After the US, it is the Canadians and British who are eyeing nuclear power deals in India. Officials from the nuclear power industry of
the United Kingdom and Canada will be here from Monday to talks on the subject.
The two teams are being led by high-profile ministers — British secretary of state for business, enterprise and regulatory reform Peter Mandelson and Canadian minister of international Trade Stockwell Day.
The UK, where no new plants have been built in the past two decades despite 20 per cent of the country’s electricity being generated from nuclear power, has changed its policy recently and is planning more plants. Britain needs to import reactors from France, US or Russia.
The British delegation includes officials from the Nuclear Industry Association, the umbrella group for the industry, Rolls Royce Nuclear, Urenco Enrichment Co, Thompson Valves, Weir Power, as well as representatives from allied academic and legal fields. The Canadian delegation includes officials from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd, nuclear reactor designers, Cameco Corp which is uranium supplier and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear, a nuclear engineering firm.
India’s cooperation with Canada had ended after the first nuclear test in 1974 when it was accused of taking plutonium from the Cirus reactor that it had got from Canada under the “atoms for peace” programme.
However, New Delhi maintained that this was not true. Canada has supported the Indo-US nuclear deal and helped in passing the India-specific safeguards agreement at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
India’s 30-year nuclear isolation ended with the signing of the India-US nuclear deal and the change in guidelines for trade with India by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
US electronics giant Westinghouse and Indian construction firm Larsen & Toubro signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on Friday to set up a joint venture to build nuclear reactors in India. India also plans to award contracts to companies from France and Russia. By 2030, India plans to increase its nuclear capacity 15-fold, to 63,000 megawatts, at an estimated cost of $80 billion.
(Source: The Economic Times of India)
Showing posts with label nuclear diplomacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nuclear diplomacy. Show all posts
Monday, January 19, 2009
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Russia, India advance strategic partnership
Russia President Dmitry Medvedev paid an official visit to India on December 4-5. During his two-day maiden trip to India, Russia and India signed 10 agreements involving cooperation in such spheres as space technology, military, nuclear energy, tourism and financial business, including the deal on the construction of four more reactors at the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Station (NPS), located at Koodankulam in Tamil Nadu, south India. To date, the construction of two reactors has already completed at the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project.
In the field of bilateral trade, Russia and India plan to lift their trade volume to 10 billion US dollars by the year 2010.
President Medvedev has been the first foreign head of state to visit India in the wake of the Mumbai terror attacks. Right after the terror attacks, the Russian government announced that there was no change in Medvedev's India visit plans. This shows the traditional and real bilateral partnership between Russia and India is deep-rooted and profound.
Russia and India are the traditional alliance. Out of their respective consideration of strategic interests, bilateral ties have been warmed up since the mid 1990s. And bilateral relations between the two countries have experienced sustainable, steady growth after Vladimir V. Putin became the Russian president. In 2000, Putin made his first ever visit to India, during which the Strategic Partnership Declaration was signed and the strategic partnership reached a new height.
In the new international situation and particularly with the global financial crisis as a backdrop, President Medvedev's India trip is of special significance. Due to a drastic drop in global oil prices, Russia's oil exports have been negatively affected. Hence, the expansion of the nation's economic and trade ties with India has become the important contents of the new Russian president's first visit to India.
Nuclear technology and military spheres are superior realms of Russia's India trade. In the field of nuclear matters, Russia and India signed an intergovernmental agreement on the construction of four more reactors, each worth 2 billion dollars. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hailed the landmark nuclear deal signed with Russia on Dec. 5th as a "milestone in the history of our cooperation"in the sphere of energy.
Meanwhile, President Dmitry Medvedev, who had signed the agreement for Russia to develop four more nuclear reactors in Tamil Nadu, said: "Today we have opened a new page"in bilateral relations.
Russia's swift conclusion of an accord on the construction of four more reactors is also related to exterior factors. In early October, the U.S. Senate voted to ratify the U.S.-India Agreement for Cooperation concerning Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy. The deal would allow India to buy American nuclear reactors and fuel for the first time in more than 30 years. Under such circumstances, Russia would not be able to enjoy the right for monopolizing India's nuclear energy field. So it takes for granted that Russia will ink the deal with India soon afterwards.
Military cooperation poses a vital link of Russia-India ties. Traditionally, India has been a principal buyer of Russia-made weaponry. President Medvedev has attached great importance to cooperation in this sphere and, during his India trip the Russian president cited military cooperation as one of the most crucial fields in bilateral cooperation. What worthparticular mentioning here is that arms Russia has sold to India is always is the most sophisticated and the quality is much higher than that of those weapons it sold to other countries. It also indicates from one aspect an extraordinary strategic partnership forged between Russia and India.
As a matter of course, there are some differences between the two nations. Citing the problem regarding costs for revamping Admiral Gorshko aircraft carrier Russia sold to India, which remains unsettled, the India found it impossible to accept its refit costs, as Russia has raised or increased the quoted prices by a very big margin.
So, it can be acknowledged that President Medvedev's India trip has continued the bid power diplomacy, energy diplomacy and geopolitics diplomacy prompted or spurred by former Russian President Vladimir Putin. This has indeed deepened the Russian-Indian traditional and real strategic partnership and, beyond any doubt, it constitutes a vital cornerstone of Russia's Asia diplomacy.
Source: People's Daily Online
In the field of bilateral trade, Russia and India plan to lift their trade volume to 10 billion US dollars by the year 2010.
President Medvedev has been the first foreign head of state to visit India in the wake of the Mumbai terror attacks. Right after the terror attacks, the Russian government announced that there was no change in Medvedev's India visit plans. This shows the traditional and real bilateral partnership between Russia and India is deep-rooted and profound.
Russia and India are the traditional alliance. Out of their respective consideration of strategic interests, bilateral ties have been warmed up since the mid 1990s. And bilateral relations between the two countries have experienced sustainable, steady growth after Vladimir V. Putin became the Russian president. In 2000, Putin made his first ever visit to India, during which the Strategic Partnership Declaration was signed and the strategic partnership reached a new height.
In the new international situation and particularly with the global financial crisis as a backdrop, President Medvedev's India trip is of special significance. Due to a drastic drop in global oil prices, Russia's oil exports have been negatively affected. Hence, the expansion of the nation's economic and trade ties with India has become the important contents of the new Russian president's first visit to India.
Nuclear technology and military spheres are superior realms of Russia's India trade. In the field of nuclear matters, Russia and India signed an intergovernmental agreement on the construction of four more reactors, each worth 2 billion dollars. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hailed the landmark nuclear deal signed with Russia on Dec. 5th as a "milestone in the history of our cooperation"in the sphere of energy.
Meanwhile, President Dmitry Medvedev, who had signed the agreement for Russia to develop four more nuclear reactors in Tamil Nadu, said: "Today we have opened a new page"in bilateral relations.
Russia's swift conclusion of an accord on the construction of four more reactors is also related to exterior factors. In early October, the U.S. Senate voted to ratify the U.S.-India Agreement for Cooperation concerning Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy. The deal would allow India to buy American nuclear reactors and fuel for the first time in more than 30 years. Under such circumstances, Russia would not be able to enjoy the right for monopolizing India's nuclear energy field. So it takes for granted that Russia will ink the deal with India soon afterwards.
Military cooperation poses a vital link of Russia-India ties. Traditionally, India has been a principal buyer of Russia-made weaponry. President Medvedev has attached great importance to cooperation in this sphere and, during his India trip the Russian president cited military cooperation as one of the most crucial fields in bilateral cooperation. What worthparticular mentioning here is that arms Russia has sold to India is always is the most sophisticated and the quality is much higher than that of those weapons it sold to other countries. It also indicates from one aspect an extraordinary strategic partnership forged between Russia and India.
As a matter of course, there are some differences between the two nations. Citing the problem regarding costs for revamping Admiral Gorshko aircraft carrier Russia sold to India, which remains unsettled, the India found it impossible to accept its refit costs, as Russia has raised or increased the quoted prices by a very big margin.
So, it can be acknowledged that President Medvedev's India trip has continued the bid power diplomacy, energy diplomacy and geopolitics diplomacy prompted or spurred by former Russian President Vladimir Putin. This has indeed deepened the Russian-Indian traditional and real strategic partnership and, beyond any doubt, it constitutes a vital cornerstone of Russia's Asia diplomacy.
Source: People's Daily Online
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Russia Russia, India to ink deals on arms, space, nuclear power
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's current visit to India is expected to see the two countries sign a number of high-profile deals.
The Russian president arrived in India on Thursday on an official two-day visit to discuss bilateral ties amid the global financial crisis and anti-terrorist efforts in the aftermath of the recent Mumbai attacks that left 174 people dead.
Medvedev is being accompanied by a host of officials and businessmen from various state-run and private agencies and companies during his visit.
Rosoboronexport, the state-run arms exporter, said on Friday it would sign a contract on the delivery of 80 Mi-17 Hip military transport helicopters to the Indian air force.
Russian nuclear power chief Sergei Kiriyenko said Russia and India would sign an agreement to build another four reactors at the Kudankulam nuclear power plant and a protocol on the delivery of nuclear fuel worth $700 million to Indian nuclear power stations. The visit may also see the signing of an agreement for Russia to build new nuclear power plants in the country.
Russia's space agency said Moscow and New Delhi would sign a new document on cooperation in space exploration, which includes plans to send two Indian astronauts to space on board a Russian Soyuz spacecraft in 2013.
Russia's Statistics Service earlier said accumulated Indian investment in Russia totaled $821 million, including $718 million of foreign direct investment. Russia invested $18 million in India in the first half of 2008.
The two countries plan to increase trade to $10 billion by 2010 from this year's expected level of $7 billion, and diversify economic cooperation in the future.
(Source: RIA Novosti)
The Russian president arrived in India on Thursday on an official two-day visit to discuss bilateral ties amid the global financial crisis and anti-terrorist efforts in the aftermath of the recent Mumbai attacks that left 174 people dead.
Medvedev is being accompanied by a host of officials and businessmen from various state-run and private agencies and companies during his visit.
Rosoboronexport, the state-run arms exporter, said on Friday it would sign a contract on the delivery of 80 Mi-17 Hip military transport helicopters to the Indian air force.
Russian nuclear power chief Sergei Kiriyenko said Russia and India would sign an agreement to build another four reactors at the Kudankulam nuclear power plant and a protocol on the delivery of nuclear fuel worth $700 million to Indian nuclear power stations. The visit may also see the signing of an agreement for Russia to build new nuclear power plants in the country.
Russia's space agency said Moscow and New Delhi would sign a new document on cooperation in space exploration, which includes plans to send two Indian astronauts to space on board a Russian Soyuz spacecraft in 2013.
Russia's Statistics Service earlier said accumulated Indian investment in Russia totaled $821 million, including $718 million of foreign direct investment. Russia invested $18 million in India in the first half of 2008.
The two countries plan to increase trade to $10 billion by 2010 from this year's expected level of $7 billion, and diversify economic cooperation in the future.
(Source: RIA Novosti)
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
U.S. Criticizes IAEA For Helping Syria Build Nuclear Power Plant
Washington has criticized the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for helping Syria build a nuclear power station while the country is being investigated for its alleged secret nuclear reactor.
"It is wholly inappropriate, we believe, given the fact that Syria is under investigation by the IAEA for building a nuclear reactor, outside the bounds of its international commitments," Voice of America quoted State Department spokesman Sean McCormack as saying.
The statement was issued following IAEI chief Mohamed ElBaradei's pronouncements that the UN nuclear watchdog will continue technical assistance to Damascus until the accusations against the Syrian government is confirmed. ElBaradei said Syria is entitled to the $350,000 assistance package for building a civilian power reactor under the IAEA rules.
The IAEA is still investigating if a facility in northern Syrian bombed and destroyed by Israeli warplanes in September is indeed a nuclear reactor. Damascus has denied that the facility is a nuclear reactor.
The issue has divided IAEA members with the U.S., France, Canada and the European Union calling for the aid to be suspended while Russia, China and developing countries support ElBaradei's position.
(Source: Gant Daily)
"It is wholly inappropriate, we believe, given the fact that Syria is under investigation by the IAEA for building a nuclear reactor, outside the bounds of its international commitments," Voice of America quoted State Department spokesman Sean McCormack as saying.
The statement was issued following IAEI chief Mohamed ElBaradei's pronouncements that the UN nuclear watchdog will continue technical assistance to Damascus until the accusations against the Syrian government is confirmed. ElBaradei said Syria is entitled to the $350,000 assistance package for building a civilian power reactor under the IAEA rules.
The IAEA is still investigating if a facility in northern Syrian bombed and destroyed by Israeli warplanes in September is indeed a nuclear reactor. Damascus has denied that the facility is a nuclear reactor.
The issue has divided IAEA members with the U.S., France, Canada and the European Union calling for the aid to be suspended while Russia, China and developing countries support ElBaradei's position.
(Source: Gant Daily)
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
India first to get third-generation nuclear power plant
A new era of Russo-Indian nuclear co-operation is about to start. The head of Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom Sergey Kirienko is going to India on Wednesday on the eve of President Medvedev’s first visit to Delhi in early December, when a major nuclear agreement between the two countries is expected to be signed.
The deal provides for the construction of four additional nuclear power units at Kudankulam, in addition to two other reactors that have almost finished construction.
Kudankulam nuclear power station is a joint project of the Russian state-run Atomstroyexport, which supplied two 1,000 megawatt light-water reactors, and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), which conduct the building and assembly jobs.
Its development started in 2002 on the basis of the 1988 bilateral agreement between India and the Soviet Union. The addition to this agreement was signed by India and Russia on June 21, 1998.
The two countries initiated the contract to build another four reactors in February 2008, and Sergey Kirienko said those plans could be realised as soon as the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) lifts a nuclear trade embargo India was under since 1974.
On August 1 2008, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors approved India’s safeguards agreement, and in September the NSG agreed to lift the nuclear trade embargo on the country. Now there are no obstacles left, and NPCIL Chief Shreyans Kumar Jain has said to Russia’s RIA Novosti news agency he hopes the development of another four power units at Kudankulam will start in 2008 or in 2009.
The NSG was founded in 1974 by then main holders of nuclear technologies, in response to India’s nuclear test.
It is a 45-nation body – currently composed of all of the G8 countries, China, Brazil, Argentina, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and others – aimed at reducing nuclear proliferation by controlling the trade in materials that may be used for nuclear weapon development and by improving safeguards and protection on existing materials.
The group decided lifting the embargo on India will not damage the current nuclear non-proliferation regime.
The motion to lift the embargo was proposed by the U.S., and it was the first to benefit, signing a huge civilian nuclear deal with India in October – shortly after sinking the nuclear deal with Moscow, which had been in negotiation for a decade, as a response to Russia’s military actions in the Caucasus in August.
However, India is not a signatory of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but has nuclear weapons, yet does not possess the official status of a nuclear power.
(Source: Russia Today)
The deal provides for the construction of four additional nuclear power units at Kudankulam, in addition to two other reactors that have almost finished construction.
Kudankulam nuclear power station is a joint project of the Russian state-run Atomstroyexport, which supplied two 1,000 megawatt light-water reactors, and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), which conduct the building and assembly jobs.
Its development started in 2002 on the basis of the 1988 bilateral agreement between India and the Soviet Union. The addition to this agreement was signed by India and Russia on June 21, 1998.
The two countries initiated the contract to build another four reactors in February 2008, and Sergey Kirienko said those plans could be realised as soon as the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) lifts a nuclear trade embargo India was under since 1974.
On August 1 2008, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors approved India’s safeguards agreement, and in September the NSG agreed to lift the nuclear trade embargo on the country. Now there are no obstacles left, and NPCIL Chief Shreyans Kumar Jain has said to Russia’s RIA Novosti news agency he hopes the development of another four power units at Kudankulam will start in 2008 or in 2009.
The NSG was founded in 1974 by then main holders of nuclear technologies, in response to India’s nuclear test.
It is a 45-nation body – currently composed of all of the G8 countries, China, Brazil, Argentina, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and others – aimed at reducing nuclear proliferation by controlling the trade in materials that may be used for nuclear weapon development and by improving safeguards and protection on existing materials.
The group decided lifting the embargo on India will not damage the current nuclear non-proliferation regime.
The motion to lift the embargo was proposed by the U.S., and it was the first to benefit, signing a huge civilian nuclear deal with India in October – shortly after sinking the nuclear deal with Moscow, which had been in negotiation for a decade, as a response to Russia’s military actions in the Caucasus in August.
However, India is not a signatory of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but has nuclear weapons, yet does not possess the official status of a nuclear power.
(Source: Russia Today)
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Chavez boasts nuclear cooperation with Russia
President Hugo Chavez said that he was looking forward to signing nuclear cooperation agreements with Russia during an upcoming visit to Venezuela by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
""Atomic energy. Technology for Venezuela. We are going to have atomic reactors, and they'll soon accuse us of building 100 atomic bombs,"" Chavez told a rally of supporters a day after a Russian delegation left Caracas where it prepared for Medvedev's visit.
Chavez said he would sign nuclear cooperation agreements ""for peaceful purposes"" when Medvedev visits Caracas toward the end of November.
""It has to be said,"" Chavez said about his non-aggressive plans for nuclear energy, adding that the only ""giant and infinite atomic bomb"" Venezuela possessed was ""the morale and consciousness"" of the Venezuelan people.
The United States has already slammed Chavez for his arms deals with Moscow.
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was first to propose nuclear cooperation with Venezuela when Chavez visited Moscow in September.
Friday, the visiting Russian delegation of politicians and some 60 businessmen signed with Chavez 15 cooperation agreements in the financial, industrial, mining, aerospace, energy and telecommunications sectors.
Medvedev's visit will coincide with the arrival of a fleet of Russian warships that includes the nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great) for maneuvers in the Caribbean.
It would be the first time that Russian warships sail into the region since the end of the Cold War.
Venezuela and Russia were also due to finalize new arms purchases, including tanks and planes, according to sources from both countries.
They have signed 4.4 billion dollars in bilateral arms deals since 2005, including radars, 24 Sukhoi-30 planes, 50 helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikov automatic rifles.
Chavez on Saturday said Venezuela's alliance with Russia ""has not come easily.
""It cost us a lot, but we're finally getting there,"" he said, adding that both countries have now become ""strategic allies.""
(Source: Tehran Times)
""Atomic energy. Technology for Venezuela. We are going to have atomic reactors, and they'll soon accuse us of building 100 atomic bombs,"" Chavez told a rally of supporters a day after a Russian delegation left Caracas where it prepared for Medvedev's visit.
Chavez said he would sign nuclear cooperation agreements ""for peaceful purposes"" when Medvedev visits Caracas toward the end of November.
""It has to be said,"" Chavez said about his non-aggressive plans for nuclear energy, adding that the only ""giant and infinite atomic bomb"" Venezuela possessed was ""the morale and consciousness"" of the Venezuelan people.
The United States has already slammed Chavez for his arms deals with Moscow.
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was first to propose nuclear cooperation with Venezuela when Chavez visited Moscow in September.
Friday, the visiting Russian delegation of politicians and some 60 businessmen signed with Chavez 15 cooperation agreements in the financial, industrial, mining, aerospace, energy and telecommunications sectors.
Medvedev's visit will coincide with the arrival of a fleet of Russian warships that includes the nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great) for maneuvers in the Caribbean.
It would be the first time that Russian warships sail into the region since the end of the Cold War.
Venezuela and Russia were also due to finalize new arms purchases, including tanks and planes, according to sources from both countries.
They have signed 4.4 billion dollars in bilateral arms deals since 2005, including radars, 24 Sukhoi-30 planes, 50 helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikov automatic rifles.
Chavez on Saturday said Venezuela's alliance with Russia ""has not come easily.
""It cost us a lot, but we're finally getting there,"" he said, adding that both countries have now become ""strategic allies.""
(Source: Tehran Times)
Monday, November 10, 2008
Arabs lament lack of dialogue on Iran nuclear crisis
Arab diplomats complained on Sunday about a lack of dialogue with the West over Iran's nuclear ambitions during a briefing on the crisis by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attended the meeting in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh alongside French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and their counterparts from Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates.
"The Arab countries wanted to be informed of the state of negotiations" between Iran and six major world powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- said an official who attended the talks.
Another participant said the Arab diplomats expressed "deep concerns" at the meeting and complained of "insufficient dialogue" between Arab countries and the six world powers on the standoff over Iran's nuclear drive.
Western nations led by the United States accuse Tehran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons but Iran vehemently denies the charges, saying its programme is solely aimed at generating electricity.
Jordanian Foreign Minister Salah Bashir told the meeting that "the nuclear crisis became a crisis (for the West) but for us the Iranian surge for hegemony has become a crisis," according to the participant who asked not to be named.
Sunni Arab governments like Egypt, Jordan and the six oil-rich Gulf monarchies have repeatedly expressed concerns over what they see as the growing influence of Shiite Iran in the region, namely in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
Iran is under three sets of UN sanctions for failing to heed international demands to halt uranium enrichment but the major powers have offered Tehran technological, economic and political incentives if it suspends the process.
(Source: AFP)
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attended the meeting in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh alongside French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and their counterparts from Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates.
"The Arab countries wanted to be informed of the state of negotiations" between Iran and six major world powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- said an official who attended the talks.
Another participant said the Arab diplomats expressed "deep concerns" at the meeting and complained of "insufficient dialogue" between Arab countries and the six world powers on the standoff over Iran's nuclear drive.
Western nations led by the United States accuse Tehran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons but Iran vehemently denies the charges, saying its programme is solely aimed at generating electricity.
Jordanian Foreign Minister Salah Bashir told the meeting that "the nuclear crisis became a crisis (for the West) but for us the Iranian surge for hegemony has become a crisis," according to the participant who asked not to be named.
Sunni Arab governments like Egypt, Jordan and the six oil-rich Gulf monarchies have repeatedly expressed concerns over what they see as the growing influence of Shiite Iran in the region, namely in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
Iran is under three sets of UN sanctions for failing to heed international demands to halt uranium enrichment but the major powers have offered Tehran technological, economic and political incentives if it suspends the process.
(Source: AFP)
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Senior SKorean official leaves for nuclear talks in US
A senior South Korean foreign ministry official left Wednesday for New York for talks with his US counterparts on North Korea's nuclear programme, officials said.
The foreign ministry said Hwang Joon-Kook, head of the North Korean nuclear issue bureau, would meet Sung Kim, director of the US State Department's Office of Korean Affairs, and other officials during his four-day trip to New York.
"The visit was made at the request of the US government," a ministry official told AFP.
The ministry declined to confirm a report by the South's Yonhap news agency that Hwang may meet Ri Gun, head of the American affairs bureau of the North's foreign ministry, to discuss ways to verify Pyongyang's recent nuclear claims.
Ri, who is in New York to attend an academic seminar, plans to meet US officials, Yonhap said.
"The US asked for consultations with us before and after the planned talks with North Korea," an unidentified official here was quoted as saying.
Washington last month removed North Korea from a list of state sponsors of terrorism saying Pyongyang had agreed to steps to verify its nuclear disarmament and pledged to resume disabling its atomic plants.
But nations involved in six-party talks have yet to endorse a protocol for the hardline communist country to fully verify its nuclear record.
(Source: AFP)
The foreign ministry said Hwang Joon-Kook, head of the North Korean nuclear issue bureau, would meet Sung Kim, director of the US State Department's Office of Korean Affairs, and other officials during his four-day trip to New York.
"The visit was made at the request of the US government," a ministry official told AFP.
The ministry declined to confirm a report by the South's Yonhap news agency that Hwang may meet Ri Gun, head of the American affairs bureau of the North's foreign ministry, to discuss ways to verify Pyongyang's recent nuclear claims.
Ri, who is in New York to attend an academic seminar, plans to meet US officials, Yonhap said.
"The US asked for consultations with us before and after the planned talks with North Korea," an unidentified official here was quoted as saying.
Washington last month removed North Korea from a list of state sponsors of terrorism saying Pyongyang had agreed to steps to verify its nuclear disarmament and pledged to resume disabling its atomic plants.
But nations involved in six-party talks have yet to endorse a protocol for the hardline communist country to fully verify its nuclear record.
(Source: AFP)
Friday, October 31, 2008
Experts Say Next US President Must Deal With Tehran's Nuclear Program
Several American experts say the next U.S. president will have to confront the need to do something about Iran's nuclear enrichment program. They say efforts over the last five years to negotiate with Tehran have been ineffective, with Iran now closer to acquiring the technology to make an atomic bomb. VOA's Ravi Khanna has more on the story.
Tehran continues to defy the West, with Iranian President Ahmadinejad saying Iran has every right to enrich uranium and that it's for peaceful uses. The U.S. and other countries believe Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons technology. The country's repeated missile tests are also a concern.
The next U.S. president will have to deal with Iran's nuclear program, the experts agree.
They say an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would have widespread consequences, because a surgical strike is impossible. Iran's nuclear facilities are believed to be deep underground and dispersed.
Experts also believe U.N. sanctions have not and will not deter Iran.
Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, says Russian and Chinese backing for more sanctions is doubtful.
Russia helped build an Iranian nuclear power plant and has provided Iran with nuclear fuel. China needs Iran's oil and natural gas.
If Israel decides to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, as it did with Iraq, Bolton favors helping the Israelis with military equipment.
"It is risky, it may not succeed fully, or it may not succeed at all. There are undoubtedly consequences that Israel would face," Bolton said. "But I think from the Israeli point of view, and from the American point of view, however deeply unattractive the use of military force is, it is far more unattractive to contemplate an Iran with deliverable nuclear weapons."
But recently, Ehud Olmert, Israel's outgoing prime minister, said the assumption that Israel will attack Iran may not be realistic.
James Phillips at the Heritage Foundation says if the new U.S. president decides on a military option, he will have to answer three questions ahead of time.
"Do we have adequate intelligence to target the key parts of Iran's nuclear program, secondly, do we have the means to destroy those targets, and thirdly, how long a military strike is likely to delay Iran's efforts to attain nuclear weapons," Phillips asked.
David Albright is a physicist at the Institute for Science and International Security. He says the military option is not practical because Iran has several thousand nuclear centrifuges, which can be hidden over a wide area.
"We don't see how you can take out the Iranian program, short of full scale aerial bombardment that will go on for quite a while," Albright said. "There is a risk of pretty widespread war in that region."
Henry Sokolski at the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center prefers a cold war against Tehran even though it might take time.
The new president, he says, should open talks with Iran but widen their scope.
"I would focus on something where you have comparative advantage that Iranians claim they care about," Sokolski said. "They claim they want security guarantees."
Steps to guarantee Iran's security, he says, should be on the agenda.
(Source: VOA)
Tehran continues to defy the West, with Iranian President Ahmadinejad saying Iran has every right to enrich uranium and that it's for peaceful uses. The U.S. and other countries believe Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons technology. The country's repeated missile tests are also a concern.
The next U.S. president will have to deal with Iran's nuclear program, the experts agree.
They say an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would have widespread consequences, because a surgical strike is impossible. Iran's nuclear facilities are believed to be deep underground and dispersed.
Experts also believe U.N. sanctions have not and will not deter Iran.
Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, says Russian and Chinese backing for more sanctions is doubtful.
Russia helped build an Iranian nuclear power plant and has provided Iran with nuclear fuel. China needs Iran's oil and natural gas.
If Israel decides to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, as it did with Iraq, Bolton favors helping the Israelis with military equipment.
"It is risky, it may not succeed fully, or it may not succeed at all. There are undoubtedly consequences that Israel would face," Bolton said. "But I think from the Israeli point of view, and from the American point of view, however deeply unattractive the use of military force is, it is far more unattractive to contemplate an Iran with deliverable nuclear weapons."
But recently, Ehud Olmert, Israel's outgoing prime minister, said the assumption that Israel will attack Iran may not be realistic.
James Phillips at the Heritage Foundation says if the new U.S. president decides on a military option, he will have to answer three questions ahead of time.
"Do we have adequate intelligence to target the key parts of Iran's nuclear program, secondly, do we have the means to destroy those targets, and thirdly, how long a military strike is likely to delay Iran's efforts to attain nuclear weapons," Phillips asked.
David Albright is a physicist at the Institute for Science and International Security. He says the military option is not practical because Iran has several thousand nuclear centrifuges, which can be hidden over a wide area.
"We don't see how you can take out the Iranian program, short of full scale aerial bombardment that will go on for quite a while," Albright said. "There is a risk of pretty widespread war in that region."
Henry Sokolski at the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center prefers a cold war against Tehran even though it might take time.
The new president, he says, should open talks with Iran but widen their scope.
"I would focus on something where you have comparative advantage that Iranians claim they care about," Sokolski said. "They claim they want security guarantees."
Steps to guarantee Iran's security, he says, should be on the agenda.
(Source: VOA)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
UN nuclear chief says Iran blocking progress
The U.N. nuclear chief said Monday that Iran is blocking his watchdog agency from verifying whether the nation has any ambitions for nuclear weaponry.
"I regret that we are still not in a position to achieve full clarity regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran," Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the U.N. General Assembly.
He urged Iran to do more to ensure "transparency," but emphasized the Vienna-based IAEA "does not in any way seek to pry into Iran's conventional or missile-related military activities."
Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee countered that the U.N. Security Council's demand that his nation suspend uranium enrichment is "illegal."
Iran's nuclear program, he said, is only for peaceful purposes and designed to produce nuclear energy and the nation "will never accept illegal demands."
Khazaee also said that the five permanent members of the Security Council — the U.S., Britain, China, Russia and France — plus Germany never responded to Tehran's proposal that they negotiate without preconditions. The six powers have offered economic and political incentives if Iran suspends its enrichment work.
"The policy of few powers in insisting on suspension as a precondition for negotiations bears zero relation to realities and is an irrational and failed policy," he said.
ElBaradei also told the General Assembly in his annual report that he hoped North Korea, which tested a nuclear device two years ago, would return to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty from which it withdrew in 2003 after expelling all IAEA inspectors from the country.
IAEA inspectors were allowed to use some monitoring equipment at North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear complex earlier this month, based on a U.S. deal that revived disarmament negotiations.
"I naturally still hope that conditions can be created for the DPRK (North Korea) to return to the NPT soon and for the resumption by the agency of comprehensive safeguards," ElBaradei said.
On Friday, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the world's nuclear powers to start negotiations on eliminating nuclear weapons and begin talks to assure other nations they will not be attacked. ElBaradei also said it was time to move from resolution to action.
Last month, the Security Council unanimously approved a new resolution reaffirming previous sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program and offering Tehran incentives to do so.
It resulted from a compromise between the United States and Russia to lead a new council effort to condemn Iran's nuclear program, without introducing any new sanctions.
The brief resolution reaffirmed the three earlier Security Council sanctions resolutions, which imposed progressively tougher sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program.
Existing sanctions include an asset freeze on 65 companies and individuals linked to Iran's nuclear program, and a travel ban on five people associated with Tehran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
The sanctions also include bans on Iranian arms exports, supplying Iran with materials and technology that could contribute to its nuclear and missile programs, and on trade in goods that have both civilian and military uses.
Enrichment can turn uranium into fissile material used in nuclear warheads, but it can also be used to generate power and is allowed under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
(Source: AP)
"I regret that we are still not in a position to achieve full clarity regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran," Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the U.N. General Assembly.
He urged Iran to do more to ensure "transparency," but emphasized the Vienna-based IAEA "does not in any way seek to pry into Iran's conventional or missile-related military activities."
Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee countered that the U.N. Security Council's demand that his nation suspend uranium enrichment is "illegal."
Iran's nuclear program, he said, is only for peaceful purposes and designed to produce nuclear energy and the nation "will never accept illegal demands."
Khazaee also said that the five permanent members of the Security Council — the U.S., Britain, China, Russia and France — plus Germany never responded to Tehran's proposal that they negotiate without preconditions. The six powers have offered economic and political incentives if Iran suspends its enrichment work.
"The policy of few powers in insisting on suspension as a precondition for negotiations bears zero relation to realities and is an irrational and failed policy," he said.
ElBaradei also told the General Assembly in his annual report that he hoped North Korea, which tested a nuclear device two years ago, would return to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty from which it withdrew in 2003 after expelling all IAEA inspectors from the country.
IAEA inspectors were allowed to use some monitoring equipment at North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear complex earlier this month, based on a U.S. deal that revived disarmament negotiations.
"I naturally still hope that conditions can be created for the DPRK (North Korea) to return to the NPT soon and for the resumption by the agency of comprehensive safeguards," ElBaradei said.
On Friday, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the world's nuclear powers to start negotiations on eliminating nuclear weapons and begin talks to assure other nations they will not be attacked. ElBaradei also said it was time to move from resolution to action.
Last month, the Security Council unanimously approved a new resolution reaffirming previous sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program and offering Tehran incentives to do so.
It resulted from a compromise between the United States and Russia to lead a new council effort to condemn Iran's nuclear program, without introducing any new sanctions.
The brief resolution reaffirmed the three earlier Security Council sanctions resolutions, which imposed progressively tougher sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its uranium enrichment program.
Existing sanctions include an asset freeze on 65 companies and individuals linked to Iran's nuclear program, and a travel ban on five people associated with Tehran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
The sanctions also include bans on Iranian arms exports, supplying Iran with materials and technology that could contribute to its nuclear and missile programs, and on trade in goods that have both civilian and military uses.
Enrichment can turn uranium into fissile material used in nuclear warheads, but it can also be used to generate power and is allowed under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
(Source: AP)
Friday, October 24, 2008
Poland talks with South Korea about nuclear plants
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak said on Friday that Poland had asked South Korea for help in building its first nuclear power plants by 2012, but Warsaw later said it had not mentioned a firm deadline.
Following a meeting with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Lee said in a statement that Warsaw had asked for Seoul's "strong interest and participation" in constructing two or three nuclear power plants as well as a 440 million euro ($570 million) liquified natural gas project.
The two leaders are in Beijing for the Asia-Europe meeting.
Slawomir Nowak, head of the Polish Prime Minister's office, later told Reuters: "Yes, we did talk nuclear power plants over with South Korea as it is one of the most experienced countries when it comes to nuclear energy, and we are willing to cooperate.
"However, we did not mention any particular deadline. We only said we were hopeful to make a final decision on such a plant and start construction works in 2012."
Poland, the European Union's largest ex-communist member, derives more than 90 percent of its electricity from coal. It has no nuclear power plants and virtually no renewable energy resources.
Nuclear power represents 40 percent of power generation in South Korea, which also has been building six nuclear power generation plants.
South Korea has been trying to sell its nuclear power generation techniques for years, but has not yet been successful.
One nuclear plant would cost $1 billion-$2 billion to build, with France, Canada, the United States and Russia among countries that are capable of selling nuclear power plant techniques.
(Source: Guardian.co.uk)
Following a meeting with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Lee said in a statement that Warsaw had asked for Seoul's "strong interest and participation" in constructing two or three nuclear power plants as well as a 440 million euro ($570 million) liquified natural gas project.
The two leaders are in Beijing for the Asia-Europe meeting.
Slawomir Nowak, head of the Polish Prime Minister's office, later told Reuters: "Yes, we did talk nuclear power plants over with South Korea as it is one of the most experienced countries when it comes to nuclear energy, and we are willing to cooperate.
"However, we did not mention any particular deadline. We only said we were hopeful to make a final decision on such a plant and start construction works in 2012."
Poland, the European Union's largest ex-communist member, derives more than 90 percent of its electricity from coal. It has no nuclear power plants and virtually no renewable energy resources.
Nuclear power represents 40 percent of power generation in South Korea, which also has been building six nuclear power generation plants.
South Korea has been trying to sell its nuclear power generation techniques for years, but has not yet been successful.
One nuclear plant would cost $1 billion-$2 billion to build, with France, Canada, the United States and Russia among countries that are capable of selling nuclear power plant techniques.
(Source: Guardian.co.uk)
Tokyo's nexus with India deepens
Minister Manmohan Singh to Tokyo - his third since he became prime minister in 2004. During his three-day official visit, Manmohan and Japanese counterpart Taro Aso issued a joint statement on the advancement of the strategic and global partnership, but more significantly signed a joint declaration on security cooperation.
It is remarkable that Tokyo has signed such a declaration with New Delhi with which it fell out badly only 10 years ago when it condemned India's nuclear testing in 1998 and imposed severe economic sanctions. The declaration is hugely significant, as India is only the second country after Australia with which Japanhas signed such a declaration outside its security ties with the United States.
This declaration is a comprehensive package emanating from different types of bilateral cooperation and exchanges in defense and security areas occurring in the past three to four years. The package reaffirms the two nations' similar perceptions of the evolving environment in the region and the world at large. It also extends their common commitment to democracy, open society, human rights and the rule of law and their role in promoting peace, stability and development in Asia and beyond.
This is all highly rhetorical and symbolic, but nevertheless important in charting a new course in the relationship. A number of areas have been identified where interests and commitments intersect, including the safety of sea lines of communication, fighting terrorism and pursuing disarmament.
Mechanisms for security cooperation have been spelled out in the declaration that include consultations between the two foreign offices, meetings and dialogues at various levels, defense-level cooperation through meetings of defense ministers, exchange of service chiefs, bilateral and multilateral exercises and exchange of staff and personnel. The declaration also stipulates the two countries develop an action plan for further cooperation.
India-Japan security ties began to warm only recently during the Junichiro Koizumi and Shinzo Abe administrations. But the momentum was lost with the inauguration of the Yasuo Fukuda administration in 2007, which was less keen on India and wanted to focus on China and Southeast Asia. The architect of this declaration is undoubtedly Aso, an India enthusiast, and who in his former capacity as foreign minister was at the forefront of developing and strengthening ties with India.
This new development raises several strategic questions. One that stands out relates to China. Both prime ministers have denied that their rising bilateral interests have any implications for China. Manmohan commented that cooperation with Japan would not be "at the cost of any third country, least of all China". Similarly, Aso observed that "we regard security cooperation with India as very important ... and we do not have any assumption of a third country as a target such as China".
While no immediate comments appeared in Chinese media because Beijing is busy with the 7th Asia-Europe meeting, no matter what Manmohan and Aso might state, it is certain that Beijing will see in the new declaration a strategic design to curb its regional influence.
Only a few years ago when a proposal for a quadrilateral framework consisting of Japan, the United States, Australia and India was advanced, Beijing regarded it as an attempt to isolate and encircle the mainland within an "arc of democracy". Given its troubled ties with Tokyo, Beijing has reasons to be suspicious of Japan's separate security agreement with Australia and now with India.
While Australia has historically been a staunch ally of the US, India-US ties have deepened considerably in recent years and most recently through the signing of the civilian nuclear agreement. New developments in Japan's security ties with these nations will not be taken lightly in the Chinese strategic community. Although the quadrilateral process is on the backburner, Japan's alliance with the United States and its new security ties, no matter how loose, with Australia and India sends the signal of a new security order in the region.
How fast the broken lines existing through bilateral and trilateral security processes between Japan, the US, Australia and India will be joined together and in what shape and form will largely depend on the priority that the new administration in Washington will attach to this issue. Additionally, both India and Japan are heading for general elections. While it seems certain that there will be a new prime minister in New Delhi next year, the future of Aso depends on how his party performs at the general election.
Civilian nuclear cooperation
While cooperation in security and defense added a new chapter in the bilateral relationship, India's desire for civilian nuclear cooperation with Japan remains unfulfilled. Although Japan reluctantly supported India's case at the Nuclear Suppliers' Group, Tokyo is hesitant to cooperate with India in the civilian nuclear area. Japan possesses state-of-the-art technology in the field and it generates about one-third of its electricity through the existing 55 nuclear power plants. It is well placed to help India meet its much-required energy needs both through technology and finance.
Despite the US-India civilian nuclear technology agreement and strong support from the Japanese business community and some strategic thinkers in Japan, the Japanese government is reluctant to talk about such a deal due to strong domestic opposition from civic groups and anti-nuclear lobbyists. It is not difficult to appreciate domestic opposition as hundreds of thousands of Japanese were victims of nuclear bombings during World War II and some still suffer the consequences.
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) acts cautiously and pragmatically over such controversial issues as nuclear cooperation, especially when its own political future remains uncertain. A general election is likely to be called soon in Japan and the LDP's electoral fortune hangs in the balance, although currently it enjoys a solid majority in the Lower House. That's why Aso reiterated Japan's long-held position that India become signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
The Japanese side understands India's position on why it has refused to sign and ratify these treaties, and the Indian side also acknowledges Japan's position on the issue. When discussing this matter with his counterpart, Manmohan stated that India was willing to wait until Japan was ready to take it (cooperation in civilian nuclear technology) forward.
Economic ties: Mixed signals
While political and strategic ties have strengthened considerably in recent years, bilateral trade and Japanese investment in India still remain at a relatively low level, compared to other bilateral trade figures that Japan and India have achieved with their major partners. Prospects of high growth are not very strong. Even the two-way trade target of $20 billion annually by 2010 looks unachievable, given that the current level of bilateral trade stands at about $10 billion. The current global financial turmoil is also likely to slow down economic activities of both nations.
Furthermore, the much-discussed economic partnership agreement for which several rounds of negotiations have been carried out in the past two years could not be brought to a conclusion. The two sides were unable to reach agreement on how to lower trade barriers to both sides' satisfaction. Nevertheless the two leaders have agreed to continue working on it, but no deadline has been set.
The silver lining was an announcement that Japan will provide some 450 billion yen ($4.6 billion) worth of loans as part of Japan's official development assistance (ODA) to India to help it build a Mumbai-Delhi freight rail connection. This is Japan's largest package ever granted to a single project. Recently India has become Japan's largest overseas aid destination, replacing China, that long occupied this status.
India was the first recipient of Japan's ODA in 1958, but Japan's shifting focus on Southeast Asia and later on China took its attention away from India. This is now changing. In an environment where Japan's aid budget is shrinking - making Japan the fifth-largest donor in the world today from number one in the late 1990s, Japan's commitment to fund India's critical infrastructure is as much an economic decision as strategic and political.
Economically, Japan sees business opportunities in a rising economy that India symbolizes. Politically and strategically, it is largely a balancing act. Japan poured billions and billions of dollars into China in the 1980s and 1990s as part of its ODA that helped develop infrastructure in China. But Japan received very little kudos for its generosity. On the other hand, India has expressed great appreciation for such assistance. In the joint declaration issued in Tokyo, the Indian prime minister acknowledged the assistance of "the Japanese people for their generous role in India’s development".
Japan-India ties have travelled a somewhat unique trajectory. Conventional wisdom tells us that strong economic and trade ties lead to greater political and security ties. This was most definitely the case with Japan's relations with Australia. Sometimes trade ties develop strongly but political relations remain fragile, as in the case of Japan and China or Japan and South Korea.
Japan-India economic and trade ties remained static for many years and have grown slowly in recent years, but the pace of political and strategic relations has moved much faster than economic ties. Whether or not Japan-India ties "will be the most important bilateral relationship in the world", as Shinzo Abe once described, it is most definitely the case that an important new chapter has been added to the relationship through Manmohan's visit to Tokyo, although much is required to give substance to declarations and agreements. These will happen only slowly and gradually, not with a big bang.
(Source: Asia Times Online)
It is remarkable that Tokyo has signed such a declaration with New Delhi with which it fell out badly only 10 years ago when it condemned India's nuclear testing in 1998 and imposed severe economic sanctions. The declaration is hugely significant, as India is only the second country after Australia with which Japanhas signed such a declaration outside its security ties with the United States.
This declaration is a comprehensive package emanating from different types of bilateral cooperation and exchanges in defense and security areas occurring in the past three to four years. The package reaffirms the two nations' similar perceptions of the evolving environment in the region and the world at large. It also extends their common commitment to democracy, open society, human rights and the rule of law and their role in promoting peace, stability and development in Asia and beyond.
This is all highly rhetorical and symbolic, but nevertheless important in charting a new course in the relationship. A number of areas have been identified where interests and commitments intersect, including the safety of sea lines of communication, fighting terrorism and pursuing disarmament.
Mechanisms for security cooperation have been spelled out in the declaration that include consultations between the two foreign offices, meetings and dialogues at various levels, defense-level cooperation through meetings of defense ministers, exchange of service chiefs, bilateral and multilateral exercises and exchange of staff and personnel. The declaration also stipulates the two countries develop an action plan for further cooperation.
India-Japan security ties began to warm only recently during the Junichiro Koizumi and Shinzo Abe administrations. But the momentum was lost with the inauguration of the Yasuo Fukuda administration in 2007, which was less keen on India and wanted to focus on China and Southeast Asia. The architect of this declaration is undoubtedly Aso, an India enthusiast, and who in his former capacity as foreign minister was at the forefront of developing and strengthening ties with India.
This new development raises several strategic questions. One that stands out relates to China. Both prime ministers have denied that their rising bilateral interests have any implications for China. Manmohan commented that cooperation with Japan would not be "at the cost of any third country, least of all China". Similarly, Aso observed that "we regard security cooperation with India as very important ... and we do not have any assumption of a third country as a target such as China".
While no immediate comments appeared in Chinese media because Beijing is busy with the 7th Asia-Europe meeting, no matter what Manmohan and Aso might state, it is certain that Beijing will see in the new declaration a strategic design to curb its regional influence.
Only a few years ago when a proposal for a quadrilateral framework consisting of Japan, the United States, Australia and India was advanced, Beijing regarded it as an attempt to isolate and encircle the mainland within an "arc of democracy". Given its troubled ties with Tokyo, Beijing has reasons to be suspicious of Japan's separate security agreement with Australia and now with India.
While Australia has historically been a staunch ally of the US, India-US ties have deepened considerably in recent years and most recently through the signing of the civilian nuclear agreement. New developments in Japan's security ties with these nations will not be taken lightly in the Chinese strategic community. Although the quadrilateral process is on the backburner, Japan's alliance with the United States and its new security ties, no matter how loose, with Australia and India sends the signal of a new security order in the region.
How fast the broken lines existing through bilateral and trilateral security processes between Japan, the US, Australia and India will be joined together and in what shape and form will largely depend on the priority that the new administration in Washington will attach to this issue. Additionally, both India and Japan are heading for general elections. While it seems certain that there will be a new prime minister in New Delhi next year, the future of Aso depends on how his party performs at the general election.
Civilian nuclear cooperation
While cooperation in security and defense added a new chapter in the bilateral relationship, India's desire for civilian nuclear cooperation with Japan remains unfulfilled. Although Japan reluctantly supported India's case at the Nuclear Suppliers' Group, Tokyo is hesitant to cooperate with India in the civilian nuclear area. Japan possesses state-of-the-art technology in the field and it generates about one-third of its electricity through the existing 55 nuclear power plants. It is well placed to help India meet its much-required energy needs both through technology and finance.
Despite the US-India civilian nuclear technology agreement and strong support from the Japanese business community and some strategic thinkers in Japan, the Japanese government is reluctant to talk about such a deal due to strong domestic opposition from civic groups and anti-nuclear lobbyists. It is not difficult to appreciate domestic opposition as hundreds of thousands of Japanese were victims of nuclear bombings during World War II and some still suffer the consequences.
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) acts cautiously and pragmatically over such controversial issues as nuclear cooperation, especially when its own political future remains uncertain. A general election is likely to be called soon in Japan and the LDP's electoral fortune hangs in the balance, although currently it enjoys a solid majority in the Lower House. That's why Aso reiterated Japan's long-held position that India become signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
The Japanese side understands India's position on why it has refused to sign and ratify these treaties, and the Indian side also acknowledges Japan's position on the issue. When discussing this matter with his counterpart, Manmohan stated that India was willing to wait until Japan was ready to take it (cooperation in civilian nuclear technology) forward.
Economic ties: Mixed signals
While political and strategic ties have strengthened considerably in recent years, bilateral trade and Japanese investment in India still remain at a relatively low level, compared to other bilateral trade figures that Japan and India have achieved with their major partners. Prospects of high growth are not very strong. Even the two-way trade target of $20 billion annually by 2010 looks unachievable, given that the current level of bilateral trade stands at about $10 billion. The current global financial turmoil is also likely to slow down economic activities of both nations.
Furthermore, the much-discussed economic partnership agreement for which several rounds of negotiations have been carried out in the past two years could not be brought to a conclusion. The two sides were unable to reach agreement on how to lower trade barriers to both sides' satisfaction. Nevertheless the two leaders have agreed to continue working on it, but no deadline has been set.
The silver lining was an announcement that Japan will provide some 450 billion yen ($4.6 billion) worth of loans as part of Japan's official development assistance (ODA) to India to help it build a Mumbai-Delhi freight rail connection. This is Japan's largest package ever granted to a single project. Recently India has become Japan's largest overseas aid destination, replacing China, that long occupied this status.
India was the first recipient of Japan's ODA in 1958, but Japan's shifting focus on Southeast Asia and later on China took its attention away from India. This is now changing. In an environment where Japan's aid budget is shrinking - making Japan the fifth-largest donor in the world today from number one in the late 1990s, Japan's commitment to fund India's critical infrastructure is as much an economic decision as strategic and political.
Economically, Japan sees business opportunities in a rising economy that India symbolizes. Politically and strategically, it is largely a balancing act. Japan poured billions and billions of dollars into China in the 1980s and 1990s as part of its ODA that helped develop infrastructure in China. But Japan received very little kudos for its generosity. On the other hand, India has expressed great appreciation for such assistance. In the joint declaration issued in Tokyo, the Indian prime minister acknowledged the assistance of "the Japanese people for their generous role in India’s development".
Japan-India ties have travelled a somewhat unique trajectory. Conventional wisdom tells us that strong economic and trade ties lead to greater political and security ties. This was most definitely the case with Japan's relations with Australia. Sometimes trade ties develop strongly but political relations remain fragile, as in the case of Japan and China or Japan and South Korea.
Japan-India economic and trade ties remained static for many years and have grown slowly in recent years, but the pace of political and strategic relations has moved much faster than economic ties. Whether or not Japan-India ties "will be the most important bilateral relationship in the world", as Shinzo Abe once described, it is most definitely the case that an important new chapter has been added to the relationship through Manmohan's visit to Tokyo, although much is required to give substance to declarations and agreements. These will happen only slowly and gradually, not with a big bang.
(Source: Asia Times Online)
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Big-Power Diplomats Discuss Iran Nuclear Issue
Senior diplomats of the five permanent U.N. Security Council member countries and Germany, the P5+1, conferred by telephone Monday on next steps in efforts get Iran to curb its nuclear program. It was the first six-party Iran discussion in nearly a month.
The State Department says the P5+1 political directors reaffirmed their commitment to the dual-track strategy of offering Iran incentives to stop enriching uranium and sanctions if it doesn't.
However, there was no claim of progress toward new U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran for its defiance of demands to curb nuclear activity that U.S. and European officials say is weapons-related.
State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood says Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns represented the United States in the conference call, the first joint conversation of the six powers on Iran since a ministerial-level meeting in New York late last month.
Wood said they discussed "the way forward" following a September 27 U.N. Security Council resolution pressing Iran for compliance on the nuclear issue and reaffirming terms of the three existing sanctions resolutions.
Wood said they agreed to remain in close touch on the issue, although there was no agreement on further political-director or ministerial meetings.
The spokesman rejected a press report depicting Monday's discussion as a failure, saying the meeting had no fixed agenda other than for the parties to talk. He said there is no recent sign of Iranian interest in accepting nuclear incentives.
"The P5+1has given Iran a generous package of incentives," said Robert Wood. "We encourage Iran every day to take up that package of incentives. We've offered them a pathway forward to better relations with the international community. The ball is in the Iranian court right now. Iran knows what it needs to do, and we all want to see that happen."
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and their colleagues in the six-party group agreed on last month's resolution as a show of unity on Iran, despite tense relations between Washington and Moscow over Russia's recent military intervention in Georgia.
But the measure only reaffirmed existing sanctions because of Russian and Chinese opposition to additional penalties against Tehran.
Iran denies that it has nuclear weapons ambitions and says it has a right to enrich fuel for nuclear power plants.
Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani - the country's former chief nuclear envoy - said last week that Tehran wants to continue negotiations over its nuclear program but that it will not accept an end to uranium enrichment as a precondition for talks.
(Source: VOA)
The State Department says the P5+1 political directors reaffirmed their commitment to the dual-track strategy of offering Iran incentives to stop enriching uranium and sanctions if it doesn't.
However, there was no claim of progress toward new U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran for its defiance of demands to curb nuclear activity that U.S. and European officials say is weapons-related.
State Department Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood says Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns represented the United States in the conference call, the first joint conversation of the six powers on Iran since a ministerial-level meeting in New York late last month.
Wood said they discussed "the way forward" following a September 27 U.N. Security Council resolution pressing Iran for compliance on the nuclear issue and reaffirming terms of the three existing sanctions resolutions.
Wood said they agreed to remain in close touch on the issue, although there was no agreement on further political-director or ministerial meetings.
The spokesman rejected a press report depicting Monday's discussion as a failure, saying the meeting had no fixed agenda other than for the parties to talk. He said there is no recent sign of Iranian interest in accepting nuclear incentives.
"The P5+1has given Iran a generous package of incentives," said Robert Wood. "We encourage Iran every day to take up that package of incentives. We've offered them a pathway forward to better relations with the international community. The ball is in the Iranian court right now. Iran knows what it needs to do, and we all want to see that happen."
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and their colleagues in the six-party group agreed on last month's resolution as a show of unity on Iran, despite tense relations between Washington and Moscow over Russia's recent military intervention in Georgia.
But the measure only reaffirmed existing sanctions because of Russian and Chinese opposition to additional penalties against Tehran.
Iran denies that it has nuclear weapons ambitions and says it has a right to enrich fuel for nuclear power plants.
Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani - the country's former chief nuclear envoy - said last week that Tehran wants to continue negotiations over its nuclear program but that it will not accept an end to uranium enrichment as a precondition for talks.
(Source: VOA)
Monday, October 20, 2008
Nuclear deal with Russia to be inked in Dec
The stage is set for the inking of the civil nuclear deal between India and Russia, later this year when the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visits New Delhi in December.
External affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, who held talks here ahead of the first official visit of Medvedev to India, did the necessary groundwork for the signing of the nuclear pact that envisages Russia building four more atomic reactors in Tamil Nadu. The pact, agreed on during a visit by former Russian president Vladimir Putin in January 2007 and initiated early this year, will follow similar pacts signed with the US and France.
This will be the third bilateral nuclear pact which India will sign after the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) lifted an atomic embargo against New Delhi September 6.
(Source: The Financial Express)
External affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, who held talks here ahead of the first official visit of Medvedev to India, did the necessary groundwork for the signing of the nuclear pact that envisages Russia building four more atomic reactors in Tamil Nadu. The pact, agreed on during a visit by former Russian president Vladimir Putin in January 2007 and initiated early this year, will follow similar pacts signed with the US and France.
This will be the third bilateral nuclear pact which India will sign after the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) lifted an atomic embargo against New Delhi September 6.
(Source: The Financial Express)
China-Pakistan nuclear power plant deal
According to officials from the Pakistani government, China has agreed to provide help to build two new nuclear power plants.
This is welcome news, not least because Pakistan is suffering from acute power shortages with official estimates putting the shortfall close to 4000 MW.
Furthermore, this enhanced cooperation with China is likely to ease Pakistan's unhappiness at the recent deal allowing American businesses to sell nuclear fuel, technology and reactors to its neighbour, India.
China previously helped Pakistan build its second nuclear power plant at Chashma, about 125 miles southwest of Islamabad. Work on a second nuclear plant is in progress, and is due to be completed in 2011.
The Chashma 3 and Chashma 4 reactors would provide Pakistan with an additional 680 MW of generating capacity. No details were given on when the units would be built or what assistance China would provide.
Pakistan, which began operating its first nuclear power station with Canadian assistance back in 1972, has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the main international agreement meant to stem the spread of nuclear weapons technology.
However, it has placed several of its civilian reactors under International Atomic Energy Authority safeguards.
The nuclear agreement was among a dozen economic cooperation accords signed during President Asif Ali Zardari's recent visit to Beijing, PR China.
(Source: Power Engineering)
This is welcome news, not least because Pakistan is suffering from acute power shortages with official estimates putting the shortfall close to 4000 MW.
Furthermore, this enhanced cooperation with China is likely to ease Pakistan's unhappiness at the recent deal allowing American businesses to sell nuclear fuel, technology and reactors to its neighbour, India.
China previously helped Pakistan build its second nuclear power plant at Chashma, about 125 miles southwest of Islamabad. Work on a second nuclear plant is in progress, and is due to be completed in 2011.
The Chashma 3 and Chashma 4 reactors would provide Pakistan with an additional 680 MW of generating capacity. No details were given on when the units would be built or what assistance China would provide.
Pakistan, which began operating its first nuclear power station with Canadian assistance back in 1972, has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the main international agreement meant to stem the spread of nuclear weapons technology.
However, it has placed several of its civilian reactors under International Atomic Energy Authority safeguards.
The nuclear agreement was among a dozen economic cooperation accords signed during President Asif Ali Zardari's recent visit to Beijing, PR China.
(Source: Power Engineering)
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Pakistan, China expected to sign civil nuclear deal
Pakistan and China are expected to sign a civil nuclear agreement during President Asif Ali Zardari's maiden state visit to the Communist nation, the country's envoy to Beijing said today.
Both countries have always supported the peaceful use of civil nuclear energy and an agreement in this connection is expected to be signed during the President's visit to China which began today, Ambassador Masood Khan said.
The two countries will ink several agreements in the fields of technology, agriculture and minerals. They will also sign an investment protocol to their existing free trade agreement to boost investments in Pakistan, he told Geo News channel.
Though Khan did not give details of the proposed civil nuclear pact, official sources were quoted by The Nation newspaper as saying that a nuclear deal with China would be the "main item" on Zardari's agenda.
An official told the newspaper that Zardari would seek a nuclear deal with China to meet Pakistan's increasing energy needs.
"What we need from our Chinese friends is the building of new nuclear reactors with their help and indications are already there that they will not disappoint us," the official said.
The government led by Zardari's Pakistan People's Party is under pressure from domestic political circles to seek a civil nuclear deal with China to match the atomic pact finalised between India and the US.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has urged the US to extend a similar deal to Pakistan and called on the world community not to discriminate between Pakistan and India in this regard.
(Source: Press Trust of India)
Both countries have always supported the peaceful use of civil nuclear energy and an agreement in this connection is expected to be signed during the President's visit to China which began today, Ambassador Masood Khan said.
The two countries will ink several agreements in the fields of technology, agriculture and minerals. They will also sign an investment protocol to their existing free trade agreement to boost investments in Pakistan, he told Geo News channel.
Though Khan did not give details of the proposed civil nuclear pact, official sources were quoted by The Nation newspaper as saying that a nuclear deal with China would be the "main item" on Zardari's agenda.
An official told the newspaper that Zardari would seek a nuclear deal with China to meet Pakistan's increasing energy needs.
"What we need from our Chinese friends is the building of new nuclear reactors with their help and indications are already there that they will not disappoint us," the official said.
The government led by Zardari's Pakistan People's Party is under pressure from domestic political circles to seek a civil nuclear deal with China to match the atomic pact finalised between India and the US.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has urged the US to extend a similar deal to Pakistan and called on the world community not to discriminate between Pakistan and India in this regard.
(Source: Press Trust of India)
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Iran: six powers "unreasonable" in nuclear row
Iran has accused six major powers of "unreasonable behavior" over its disputed nuclear program, but the European Union said on Tuesday it would stick to a dual approach combining diplomacy with the threat of sanctions.
Tehran's accusation was contained in a letter from its top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, that was delivered to European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Monday.
"It's a letter that in a way complains about our policy but our policy is clear. It's a double-track approach," Solana told Reuters in Berlin on Tuesday.
Asked whether the letter would make negotiations with Iran more difficult, Solana replied: "It's just a letter."
The United States and other Western powers suspect Tehran is seeking a nuclear bomb under cover of its civilian nuclear program. Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil producer, denies it has any such intentions, saying it only wants to generate electricity.
Jalili's letter, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, was addressed through Solana to foreign ministers of the six-power group consisting of the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany.
In Washington, a U.S. official said the six powers planned to hold a conference call later this week to discuss the letter and their possible response, but declined to say exactly when.
IMPROVED OFFER
In June, the six gave Iran a beefed-up offer of political and economic incentives, including nuclear reactors, in exchange for suspending its uranium enrichment program.
Iran responded at the time with a non-committal letter. The group of six handed the United Nations Security Council a toothless draft resolution on Iran's nuclear program in September after Washington, facing stiff Russian opposition, failed to secure agreement for fresh sanctions.
"In the judgment of the world community, this unreasonable behavior is an indication of the lack of a clear response to the principled questions of the Islamic Republic of Iran," Jalili said in the letter.
Iran has shown no sign of compromise, vowing to resist U.S. "bullying" to force it to abandon its right to develop peaceful nuclear technology. Enrichment is at the heart of the dispute because it can be used either to provide reactor fuel or -- if the uranium is purified to a much higher degree -- to supply the fissile material for a nuclear bomb.
Jalili said "logical behavior" by major powers could pave the ground for constructive talks to remove international concerns over the country's nuclear work.
Solana, representing the six powers, and Jalili last discussed Tehran's nuclear program by telephone in August.
"It is interesting ... to see that in the course of talks ... the other party (the major powers) ... resorts to levers of pressure instead of offering answers to questions and trying to remove ambiguities," Jalili said.
A senior Iranian official said Jalili's letter would also be delivered to the Swiss embassy in Tehran on Tuesday. Switzerland represents U.S. interests in Iran since Washington severed ties with Tehran a year after its 1979 Islamic revolution.
(Source: Reuters)
Tehran's accusation was contained in a letter from its top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, that was delivered to European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Monday.
"It's a letter that in a way complains about our policy but our policy is clear. It's a double-track approach," Solana told Reuters in Berlin on Tuesday.
Asked whether the letter would make negotiations with Iran more difficult, Solana replied: "It's just a letter."
The United States and other Western powers suspect Tehran is seeking a nuclear bomb under cover of its civilian nuclear program. Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil producer, denies it has any such intentions, saying it only wants to generate electricity.
Jalili's letter, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, was addressed through Solana to foreign ministers of the six-power group consisting of the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany.
In Washington, a U.S. official said the six powers planned to hold a conference call later this week to discuss the letter and their possible response, but declined to say exactly when.
IMPROVED OFFER
In June, the six gave Iran a beefed-up offer of political and economic incentives, including nuclear reactors, in exchange for suspending its uranium enrichment program.
Iran responded at the time with a non-committal letter. The group of six handed the United Nations Security Council a toothless draft resolution on Iran's nuclear program in September after Washington, facing stiff Russian opposition, failed to secure agreement for fresh sanctions.
"In the judgment of the world community, this unreasonable behavior is an indication of the lack of a clear response to the principled questions of the Islamic Republic of Iran," Jalili said in the letter.
Iran has shown no sign of compromise, vowing to resist U.S. "bullying" to force it to abandon its right to develop peaceful nuclear technology. Enrichment is at the heart of the dispute because it can be used either to provide reactor fuel or -- if the uranium is purified to a much higher degree -- to supply the fissile material for a nuclear bomb.
Jalili said "logical behavior" by major powers could pave the ground for constructive talks to remove international concerns over the country's nuclear work.
Solana, representing the six powers, and Jalili last discussed Tehran's nuclear program by telephone in August.
"It is interesting ... to see that in the course of talks ... the other party (the major powers) ... resorts to levers of pressure instead of offering answers to questions and trying to remove ambiguities," Jalili said.
A senior Iranian official said Jalili's letter would also be delivered to the Swiss embassy in Tehran on Tuesday. Switzerland represents U.S. interests in Iran since Washington severed ties with Tehran a year after its 1979 Islamic revolution.
(Source: Reuters)
Bush to sign US-India nuclear deal
US President George W. Bush will sign legislation enacting a landmark US-India nuclear agreement in a high-profile ceremony at the White House on Wednesday, his press office said.
Vice President Dick Cheney, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, and India's ambassador to Washington, Ronen Sen, will attend the event in the ornate East Room of the presidential mansion.
US lawmakers, and roughly 200 guests including Indian-American community leaders, will also attend the signing ceremony, according to Bush spokesman Carlton Carroll.
"The president looks forward to signing this bill into law and continuing to strengthen the US-India Strategic Partnership," Carroll said in a statement.
"This legislation will strengthen our global nuclear nonproliferation efforts, protect the environment, create jobs, and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner," he said.
Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh first agreed to it in July 2005 as part of a strategic partnership between the world's two biggest democracies, but ran into objections from critics worried about the spread of nuclear know-how.
Rice and others had to lobby hard to win approval for the deal from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which controls global atomic trade.
She also pushed hard for the agreement -- which lifts a ban on civilian nuclear trade imposed after India first conducted a nuclear test explosion in 1974 -- to be approved by both Houses of Congress.
Lawmakers had sought safeguards on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons technology before passing it overwhelmingly last week and handing the increasingly unpopular Bush administration a foreign policy success.
But critics say it still undermines global efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons, because India has refused to sign the international non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
The pact offers India access to sophisticated US technology and cheap atomic energy in return for New Delhi allowing UN inspections of some of its civilian nuclear facilities.
Military nuclear sites will remain closed to international inspections.
(Source: AFP)
Vice President Dick Cheney, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, and India's ambassador to Washington, Ronen Sen, will attend the event in the ornate East Room of the presidential mansion.
US lawmakers, and roughly 200 guests including Indian-American community leaders, will also attend the signing ceremony, according to Bush spokesman Carlton Carroll.
"The president looks forward to signing this bill into law and continuing to strengthen the US-India Strategic Partnership," Carroll said in a statement.
"This legislation will strengthen our global nuclear nonproliferation efforts, protect the environment, create jobs, and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner," he said.
Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh first agreed to it in July 2005 as part of a strategic partnership between the world's two biggest democracies, but ran into objections from critics worried about the spread of nuclear know-how.
Rice and others had to lobby hard to win approval for the deal from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which controls global atomic trade.
She also pushed hard for the agreement -- which lifts a ban on civilian nuclear trade imposed after India first conducted a nuclear test explosion in 1974 -- to be approved by both Houses of Congress.
Lawmakers had sought safeguards on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons technology before passing it overwhelmingly last week and handing the increasingly unpopular Bush administration a foreign policy success.
But critics say it still undermines global efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons, because India has refused to sign the international non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
The pact offers India access to sophisticated US technology and cheap atomic energy in return for New Delhi allowing UN inspections of some of its civilian nuclear facilities.
Military nuclear sites will remain closed to international inspections.
(Source: AFP)
Friday, October 3, 2008
Indian PM to visit Japan for nuclear talks: official
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will visit Japan this month for talks on nuclear energy cooperation and a free-trade deal as the two countries expand ties, officials said Friday.
Singh will meet with his Japanese counterpart Taro Aso and have an audience with Emperor Akihito during his October 21-23 visit, a Japanese foreign ministry statement said.
Aso, a former foreign minister who became Prime Minister last week, is a strong supporter of cementing Japan's relationship with fellow democracy India, partly to balance Tokyo's often uneasy ties with China.
Singh is expected to discuss nuclear energy issues in Japan, which reluctantly backed a nuclear technology deal between India and the United States despite New Delhi's refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Japan has a major nuclear power industry but strongly opposes nuclear weapons - a legacy of falling victim to the world's only atomic attacks.
Singh and Aso are also set to discuss efforts to forge a free-trade deal. Tokyo announced that Japanese and Indian negotiators would hold a 10th round of talks starting Monday in the capital.
The two countries missed a deadline to reach an outline of the deal by mid-2008 as they struggled to reach an agreement on tariff reductions and investment goals.
Singh also travelled this week to France to sign another atomic energy deal, part of India's efforts to make up for a critical power shortage holding back its booming economy.
(Source: AFP)
Singh will meet with his Japanese counterpart Taro Aso and have an audience with Emperor Akihito during his October 21-23 visit, a Japanese foreign ministry statement said.
Aso, a former foreign minister who became Prime Minister last week, is a strong supporter of cementing Japan's relationship with fellow democracy India, partly to balance Tokyo's often uneasy ties with China.
Singh is expected to discuss nuclear energy issues in Japan, which reluctantly backed a nuclear technology deal between India and the United States despite New Delhi's refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Japan has a major nuclear power industry but strongly opposes nuclear weapons - a legacy of falling victim to the world's only atomic attacks.
Singh and Aso are also set to discuss efforts to forge a free-trade deal. Tokyo announced that Japanese and Indian negotiators would hold a 10th round of talks starting Monday in the capital.
The two countries missed a deadline to reach an outline of the deal by mid-2008 as they struggled to reach an agreement on tariff reductions and investment goals.
Singh also travelled this week to France to sign another atomic energy deal, part of India's efforts to make up for a critical power shortage holding back its booming economy.
(Source: AFP)
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Objections on US-India nuclear deal overcome
Senators have agreed to vote Wednesday on a U.S.-India nuclear cooperation accord, clearing a major hurdle that had been blocking consideration of the landmark pact that would overturn 30 years of U.S. nonproliferation policy.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told his colleagues late Tuesday that the Senate also would consider two amendments seeking to deal with the U.S. reaction should India conduct another atomic test. The amendments reflect an attempt to make sure U.S. nuclear exports do not help boost India's nuclear weapons program.
The accord would allow American civilian nuclear trade with India in exchange for safeguards and U.N. inspections at India's civilian nuclear plants. Military plants would be off-limits. Opponents say the Senate has failed to examine carefully a deal that could spark an atomic arms race in Asia.
The accord, a top priority of President Bush, enjoys wide support from senior lawmakers in both parties and was approved by the House on Saturday.
It had stalled in the Senate, and Reid's announcement Tuesday came after behind-the-scenes wrangling designed to ease the qualms of at least one unidentified senator who had blocked a vote.
Lawmakers working to deal with a financial crisis gripping the United States are eager to leave Washington to campaign for the November elections. Reid ratcheted up pressure for quick action on the India deal, suggesting that he might call senators back to work in about two weeks for a vote on the accord if objections were not cleared up soon.
A draft of a Senate amendment obtained by The Associated Press from an e-mail to senators would require the U.S. president, should India detonate a nuclear weapon, to certify that no American technology or material supplied under the accord was used in the explosion. Another draft amendment would stop U.S. nuclear trade if India should detonate a nuclear device.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she hoped to get the deal settled.
"It would be a way to solidify what has been an extraordinary period in which U.S.-Indian relations have reached the kind of deepening that is really appropriate for two of the world's largest and great democracies," she told reporters at the State Department.
The deal received a boost this month when the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group of countries that supply nuclear material and technology agreed to lift a ban on civilian nuclear trade with India.
Critics say the plan would allow India to use the extra nuclear fuel that the deal would provide to free up domestic uranium for its weapons program
India built its bombs outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which allows civil nuclear trade in exchange for a pledge from nations not to pursue nuclear weapons. The country has faced a nuclear trade ban since its first atomic test in 1974.
Sharon Squassoni, a nonproliferation analyst with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said, "This kind of congressional approval is a farce, and the reason why it's happening is the tremendous political pressure being exerted by the Bush administration on behalf of the Indian government" and Indian-American political action committees.
(Source: AP)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told his colleagues late Tuesday that the Senate also would consider two amendments seeking to deal with the U.S. reaction should India conduct another atomic test. The amendments reflect an attempt to make sure U.S. nuclear exports do not help boost India's nuclear weapons program.
The accord would allow American civilian nuclear trade with India in exchange for safeguards and U.N. inspections at India's civilian nuclear plants. Military plants would be off-limits. Opponents say the Senate has failed to examine carefully a deal that could spark an atomic arms race in Asia.
The accord, a top priority of President Bush, enjoys wide support from senior lawmakers in both parties and was approved by the House on Saturday.
It had stalled in the Senate, and Reid's announcement Tuesday came after behind-the-scenes wrangling designed to ease the qualms of at least one unidentified senator who had blocked a vote.
Lawmakers working to deal with a financial crisis gripping the United States are eager to leave Washington to campaign for the November elections. Reid ratcheted up pressure for quick action on the India deal, suggesting that he might call senators back to work in about two weeks for a vote on the accord if objections were not cleared up soon.
A draft of a Senate amendment obtained by The Associated Press from an e-mail to senators would require the U.S. president, should India detonate a nuclear weapon, to certify that no American technology or material supplied under the accord was used in the explosion. Another draft amendment would stop U.S. nuclear trade if India should detonate a nuclear device.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she hoped to get the deal settled.
"It would be a way to solidify what has been an extraordinary period in which U.S.-Indian relations have reached the kind of deepening that is really appropriate for two of the world's largest and great democracies," she told reporters at the State Department.
The deal received a boost this month when the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group of countries that supply nuclear material and technology agreed to lift a ban on civilian nuclear trade with India.
Critics say the plan would allow India to use the extra nuclear fuel that the deal would provide to free up domestic uranium for its weapons program
India built its bombs outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which allows civil nuclear trade in exchange for a pledge from nations not to pursue nuclear weapons. The country has faced a nuclear trade ban since its first atomic test in 1974.
Sharon Squassoni, a nonproliferation analyst with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said, "This kind of congressional approval is a farce, and the reason why it's happening is the tremendous political pressure being exerted by the Bush administration on behalf of the Indian government" and Indian-American political action committees.
(Source: AP)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
