[Marxism] Re; Indo-US Nuclear Deal: 123 Agreement

David Walters dave.walters at comcast.net
Tue Aug 14 21:06:49 MDT 2007

Sukla, you don't get it. India is doing *exactly* what Brazil and 
Argentina is doing (which I notice has raised a single hackle here on 
this list). The driving force is energy, no bombs. Bombs have held up 
India's access to the energy (IMO). The article in  /Analytical Monthly 
Review/, published in Kharagpur, West Bengal, India is spot on and you 
have not challenged ONE assertion in the article...that is, that the US 
ends of up controlling India's access to fuel supplies to it's new 
reactors. This puts you in an awkward place because you don't think 
India ought to develop nuclear energy, so you don't necessarily see this 
as a bad thing, I would suppose. I've been arguing from the beginning 
that the problem with what has become the 123 Agreement is *sovereignty* 
and nothing else.

You should address the points in this well written article.

On nuclear weapons. If you don't believe your country should have 
nuclear weapons then *get rid* of the nuclear weapons. It's a policy or 
programmatic position. You are either for or against them and then act 
accordingly. If you are serious about the threat they poise to India, 
then don't *hinder* the campaign against them by latching them on to 
nuclear energy because of the misperceived notion that weapons somehow 
organically flow from the energy side of the equation. There are 
probably millions of Indians who abhor their country's procession of 
nuclear bombs but support India trying to develop a safe, clean and 
cheap energy source such as nuclear fission. By tying them together as 
you do you neither fight nuclear weapons or enlighten anyone on the 
reality of nuclear energy.


More information about the Marxism mailing list