The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

EDITORIALS

With hope and confidence
PC’s budget reflects nation’s mood

BY leaving personal income tax unchanged, the Budget for 2006-07 may have dampened the enthusiasm of the salaried people who were waiting for some extra cash in their pocket, but it has other benefits for individuals. Small cars, soft drinks, idli-dosa mixes, ice cream and electronic items such as DVDs will become cheaper, while smokers will have to shell out a little extra. The one-by-six scheme that required compulsory filing of tax returns stands abolished. Steel, mineral products and life-saving drugs will also become cheaper. No wonder, the Prime Minister has called it “a common man’s Budget”.

Finance Minister P. Chidambaram’s third successive Budget presented on Tuesday provides more money for education, job creation, health and infrastructure. It is a positive, growth-oriented, carry-on Budget with few surprises and few shocks. If the policy framework is enabling an 8 per cent GDP growth, why tinker with it? That seems to be the thinking behind the Budget. It is positive because the social secor has got the much-deserved support; it encourages savings and foreign investment; no additional taxes have been imposed; it contains nothing that can send a wrong signal to the outside world; and it addresses global investors’ concerns on fiscal deficit. Infrastructure building, particularly power, gets a boost and it carries forward the UPA government’s agenda of taking reforms to rural India. There are no giveaways despite state elections later this year.

However, there are certain disappointments from the Budget. Senior citizens have got no relief. The rising cost of treatment and the shrinking income from bank deposits has particularly hit those without a pension. A social security system for vulnerable sections of society is yet to be put in place. Personal income tax payees have been totally ignored this time. India Inc’s demand for abolishing the Fringe Benefit Tax has not been accepted; the FBT has been modified. Another irritant in last year’s Budget, the cash withdrawal tax, also stays as it has yielded some unaccounted money.

Particularly commendable is the UPA government’s efforts at containing the fiscal and revenue deficits. The fiscal deficit has been pegged at 3.8 per cent of the GDP and the revenue deficit at 2.1 per cent for the coming fiscal. This is fairly acceptable. The tax-to GDP ratio will rise to 11.2 per cent from 10.5 per cent, though the Economic Survey has expectations of 13 per cent tax-to-GDP ratio from the government. Critics point out that fiscal prudence has been achieved as the government has repackaged the existing job and development schemes and renamed them as the Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Bharat Nirman while there is hardly any additional spending.

There are some announcements which deserve notice. The much awaited Goods and Services Act will be introduced in April, 2010, though many in the industry would have preferred a much advanced deadline. The extension of the services tax to 16 more services like ATMs and luxury class air travel is welcome. The reduction of the peak Customs duty from 15 to 12.5 per cent is in keeping with the Prime Minister’s proposal to bring duties to the ASEAN levels. Fixed deposits in banks with at least five years maturity will get rebate under the income tax for savings. The budgetary grants to certain universities, specially Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, will, hopefully, push higher education and research. The short-term credit at 7 per cent interest rate for farmers will be widely appreciated. The Bharat Nirman programme will get a 54 per cent hike in the budgetary support.

What the Finance Minister has not done is also significant. Once again the Finance Minister has failed to initiate labour reforms, which essentially would have meant an easier hire-and-fire policy. Disinvestment of government stake in public sector units will stay in the freezer. An announcement of allowing FDI in retail would have enthused foreign investors. The expected health cess has not materialised. There has been no mention of the Sixth Pay Commission. Over all, Mr Chidambaram has been slowly and cautiously treading the reform path, thanks to compulsions of coalition politics.

PM silences sceptics
Nuclear deterrent remains intact

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s statement in Parliament on Monday should end the controversy over the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal. He has cleared every doubt being voiced by the sceptics of the July 18 deal on the eve of the visit of the US President, Mr George W. Bush. Those who feared that India’s strategic (nuclear weapons) programme might get compromised should have no reason to complain after the Prime Minister’s categorical assurance in Parliament. Clearly, no loopholes have been left to ensure that India’s nuclear deterrent programme remains unaffected. He has emphasised that the statement he signed in July along with President Bush is only about nuclear energy generation and in no way compromises India’s strategic programme or dilutes its deterrent capability.

Enunciating the national position, the Prime Minister told Parliament that India would include only about “65 per cent of the total installed thermal nuclear power capacity” in the civilian list as is required by the joint statement signed in Washington. No outside influence will be tolerated in preparing the list, and “the decision of what facilities may be identified as civilian will be made by India alone”. It is a matter of satisfaction that India has made it clear to the US that no safeguards are acceptable with regard to India’s indigenous Fast Breeder Reactor programme. India could not agree to anything which could prove to be an impediment in the way of its future nuclear research and development activities. There will also be no sharing of information which could compromise India’s strategic interests.

From the 2000-word statement of the Prime Minister’s statement it is clear that the scare-mongering by the sceptics, including some of our scientists, was avoidable. Being on guard is understandable, but opposing something as significant as the nuclear deal with the US on the basis of imaginary fears is unfair. India can now meet the nuclear energy needs of its fast-growing economy, accessing nuclear fuel and technology abroad, without compromising its strategic interests and options. Also, there is in the July deal an implicit recognition of India as a nuclear weapon State. The advantages that India will have as a member of the prestigious nuclear club can easily be understood. Besides making the government’s stand clear, the statement should strengthen the Prime Minister’s hands in his talks with President Bush.

ARTICLE

Document
No compromise on capability
India finding space in nuclear order
by Dr Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India

THE article has been excerpted from the statement made by the Prime Minister in Parliament on February 27on civilian nuclear energy cooperation with the United States.

Established through the vision of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and sustained by the commitment of scientists like Dr Homi Bhabha, our nuclear programme is truly unique. Its uniqueness lies in the breadth of its overarching vision: of India mastering a three-stage nuclear programme using our vast thorium resources, and mastering more complex processes of the full nuclear fuel cycle. Consequently, our civilian and strategic programmes are deeply intertwined across the expanse of the nuclear fuel cycle. There are hardly any other countries in a similar situation. Over the years, the maturation of our nuclear programme, including the development of world-class thermal power reactors, has made it possible to contemplate some changes. These are worth considering if benefits include gaining unhindered access to nuclear material, equipment, technology and fuel from international sources.

However, international trade in nuclear material, equipment and technologies is largely determined by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG)-an informal group of 45 countries. Members include the United States, Russia, France and the United Kingdom. India has been kept out of this informal arrangement and, therefore, denied access to trade in nuclear materials, equipment and various kinds of technologies.

It was with this perspective that we approached negotiations with the United States on enabling full civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India. The essence of what was agreed in Washington last July was a shared understanding of our growing energy needs. In recognition of our improved ties, the United States committed itself to a series of steps to enable bilateral and international cooperation in nuclear energy. These include adjusting domestic policies, and working with allies to adjust relevant international regimes. There was also a positive mention of possible fuel supply to the first two nuclear power reactors at Tarapur. US support was also indicated for India’s inclusion as a full partner in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Research Project and the Generation IV International Forum.

But more importantly, in the Joint Statement, the United States implicitly acknowledged the existence of our nuclear weapons programme. There was also public recognition that as a responsible State with advanced nuclear technologies, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other States which have advanced nuclear technology, such as the United States. The Joint Statement offered the possibility of decades-old restrictions being set aside to create space for India’s emergence as a full member of a new nuclear world order.

On our part, as Hon’ble Members may recall from my suo motu statement on July 29 last year, we committed ourselves to separating the civilian and strategic programme. However, this was to be conditional upon, and reciprocal to, the United States fulfilling its side of the understanding. I had stressed that reciprocity was the key and we expected that the steps to be taken by India would be conditional upon and contingent on action taken by the United States. I had emphasised then — and I reiterate today — that no part of this process would affect or compromise our strategic programme.

At the official level, we have constituted two groups comprising key functionaries concerned with strategic and nuclear matters. They included the Department of Atomic Energy, the Ministry of External Affairs, the Armed Forces and my Office. These two groups were respectively mandated to draw up an acceptable separation plan, and to negotiate on this basis. The directive given to both groups was to ensure that our strategic nuclear programme is not compromised in any way, while striving to enlarge avenues for full civil nuclear energy cooperation with the international community. The negotiations by our officials have been extensive and prolonged. These have focused on four critical elements: the broad contours of a separation plan; the list of facilities being classified civilian; the nature of safeguards applied to facilities listed in the civilian domain; and the nature and scope of changes expected in US domestic laws and NSG guidelines to enable full civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India.

Members may be assured that in deciding the contours of a separation plan, we have taken into account our current and future strategic needs and programmes after careful deliberation of all relevant factors, consistent with our Nuclear Doctrine. We are among very few countries to adhere to the doctrine of “No first Use”. Our doctrine envisions a credible minimum nuclear deterrent to inflict unacceptable damage on an adversary indulging in a nuclear first strike. The facilities for this, and the required level of comfort in terms of our strategic resilience have thus been our criterion in drawing up a separation plan. Ours is a sacred trust to protect succeeding generations from a nuclear threat and we shall uphold this trust. Members may, therefore, be assured that in preparing a separation plan, there has been no erosion of the integrity of our Nuclear Doctrine, either in terms of current or future capabilities.

The separation plan that is being outlined is not only consistent with the imperatives of national security, it also protects our vital research and development interests. We have ensured that our three-stage nuclear programme will not be undermined or hindered by external interference. We will offer to place under safeguards only those facilities that can be identified as civilian without damaging our deterrence potential or restricting our R&D effort, or in any way compromising our autonomy of developing our three-stage nuclear programme. In this process, the Department of Atomic Energy has been involved at every stage, and the separation plan has been drawn up with their inputs.

Therefore, our proposed separation plan entails identifying in phases a number of our thermal nuclear reactors as civilian facilities to be placed under IAEA safeguards, amounting to roughly 65% of the total installed thermal nuclear power capacity, by the end of the separation plan. A list of some other DAE facilities may be added to the list of facilities within the civilian domain. The separation plan will create a clearly defined civilian domain, where IAEA safeguards apply. On our part, we are committed not to divert any nuclear material intended for the civilian domain from designated civilian use or for export to third countries without safeguards.

At the same time, we are not underestimating the difficulties that exist in these negotiations. There are complex issues involved. Several aspects of the nuclear programme lend themselves in the public discussions to differing interpretations, such as the Fast Breeder Programme or our fuel-cycle capabilities such as re-processing and enrichment requirements. The nature and range of strategic facilities that we consider necessarily outside safeguards constitute yet another example. We have, however, conveyed to our interlocutors that while discussing the separation plan, there are details of the nature and content of our strategic requirements that we cannot share. We will not permit information of national security significance to be compromised in the process of negotiation.

It is essential to recall that the July 18 statement was not about our strategic programme. It was intended to be the means to expand our civilian nuclear energy capacities and thereby to help pave the way for faster economic progress. In seeking to achieve this objective, we appreciate the need for patience to remove misperceptions that abound. I reiterate that India has an exemplary record on non-proliferation and this will continue to be so. All in all, one major achievement so far is that a change is now discernible in the international system. We believe that when implemented, the understandings reflected in the Joint Statement will give India its due place in the global nuclear order. The existence of our strategic programme is being acknowledged even while we are being invited to become a full partner in international civil nuclear energy cooperation.

The nation is justly proud of the tremendous work of our nuclear scientists and the Department of Atomic Energy in mastering all the key aspects of the full nuclear fuel cycle, often under difficult circumstances. The tremendous achievements of our scientists in mastering the complete nuclear fuel cycle — the product of their genius and perseverance — will not be frittered away. We will ensure that no impediments are put in the way of our research and development activities. We have made it clear that we cannot accept safeguards on our indigenous Fast Breeder Programme. Our scientists are confident that this technology will mature and that the programme will stabilise and become more robust through the creation of additional capability. This will create greater opportunities for international cooperation in this area as well. An important reason why the US and other countries with advanced nuclear technologies are engaging with India as a valued partner is precisely because of the high respect and admiration our scientists enjoy internationally, and the range and quality of the sophisticated nuclear programme they have managed to create under the most difficult odds. This gives us confidence to engage in these negotiations as an equal partner.

Many aspects of the proposed separation plan are currently under negotiation. It is true that certain assurances in the July 18 statement remain to be fulfilled — the supply of imported fuel for Tarapur I and II, for one. Some elements, such as US support for India’s participation in the ITER programme, have materialised. The issue of the nature of safeguards to be applied to facilities designated civilian also remains pending resolution. I seek the indulgence of this House not to divulge every single detail of the negotiations at this time. However, this august House can be assured that the limits are determined by our overarching commitment to national security and the related issue of the autonomy of our nuclear programme. Our government will take no step that could circumscribe or cast a shadow over either.

I am aware that concerns have been raised over information being shared with outsiders, but not with our own citizens. Members may be assured that nothing that could compromise our nuclear deterrent has been shared with anyone. On this aspect there is no reason for concern or doubt.

OPED

Fast breeders for energy security
by O.P. Sabherwal

THE question is often posed — why fast breeder reactors? What is the special place of fast breeders in India’s nuclear power programme? The simple answer is that fast breeders are the route to India’s energy security, providing this country the means to tap a vast nuclear power pool.

Fast breeders reactors (FBRs) extract the optimum energy from nuclear fuel — more than four times that of thermal reactors, whether heavy water or light water moderated — and have a higher overall power plant efficiency. Fast breeders thereby offer this country optimum utilization of its scarce uranium resources.

Fast breeders best utilize plutonium, obtained by reprocessing spent fuel of thermal reactors, as reactor fuel, thereby enhancing many times India’s nuclear power potential. Further, fast breeders generate more fissile material than consumed during their operation.

Most important of all, fast breeders open the route to utilization of thorium as nuclear fuel, the key requisite for India’s energy security. India has an abundance of thorium reserves, while its uranium reserves are meagre. India’s thorium quest places the focus on fast breeders because these reactors are best suited for breeding fertile uranium-238 to fissile plutonium-239, and fertile thorium-232 into fissile uranium-233.

India’s existing uranium reserves are hardly capable of supporting a nuclear power programme of 10,000 MW if the uranium fuel is run in thermal reactors on a once through basis. But when the plutonium produced in reactors in uranium fuel is recovered and recycled as fresh fuel in fast breeder reactors, along with depleted uranium, nuclear electricity generation could be increased to about 350,000 MW.

This is what the first generation fast breeders, which transform fertile U238 into fissile Pu239, achieve, thereby opening the vista of a significant nuclear power contribution to India’s electricity needs.

The second generation thorium fuelled fast breeders will further open up India’s nuclear power capacity many times - approximately four times over - a perspective of adequate nuclear electricity to provide energy security to this country. The thorium route is based on the fissile material U233, produced by irradiation of the fertile thorium-232, in abundance in this country.

Based on this perspective is the three-stage approach outlined by Dr Homi Bhabha, the founder of India’s nuclear programme. Reprocessing the spent fuel from India’s thermal reactors in the first stage gives plutonium and depleted uranium fuel for fast breeders, in the second stage, which in turn lays the basis for thorium fuelled fast breeder reactors, harnessed in the third stage.

One might add another little known bounty from fast breeders, which contributes significantly in meeting the country’s security concerns. This arises from the fact that plutonium-239 obtained by reprocessing fast breeder spent fuel is, in percentage, many times the plutonium obtained by reprocessing spent fuel of thermal reactors — approximately in the ratio of ten to one. Fast breeders are therefore a Pu239 reservoir for India’s security needs. The implication has to be gauged against the prospect of degradation of the existing nuclear weapon grade plutonium stockpile after a decade. Only fast breeders can ensure plutonium recycling, which is being done by other nuclear weapon powers.

Finally, a benefit on the sidelines from fast breeders is their usefulness in burning of actinides, thus making waste management a lesser problem: The hard spectrum of neutrons present in the FBR core helps in useful fission of actinides, reducing the magnitude of waste management.

Set against these great boons, fast breeders pose formidable hurdles as well - special challenges in their design and operation, in their safety parameters, and recurring cost because of heavy investment on account of the quality of material and equipment used. Nor are their economies of scale easy to catch up.

The high power density of the fast reactor cores require liquid metal cooling, such as by liquid sodium. Typical temperature at the core outlet is 800 degrees Kelvin, as compared to about 570 degrees Kelvin for heavy water or light water cooled reactors. Mastering the technology of FBRs, developing the matching fuel for fast reactor operations, and producing materials that withstand extreme service conditions and material degradation mechanisms in fast breeders are some of the key challenges in the first round.

The good news is that most of these challenges have been tackled by Indian nuclear scientists with great success. The first Indian FBR - the 40 MW(t) fast breeder test reactor (FBTR) - has been a success story. It is now generating its optimum power capacity. In the design and construction of the FBTR, the full range of FBR technology has been harnessed through the setting up of R&D laboratories.

These include “capability to analyse reactor behaviour under steady state and transient conditions, reactor physics modelling, shielding design, thermal hydraulic studies and corrosion studies, engineering development programme related to sodium pumps, all aspects related to special steels used in FBRs, and establishing fuel reprocessing technology”, says Dr R Chidambaram, Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government. Added on, the requirement of sodium inventory has been achieved, for which a sodium purification plant was set up.

A momentous achievement, for which the country can be proud of, is the development of the mixed uranium-plutonium carbide fuel for the FBTR — an outstanding success, having reached burn-up of 125,000 MW d/t without a single failure in the core of more than 1400 fuel pins.

But, although the FBTR has provided valuable experience, construction of the 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam, has to tread on new ground in several respects. The Indian nuclear establishment has successfully tackled most of these challenges, and at lower costs. The construction of the PFBR is, one might say, a nuclear dream come true.

Hit 50 with few heart disease, stroke risk factors
by January W. Payne

It’s a truism that healthy aging begins long before you hit old age. Now a large study has confirmed that and suggested a new approach for those hoping to live a long and healthy life: Aim to reach age 50 with as few risk factors for heart disease and stroke as possible.

Not smoking, maintaining a healthy weight and warding off diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol may drastically reduce your risk of cardiovascular disease and add 10 years to your life, the study reports.

The “prevention of heart disease needs to begin very early in life because by middle age, most of the risk factors are already established,’’ said Howard Cooper, associate director of the coronary care unit at Washington Hospital Center. ``We need to focus on young adults, even teens’’ and ``create a lifestyle that will prevent or keep (them) from developing’’ cardiovascular disease, which is the country’s leading cause of serious illness and death.

The findings, published in the journal Circulation this month, are the latest results from the Framingham Heart Study, which began in 1948 and is run by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The observational study, which did not detail specific treatments, ``supports the notion that aggressively treating cardiovascular disease risk factors’’ is the smartest approach, said Chris O’Donnell, associate director of the Framingham Heart Study.

Estimates of lifetime risk for cardiovascular disease, presented in the study, have not been calculated in previous research. ``Until today all we’ve talked about is risk in increments of time’’—such as five or 10 years out, making the results of this study particularly useful, said Mandeep Mehra, head of cardiology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

The results—based on findings from 3,564 men and 4,362 women—are ``really very tangible data that strongly support the need for modifying one’s risk as early as possible,’’ O’Donnell said.

Researchers found dramatic differences in cardiovascular disease risk and length of life between participants who reached age 50 with two or more risk factors, and those who reached that age with ``optimal’’—that is, fewer than two—risk factors. Lifetime risk of developing cardiovascular disease among 50-year-old men with two major risk factors was almost 69 percent, compared with 5 percent in those with fewer; for women, those with two or more risk factors had a 50 percent lifetime risk, compared with 8 percent in those with fewer. Those with minimal risk lived longer, too—about 10 years longer than those with two or more factors.

Researchers included participants age 50 and older who, during initial exams, were free from cardiovascular disease. Overall, their lifetime risk of developing cardiovascular disease was 51.7 percent for men and 39.2 percent for women. Men with two or more risk factors at age 50 were found to live to a median age of 78—compared with 89 in those with fewer risk factors; women with two or more risk factors survived to age 81, compared with 89 in those with fewer risk factors.

Addressing risk factors well before reaching age 50, say heart specialists, offers the best chance of a long life. Still, very few of the study’s participants had less than two risk factors: just 3 percent of men and 4.5 percent of women—figures that are probably representative of the larger American population, experts said.

— LA Times-Washington Post

Opposition rises against Thai PM
by Bruce Wallace

TENS of thousands of protesters, many swathed in headbands declaring “Save the Country,” answered Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s weekend snap election call with a festive nighttime rally on Sunday calling on him to quit instead.

Organisers hoped the peaceful gathering will spawn a wave of protest strong enough to push Thaksin from power. The opposition has been enraged by what it says is the prime minister’s unethical, if not illegal, sale of his Thaksin family holding company to Singaporean interests in January for a tax-free $1.8 billion gain.

Speckled in royal yellow T-shirts to show loyalty to king and country, and chanting “Thaksin Get Out,” some protesters vowed to camp out on the palace grounds until the prime minister resigned.

They may be in for a long wait. The collage of students, teachers, workers and Buddhist monks that forms the core of the People’s Alliance for Democracy has been thrown on its heels by the prime minister’s decision to dissolve parliament and seek a fresh mandate in a national election on April 2.

“I will not accept the opinion of the mob,” Thaksin said Friday, in announcing the new elections.

His decision has sharpened the clash between the ballot box and street power in this southeast Asian country of 65 million.

The initial reaction of the three main opposition parties, which concede they are too weak and disorganized to defeat Thaksin at the polls, was to urge a boycott of the election, though they appeared to back away from that drastic step on Sunday.

“He is very accomplished; he’s good at creating an image, and the election is still happening within the boundaries of his power,” complained Samana Bodhirak, head of the Santi Asoke Buddhist sect, as he sat with several hundred supporters at the rally.

Thaksin’s power remains formidable. His Thai Rak Thai party currently controls 376 of the parliament’s 500 seats, and the billionaire populist shows no sign of being abandoned by rural voters in the country’s north, a political base he has showered with government money since coming to office in 2001.

While his opponents were denouncing him at the rally, Thaksin was in a Bangkok neighborhood Sunday, formally signing over government housing to about 1,000 local residents, who presented him with roses as thanks.

“He tricks the Thai people, especially in the countryside,” said Bancha, 37, a vegetable seller attending the rally and who, like many Thais, goes by a nickname. “It’s easy to fool them.”

Much of the hostility to Thaksin remains centered in the capital, where it is amplified by the Bangkok media. The urban elite appeared to hit a tipping point in their patience with the prime minister after the January sale of Shin Corp., his family holding company that includes telecommunications media and airline holdings, to the investment arm of the Singapore government. The sale came just days after the government passed a law easing restriction on foreign investment.

Thaksin points out that the changes to the law had been in the works for two years. And he argues that he ceded control of the family business to his children when he took office, though critics have always scoffed at suggestions the self-made businessman no longer was pulling the strings behind the scenes.

— LA Times-Washington Post