[Reader-list] US-India Nuclear Agreement - Still a Bad Deal

[radhikarajen at vsnl.net]

When a lame duck prime minister and governance by UPA which is struggling to cobble numbers to remain in power at any cost by appeasing regional satraps who have their own agendas of loots, likes of lalu in chara gotala, Devegowda which has the land mafia with him, TR Balu and raja selling spectrum for their gains as exposed in media, PM who is heading a minority government has no moral rights to mortgage the national interest to please his world bank boss, Bush, and gain kickbacks for his madam Sonia.

 It may also be noted that the spokespersons of Congress likes of Moily and Poojary also, Jayanthi have been discarded by thier own communes of votebanks, lost all elections and have been courtesans in the court by virtue of being court jesters to madam Sonia,?

 Regards.

----- Original Message -----
From: Anivar Aravind <anivar.aravind at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2008 10:29 pm
Subject: [Reader-list] US-India Nuclear Agreement - Still a Bad Deal
To: reader-list at sarai.net, fourth-estate-critique at googlegroups.com

> 
> From: 	SANSAD <sansad at sansad.org>
> 
> As a constituent of US-India Working Group of Abolition 2000, 
> SANSAD is
> pleased to disseminate this Media Release. Once again, we urge the
> Canadian government (a member of Board of Governors of the 
> InternationalAtomic Energy Agency, as well as of the Nuclear 
> Suppliers Group) to not
> support the highly problematic US-India Nuclear Deal.
> 
> sansad
> *******************
> 
> Media Release
> July 8, 2008
> 
> US-India Nuclear Agreement - Still a Bad Deal:
> Global Network of NGOs Urge International Community to Oppose
> 
> The US-India Deal Working Group of Abolition 2000, a global 
> network of
> over 2000 organizations in more than 90 countries working for a global
> treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons, says that pressure to rush a
> decision on the US-India Nuclear Agreement must be resisted.
> 
> The organizations are calling upon key governments "to play an active
> role in supporting measures that would ensure this controversial
> proposal does not: further undermine the nuclear safeguards system and
> efforts to prevent the proliferation of technologies that may be 
> used to
> produce nuclear bomb material," or "in any way contribute to the
> expansion of India's nuclear arsenal."
> 
> This week, in defiance of opposition from Left Parties on whose 
> supportit depends, the Indian government is expected to circulate 
> a draft
> nuclear Safeguards Agreement to the Board of Governors of the
> International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In doing so, it set in 
> motionthe remaining steps required to operationalize the US-India 
> bilateralnuclear agreement (known as the "123 Agreement" after the 
> relevantclause in the US Atomic Energy Act). Besides the 
> Safeguards Agreement,
> the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) must grant India a special
> exemption from its nuclear trade guidelines and finally the US 
> Congressmust accept the terms of the "123 Agreement".
> 
> It took two years from the July 2005 Joint Statement by Prime Minister
> Singh and President Bush until the text of the "123 Agreement" was
> finalized and nearly a year has elapsed since then. After delaying for
> so long, the decision at this time by the Indian government to 
> send the
> draft Safeguards Agreement to the IAEA Board of Governors has more 
> to do
> with the personal pride of Prime Minister Singh than with any 
> changes in
> national or international circumstances. It appears that Mr Singh is
> more concerned about keeping faith with President Bush than the 
> chancesthat the deal might actually be concluded. Most political 
> commentators,including proponents of the deal within the US 
> government and Congress,
> believe that the required steps cannot be completed during the 
> life of
> the Bush Administration. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the
> next President will wish to proceed with the deal in its current form.
> 
> The US-India Nuclear Agreement was a bad deal when it was originally
> conceived and nothing has changed to redeem it since then. All the
> problems identified in a letter sent to the NSG and the IAEA by 
> 130 NGOs
> and experts in January this year still remain. See the following link
> for the text of and list of signatories of the international letter:
> 
> _http://cnic.jp/english/topics/plutonium/proliferation/usindiafiles/nsgiaea7jan08.html_
> _
> _
> The deal effectively grants India the privileges of nuclear weapons
> states (NWS), despite the fact that India developed nuclear weapons
> outside the NPT regime. It doesn't even require India to accept 
> the same
> responsibilities as other states: full-scope IAEA safeguards for 
> non-NWS
> and a commitment from NWS to negotiate in good faith for the 
> eliminationof nuclear weapons.
> 
> The IAEA and NSG must not to be stampeded into making decisions to fit
> in with an unrealistic political time-table. The 35 countries
> represented on the IAEA Board of Governors must consider the 
> possibilitythat special conditions demanded by India could 
> undermine the
> credibility of the IAEA safeguards system itself. They must also
> consider whether undertakings made by a government at the fag end 
> of its
> tenure and facing strong domestic opposition would actually be 
> honored.The NSG must consider the implications for the international
> non-proliferation regime of granting India a special exemption. These
> are weighty matters which should not be judged precipitously.
> 
> The IAEA Board of Governors and the Nuclear Suppliers Group of 
> countriesshould, as a minimum condition, hold firm to the longstanding
> international effort to end all production of highly enriched uranium
> and plutonium to make nuclear weapons. They should insist that the
> U.S.-India deal be conditioned on an end to further production of
> fissile materials for weapons purposes in South Asia.
> 
> Contacts
> JAPAN (English and Japanese)
> _Tokyo:_ Philip White, Coordinator, Abolition 2000 US-India Deal 
> WorkingGroup +81-3-3357-3800
> _Toyako G8 Summit_: Akira Kawasaki, Peace Boat, 090-8310-5370,
> kawasaki at peaceboat.gr.jp
> INDIA: Sukla Sen, National Coordination Committee Member, 
> Coalition for
> Nuclear Disarmament and Peace +91-22-6553-4377
> UNITED STATES: Daryl Kimball, Director, Arms Control Association,
> +1-202-463-8270
> AUSTRALIA - John Hallam PND Nuclear Flashpoints 61-2-9810-2598
> 61-2-9319-4296
> 
> c/- Citizens' Nuclear Information Center, Tokyo, Japan
> Tel: 81-3-3357-3800  Fax: 81-3-3357-3801        Email 1: white at cnic.jp
> Web Site: 
> http://cnic.jp/english/topics/plutonium/proliferation/usindia.html
> 
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with 
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-
> list 
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>