The Week's Nuclear Round-Up 12-18 November '07

India

• Indo-Russian Koodankulam agreement fails to materialise; Left allows government to talk to IAEA; PM, Sonia bat for nuclear deal at AICC meeting

The much expected Indo-Russian agreement for the construction of four additional reactors at the Koodankulam site failed to materialize during Prime Minster Manmohan Singh’s recent visit to Moscow. No reasons were assigned for the agreement not being signed.23 Some reports suggested that the decision could be due to the domestic problems that the government was facing with operationalising the nuclear deal.[1]

In other developments, Dr. Singh reiterated during a meeting of the All India Congress Committee that Indo-US nuclear agreement concerned only the civil side of the nuclear programme and would have no bearing on India’s strategic programme. Congress President Sonia Gandhi also affirmed that the deal would facilitate India’s access to fuel and new technologies to fulfil its requirements in the energy sector.[2]

Share:

Read more

The Week's Nuclear Round-Up 5-11 November '07

India

• Indian expert to be sent to Switzerland to explain Indo-US nuclear deal; India-Russia to sign agreements for 4 more reactors during Dr. Singh’s visit

Switzerland President Micheline Calmy-Rey told reporters at the end of her New Delhi visit during the week that she had requested Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to send an Indian expert to Switzerland in order to explain the Indo-US nuclear deal.[1]

It was also reported that India and Russia would sign an agreement for building four more nuclear reactors at Koodankulam during Dr. Singh’s upcoming visit to Moscow. Reports quoted an unnamed Russian official as stating that the ongoing civil nuclear energy cooperation between the two countries was independent of the fate of the Indo-US nuclear deal.[2] Russia has also been willing to build fast neutron reactors for Indian power plants after international sanctions are lifted against New Delhi in civil nuclear cooperation.

Share:

Read more

It's about the Fuel, Stupid!

Published in the IPCS website in November 2007.

PM Singh (IBN Live)

There was a sense among supporters of the nuclear deal that if India missed the bus on the Indo-US nuclear agreement, it would come back to haunt us sooner rather than later. What one did not know was that, this would happen so soon. The recent news about the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NCPIL) deciding to shut down 5 units due to lack of fuel though unfortunate is not unexpected. The incident is the result of a mismatch between demand and supply of uranium from operational mines that has hit Indian domestic nuclear power programme quite hard in the last couple of years. Indian companies like the NCPIL have reached a stage in their learning curves where they are able to construct and commission nuclear power plants in relatively shorter time-frames. However, on the supply side, there is just not enough fuel coming out of the domestic uranium mines to power these reactors.

Share:

Read more

Indo-US nuclear deal and the Issue of Uninterrupted Fuel Supplies

Indo-US nuclear deal (from Rusin speaks)

On the issue of continued fuel supply in the event of termination of the agreement, the critics of the nuclear deal are jumping the gun when they say that the US would prevent other Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) countries from continuing with their supply of fuel and other supplies to India if the agreement is terminated under US laws. The issue is an important issue that needs to be discussed. However, the ‘Statements of Policy’ or ‘Sense of Congress’ found in the Hyde Act are not the proper reference points for discussion on the issue.

What Indian decision makers need to be concerned about is the nature of exception to be provided by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) as well as the bilateral civil nuclear agreements that India will sign with other supplier countries like Russia, France, Canada and Australia. Another point which should be taken into account is that currently there is no NSG requirement which stipulates that if one member terminates cooperation other member countries have to follow suit.

Share:

Read more

The “Nuts and Bolts" of North Korean disablement

Kim Jong-un (First post.com)

Disablement is a word that has crept into the language of the Six-Party talks since it was used by Scott McClellan, the former White House press secretary. In the absence of a more acceptable term, disablement became something of a convenience. There is a general agreement that the current phase is a difficult one. As Christopher Hill put it, the Six-Party talks have reached a point where “they have not been before, beyond just shutting down the facilities.” In such situations of advanced and complex diplomatic negotiations, terminologies become quite important. This is a fact which negotiators to the Six-Party talks have come to realise of late. Christopher Hill pointed this out when he talked about the need to come up with common definitions, “so that we are satisfied when they say they are disabling, we know what they're doing and we agree that it's disablement.”

However, gloating over terminologies is not going to get us anywhere on dismantling North Korean facilities. The task before the international community is to effectively dismantle the North Korean facilities in a manner which allows verification and forensic activities. In August 2007 some ideas were also throw up at the meeting of the denuclearisation group at Shengyang. This was followed up by a five-day inspection of the Yongbyon facility by a team of American, Chinese and Russian experts conducted a five-day inspection in September 2007. However, the five-day inspections and other such future visits will enable experts to adapt the ideas thrown up to suit the actual equipment present in North Korean facilities.

Share:

Read more

The Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Indo-US Nuclear Deal

This article was published in the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses website as an IDSA Strategic Comment
 
In the midst of the domestic hullabaloo surrounding the nuclear deal in India, the United States convened a special meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) on September 20, 2007 at Vienna on the sidelines of the IAEA Annual General Conference to brief members on the deal. The NSG derives its important position in international civil nuclear commerce from its membership, which currently stands at forty-five and includes a majority of countries engaged in nuclear trade. NSG members control roughly 80 per cent of the global uranium reserves and about 78 per cent of global uranium production.1 Currently, Namibia, Niger and Uzbekistan are the only three non-NSG countries producing significant amounts of uranium. However, they are party to Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaties and once the African and Central Asian nuclear weapon free zones come into force they too would insist upon full scope safeguards for any transfer of nuclear material or technology to non-nuclear weapon states as defined by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). NSG members possess a stranglehold on the entire spectrum of nuclear technology, given that there is no supplier country outside of the NSG with civilian nuclear technology.

Share:

Read more