| Do you support the nuclear energy agreement Bush reached with India? |
| Yes |
|
100% |
[ 6 ] |
| No |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 6 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:48 pm Bush, India Reach Nuclear Energy Agreement |
|
| Quote: |
Bush, India Reach Nuclear Energy Agreement
Thursday, March 02, 2006
NEW DELHI, India � President Bush scored a victory Thursday on his first trip to India, a landmark nuclear energy agreement that he says could ease U.S. energy prices.
Bush acknowledged it will be difficult to persuade Congress to support the agreement, in which the United States would share its nuclear know-how and fuel with India. But he said he's confident Congress will approve the deal so India can power its fast-growing economy without expanding the world demand for oil.
Critics in Congress say the United States is making an exception for India, which has nuclear weapons but won't sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
"Proliferation is certainly a concern and a part of our discussions, and we've got a good-faith gesture by the Indian government that I'll be able to take to the Congress," Bush said.
"But the other thing that our Congress has got to understand is that it's in our economic interests that India have a civilian nuclear power industry to help take the pressure off the global demand for energy," the president said. "To the extent that we can reduce demand for fossil fuels, it will help the American consumer."
The agreement between the world's oldest and largest democracies was a political coup, too, for Singh. "We made history," he said, standing alongside Bush in a sunwashed courtyard.
The two announced new bilateral cooperation on an array of issues from investment to trade, health to the environment, agriculture to technology, and even mangoes. "Mr. Prime Minister, the United States is looking forward to eating Indian mangoes," Bush said of a provision that will bring the country's beloved fruit to the U.S. for the first time in nearly two decades.
But the civilian nuclear agreement is the major building block of renewed relations between the United States and India, which is seeking greater recognition on the world stage.
Critics say the United States is using India as a counterweight to China's growing economic and political influence. And they argue that the agreement sends the wrong signal to leaders of North Korea and Iran, who have thumbed their noses at international monitoring of their weapons programs.
Bush disagreed. "What this agreement says is things change, times change � that leadership can make a difference," he said.
"I'm trying to think differently, and not stay stuck in the past."
The agreement marks a major shift in policy for the United States, which imposed temporary sanctions on India in 1998 after it conducted nuclear weapons tests. India insists that it has been a good steward of nuclear material for decades; that there has never been one incident of proliferation from it.
Singh's leftist allies criticized the pact, saying it paves the way for U.S. meddling in Indian affairs. "Today is one of the most shameful days in the history of independent India," said Shambhu Shrivastava, spokesman for the socialist Samata Party.
Bush and Singh signed an agreement in July, but it hinged partly on determining how to segregate India's nuclear weapons work from its civilian nuclear program. A senior administration official said India classified 14 of its 22 reactors as civilian, which would open them to international inspection; eight were deemed military reactors, making them exempt from inspection.
The late night negotiations for the nuclear pact, coupled with protests planned throughout Bush's stay, reflected India's mixed feelings about the visit by the leader of the United States � a country seen as a loyal friend by some and a global bully by others.
Many business and government leaders are eager to strengthen ties with the United States.
But for a second day Thursday, thousands of demonstrators gathered in New Delhi to protest Bush's visit. Dozens of politicians, mainly from leftist parties, stood on the steps of the country's national parliament building chanting "Bush go back!" and "Down with Bush!"
"We're saying this because he is the biggest killer of humanity in the 21st century. He has killed in Afghanistan, he has killed Iraqis and now he is bent on killing Iranians," said Hannan Mollah, a lawmaker from the Communist Party of India (Marxist). "The Indian government should not get into any deal with the Americans. Bush has laid a trap for India."
Bush said he was mourning the loss of life in a bombing Thursday that ripped through the parking lot of the Marriott Hotel in Karachi and broke windows in the nearby U.S. consulate. At least four people died, including a U.S. foreign service officer. The attack occurred hundreds of miles from Islamabad, where Bush was headed later this week.
"Terrorists and killers are not going to prevent me from going to Pakistan," Bush said.
And Bush repeated his position that reforms at the United Nations are needed before the U.S. will consider whether it would back India's desire to become a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.
The president and his wife, Laura, visited a memorial to India's independence leader, M.K. Gandhi, standing in stocking feet for a moment of silence and wreath-laying at the site where he was cremated in 1948. Following tradition, the Bushes tossed rose petals on the cremation platform � repeating the gesture several times at the request of an Indian photographer who didn't get the first shot.
SEARCH
|
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:20 am |
|
Nuclear Energy is great, trustworthy counrties who aren't sitting on top of a ton of oil should be using it as often as possible.
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:54 am |
|
While I have my reservations about nuclear energy as a sustainable source of power, it is probably better than fossil fuels. Plus this is a nice diplomatic agreement too. 
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:24 am |
|
Agree with Hitchhiker- although nuclear isn't ideal, it's better than some of the alternatives.
I like good diplomatic agreements, too
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:36 pm |
|
I agree with this in principle, but I truly wish India would use better than light-water reactors. I am hoping they would go with a pebble-bed or even more advanced technology.
Those that opose this deal should ponder two things:
1) India already has "the bomb", and has kept it entirely in their hands since 1998. Even though they won't sign the non-proliferation agreement (which has certain provisions which are somewhat unfair), they are trustworthy.
2) India will keep growing economically, and their energy needs will be filled. If we don't help them use nuclear, they will compete with us for oil, which just means prices will go up faster. It is better that they never develop the need for oil for non-transportation energy, that way they won't face the problems of swithing to nuclear when oil runs out.
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
