|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << March15, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]WTO,Nuke updates etc |
March18, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]Rebecca,Sukla,Ram Narayan & Yogi posts >> |
|
[1] From: Sukla Sen <suklasen@yahoo.com> Date: Wed Mar 15, 2006 Subject: Modern India's Nuke Obsession and Rejection of South Asian Heritage Nepali Times 10 March 06 - 16 March 06 INDIA GETS US NOD ON NUKES: MK GANDHI WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN INDIA NUCLEAR, NOR SOUGHT THE ATOMIC BLESSINGS OF THE US by Kanak Mani Dixit NO NUKES: South Africa's Gandhian, Nelson Mandela said no to nuclear weapons. How much of the satisfaction of being 'India' can present-day India take, if there is cause for satisfaction, that is? Much of the heritage of what is today the nation-state of India derives of course from the 'Indian civilisation' to which the contribution has been made by regions as far afield as (present-day) Tibet and Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Burma. But there are certain actions for which discredit must go solely to nation-state India, the post-1947 phenomenon. Such as the nuclear weaponisation underway, to which George W Bush has recently given his unipolar superpower blessing. The 'smiling Buddha' nuclear explosion of 1974 at Pokhran and the BJP-engineered Pokhran-II explosions of 1998 were actions that went against the civilisational attributes of the Subcontinent. This need to go nuclear has emanated from an incomprehensible and unjustified sense of inferiority harboured by the Indian power elite. Unhappy with the 'third world' stigma that represents the reality of the majority population, it has reached out for artificial markers of modernity that are brittle and unconvincing. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi would not have supported the 1974 test nor the 1998 explosions. He would most likely have gone into a protest fast and satyagraha against their regressive message. Rabindranath Tagore would have written a ballad against the misuse of the name of the Sakyamuni to announce the fission at Pokhran-I. Boy, are the strategic thinkers happy to be part of the nuclear club, to be able to discuss '??throw-weights' and 'mutual assured destruction', 'delivery vehicles' and 'failsafe systems'. The world has been there, done that but the boys with their toys are thrilled. Among them is one elevated to be president of the republic. Having grown up as brown sahibs, here is the opportunity to actually be a sahib. They wouldn't care to acknowledge to their minions that going 'nuclear' no longer requires great technological capability. Any half-capable university physics department could manage an atomic explosion. There are many countries in the southern hemisphere capable of developing nuclear weaponry but which have decided to forgo this lethal arsenal. India should be shamed by the forebearance and abstinence of the Australias, Malaysias, Indonesias or Egypts. In 1994 Argentina, Brazil and Chile brought into force the Treaty of Tlatelolco and agreed to forgo their existing nuclear programs. South Africa under Nelson Mandela took the most Gandhian step of the nuclear era by relinquishing its existing nuclear weaponisation program. The decision-making classes and opinion-makers of these southern countries did not have the level of self-questioning that they needed a nuclear weapon to provide confidence before the world. Meanwhile, what of the anti-nuclear proliferation cacophony that emanated prior to 1999 from Indian diplomacy and intelligentsia? Suddenly, the reference to Gandhian ahimsa as the Indian gift to the world has disappeared from addresses by New Delhi's representatives at the UN in New York. Now, it is all realpolitic and India has more or less stopped speaking for the South at large. The nuclear anointing of India, at the cost of nuclear non-proliferation, is the most recent manifestation of American and western understanding of what India is becoming and what the West wants India to be. The first hints of the changing fortunes of the Indian upper classes, in terms of wanting to be part of the sophisticated worldly set, came when the manipulative corporatised Miss World and Miss Universe competitions decided to place their respective crowns on a Sushmita Sen or a Aishwarya Rai. The process of co-optation had begun. Since then, the economic growth of India has made those within the Washington Beltway suddenly keen to co-opt those within the New Delhi Ring Road. As for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, who cares for the destruction of an entire international regime when the short term agenda of George W Bush dictates otherwise? Bush and his vainglorious administration can be expected to do few things right and the Indian power elite have simply decided to take advantage of this situation for the sake of their own short-term goals which goes in the face of their Southasian civilisational heritage. Who are you going to use those nuclear-tipped missiles against? Do you really need them to become a world power and would you not become a better world power when your children are better fed? ------------------- [2] From: "C R Bijoy" <crbijoy@indiatimes.com> Date: Wed Mar 15, 2006 Subject: Common Sense in Arabic crbijoy If you think that all Arabs are raving lunatics, waiting to burn down another embassy and happily bomb themselves to kingdom come, then watch this video. (http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ai=21\ 4&ar=1050wmv&ak=null) Don't think this will be up for many days. -------------------------- [3] From: "Ram Narayanan" <ramn_one@adelphia.net> Date: Wed Mar 15, 2006 Subject: The Varanasi Miracle STOP THE "RIOT ENTERPRENURS" IN THEIR TACKS (Vijay Times, 15 March 2006) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mahajanapada --------------------- [4] From: rkurian@bgl.vsnl.net.in Date: Wed Mar 15, 2006 Subject: Welcome to the Real World! http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200603151001.htm?headline=US~opposes~Rus\ sian~supply~of~nuclear~fuel~to~India US opposes Russian supply of nuclear fuel to India Washington, March 15 (UNI): The US has opposed Russia to supply India with nuclear fuel for its Tarapur nuclear power station because New Delhi has not yet fulfilled its commitments made under the landmark civilian nuclear deal it had signed recently with the US, sources said. State Department sources said on Tuesday that supply of nuclear fuel to India was alright as long as it had taken the steps called for in the US-India civilian nuclear cooperation initiative that envisages New Delhi to bring its nuclear facilities under conformity with NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and international safeguards. Five years ago, the United States strongly opposed a similar move by Russia. Earlier in the day, a Foreign Ministry official in New Delhi said Russia had informed the NSG of its decision to supply fuel for the Tarapur reactors. Reacting to this, Deputy State Department spokesman, Adam Ereli, told reporters here that the United States was well aware of India's need for nuclear fuel, but that it first had to fulfill its obligations under the agreement it signed. "We recognise that they have need for fuel, and we think that deals to supply that fuel should move forward on the basis of the joint initiative, on the basis of steps that India will take, but has not yet taken," Ereli said. The US-India nuclear deal, which reverses three decades of US policy, was finalised during President Bush's recent visit to India. It will give India access to US civil nuclear technology. In return, India has agreed to open 14 of its nuclear facilities to inspection. Eight others have been designated as military sites and will remain closed. But the deal has yet to be ratified by the US Congress and the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), of which Russia is a member. The NSG controls trade in atomic fuel, which has long been denied to India after it conducted nuclear tests and refused to join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia, which is a member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) cannot supply fuel to countries like India which have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). But, media reports from India, quoting an Indian Foreign Ministry spokesman said, Moscow has agreed to send the fuel using a NSG "Safety Exception Clause' which allows fuel transfers if there is reason to believe that starving a reactor of fuel could result in a nuclear hazard. The fuel from Moscow was needed to ensure two units at the Tarapur power station continued to operate safely, the reports said. The Tarapur Power Reactor Fuel Reprocessing Plant is among the 14 nuclear facilities to be opened by India for international safeguards under the deal with the US. According to Uranium Information Center, India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction Nuclear power supplies about 3 per cent of India's electricity. By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25 per cent of the country's electricity. |
|
| << March15, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]WTO,Nuke updates etc |
March18, 2006 - [India Thinkers Net]Rebecca,Sukla,Ram Narayan & Yogi posts >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |