Bush sends India nuclear request to Congress: sources

[deminks]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060310/pl_nm/nuclear_india_usa_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration on Thursday submitted to Congress its proposal to change U.S. law to allow the sale of nuclear technology to India, congressional sources said.

The sources told Reuters the administration wants the first of two needed legislative steps enacted by May, but said this would be difficult because the bill raises questions about an already complicated and controversial nuclear deal.

But the sources said the administration has proposed that instead of requiring lawmakers to vote in favor of the agreement, the accord would automatically take effect unless Congress moved to block it.

"They want us to change the law and give up the ability of having a higher standard for reviewing this unique agreement, one Congressional source said. "If the deal is so good, why are they so afraid of letting Congress consider it."

[49jim]

1. Block it! N/T

[Flabbergasted]

2. So long NPT

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/03/dadded02-1275-469e-8fae-b6f886015140.html

Indian Parallels (to Iran)

RFE/RL: Some people say the nuclear deal between the United States and non-NPT-member India, while NPT member Iran is going to be punished, could weaken the NPT. Do you agree?

Cirincione: Yes. The U.S. deal, brokered by President Bush and Prime Minister Singh, is a real blow to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. If this deal stands, the treaty could fall. Here's why: The president is basically violating Article 1 of the treaty. Article 1 says that no state with nuclear technology will sell that technology to another country if it assists or encourages that country's nuclear-weapons program. This sale does help India build more nuclear weapons; it does encourage India's nuclear-weapons program.

This deal is going to come back to haunt us. If we're making an exception for India, selling nuclear technology even though they're not a part of the , then why can't Russia decide that it's going to make an exception for Iran -- to sell nuclear technology to Iran even if Iran were to pull out of the treaty? Once you start playing this nuclear exceptionalism theme, once you start breaking the rules for favorite states, it becomes impossible to stop. That's why the India deal actually greatly weakens our efforts to enforce the NPT against Iran.

snip


U.S. Credibility

RFE/RL: You've said in the past that Secretary Rice has been successful in uniting the international community against Iran's stance. Now we hear statements by Vice President Cheney or others implying possible military actions against Iran. Could that harm the unity?

Cirincione: Yes. What's disturbing about the vice president's remarks is, number one, that he's getting involved in this discussion at all -- because people remember the role he played in Iraq, where he basically misled the world, misled the American people, gave a lot of false information, and was the prime architect of the war against Iraq. Number two, to have the vice president intervening at this point could lead other countries to conclude that all this talk about a peaceful settlement is not true. Countries may start to believe the U.S.'s true agenda is regime change and that they're just using this nuclear issue as a way to get it. If that becomes the widespread view, then support for the U.S. and European position will collapse.

[Flabbergasted]

3. Perhaps the UN should entertain impeachment hearings?

[Flabbergasted]

4. Other unintended consequences of the Indo/US deal

http://us.rediff.com/news/2006/mar/09kreponchat.htm?q=tp&file=.htm

Rajdeep Reddy asked, Hello Sir, There was an opinion artcile in the NYT on March 6th, titled "Iran's Best Friend", which outlined that the deal with India is fraught with danger for the non-proliferation regime. Kindly comment on that.

Michael Krepon answers, India and Iran are entirely different cases. But the timing as well as substance of the US-India deal make it harder to close ranks against Iran. And if the Nuclear Suppliers Group is weakened by the March 2nd deal, then the gates of nuclear commerce will be open to others.

sp asked, Hi,what does US gain with this deal?Where do u see china moving?

Michael Krepon answers, The Bush administration has placed a very large bet that prospective Indo-US cooperation will outweigh negative proliferation consequences.

Michael Krepon is President Emeritus and Co-Founder of the Henry L Stimson Center and South Asia expert. The Stimson Center, founded in 1989, specializes in threat reduction and international security issues.

[Flabbergasted]

5. Ok so what does the US gain...

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=11576

The Bush administration's motivations behind this deal lie in Washington's strategy of convincing India to become a South Asian ally of the United States. The purpose of turning India into a U.S. ally in the region is primarily due to Washington's concerns over the growing power of China. There is recognition in Washington that China will pose a strategic threat to U.S. interests in the future. Nevertheless, Washington also sees India as a stable partner in a critical region.

One aspect of U.S.-India cooperation that has caused unrest in India is how the relationship will affect India's relationship with Iran. While India and Iran were on opposite sides during the Cold War, in the last decade they have improved relations dramatically. The two countries have engaged in joint military exercises, and they also have increased economic ties. However, as India and the United States improve relations, Washington has put pressure on New Delhi to weaken its relationship with Tehran. This has caused much domestic unrest in India, with lawmakers seeing the U.S.-India nuclear deal as placing too many restrictions on India's foreign policy.

The Bush administration, however, apparently recognized India's interests in this matter and altered its position, stating that India can go ahead with a pipeline deal involving Iran and Pakistan. For instance, on March 4, Bush said in Islamabad, in a statement more directed at Pakistan, "Our beef with Iran is not the pipeline."

[CONN]

6. Congress must block it!

The NPT is the most widely accepted arms control agreement. As of early 2000 a total of 187 states were Parties to the NPT. Cuba, Israel, India, and Pakistan were the only states that were not members of the NPT.
source : http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/


And to quote Patrick Buchanan (wow):
Israel, which has also refused to sign the NPT and has 200 to 300 nuclear weapons, will demand the same nuclear technology that India got. On what grounds can Bush deny Israel?

And while Bush may grant exemptions from U.S. law and the NPT regime for countries he views as friendly and democratic, China is likely to provide similar aid to its friends, democratic or not, and step into the breach Bush opened with Pakistan.

Iran will use the U.S. concessions to India to show U.S. hypocrisy. For unlike New Delhi, Tehran signed the NPT, agreed to open up its nuclear facilities, and never tested a bomb. On this one, Democratic Rep. Ed Markey is right: "America cannot preach nuclear temperance from a barstool."

source : http://antiwar.com/pat/

[wordpix2]

7. my head is gonna explode with all the bad decisions * makes. Pls. we have

to get thisguy OUT of office!

[0007]

8. What fucking world is junior living in?

As a first step, the administration's proposal would exempt India from the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits nuclear sales to non-NPT states, if Bush makes seven determinations.

These include India providing Washington with a "credible" plan for separating its civilian and military nuclear facilities and supporting international efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear enrichment and reprocessing technology.

Although Bush and Singh announced that India would place 14 of 22 civilian nuclear power reactors under international inspections to guard against weapons diversion, one congressional source said the data sent to Congress on this point was incomplete.

[dusty64]

9. Our regime giving

nuclear technology to our rivals, spreading weapons of mass destruction, helping America to become a third world nation. Strong on national security my ass!