My beloved Mr Yechuri discussed Nucleared deal

I thought enough of nuclear energy discussion but then when an argument is being stopped by quoting motives, I got into a debate mode. My favorite handler of words Mr Sitaram Yechuri in his column in Hindustan Times gives his own views on how Lefts opposition is being decried not because of reasons but because of prejudice. Point taken, a rational debate should be based on reasons so lets take his arguments and discuss.

"any attempt to cap India’s nuclear strategic capabilities will immensely benefit both China and Pakistan. Who, may we ask, is vigorously pursuing this Indo-US nuclear deal which, we are told, will limit India’s strategic capacities...". Interesting argument. "We are told" by whom? The very same Left. You make an assumption, prove a premise on the basis of that assumption and conclude that the assumption is right! As per my earlier writeup, the deal enhances our strategic capabilities by 1. allowing for nuclear technology know how. While this should not be transferring bomb technology, there are other engineering capabilities, safety training that will help. By creating opportunities for nuclear scientists to get jobs we'll get more talented people taking up such studies. Currently most end up being code monkeys in IT.

He rightly mentions that India is electricity starved. He also makes the oft quoted argument that our current nuclear electricity percentage is 3 percent of total which will go upto mere 6 percent in 20 years due to this deal. What the argument leaves out is why its only 3% today. I can think of 3 reasons.

1. We do not have the technology to build bigger/better plants and not enough engineers to maintain a lot of small plants.
2. We do not have access to enough fuel to generate more
3. We made a conscious decision not to build plants

Evidently its not 3, and Mr Yechuri does not say that it is. For if it was the whole deal needn't be signed. Which means its some combination of 1) and 2). And both imply we need to import technology And import fuel. Alas both cannot be imported unless India signs up NPT and gives up the very loved strategic option or by signing the deal. If opponents of the deal can get us both without either, lets welcome that option.

"Further, is nuclear power cost-effective? On the contrary, it is the most expensive option.". Agreed. But there is also an economy of scale. France gets most of its electricity from nuclear plants. Which brings down costs. That however is a part of the story. Even with scale the nuclear power option is the more expensive option in short term. In short term. Fossil fuels are limited and especially oil, gas only a little less and prices are continuously rising. Further more, oil supply is nearly at peak and so its not that we can increase our consumption to 5 times and get adequete supply. I do not have the link right now but I read that already some gas based plants in India are running at sub optimal generation level because gas supply is not adequate. Further any reliance on unstable Mideast for oil is a strategic dependence on an unstable region. We depend on others for oil or for uranium its still a dependence.

Other thing is environmental impact. "This year’s floods according to the United Nations, are ‘unprecedented’ in human memory.". Most climate scientists blame global warming for sudden climatic changes and fossil fuel usage is the biggest culprit. Mr Yechuri's solution to a problem is the solution that is creating the problem in the first go.

"Huge commercial orders running into thousands of crores of rupees for the purchase of nuclear reactors would be placed on the US." .... "Is India then actually going in for this deal to bolster US economic interests?". So is this the real reason for Left's opposition if not 'instructions from abroad'? Well the logical argument is that you buy technologies from whoever has it. I'd say if the government is smart it will diversify sources. France is an obvious choice. As is Indian private sector which can soon learn the ropes.

"If the same amount of resources were to be spent on generating power through hydro, thermal, gas, clean non-renewable and solar electricity, India’s energy augmentation would be many times higher.". Admirable. Dams require a lot of land and displacement of people. Is Left recommending that such massive forcible land acquisition happens? Solar is great but is it commercially viable as a regular source of power? Where in the world has it happened. And how does the cost compare to the nuclear energy generation cost. Ah no figures there because they'll contradict his earlier arguments about cost reasons for avoiding nuclear energy. Thermal energy we tried once in south, alas our power plant sunk in the sea!

The rest of the argument gets into joint exercises and multipolar world and what not. I'm too sleepy to talk about it now but its already discussed in earlier posts.

"Any alignment with US imperialism to impose unipolarity will dissolve India’s distinctiveness in world politics. This is precisely what the Left seeks to prevent in the interests of India and its people.". So is the opposition to the deal because its with US and we cannot align with them to ensure multi polarity or is it because the deal is bad?

In short I find again Mr Yechuri's reasoning contradictory. Given my very high regards for his intellectual calibre, I can only speculate on reasons. But I for once am not convinced that the deal is not in our national interest.

Updated: Sept 20th.
Hindustan Times has this rather good analysis on need for Fuel supply diversification. It always gets my goat that our self serving politicians want India to live by their ideals (assuming that the arguments are really born of ideology). How I wish they work to make India live on its self interests rather than some arcane or popular ideology. Reminds me of all those years where we fought wars in ways that ensured an honorable defeat rather than a dishonourable win. The kings won their glory, the people had they women raped, wealth looted and liberty crying in chains.

Rich and Vengeful.

Last few days were all full of angst at the politics happening. This week is for a change cool and Sunny. In keeping with the theme, here is another rather interesting item on ABC news chronicling the wills of the rich and vengeful. I even love the heading. Good read for a slow day.

Sample a few gems of wills from the article:

"To my son, I leave the pleasure of earning a living, which he had not done in 35 years."

Or: "To my daughter, I leave $1,000. She will need it. The only good piece of business her husband ever did was to marry her."

It proves that the rich and sometimes famous can also have a sense of humor even if it rebounds as a Greek Tragedy on some of the people in their lives.

What was that?

Chinese government bans reincarnations screamed a headline on MSNBC. Closer reading revealed that the law prohibits spirits from choosing a new body only if the spirit and bodies are both outside China!
Talk about extraterritorial jurisdictions. This goes beyond even carnal world. Behind the farce is a serious issue of decimation of an entire civilization at the hands of totalitarian politics. Reminds me often of those Calvin and Hobbes strip that often bemoan our behaviour.
"The surest sign that intelligent life exists in this Universe is that none has tried to contact us"
--- Bill Waterson in Calvin and Hobbes.

Office Tea

Office tea ends up being like those girls next door or do I mean failed relationships?
It is
not as hot as u want
not as delicious as u prefer
in short like an unfulfilled promise

Friends...

Why do we so often take friends for granted? Often so times I have observed that friends ask us to do something and we refuse - sorry no time, nah not mood. Basically we can tell them what we really feel like.
On the other hand same kind of questions coming from say colleagues, casual acquaintances, bosses, seniors and we play along, sometimes even enjoy doing it.
So which is right? Being true to self and denying friends the company while maybe being polite and letting those we do not care about that deeply have the company? I would expect that close friends should by definition get more of us than the rest. But does it always happen in real life?
We also use close friends to steam off. Poor folks who care enough to suffer us in all moods are those who actually bear the brunt of our ill humor while the acquaintances merely get a coldish shrug.
I wonder if we haven't got it all wrong? Shouldn't the ones we love be the ones we always give the happiest us and the enemies get to bear the steam?

Whats left? Reference to context

Thanks to Mudit in Bus Yun Hi blog for giving me a link to that other master misguider Prakash Karat making some points on the Nuclear deal. As usual what he quotes and how he quotes are not the same things. Let us try and analyze the workings of this great patriot.
"Prior to the joint statement of July 2005, the UPA government signed a 10-year Defence Framework Agreement with the Untied States. It is evident that without the defence agreement, the Americans would not have agreed for the nuclear cooperation. This is part of a quid pro quo."
No references here as to how the 10-year Defence Framework Agreement is a bad thing? the "quid pro quo" that makes it out as some sell out of national interest may/may not be so. For all that is not said, it may have meant USA guarantying India that they will always be on sides of India in case of an armed conflict with any 3rd party. Since Mr Karat conveniently does not spell out the issue with it, merely hinting that its evil are we to take him on face value?

"The first serious conflict with the Left arose when the UPA government did a volte-face on the Iran nuclear issue. The government voted along with the US and the Western countries in September 2005 and was not even prepared to go along with the position adopted by the bloc of Non-Aligned Movement countries."

Again we go into unfamiliar territory. It again implicitly assumes that Iran issue had only 1 moral choice and that was to vote for Iran. While I can agree that US often does not play by fair, we have to remember that this is an NPT signing nation that went against some of the commitments made in that treaty. In short an explicit violation of an accepted treaty. India voted against it.
While I can see the logic of having nuclear power plants and Iran wanting that. In this specific case though it seems that there was something more than mere power plants happening. Mr Karat may say India should not have nukes but he wants Iran to have it. I and any rational Indian without any vested political agenda would say it is bad. For one India maintains that nukes are bad and the only reason we want to have them is because Pakistan and China, both nations claiming Indian territory for its own have nukes and probably directed at India.
Also India does have a lot of terrorism problems often from Muslim fundamentalist organizations mostly outside India. Iran for all its other good points will probably claim the bomb to be an Islamic bomb. India should get alarmed especially since Iran belongs to a rather volatile area with often such considerations coming into force. For all our support to Palestinians on their struggles (often just) I find that those nations do not criticize the fundamentalist groups when they strike against India. Iran for all our support still went back on some of the agreements on the gas pipeline. Given their fickle stand on issues pertaining India why should India not take the sensible decision and stick its neck out to support Iran on this issue given that we do not want a nuke armed Iran. let me rephrase, given that rational Indians do not want nuke armed Iran, Mr karat though probably has a different opinion.

"The Left parties have been watching with diOk squiet the way the UPA government has gone about forging close strategic and military ties with the United States. The Left came out in strong opposition to the Defence Framework Agreement."

All said and done, we are proudly the world's biggest democracy while USA is often held as the world's most functioning democracy, certainly the most powerful one. USA is often held to be the national which brought the idea of individual liberty as supreme, codified the right to free speech and is called the land of the free. On the other hand communist China treated unarmed students clamoring for democracy to tank fire in Tienanmen's Square, still controls access to media and generally has less freedom than any democracy for common citizens. same for other communist countries. Left does not protest against our alliance with any communist country but an alliance with a democracy is bad? Funny that the same democracy that allows Left to protest in India (and would get them killed in most communist countries) is what the Left hates the most.
As discussed earlier in a blog post of mine, the strategic tie-up with US and consequently Europe/Japan/Israel is the need of hour. We probably already have enough nukes for deterrent. What we lack is the multi lateral delivery capacity. This is where we need technology help and this is where the real importance of Strategic tie-up with US help. It allows us not only access to US technology, it also allows us to get France, Germany, UK, Sweden, Japan, Australia, Israel to also share technology. Lets face it, we currently only have Russia as somewhat of an important ally that can give us technology and as the cryogenic engine fiasco proves, its not good to place all eggs in 1 basket. Do we expect China to help us develop such military projection capacity? Give me a break!

"The Left has been vehemently opposed to the joint military exercises as the one that took place in the Kalaikunda air base in West Bengal. These exercises were held despite the strong protests of the Left parties and the Left Front government of West Bengal."

So Indian government must do everything as per Left's sensibilities? Why only left? Should then logically they not also take opposition BJP's all sensibilities in mind? No not opposition merely allies? then how about Laloo's RJD also which is pro deal? Apparently not allies either, merely Left.
Or will he now say anytime there is a street protest? I remember In West Bengal which as correctly claimed by Mr Karat is under the Left front government, there is a huge protest against some land acquisition which the Left wants. Paradoxically in this case I think the the Chief Minister is right. Relying merely on agriculture for a living will ensure people at starvation level. Our land holdings are too small for farmers to survive. the way out is to industrialize. But in this case the principled Left did not merely handle the protest in government way. Its cadre (and lot of media has given very strong proofs of this) murdered protesting men and boys raped and murder the protesting women and girls, in all over 300 people dead! And still Mr Karat expects the government to stop alliances because left does not like democracies!

"UPA government has been deepening collaboration with Israel in the military and security spheres which violates our long-held policy of support to the Palestinian cause and friendship with the Arab countries."

Its ok for Egypt - an Arab country to have normal relations with Israel? Its ok for Pakistan to start normalizing its relationships with Israel but not India! if you draw an arch across Asia, Israel at its beginning, India at its middle and Japan at its end are probably the 3 most (and maybe the only real) democracies in Asia. By definition that same democracy that allows Left to function well in India and have a voice makes these nations pariah? Agreed Israel's policies may not always have been more benign but as Nandigram proves nor are the Left's? And how has friendship with Israel bad. I remember Arafat of PLO agreeing that India needs to improve relations with Israel. We get great military hardware and technologies from them. Their counter terrorism skills are the best in the world, we need those badly, And as mentioned before, Arab countries by and large have not helped India against state sponsored terrorism in the name of Islam. Have not seen any Arab country coming out strongly in support of our Permanent seat in UN security council, have not seen them sending cheap oil to India (rates of oil sold to the evil empire USA are paradoxically lot lower for USA than for Asian countries). I'd say Arab world needs to give more to India for the support we have shown them than they do. Statecraft is about getting the best deal for your nation, not some dumb ideals that enslave your nation.
"The Hyde Act expects India to have a foreign policy 'congruent' to the United States."
True its a loaded statement. But the language of diplomacy is not straight. making it non binding is the nearest USA can do to say - dude don't worry about it. You can say what if another administration decides its binding? I'd say all the more reason to close the deal while the current administration is there! then once the deal with NSG is signed where does it say all our reactors will come only from USA? I do remember the deal making it clear that the USA will help create a strategic reserve of fuel. even if fresh supplies stop this reserve can be used. Further the same defense co-operation that so threats Mr Karat makes unilateral action by US so tough on them. We can simply say sorry, you pinch us there and we don't give you that billion dollar aircraft order. Our airlines too will only get Airbus from now on and so on.
Lets face it, USA and India are natural allies. And given the Chinese presence of listening posts in Pakistan, Tibet, Myanmar, Bangladesh and their intent in Sri Lanka, India will be fool of highest degree not to try alliance with other important Asian nations. Negotiations happen between equals, not between a lame beggar and a King. If India is to have good relations with China based on mutual respect, India has to show that it is equal to meet Chinese challenge should the need ever arise. The same reason why Left wants a multi-polar world, we need a multi-polar Asia. Its not some power trip, its the best chance for a healthy peaceful co-existence.
It a lay person like me can understand this but an erudite leader like Mr Karat pretends not to, do I take it for incompetence or do I look for designs. I refuse to believe that he is incompetent hence the conclusion is obvious.

Updated: Apr 21, 2008
If proof of the "design" is needed, read this and draw your own conclusions.

Midst of Gloom, flowers may still bloom

Amidst all the gloom of the party with less than 5% of popular vote trying to set country's agenda and the stock market worries comes some good news.
Mayawati, the Chief Minister of UP - our most populous state makes some steps towards privatization in agriculture. Essentially she is going to allow private parties (above a certain net worth ) to directly buy from the farmers should the farmer wish to sell. Eminently sensible since now the farmer can choose to sell to govt or to any pvt player depending on who is paying more. But alas sensible policies are an exception in India and that is why its only happening now in a tentative way. Upto now farmers could only sell in Mandis and in case that cost to transporting to Mandis is high compared to prices, or other things like non availability of trucks for perishables, the farmer was forced to destroy standing crops!

I guess Mayawati being politically strong and very savvy and right caste may just carry it off in spite of trenchant criticism that the established interests may heap. What i hope is that private players will invest in air conditioned goods trucks and help farmers with scientific inputs as often happens in contract farming. From what I have read upto 40% of our produce is lost to improper storage and all. Hopefully the private buyers will invest in cold storages also which ofcourse depends if Left and BJP not manage to set the agenda and ensure Indians go back to the glorious Hindu age of Diyas. After all Electric power has lot to do with Edison - an American and since America is imperialist any American invention will make us their slaves for all times to come.

Also the Japanese premier is coming to India. Japan and India have so much to gain from mutual partnership. Japan has surplus capital, India needs capital. Japan has cutting edge technology especially in manufacturing/electronics and space. India needs it. Japan lacks resources and young folks, India has plenty. If our politics doesn't wreck it I see the start of a beautiful relationship there. We can build the industrial corridor, have really high speed trains which will further bring forwards a bigger market for perishables nearer. It will also help decongest. Imagine if a train running at 300 km/hour were running between Mumbai and say Ahmedabad/ Delhi that will bring an area of 600 km within commuting reach.
In short there is so much of opportunity to bridge the gap between our potential and reality. If only we don't squander our chance away. It may never again come.

Updated 24/08
The Hindu and other newspaper report that the idea is put on hold after traders protested. Amusingly The UP government said that to protect the interests of farmers the policy needs be reviewed. I thought the farmers were the gainers since Reliance Fresh pays more to farmers and charges consumers less. They make real margin by cutting off middle men. So why not be honest and say that the in the interest of traders the policy is being reviewed rather than a rather inaccurate word called farmer?
This also brings another issue in mind. I thought that all Indians are free to profess any trade they want to (Except some that require special training like medicine where anybody who is trained then can undertake). So isn't this whole business of no vegetable seller is allowed to open a large show a bit unfair?

Updated: Sept 3
Express reports that finally farmers have woken up to the fact that this review is not in "farmer's interest" and are protesting in Lucknow. The farmers hold that Retail stores are paying the them- the producers more than the current middlemen riddled system. Flowers may still bloom for the countless farmers.

Nuke deal: Nuked or Left?

What a comedy over the Nuke deal! For once MM showed spine and said take the deal or withdraw support. Three cheers to Dr for finally choosing national interest over politics.
Left meanwhile makes its issue clear. They claim its both the deal and the strategic tie up with the USA that they resent. Strategic tie up with a 'democratic' sole super power is bad? lets face it, we've been beggars most of our modern life. finally that we are waking up to potential it makes sense to make ties. Its time we realize that a nation is truly independent only when it feed all its citizen, ensure full life and liberty and is powerful enough to stand up to any nation militarily and economically. We can harp on non-alignment for all we want but who gives a hoot to it? Do we matter to any nation. Heck we can't even fix a small nation on our side and we dream of being leaders of the world.

I won't be surprised if left is getting instructions on this from China. After all the nation that lays claim to a fair bit of our territory, is most steadfast ally of the nation that has make death by thousand cuts of India its raison de etre, and aims to be the power in Asia has genuine reasons to fear India and USA coming closer. Left being a client party of China CPA may actually have got word to oppose it on this big an issue.

BJP is of course opposing it while the deal that they were negotiating had much less to India (Talbot in his book mentions that Jaswant was willing to sign CBDT to get the deal), but in India opposition is not about working for interest of India if government goes wrong. Its about power even at the cost of India and Indians. But i wonder a mid term poll is such a good idea for BJP. They are in a hopeless disarray and their recent acts will make any rational Indian wince at the thought of voting them back to power.

Pity that Karan Thapar on CNBC made such a hash of interviewing Sitaram Yechuri. for once I agreed with S Y that Karan came with an agenda and tried to impose it besides monopolizing conversation. He just made one good point of the agreement text circumventing a US law which SY said is denying India its rights. While I have strong views on SY's misrepresentations of reality, this encounter left SY with moral upper ground. Such a pity or was it a part of the agenda too?

One question I would like to ask Left is whats the net gain if we do not have this deal? We don't have uranium fuel to run our power reactors. While jingoistic pride leads one to say we are the leaders in fast breeder using thorium, I doubt. if thats true why ain't we generating more electricity? Exporting nuke reactors? Have more nuclear science university programs? As for weapons we probably have enough to deter any body.

What we might lack might be the delivery systems where a strategic tie up with US might help more. After all, Pakistan is imploding. Where we might need a triad of delivery system might be to deter China, not so much Pak. Of course given that, Left very conveniently is dead set against any strategic, military and technology tie up with USA and Israel the two countries that can actually help develop a reach capability (reach within the immediate and near neighborhood).

In this case the deal actually allows us to import fuel for our reactors. Which means that our own meager supply of Uranium is actually available for military purposes. This is an argument often quoted correctly by Nonproliferation ayatollahs and is essentially true. Left of course very conveniently forgets to comment on this. Currently we have a severe shortage of fuel for our reactors and hence have to eat into our military use reserves. The deal also allows us to build a strategic reserve of fuel for our reactors. Assuming that Left fears are true and USA does demand a recall after say a nuclear test by India. It has to buy out our reactors and fuel which means that the financial impact is less on India than on US.
Besides I doubt if India will really test anymore at least in near future. Even without the deal the cost of a fresh test will be steep, a percentage more or less after the deal ain't all that different. Besides an underlying assumption is the we need more nuclear weapons. Do we? Aren't say 50 bombs enough to deter any nuke power from nuking us? As for non nuke warfare which is what the world usually sees, having great allies helps in preventing war and helps in upgrade of military. Of course Left opposes military games with countries who can be our natural allies.

Is it really that far fetched if some smart congressmen tie up with BJP. lets face it, ideologically they are not too far apart. If Vajpayee is brought around, Advani, Narendra M marginalized, Both may gain. I'll say tie up for the next elections. that will give both 7 years. Eliminate left from Bengal (if they can't after Nandigram they are really too incompetent), Shiv Sena from Maharashtra, Mulayam from UP, Dev Gowda from Karnataka can all be gotten rid if we just allow the law to take its own course. and 7 years is long enough for law to take its own course. That leaves the two to slog out in subsequent elections on real issues.

History shows that Indians are their own worst enemies. Cong and BJP of course will not come together. And Left will ensure that any chances of India becoming a real important power are fizzled out at first opportunities. What the deal and its strategic implications give us is high technology, access to top civilian nuclear tech which is all the more important given the scarcity and politics of oil based economy. Our engineers may train with the best university world wide (in civilian tech areas), all of which is so important with future. The reason why left is so anti is because its coming from US.

They probably want us to sign space technology kind agreements with Papua New Guinea's to improve our capabilities. The sheer duplicity of left which opposes Indian nuclear progress which vehemently championing Iranian program is staggering. and to think we elected 59 of these folks to stab us in heart, back and eyes just proves we get what we deserve.
I fear that even if the crises blows over and there is some compromise put in place which it may given the lust for power in Delhi, our negotiators may have their hands severely weakened after all this visible circus. That may be the biggest loss of them all.

Neemhakim Prescribes....

1. The key to success is ...temptation
2. Money can buy most things but not happiness ... say those who don't really know how to spend money
3. You can be anybody if you try hard ... thanks but I'm happy being me
4. There are some things money can't buy, for everything else there is ... dad
5. When sh@#t hits the fan, its time to ... run out
6. If you never succeed in first attempt... charge your patients before the operation
7. Nothing succeeds like... procrastination