RSS FeedsKalam Says The Nuclear Deal Is OK
|
04 Sep
2007 |
Here’s the link where APJ Abdul Kalam says:
“It’s unique, what he has done,” Mr. Kalam said on NDTV’s ‘Walk the Talk’ program when asked whether the Prime Minister can be complimented for having clinched the deal.
I wonder if he is simply being sarcastic or really means he likes the controversial nuclear deal. “Unique” is a very ambiguous expression.
Additionally, the link mentions:
“I told the Prime Minister that thorium reactors are very important,” he said.
Deriving nuclear energy out of thorium is a totally indigenous technique developed out of necessity when America imposed the nuclear embargo on India way back in the 70’s. This, many think, was a blessing in disguise, although I’m not sure what it cost to the nation. But the good thing is, if the government (the bureaucracy has been the biggest roadblock) lets our scientists work on the thorium technology unhindered, we perhaps don’t need a constraining nuclear deal with any country. Another good, and most important thing is that thorium-based reactors produce up to 10,000 times less radioactive waste than uranium and plutonium reactors. Many also say that Amemrica will be giving obsolete technology to India and the deal will boost America’s economy and cost us dear.
Have you been reading some text on this? Please share your thoughts on this blog.
Technorati Tags: kalam, india america nuclear deal, 123 deal, thorium technology
Email this link | Posted by Amrit | Tags: General
Add to: Digg | Del.icio.us | StumbleUpon | Mixx | Yahoo! | Netvouz | BlinkList | Furl
September 7th, 2007 at 8:11 am
The other day, while surfing channels, I managed to stop at a TV news channel, which was airing a discussion on the controversial 123 agreement with the USA. Earlier also, I had by chance had the opportunity to see the interview conducted by a leading journalist, in which he asked a senior left leader about his views and objections relating to the concerned agreement.
One issue, which is now becoming very clear is that those who are raising objections to this agreement, including the left, are not very sure what they are actually talking about. As one senior journalist asked, “It needs to be made clear to the country, whether those who are against this agreement have objection to the 123 agreement or are they having problem with the hydeact?” Most politicians do not have a direct answer to this and point out that the 123 agreement and the hydeact are one and the same thing.
Well, it seems that this actually is a total misrepresentation of the actual facts. The reality, it seems, is that despite the fact that the hydeact is the main constitutional law that governs the nuclear energy related issues in the USA, this deal has nothing to do with it and does not compel India to identify with or comply with the provisions of that controversial act. It seems that despite the fact that 123 agreement is a part of hydeact, which may theoretically seem to indicate that both hydeact and 123 agreement serve the same purpose, they are completely different from each other. Whereas, since the hydeact is a complete law, which caters to the overall needs of that country regarding the nuclear fuel requirements, it contain certain sections in it, that ensure that the USA’s interest is safeguarded. India, on the other hand has nothing to do with it. What the Indian government is getting into is a specific section of the hydeact, which is termed as the 123 agreement and specifies how USA will deal with other countries on the nuclear energy issue. Therefore, the fear of the left parties that India will now be governed by US laws is not valid.
Analysts also point out that though it is unwanted in the first place, India need not be unduly afraid of hydeact also. They indicate that certain sections or provisions of the hydeact to which left has objected are only guidelines regarding how the American president needs to carry out his duties with regard to the hydeact and do not apply on India. Thus, these are only guidelines, which the American Congress and Senate issue to the President of USA while finalizing any law applicable to that country so that the American interest is safeguarded but they are not a binding on the US president. Even Indian constitution has certain sections like the Preamble, which though being an integral part of Indian constitution is not a legal binding on the Indian government. No one can drag the central government to court asking it to enforce what is mentioned in the Preamble. In the very same manner, if all the provisions of hydeact and 123 agreement are not applied in totality, the agreement will still stand valid since the agreement goes on even if all the conditions mentioned in it are not fulfilled. Therefore, there is a lot of scope of flexibility in this agreement and the argument which the left is giving that the Indian interest has been sold to USA, is not valid.
Now, let us have a brief look at Indian’s security interest and how they are affected by this 123 agreement. The experts say that with the amount of nuclear energy available with India today, it can produce up to 2000 nuclear weapons a year and this figure will reduce to 200 once the provisions of the 123 agreement come into force. But alongside, it is also equally true that keeping in mind all the security threats that India has, mostly from its two neighbors China and Pakistan, it only needs to produce 20 nuclear weapons a year. So, even after applying all the safeguards that USA will ask for after this agreement is put into force, India will be in a position to carry on with its military nuclear program as per the requirements of the country’s security needs and produce weapons needed to fulfill India’s needs.
Moreover, according to the former President Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, the whole technology of producing the nuclear weapons is to undergo a dramatic change in the next few years. And mind you, few years here do not mean 2020 but it refers to the year 2010 at the most. By then, according to Dr. Kalam, a new technology of producing nuclear energy will be developed by scientists working on this issue world over (Including Indian Scientists at ISRO), which is going to be much more cheap and powerful. Indian scientist are said to be leading this research since the resources required to produce this new form of nuclear power are available only with a selected number of countries including India. This will eventually lead to a situation where the existing nuclear resources will ultimately put to the civilian use only. The government is doing just that. What’s wrong in it?
September 7th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Wow Alok! What an analysis. Simply brilliant! Why don’t you have your own blog? I will definitely be a regular visitor to your blog.
September 7th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
I totally agree with Alka :-). Let me know if I can help you set it up.
September 8th, 2007 at 10:39 am
Thanks for the suggestion. Actually I wanted to write something unique. I do have a blog but I am so involved in my work that i haven’t been able to concentrate on it. Hopefully, in the next few weeks, i will overcome all my problems and finish this unique project that i am working on. Then, I can be more focused. Well, I personally feel that if this write up, which I wrote in one go is good, then that should be the best because every word written in it has been well thought of. No, I am not complaining but there are some genuine problems created by my disability due to which i haven’t been able to do the things the way i would have liked. Hopefully, all this will change sooner than expected and i will be able to launch a blog and write.
June 24th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
First National issues tend to get argued through entrenched or acquired instincts.Historically our instincts rest on seeking the advantage of the moment with little long term vision without which one cannot project the power of a S;or we would not be saddled with a plethora of burdens by default,miscalculations,ommissions and commissions in all fields ranging from strategic to social and political paradigms.Second we are not a society which has any strategic sense or a strong affinity for the concept of the State.In fact we would like to dismantle the State for the individual which is why we prefer private to state ownership,acquiring goodies without having to create them,in brief we prefer quick fix fix advancement which is why we flock around Godmen for quick solutions to life’s problems.This may get individuals into riches but not
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:01 pm
alok if we are going to producing a technology by 2010 and we are gonna use it for civilian y the hell we need to sign an agreement with others for civilian nuclear reactors??
don’t you think we should not sign an agreement with any one because we will have our own technology and energy assets?
and more over if your boss as provision in agreemnet that he can check your house/or spy on you if in doubt any time would you still accept that job? yes it is just premeable doesn’t mean your boss gonna do it would you still accept the job in that company?
y should we sign an agreement which contain ambigious things in it?
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:04 pm
and more over usa is not india’s boss its just one of those neighbours around