<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: HIRC Markup, US-India Nuclear Deal	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 16:55:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Rohit		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-210</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rohit]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 16:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-210</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It seems to me that this whole argument is useless.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You see, laws and agreements are built using some assumptions. Different times dictate different needs. For instance, you think it possible for US to have some sort of Military alliance with Germany in 1939. But today, they are members of NATO.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You may not appreciate the xample, but try to get the theory. When conditions change, you have to change the way in which you will tackle the situation. NPT was formed at a time when there was cold war, and chances of a nuclear war were very high between the USSR and its Allies and the NATO. Today, the situation is nothing like that.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
India is not a threat to most of the countries of the world, and I need not mention that US and europe fall in this category. However, enviornment is, and it is important that India&#8217;s highly increasing energy sector be provided with alternative fuels to decrease the CO2 emmissions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Why should India build nukes if there is low prob of nuclear conflict?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The answer to that is, the chances of a global nuclear war is very low, but a war in south asia is very very high indeed. I dont know if u are ware, but immediately after India and Pak tested their nukes in 1998, We had the kargil war with pak. Just as it was necessary for the US to have stockpiles to detter USSR, we need to have stockpiles to detter Pak and China.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
No amount of treaties can ensure that Pak will not use nukes, aas the regiemes in Pak changes the evry other day.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
And i believe there ahould be no issues rewgarding nuclear profileration due to india.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I hope u understand why india needs nukes now]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems to me that this whole argument is useless.</p>
<p>You see, laws and agreements are built using some assumptions. Different times dictate different needs. For instance, you think it possible for US to have some sort of Military alliance with Germany in 1939. But today, they are members of NATO.</p>
<p>You may not appreciate the xample, but try to get the theory. When conditions change, you have to change the way in which you will tackle the situation. NPT was formed at a time when there was cold war, and chances of a nuclear war were very high between the USSR and its Allies and the NATO. Today, the situation is nothing like that.</p>
<p>India is not a threat to most of the countries of the world, and I need not mention that US and europe fall in this category. However, enviornment is, and it is important that India&#8217;s highly increasing energy sector be provided with alternative fuels to decrease the CO2 emmissions.</p>
<p>Why should India build nukes if there is low prob of nuclear conflict?</p>
<p>The answer to that is, the chances of a global nuclear war is very low, but a war in south asia is very very high indeed. I dont know if u are ware, but immediately after India and Pak tested their nukes in 1998, We had the kargil war with pak. Just as it was necessary for the US to have stockpiles to detter USSR, we need to have stockpiles to detter Pak and China.</p>
<p>No amount of treaties can ensure that Pak will not use nukes, aas the regiemes in Pak changes the evry other day.</p>
<p>And i believe there ahould be no issues rewgarding nuclear profileration due to india.</p>
<p>I hope u understand why india needs nukes now</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Andrew		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-209</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-209</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Anon,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thanks for answering the question.  It sounds like technical and administrative challenges may be the big impediments to expanding India&#8217;s nuclear energy program, not just supply of good uranium.  Still, with increasing energy demand in India and the high global price of oil lighting a fire under the butts of politicians in both India and the Western nations, it seems to me that if this deal goes through, there is a very real possibility of greatly expanding India&#8217;s nuclear energy program.  When political will (domestic and international) and market forces team up to encourage something to happen, it usually happens.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anon,</p>
<p>Thanks for answering the question.  It sounds like technical and administrative challenges may be the big impediments to expanding India&#8217;s nuclear energy program, not just supply of good uranium.  Still, with increasing energy demand in India and the high global price of oil lighting a fire under the butts of politicians in both India and the Western nations, it seems to me that if this deal goes through, there is a very real possibility of greatly expanding India&#8217;s nuclear energy program.  When political will (domestic and international) and market forces team up to encourage something to happen, it usually happens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RT		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-208</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-208</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If Pakistan can convince the P-5 and other stakeholders, then sure. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The point here is that &#8220;arms control&#8221; as defined by the world powers is a function of a country&#8217;s geopolitical clout and international standing. India political clout and its responsible outward proliferation behavior is a key driver for this deal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
OTOH Pakistan&#8217;s reputation today is in tatters and it is known as a paragon of nuclear irresponsibility and a center of global terrorism. Therefore, they are unlikely to be able to convince anyone that they deserve nuclear breaks. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
But if Pakistan is able to make a persuasive argument at the NSG or elsewhere, then good for it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Pakistan can convince the P-5 and other stakeholders, then sure. </p>
<p>The point here is that &#8220;arms control&#8221; as defined by the world powers is a function of a country&#8217;s geopolitical clout and international standing. India political clout and its responsible outward proliferation behavior is a key driver for this deal.</p>
<p>OTOH Pakistan&#8217;s reputation today is in tatters and it is known as a paragon of nuclear irresponsibility and a center of global terrorism. Therefore, they are unlikely to be able to convince anyone that they deserve nuclear breaks. </p>
<p>But if Pakistan is able to make a persuasive argument at the NSG or elsewhere, then good for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: jkelly		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-207</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jkelly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:41:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-207</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@RT&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Question, Pakistan would like a similar deal as the one promised to India.  Do you support this?  They should have a seat at the table too, no?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@RT</p>
<p>Question, Pakistan would like a similar deal as the one promised to India.  Do you support this?  They should have a seat at the table too, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Amit Joshi		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-206</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Amit Joshi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:12:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-206</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Years ago, when I visited India, I was amused to find that on all maps of India in my guidebooks, there was a disclaimer to the effect that India doesnt recognise any of its borders.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Responsible Democracy indeed!&#8221;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
India respects its borders. OTOH, your guide books were printed outside India and do not respect India&#8217;s stated borders (kashmir). It is a legal matter since the Indian Parliament is under obligation to recover all Indian territories lost in war.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Years ago, when I visited India, I was amused to find that on all maps of India in my guidebooks, there was a disclaimer to the effect that India doesnt recognise any of its borders.</p>
<p>Responsible Democracy indeed!&#8221;</p>
<p>India respects its borders. OTOH, your guide books were printed outside India and do not respect India&#8217;s stated borders (kashmir). It is a legal matter since the Indian Parliament is under obligation to recover all Indian territories lost in war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RT		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-205</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:57:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-205</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oh boy. The bash India brigade is here.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh boy. The bash India brigade is here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: damien morton		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-204</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[damien morton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:54:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-204</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Years ago, when I visited India, I was amused to find that on all maps of India in my guidebooks, there was a disclaimer to the effect that India doesnt recognise any of its borders.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Responsible Democracy indeed!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Years ago, when I visited India, I was amused to find that on all maps of India in my guidebooks, there was a disclaimer to the effect that India doesnt recognise any of its borders.</p>
<p>Responsible Democracy indeed!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Anonymous		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-203</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-203</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Andrew, before taking a stab at your question, I should clarify a few things.  According to the US Energy Information Agency, nuclear energy accounts, not for three percent of India&#8217;s total energy consumption, but rather three percent of India&#8217;s total electricity generation.  Since electricty constitutes only a small portion of India&#8217;s total consumption, nuclear energy accounts for far, far, far less than three percent of India&#8217;s total energy consumption.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Nuclear fuel may be a necessary condition for more nuclear-generated electricity, but it will not be a sufficient condition.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, India&#8217;s AEC has had problems meeting its plans and projections.  In 1985 Raja Ramanna, a pioneer of India&#8217;s nuclear program and a key physicist in India&#8217;s 1974 Pokhran test, predicted that India would have an installed nuclear capacity of 10,000 MW by 2000.  (In 1969 Vikram Sarabhai, the father of India&#8217;s space program, predicted 43,500 MW by 2000!)  Today, India has only about 3300 MW.  Problems have included huge cost overruns, in certain instances nearing 200 percent, as well as, shall we say, overly optimistic construction timelines.  And, over the two coming decade, some exisitng reactors&#8212;having lived well past their safe operation lifetimes&#8212;will need to be decommissioned, and will decrease installed nuclear capacity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Second, New Dehli would like to get foreign vendors to build nuclear reactors in India.  Foreign vendors, however, won&#8217;t even think of building in India until New Dehli figures out how it would insure these facilities (the private sector, especially banks, won&#8217;t do it), and deal with a host of liability issues.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I&#8217;m not saying that the Indians can&#8217;t figure all of this out.  I&#8217;m just saying it&#8217;s not going to be as easy as people might think.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andrew, before taking a stab at your question, I should clarify a few things.  According to the US Energy Information Agency, nuclear energy accounts, not for three percent of India&#8217;s total energy consumption, but rather three percent of India&#8217;s total electricity generation.  Since electricty constitutes only a small portion of India&#8217;s total consumption, nuclear energy accounts for far, far, far less than three percent of India&#8217;s total energy consumption.</p>
<p>Nuclear fuel may be a necessary condition for more nuclear-generated electricity, but it will not be a sufficient condition.  </p>
<p>First, India&#8217;s AEC has had problems meeting its plans and projections.  In 1985 Raja Ramanna, a pioneer of India&#8217;s nuclear program and a key physicist in India&#8217;s 1974 Pokhran test, predicted that India would have an installed nuclear capacity of 10,000 MW by 2000.  (In 1969 Vikram Sarabhai, the father of India&#8217;s space program, predicted 43,500 MW by 2000!)  Today, India has only about 3300 MW.  Problems have included huge cost overruns, in certain instances nearing 200 percent, as well as, shall we say, overly optimistic construction timelines.  And, over the two coming decade, some exisitng reactors&#8212;having lived well past their safe operation lifetimes&#8212;will need to be decommissioned, and will decrease installed nuclear capacity.</p>
<p>Second, New Dehli would like to get foreign vendors to build nuclear reactors in India.  Foreign vendors, however, won&#8217;t even think of building in India until New Dehli figures out how it would insure these facilities (the private sector, especially banks, won&#8217;t do it), and deal with a host of liability issues.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not saying that the Indians can&#8217;t figure all of this out.  I&#8217;m just saying it&#8217;s not going to be as easy as people might think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RT		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-202</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:56:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-202</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Paul,&lt;br /&gt;
&#8212;&#8212;&lt;br /&gt;
inÂ·defÂ·iÂ·nite &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: not precise : VAGUE  : having no exact limits&lt;br /&gt;
&#8212;-&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Give me a date by which you&#8217;d require the NWS to begin disarming for you to accept that the NPT has not been violated.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you don&#8217;t give a date, then it is fair to say that you support an indefinite posession of nukes by the NPT-5.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Q.E.D]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul,<br />
&#8212;&#8212;<br />
inÂ·defÂ·iÂ·nite </p>
<p>: not precise : VAGUE  : having no exact limits<br />
&#8212;-</p>
<p>Give me a date by which you&#8217;d require the NWS to begin disarming for you to accept that the NPT has not been violated.</p>
<p>If you don&#8217;t give a date, then it is fair to say that you support an indefinite posession of nukes by the NPT-5.</p>
<p>Q.E.D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RT		</title>
		<link>https://totalwonkerr.net/2006/06/27/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-201</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:49:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.totalwonkerr.net/hirc-markup-us-india-nuclear-deal/#comment-201</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Anon,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Your ideas are a novel reinterpretation of the NPT&#8217;s goals and fly in the face of the 13 steps that was passed in the 2000 RevCon. Nonproliferation and disarmament are two equal pillars of the NPT. You cannot have one without the other. If you think disarmament is a mere aspiration, you will have to come to grips with the fact that nonproliferation is a &#8220;nice to have&#8221; as well. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most of the NPT NNWS only signed on to the treaty after getting nuclear &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
umbrella assurances from NATO or Warsaw Pact. So much for their noble &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
intentions. They just outsourced their nuclear deterrent. BTW, If the likes of Japan or South Korea do not have nuclear envy then why do they oppose the US-India deal so viscerally. They do so because they volunatrily neutered themselves in the hope of getting status crumbs &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
but see India getting the big prize without neutering itself and by &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
standing on principle.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Anyway, People like you are the reason why some Indians will celebrate the NPT&#8217;s demise because it is patent that you guys are aghast at the prospect of Indians sitting next to you in the high table. Your contempt for India is palpable. But it will matter no longer. The snake oil you guys peddled under the &#8220;arms control&#8221; label is past the sell by date and has no more takers. You guys better find a new career.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I&#8217;ll go drink to that cheerful development tonight.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anon,</p>
<p>Your ideas are a novel reinterpretation of the NPT&#8217;s goals and fly in the face of the 13 steps that was passed in the 2000 RevCon. Nonproliferation and disarmament are two equal pillars of the NPT. You cannot have one without the other. If you think disarmament is a mere aspiration, you will have to come to grips with the fact that nonproliferation is a &#8220;nice to have&#8221; as well. </p>
<p>Most of the NPT NNWS only signed on to the treaty after getting nuclear </p>
<p>umbrella assurances from NATO or Warsaw Pact. So much for their noble </p>
<p>intentions. They just outsourced their nuclear deterrent. BTW, If the likes of Japan or South Korea do not have nuclear envy then why do they oppose the US-India deal so viscerally. They do so because they volunatrily neutered themselves in the hope of getting status crumbs </p>
<p>but see India getting the big prize without neutering itself and by </p>
<p>standing on principle.</p>
<p>Anyway, People like you are the reason why some Indians will celebrate the NPT&#8217;s demise because it is patent that you guys are aghast at the prospect of Indians sitting next to you in the high table. Your contempt for India is palpable. But it will matter no longer. The snake oil you guys peddled under the &#8220;arms control&#8221; label is past the sell by date and has no more takers. You guys better find a new career.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll go drink to that cheerful development tonight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
