Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 164

Thread: How clean is India?

  1. #1
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    33

    How clean is India?

    An editorial by Adnan Gill called 'Nukes for India'

    Nukes for India
    Monday March 13, 2006 (1650 PST)

    Adnan Gill
    gill_adnan@hotmail.com


    On March 2, 2006, succumbing to unrelenting pressure from neo-cons? nuclear lobby and the increasingly powerful Indian lobby, President Bush signed a nuclear technology-sharing/transfer deal with India. Reportedly, President Bush agreed to share so-called ?civilian nuclear technology? with India despite its dubious nuclear weapons programs and its refusal to sign the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). President Bush has single handedly done what last six US presidents refused to do. For decades President Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Bush (Senior) refused to aid India`s nuclear-weapons program by breaking US and international laws meant to reign in nuclear proliferation. If the US Congress will not judiciously kill the ill advised deal, the ripple effects from the U.S. decision to violate international treaties, and reverse decades of non-proliferation policy by permitting sales of nuclear technology and fuels to India will be felt for ages to come.


    The details of the deal are largely unknown, but it appears that at least one-third of current and future Indian nuclear plants will be exempt from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. Experts believe the "Indian-specific" inspection regime envisioned by the Bush administration falls well short of the normal, full-scope inspections practiced worldwide.

    India has limited uranium reserves, but thanks to President Bush, US will supply uranium fuel for Indian civilian nuclear reactors, which in turn will free up Indian originated uranium to make nuclear weapons. It is estimated that currently India is producing approximately six to 10 nuclear bombs per year. The deal will certainly boost Indian nuclear weapons production to several dozen a year. By all means, the deal assists and enhances India`s nuclear-weapons program. In the words of one of the deal?s architect turned lobbyist, "the problem is not that India has too many nuclear weapons, it is that they do not have enough." As a good neo-con soldier, President Bush is doing his best to turn India?s dream into a reality.

    Last time the US generously handed over the civilian nuclear technology to India, it resulted in a so-called ?peaceful nuclear explosion? (detonated on May 18, 1974). The radioactive core for India?s first nuclear device was the plutonium diverted from its American-Canadian supplied civilian nuclear reactor (CIRUS). This time around too, it is hard to imagine how the US will ensure the Indians will not divert or copy the technology transfer for military purposes?

    Non-proliferation experts like Dr. Joseph Cirincione (director for non-proliferation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC.) are deeply worried of another negative effect stemming from this deal. He believes the deal is setting a ?bad example? for other countries pursuing their own nuclear programs. Dr. Cirincione explains, ?The lesson Iran is likely to draw is simple: if you hold out long enough, the Americans will cave. All this talk about violating treaties, they will reason, is just smoke. When the Americans think you are important enough, they will break the rules to accommodate you.? He further shares his fears emanating from this deal,

    ?Pakistani officials have already said they expect their country to receive a similar deal, and Israel is surely waiting in the wings. Other nations may decide that they can break the rules, too, to grant special deals to their friends. China is already rumored to be seeking a deal to provide open nuclear assistance to Pakistan. Will Russia decide that it can make an exception for Iran??

    Contrary to Bush Administrations bullish pursuit to modernize Indian nuclear program, serious objections have been raised in India and the United States against this particular deal. American environmentalists, opinion makers (e.g. New York Times & Washington Post), and legislators are questioning the wisdom behind Bush Administration?s desire to modernize Indian nuclear program at the cost of violating international treaties like NPT and in a display of barefaced defiance of a ?Nuclear Suppliers Group? ban.

    The deal drew wide criticism from all corners of Earth, including from the US media and lawmakers. Both Republicans and Democrats legislators in the US Congress angered over being kept in dark about the deal promised the White House an uphill battle.

    Republicans and Democrats legislators in the US Congress are deeply concerned over the nuclear deal. Purportedly, the deal was conceived by a few senior Bush

    administration officials and was never reviewed by the departments of State, Defense or Energy prior to the joint-announcement.

    Apparently, the US Congress was left out of loop. Even the Bush loyalists like, chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation, Republican Congressman Ed Royce issued veiled warning, "the US-India agreement on civil nuclear cooperation has implications beyond US-India relations. In this process, the goal of curbing nuclear proliferation should be paramount. Congress will continue its careful consideration of this far-reaching agreement."

    Democratic Congressman Edward Markey most vocally criticized the deal by saying, "America cannot credibly preach nuclear temperance from a barstool. We can`t

    tell Iran, a country that has signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that they can`t have [uranium] enrichment technologies while simultaneously carving out a special exemption from nuclear-proliferation laws for India, a nation that has refused to sign the treaty." Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Senator Richard Lugar and Republican, Congressman Henry Hyde both have made no secret of their reservations about the deal.

    Dismissing critics who charged that the agreement with New Delhi would prompt nations such as Pakistan to seek similar treatment and escalate their own weapons production, Bush said, "Pakistan and India are different countries, with different needs and different histories". Apparently, President Bush was referring to A.Q. Khan, the former head of Pakistan`s nuclear program, who allegedly ran a black-market operation selling nuclear secrets and technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya. In response, the non-proliferation experts point to India?s unholy record of proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, and Iraq (President Bush`s axis of evil).

    India has a long history of horizontal and vertical nuclear proliferation. It is public knowledge that India?s nuclear weapons are developed from the radioactive cores diverted from her so-called civilian nuclear reactors. Not only that, India also built a long rap sheet of nuclear proliferation by callously paddling WMD technologies to the supposedly pariah nations like Iran and Iraq.

    Indian Nuclear/WMD Proliferation Record:

    Proliferation to Iran

    India has a distinct record of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) collaboration with Iran. Although this collaboration can be traced to as far back as 1970s, following is a list of most glaring examples of Indian WMD proliferation to Iran:



    Following Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi?s 1974 official visit to Tehran, Iran and India announced contacts will be made "between the atomic energy organizations in the two countries in order to establish a basis for cooperation in this field." [1]



    Reportedly, in 1975 Iran hosted nuclear technical advisers from (among others) India who worked on its nuclear program.[2]



    During 1980 and1983, Iran requested Indian help in completing the Bushehr reactor after West Germany halted work on the project in 1980. [3]



    Indian nuclear collaboration with Iran goes at least as far back as 1982. In 1982, the Indian radio and BBC Summary of World Broadcasts reported that India will send a group of nuclear engineers and scientists to Iran. They supposedly inspected the Bushehr nuclear power plant to study the problems.



    On July 1, 1989, officials from Indian State Trading Corporation in Bombay admited that they sold about 60 tons of thionyl chloride (a mustard gas or nerve agent precursor) to Iran for approximately $50,000. Allegedly, the same year another Indian State Trading Company`s supplier, Transpek Private Ltd., sold about 257 tons more of the chemical to Iran. [4]



    On February 1, 1991, Indian Atomic Energy Commission announced that India will seek to export its nuclear technology. Following the Indian announcement the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran negotiates to purchase nuclear technology or expertise from India. As a result, India and Iran exchange nuclear scientists. [5]



    In the October of same year (1991), Iran`s Deputy Foreign Minister Alaeddin Borujerdi met Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao in New Delhi to discuss the purchase of 10MW reactor. Finally on November 11, 1991 the Indian Foreign Minister Sing Solanki signed a technical cooperation deal with Iran ensuring the delivery of 10MW reactor to Iran. [6]



    In a Middle East Defense News June 8, 1992 report, it was announced, Iran negotiated the purchase of a 10MW nuclear research reactor subsequently installed at the Moallem Kalayeh site. Though the construction on the Moallem Kalayah site had already begun in 1987.



    Another Indian company, Transpek Industry Ltd., in 1990, won an estimated $12.5 million bid to install and commission a turn-key chemical plant in Iran. By 1996 the company built the world`s largest manufacturing facility for thionyl chloride outside of Europe. [7]



    In November 1994, the German intelligence reported that an Indian consortium was building a pesticide plant that could be linked to the production of chemical weapons in Iran. [8]



    On January 30, 1995, the German Intelligence Agency (BND) stated that Indian companies were aiding Iran in its development of tabun and sarin. [9]



    In its January 1995 report, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reported that Indian firms have provided equipment and raw materials to Iran, which aided the Iranian development of chemical weapons. [10]



    Reportedly, an Indian nuclear scientist Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad who retired in 2000 made at least two visits to Iran`s Bushehr nuclear facility. Mr. Chidambaram, a former head of the Atomic Energy Commission, acknowledged Dr. Prasad?s work in Iran. He said Dr. Prasad "originally went to Iran as part of an IAEA assignment. Later, he went back to Bushehr under a private contract with the Iranians."



    The Hindustan Times, quoted a classified government document, which stated Dr. Prasad spent years working on India`s atomic energy programmes, did not seek government permission to go to Iran. [11]



    The most damning admission of Indian nuclear proliferation to Iran came in December 2003. When pressed by Iranian reporters, the Indian external affairs minister Yashwant Sinha said "most certainly between Iran and India, there would be collaboration, there is collaboration".



    In 2004, the US State Department blacklisted two Indian scientists. The Indian nuclear scientists were charged with nuclear proliferation to Iran. The US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher explained, "The cases reflected poor Indian commitment to non-proliferation."



    In yet another instance, the US sanctioned two Indian firms for selling prohibited items to Iran.

    Proliferation to Iraq

    Likewise, Indian-Iraqi nuclear relations date back to 1974, when Saddam Hussein flew to India specifically to sign a nuclear cooperation treaty with the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.



    The little known nuclear cooperation treaty involved the exchange of scientists, training, and technology. After the destruction of the Iraqi (French-supplied) Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981, Iraq severly limited the exchange of scientists for fear of revealing its clandestine program, but till then, Iraqi scientists were working in India`s plutonium separation labs. The same Iraqi scientists who gained valuable training and experience from working in Indian nuclear labs later took charge of the nuclear fuel reprocessing unit supplied to Iraq by the Italian company CNEN. An Indian scientist trained the Iraqi scientist at Atomic Energy Commission`s computer center on the use of nuclear computer codes. [12]



    In 1979, Iraq sent engineers to visit India`s nuclear establishments and scientists. [13]



    CNN reported that Investigators say between 1998 and 2001, an Indian company NEC Engineers Private Ltd. illegally shipped 10 consignments (worth $800,000) of highly sensitive equipment, including titanium vessels and centrifugal pumps, to Iraq. NEC reportedly built the chemical plant in the city of Fallujah. In a statement by NEC Engineers Private Ltd`s project manager, N. Katturajan said the chemical facility was controlled by Iraqi military. According to CNN ?official at NEC Engineers Private Ltd. said large amounts of chlorine were removed from the Fallujah chemical complex, which was constructed by Indian engineers. Experts say chlorine can be used in the production of chemical weapons like mustard gas and nerve agents.? For their services rendered the Indian managers from NEC Engineers` Private Limited demanded $1

    million. [14]

    India has a record of proliferating WMDs through knowledge support and material transport. It has a huge manpower trained in nuclear secrets, which inherently makes it a considerable knowledge transfer risk. American nuclear technology transfer to India will only exponentially increase the odds of American nuclear secrets being leaked to whole world.

    Even if by some miracle India does not leak the American secrets to other nations, the technology will for sure find its way to Indian military nuclear weapons program. Anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of how nuclear technology works knows there are no fundamental differences between so-called ?civilian? and ?military? nuclear facilities. No matter how one designates a nuclear facility, all it takes to fashion a nuclear weapon is a transfer of irradiated fuel (e.g. plutonium) from a nuclear reactor to reprocessing plant. India is not a NPT signatory and has a record of diverting nuclear fuel from its civilian facilities to weapons program. World community will have to take

    Bush Administration?s word that India will not misuse US technology to modernize and bolster its nuclear weapons stockpile.

    If the Bush Administration in its pursuit of contain-China-by-building-up-India policy can be callus enough to unilaterally violate the NPT, -- by transferring latest US nuclear technology to India -- it is anyone?s guess why or how it will guarantee that such a transfer will not benefit India?s nuclear weapons program?

    On the other hand, for different reasons, even some Indian voices are joining the opposition to this deal. At the heart of Indian opposition were India?s Fast Breeder Reactors [FBR]. Americans were demanding the FBRs to be separated from Indian military nuclear facilities. But the leading Indian scientists who believe their nuclear program to be much more advanced than Americans?, especially its FBR program, succeeded in keeping the FBRs out of Indian civilian nuclear facilities list. They believe FBRs to be the salvation for the unhindered production of fissile material for its unverifiable nuclear weapons. Therefore, they staunchly opposed categorization of its FBRs as civilian nuclear facilities.

    India`s first fast breeder nuclear reactor (adopted from the French reactor design) has already completed 20 years of work. The FBTR is located at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research [IGCAR] at Kalpakkam. Indian experts envision FBRs to be the technology that can secure India`s energy future as it can convert thorium (readily available in India) into U-233. Such reactors also form the second stage of India`s nuclear program, converting Uranium 238 present in nature to plutonium. It is basically an invaluable source of unaccounted fissile material for India?s nuclear weapons.

    Ironically, highly suspicious Indian scientists who also belong to the Swadeshi Science Movement (Vijnana Bharti) believe the U.S. offer of collaboration in India?s nuclear research to be a tactic to steal Indian technology. Vijnana Bharti?s organizing Secretary A. Jayakumar, in an open letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, said, ?The deal offers no tangible benefits to India?. Mr. Jayakumar said ?the American offer of reciprocity and collaboration in our nuclear research and development is nothing more than the ancient tactic of Dhrithrashtra embrace.? He further complained, ?experience shows that either [U.S] would stall it, or steal it.? Mr. Jayakumar asked the government not to surrender Indian interests to the U.S. and finally warned, ?otherwise all patriotic citizens of this land, cutting across political and academic lines, would take to the streets?.

    It?s also worth mentioning that the IGCAR has a tainted safety and hazard record. According to IGCAR, in 1987, during a fuel transfer process, a tube that guides fuel into the reactor snapped. Then in 2002, 75kg of radioactive sodium leaked inside a purification cabin.

    The deal gave India a final say over which reactors to open to inspection and which ones to declare secret military sites, where weapons continue to be produced. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration caved in to Indian demands and allowed it to classify FBRs as military sites. This one misclassification will essentially enable India to secretly produce unlimited nuclear weapons. And for some unfathomable reason, Bush administration officials said this move would lead to fewer nuclear weapons. But critics were quick to argue that the US reversed decades of precedent with the deal, which lifted the ban on sales of nuclear materials to a country that has refused to sign the nonproliferation treaty and has a record of diverting fissile material from civilian sites.

    Regardless of what proponents or opponents of the deal say, it should be clear to the world that, just as it did in the past, sooner or later India will divert American nuclear technology to its weapons program. The questions Bush Administration and members of Nuclear Suppliers Group should be seriously asking are, will the modernization of Indian nuclear weapons make the world, especially, the South-Asia safer? Will the American technology transfer start a new nuclear weapons race between India and Pakistan vis-à-vis China? Is it wise to destabilize the world by further arming a nation with a history of dishonoring its word? If not, then why the neo-cons in the Bush Administration are hell-bent at undermining the international treaties and conventions by breaking them in spirit and practice?

    The greatest irony of this Indo-US deal remains that While America disarms the unarmed, it arms up the well armed.

    Courtesy: Defence Journal



    Key Sources:



    ["Full Text of Iran-India Joint Communiqué," Iran Almanac (Tehran: The Echo of Iran, 1974), p. 176]

    [George Quester, "The Shaw and the Bomb" (unpublished paper, 1975), and a private interview conducted in February 1975; in Anne Hessing Cahn, "Determinants of the Nuclear Option: The Case of Iran," Nuclear Proliferation in the Near-Nuclear Countries (Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1975), Onkar Marwah and Ann Shulz, eds., p. 199.]

    [Nuclear News Buyers Guide, March 1983, pp. 19-24]

    ["India Says It Sold Iran a Chemical Used in Poison Gas," The New York Times,1 July 1989, p. 1]

    [?Nucleonics Week?, 7 February 1991, p. 17; Nuclear News, March 1991, p.56]

    ["An Iranian Nuclear Chronology, 1987-1982", "Nuclear Facilities," Middle East Defense News, 8 June 1992]

    [Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI):

    http://www.nti.org/e_research/profil...cal/index.htm]

    [Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin, March 1995]

    [The Arms Control Reporter; Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin, October 1995, Issue Number 27]

    [The Arms Control Reporter; Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin October, 1995, Issue Number 27]

    [Top Indian nuclear expert helped Iran develop power plant: report; http://www.spacewar.com/2003/0310230...vbyeqa4o.html]

    [India`s Nuclear Tests: Will They Open New Possibilities for Iraq to Exploit?; ISIS Issue Brief; May 28, 1998]

    [Chengappa, Raj. 2000. Weapons of Peace, HarperCollins Publishers India, ISBN 81-7223-330-2]

    [Probe into illegal Indian exports to Iraq, New Delhi Bureau Chief Satinder Bindra and Amol Sharma, January 26, 2003; Indian documents suggest Iraq violated U.N. resolutions, Satinder Bindra and Amol Sharma, CNN, February 5, 2003]
    http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=137193

  2. #2
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Adnan Gill or Harbachan Gill, this does not cut ice both in the White House or in the Indian PM's residence.

    Try as one might with the lobbyist and buying up the media, the deal will go thorugh.

    Bush is an adamant man!


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  3. #3
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray
    Adnan Gill or Harbachan Gill, this does not cut ice both in the White House or in the Indian PM's residence.

    Try as one might with the lobbyist and buying up the media, the deal will go thorugh.

    Bush is an adamant man!
    I have no objections to the deal, it will pave way for us to get a similar deal with China.
    Since Mr. Tronic in his colorful way of speaking challenged my claims about Indian proliferation, I posted the above aditorial.
    Spledid piece to proof US' double standards and Indian hypocracy when it comes to classical whining about nuclear proliferation in the region.

    Meet you're equivalent of A.Q. Khan, Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad!

  4. #4
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    33
    So where is Mr. Tronic?
    Your comments please..

  5. #5
    Tamizhanban Senior Contributor Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,692
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo
    I have no objections to the deal, it will pave way for us to get a similar deal with China.
    Dude, you've got war head and missile blueprints and fully assembled missile kita from China. Tell us something new

    Meet you're equivalent of A.Q. Khan, Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad!
    YSR Prasad:
    Sanctioned by the United States on September 23, 2004 under the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000, for transferring to Iran equipment and/or technology of proliferation significance since January 1, 1999; served as Managing Director of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) as of January 1, 1995 and Chairman and Managing Director of the NPCIL beginning in August 1997; the NPCIL is controlled by the Department of Atomic Energy of the Indian government; traveled to Iran under the Technical Cooperation Program of the International Atomic Energy Agency and as a consultant on the Bushehr nuclear power plant, according to a spokesman for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, which denies the U.S. charge that Prasad sold or transferred sensitive equipment to Iran; has not traveled to Iran since mid-2003 according to the Ministry of External Affairs spokesman.

    http://www.iranwatch.org/search/view...ppliers&id=132

    AQKhan
    According to President George W. Bush, "father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program" and "director...leading scientific mind...[and] primary salesman" of "an extensive international network for the proliferation of nuclear technology and know-how"; through smuggling network sold blueprints for centrifuges, a nuclear bomb design and uranium hexafluoride; provided centrifuge designs and components, and, in some cases, complete centrifuges to Iran, Libya and North Korea; used a factory in Malaysia to manufacture key parts for centrifuges and had operatives in Europe, the Middle East and Africa; according to President Bush, his deputy and the network's chief financial officer, B.S.A. Tahir, ran SMB Computers, a front company in Dubai used as a cover for the shipment of centrifuge parts to various clients;

    http://www.iranwatch.org/search/view...ppliers&id=126
    He did not seel blueprints to warheads like AQKhan did. Big difference Dont make a mountain out of a molehill.
    Last edited by Jay; 19 Apr 06, at 19:35.
    A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

  6. #6
    Liberté, Unité, Egalité Senior Contributor Tronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Dec 04
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,997
    Nukes for India
    Monday March 13, 2006 (1650 PST)

    Adnan Gill
    gill_adnan@hotmail.com


    On March 2, 2006, succumbing to unrelenting pressure from neo-cons? nuclear lobby and the increasingly powerful Indian lobby, President Bush signed a nuclear technology-sharing/transfer deal with India. Reportedly, President Bush agreed to share so-called ?civilian nuclear technology? with India despite its dubious nuclear weapons programs and its refusal to sign the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). President Bush has single handedly done what last six US presidents refused to do. For decades President Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Bush (Senior) refused to aid India`s nuclear-weapons program by breaking US and international laws meant to reign in nuclear proliferation. If the US Congress will not judiciously kill the ill advised deal, the ripple effects from the U.S. decision to violate international treaties, and reverse decades of non-proliferation policy by permitting sales of nuclear technology and fuels to India will be felt for ages to come.
    well, what effects this treaty will have, only time will tell...


    India has limited uranium reserves, but thanks to President Bush, US will supply uranium fuel for Indian civilian nuclear reactors, which in turn will free up Indian originated uranium to make nuclear weapons. It is estimated that currently India is producing approximately six to 10 nuclear bombs per year. The deal will certainly boost Indian nuclear weapons production to several dozen a year. By all means, the deal assists and enhances India`s nuclear-weapons program. In the words of one of the deal?s architect turned lobbyist, "the problem is not that India has too many nuclear weapons, it is that they do not have enough." As a good neo-con soldier, President Bush is doing his best to turn India?s dream into a reality.
    Firstly, where the
    well, it seems like Indian nuclear weapons aren't a threat to anyone unlike Islamic Nukes in the hands of people with the views (why I won't live with _____) people ;Indian nukes are a good retaliationary tool against Pakistan, because if another military conflict starts with Pakistan (or "could have" started against Pakistan prior to getting nukes), Indian Army is enough to handle the situation, we don't need nukes, contrast to Pakistan. Then there comes the China issue, in which the nukes are there for self defense if a conflict arises there which probably won't since both countries are facing an economic boom.

    Last time the US generously handed over the civilian nuclear technology to India, it resulted in a so-called ?peaceful nuclear explosion? (detonated on May 18, 1974). The radioactive core for India?s first nuclear device was the plutonium diverted from its American-Canadian supplied civilian nuclear reactor (CIRUS). This time around too, it is hard to imagine how the US will ensure the Indians will not divert or copy the technology transfer for military purposes?
    wth... when did the US hand over civilian nuclear technology to India????? This is the first time this will be happening, and where the hell is this guy getting that above info??? This above paragraph just shows this guys knows nothing what he's talking about... The Indian nuclear program has existed since 1947...

    Non-proliferation experts like Dr. Joseph Cirincione (director for non-proliferation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC.) are deeply worried of another negative effect stemming from this deal. He believes the deal is setting a ?bad example? for other countries pursuing their own nuclear programs. Dr. Cirincione explains, ?The lesson Iran is likely to draw is simple: if you hold out long enough, the Americans will cave. All this talk about violating treaties, they will reason, is just smoke. When the Americans think you are important enough, they will break the rules to accommodate you.? He further shares his fears emanating from this deal
    yea, thats this guys opinion, but I think Iran was already on the path to obtaining the bomb way before India and the US signed the treaty, plus, Libya and North Korea, there was nuclear proliferation going on (thanks to Pakistan and AQ Khan) way before India and the US signed the treaty.


    ?Pakistani officials have already said they expect their country to receive a similar deal, and Israel is surely waiting in the wings. Other nations may decide that they can break the rules, too, to grant special deals to their friends. China is already rumored to be seeking a deal to provide open nuclear assistance to Pakistan. Will Russia decide that it can make an exception for Iran??
    well, good luck with that, Israel too has already achieved significant nuclear achievement

    Contrary to Bush Administrations bullish pursuit to modernize Indian nuclear program, serious objections have been raised in India and the United States against this particular deal. American environmentalists, opinion makers (e.g. New York Times & Washington Post), and legislators are questioning the wisdom behind Bush Administration?s desire to modernize Indian nuclear program at the cost of violating international treaties like NPT and in a display of barefaced defiance of a ?Nuclear Suppliers Group? ban.
    well, it's not the first time Bush is doing such a thing, he defyed the United Nations when he went to war with Iraq. He does what he thinks is right...


    We can`t tell Iran, a country that has signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that they can`t have [uranium] enrichment technologies while simultaneously carving out a special exemption from nuclear-proliferation laws for India, a nation that has refused to sign the treaty." Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Senator Richard Lugar and Republican, Congressman Henry Hyde both have made no secret of their reservations about the deal.
    ok, now thats just stupid, Iran, despite being a signatory has openly broken the rules and well had nuclear proliferation connections with the Pakistani's, so thats answering your own questions...

    Dismissing critics who charged that the agreement with New Delhi would prompt nations such as Pakistan to seek similar treatment and escalate their own weapons production, Bush said, "Pakistan and India are different countries, with different needs and different histories". Apparently, President Bush was referring to A.Q. Khan, the former head of Pakistan`s nuclear program, who allegedly ran a black-market operation selling nuclear secrets and technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya. In response, the non-proliferation experts point to India?s unholy record of proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, and Iraq (President Bush`s axis of evil).
    I think the Title should be How clean is Pakistan?

    India has a long history of horizontal and vertical nuclear proliferation. It is public knowledge that India?s nuclear weapons are developed from the radioactive cores diverted from her so-called civilian nuclear reactors. Not only that, India also built a long rap sheet of nuclear proliferation by callously paddling WMD technologies to the supposedly pariah nations like Iran and Iraq.
    Sure, maybe in this guyz dreamland...

    Indian Nuclear/WMD Proliferation Record:

    Proliferation to Iran

    India has a distinct record of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) collaboration with Iran. Although this collaboration can be traced to as far back as 1970s, following is a list of most glaring examples of Indian WMD proliferation to Iran:
    haha, back to the 1970's????? wow, funny thing, India didn't really have WMD's back then, and I think it would be pretty stupid for a country to pass over nuclear secrets to other countries when they themselves don't have the bomb integrated into the army... and the only thing that pushed us to that nuclear explosion was the Chinese nuclear test in 1964...


    Following Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi?s 1974 official visit to Tehran, Iran and India announced contacts will be made "between the atomic energy organizations in the two countries in order to establish a basis for cooperation in this field." [1]
    this does not mean WMD proliferation...
    the Iranian nuclear program was supported by several Western powers back then. Reactors were purchased from the United States, France, and West Germany. Iranian nuclear scientists were trained in those countries as well as in Great Britain, Italy, Belgium, and Canada. Argentina, an aspiring nuclear power at the time, also provided advisers.


    Reportedly, in 1975 Iran hosted nuclear technical advisers from (among others) India who worked on its nuclear program.[2]
    read above... a whole lot of Western countries also worked with Iran...

    During 1980 and1983, Iran requested Indian help in completing the Bushehr reactor after West Germany halted work on the project in 1980. [3]



    Indian nuclear collaboration with Iran goes at least as far back as 1982. In 1982, the Indian radio and BBC Summary of World Broadcasts reported that India will send a group of nuclear engineers and scientists to Iran. They supposedly inspected the Bushehr nuclear power plant to study the problems.
    read above...


    On July 1, 1989, officials from Indian State Trading Corporation in Bombay admited that they sold about 60 tons of thionyl chloride (a mustard gas or nerve agent precursor) to Iran for approximately $50,000. Allegedly, the same year another Indian State Trading Company`s supplier, Transpek Private Ltd., sold about 257 tons more of the chemical to Iran. [4]
    all is fair... Americans provided Iraqi's with Chemical weapons... atleast the Iranians didn't manage to use them on their own people, lol.



    On February 1, 1991, Indian Atomic Energy Commission announced that India will seek to export its nuclear technology. Following the Indian announcement the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran negotiates to purchase nuclear technology or expertise from India. As a result, India and Iran exchange nuclear scientists. [5]



    In the October of same year (1991), Iran`s Deputy Foreign Minister Alaeddin Borujerdi met Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao in New Delhi to discuss the purchase of 10MW reactor. Finally on November 11, 1991 the Indian Foreign Minister Sing Solanki signed a technical cooperation deal with Iran ensuring the delivery of 10MW reactor to Iran. [6]



    In a Middle East Defense News June 8, 1992 report, it was announced, Iran negotiated the purchase of a 10MW nuclear research reactor subsequently installed at the Moallem Kalayeh site. Though the construction on the Moallem Kalayah site had already begun in 1987.



    Another Indian company, Transpek Industry Ltd., in 1990, won an estimated $12.5 million bid to install and commission a turn-key chemical plant in Iran. By 1996 the company built the world`s largest manufacturing facility for thionyl chloride outside of Europe. [7]



    In November 1994, the German intelligence reported that an Indian consortium was building a pesticide plant that could be linked to the production of chemical weapons in Iran. [8]



    On January 30, 1995, the German Intelligence Agency (BND) stated that Indian companies were aiding Iran in its development of tabun and sarin. [9]



    In its January 1995 report, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reported that Indian firms have provided equipment and raw materials to Iran, which aided the Iranian development of chemical weapons. [10]



    Reportedly, an Indian nuclear scientist Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad who retired in 2000 made at least two visits to Iran`s Bushehr nuclear facility. Mr. Chidambaram, a former head of the Atomic Energy Commission, acknowledged Dr. Prasad?s work in Iran. He said Dr. Prasad "originally went to Iran as part of an IAEA assignment. Later, he went back to Bushehr under a private contract with the Iranians."



    The Hindustan Times, quoted a classified government document, which stated Dr. Prasad spent years working on India`s atomic energy programmes, did not seek government permission to go to Iran. [11]



    The most damning admission of Indian nuclear proliferation to Iran came in December 2003. When pressed by Iranian reporters, the Indian external affairs minister Yashwant Sinha said "most certainly between Iran and India, there would be collaboration, there is collaboration".



    In 2004, the US State Department blacklisted two Indian scientists. The Indian nuclear scientists were charged with nuclear proliferation to Iran. The US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher explained, "The cases reflected poor Indian commitment to non-proliferation."



    In yet another instance, the US sanctioned two Indian firms for selling prohibited items to Iran.

    Proliferation to Iraq

    Likewise, Indian-Iraqi nuclear relations date back to 1974, when Saddam Hussein flew to India specifically to sign a nuclear cooperation treaty with the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.



    The little known nuclear cooperation treaty involved the exchange of scientists, training, and technology. After the destruction of the Iraqi (French-supplied) Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981, Iraq severly limited the exchange of scientists for fear of revealing its clandestine program, but till then, Iraqi scientists were working in India`s plutonium separation labs. The same Iraqi scientists who gained valuable training and experience from working in Indian nuclear labs later took charge of the nuclear fuel reprocessing unit supplied to Iraq by the Italian company CNEN. An Indian scientist trained the Iraqi scientist at Atomic Energy Commission`s computer center on the use of nuclear computer codes. [12]



    In 1979, Iraq sent engineers to visit India`s nuclear establishments and scientists. [13]



    CNN reported that Investigators say between 1998 and 2001, an Indian company NEC Engineers Private Ltd. illegally shipped 10 consignments (worth $800,000) of highly sensitive equipment, including titanium vessels and centrifugal pumps, to Iraq. NEC reportedly built the chemical plant in the city of Fallujah. In a statement by NEC Engineers Private Ltd`s project manager, N. Katturajan said the chemical facility was controlled by Iraqi military. According to CNN ?official at NEC Engineers Private Ltd. said large amounts of chlorine were removed from the Fallujah chemical complex, which was constructed by Indian engineers. Experts say chlorine can be used in the production of chemical weapons like mustard gas and nerve agents.? For their services rendered the Indian managers from NEC Engineers` Private Limited demanded $1

    million. [14]
    India has a record of proliferating WMDs through knowledge support and material transport. It has a huge manpower trained in nuclear secrets, which inherently makes it a considerable knowledge transfer risk. American nuclear technology transfer to India will only exponentially increase the odds of American nuclear secrets being leaked to whole world.

    Even if by some miracle India does not leak the American secrets to other nations, the technology will for sure find its way to Indian military nuclear weapons program. Anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of how nuclear technology works knows there are no fundamental differences between so-called ?civilian? and ?military? nuclear facilities. No matter how one designates a nuclear facility, all it takes to fashion a nuclear weapon is a transfer of irradiated fuel (e.g. plutonium) from a nuclear reactor to reprocessing plant. India is not a NPT signatory and has a record of diverting nuclear fuel from its civilian facilities to weapons program. World community will have to take

    Bush Administration?s word that India will not misuse US technology to modernize and bolster its nuclear weapons stockpile.

    If the Bush Administration in its pursuit of contain-China-by-building-up-India policy can be callus enough to unilaterally violate the NPT, -- by transferring latest US nuclear technology to India -- it is anyone?s guess why or how it will guarantee that such a transfer will not benefit India?s nuclear weapons program?

    On the other hand, for different reasons, even some Indian voices are joining the opposition to this deal. At the heart of Indian opposition were India?s Fast Breeder Reactors [FBR]. Americans were demanding the FBRs to be separated from Indian military nuclear facilities. But the leading Indian scientists who believe their nuclear program to be much more advanced than Americans?, especially its FBR program, succeeded in keeping the FBRs out of Indian civilian nuclear facilities list. They believe FBRs to be the salvation for the unhindered production of fissile material for its unverifiable nuclear weapons. Therefore, they staunchly opposed categorization of its FBRs as civilian nuclear facilities.

    India`s first fast breeder nuclear reactor (adopted from the French reactor design) has already completed 20 years of work. The FBTR is located at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research [IGCAR] at Kalpakkam. Indian experts envision FBRs to be the technology that can secure India`s energy future as it can convert thorium (readily available in India) into U-233. Such reactors also form the second stage of India`s nuclear program, converting Uranium 238 present in nature to plutonium. It is basically an invaluable source of unaccounted fissile material for India?s nuclear weapons.

    Ironically, highly suspicious Indian scientists who also belong to the Swadeshi Science Movement (Vijnana Bharti) believe the U.S. offer of collaboration in India?s nuclear research to be a tactic to steal Indian technology. Vijnana Bharti?s organizing Secretary A. Jayakumar, in an open letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, said, ?The deal offers no tangible benefits to India?. Mr. Jayakumar said ?the American offer of reciprocity and collaboration in our nuclear research and development is nothing more than the ancient tactic of Dhrithrashtra embrace.? He further complained, ?experience shows that either [U.S] would stall it, or steal it.? Mr. Jayakumar asked the government not to surrender Indian interests to the U.S. and finally warned, ?otherwise all patriotic citizens of this land, cutting across political and academic lines, would take to the streets?.

    It?s also worth mentioning that the IGCAR has a tainted safety and hazard record. According to IGCAR, in 1987, during a fuel transfer process, a tube that guides fuel into the reactor snapped. Then in 2002, 75kg of radioactive sodium leaked inside a purification cabin.

    The deal gave India a final say over which reactors to open to inspection and which ones to declare secret military sites, where weapons continue to be produced. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration caved in to Indian demands and allowed it to classify FBRs as military sites. This one misclassification will essentially enable India to secretly produce unlimited nuclear weapons. And for some unfathomable reason, Bush administration officials said this move would lead to fewer nuclear weapons. But critics were quick to argue that the US reversed decades of precedent with the deal, which lifted the ban on sales of nuclear materials to a country that has refused to sign the nonproliferation treaty and has a record of diverting fissile material from civilian sites.

    Regardless of what proponents or opponents of the deal say, it should be clear to the world that, just as it did in the past, sooner or later India will divert American nuclear technology to its weapons program. The questions Bush Administration and members of Nuclear Suppliers Group should be seriously asking are, will the modernization of Indian nuclear weapons make the world, especially, the South-Asia safer? Will the American technology transfer start a new nuclear weapons race between India and Pakistan vis-à-vis China? Is it wise to destabilize the world by further arming a nation with a history of dishonoring its word? If not, then why the neo-cons in the Bush Administration are hell-bent at undermining the international treaties and conventions by breaking them in spirit and practice?

    The greatest irony of this Indo-US deal remains that While America disarms the unarmed, it arms up the well armed.

    Courtesy: Defence Journal



    Key Sources:



    ["Full Text of Iran-India Joint Communiqué," Iran Almanac (Tehran: The Echo of Iran, 1974), p. 176]

    [George Quester, "The Shaw and the Bomb" (unpublished paper, 1975), and a private interview conducted in February 1975; in Anne Hessing Cahn, "Determinants of the Nuclear Option: The Case of Iran," Nuclear Proliferation in the Near-Nuclear Countries (Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1975), Onkar Marwah and Ann Shulz, eds., p. 199.]

    [Nuclear News Buyers Guide, March 1983, pp. 19-24]

    ["India Says It Sold Iran a Chemical Used in Poison Gas," The New York Times,1 July 1989, p. 1]

    [?Nucleonics Week?, 7 February 1991, p. 17; Nuclear News, March 1991, p.56]

    ["An Iranian Nuclear Chronology, 1987-1982", "Nuclear Facilities," Middle East Defense News, 8 June 1992]

    [Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI):

    http://www.nti.org/e_research/profi...ical/index.htm]

    [Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin, March 1995]

    [The Arms Control Reporter; Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin, October 1995, Issue Number 27]

    [The Arms Control Reporter; Chemical Weapons Convention Bulletin October, 1995, Issue Number 27]

    [Top Indian nuclear expert helped Iran develop power plant: report; http://www.spacewar.com/2003/031023....vbyeqa4o.html]

    [India`s Nuclear Tests: Will They Open New Possibilities for Iraq to Exploit?; ISIS Issue Brief; May 28, 1998]

    [Chengappa, Raj. 2000. Weapons of Peace, HarperCollins Publishers India, ISBN 81-7223-330-2]

    [Probe into illegal Indian exports to Iraq, New Delhi Bureau Chief Satinder Bindra and Amol Sharma, January 26, 2003; Indian documents suggest Iraq violated U.N. resolutions, Satinder Bindra and Amol Sharma, CNN, February 5, 2003]
    ok... i gave up on this article... too much cleaning to do, I don't know why the damn authors don't do more research before publishing garbage...
    Last edited by Tronic; 19 Apr 06, at 19:37.
    Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
    -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

  7. #7
    Tamizhanban Senior Contributor Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,692
    I just googled to get this author's credentials and I stumbled upon his "scholarly" article which he wrote after AQKhan's arrest, where he says,

    The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is any way so discriminatory that it was rightly called as “disarming the unarmed”. Those moralizing to Pakistan are well advised to do some honest soul searching.

    Pakistan is only a window to the Nuclear Proliferating World, but certainly not the door to it.
    http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/index.c...rticle&ID=1513
    A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

  8. #8
    Liberté, Unité, Egalité Senior Contributor Tronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Dec 04
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,997

    India, Pakistan, Israel

    India, Pakistan, Israel
    See also India and WMD, Pakistan and WMD, Israel and WMD

    Three states - India, Pakistan, and Israel - have declined to sign the treaty. India and Pakistan are confirmed nuclear powers, and Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons, although it is not known to have conducted tests (see List of countries with nuclear weapons). These countries argue that the NPT creates a club of "nuclear haves" and a larger group of "nuclear have-nots" by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967, but the treaty never explains on what ethical grounds such a distinction is valid.

    India and Pakistan have publicly announced possession of nuclear weapons and have detonated nuclear devices in tests, India having first done so in 1974 and Pakistan following suit in 1998 in response to another Indian test during a time of intense tensions regarding the disputed Kashmir region. India is estimated to have enough fissile material for more than 150 warheads. Pakistan reportedly has 60. The Israeli government refuses to confirm or deny possession of nuclear weapons, although this is now regarded as an open secret after Israeli nuclear expert Mordechai Vanunu -- later abducted and jailed by Israel -- revealed the program to the British Sunday Times in 1986.

    In early March of 2006, India and the United States finalized a controversial deal to provide India with US civil nuclear technology. Proponents of the deal note that India will now classify 14 of its 22 nuclear facilities as being for civilian use, and thus open to inspection. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director the IAEA at the time, welcomed the deal by calling India "an important partner in the non-proliferation regime". However, attempts made by Pakistan to sign a similar agreement have been thwarted by the U.S. as well as the international community. The argument put forth is that Pakistan lacks the same energy requirements, and that the track record of Pakistan as a nuclear proliferator makes it impossible for it to have any sort of nuclear deal in the near future.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear...eration_Treaty


    Bush hails India's proliferation record
    Dispelling fears that the Indo-US civil nuclear deal will violate the US policy on non-proliferation, US President W George Bush has hailed India's impeccable record on proliferation.
    "They (India) have had 30 years of not proliferating their nuclear know-how," the President said.

    "Unlike Iran, for example, India is willing to join the IAEA. They want to be a part of the global agreements around nuclear power," he said, while replying to questions after his address at the City Club of Cleveland, in Ohio State.

    Lavishing praise on the Indian democracy, Bush said, "India is a democracy and a transparent society. You find out a lot about India because there's a free press. There is openness. People run for office and are held to account...It's an open process."

    The landmark deal, which is pending a clearance from the US Congress, has been advocated by various Bush administration officials on the grounds the deal will bring India, which is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), into non-proliferation mainstream.

    Urging the Congress to endorse the deal, Mr Bush said the agreement would go a long way in establishing an "important relationship" between the two countries.

    "I feel very comfortable recommending to the United States Congress that they ought to agree with the agreement that Prime Minister Singh and I have reached. It's very important for an important relationship," he said.

    While referring to the Cold War era tensions between the two nations, Mr Bush said, "For too long, America and India were not partners in peace. We didn't deal with each other because of the Cold War. And now is the time to set the Cold War behind us. It's over."

    He asserted that the nuclear accord was necessary to strengthen global security and non-proliferation goals of the US.

    Affirming that the agreement is a "controversial decision" on his part, the President said he took the step despite the fact that "the controversial decision basically flies in the face of old Cold war attitudes, as well as arms control thinking."

    Explaining the logic behind his decision, Mr Bush said, "We live in a global economy, there is a demand for fossil fuels and India should be able to develop clean fuel for its energy and so in our interests, our economic interests we worked on an agreement with India to encourage their expansion of civilian nuclear power."

    "I agreed with the Indian government that India ought to be encouraged to develop a nuclear power industry," he said.

    Bush appreciated the recent bonhomie in the relations between India and Pakistan and appreciated Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf for keeping up the momentum on the peace talks.

    Visualising what the India-US deal would mean after the next 30 years, Mr Bush said, "My hope is some day somebody will be asking a question, aren't you glad old George W thought about entering into a strategic relationship with India?"

    http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/1...9,00050001.htm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4770946.stm


    lol, well... what can i say???
    Last edited by Tronic; 19 Apr 06, at 19:48.
    Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
    -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

  9. #9
    Tamizhanban Senior Contributor Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,692
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo
    Meet you're equivalent of A.Q. Khan, Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad!
    Again, some more news to reiterate my points,
    U.S. sanctions not justified, says India

    External Affairs Ministry says the companies acted within the purview of Indian export laws

    # Transfer of such chemicals not in violation of our regulations or our international obligations
    # A rigorous system of export controls instituted

    NEW DELHI: In a reaction to the recent imposition of U.S. sanctions on two Indian firms for having exported chemicals to Iran, the Ministry of External Affairs said on Wednesday that the companies concerned had acted entirely within the purview of Indian export laws and that Washington's move was unjustified.

    "We have... seen reports about the imposition of sanctions on two Indian firms, namely Sabero Organics Gujarat Limited and Sandhya Organics Limited, under the Iran [Non]Proliferation Act, 2000... [for the] transfer of some chemicals to Iran" , MEA spokesperson Navtej Sarna said. "Our preliminary assessment is that the transfer of such chemicals is not in violation of our regulations or our international obligations. The Government of India's commitment to prevent onward proliferation is second to none. We have instituted a rigorous system of export controls and our track record in this regard is well known. India is working with the international community, including with the U.S., as a partner against proliferation. In this context the imposition of sanctions by the U.S. on our firms, which in our view have not acted in violation of our laws or regulations, is not justified."

    Mr. Sarna welcomed the U.S. decision to lift sanctions imposed last year under the same Act on the retired Indian nuclear scientist, C. Surendar, as a "vindication" of the Indian Government's position on the matter. India said at the time that neither Dr. Surendar nor Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad, who was also sanctioned by the U.S. under the Iran Non-proliferation Act, had done anything to assist Iran's nuclear programme. "Since the imposition of sanctions in September 2004, the Government has maintained that this had no justification. Accordingly, we had urged the U.S. Government to review the issue and withdraw the sanctions. The Government also reiterates that sanctions against Dr. Y.S.R Prasad should be removed," Mr. Sarna said.

    The sanctions on Dr. Prasad are due to expire on 22 September 2006.
    http://www.thehindu.com/2005/12/29/s...2917171400.htm

    Now I dare you to compare Prasad with AQKhan

    Remember how US busted AQKhan and his network and Pakistan's initial reponse to the allegations and the end results of the allegations. Did you hear anything about Dr.Prasad like you heard about A.Q.Khan?? Why??
    A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

  10. #10
    Tamizhanban Senior Contributor Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,692
    Some more funny stories on Adnan Gill,

    Selling Out on F-16s (Part II)
    This post is a followup to Saturday's "Selling Out on F-16s"

    Well folks, it may not have the allure of 50 Cent versus The Game, but there's beef afoot in the blogosphere!

    This past weekend I was debating Mr. Adnan Gill of Owl's Tree, a journalist who "frequently writes articles in national and international news media." The latter raised a couple of points worth mentioning, but before I get to that I want to point to my readers to a post Mr. Gill subsequently made in which he resorted to ad hominem attacks implying that I was somehow disingenuous or less-than-forthcoming on this site about my identity.

    I find the claim that I am hiding behind an Internet alias to be not only inaccurate, but humorous when considering that Mr. Gill got my email address from my profile on this site, where my full name and status as a student in Maryland is given. (An undergraduate at the University of Maryland, College Park for those who care to know.) While I am of Indian ethnicity, I was born and raised here to parents that are American citizens and have lived here for over twenty years. My pride in my heritage does not translate into a blind nationalism for a country that I do not really have any ties to. And I will be first in line to criticize India when their actions merit it, such as when religious strife is permitted or the rights of minorities are not protected. Had Mr. Gill chosen to question me on India's close ties to Iran as an energy source, I would admit that I find these actions in conflict with the U.S.'s attempt to isolate the "rogue state".

    Mr. Gill, as he mentions on the home page of his site, is a political commentator whose work has been seen in many publications. In the interest of full disclosure, however, I think it is worth mentioning that he also happens to be a writer for the Pak Tribune, an Islamabad-based online news service. I believe it's only fair that this bit of information serve as a disclaimer to a site which posts entries with titles like "Come India, the myth is busted", "Indians behind masks" and "Indians, eat your hearts out!"

    He said of me, "If I didn't know any better, I would say you are Indian." Whereupon I might speculate that he is from Pakistan or some other Muslim country. This point is actually irrelevant. Mr. Gill's affiliation does not detract from the value of his argument; it is, however, a reminder not to throw around claims of disingenuity or bias when they are unwarranted.

    As to the actual matter at hand, I'll say this. India, situated in a dangerous "neighborhood", must have the means to protect itself. As a peaceful democracy, I would argue that it has earned that right. In my opinion, it is in the U.S.'s interest to promote India's economic expansion and military strength because they are a free country in South Asia whose growth as a world power is needed to balance the region. (An unstable dictatorship in Pakistan, India's other struggling small country neighbors, and the burgeoning power of communist China.) Nick commented on my previous post that Musharraf in charge of Pakistan is better than the fundamentalists, and with that I obviously agree. Still, we must not forget that democracy has intermittently existed in Pakistan in years past. With elements of democracy now coming to such unlikely places as Palestine, Ukraine, and Saudi Arabia, perhaps it's not too much to hope for a healthy democracy in Pakistan's future. That, I think, is the key to a lasting positive future for Indo-Pakistani relations.

    I opposed the release of the F-16s to Pakistan because I do not want anything to escalate tensions between India and Pakistan right now. Recently, constructive measures have been taken to reduce hostilities, such as the creation of a bus line linking divided Kashmir. Why then, when such progress is being made, introduce a new point of contention into the equation?

    All can agree, I think, that the one element of rivalry worth preserving between the two nations is in cricket. I understand that Pakistan apparently won a thrilling victory today--Mr. Gill, I surmise, should be pleased. As for me, I suppose it's a betrayal of my Indian roots that I've never seen a cricket match in my entire life--and the big sports event I'm eagerly awaiting is baseball's Opening Day! The only "mask" this Indian has ever put on is a catcher's mask.

    The purpose of Citizens Band is not to provide political "spin" or to be a source of one-sided commentary. I try my best to adhere to the oft-quoted Daniel Patrick Moynihan maxim "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." On that note, I thank Mr. Gill for providing an opposing perspective to my stated thoughts, and for prodding me to illustrate in greater detail my rationale for my position. These kinds of exchanges, I hope, are beneficial to both parties and to the readers of our blogs. The more said, the better, as long as what's being said is about the issue itself and not who is saying it.

    # posted by Citizen Jay : 5:40 PM 4 comments
    Comments:
    Adnan Gill responds
    # posted by Adnan Gill : March 29, 2005 2:26 AM

    I neither have time to waste nor any inkling in spending it by going through your monologs just to find your identity or your so-called responses.

    Oh, come now, Mr. Gill, surely you can do better than that? One might think you were avoiding the issue here. It's only a friendly little game of hardball...so step up!
    # posted by Citizen Jay : March 29, 2005 8:08 AM

    Why does this guy put himself through the trouble of complaining about what your name is? Also, Indian men are hot, especially when they're short. Holla.
    --- On to a more serious point:
    The F-16s should not have been given to Pakistan or any other country in the Middle East/Asia because of the tensions and distinct advantage that Pakistan will now have over India. Like you said, Pakistan considered a "rogue" nation.
    # posted by Jackie H : March 29, 2005 4:05 PM

    Adnan Gill a journalists!!

    You got to be kidding! He's a hack who used to post abuses and derogatory comments at the premier South Asian portal: South Asia Tribune. He was banned by us for hijacking the forum.
    http://citizensband.blogspot.com/200...s-part-ii.html
    A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

  11. #11
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo
    I have no objections to the deal, it will pave way for us to get a similar deal with China.
    Since Mr. Tronic in his colorful way of speaking challenged my claims about Indian proliferation, I posted the above aditorial.
    Spledid piece to proof US' double standards and Indian hypocracy when it comes to classical whining about nuclear proliferation in the region.

    Meet you're equivalent of A.Q. Khan, Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad!
    Not quite.

    Pak money can be smelt. The same money that kept Pakistan out of the 9/11 Commission Hearing!!

    Lobbyists and media on hire, hired!

    Further, with a name like Adnan, what do you expect him to write - pro India stuff? But he sure has the potential to be a good fiction writer!

    So, I say "Gill, ki Gall?"

    Last edited by Ray; 19 Apr 06, at 21:06.


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  12. #12
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 05
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    33
    LOL
    Exactly the kind of replies I was expecting!

  13. #13
    Liberté, Unité, Egalité Senior Contributor Tronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Dec 04
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo
    LOL
    Exactly the kind of replies I was expecting!
    whats there to grin about???

    Mohamed ElBaradei, the director the IAEA at the time, welcomed the deal by calling India "an important partner in the non-proliferation regime". However, attempts made by Pakistan to sign a similar agreement have been thwarted by the U.S. as well as the international community. The argument put forth is that Pakistan lacks the same energy requirements, and that the track record of Pakistan as a nuclear proliferator makes it impossible for it to have any sort of nuclear deal in the near future.
    the top article basically sums it all up... if u want to read the whole article, then read the article i posted in my previous posts above...
    Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
    -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

  14. #14
    Banned platinum786's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Jun 04
    Posts
    1,086
    India and clean, a third term springs to mind, oxymoron.

  15. #15
    Liberté, Unité, Egalité Senior Contributor Tronic's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Dec 04
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,997
    aren't u a bit embarassed??? especially when you happen to be from a country like Pakistan?
    Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
    -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •