N Deal.......between India and US...will it materialize? Investor Review

FinGad is a Place to Review Strategies With Fellow Investors
Not a member yet?

rajiv's review
Investment Sector: Emerging Markets
Submitted by Rajiv

, An Investor... at Bank Of Baroda....migrating to USA
2 months ago
Add Tag

Vote

N Deal.......between India and US...will it materialize? [ Login to Propose An Edit ]

Freinds,

I just went through a post at othersite which says that what India was thinking about NDeal is not the case.There are many rules and many regulations and if that is the case I am afraid the N Deal will not go through....

I am pasting it here:

Embarrassing revelations on the nuclear deal

September 03, 2008

The Bush administration, through a gag order on its written responses to Congressional questions, had sought to keep the Indian public in the dark on the larger implications of the nuclear deal, lest the accord run into rougher weather. But now its 26 pages of written answers have been publicly released by a senior United States Congressman.

The administration's January 2008 letter to the House Foreign Affairs Committee -- <u>made public</u> by Representative Howard L Berman on Tuesday -- bring out the following:

The US has given no binding fuel-supply assurance to India. The prime minister told the Lok Sabha on August 13, 2007 that 'detailed fuel supply assurances' by the US for 'the uninterrupted operation of our nuclear reactors' are 'reflected in full' in the 123 Agreement. But the Bush administration has denied this. Its letter to the House Committee states that the US will render help only in situations where 'disruptions in supply to India... result through no fault of its own,' such as a trade war or market disruptions. 'The fuel supply assurances are not, however, meant to insulate India against the consequences of a nuclear explosive test or a violation of nonproliferation commitments,' the letter said. The letter also reveals that the US has given no legally binding fuel-supply assurance of any kind.

No US consent to India's stockpiling of lifetime fuel reserves for safeguarded power reactors. The prime minister had told the Lok Sabha on August 13, 2007 that, 'This Agreement envisages, in consonance with the Separation Plan, US support for an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply for the lifetime of India's reactors.' But the Bush administration's letter to the House Committee makes clear that India will not be allowed to build such stocks as to undercut US leverage to re-impose sanctions.

US civil nuclear cooperation is explicitly conditioned to India not testing ever again. The prime minister told the Lok Sabha as recently as July 22, 2008 that, 'I confirm that there is nothing in these agreements which prevents us from further nuclear tests if warranted by our national security concerns. All that we are committed to is a voluntary moratorium on further testing.'

Last year, he had told Parliament that, 'There is nothing in the Agreement that would tie the hands of a future Government or legally constrain its options to protect India's security and defence needs.' The Bush administration, however, has told the House Committee that India has been left in no doubt that all cooperation will cease immediately if New Delhi [Images] conducted a test.

The US has retained the right to suspend or terminate supplies at its own discretion. The Bush administration letter plainly contradicts the prime minister's assertion in Parliament on August 13, 2007 that, 'An elaborate multi-layered consultation process has been included with regard to any future events that may be cited as a reason by either Party to seek cessation of cooperation or termination of the (123) Agreement.' The letter states that the US right to suspend all supplies forthwith is unfettered.

The letter makes clear that the 123 Agreement has granted India no right to take corrective measures in case of any fuel-supply disruption. Rather, India's obligations are legally irrevocable. It further indicates there is no link between perpetual safeguards and perpetual fuel supply. Contrast this with what the prime minister claimed in Parliament on August 13, 2007: 'India's right to take "corrective measures" will be maintained even after the termination of the Agreement.' Or the prime minister's repeated assurances to Parliament since March 2006 that India's acceptance of perpetual international inspections will be tied to perpetual fuel supply.

The Bush administration's letter states that the 123 Agreement fully conforms to the Hyde Act provisions. In a press release recently, the Prime Minister's Office made the following claim on July 2, 2008: 'he 123 Agreement clearly overrides the Hyde Act and this position would be clear to anyone who goes through the provisions.'

The letter assures Congress that the 'US government will not assist India in the design, construction or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies.' That rules out not only the transfer of civil reprocessing and enrichment equipment or technologies to India even under safeguards, but also casts a shadow over the US granting India operational consent to reprocess spent fuel with indigenous technology. Under the 123 Agreement, India has agreed to forego reprocessing until it has, in the indeterminate future, won a separate, congressionally vetted agreement.

On one issue, the 123 Agreement had held out hope for India in the future by stating in its Article 5(2) that, 'Sensitive nuclear technology, heavy water production technology, sensitive nuclear facilities, heavy water production facilities and major critical components of such facilities may be transferred under this Agreement pursuant to an amendment to this Agreement.' But the Bush administration's letter to Congress states that the US government had no plan to seek to amend the deal to allow any sensitive transfers.

Contrast this with what the prime minister said in Parliament on August 17, 2006 -- that India wanted the 'removal of restrictions on all aspects of cooperation and technology transfers pertaining to civil nuclear energy, ranging from nuclear fuel, nuclear reactors, to reprocessing spent fuel.' Lest there be any ambiguity regarding this benchmark, he added: 'We will not agree to any dilution that would prevent us from securing the benefits of full civil nuclear cooperation as amplified above.' Earlier, on August 3, 2005, he told the Lok Sabha that he had received 'an explicit commitment from the United States that India should get the same benefits of civilian cooperation as (an) advanced country like the United States enjoys.'

Dr Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, is the author, among others, of Nuclear Proliferation: The US-India Conflict.

Well,

It is very clear that US do not gives any guarentee for uninterrupted Uranium.USA is not binded by the law that they will give fuel ....besides that there is a clause that if India TEST a nulcear explosion...USA will immidiately stop giving Uranuim and that in no circumstances the PEOPLE OF INDIA WILL GET READY TO TAKE.

If the nuclear deal is going to create 10,000 jobs in US itself and if US feels that they are the natural ally of India as both believes in democracy then US will have to overrule it otherwise with the above article , which is a part of 123 agreement, this deal is definately not going through.....US can't impose rules to go for civil nuclear to India. If this is a win win situation for both and if both countries are to be benifitted then why there are RULES.......

India's SECURITY is at the TOP of anythi ng in the WORLD and not a single Indian will do away with it....India has all rights to do whatever she feels is needed for her defence and that RIGHT INDIA WILL NEVER SURRENDER TO ANYBODY..........I think USA should understand that and think over it.....

Indian N-deal will create 10000 jobs in US: State Dept

Wed, Sep 3 01:55 PM

India plans to import eight 1000 mw nuclear-powered reactors by 2012 and the US hopes to win at least two contracts, which it feels will significantly boost its atomic industry.

The envisaged sale of at least two reactors, to what it calls 'lucrative and growing Indian market', would create 3000-5000 direct jobs and 10,000-15,000 indirect jobs in the US nuclear industry, the US Department of State has said.

"Access to Indian nuclear infrastructure would allow US companies build reactors more competitively here and in the rest of the world -- not just India," it said in answer to questions raised by the powerful US House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Though the replies to searching spate of queries raised by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were delivered in October, 2007, they were made public on Wednesday by the new Chairman of the panel Howard Berman just ahead of the Nuclear Suppliers Group plenary in Vienna to consider a waiver for India from its guidelines enabling atomic trade.

"We are confident that the initiative for a civil nuclear cooperation would yield important economic benefits to the US," the US State Department has told the Congress.

India currently has 15 operating nuclear power reactors with seven under construction, but 'it intends to increase this number significantly,' it said.

The Department's assessment says that meeting this ramp up in demand for civil nuclear reactors, technology, fuel and support services holds the promise of opening new markets for the US.

The US also feels that participation in India's emerging market will help make the American nuclear power industry globally competitive thereby benefiting its domestic nuclear power sector.

"This initiative will permit US companies to enter the lucrative and growing Indian market -- something they are currently prohibited from doing so," it said.

The State Department has listed 15 nuclear-related US firms, including giants like General Electric and Westinghouse who are ready to move to India.

The State department feels that a successfully implemented civil nuclear cooperation initiative with India will allow scientists from both the nations to work together in making nuclear energy safer, less expensive, more proliferation resistant and more efficient.

"Newly forged partnerships in the nuclear field will facilitate scientific advancement in the many facets of nuclear energy technology," it said.

The US also feels that Indian involvement in global for a such as International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor and the Generation-IV Forum can expand the potential for innovation in the future of nuclear energy as well as stake of emerging countries in developing cheaper sources of energy.

US official have also revealed that Washington may choose to allow India to participate in the future in the Department of Energy's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and allow it to collaborate with advanced nuclear technology in developing new proliferation resistant technology.

"Such interaction could only be contemplated subsequent to the civil nuclear cooperation initiative," US officials said.

It is obvious that this deal will do loads of good for US company as well.It will also do loads of good for Nuclear plants co in USA......It is estimated that around rupees 30,000 cr will be invested if the deal goes through and if it doesn't go through then many companies will be loosing an opportunity in USA as well as in India.Indis needs power(nulcear Power for civil use) to grow but not at the expense of its security......

Prez Bush has to rethink it over.

Did you find this article useful?

Add Review to: