WhamBam

The US did not do that after 1998. So tough luck if you think it will happen now. India is no walkover anyway.

I do not see any sensible reason for things to come to such a pass. Doesn't suit US or India.

Officer of Engineers

Oh, the US will be able to do it - through India's Courts. Any commercial deal with the US will include in its contracts such provisions as to withdrawl of equipment, and knowledge. India may not be a walkover but India is also a nation of law.

__________________
Chimo

kams

Its the deal with NSG, which will be binding. And Hyde act will be the basis for that deal b/w NSG and India.

1. We will not be allowed to reprocess the fuel.
2. Sanctions will follow if we test any nukes and the deal is off.
3. We will be allowed to import sufficient fuel to operate the reactors safetly, no stockpiling will be allowed.

This will be basic guidelines will apply, no matter from whom you buy the reactors.

subba

That was phrased so differently and well you almost got me there sir..

Yet i think it does violate the NPT in the sense it allows a non-NPT signatory full civil cooperation in addition to no power having the right to investigate strategic plants. Also India can build any number of nuclear plants and classify them accordingly. Military or civilian. Something NPT signatories that are not N5 don't have the liberty under the agreement. So it's not really the US adhering to the NPT on India's behalf.

The problem coming in really is even not nuke testing but reprocessing/ reusing spent fuel for India's larger Thorium based initiative. For the nuke testing i think there is a 'supreme interest' clause which will be in the 123 agreement. (please correct me if am wrong here).

WhamBam

OK. I understood you wrong here. I thought you were talking about an invasion or something.

This makes sense.

Officer of Engineers

Not me but a couple of Captains from JAG who "tried" to explain it to me. As for the rest, let me pass it to them when we're meeting for Scotch later on today.

subba

Whambam sir..you and OOE Sir have crystallized things a bit in your discussion here. Pretty valid points well made by both of you made interesting reading. Yet i would put it that this act between US-India gives

1. India full civil cooperation.
2. The right to retain Nuclear weapons outside the NPT.
3. Build, operate nuclear plants solely for military purposes.

Provisions invoked will be on the basis of..

1. Nuclear tests.
2. Using spent fuel for plants outside the scope of IAEA. Which include our thorium based FBRs.

The only difference i see with N5 and India is the US reaction to India's nuclear tests. JUst don't test please clause in the Hyde act.

And makes India's path to maturing Thorium based reactors tougher without using spent fuel from safeguarded plants.

Officer of Engineers

Some items here.

How many nukes do we KNOW India got? And what is a definition of a nuke under the NPT? START II allows both the US and Russia 2000 warheads but both got over 10,000 in dis-assembled form and those definitions are not even found within the NPT.

kams

Well Sir, If you have to depend on Indian Judicial system, we will win, it will take forever to get a decision and we know from past history that sanctions will be lifted in 2-3 years any way.

Most likely the contracts will have a neutral arbitrator whose decision will be binding on both parties.

subba

Part 1 of your question Sir..,

A) I think zero active. Warheads i doubt are mated and kept. I could be dead wrong though again.

B) The number of warheads that could be readily mated to warheads in case of conflict? Dunno again.

C) The number of warheads around 250Kt, 95 vintage 3 stage devices that could be made from potential pu stocks assuming 3 kg per weapon..hard call again sir, but some sources say India has access to around 2500 kg of WGP.

Part 2 of the def of a nuke under the NPT..

Only N5 allowed. No one else.

The NPT contains a provision granting the right to all parties to the treaty to develop, research, produce, and use nuclear energy under article 4. The presence of this provision quite properly raises questions about whether the central purpose of the NPT, which is to stop the spread of nuclear weapons beyond the five nuclear powers acknowledged by the treaty is undermined. Which it evidently is..

Just my take.

kams

Subba, will the position any worse if we don't have the agreement? Right now we have to do with what Plutonium our non-safeguarded reactors produce. After the agreement , situation will remain same. We would have preferred a better agreement where we are allowed to process spent fuel.

NPT also prohibits 'Nuclear explosive device' aka 'Smiling Budha'

subba

I think the problem is more with the shifting goalposts from the 2006 agreement. If we knew the original goal posts would be shifted to positions that go with the Hyde act today , i doubt India would have bothered about an agreement.

Thats why i was asking the other thread what sort of investment does India require to commercialize fully just 1 thorium based FBR say in the next 6-7 years. To raise it from a 220MW to 1600MW plant in 6-7 years will require a wartime like effort and investment. But it can be done. The disgusting thing is it looks this govt does'nt have the gonads.

kams

Hmm more than investment it is the technology. We still don't make large nuclear reactors, not due to lack of investment. Only 1000 MW reactors being built are Russian. Thats one reason we need the technology.

Regarding no. of nuclear weapons we have, Ashley Tellis has a paper estimating them based on Plutonium output. Will try to find it later.

WhamBam

Absolute numbers don't really matter. It's good if there is no clear answer to that. We need them for deterrence and not for use. So a bit of obfuscation and amguity doesn't harm.

subba

Kams sir the problem are scalability issues than technological. India makes perfectly good and safe 600 MW reactors. We know how the Govt has been doling out funds. Well do a 500 MW plant, meanwhile make a deal for a 1000MW russian reactor. So while available funds go to Russia, Indian scientists end proving tech capability in lesser capacity models. Get up the funding these scalability issues will vanish. Thats why i asked how much are we prepared to say BLOW to get a 1000MW thorium based power reactor up and running by say 2014. 5 billion US max? If so just give the scientists a go ahead. India is being in a way put on the burner just coz we don't have Uranium reserves. The issues are not technological.