Slashdot Mirror


India Joins Nuclear Market

figona brings news that India will be allowed to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). A waiver was approved yesterday that provided an exception to the requirements that India sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. This means India will be able to buy nuclear fuel from the world market and purchase reactors from the US, France, and Russia; something it has been unable to do since it began nuclear testing in 1974 (which inspired the creation of the NSG). The waiver does not include terms to cut off access if India resumes nuclear testing, but the US Congress drafted a letter stating their willingness to do so. Opponents of the waiver have called it a "non-proliferation disaster."

12 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. Place your bets now! by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How many minutes until Pakistan demands the same treatment?

    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    1. Re:Place your bets now! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      And Pakistan might just get the same treatment India just got, actually. After all, without their help militarily, fighting wars in Afghanistan would be much more difficult.

    2. Re:Place your bets now! by ghoul · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Look the Muslims of Northern India had held power before the British took over. So a section of the Muslim Elite thought when they throw out the British they can go back to being kings. Then they realized in a democracy if people started voting on religious lines the Hindus would always be a majority. These people (the Muslim League) were not willing to base their politics on something besides religion nor were they willing to be in permanent opposition (like the South African Whites party nowadays) so they came up with the brilliant idea of a separate nation for Muslims. It would be like if at the end of Apartheid the whites had demanded a separate white state in South Africa. The people of the two releigions had been living together for centuries and it was simply not possible to just separate them. Some so called Muslim majority areas which went to Pakistan were 51% Muslim, 49% Hindus and after partition the 49% had to just get up and leave. And large Muslim majority areas were there at the heart of India which India simply could not give to Pakistan or India would be reduced to a patchwork like Africa. So partition was imperfect,incomplete and stupid , Pakistan a country based on religion is a stupid idea for the 20th century (BTW that goes for Israel too.) But the partition and the corresponding riots/ethnic cleansing which happened crested a lot of enemity between people of the two religions ( I had an Uncle who stayed on in East Pakistan. He was Hindu but he had been a senior police officer under the British and simply didnt believe anyone could touch him but yup he was killed by Muslims during the riots. The rest of the family left with only the clothes on their backs leaving behind lands and factories) Riots happened on both sides but they were a lot worse on the Pakistani side. This was because Pakistan had declared itself a Muslim only state while India had declared itself Secular and still had large Muslim populations in its heartlands so it couldnt carry out the kind of ethnic cleansing Pakistan did. The result at time of Partition the areas that were Pakistan had a 24% Hindu population . Now its less than 4%. India on the other hand started out with a 18% Muslim population which is now 21%. Just in case if you are wondering whether I hate Muslims I dont My wife is Muslim. What I do hate are the Muslim League and its philosophy which caused the partition and am virulently opposed to any philosophy which says people of different religions cannot stay together. The sad thing is Pakistan having being founded by selfih elites who didnt give a damn how many people suffered just as long as they can grab political power has become a totally unstable and dangerous state. Even though the GDP per capita of Pakistan is higher than India it is skewed horribly. There is a class of feudal lords the Bhuttos, the Sharifs etc who own almost all the land not owned by the Army and win all the elections as if the people dont vote for them they will throw the tenants off their land. Most of the rest of the population are no better than serfs like in Imperial Russia over whom the Feudal politicians hold the power of life and death. The only way out of poverty is to join the Army which has had the unfortunate effect of making the Army the strongest institution in the country. The Army on its part can only maintain its prestige and its budget as long as there are conflicts so they have no interest in peace with India or Afghanistan. The feudal politicians have made a deal with the Army that as long as they keep giving half the budget to the Army they can steal the rest and the people can go to hell. No wonder the desperate people are willing to listen to anything (including Islamic fundamentalism) which promises them a way out of their misery. All in all a very bad situation even without China giving them Nukes to try and hamper India's progress. The only solution I see is for India to reabsorb Pakistan and Bangladesh (Given the much faster population growth that has happened in Pakistan and Bangladesh this would result in a cou

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    3. Re:Place your bets now! by XchristX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only solution I see is for India to reabsorb Pakistan and Bangladesh

      Arre pagal ho gaya hai kya?? Are you fucking insane? India is still very much a developing country with it's own internal issues and problems. You want us to "absorb" a recalcitrant, hostile, genocidal population that is taught to hate before it is taught to read and are ideologically indoctrinated to want our destruction?

      Why? We should keep as much distance between us and them as possible and cultivate better relations with western countries instead, focus more intensely on poverty reduction, reducing oil dependency, infrastructure and the anti-AIDS stuff, beef up our miltary to protect our borders and stamp illegal immigration from Nepal and B'Desh, and all that (imagine shouldering those burdens for the starving millions in B'Desh, there are enough of our brothers starving on our own soil).

      Pakistan won't last long anyway. Already, East Pakistan broke away, Waziristan declared independence just a few years ago and Balochistan insurgency is in full swing after Nawaab Akbar Bugti has been declared a Shiite "Shaheed' (Islamic martyr) after the Sunni-dominated Pakistan army assassinated him. The Muttahida Qaumi movement is rising in Sindh. Now that Musharraf the dictator is out of the picture they will hold "democratic" (ie staged) referendum, effectively "elect" (ie dragoon) a bunch of Islamic nutters to power like they did with Nawaz Sharif, and start blowing each other up with renewed intensity. India cannot afford to deal with THAT can of worms. Let Pak be America's problem, and Bangladesh remain the royal shithole that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party made it into. We should focus on developing our own country into a stronger and more prosperous nation.

      Empire building==bad idea.
      Nation building==good idea.

      --
      l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
  2. India already has nukes by iNaya · · Score: 5, Informative

    Any danger the arsenal represents probably wouldn't even double if it increased 100 fold. Nuclear fuel is something the world needs right now, if all the hype about global warming is as bad as they say it is. Not only that, but cheaper nuclear fuel -> cheaper power -> better economy -> less poverty.

    --
    The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  3. Re:My government is hypocritical by iNaya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Indians don't go around chanting "Death to America" for starters, nor do they have a crazy self-indulging senseless control freak for the head of their government. India has a tendency to honour international agreements, while the DPRK tends to flout them over and over again.

    Besides, anyone has a right to sell something (or not) to someone for whatever reason they have. If I decide I don't want the USA to have any of my little pink bunnies, while letting the UK have them, what's wrong with that? My decision.

    --
    The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  4. Re:My government is hypocritical by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Err, what?

    India has had nuclear weaponry since the 1960's (or '70s?). Iran probably doesn't have a nuclear weapon, and North Korea may or may not have one.

    Besides, when given a choice between a relatively peaceful nation that already has nuclear weapons (and the means to deliver them), and arguably hostile regimes who are trying to lay hands on one?

    In short - you must be joking, man.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  5. Not just about proliferation by oiron · · Score: 5, Informative

    People in the US especially seem to think of India in terms of snake charmers and cheap IT, forgetting that we are the second largest nation on earth, with genuine security concerns.

    With China sitting to our east and making noises (usually, very loud noises) and a particularly unstable Pakistan to the west who got most of their nuclear tech from China, we really don't have a choice.

    Besides which, far too many other pieces of tech cannot be sold to India because they may kinda sorta have some possible application in one corner of the fine art of nuclear weapons manufacture. This can finally stop now.

    Finally, the whole deal means that we can now start having safety equipment for our nuclear program, which we haven't been able to obtain for years now.

    Anyway, you probably don't know the amount of flak the government has taken over this deal... There's talk from lots of sides about "selling our sovereignty", because there will now be periodic inspections of all nuclear facilities by the IAEA.

    Anyway, Arbitrarily restricting possession of nuclear weapons to those nations that tested before 1967 is not exactly a solid foundation for the NPT. It should have been quite blindingly obvious right back then that several nations, even reasonably stable ones, would have severe reservations about such an imbalanced treaty.

  6. Re:Why Is India Not a Signatory? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because the NPT is a biased treaty of HAVES and HAVE NOTS. It basically says that the countries that HAVE nuclear weapons can continue to have them forever and those that don't can never have them forever, thereby creating a hierarchy of powers. India rejects this as highly discriminatory and wants a world where all nuclear weapons are eliminated. Since that sounds impossible, India went ahead with its nuclear program to defend against its neighbours like China and Pakistan.

  7. Re:Sweet! I'll take 5 by Joebert · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hi friend

    we are having nuclears for the cheapest prices
    please telling us number of many you like

    warm regards,
    Praktah Andgambl

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  8. Re:My government is hypocritical by iNaya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been almost everywhere in South and East Asia. Never been Europe or the Americas though, maybe they shout "Death to America" over there...

    I can see no reason why a news organisation would show people in the Middle East shouting death to America, but wouldn't show it if it happened in India. I'm pretty sure it would. It would certainly be a lot more interesting if it happened in India.

    But Indians seem more concerned with their internal problems and the cause, rather than concerning themselves with whether it was something the Americans/Europeans did. Which is a complex which occurs a lot in China (generally the newspapers / commentators) and Korea (generally random protests).

    And yes I've been to India, Korea and China. All for reasonable amounts of time (over a year each). I have also met a great deal of Iranians, none of whom wished death to America.

    And I've never ever seen any Western recorded footage of people in Iran shouting "Death to America", perhaps you should look up the facts of that incident. It was a country wide chant, and it was recorded officially by various Arab channels. It's their government that's crazy, but the Iranians I've met seem much more friendly than most Americans I've met.

    --
    The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  9. Re:India does not need to buy anything by bheer · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problem with Thorium is that it's a decade or two away from commercial use. India needs power NOW. And oh, they aren't mothballing their Thorium programme -- if anything progress has been good.