Why has Bush proposed giving nuclear technology to India and why is congress approving it?

Question

Reminds me of the time Reagan and Bush I supplied Saddam with Chemical weapons and other armaments

Answer 1

Money. Follow the money.

Answer 2

Could be because India already has nuclear technology. The only way to have stability between nuclear powers is for everyone of them to have the ability to effectively retaliate after a nuclear strike on their nation. India already has second strike capabilities, but maybe their technology is becoming less effective in terms of that ability.

Answer 3

Most of India is Hindu. Hindu religion is based on not hurting any living thing. That's why they are mostly vegetarians. They are a peace loving country and nuclear technology in their hands are more likly to be used for the good of the people of India, rather than the destuction of anyone or anything.

Answer 4

Everyone has the right to nuclear power. It shouldnt be a thing just for the richest countries in the world which is a point Iran is trying to make. I keep saying if they wanted some nuclear bombs they could buy them off the black market easier than trying to fight the rest of the world to make them.

Answer 5

Maybe after stealing india's nuclear info, they were able to figure out how pathetic India's nuclear technology is.. someone needs to offset china.. and india is the only real bet.

If China outpaces India technologically China owns asia.. if India can offset S5 etc.. then it stalemates asia abit.

Although if you look to how many indians work for NASA.. youve got to wonder why india wouldn't have or be able to produce the technology themselves....

or maybe that is it right there.. the US doesn''t want india to produce the technology themselves.

oh and re: "NOT sitting on top of one of the world's largest deposits of natural gas and oil. "

I wouldn't be so sure about the 'natural' gas.


ALSO
the deal is for CIVILIAN nuclear technology .. india already has MILITARY NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY..

why wouldn't they share technology?


OR MAYBE
the theft of indian nuclear information WAS an oversight but called theft for various reason..maybe the theft was "allowed" to happen so that oversight and knowledge was there.

Then again maybe not.

Answer 6

Arming India will give China and Russia something to think about. Japan will soon be added to that club. Look out N Korea!

Answer 7

India has a fast growing economy, is a huge trading partner, is the world's most populous democracy, and IS NOT sitting on top of one of the world's largest deposits of natural gas and oil.

We help our friends.

(yeah, the nerve gas used to kill those thousands of Kurds had big "made in the USA" stamps on the side... go parrot your baseless propaganda elsewhere...)

Answer 8

Because he wants to outsource all American jobs to India in the nuclear department.

Answer 9

Maybe because its the only country in the region that we need better relations with, that isnt ruled by medieval throatcutters and splodeydopes. They need this nuclear edge over pakistan to keep the splodeydopes there from stirring up shiite. AND if china really is the next big superpower, it would be good to have a nuclear buddy on her doorstep with a large population. have you heard of geo-politics or do you just parrot dean and koskidz?

Why did gore agree to let russia give Iran nukes and kilo class subs?

By Bill Gertz

THE WASHINGTON TIMES



Vice President Al Gore, at the urging of Russian Prime Minister Viktor
Chernomyrdin, agreed to keep secret from Congress details of Russia's nuclear
cooperation with Iran beginning in late 1995.


In a classified "Dear Al" letter obtained by The Washington Times, Mr.
Chernomyrdin told Mr. Gore about Moscow's confidential nuclear deal with Iran
and stated that it was "not to be conveyed to third parties, including the U.S.
Congress."

But sources on Capitol Hill said Mr. Gore withheld the information from key
senators who normally would be told of such high-level security matters.

The Gore-Chernomyrdin deal, disclosed in a letter labeled "secret," appears to
violate a provision of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Act, which requires the
Clinton administration to keep congressional oversight committees fully informed
of all issues related to nuclear weapons proliferation.

The Chernomyrdin letter on nuclear cooperation with Iran follows a report in the
New York Times last week showing that Mr. Gore reached a secret deal with
Russia several months earlier that appears to circumvent U.S. laws requiring the
imposition of sanctions on Russia for its conventional arms sales to Iran.

That arrangement also was kept secret from Congress, raising concerns among
some lawmakers that the administration may be hiding other secret deals.

Gore spokesman Jim Kennedy said: "It's obvious that the motivation for this leak
is political."

The letter "simply appears to be part of the overall United States effort to
encourage the Russians to break off or limit their nuclear relationship with Iran,"
Mr. Kennedy said in a statement last night.

The Dec. 9, 1995, letter on Iranian nuclear cooperation states that the two leaders'
discussions as part of a special commission had resulted in "clarity and mutual
understanding" on the matter.

The letter said there were "no new trends" in Moscow's sale of nuclear equipment
to Iran since a 1992 agreement. It also states that Russia and the United States
would seek to prevent the "undermining of the nuclear arms non-proliferation
program."

Mr. Chernomyrdin said Moscow's program of building a nuclear reactor in Iran
would be limited to training technicians in Russia, and the delivery of "nuclear fuel
for the power plant for the years 2001 through 2011."

"The information that we are passing on to you is not to be conveyed to third
parties, including the U.S. Congress," Mr. Chernomyrdin said. "Open information
concerning our cooperation with Iran is obviously a different matter, and we do
no[t] object to the constructive use of such information. I am counting on your
understanding."

A classified analysis acompanying the letter stated that Russian assistance "if not
terminated, can only lead to Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability."

"Such a development would be destabilizing not only for the already volatile
Middle East, but would pose a threat to Russian and Western security interests,"
the analysis stated.

Russian promises to limit cooperation with Iran's nuclear program have been
undermined by numerous U.S. intelligence reports showing Moscow is providing
nuclear-weapons-related equipment to Tehran outside the scope of its declared
limits, according to U.S. officials.

A senior State Department official, Robert Einhorn, told a Senate subcommittee
hearing earlier this month that Russian nuclear assistance is a "persistent problem"
and that Russian companies linked to the government are providing Iran with
"laser isotope separation technology" used to enrich uranium for weapons.

Asked about the letter, congressional aides close to the issue said they knew
nothing about the details that the Russian leader gave Mr. Gore. "All this nuclear
cooperation is sanctionable," said a senior congressional aide.

The secret Gore-Chernomyrdin dealings have become an issue in the presidential
election campaign.

Texas Gov. George W. Bush stated during a campaign stop in Michigan last week
that the reported deal on Russian arms transfers to Iran was "a troubling piece of
information." He demanded an explanation from the vice president.

An earlier Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement, also obtained by The Washington
Times, reveals that the United States would not impose sanctions on Russia
required under U.S. law in exchange for Moscow's promise to end arms sales to
Iran.

That agreement, called an "aide memoire" and signed by Mr. Gore and Mr.
Chernomyrdin on June 30, 1995, required Russia to halt all arms sales to Iran by
Dec. 31, 1999.

In exchange, the United States promised "to take appropriate steps to avoid any
penalties to Russia that might otherwise arise under domestic law . . .," says the
agreement, labeled "secret."

The aide memoire also states that the United States would "pursue steps that would
lead to the removal of Russia from the proscribed list of International Traffic in
Arms Regulations of the United States" — which limits U.S. arms and defense-
related technology sales.

A third classified letter, from Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, indicates
that Russia is not living up to its promise to halt conventional arms deliveries to
the Iranians.

Mrs. Albright stated in a Jan. 13 letter to Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov,
also labeled "secret," that "Russia's unilateral decision to continue delivering arms
to Iran beyond the Dec. 31 deadline will unnecessarily complicate our
relationship."

"I urge that Russia refrain from any further deliveries of those arms covered by the
aide memoire; provide specific information on what has been delivered, what
remains to be shipped and anticipated timing; and refrain from concluding any
additional arms contracts with Iran," Mrs. Albright stated.

She added that the United States had lived up to its commitment in the 1995 Gore-
Chernomyrdin aide memoire, including removing Russia from the list of nations
limited by munitions-export controls.

In the "Dear Igor" letter, Mrs. Albright stated that "without the aide memoire,
Russia's conventional arms sales to Iran would have been subject to sanctions
based on various provisions of our laws."

The 1992 Iran-Iraq Nonproliferation Act requires the imposition of sanctions for
"destabilizing" arms sales to either country. A 1996 amendment to the 1962
Foreign Assistance Act also requires sanctions on nations that provide lethal
military assistance to a nation designated as a state sponsor of terrorism. Iran is on
the State Department's terrorism sponsor list.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican, and Senate Foreign
Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms, North Carolina Republican, wrote to
President Clinton on Friday asking about the 1995 aide memoire.

"Please assure us . . . the vice president did not, in effect, sign a pledge with Victor
Chernomyrdin in 1995 that committed your administration to break U.S. law by
dodging sanctions requirements," they stated.

Senate aides said the administration failed to notify the Senate about the specific
arrangements to cover up for Russian arms sales.

National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger said on Sunday, contrary to Mrs.
Albright's classified letter, that U.S. sanctions did not apply to Russia.