Congress may not have enough time to pass the deal, unless a special session is held. And if it’s not passed by this congress, it’s probably going to go through another congressional hearing which means more delay and possibly more strings on it.

This deal is blown out of proportion by Indian media.. It’s really not a big deal. And I don’t see a lot of benefits for India from the deal. Afterall, nuclear energy is extremely expensive for countries like India. The US made it out to be a big deal for India, so India will join the US side in containing the rising China.

And really, China is not seeing India as a strategic competitor. Other than that People’s Daily piece, this deal simply is ignored by the Chinese media. The only beneficiary is the Neocons who’re recruiting more pawns and the military industrial complex who’s going to make billions from the deal and future weapon sales to India.

September 12, 2008 @ 1:43 am | Comment

And I don’t see a lot of benefits for India from the deal.

I would disagree on that point – I think that this was extremely favourable for India. Whether civilian nuclear power is a red herring is another matter.

so India will join the US side in containing the rising China… And really, China is not seeing India as a strategic competitor.

So do you think that China should consider India a strategic competitor if you say India will join the “US side” against China, or that it is not much to worry about.

There has been debate on whether India should be a concern for China or not – I know that many Chinese are dismissive of India’s potential. But I would more question whether India would back up the US against China. The answer to that would be worth a lot of money.

September 12, 2008 @ 2:11 am | Comment

Strategically, China should not worry too much about India, as long as Pakistan is around. India is a country with a lot of pride, but by signing this deal with the US and NSG, india gives up her right to further nuclear test. Hence India would be less of a threat to China and Pakistan. As for Pakistan, they don’t have to test since all their nukes are from China. China will fight India till the last Pakistani.

I can see why the elites in India want this deal, the haves always want to cozy up with the US and send their kids to the US for good. No surprise, Chinacom bosses are doing the same thing. It’s just too damn expensive for India.

It’s not extremely favorable to India, since every country can share nuclear tech and materials under the NSG/IAEA frame, other than IRAN, North Korea and Pakistan. Again, this is totally blown out of proportion.

September 12, 2008 @ 3:16 am | Comment

by signing this deal with the US and NSG, india gives up her right to further nuclear test

I know that this was proposed, but did it make it into the final version of the agreement? Do you have a source for this? The following article quotes an opinion that says it does not:

http://tinyurl.com/46cw74

China will fight India till the last Pakistani.

Assuming, of course, Pakistan would intervene on China’s side. It might well object to being used as a suicide squad for Beijing.

It’s just too damn expensive for India.

I think the elites can afford quite easily to send their kids to Europe and the US to study.

September 12, 2008 @ 3:24 am | Comment

The elites want more kickbacks, right? Buying potentially hundreds of billions of Nuclear technology… someone is going to be really rich, in Delhi.

You are right that it did not make to the final version of the treaty with the NSG. And that’s the whole point why India would go through all these troubles. Because if the ban on nuclear test made to the treaty, India would just sign the NPT(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty) and save all the mess. India made a point not to sign the NPT because India thinks nuclear test as a sovereignty decision. Well, the truth is that India does not have enough data/tech to do the simulation as the big 5 are doing.

But, Indian government made a statement of self enforced ban on future nuclear test. That’s why the opponents in the NSG let India go. If India tests again, there will be a withdraw of all nuclear material and technology from the NSG countries. Also, you need to take the Hyde act into account.

Overall, India ALMOST signed the NPT, so I don’t see any reason not to let India have the nuclear tech and materials for civilian uses. Again, this is really not a big deal, had India signed NPT, she could have enjoyed everything all others are having for decades.

Neocons and Bush made this a big deal to recruit India and the potential weapon market. Only the elites in both country benefit, not the poor

September 12, 2008 @ 3:35 am | Comment

Raj, you didn’t get what I meant by “China will fight India to the last Pakistani”

China will not fight India. By giving FC-17 to Pakistan with below market prize, by giving nukes design to Pakistan, by selling cheap weapons to Pakistan, China never needs to fight India again. You see, it’s a win-win for both China and Pakistan as Pakistan receives billions of aids from the US, too. The only one hurting in this strategic triangle is India.

If I were the leaders of India, I would just make peace with Pakistan and spend billions in defence into building roads and running water system for the billion poor. Cold war is for the rich kids.

September 12, 2008 @ 3:44 am | Comment

Because if the ban on nuclear test made to the treaty, India would just sign the NPT

Yeah, exactly – which was why I didn’t understand you when you originally said India had given up its right to perform nuclear tests.

Only the elites in both country benefit, not the poor

Arguably the poor never benefit from military-related deals, just as China’s poor don’t benefit from space flights.

China will not fight India. By giving FC-17 to Pakistan with below market prize, by giving nukes design to Pakistan, by selling cheap weapons to Pakistan, China never needs to fight India again.

That doesn’t mean China will not have to fight India. Pakistan may be developing the means of disuading India from attacking it, but that does not mean it would definitely intervene militarily if China and India were to move towards war.

If I were the leaders of India, I would just make peace with Pakistan and spend billions in defence into building roads and running water system for the billion poor.

1. India has been working to formally put aside its differences with Pakistan – but it is not like they can just push a button to make it happen.

2. The same thing could be said about China and the countries it envisages it might have to fight, except it might spend some money on health care instead of roads (of which it is already building a lot).

September 12, 2008 @ 4:05 am | Comment

India didn’t sign the NPT but the Indian government promised in written statement that she will not do more nuclear test. And if India tests again, this treaty signed with the NSG will be nullified and according to the Hyde Act, the US will take back everything, tech and material. Plus the NSG countries which includes everyone that matters will embargo India in not only nuclear technology but other techs. In short, India would be greatly hurt if she tested again.

Raj, China’s space program is not that expensive as this Nuclear deal will be. China also can use the technology developed in the program to develop the high tech economy. Chinese government has a huge surplus in revenues, not the case for Indian government. Plus, China’s poverty problem is not as severe as that in India?

September 12, 2008 @ 4:44 am | Comment

Raj, as for the conflicts between India and China. It’s not going to be a hot war considering the terrain of the borders between the two countries. India cannot grab anything from China and China is not interested in taking any more lands from India.

There are only rocks there, other than pumping up one’s ego, it is of no use at all.

China is just playing the coldwar game by making Pakistan strong, that and the Muslim-Hindu conflicts within India, China doesnt need to take the Indian threat very seriously.

You didn’t get China’s grand plan at all.. When was the last time China invaded any country? China’s plan is to use her softpower in economy, culture and diplomacy. China doesn’t see India as a meaningful threat.. You can have HHDL, China is happy with that.

September 12, 2008 @ 4:51 am | Comment

India didn’t sign the NPT but the Indian government promised in written statement that she will not do more nuclear test. And if India tests again, this treaty signed with the NSG will be nullified

What part of the waiver says that? There are conflicting statements and I would like to see some hard evidence.

Raj, China’s space program is not that expensive as this Nuclear deal will be.

You didn’t talk about the nuclear deal, you talked about re-directing defence spending.

China also can use the technology developed in the program to develop the high tech economy.

Why does China need to have a space programme to do that?

Chinese government has a huge surplus in revenues, not the case for Indian government. Plus, China’s poverty problem is not as severe as that in India?

None of that means that China should not be spending more money on social care. If China has that huge surplus, why isn’t it going on a national health system and pension system to cover the poor and lower middle classes? We know it isn’t happening. So if there’s all this excess money, where’s it going?

India cannot grab anything from China and China is not interested in taking any more lands from India.

Ah yes – the “China can take what it likes but chooses not to” routine.

When was the last time China invaded any country?

Vietnam in 1979, I believe. Not that China likes to talk about that war, given it basically lost.

September 12, 2008 @ 5:16 am | Comment

Raj,

Basic economics tells one to invest in portfolios. You cannot spend all your money on health care, or building roads, or buying expensive Russian weapons. You have to optimize how much you want to spend on each. Especially you borrowing money like the Indian government does every year. China is only investing peanuts in her space program which is pretty smart considering the potential high reward from the space technology. Hence the portfolio is optimized in a way.

In my estimate, the deal will cost India hundreds of billions of dollars in Nuclear energy which is not exactly the best investment one can make considering the abundance of the solar and wind energy in India.

As for the waiver, you need to read it and more importantly, the Hyde act. More importantly, you have to understand the NSG was founded in reaction to India’s 1974 nuclear test. India gives up a lot in achieving the waiver, including opening up her civilian nuclear facilities to IAEA inspections. India basically gives up her nuclear test as long as she still wants her future nuclear plants working. And that’s exactly what India would get had her signed the NPT.

In short, this deal is really no big deal. You see China didn’t even raise a finger in the NSG meetings. It’s the NPT purists ( Austria, New Zealand etc) who were opposing the waiver. As a matter of fact, China will take Pakistan to the NSG and sell nuclear techs to the Pakistanis according to some international observers.

September 12, 2008 @ 6:02 am | Comment

You cannot spend all your money on health care

Why does that mean China cannot introduce a better system for the poor? I keep hearing that China has plenty of money, but then that it “can’t” spend it on things the poor could really benefit from. That isn’t logical.

China is only investing peanuts in her space program which is pretty smart considering the potential high reward from the space technology.

Again, I’d like to know why this unexplained tech gain can only be produced by going to space.

As for the waiver, you need to read it

Full text to be found where, please? Indicate specific sections if you wouldn’t mind.

Similarly I would need a citation to the relevant parts of the Hyde Act – the final one, please.

In my estimate, the deal will cost India hundreds of billions of dollars in Nuclear energy

How did you come to that estimate?

You see China didn’t even raise a finger in the NSG meetings.

The allegation was that China was actually quite involved in opposition, only more covertly – until it was apparent that it couldn’t win.

India basically gives up her nuclear test as long as she still wants her future nuclear plants working. And that’s exactly what India would get had her signed the NPT.

Except that you admitted there is no such clause in the agreement – only that India has made a statement about testing. There is no certainty that the club would introduce all kinds of sanctions if India made another test.

September 12, 2008 @ 6:59 am | Comment

Raj,

Read the Hyde Act, it’s online.

It’s obvious that you have absolutely no idea how NSG/IAEA/123 Treaty works and you know absolutely nothing about space technology.

“Again, I’d like to know why this unexplained tech gain can only be produced by going to space.”

GPS, Google earth, Satellite communication, gosh.. AM I TALKING TO A ROCK?

September 12, 2008 @ 7:12 am | Comment

The NSG waiver required the concensus of 45 countries to pass. At this point India can trade with any country (as long as that country want to). So even if the 123 agreement with the US does not pass, India can trade with Russia, France etc. Therefore I think the agreement with the US will pass, otherwise only US companies lose out.

The waiver talks about India promising a “voluntary moratorium” on testing. (moratorium is a suspension/delay, not a ban). If India tests again, there is no automatic withdrawal of the waiver. The NSG needs a consensus of 45 countries to revoke the waiver. It is unlikely to happen, especially since many of those countries would have nuclear trade worth billions with India. Of course, individual countries are free to suspend trade after a test, but without a multilateral ban, competitive pressures are likely to whittle it down over time.

The Hyde Act only affects trade with the US. With the NSG waiver, India can trade with Russia, France etc. even if the Hyde Act prohibits trade with the US.

The following article from the Economist has more details:
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12209631

Basically India got what it wanted. Benefits of signing the NPT without giving up nuclear weapons. But I don’t think India would test in the near future.

How expensive nuclear trade is for India is debatable. If nuclear power is so expensive, why does at lot of countries have reactors (including China, which is building a huge number of them)?

Also, this allows India to have access to many dual use items, which was holding up Indian progress in other areas like space technology. Also, being able to source world class components allows India to build cutting edge safe and efficient reactors, and potentially sell them to other NPT countries (The Indian space program makes some money by launching foreign satellites).

Overall, I think it is a very good deal for India. Whether it is good for non-proliferation is debatable. In any case, I believe NPT being an unfair and discriminatory treaty is not worth defending (although the goal of non-proliferation and elimination of nuclear weapons is to be supported).

September 12, 2008 @ 8:44 am | Comment

About the money India is planning on spending on reactors — I have seen numbers like $100 billion over 2 decades in the Indian media. That is 0.3% of GDP. Of course any money spent on nuclear technology results in savings on coal, natural gas etc.

September 12, 2008 @ 8:53 am | Comment

MT

By signing the NPT/CTBT, India doesn’t have to give up her Nukes. You misunderstood the significance of NPT/CTBT, completely. Indian government promised not to test in a last minute statement. That, my friend, is what India has to give up. Your future nuke test policy has to agree with the NPT although you didn’t sign it. Stupidity? Maybe. And no, India cannot trade with France and Russia before trade with the US, that’s the agreement between the two governments.

You cannot compare India’s nuclear industry with China’s. China has a well developed one. China signed the NPT/CTBT because she had enough tests so she can simulate test in the future.

0.3% of your GDP is a lot, let me put it this way. The Iraq War is worth 0.6% of the US GDP. Plus, 100 billion over 20 years is more like 5 billion a year, that’s 0.5% of your GDP. Simply put

India cannot afford it. Better develop other cheaper energy.

Again, this is another HYPE by the media. As a country, India benefits little from the deal, by aligning with the US interest in the region, you will pay more for Iran’s oil (read the Hyde ACT)

September 12, 2008 @ 2:49 pm | Comment

Kumara,

You said: ————–
By signing the NPT/CTBT, India doesn’t have to give up her Nukes. You misunderstood the significance of NPT/CTBT, completely. Indian government promised not to test in a last minute statement. That, my friend, is what India has to give up. Your future nuke test policy has to agree with the NPT although you didn’t sign it. Stupidity? Maybe. And no, India cannot trade with France and Russia before trade with the US, that’s the agreement between the two governments.
—-

Almost everything you said above is wrong. Please take some time to look up the facts. And I would appreciate some references.

All states which sign the NPT (other than the P5 countries) are required not to receive, manufacture or acquire nuclear weapons. (Article II)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

There is no legal requirement not to test. The Economist magazine says: “NSG waiver refers to a statement by Mr Singh that India will keep to its “voluntary” test moratorium. But that assurance is political, not legal, since India refuses to sign the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty. A future government might equally voluntarily decide to test again.”
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12209631

India would like to wait for the 123 agreement to be completed before starting nuclear trade, as courtesy to the US for all the help with getting the NSG waiver. But the NSG waiver is already signed. The 123 agreement is between India and the US and covers bilateral trade with the US, not India’s trade with Russia, France etc. If the 123 agreement doesn’t pass, India is free to trade with other countries. (Of course the US congress knows this and there is almost no chance that it is not going to pass)

You said: ———
0.3% of your GDP is a lot, let me put it this way. The Iraq War is worth 0.6% of the US GDP. Plus, 100 billion over 20 years is more like 5 billion a year, that’s 0.5% of your GDP. Simply put India cannot afford it. Better develop other cheaper energy.
————-

It is 0.5% of current GDP. I got 0.3% by factoring in GDP growth over 20 years. India has to get energy from somewhere. So if India did’t spend 100B on nuclear, they might have to spend a similar amount on coal (causing global warming), or more expensive wind, solar etc.

You said:———–
Again, this is another HYPE by the media. As a country, India benefits little from the deal, by aligning with the US interest in the region, you will pay more for Iran’s oil (read the Hyde ACT)
—————-

And you have India’s best interests in mind, right!. Oil is traded in the global market at global market prices. Iran doesn’t give oil at discounted rates to India.

This deal will allow India to have a closer alliance with the US. India and the US are both multicultural democracies, with shared values. Also it doesn’t have a shared border (and border disputes) with the US. Both countries make policy openly in public. This avoids nasty surprises, and keeps the partnership healthy. Besides India needs powerful friends in its tough neighborhood.

September 12, 2008 @ 3:58 pm | Comment

Read the Hyde Act, it’s online.

I am not going to read the entire Act. If you understand it so well, highlight the areas you feel are relevant given that you are relying on them. I’m not going to do your work for you.

you have absolutely no idea how NSG/IAEA/123 Treaty works

Again, if you want to assert something, back it up with direct quotations and relevant extracts. If you refuse to then your argument has no grounding.

GPS, Google earth, Satellite communication, gosh.. AM I TALKING TO A ROCK?

No, you’re being a rock yourself. I’m not talking about USING SPACE, I talking about GOING INTO SPACE – i.e. manned space missions. Loads of countries put satellites et al into space…

Geez.

September 12, 2008 @ 5:35 pm | Comment

MT

Oil is never traded in the global market at global market prices. That’s why the big oils of China are all out buying oil fields, and that’s why Hu Jintao is toasting with those dictators around the world. By signing this deal, India is losing Iran. One of the main goals from the US perspective is to cut the nuclear cooperations between India and Iran. Please read the Hyde Act, it’s written all over it.

That 100 Billion can be spend on other cheaper energies. France is nuclear heavy because she makes everything herself. India has an energy crisis, yet the government decides to go with the most expensive solution?

Your government statement is taken seriously in the NSG. A nuclear test means a complete tech/fuel withdraw (billions of dollars gone) and an international isolation. This is also guaranteed by the Hyde Act. Again, this deal is about the US interest, and Hyde Act is the most important document of all.

Raj,

New materials, medicines, agricultural technologies, a lot of experiments cannot be done by robots, mmmmk?

Plus, hundreds of millions of TV revenue, sponsorship from Tang and on and on
Manned space missions are fun and I will just enjoy the show.

September 12, 2008 @ 11:59 pm | Comment

kumra,

Do you have so much trouble acknowledging when you are wrong?

More assertions, without bothering to provide any proof. It is supposed to convince anybody?

September 13, 2008 @ 12:18 am | Comment

MT,

I am not writing an wikipeida entry here, you can google Hyde Act and read it yourself. One thing I learnt from you guys from the sub-continent is that never try to convince anyone in an internet debate.

It’s not worth my time and it’s simply mission impossible. So I’m not trying to convince you. All I’m doing is to throw my opinions and my understandings of the situation here and OTHERS can get a balanced view of what’s going on.

BTW, just another fact for fun, your 98 nuke test is a DUD. I know it’s going to hurt your feelings, but it didnt go as planned.

September 13, 2008 @ 12:55 am | Comment

New materials, medicines, agricultural technologies, a lot of experiments cannot be done by robots, mmmmk?

So how come lots of other rich countries don’t have manned space missions? Possibly because they co-operate with states like the US on space labs? Or perhaps they’re not trying to justify nationalistic penis-waving with vague promises of tech development.

TV money, give me a break – that doesn’t benefit ordinary Chinese! It makes fat-cats fatter.

As MT says, it is clear you are running away from the argument if you will not even give references to the specific pieces of documents you are referring to. The only conclusions to draw are that:

a) you are too lazy to support your own views
b) you are pontificating about things you cannot support

Neither is good for you.

September 13, 2008 @ 1:03 am | Comment

Raj

You know that US refused China’s entry to the international space lab project, right? It sure would have been a lot cheaper for China.

wiki it… Raj

September 13, 2008 @ 1:21 am | Comment

It is funny that Indians always have sense of superioty over Chinese because they have “democracy”. In reality, you can not find a better example than India to illustrate that “democracy” has no intrinsic value at all. It has not stopped bride burnings, religious conflicts, caste system, poverty,…

By all indices, Chinese are ahead of Indians without democracy. Indians feel more secure when Americans are closer, even though they are being manipulated as a pawn in the strategic game of America. Pity on them.

September 13, 2008 @ 1:50 am | Comment

Oh No,SBtiger

I hope this thread not go down as another nasty who’s dad is better chest pumping fest. What you said about India may or may not be true, but it’s irrelevant to the nuclear deal.

Let’s stay on topic: the nuclear deal and China’s space program.

September 13, 2008 @ 1:58 am | Comment

Oh, no, you are wrong, kumra guptra. The topic is about Indian nuclear deal and its China bashing.

China was “absent” and did not try to stop the deal, and why the bashing? Indian future is grim because its popultion will continue to explode and that will intensify all sorts of conflicts and of course more riots

September 13, 2008 @ 2:14 am | Comment

kumra,

You said:
“BTW, just another fact for fun, your 98 nuke test is a DUD. I know it’s going to hurt your feelings, but it didnt go as planned.”

In which case the Indian govt duped the whole world including China to give it a waiver. They should be pretty smart, eh?

September 13, 2008 @ 2:27 am | Comment

SiberianTiger,

You said:
“In reality, you can not find a better example than India to illustrate that “democracy” has no intrinsic value at all. It has not stopped bride burnings, religious conflicts, caste system, poverty,…”

You will win that argument when an Indian leader massacres 35 million of its own citizens, and still manages to keep his picture hanging from every govt building.

You said:
“By all indices, Chinese are ahead of Indians without democracy. Indians feel more secure when Americans are closer, even though they are being manipulated as a pawn in the strategic game of America. Pity on them.”

Did you feel the same way when China was sucking up to the US during the 1970s, to hedge against the soviet union?

September 13, 2008 @ 2:31 am | Comment

SiberianTiger,

You said:
“It is funny that Indians always have sense of superioty over Chinese because they have “democracy””

Would you say it is as bad as the Chinese inferiority complex, that leads them to whine over all the internet forums whenever there is anything critical of China in any international media?

September 13, 2008 @ 2:34 am | Comment

SiberianTiger, kumra,

Why don’t you guys try to provide some evidence for stuff you say, instead of just trying to troll. It was fun laughing at your arguments. Unfortunately I have more worthwhile stuff to do.

Thanks!

September 13, 2008 @ 2:37 am | Comment

MT,

Because of the not as planned nuke test in 98, India’s nuke threat to China or other countries is not there yet. That’s partially why China and the world give India the waiver. Nobody is duped here, the Indian nuke test was small to begin with (10K ton) and the not-so-successful test is well documented in US reports.

September 13, 2008 @ 6:02 am | Comment

MT

Have some respect to the regulars on this blog. Stop that childish name calling.

As I said before, I’m not writing wiki pages here. And I am not going to give you free educations here. Go look for the resources, I throw out the names here, you google yourself.

As I said before, I have no interest winning a debate here. My only intention is to give a more balanced view on the issue to other readers.

September 13, 2008 @ 6:07 am | Comment

Kumra,

Let us review what happened here. You make some statements without any reference or proof. I take my time to show that most of what you said was plain wrong, with references. You instead of acknowledging that you were wrong, ignores those and make another set of statements with no references. From you track record on this thread, they are very likely to be made up too. The burden of proof is on the person making the statement.

Hopefully this has been an education in debating for you.

September 13, 2008 @ 7:12 am | Comment

MT

“There is precedent for rebranding a nuclear fizzle as something more politically palatable. In May 1998, India conducted a series of nuclear detonations, some at lower yields than claimed and two that never registered on seismic instruments around the world. Afterward, India declared those as “subcriticals” experiments, a term used by the United States for experiments using plutonium but never intended to reach critical mass and produce nuclear yield.”

I’m not gonna give you the resource since you have no respect to the regulars. Now who’s the troll? You know nothing about your countries nuke project, how embarrassing your 98 test was. How NSG/IAEA works and what the significance of the NPT/CTBT is. (well, you sure know how to use wikipedia, I give you that)

I will stop here and I’m done with you.

September 13, 2008 @ 7:29 am | Comment

Kumra,

You really need a class on debating. You are debating with yourself in your head. Did I ever make a statement about the nuclear tests being a complete success? You made a statement saying that they were a DUD. Clearly your little blurb contradicts that.

I was simply arguing that the nuclear deal is great for India. You were disagreeing with that. You haven’t provided ONE reference to support your arguments, mostly because they were all wrong! Admitting when is you are wrong is a sign of strength, not weakness.

September 13, 2008 @ 7:55 am | Comment

@MT

“You will win that argument when an Indian leader massacres 35 million of its own citizens, and still manages to keep his picture hanging from every govt building.”

You clearly don’t understand what MASSACRE means. Yes, millions of Chinese starved during “great leap forward”, but don’t tell me that was Mao’s intention The world didn’t cry over it and didn’t try to save Chinese. I doubt that any Mao basher ever loved China more Than Mao did. BTW, India had famines too, even it was armed with democracy and Hindu God.

I read some nonsense about “Mao’s massacre of 70 millions” which included
the death toll of wars before 1949. The death toll from the famine was estimated by the lack of population growth. The women had low birthrate at the hard time and the “missing population” was counted as “massacre” too.

I disagree with CCP a lot, but agree that Mao was 70% positive to China. “Women hold up half of the sky” worth 50% to me, 10% for almost unification of China and 10% for the public education.

”
Did you feel the same way when China was sucking up to the US during the 1970s, to hedge against the soviet union?”

MT, you got it all wrong. China didn’t suck up US, it was the other way. In fact, Mao held up a giant middle finger in the middle kingdom to both US and
Soviet Union. He deserves 10% more for that.

Come back to the thread topic. China was neutral to the deal and
some other nations was absent too. Why did Indians have to celebrate by bashing China? If they think they can “forward leaning” into China again, think again.

September 13, 2008 @ 2:44 pm | Comment

don’t tell me that was Mao’s intention

He is responsible for the extent of the deaths because it was at least partly man-made. The idiot shunted peasants into the factories – crops were left rotting in the fields. And before you try that “good emperor surrounded by bad advisors” crap, anyone who believes reports of giant vegetables being produced around the country needs his head examined – he should have known it was going wrong. But he was too proud, too focused on his goal and didn’t care about ordinary Chinese.

September 13, 2008 @ 5:42 pm | Comment

SiberianTiger,

“You clearly don’t understand what MASSACRE means. Yes, millions of Chinese starved during “great leap forward”, but don’t tell me that was Mao’s intention The world didn’t cry over it and didn’t try to save Chinese.”

It is true that much of the deaths GLF was a result of stupidity rather than malice. But the Cultural Revolution which killed over a million people was pure mass murder.
It is not the world’s job to take care of China. It is China’s job. Besides, the full scale of the tragedy became known outside China only later.

“I doubt that any Mao basher ever loved China more Than Mao did.”

I suspect the million Chinese killed during the Cultural Revolution would disagree.

“BTW, India had famines too, even it was armed with democracy and Hindu God.”

Independent India didn’t ever have a famine where large numbers of people died. The last famine was the 1943 Bengal famine (India became independent in 1947). In independent India, an free press makes a fuss and corrective action is take before food shortages get too bad. In short the Great Leap Backward is unlikely to happen in India.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India

“I read some nonsense about “Mao’s massacre of 70 millions” which included the death toll of wars before 1949. The death toll from the famine was estimated by the lack of population growth. The women had low birthrate at the hard time and the “missing population” was counted as “massacre” too.”

Are you debating with yourself?

“I disagree with CCP a lot, but agree that Mao was 70% positive to China.”

If Mao was 70% positive on China, I shudder to know how many people a leader would have killed if he wasn’t positive on China at all. The funny thing is that the Japanese occupation killed similar numbers of Chinese as Mao’s Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. The CCP sees no irony in asking Japan to apologize for killings while adorning the picture of a mass murderer who killed similar numbers of Chinese more recently in almost every govt office. (I have a feeling that you need to be inoculated against irony before you can join the CCP:)

“MT, you got it all wrong. China didn’t suck up US, it was the other way.”

It is funny how you have one view when India does something, quite another when China does the same thing. Do you know that the US has a 123 agreement with China which was signed during the Clinton administration.

“China was neutral to the deal and some other nations was absent too. Why did Indians have to celebrate by bashing China?”

You are entitled to your opinion, but many accounts of what happened disagree with that. I can understand NZ, Ireland etc. opposing the deal. They don’t have weapons and are not being hypocritical in opposing the deal. China opposed it not because of any principle, but pure hypocrisy and geopolitics. China actively sold nuclear weapons to Pakistan in violation of the NPT and even tested a bomb for them in 1990.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-08-28-china_N.htm

September 14, 2008 @ 12:44 am | Comment

Independent India didn’t ever have a famine where large numbers of people died.

Yet they literally have hundreds of millions that are severely malnourished.

September 14, 2008 @ 1:48 am | Comment

ferin nice to see you back. Please play nice.

September 14, 2008 @ 3:29 am | Comment

“I doubt that any Mao basher ever loved China more Than Mao did.”

Mao might have loved his country, but he saw Chinese people as a resource to exploit to make China “greater” as he saw fit. That made him a horrible individual – whether he “loved” China or not was therefore irrelevant. Members of the KKK would say they love America more than anyone.

September 14, 2008 @ 4:43 am | Comment

Mao was awesome before early fifties.. then he turned maosome.

I myself is a big admirer of the pre-50’s Mao. He’s got some big plans for China.

Gender equality, land reform, early industrialization, public education all started in his early reign. His policies in his last 20 years are atrocious (whoever praises mao should put this line in their thesis, it makes one look fair and balanced).

Dude got the hottest asses in China. When people call themselves MAOISTs and their ideology MAOISM and they are running winning elections, you know MAO made it.

September 14, 2008 @ 5:17 am | Comment

(AFP) — The US push to end India’s status as a nuclear pariah was partly motivated by a desire to counter China’s rise, but New Delhi does not want to get sucked into a US-Sino power play, analysts say.

The financial incentives are obvious, with the United States expecting to be rewarded with a major slice of India’s civilian nuclear energy market — estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars.

But there are also geopolitical considerations.

Building India as a counterweight to China was “at least part of the motivation among some of the (US) decision-making circle,” said Michael Quinlan from the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

India has also been upset by perceived Chinese moves to “checkmate” its own rise — allegedly supporting arch-rival Pakistan with arms and economic aid and reportedly trying to block the NSG waiver last week, Indian officials say.

While India may baulk at the idea of being a counterweight to China, it knows it can reap certain strategic benefits from a closer relationship with the United States…

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j8ft2ILdj4YbHq5pyPDxrncXM1Qg

September 14, 2008 @ 2:21 pm | Comment

“ferin nice to see you back. Please play nice.”

Yeah, don’t be as rude as mor who dared to ask Richard if he can actually communicate in Chinese (and who still hasn’t died of cancer as you, ferin, wanted him to).

Bad, bad mor!

Now let’s see how long this comment stays (and how many people get to see it, before it gets deleted)!

September 15, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Comment

This thread has the potential to be one of the all time greats on the Duck. Like this one

http://www.pekingduck.org/2006/07/india-vs-china/

It touches one of the hottest debates on the internet : India vs China and when India is gonna overtake China as the star of tomorrow.

In my opinion, there is no such thing as India catching up with China. The dietary structure of the Indian people hinders India’s growth to the Chinadom. Again, I have no wikipedia links to back me up. I just throw some opinions here and enjoy the ride.

September 15, 2008 @ 4:45 am | Comment

My question is…what’s all this fuss about? It’s just a civilian nuclear deal guys get over it.

The dealings at NSG had all the ingredients of a telly soap, drama, betrayal.

And yes nuclear energy is expensive…It would be prohibitive for a developing country. India has a very advanced nuclear program. If it was all about weapons India has enough domestic Uranium reserves for a couple of hundred nukes. What India does have is world’s largest Thorium reserves. Thorium can be used as a nuclear fuel along with reprocessed spent fuel. This would take a few decades and India has a very advanced indigenous program for it. This is what India wants to do, as India imports more than 80% if the oil it consumes it wants to get away from oil trap. Its about survival and foresight.

So why does it matter to China.

No denying that, China is an Asian power and wants to be the sole Asian power with global reach. NSG was created after India’s 1974 nuclear tests. So when the very organization which was created in repose to Indan tests allows an exception and grants India to conduct nuclear trade. It does looks like a strategic shift in world order to me. Why would China appreciate a de-facto nuclear power in its neighborhood? There is no denying that China was hoping that India would not get a waiver because of Irish, Swiss and New Zealand playing hardball. When they buckled China threatened to walk out. China President and PM had promised their Indian counterpart of Chinese support. So I think Indians have a valid point when they say they feel betrayed. China behaved like a developing country upstart rather than a mature world power. Indian reactions are justified. Its upto China how it wants itself to be seen in India, a neighbourhood bully or a global power.

I am sure China-India hyphenation pisses Chinese as much as India-Pakistan hyphenation pisses Indians. So this deal basically breaks the India-pakistan hyphenation, which obviously doesn’t really goes well with Chinese government.

September 15, 2008 @ 8:21 pm | Comment