India nuke deal : US breaks international law

[tocqueville]

The deal endorses and assists India's nuclear-weapons program. US-supplied uranium fuel would free up India's limited uranium reserves for fuel that otherwise would be burned in these reactors to make nuclear weapons. This would allow India to increase its production from the estimated six to 10 additional nuclear bombs per year to several dozen a year. India today has enough separated plutonium for 75-110 nuclear weapons, though it is not known how many it has actually produced.

The Indian leaders and press are crowing about their victory over the United States. For good reason: President Bush has done what Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and his own father refused to do - break US and international law to aid India's nuclear-weapons program. In 1974, India cheated on its agreements with the United States and other nations to do what Iran is accused of doing now: using a peaceful nuclear energy program to build a nuclear bomb. India used plutonium produced in a Canadian-supplied reactor to detonate a bomb it then called a "peaceful nuclear device". In response, president Richard Nixon and Congress stiffened US laws and Nixon organized the Nuclear Suppliers Group to prevent any other nation from following India's example.

Bush has now unilaterally shattered those guidelines, and his action would violate the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) proscription against aiding another nation's nuclear-weapons program. It would require the repeal or revision of several major US laws, including the US Nonproliferation Act. Nor has he won any significant concessions from India. India refuses to agree to end its production of nuclear-weapons material, something the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China have already done.

This is where Bush is likely to run into trouble. Republicans and Democrats in the US Congress are deeply concerned about the deal and the way it was crafted. Keeping with the Bush administration's penchant for secrecy, the deal was cooked by a handful of senior officials (one of whom is now a lobbyist for the Indian government) and never reviewed by the departments of State, Defense or Energy before it was announced with a champagne toast by Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Congress was never consulted. Republican committee staff say the first members heard about it was when the fax announcing the deal came into their offices. Worse, for the president, this appears to be another give away to a foreign government at the expense of US national-security interests.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HC04Df03.html

[Disturbed]

1. Doesn't everyone know by now...

that King George does what his Multi-National Masters tell him to do?

Congress has no power. They sold it to the lowest bidder.

[malaise]

2. So what's new? n/t

[Rabrrrrrr]

3. So this is, what, the 20th impeachable act of treason by our asshole?

[rodeodance]

4. the past does not matter for Bush.

.....The Indian leaders and press are crowing about their victory over the United States. For good reason: President Bush has done what Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and his own father refused to do - break US and international law to aid India's nuclear-weapons program. In 1974, India cheated on its agreements with the United States and other nations to do what Iran is accused of doing now: using a peaceful nuclear energy program to build a nuclear bomb. India used plutonium produced in a Canadian-supplied reactor to detonate a bomb it then called a "peaceful nuclear device". In response, president Richard Nixon and Congress stiffened US laws and Nixon organized the Nuclear Suppliers Group to prevent any other nation from following India's example.

[Disturbed]

5. Neo Fascist hypocrisy at it highest.

"The comparison between India and Iran is just ludicrous," R. Nicholas Burns, the under secretary of state for political affairs, said Thursday in a telephone interview. "India is a highly democratic, peaceful, stable state that has not proliferated nuclear weapons. Iran is an autocratic state mistrusted by nearly all countries and that has violated its international commitments."

Pakistan is autocratic state where a majoity of the people support al Q and their Dictator has had three assasination attempts on him. His main Nuke Director was selling of Nuke material to N.Korea and Iran. Oh but Pakistan is a Bush Regime ally. The Bush Regime has sold Pakistan a whole lot of non-nuke weaponry. Pakistan country has around 40 nukes.

[pretzel4gore]

6. blackmail....

it's been blackmail from before regan's time. the blackmail was premised on the idea that if we want to improve the lot of the poor/marginalized, the criminal element would be allowed to run amok (damn that miranda!)....every guideline became a limitation-to deny the cops the right to strip search young kids on the street meant psychothugs got to escape arrest conviction cuz their 'rights' were violated in some nudgewink way.....that went on to such things as bussing (great way to turn disinterested citizens into radical neocon rightwingers) and so on. A pattern emerged long ago that a system that could be made better could also be made much worse, using the pretense of making it better....geeb (brother of that 'john ellis bush' guy, aka 'jeb' down in florida) is the natural result; the stock market as a tool for rightwing supremacy and national security as the key to fort knox (??????)...'a fool and his money are easily parted' as the saintly Che (Guevera) once said!

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Think that Congress will cave to this deal the same week as the Ports?

[radfringe]

11. not sure

I think it will be a difficult decision for them - a box of mangos is pretty hard to turn down

enny-whooo - bush* says yes to nukes for India, but no to nukes for Pakistan. My partner was sputtering about it this morning...
and dripping with sarcasm she said...

I don't know why Pakistan can't have nukes. Iran has or will have nukes, Iraq was suppose to have had nukes, North Korea has nukes... and these were/are all countries on that stupid axis of evil list -- so where does that leave Pakistan -- on an AXIS OF LESSER EVIL list?

[FloridaPat]

8. * goes out of his way to send computer and other jobs to India.

He tells the India firms here in the states that he will make sure any law that is passed to stop the job flow, he will stop the law. Now there is talk about lifting the maximum number of overseas programmers that can come into the country to work. THe few jobs I've been on the last 2 years have had 25-75% Indians on them. And now this. Maybe it is blackmail. After all, it was India that traced the $100,000 that was sent to Muhammad Atta a month or so before 9-11. And the FBI couldn't trace where it came to before then. Which is hard to believe.

[tecelote]

9. Somebody needs to follow the money.

I'm sure we were sold out again.

There is nothing else that motivates this Administration.

[TomClash]

10. NPT is finished

if the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons does not want to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

[Marie26]

12. And maybe that's the point - allowing nuclear counterproliferation

They don't like the Non-Prol. Treaty, and so will try to use any & all means to weaken it. Since India didn't sign it, it now gets all sorts of nuclear goodies from the US. This encourages other countries to withdraw & makes the treaty basically worthless.

I think this is all in step w/necon plans. When Bolton left the State Dept. as arms control undersecretary, he was replaced by another neocon named Bob Joseph. Joseph inserted the "16 words" about Iraq buying Niger uranium into Bush's SOTU speech. Joseph also changed the policy of the dept. that deals w/arms control - from "Nonproliferation" to "Counter-Proliferation." Non-proliferation means the US is committed to disarming & ending nuclear & WMD warfare. Counter-proliferation means that the US will keep it's own WMDs, & distribute these weapons to our allies, but will use military means to prevent enemies from obtaining these weapons. He has publicly supported allowing the US to use WMD's itself, or perform a nuclear first strike against our perceived enemies.

He was the founder in 1999 of something called the "Counterproliferation Center." Testifying to Congress, he proudly stated "“We are making progress in improving our ability to strike deep underground targets, as well as in protecting the release of agents . We are revising joint doctrine for the conduct of military operations in an NBC environment (meaning one in which nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons are the weapons of choice), based on the assumption that chemical and biological use will be a likely condition of future warfare.” He also wrote a thesis on "Counterproliferation in the Middle East".

When Bush was elected, he moved into the Ad. as "Special Assis. the President."In 2001, he was in charge of the US's withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missle Treaty. In an October address at Fletcher University, Joseph said: “Counterproliferation must also be an integral part of the basic doctrine, training, and equipping of our forces as well as those of our allies to insure that we can operate and prevail in any conflict with WMD-armed adversaries. Counterproliferation can no longer be a specialty or an afterthought.” (5)

"For Joseph, diplomacy, deterrence, and international agreements are at best weak instruments of U.S. national security. “In the new world we have entered, the only path to peace and security is the path of action,” concludes Joseph—and that action includes the U.S. preemptive use of WMDs."
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/analysis/2005/0506joseph.php

Joseph, unsurprisingly, loves this deal. I think he was probably the motivating force behind it. The "counterproliferation" strategy is to allow India to develop more nuclear weapons. In the twisted neocon mindview, this will act as a check to the Middle East, and allow India to become a valuable partner in using WMD's against our enemies. That's the strategy, & IMO, that's the reason for this deal.

Bob Joseph official bio - http://usinfo.state.gov/is/international_security/arms_control/arms_biographies/robert_joseph.html

Robert "First Strike" Joseph: a Neocon for Nukes - http://www.counterpunch.org/barry06162005.html

Bob Joseph profile -
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1235

2005 State Dept. press release - Joseph praising plan to allow India to develop nuke technology -
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2005&m=September&x=20050909161433ndyblehs0.652508&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html

[TomClash]

14. I wholeheartedly agree with you

An excellent post.

I have long thought that with these "people" in power it is only a matter of time before a US city is "nuked" or destroyed by WMDs.

[OhioBlue]

26. The stupidity of the NeoCons is simply amazing

Counter Proliferation - give me a mother f'in break!

Do they read History??? Just because a country is an ally today does not make them an ally tomorrow. Who knows what the hell the future holds and who may come to power in that Country.

[Marie26]

30. And what's to prevent

our "ally" from selling the technology/weapons to the highest bidder? This is exactly what Pakistan did. And the dual strategy of attacking "enemies" w/WMD's will assure that we are hated around the world, and that those nations will try to amass nukes even faster because of our threat. The "counter-proliferation" strategy is one that allows loose WMD's across the world, and is a recipe for endless war. It may also be a recipe for nuclear war.

I don't understand how these people are so stupid either. A typical neoconservative has a few degrees from U of Chicago or Yale, yet doesn't seem to understand even the basics of foreign relations. They love to play w/war strategies, but have no military experience. It all seems like a war geek fantasy to me. But now they're in a position to inflict their stupidity & arrogance on the rest of us.

[fujiyama]

31. What's to prevent NPT

signatories from proliferating weapons technology?

China has already done so on numerous cases to Pakistan and has helped them in their "civilian" nuclear program.

Plus, there has been no indication that India has ever proliferated nuclear technology. They've had the chance. So far they've proven responsible (moreso than China who has the audacity to call for India to disarm its nuclear program).

[bpilgrim]

13. Our CEO president is just doing what all CEO's do

DICTATE


more...
http://GlobalFreePress.com

peace

[rpgamerd00d]

15. We just won 06. and probably 08.

Thank you, Shrubby!

[Warren Stupidity]

16. NPT died when we invaded Iraq.

The final nails in the coffin of the NPT were driven in by the PNAC-led invasion of Iraq. First, we demonstrated by invading Iraq while ignoring North Korea that if a nation wishes to remain sovereign and independent of US domination, it must have a credible nuclear deterrent. Second, there is an underlying assumption behind the NPT that the nuclear super powers will not exploit their conventional military superiority to achieve unilateral national goals at the expense of smaller nations. Needless to say, our invasion of Iraq, and our concurrent announcement that other nations would be subjected to the same treatment, nullified that assumption. Third, explicit in the NPT is the requirement that the nuclear nations proceed with disarmament, reducing their nuclear arsenals. The Bush Cabal has taken the opposite approach, abandoning all disarmament efforts and initiating new nuclear weapons programs, unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty, thus restarting an arms race, and announcing its intentions to engage in first strike use as it sees fit.

The smaller nations cannot possibly match our conventional military power. If they wish to remain sovereign and independent they can only do so by building a nuclear deterrent if they have the economic and technical ability to do so. Iran is simply the next most likely nation to 'nuke up'. More will follow.

One of the consequences of neocon imperialism will be the first military use of nuclear weapons since world war II. We have made the world vastly more dangerous than it was september 10 2001. Everything has indeed changed, and not for the better.

[doni_georgia]

17. India/Pakistan tumultuous history

When I read about this deal last week, what I was struck by is the rising conflict this will cause. Pakistan and India have a long hatred for one another. Remember all the nuclear tests on the borders a few years back? I have a good friend from Pakistan - he's a US citizen now. He is a very reasonable person except when it comes to anything having to do with India. Any support of India is seen by Pakistanis as an action against them. There will be rising tensions and protests in Pakistan in the weeks to come, and you can mark my words, this deal will aid Al Qaida recruiting efforts in Pakistan.

[IronLionZion]

19. Yup,

I'm Indian, born and raised in the US. Even the most educated doctors, engineers, and scientists in India get bent over Pakistan. It's surreal. They're perfectly rational about everything else, but if you mention Pakistan they get visibly angry and tell you it's time to wipe them off the map once and for all. I'm sure it's the same way in Pakistan. Thank God India has a strict no first use policy and several checks and balances in place.

It doesn't make any sense if you didn't grow up there. It seems ridiculous to an American. But to a South Asian, it seems ridiculous to super-size your extra value meal and disgusting to eat anything without washing your hands before and after. It's cultural.

[indie_voter]

25. ditto.

I am also of Indian origin, born and raised in the US. People just don't understand the depth of mistrust and anger.

A few years ago I was sightseeing in New Delhi, our guide was Muslim from Kashmir, the person driving was Hindu from New Delhi. It seemed to an outsider they were chummy buddies, but man, when one was out of sight of the other, the distrust was amazing.

It was too dangerous to go to Kashmir, I wanted to show my husband how beautiful it is, I went there with my mom & siblings in the mid 70s when it was still safe.

My dad did some refugee work soon after Partition a few years before he moved to the US, the stories he used to tell were amazing.

This latest deal isn't going to help us with Muslims, and I agree it just got easier for bin Laden and his ilk to recruit in Pakistan.

[IronLionZion]

18. 1 billion people require a lot of electricity

India is most definitely the South Asian superpower that can wipe Pakistan off the map several times over. India has way more warheads and missiles and aircraft etc. than Pakistan. Why would they need more nuclear weapons? Think about it.

The nuclear technology is for electricity. India's reactors are pretty old but energy consumption is growing with the population and industrial development. They can't just keep building more big dams and windmills. The big dams they have are really destroying the environment. They need new nuclear power plants.

[formercia]

20. The additional weapons are to counterbalance China

if India were to get into a nuclear confrontation with China, their nuclear arsenal would not be a match.

[Disturbed]

21. "I don't know why Pakistan can't have nukes."

Pakistan is estimated to have at least 40 Nuke Warheads. India may have around 30. It seems that both nations already have enough to destroy each other, doesn't it?

[IronLionZion]

23. Why would India get into any kind of confrontation with China?

No one in their right mind should go to war with China, not even the US.

There's no need.

India and China have 2 very minor border disputes that are not likely to result in warfare. The highest mountains in the world are between India and China so there's not going to be a ground war. And there's no need for an air war either. No one is expecting another war between India and China.

[fujiyama]

28. I don't expect

a direct conflict between China and India, but India is understandably very distrusting of Chinese motives.

For one, China has been helping Pakistan militarily for decades now. Also as you mentioned there are still some border disputes between the two. China is also the only member of the SC which refuses to back India's bid for a permanent seat on the SC (tough I'm not sure how enthusiastic the US is about this).

What especially pisses off India is China's sanctimoniousness and self righteousness regarding nuclear power. China recently called for India to "disarm its nuclear weapons". Such a statement isn't even worth a response. It's easy for China to sign the NPT considering they had a leg up of several years over India in their nuke program and they have a larger military as well.

So until China stops helping Pakistan's military and nuclear program, India isn't going to disarm and sign the NPT. It's just not going to happen. That's why this nuke deal isn't as bad as many are making it to be. It puts several of India's reactors and facilities under some international supervision and monitoring. It also restricts them from using those designated facilities for their nuclear weapons program.

[tocqueville]

29. unless they cheat

"It also restricts them from using those designated facilities for their nuclear weapons program"

they have done that before

[IronLionZion]

32. France was still doing nuclear weapons tests in the 1990's

for no apparent reason.

Ask yourself why the US is sharing nuclear technology with India and no one else, not even the allied state of Pakistan.

The technology is for electricity, which India requires a lot of. As a French person, your should know how much your country relies on nuclear power. Pakistan is the one that proliferates nuclear weapons technology to the muslim world. They have a proven history.

[tocqueville]

33. the tests were done for military purposes

because at that time the French didn't have implemented laser simulation technology. When they did they stopped.

but this is besides the point. I don't deny that India needs peaceful nuclear technology and it's better to have that kind of energy provided by uranium than by coal or other fossile fuels. It's good for electricity, heating and energy craving industry. But that won't solve their transportation problem unless some Indian invents some kind of "back to the future" device.

I just stated that India can on a large scale internal uranium cycle divert plutonium (a residue) to military purposes. Which they couldn't with a few reactors. And as the article points out, they have done that before :

Bush gave in to Indian demands for "Indian-specific" inspections that would fall far short of the normal, full-scope inspections originally sought. Worse, Indian officials have made clear that India alone will decide which future reactors will be kept in the military category and exempt from any safeguards.

The deal endorses and assists India's nuclear-weapons program. US-supplied uranium fuel would free up India's limited uranium reserves for fuel that otherwise would be burned in these reactors to make nuclear weapons. This would allow India to increase its production from the estimated six to 10 additional nuclear bombs per year to several dozen a year. India today has enough separated plutonium for 75-110 nuclear weapons, though it is not known how many it has actually produced.

[Ksec]

22. They get BILLIONS of dollars worth of our best scientific minds and

their technological breakthroughs.

We get Indian mangoes.

Sounds fair in a Repukelican kinda way.

[IronLionZion]

34. We poached german scientists

to start our nuclear and rocket programs. :shrug:

India also sends AIDS drugs and prosthetic limbs to Africa. And they've always been selling us clothing, shoes, soccer balls, etc. It's global trade, get used to it.

And don't underestimate the delicious power of mangoes. :silly:

[TheBaldyMan]

24. now Australia is using it as an excuse to export uranium to India

I posted in LBN about it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2147081&mesg_id=2147081

[jpak]

27. This deal opens up India to US defense contractors as well

They all want a piece of this "peace dividend" pie....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=568117&mesg_id=568184

[FreedomAngel82]

35. So what else is new?