Nuclear Deal With India a Victory for Bush

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Do you have a link on that, especially the "corner China" part?

No :-)

[bishop]

i'm not sure i follow... what "back door" are you talking about? singh shoving a mango up bush's ass?

heh.. seriously though.. what kind of hypothetical are you worried about? india already has nukes..

congress still needs to approve this deal though.. with the dubai deal in such chaos, it will definitely be interesting to see if they take a similar track with this issue.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: bishop what kind of hypothetical are you worried about? india already has nukes

That is not about India's nuclear weapons along with its system.

China's (potential) needs would continue to grow.
What results it may bring and/or cause ?
India may become the state, that would help to control those (unknown today) events, then.

[bishop]

i almost think i understand what you said - "the time may come when we will rely on india to keep china in check."..

that's fine if that's the case, i agree with that position for the most part.. still, it would be really nice if we could get more than mangos from this deal. maybe singh should've gotten a little more ambitious - who knows what else he could've gotten from bush.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: bishop i'm not sure i follow... what "back door" are you talking about? singh shoving a mango up bush's ass?

As much as I would PAY to see that, the "back door" I was referring to was the REAL reason for something a politician does is not always the reason we are told.

If a president wants to do something (like invade a country, for example) that would be unpopular, just give the sheep a phony reason they will eat up and this way you still get to do what you wanted.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: bishop "the time may come when we will rely on india to keep china in check."

That is correct.
That is the reason Bush was so pleased on that agreement with India. It would additionally keep preasure on Iran, in hope political and administrative changes emerge, one day.
What seems to be hard to achieve directly in Iraq, U.S. tries different "routes" to box Iran today, to reach its goals in the Middle-East region.
Look at the world map, to better understand a role along with importance Iraq play in that whole enterprise. Russia does not want to give up its initiative, either. (Putin) By pushing Hamas into political stance to be changed towards Israel, Russia can accomplish much greater goal, that would influence all the Arabic nations. That will have its effect on events in Iraq, as well.

Unknown ?
Saudi Arabia, with its supportive policy for Sunni.
As of today, those guys love to occupy palaces.

What China is going to say about it ? :-)

[Sonart]

He finally got something right. Kudos to President Bush for his recent trip to India. This could be the single most significant (positive rather than negatively significant) and valuable international gester he's made in his presidency. We can no longer sit back and smugly think of India as some quaint former British raj populated by silly forehead dotted people who talk and dress funny, surrounded by millions of toothless untouchables wearing filthy loincloths and turbans.

India has become, along with China, the continent's fastest growing economic and political giant, and as a thriving and stable middle class dominated democracy, with - thanks to millions of Indian expats - virtual blood ties to the United States, India has the potential to be one of America's most valuable strategic, economic and political allies.

As the world's most populace and increasingly successful democracy, we have to accept India into the league of major international political players. That they have a nuclear capability must be as accepted a political reality, as are China, Russia and Israel, to be dealt with as an equal rather than some doddering loose cannon to be lectured to and sanctioned.

Our nuclear technology deal with India is not only important politically but is also a valuable step in halting the explosive growth in the burning of fossil fuels.

Sadly, as some talking media-head pointed out the other night, maybe one in ten Americans are even aware of the significance of this trip, some even suggesting that Bush is simply sneaking out of town to get away form Portsgate, Katrinagate and the bad news in Iraq.

Not that I'm forgetting any of that. After all, even Nixon went to China. Still, good on ya, George.

.

[bishop]

i agree that it was a good decision, but don't you think bush should've fought for more than mangos?

this is definitely a win for india in many real ways.. despite my support for this deal, all of our benefits are completely intangible - unless you're satisfied with mangos.

[rmnunez]

Why must the critical left always seek some "ulterior" motive? Google is likely experiencing a surge of enquiries relating Bushian cabineteers and shareholders of "General Electric" or other nuclear technology purveyors. The deal makes sense, by institutionalizing a technological relationship maybe the US can monitor any Indian transfers.

India has detonated a nuke, they are known to have a limited nuclear arsenal and some ballistics technology. India is admired as a third-world leader, they have a great pacifist tradition, a huge market, powerful economy and top rate technology. In some way India, though thuroughly capitalist, is a model for the critical left. They have poverty which helps show them as victims of neoliberal globalization, they have high technology and democracy which shows these aren't western exclusives, they have a huge market which gives them muscle in global trade, they have a large surface with some wonderful natural environments which makes them ecologically attractive. For India to embrace united statian nuclear policy enrages the critical left which can only explain this with some hidden and secret motive behind the scenes, mangoes?

I think the deal is for the US to somehow curtail any Indian nuclear technology transfers through non-IAEA monitoring, with an exception to the Agency's restrictions for transfers to India that are approved by the US. The advantage for the US may be some sort of 'exclusive' on upper-end technology transfer, though I'd anticipate non-US developers will bid.

[bishop]

deals like those almost always have stipulations which state that the only valid bids are those from companies based in either of the contracting parties. even though i haven't seen any specifics of the deal, i am very confident that the only companies entitled to bid on nuclear technology contracts will be american companies.

the classic example are the stipulations we've attached to loans made to african countries.. we give them loans and in exchange, purchases of manufactured products must be made from american companies. another form of protectionism/mercantalism that falls unter the wto's radar.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Bishop This is definitely a win for india in many real ways.. despite my support for this deal, all of our benefits are completely intangible - unless you're satisfied with mangos.

Sometimes it's the intangible things that are the most valuable. This is what makes this so un-Bushesque. It's foresight over stubborn reactionism.

.

[bishop]

no disagreement here - i just think we could've received a little more than a friendly handshake and mangos.. bush is the shittiest negotiator on the planet imo - whenever he makes a deal, the other party always wins hand over fist while we get nothing other than increased ease of exporting jobs...

i have said that i think india's a natural ally - so i don't have a problem with the deal from a national security standpoint.. and it definitely makes sense geopolitically - i'm sure the chinese and pakistanis weren't happy about this deal.. and not that this is a really persuasive rationale - but i work in IT, so i work with lots of off the boat indians.. i've always been amazed at how effortlessly they seem to assimilate into our society.

[RickSp]

I think the NYTimes got it right. Bush's deal with India only advances Iran's position.

Iran's Best Friend

At the rate that President Bush is going, Iran will be a global superpower before too long. For all of the axis-of-evil rhetoric that has come out of the White House, the reality is that the Bush administration has done more to empower Iran than its most ambitious ayatollah could have dared to imagine. Tehran will be able to look back at the Bush years as a golden era full of boosts from America, its unlikely ally. Fast-forward to Thursday's nuclear deal with India, in which President Bush agreed to share civilian nuclear technology with India despite its nuclear weapons programs and its refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. This would be a bad idea at any time, rewarding India for flouting the basic international understanding that has successfully discouraged other countries from South Korea to Saudi Arabia from embarking on their own efforts to build nuclear weapons. But it also undermines attempts to rein in Iran, whose nuclear program is progressing fast and unnerving both its neighbors and the West. The India deal is exactly the wrong message to send right now, just days before Washington and its European allies will be asking the International Atomic Energy Agency to refer Iran's case to the United Nations Security Council for further action. Iran's hopes of preventing this depend on convincing the rest of the world that the West is guilty of a double standard on nuclear issues. Mr. Bush might as well have tied a pretty red bow around his India nuclear deal and mailed it as a gift to Tehran.

I have long held the Bush was Osama's Best Friend. Perhaps he is Tehran's as well.

[bishop]

i see that as a red herring.. iran would've proceeded with their own nuke plans regardless of this deal with india. whenever any country has wanted nukes, they've done whatever it took to make them - against intl law if necessary....

[BobbyO]

Quote by: RickSp I think the NYTimes got it right. Bush's deal with India only advances Iran's position. Iran's Best Friend I have long held the Bush was Osama's Best Friend. Perhaps he is Tehran's as well.

The idea of the article seems to be is that this offers Iran the opportunity to ignore the "international community." But they are already doing that, and it is a very naive person who thinks Iran is not interested in nuclear weaponry, and not do what it takes to secure it. Its based upon viewing iran and India the same.

OTOH, India now needs to open up, when it had not in the past. And what should the world fear more- an open Indian nuclear program, or a closed Iranian one?

[Boetie]

There is to much ambiquity in this deal. What makes it harder to decipher this issue is that China is not saying anything.

If China were to make a comment on it one way or another, we can get a better picture of what is going on.

The way to look at this is by using a Texas Holdem analogy.

It's obvious that none of the three players, China, India and the United States is holding the nuts. [note: nuts means unbeatable hand endnote]

Who has the better hand could be anyone's guess. China's silence may be intepreted as a wait and see move, a sign of weakness, but a wrong move on U.S or India's part could allow China justification to create a naval prescence in the region just as they are doing in the region of Tawain, which could be why China is being quiet.

Some are saying this deal will face an uphill battle in Congress. Let's look into why that is. If Congress allows for the deal, what kind of signal will it send to nations looking for nuclear weapons? Will those nations see acquiring nuclear weapons as a stepping stone to being a global player? Will Pakistan get pissed off and therefore we lose an ally in the fight against terrorism? not to say that Pakistan has ever been a good ally in that issue.

Can the we trust India on critical issues such as U.S-China relationship or Iran's nuclear weapons program?

How can the United States answer charges to playing favorites? Strange how the Republicans are being quiet on that question and the Democrats are openly saying the nuclear deal is controversial.

It's too early to tell and the game is still in progress, but I can guarantee all of you no one is holding the nuts.

[bishop]

china would care much more about the sale of weapons systems to india, rather than sharing nuclear technology/know-how.. and the chinese are going to continue building their military - this deal also doesn't affect that..

as far as pakistan goes, i don't know about you, but i don't see that country as really being an ally - and definitely not a long-term ally.. india, on the other hand, has solid prospects of being a long-term ally.

[RickSp]

Quote by: BobbyO The idea of the article seems to be is that this offers Iran the opportunity to ignore the "international community." But they are already doing that, and it is a very naive person who thinks Iran is not interested in nuclear weaponry, and not do what it takes to secure it. Its based upon viewing iran and India the same. OTOH, India now needs to open up, when it had not in the past. And what should the world fear more- an open Indian nuclear program, or a closed Iranian one?

The deal is based on a whopper of a double standard, just confirming the imperial arrogance than the US doesn't need to pay attention to treaties or international agreements.

The suggestion that India needs to open up is laughable. Have you called a "help desk" recently? India is already wide open to trade. All this deal does, besides strenthening Iran's positon, is to give US industrial vendors a short term advantage in selling India nuclear components.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Bishop i see that as a red herring.. iran would've proceeded with their own nuke plans regardless of this deal with india. whenever any country has wanted nukes, they've done whatever it took to make them - against intl law if necessary....

I agree.


.

[rmnunez]

I see no relationship between the Iran and India cases, other than that they involve the same sector.