United States decide to transfter the nuclear technology to india, despite the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. when the chinese was pressing on Iran to cooperate with the UN nuclear watchdog and suspend nuclear enrichment activities.

I think bush was becoming more and more like an actor. If USA didn't follow the treaty, why do you think the chinese and other member are going to abide by this treaty, the next thing i expect to see is that other nuclear power are going to help Iran with his big project. you know it's very dangerous for usa. Can i have you opinion about this bush policy.

Source: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayA...bcontinent&col=

Under the deal signed while Bush visited Delhi, the United States offered India nuclear fuel and technology in return for India agreeing to put a wall between its civilian and military nuclear facilities and place its civilian programme under international inspections.

Some US lawmakers and nuclear experts have criticised the deal, saying it weakens international safeguards, especially the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which India has refused to join.

Seems about the same deal that Russia offered Iran. Not sure of all the details but the similarities are there.

the main difference here is that India already has nuclear weapons, while Iran is looking to develop them. i see this almost as helping bring India towards joining the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, or at least a stepin that direction.
-Matt

..

Originally Posted by achinese

United States decide to transfter the nuclear technology to india, despite the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. when the chinese was pressing on Iran to cooperate with the UN nuclear watchdog and suspend nuclear enrichment activities.

I think bush was becoming more and more like an actor. If USA didn't follow the treaty, why do you think the chinese and other member are going to abide by this treaty, the next thing i expect to see is that other nuclear power are going to help Iran with his big project. you know it's very dangerous for usa. Can i have you opinion about this bush policy.

It's Exactly Opposite of that ......... It's No Secret that India has NUclear Weapons ....... and Untill this Deal was Signed No International Agency had Access to India's NUclear Program .......... For the First Time India Would have to open It's Nuclear Program to the World ....... Now India has to Seperate it's Civilian and Military Nuclear program and Open It's Civilian reactors to the IAEA .

Source:BBC News

Atomic agency hails US-India deal

The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog has welcomed a nuclear agreement between the US and India.

International Atomic Energy Agency chief (IAEA) Mohammed ElBaradei said it would boost non-proliferation efforts.

The UK and France also hailed the deal. But it was criticised by some members of the US Congress, who said it would lead to the spread of nuclear weapons.

Under the accord, India gets access to US civil nuclear technology and opens its nuclear facilities to inspection.


It's a necessary agreement. It's one that will help both our peoples
George W Bush


US President George W Bush - who finalised the agreement with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Delhi - called it "historic".

However, Mr Bush admitted it might be hard to get it through the US Congress, which must ratify it.

The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says Mr Bush has a fight on his hands, after being accused of sending out the wrong signal just as America and its allies try to limit Iran's nuclear ambitions.

'Milestone'

India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).


The president has blown a hole in the nuclear rules the whole world has been playing by
Ed Markey, Democrat lawmaker
Under the agreement, India will classify 14 of its 22 nuclear facilities as being for civilian use, and thus open to inspection.

Many supporters of the NPT believe the deal ignores India's nuclear weapons programme.

Mr ElBaradei said the US-Indian deal would end Delhi's nuclear isolation and spur non-proliferation efforts.

"It would be a milestone, timely for ongoing efforts to consolidate the non-proliferation regime, combat nuclear terrorism and strengthen nuclear safety," he said.


HAVE YOUR SAY
With the India-US accord, the West has created a long-term ally and friend in the East
Arun Khanna, Indianapolis, United States

Send us your comments
US-India 'seismic shift'
Mr ElBaradei also said the agreement was "an important step towards satisfying India's growing need for energy".

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said the accord could "make a significant contribution to energy security... as well as representing a net gain for the non-proliferation regime".

French President Jacques Chirac, who signed a similar deal with India last month, said the agreement would help fight climate change and non-proliferation efforts.

'Historic failure'

However there was a mixed reaction in Washington.

Some congressmen cautiously welcomed the agreement, despite the lack of details.


NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA
India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction
Nuclear power supplies about 3% of India's electricity
By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's electricity
India has limited coal and uranium reserves
Its huge thorium reserves - about 25% of the world's total - are expected to fuel its nuclear power programme long-term
Source: Uranium Information Center

Global nuclear powers

Ed Royce, Republican chairman of the House subcommittee on terrorism non-proliferation, said there was enthusiastic support for improving ties with India.

However, he added that the deal had wider implications that Congress would have to consider carefully.

Ed Markey, senior House Democrat, said the agreement was a "historic nuclear failure" that compromised American security.

"The president has blown a hole in the nuclear rules the whole world has been playing by," Mr Markey said.

Pakistan - India's regional rival - said it would be pressing the US to give Islamabad the same kind of civilian nuclear co-operation.

"We also have a claim... especially because Pakistan is a fossil fuel-deficit country," Pakistani foreign ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told the BBC.

However, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told India's Zee News that "this is not the time for such an arrangement with Pakistan".

"There have been concerns in terms of proliferation with Pakistan," she said in an apparent reference to a row over Pakistan's top nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who admitted to leaking secrets to North Korea, Libya and Iran.

PEace
-=SF_13=-

The US "proliferated" nuclear weapons technology throughout the 40's-50's-60's and 70's through our cooperative programs with the UK and France.
The difference is we didn't sell it to the highest bidder, actively evade international control regimes and use it to militarily destabilize entire regions. I can't wait to hear our Pakistani "allies" piss and moan about the proposed nuclear agreement with India. Their national hero Khan could use his ill gotten gains to buy enough nuclear fuel to run a commercial nuclear power generation facility for the next hundred years.
Oh, I forgot. He's sorry he did that, isn't he. We will see how sorry he is when a couple million Koreans get torched by his customer base.

Agreed
You know everyone can come up with a very good augument regardless how worse it might mean. the things really concerned me is the consequence. when USA is free to share their nulcear tech with us_friendly regime, the other nuclear powers will also follow suite, they gonna pass on their nuclear tech to Iran. Iran pass on to other iran_friendly regime. I mean it's suicidal to usa. and just another big step closer to "end of the world". the Nulcear non—proliferation will be exist in name only.

when the world is on the verge of total destruction. then the us congress will sit down talk about who is to blame for the doom day. I mean is that all too late???

End of the world or end of the world as we know it. The only certainty is change. We evolve or we die. Using 50 year old diplomatic mechaisms to address the problems of today is un-informed. The nuclear genie is already out of the bottle. The more nations we have sharing responsibility for keeping folks sane, the better off we are. The old nuclear powers used old relationships and failed. India is a major actor in the non-aligned world. Showing India it is in her best interest to control nuclear technology is in everyone's best interest; especially her close neighbors.

Originally Posted by G Connor

Using 50 year old diplomatic mechaisms to address the problems of today is un-informed. The nuclear genie is already out of the bottle. .

so you mean the usa 's new diplomatic mechaisms is to share reponsibility by passing on the nuclear tech to other country. and what will be the consequence. did usa have already come up with some new revolutionary high tech to stop the nuclear bomb from being lauching by some other not_so_usa_friendly regime. if not, you better have to take everything into consideration.

who know for sure that the nuclear bundle doesn't come with some remote control device. therefore, india would have to be blamed for something they didn't intented or even being dragged into the nuclear holocaust.