having struck a good deal, based on a phony bargaining chip.

That's basically what you are suggesting with the NPT right now. It was created exclusively as an India-centric bargaining chip, precisely to induce this Trojan-like thinking in Indians : "If we accede to western demands by signing NPT then we will get entry into NSG and they will stop antagonizing us" and then do what? In that case, why not surrender nuclear weapons as well? If the US saw your forum post, they would be more than happy to create more phony clubs to allow India in, in exchange for India surrendering more of its national assets.

"I will stop being hostile to you if you surrender to my will", I mean, what a great offer right? we should accede immediately without wasting even a moment.
 
Last edited:

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,369
Thanks for tagging me in this thread.

China is joker of the pack of so called NSG regime who is doing all the circus it could do, along with his minion Pakistan to unsettle India.

If I am reading it correct Indian establishment knows that China hates India being a good boy, obliging to NTP, CTBT and NSG regimes even without being a signatory and literally has no serious impediments as far as supplies of fuel is concern for our reactors.

Chinese and Pakistanis think by such needle prick they will make India a rebel who will then take radical actions for them to make a point to isolate us further. e.g: testing nuclear bombs etc.

Our membership with NSG is important for our ever growing long term investment in nuclear energy and nuclear technology. Any set back because of China should be ridiculed diplomatically and China must be hurt where we could but there should be no knee jerk reaction.

I can foresee China and it rouge friends becoming more exasperated in this futile effort to make India unsettled using their diplomatic equities and resources. India on the other hand will invest minimum effort knowing China will never let us be part of the group. I don't think Indian establishment think of pulling out any diplomatic coup in this whole exercise; notwithstanding a textbook diplomatic effort will be always there to make our case presentable.

Like a member mentioned, In future if we can become self sufficient in nuclear know how and be able to establish industry capable of supplying affordable reactors and components; looking for NSG membership will be more symbolic than what is today.
 

Mikesingh

Professional
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
7,353
Likes
30,450
Country flag
The NSG is not a real club, it's a phony blackmail tactic conjured up by the US to coerce India into a corner, hoping that once the tunnel thinking sets in, Indians themselves will start doing their enemy's bidding. It's a classic negotiating tactic of opening a second front, a false one, just to use as a bargaining chip as a leverage against something else. It's nothing short of stupid to fall for it. Even China does it to us. First they capture Aksai Chin, then, to divert Indian attention, they open up a second front and claim Arunachal Pradesh. The intended effect? they expect the conversation to go this way :

China : If you accept Aksai China as Chinese territory, we will relinquish our claim on Arunachal

Indians : WoW, that's awesome! You're so generous. Let's do it.

All the while China never really had any plans to take Arunachal military anyway, but they posture themselves to make you feel as though they were planning to, and thereby did a big favor to you by relinquishing their claim. And Indian people start celebrating having struck a good deal, based on a phony bargaining chip.

That's basically what you are suggesting with the NPT right now. It was created exclusively as an India-centric bargaining chip, precisely to induce this Trojan-like thinking in Indians : "If we accede to western demands by signing NPT then we will get entry into NSG and they will stop antagonizing us" and then do what? In that case, why not surrender nuclear weapons as well? If the US saw your forum post, they would be more than happy to create more phony clubs to allow India in, in exchange for India surrendering more of its national assets.

"I will stop being hostile to you if you surrender to my will", I mean, what a great offer right? we should accede immediately without wasting even a moment.
Remember, it's not just India but as of February 2015, 190 states are recognized as parties to the NPT and thus the NPT as you suggest is not India-centric. So what's the big deal?

The NPT is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.

This last bit of nuclear disarmament will take till the end of days or till the stars start winking out signalling the end of the universe, meaning it will never happen! There's nothing alarming or disadvantageous to us regarding the other objectives of the NPT.

If verification measures of the IAEA is a concern, several high-ranking officials within the United Nations have themselves admitted that they can do little to stop states using nuclear reactors to produce nuclear weapons.

So we sign the NPT and continue doing what we're doing, but get the license to join the various clubs like the NSG etc. That's like killing two birds with one stone!
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,168
Likes
55,534
Country flag
Remember, it's not just India but as of February 2015, 190 states are recognized as parties to the NPT and thus the NPT as you suggest is not India-centric. So what's the big deal?

The NPT is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.

This last bit of nuclear disarmament will take till the end of days or till the stars start winking out signalling the end of the universe, meaning it will never happen! There's nothing alarming or disadvantageous to us regarding the other objectives of the NPT.

If verification measures of the IAEA is a concern, several high-ranking officials within the United Nations have themselves admitted that they can do little to stop states using nuclear reactors to produce nuclear weapons.

So we sign the NPT and continue doing what we're doing, but get the license to join the various clubs like the NSG etc. That's like killing two birds with one stone!
Are you smoking man?
NPT was created due to India's Nuke test.
What will happen if India signs NPT.
  1. India will never boost nuclear weapon capability by much extent.
  2. Pakis will catch up.
  3. US, Russia, France and UK will succeed and will always end up as militarily stronger than India just due to nukes.
 

Mikesingh

Professional
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
7,353
Likes
30,450
Country flag
Are you smoking man?
NPT was created due to India's Nuke test.
What will happen if India signs NPT.
  1. India will never boost nuclear weapon capability by much extent.
  2. Pakis will catch up.
  3. US, Russia, France and UK will succeed and will always end up as militarily stronger than India just due to nukes.
Wrong! NPT was opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970 which included 190 countries.

India tested its bomb, Smiling Buddha (MEA designation: Pokhran-I) on 18 May 1974.

So the NPT has nothing to do with India's nuke test which much came later. Even the Americans didn't know till the bomb test was conducted in 1974, years after the NPT came into force.

Secondly, how do you say that India can never boost its nuclear weapon capability? 'Tests' are nowadays done using computer simulations. Nothing or no one can stop us from boosting our nuke capabilities.

Thirdly, how do you say Pakistan will catch up? It has at present the fastest growing nuke arsenal in the world ahead if not equal to India's nuke arsenal. It's caught up quite some time ago. And then, Pakistan will be forced to sign the NPT too, due to geopolitical reasons. They'll have no other option.

You think China, which is a signatory to the NPT has stopped its nuke weapon production? Not by a long shot. They're even making newer delivery platforms like the DF series of missiles for their new MIRVs.

Fourthly, we're not concerned with US, Russia, France and UK, but China and Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
Are you smoking man?
NPT was created due to India's Nuke test.
What will happen if India signs NPT.
  1. India will never boost nuclear weapon capability by much extent.
  2. Pakis will catch up.
  3. US, Russia, France and UK will succeed and will always end up as militarily stronger than India just due to nukes.
@Mikesingh 's calculation is based on the assumption that we will never do another nuke test, he has already made it clear in his previous post. So it all boils down to whether you agree to that assumption or not? I certainly don't.

We have time on our side, we don't need to bow down to their demands. They haven't heeded to any of our concerns, first they threw us out of Afghanistan dialogue, then they sell F16 to Pakistan, then they give aid to them through USAID, IMF, and NATO coalition support fund. If they aren't willing to make even small concessions to us then we have no obligation to concede to their demands. Same with MTCR. If we simply offer some Make in India deal to any of the American companies which makes it cheaper for them to manufacture their missiles in India (we don't need to buy them) and increase their profit margin, they will be more than happy to lobby their government to pull some strings to make sure India is included in MTCR to transfer technology to Indian subsidiaries to start manufacturing in India. Currently, the MTCR doesn't restrict any of our strategic plans, we are self sufficient in missiles. Italy can sit in a corner and cry, we aren't going to yield even an inch.

I think we can get all the benefits of NSG without having to take on the extra legal obligations by signing any restrictive treaty. After all, the US did make an exception for us because their companies stand to make huge profits by running nuclear power plants in India. We need to stop pandering to their whims and allowing them to brainwash us into thinking that they are doing some sort of favor by allowing us to acquire nuclear fuel. After all, if the US wants to run nuclear plants in India (one is coming up in Jaitapur) they will have to make a provision in NSG to make sure the nuclear fuel reaches their plants in India, so they have a vested interest in letting India in NSG, we don't need to make any more compromises.

It all depends on what tone you take during negotiations. The fact that we are allowing foreign companies to run nuclear plants on our soil itself is a concession made to their companies, we don't need to make any more concessions from our part, they aren't doing a favor by running their nuclear plants here. If we take a tough stance and simply stall the issue, their corporates will get desperate and start lobbying to create more exceptions for India. NPT has nothing to do with NSG. What we do with spent fuel in our own reactors, (especially non-US reactors) is not connected to the civilian energy production which NSG deals with. The US can simply make an NSG waiver for India and start minting money from selling electricity, and leave the weapons programs to us. It's none of their business. If we sign NPT or IAEA restrictions then our spent fuel from other reactors will come under inspections, and it will also restrict our Thorium reactors which are planned for the future.


US linking our NSG membership to NPT is like a groom saying "I want to marry your elder daughter but you should also let me fuck your younger daughter".
 
Last edited:

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,168
Likes
55,534
Country flag
Wrong! NPT was opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970 which included 190 countries.

India tested its bomb, Smiling Buddha (MEA designation: Pokhran-I) on 18 May 1974.

So the NPT has nothing to do with India's nuke test which much came later. Even the Americans didn't know till the bomb test was conducted in 1974, years after the NPT came into force.
:doh:
Bloody damn.
That was test ban treaty or NPT.
I'm talking about NSG.
Please, think over it.
In brief,
NSG was formed because India violated test ban treaty.
Secondly, how do you say that India can never boost its nuclear weapon capability? 'Tests' are nowadays done using computer simulations. Nothing or no one can stop us from boosting our nuke capabilities
But how many tests we have done in real actually which will ensure our simulations are right? o_O
Otherwise, Pokhran- II could be a successful 100-200KT thermonuclear weapon.
First, need some experience of real tests, then, using computer simulations is better.
Thirdly, how do you say Pakistan will catch up? It has at present the fastest growing nuke arsenal in the world ahead if not equal to India's nuke arsenal. It's caught up quite some time ago. And then, Pakistan will be forced to sign the NPT too, due to geopolitical reasons. They'll have no other option.
Pakistan can never sign NPT given Indian Conventional Strength, similar to Europeans never agreed to NFU policy given Soviet Conventional Strength.
Mark my words,
They'll never sign NPT. :)
You think China, which is a signatory to the NPT has stopped its nuke weapon production? Not by a long shot. They're even making newer delivery platforms like the DF series of missiles for their new MIRVs.
That's happening because they signed on own will.
Signing under international pressure will be something different.
Fourthly, we're not concerned with US, Russia, France and UK, but China and Pakistan.
So, not even prepare for possible threat?
We were not even concerned with China initially after independence.
What happened?
US changes colour like Chameleon immediately,
Russia has become closer partner to China, who knows what happens next?
It's diplomacy man. If you can make your enemy your biggest trade partner, you can undergo at war with your best friends as well.
So, don't trust blindly. :)
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,920
Likes
98,472
Country flag
has he achieved at least 25% of his stated goals ? at the very least in the critical areas ?
if he has fine....then we are on track and i can accept your statement

otherwise ? ...is it another dream ?

but i'd like members' responses please
Course correction is a hell lot of a job to do than to make substantial progress in any given direction.
In my opinion NDA so far has been exponentially putting effort on corrective measures.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
:doh:
Bloody damn.
That was test ban treaty or NPT.
I'm talking about NSG.
Please, think over it.
In brief,
NSG was formed because India violated test ban treaty.

But how many tests we have done in real actually which will ensure our simulations are right? o_O
Otherwise, Pokhran- II could be a successful 100-200KT thermonuclear weapon.
First, need some experience of real tests, then, using computer simulations is better.

Pakistan can never sign NPT given Indian Conventional Strength, similar to Europeans never agreed to NFU policy given Soviet Conventional Strength.
Mark my words,
They'll never sign NPT. :)

That's happening because they signed on own will.
Signing under international pressure will be something different.

So, not even prepare for possible threat?
We were not even concerned with China initially after independence.
What happened?
US changes colour like Chameleon immediately,
Russia has become closer partner to China, who knows what happens next?
It's diplomacy man. If you can make your enemy your biggest trade partner, you can undergo at war with your best friends as well.
So, don't trust blindly. :)

There are three main points here.

Firstly, we can get nuclear fuel simply by diplomatic leverages. No one can pressurize us to surrender our strategic assets in exchange for electricity. We just need to stand our ground. Even a ragtag country like Pakistan is more assertive than us in preserving their strategic assets.

Secondly, Mike strongly recommends signing the restrictive treaties with a sense of urgency, but doesn't really explain the benefits of doing so, nor does he weigh in the detrimental effects of signing them. He simply assumes that we should do it. Then he goes on to assume that if we sign it then Pakistan will sign it; Let's assume they do, and then what? Pakistan and India both surrender their nukes? What a brilliant strategy. So the US and China would succeeded in getting exactly what they want : using Pakistan as a bargaining chip to denuclearize India. In the end both Pakistan and India will be denucleariazed, basically the pre-Cold War status quo would be restored and the great powers would be back to threatening India like they did in 1971. What does India get from this? Baba ji ka thullu?

It would have been another story if we were under some sort of pressure like economic sanction or war, but here we don't face any pressure, and yet the willingness with which Indians recommend acceding to American demands is worrying, on top of that he is an Indian army veteran.

Thirdly, it's not about whether nukes can be built and tested on computer simulators, it's about why we should voluntarily shut down our own options, regardless of whether we test in the future or not? Should we stitch up our nose just because it is possible to breath through the mouth? If a case is being made that signing the NPT wont affect our program even one bit, then why sign at all? and why is the US insisting on getting India to sign it? What benefit does it give us to sign the NPT? even if one admits the flawed assumption that it doesn't hurt to sign us, why should we take any measure which doesn't benefit us? Both the nations which are of concern to us in our neighborhood are nuclear powers already and our adversaries, not to mention, they were propped up by the same US which is sermonizing us on proliferation. Any more nations which are prevented by the NPT from having the nukes will be of less concern for us and the world powers would take care of them even without the NPT anyway.

You think China, which is a signatory to the NPT has stopped its nuke weapon production? Not by a long shot.
The NPT is inherently discriminatory as it allows only a few privileged states to have nuclear weapons while penalizing others. India signing the NPT without an amendment in the NPT is the same as giving away our nukes. Probably @Mikesingh hasn't read the provisions?

We can't sign restrictive clauses in the name of philanthropy. We can have best of both worlds, if we only set our tone right.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,785
Likes
48,227
Country flag
There are three main points here.

Firstly, we can get nuclear fuel simply by diplomatic leverages. No one can pressurize us to surrender our strategic assets in exchange for electricity. We just need to stand our ground. Even a ragtag country like Pakistan is more assertive than us in preserving their strategic assets.
This is not accurate all nuclear transactions are regulated by iaea and NSG. China is willing to violate NPT to arm Pakistan. No one including Russia is ready to do that for India.
Russia has in the past built reactors for India but the fuel is still a problem since even Russia was importing uranium from Australia.
NSG membership would let India do nuclear business with other countries import and export today it is only an importer from specific countries where there are nuclear agreements France, USA, Japan, Russia Australia etc




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
This is not accurate all nuclear transactions are regulated by iaea and NSG. China is willing to violate NPT to arm Pakistan. No one including Russia is ready to do that for India.
Russia has in the past built reactors for India but the fuel is still a problem since even Russia was importing uranium from Australia.
NSG membership would let India do nuclear business with other countries import and export today it is only an importer from specific countries where there are nuclear agreements France, USA, Japan, Russia Australia etc




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not a single poster on the entire thread has suggested that we shouldn't be in the NSG, we are simply suggesting that we shouldn't accept the precondition that we have to accede to the NPT to be in the NSG. We should dehyphenate the NSG and NPT. We shouldn't allow the US to link NSG to NPT since the NPT is tied to the very existence of our civilization.

China was able to violate NPT because at that time, it was in American interest to let Pakistan have the nukes, so they (all the monitoring agencies) turned a blind eye, during the Cold War.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,785
Likes
48,227
Country flag
Not a single poster on the entire thread has suggested that we shouldn't be in the NSG, we are simply suggesting that we shouldn't accept the precondition that we have to accede to the NPT to be in the NSG.

China was able to violate NPT because at that time, it was in US interest to let Pakistan have the nukes, so they (all the monitoring agencies) turned a blind eye, during the Cold War.
Lack of foresight placed India in this position. Without energy no economic growth so there is not much of a choice. China is still violating NPT and not much can be done by anyone.
India has enough fissile material to make more bombs than China and pak combined.
If India is an NPT signatory it may provide an umbrella by other members to protects a signatory nations interests


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,785
Likes
48,227
Country flag
The NPT is inherently discriminatory as it allows only a few privileged states to have nuclear weapons while penalizing others. India signing the NPT without an amendment in the NPT is the same as giving away our nukes. Probably @Mikesingh hasn't read the provisions?

We can't sign restrictive clauses in the name of philanthropy. We can have best of both worlds, if we only set our tone right.
The nuclear deal India signed with USA is even more restrictive than NPT. Look at details of 123 agreement and Hyde act
It incorporates not just NPT also FMCT and
MCTR test ban treaty etc.... India is not a threat to test anymore , basically India gave up a lot of leverage it use to have .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
Lack of foresight placed India in this position. Without energy no economic growth so there is not much of a choice. China is still violating NPT and not much can be done by anyone.
India has enough fissile material to make more bombs than China and pak combined.
If India is an NPT signatory it may provide an umbrella by other members to protects a signatory nations interests


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A law is only as strong as the authority tasked with enforcing it. If China violates its obligations, who is going to police them? More importantly, is China violating it in a way which hurts US interests? no. Great powers aren't irresponsible players. If they allow something to happen, then it is happening with their connivance otherwise the US would have complained about it, at least verbally. Take the example of UNSC. It is in US interest to keep Indian out so they meet up with China and tell them to block it, on the other side Indians are told that the US supports India's entry in UNSC but China is blocking it. The end result is the same, we get nothing and end up blaming only China. Same with proliferation of nukes to Pakistan.

Look at details of 123 agreement and Hyde act
It incorporates not just NPT also FMCT and
MCTR test ban treaty etc.
No. Just the opposite.

Conventional US law prohibits US from doing nuclear deals with non-NPT states. Hyde act creates an exception to that law to permit the US to do a nuclear deal with India which has not signed the NPT. Claims of Hyde act being discriminatory was a CPI and BJP drama when in opposition for domestic political purposes, it has no factual merit. The act itself was an exception to facilitate a deal without making it obligatory for India to sign NPT and it puts restrictions on even the scope of the 123 treaty and it's impact on India. Even Israel wants this deal but hasn't been successful in lobbying for it.

Let me quote :

The framework for this agreement was a July 18, 2005, joint statement by then Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and then U.S. President George W. Bush, under which India agreed to separate its civil and military nuclear facilities and to place all its civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards and, in exchange, the United States agreed to work toward full civil nuclear cooperation with India.
This doesn't place our non-US, non-civil nuclear facilities under IAEA. So, if we have a purely military centrifuge, the international community cannot inspect it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,785
Likes
48,227
Country flag
13 reactors are on military side if I recall correctly. All future fast breeder reactors will be on military side.

Imo India signed the nuclear deal way too early


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
13 reactors are on military side if I recall correctly. All future fast breeder reactors will be on military side.

Imo India signed the nuclear deal way too early


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hopefully we can renegotiate the clauses in the future as our clout grows. Thankfully it's just a bilateral deal between US and India so both of them can get together and change it as and when they want (basically when India has any leverage to get the US to change it). It would have been more complicated had it been an international treaty like NPT with multinational forums involved. Anyway, look at the language of the treaty "India putting civil reactors on IAEA safeguards allows US the legal prerequisite to operate in India", which, by corollary means that if India breaches this treaty then the worst that could happen is the US companies will have to shut their reactors in India, claiming that India is no longer compliant with the rules. If we want to stop an inspection we can simply send them packing, in fact, it will put pressure on American companies since they will have to shut immediately after we refuse to allow inspections by IAEA on any of our facilities.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

Articles

Top