to Dr. Dinesh Chandra Kakati - Posoowa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

One Minute Outcry of Anguish stop the floods ‘The water came in and within 30 minutes engulfed the whole area giving us just enough time to save our lives. Just like in an awful nightmare, our houses and whatever we had were under water. And today, I am living like a refugee in my own town,’ narrated one of the flood stricken victims of Lakhimpur. ‘It happens every year. The water comes and ruins our lives. Every year we move away, but every year the water comes to us, as if it has made up its mind never to let us live in peace.’ ‘The hydel project that is going on was supposed to be a boon for us, but it has turned into a curse. Every year, whenever the water increases on their side---they release water into the already raging rivers and it causes massive floods. Even before the project started, they were warned that their efforts might lead to an increase in floods down the river. But all those advice and protestations fell into deaf ears. Now although some of their own people admit their dreadful mistake, publicly they maintain a strong stance of modernization. This time though they have claimed that they had informed the district administration, but it seems the district administration simply ignored it. But even if they had heeded, what could they have done? Is it possible to remove such a huge populace and their belongings in short notice? What’s the use of progress if it harms people instead of benefiting them?’ ‘Nature itself never causes all these problems; it’s all human follies. So many trees have been cut down, and it has led to massive soil erosion; and deposition of this soil in the river has made the river bed rise; and hence, when it rains a little-- the river overflows and floods.’ ‘Simple things can change the scenario—the hydel project should be stopped for the time being and its environmental impacts should be studied. They should investigate measures to ensure that they do not release water to the rivers and hence cause floods. They should develop a plan and release the water where it won’t impact the populace and at least work with the government and local administration to stop this kind of destruction.’ Page 6 * POSOOWA, July 2007 ‘Can’t we do something to clean up the riverbed, thus ensure that the river does not overflow after a mere rainfall? It is not an impossible task, most of these rivers almost dry up during the winters and the soil can be removed from the riverbed. This soil can be used for agricultural purposes as it is very fertile.’ ‘Why don’t we build dams at the right locations? These can provide us with electricity and also ensure that the surrounding areas are not flooded.’ ‘These ideas are ripe and are floating around, but nobody seems to care. After all, floods also mean money for the politicians who control all the purse strings. Half of the relief money that comes for the people disappears. But we don’t care about that. What we need is to work out something that can prevent the river from coming to us every summer. Why can’t anybody do anything to stop these floods from killing us and destroying us all over--every year?’ Author’s Note: The idea of bringing up this lamentation of anguish by a flood victim is to highlight the need for a symposium or a discussion forum to find ways to defeat the floods that cripple the lives of our people back home—without fail every year. Even a small step can bring miracles to the lives of many. By Kaushik Phukan Seattle Online newspaper from Assam with breaking news, features, photos ... Please visit : www.assamtimes.org or write to editor@assamtimes.org
The Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Cooperation (The 123 Agreement) The controversy over the Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement has in recent weeks caused much political turmoil in India. The fate of India's coalition Government and its historic nuclear deal with the United States is hanging in the balance today as voting is going on for a confidence motion in the Indian parliament at the time of writing this article. Considering the fact that not much has happened in terms of debates and discussion in the entire country on a matter of vast national interest, it is worthwhile for all to understand various implications of operationalizing the Agreement. Towards that end this article presents some information extracted primarily from the public domain. The Agreement of Cooperation between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of India concerning peaceful uses of nuclear energy, commonly known as the 123 Agreement, refers to Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 which governs all civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with the US. This Act, as amended, requires U.S. reactor and reactor fuel exports to be subject to the terms of a Section 123 Agreement. Section 129 of the same act states that “No nuclear materials and equipment or sensitive nuclear technology shall be exported to (1) any non-nuclear-weapon state that is found by the President to have, at any time after the effective date of this section, detonated a nuclear explosive device;” etc. The above stipulation regarding a non-nuclearweapon state has created a hurdle for India since India is a non-nuclear-weapon state according to the provisions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) - a landmark international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament. According to this Treaty that became effective in 1970, a nuclear-weapon state is one that has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to January 1, 1967. Since India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974 after the cut-off date, it was not included in the select group of five nuclear weapon states - USA, UK, France, Russia and China. India is not a signatory of the NPT because India considers it to be discriminatory. India has an indigenous strategic nuclear program and it is a de facto nuclearweapon- state. India also has an impeccable record of non-proliferation of nuclear materials and technology. Soon after India exploded its “peaceful nuclear device” in 1974, the US led a nuclear ban on India and all foreign assistance immediately stopped, crippling its indigenous nuclear program, most visibly at Tarapur nuclear plant. India, a “rising Asian giant” and an emerging economic power, is in dire need for energy to run its economic growth machine much like China. Nuclear energy offers a very attractive option to meet part of the country’s energy needs. It is renewable, does not produce carbon and cost effective and, therefore, it is a desirable component of the country’s overall energy program. But to generate nuclear energy, India needs nuclear fuel that is uranium based. India has only limited supply of uranium and it has to depend on foreign supply of this nuclear fuel, which it is barred from getting in the international market because of the sanctions imposed after the first nuclear test in 1974. India’s civilian nuclear energy development is embodied in a three-stage strategy of which the final stage is based on thorium fuel cycle, which is in the process of development and finalization. India has the second largest reserve of thorium and about a fourth of the world’s supply. But it has very limited supply of uranium. Until thorium based fuel cycle is rolled out completely, India has to depend Tarapur Nuclear Poer Plant, Maharashtra Page 7 * POSOOWA, July 2007 on supply of uranium based nuclear fuel. During the last three decades or so, realities of geopolitics have changed. The rise of China and India as two Asian economic giants has given rise to new imperatives on the part of the US - the only superpower in a multi-polar world. India being the biggest democracy has close affinity politically with the US and US fear for China’s rise requires it to have an Asian counterweight for balance of power. Additionally, nuclear trade of material and technology has a lot to gain from for both the US and India. India’s strength can well be perceived to be in the best interests of the USA. The confluence of varied interests in different circles eventually led to the overture by the US to lift India out of the post- Pokhran nuclear isolation. This was expressed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Bush in their joint statement on July 18, 2005. In March 2006, President Bush and Prime minister Manmohan Singh inked the historic 123 Agreement draft that has been negotiated back and forth and finally released on August 03, 2007. Towards operationalizing this agreement a Nuclear Safeguards Agreement has been ironed out with the IAEA-Nuclear watchdog of the United Nations and released on August 10, 2008. Following this, India will have to work out a deal with the 45 member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and eventually the agreement will have to be approved by the US Congress. In its attempt to overcome the obstacles presented by the existing laws of the land barring India from receiving civil nuclear cooperation, the US congress passed the Hyde Act clearing the way to do nuclear business with India. This essentially facilitates a special status to India to avail certain benefits, which it would not be able, get as a non-nuclearweapon state. However, certain stipulations of the Hyde Act have been a source of controversy on their implications especially on the sovereignty of India with respect to conduct of India’s independent foreign policy. Continued on page 11..
Page 1 and 2: www.posoowa.org VOLUME 35, ISSUE NO
Page 3 and 4: you Sankumani! Some of the other hi
Page 5: The joy of seeing and doing ordinar
Page 9 and 10: Response to appeal for Parijat Acad
Page 11 and 12: 7) Trying to locate faults in succe
Page 13 and 14: 12345678901234567890123456789012123

to Dr. Dinesh Chandra Kakati - Posoowa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?