And here is something more: Quote India believes the latest IAEA report on Iran's nuclear programme is "disturbing". "We are very clear that a nuclear Iran is not in India's interest, it does not contribute to regional security," government sources said. In Vienna, India, along with other IAEA board members, is working on a resolution to criticize Iran for continuing with its nuclear enrichment work in defiance of a series of strictures from the IAEA and UN Security Council. Unquote [Source: < http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-11-18/india/30414678_1_nuclear-iran-nuclear-programme-iaea-decision >.]
Also relevant in the context of a point made earlier: Quote On 10 September, the General Assembly adopted a draft resolution, initiated by Australia and sponsored by 126 States, by a vote of 158 in favour, 3 against (Bhutan, India, Libya), with 5 abstentions (Cuba, Lebanon, Mauritius, Syria, Tanzania). By resolution (A/RES/50/245)<http://www.un.org/Depts/ddar/ctbt/21b2.htm> the General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty and requested the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary of the Treaty, to open it for signature at the earliest possible date. Unquote [Source: 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT)' at < http://www.un.org/Depts/ddar/ctbt/ctbt.htm>] Sukla On 27 January 2014 21:53, Sukla Sen <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry! > The source of the last quote is: < > http://www.dsalert.org/crisis-in-iran-impact-on-india/355-crisis-over-irans-nuclear-programme > >. > > Sukla > > > On 27 January 2014 17:56, Sukla Sen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The CTBT, as it stands, proposes a blanket ban on nuclear explosions (for >> those who sign and ratify after the treaty comes into force). >> Would you care to explain what's a "fair CTBT"? >> >> And what's "fairness" that excludes "tom dick and harry"? >> That was precisely my point. In India's perception a system is "fair" if >> it allows India to develop its nuclear weapons unhindered but prohibit >> other non-nuclear weapon states. The typical "second class railway >> compartment syndrome". >> >> As regards India on Iran's nuclear programme: >> Quote >> >> Tel Aviv: Justifying India's vote against Iran on its nuclear programme, >> former union minister Shashi Tharoor has said it was in line with the >> principle that Tehran had agreed to the terms of NPT and hence had to abide >> by it. >> >> "We said we didn't sign it, but you did sign it (NPT). Since you did sign >> it you are subject to all the standards of IAEA and if you are found to be >> not in compliance, or doing things to hide from them, then we will vote >> against you because you have violated the very principles for which you had >> made solemn declarations," Tharoor said addressing a gathering at Tel Aviv >> university. >> >> Tharoor, former minister of State for External Affairs and UN >> Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information, made the >> comments in response to a query regarding India's position on Nuclear >> non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty >> (CTBT). >> >> India twice voted against Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency >> in 2005 and 2009. >> >> "I am not hiding anything in saying that India is not a fan of NPT and >> has not been from the very beginning. We thought that it was a deeply >> misguided treaty which essentially enshrined apartheid in international >> law, which basically said that only five countries had the right to have >> something that nobody else did, and for us it was fundamentally >> unacceptable," he said. >> >> "It was wrong morally, ethically, legally and logically. What we would >> have been very much in favour of, and remain strongly in favour of, is >> total universal nuclear disarmament", he emphasised. >> Unquote >> [Source: < >> http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/india-right-in-voting-against-iran-tharoor_755896.html >> >.] >> >> So, while repeating the familiar lines against the "nuclear apartheid" of >> the NPT and advocacy for "total universal nuclear disarmament", Tharoor >> iterated that as Iran is a signatory to the NPT, the provisions of the NPT, >> howsoever discriminatory, shall apply to Iran; and definitely not to India, >> which is a non-signatory. >> It's quite another matter altogether that Iran categorically denies >> flouting of the NPT. >> Yet it didn't stop India from voting twice against Iran in the IAEA. >> >> Also relevant: >> Quote >> The growing suspicions over Iran's nuclear ambitions have emerged as a >> major foreign policy challenge facing India, during the course of the past >> year. India voted twice against Iran in the International Atomic Energy >> Agency (IAEA), generating widespread debate inside the country that >> highlighted some of the basic problems facing India and its nuclear policy. >> Unquote >> [Source: < >> http://humanities.tau.ac.il/iranian/en/previous-reviews/10-iran-pulse-en/115-12 >> >.] >> >> And: >> Quote >> While the Iranian government has categorically ruled out any intentions >> of acquiring nuclear weapons, India is concerned that the acquisition of >> uranium enrichment capability may create the propensity to develop nuclear >> warheads. Indian policy makers and analysts have been largely >> apprehensive of Pakistan's nuclear weapons falling into the hands of >> Islamist fundamentalists who may use these as weapons of terrorism. As a >> hard-line nationalist regime has been ruling Iran for over two decades, the >> acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran will add to regional instability in >> an already unstable neighbourhood, particularly when viewed in the light of >> the on-going conflict in Iraq that faces the prospects of a civil war and >> Afghanistan that has seen the resurgence of the Taliban. Saudi Arabia may >> also opt to acquire its own nuclear weapons and other neighbours may seek >> nuclear guarantees from the US and even Israel. The long history of >> conflict between the nuclear-armed neighbours India and Pakistan and the >> uneasy thaw between India and China are also causes for strategic >> instability in the region. An unstable regional security environment >> hampers growth and economic development as overseas investors shy away from >> investing in the region. Iran has obtained uranium enrichment technology by >> clandestine means from Pakistan through Dr A Q Khan and may, in turn, pass >> on this technology to terrorist groups either as a state policy or through >> lax procedures that may be exploited by scientists with fundamentalist >> leanings. Also, an Iran-Pakistan nexus cannot be ruled out in future even >> though their present relations are lukewarm. Iran's nuclear programme is >> following the same pattern as that of Pakistan and the possibility that >> Iran may acquire nuclear weapons in future cannot be ruled out. Iran also >> has an advanced ballistic missile development programme with the Shahab-3 >> IRBM capable of striking targets in western India. Together these two >> programmes are capable of giving Iran a robust nuclear weapons delivery >> capability. On account of national security considerations alone India's >> opposition to Iran's uranium enrichment programme, which violates Iran's >> treaty and safeguards obligations, is absolutely justified. >> Unquote >> >> Hypocrisy unlimited! >> >> Sukla >> >> >> >> On 27 January 2014 16:35, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I don't think most of us who want a fair CTBT want WMDs to become >>> available to every "tom dick and harry" - that's your interpretation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Our contention is that a CTBT regime needs to be fair and NOT IN FAVOR >>> OF THE HAVE'S. I am also certain that if a move is made for universal >>> disarmament and eradication of nuclear arms, India would back that move >>> (notwithstanding the corrupt and immoral nature of our government and >>> bureaucracy). Yes, India could be at the forefront of this move along with >>> Japan... >>> >>> >>> >>> By the way, please share any reference you have on India's position on a >>> nuclear Iran. Thanks. >>> >>> Viswa >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- > Peace Is Doable > -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
