Two related topics:
Full text of IAEA agreement.
Commie regimes -- theory and practice.
The two topics are related because Commies led by Prakash Karat have made a song and dance (so has the Congress spokesperson Shri Manoj Tiwari) about the agreement with IAEA on the nuke deal. Transparency? What transparency can be suspected among politico's of the empress variety making trips to St. Petersburg on chartered Reliance jets or the Karats variety seeking holidays in USA? (Prakash Karat has not denied so far his holiday in June in USA reported by Economic Times).
Why has Karat become a cry baby? Why didn't he ask for the draft IAEA agreement on day 1 of the coord meet with the empress of 10 Janpath supported by chamcha Pranab Mukherjee (with Manmohan playing difficult to get)?
It is all about deals, deals cut for saving the sattaa using the IAEA deal as a cover to avoid discussions on what concerns the aam aadmi. Poverty. See how commies deal with poverty in the scorching attack mounted by Kesavan Nair, a fellow-traveller.
kalyanaraman
http://dharma1.blogspot.com/2008/07/iaea-agreement-full-text.html
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3886481/IAEA-Agreement-text (Thanks to rediff.com http://im.rediff.com/news/2008/jul/iaea.pdf )
See Sheela Bhatt's review at http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/may/09iaea.htm
Points in India nuke text raise red flag at IAEA
Reuters
Posted online: Thursday, July 10, 2008 at 0744 hrs IST
The draft nuclear safeguards pact India submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency on Wednesday contains ambiguities that must be clarified before the UN watchdog approves the deal, a leading expert said.
The IAEA said the safeguards text, which India hammered out with IAEA inspectors early this year and is a key element in a landmark 2005 US-Indian nuclear cooperation deal, had been sent to the agency's 35-nation board in Vienna after the New Delhi government gave the green light.
The draft, which was circulated by Washington-based think tanks, contained several points that "raise questions that board members need to get clarity on" because they would restrict international monitoring of India's atomic programs, said Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association.
He said a key red flag is raised by a clause in the draft that says India "may take corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies."
Disruption of fuel supplies would happen only if India were to resume testing of nuclear weapons and that loophole would blunt any IAEA effort to keep that country's civil nuclear power program from being used to augment its atomic arsenal.
"Does that mean that India intends to withdraw from what are supposed to be permanent safeguards if it tests and other states decide to terminate fuel supplies?" asked Kimball.
"If so, that is a big problem and the Indian government has not clarified what that means," he said.
'ABNORMAL' OMISSION
India - one of just three nations outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) - developed atomic bombs in secret and conducted a nuclear test in 1974, prompting the United States to ban sales of US nuclear fuel and reactor technology.
The draft, which in many respects resembles IAEA agreements with other countries, also omits a list of nuclear facilities that India has voluntarily agreed to place under IAEA safeguards, said Kimball, calling that "abnormal".
India's motives were not clear, he said, but added that it appeared "they're trying to preserve their options to put some reactors in or take some out" from IAEA scrutiny, depending on future bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements.
In addition to getting IAEA governors' approval, India must also obtain a waiver for the nuclear deal from the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, where some members may resist the deal because NSG regulations ban trade with non-NPT states.
Proponents of the US-India accord say it will move the Asian giant's trade and diplomatic relations closer to the West and more broadly promote an alternative to high-polluting and expensive oil and gas energy in developing nations.
Critics say it will encourage nuclear proliferators and weaken the Western case against the nuclear ambitions of Iran or North Korea.
Ashley Tellis of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a former Bush administration official and proponent of the deal, said fears of another Indian nuclear weapons test were theoretical and India had too much to risk by testing.
"With the investments that they have made in this deal, the incentives not to test actually grow," he said.
"If India tests in the future, it will not be the first to test. It will test most likely in response to somebody else testing," added Tellis.
The Arms Control Association published the draft at: http://www.armscontrol.org/pdf/20080709_India_safeguards.pdf
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Points-in-India-nuke-text-raise-red-flag-at-IAEA/333834/
Marxism failed in both theory and practice
By Jayapradeep Viswanath
(This article is based on the book written by Marxist leader
P. Kesavan Nair. He is frustrated with Marxism and his
expose has become a bestseller in Malayalam.)
As he seems, unlike other communist-turned-
anti-communists, Nair is never emotional. His
critical narration exposes Marxism. Cleverly he
quotes Bertrand Russell.
"Russell was one of the greatest scholars of 20th
century. Philosopher, mathematician, writer, etc., his battles
for world peace are legendary. Russell disapproved and
dissented Marxism till his end. The history gave
flamboyant approval to Russell's criticism on Marxism.
His reservations against communist governments are harsher
than against Marxism. Russell had been seeking answer to
two questions: 1. Whether Marxism is truth. 2. The
implementation of that gave human beings peace and
happiness. In the celebrated article 'Why I am not
Communist', Russell quests for the answer. Marxism is
not only not truth but also it supplies
only chaos, were his findings. The history
of socialist governments and Marxism
justify the findings."
"The concept of dialectical materialism and historical
materialism of Marx do not merge with the philosophy
originated from the modern science," Nair's theoretical
analysis goes on. "Marx imagined that the dialective materialism
is a law which rules the universe. He also considered it a
universal force which rules the human history, independent
of human ambitions. It is the same value that religion gives
to God's rules, that the Marx gives to the dialective
materialism. The communists misunderstood the
dialective materialism as the science of science. This
history-discarded principle is still the basic principle of the
strategy and swindle of the communists. The approach of
the communists, snuggling the failed techniques, is
highly conservative', Kesavan Nair swears.
From the theory he comes to the epitomes. "The incidents in
the socialist countries proved the theory and practice of
Marxism has no correlation. The destruction of Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe are examples. In regard to the
Marxist theories, these incidents are very important. According
to the Marxian view the theory is to be proved through practice. In that view, the devastation in Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe proves that in practice the
Marxian theory is a failure. In those countries and in China
the practice of Marxism ended in the bullying of predominance
of party leaders and their gourmet pursue. Communist
party leaders rejoiced in luxury, extravagance,
corruption, hedonism and wealth. Marxism was
establishmentlised in socialist countries. In China so-called
market-socialism is going on. Economy is capitalism while
the political system is 'socialism' ! In capitalist countries
the monopolists control the economical-political systems. But
in Marxism the economy decides politics. But Chinese
communist party says that the political system is decided
by economic system. What an irony! In China the party leaders
are the shareholders or veneer owners of the
industrial-commercial establishments."
"Imperialism is the apex state of capitalism, Leninism
says. Theoretically and pragmatically the prime opponent
of communism is imperialism. America is the main envoy
of imperialism. But the most favoured nation of America is
China. America's enormous investments flows into China.
Virtually now-a-days China is under the American boots.
Red China spread red carpet to Henry Kissinger, Nixon,
George Bush and Bill Clinton and now to the junior Bush.
Under the leadership of Communist party, capitalism is
bullying China. In normal capitalist countries
'independent democracy' is the camouflage of capitalism. In
China the camouflage is 'communism'."
"It was not with the people's involvement the 1917
October revolution cropped up in Russia. It was a
planned, conspired sabotage against the Kerenski government by the Bolshevik party led by Lenin during
the tail end of first World War. Lenin and those
intellectuals around him depicted it as a
labour-class revolution. Lenin who came to power in
Russia became the unquestionable leader of international Communism through shortcuts. After Lenin, more autocratically than Tsar, annihilating all the old revolutionarists, Stalin established the 'Commissar' empire. The brutality of Stalin beneath the iron curtain is indescribable. It was Khrushchev who lifted the iron curtain a little through his confessing speech in the 20th party congress of CPSU. The artists and writers who pointed out the autocracy of communist rule were branded as the enemies of working-class. The 75-year-long despotism of Communist rule ended up not due to any external force, but by the natives themselves."
"The government led by Lenin in the post-revolutionary period also was an oppression machine. The governmental terrorism was at its zenith when it was ruled by Stalin. With the rule of Stalin the identity of individuals waned out. The emotion, likes and dislikes, independent personality, the value of life, etc, become taboos. In the working-class totalitarianism, an individual withers to a scapegoat to scarify in the revolution."
The reason of becoming of Communist leaders as autocrats, is to be sought in the concept of Marx about revolution. Marxism opened up a vast vista for autocracy. 'Labour-class-totalitarianism' was brought about by removing the existing governments, and those who criticise such labour-class governments were, without any mercy, annihilated or wiped off. That were the basic lessons taught by Marx and Angels. In Communist countries, all those reign on the saddle of power become autocrats. Workmen and farmers have no role in the Governments. The ruling Communist leaders themselves become a 'Ruling class'.
'The Communists give an impression that, the working-class-totalitarianism is a rule of the majority. Not at least one example is available to show that the Communist Government is the equipment of the majority. During the devastation period of the Soviet Union, the apology of CPSU is worth notable. 'All country men' narrowed to 'working-class'. 'Party' constricted to its central committee, central committee to Politburo, Politburo to the General Secretary. Working-class totalitarianism and democratic-centralisation is the foundation. Democratic-centralisation transformed to the power-centralisation of the Secretary. In democratic-centralisation the difference between 'upper' and 'lower' become severe. The directions from 'up's are strict orders. Those who are in the lower committees are the slaves of upper committees.
'Between 1825 and 1917, under the rule of Tsar, the total slay was 6321. But, after the 1917 revolution, within the two months of 1918, the 'red terrorism' declared officially by Lenin did 15,000 killings. In the famine occurred due to the implementation of collective farming in 1932-33, the total carnage was 60 lakhs. In the cleaning process done by the party bumped off 7,20,000 people. Between 1934 and 1941, 70 lakhs innocent people were jailed in the notorious 'Gulags'. Of them the majority found their end within that camps. When Stalin expires 27.5 lakhs prisoners were in the Gulags. For vindictiveness towards their own people, the Communist leaders are more cruel than those of capitalists countries. In the famous book 'Gulag Archipelago', the celebrated writer Solzhenitsyn imparts that, 6 crores people were put to sleep in the Communist experiment in Russia due to the cruelty of the governments.'
'During the era of Tsar, the Russia was the granary of Europe. 1/6th land of the earth, with plentiful natural resources and minimal populace were the blessings of Soviet Union. Though they were ahead in Astronomy, Nuclear physics and Armoury, Soviet Union was trailing behind in agriculture and industry. Under Communists' rule the agony of Soviet people was relentless. Everything was in dearth. From bread to butter people queued up for hours. The Russian breadlines were notorious. Two crores of people involved in black marketing. Meanwhile curious voices for food and clothing were muffled like anything. During the rule of Communists', the workers and farmers of Soviet Union got only chains but no new world.'
'The turmoil is similar in China, Cambodia, North Korea and Eastern Europe. In China, the cultural revolution bestowed mass slaughter. Including Liu Shaoqi, the No.2 in the party leadership, with other top leaders ( the foes of Mao), one crore pretty 'comrades' were numbed in the name of cultural revolutions. A section of the world still believe that the toll is three crores. It is pity to find that those who killed and kill are Communists. In the ''Great Leap Forward'', lead by Mao, due to famine, another four crores of people dead. Nobody knows that, how many people were killed in Tiananmen square.
'The Pol Pot, the leader of Cambodian Communist party rejoiced by heaping skulls and bones in the 'killing fields'. During his regime, 30 million people were slaughtered. The red terrorism ran riot in north Korea and Eastern Europe.' 'The ideas and opinions of not of them were suppressed by Communism. Talented writers and scientists were forced to flee from those countries.
'Though the pre-streams are there, Marxism did not expounded in Western Europe. Though the political set up were based on Capitalism, Communism could not mature there. In the capitalist countries also, they could not mellowed. The poverty in the undeveloped & under developed countries welcome Communism, says Russell. Communism is the philosophy of poverty. It is the philosophy of insurgence and hatred. Poverty and starvation usher the Communist devil and its proliferation can be stopped only by poverty eradication.'
'The Marxism exported by the Communist totalitarianism-Government of Soviet Union to the countries like India, turned up like a bad penny as opium to the so called left intellectuals. They betrayed their poor brothers and sisters with its intoxication'.
(The author is a practising lawyer in Kerala High Court and Editor of 'Neethi' Magazine.)
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=245&page=42
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment