Russia and Burma in nuclear deal

[SHAM]

From the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6658713.stm




Russia has agreed to build a nuclear research centre in Burma, state atomic energy agency Rosatom has said.
In a potentially controversial deal, the centre will include a 10MW light-water reactor and facilities for processing and storing nuclear waste.

It will be monitored by the UN nuclear agency, the IAEA, Rosatom said.

The United States and European Union have imposed sanctions on Burma's military rulers, whom they accuse of widespread human rights abuses.

Nuclear know-how

Rosatom head Sergey Kiriyenko and Burma's Science and Technology Minister U Thaung signed the nuclear deal in Moscow, Rosatom said in a statement.

"The centre will comprise a 10MW light-water reactor working on 20%-enriched uranium-235, an activation analysis laboratory, a medical isotope production laboratory, silicon doping system, nuclear waste treatment and burial facilities," it said.



Russia will train 300-350 specialists for the centre, the statement said. It did not give a timescale for construction.

With 10MW, running on low enriched uranium, the proposed reactor could not be used for a nuclear weapons programme, says the BBC's Steven Eke.

But the deal will again raise questions about Russia's willingness to export nuclear know-how to countries the West considers repressive or hostile, our reporter adds.

Russia's nuclear cooperation with Iran - who the US and other nations accuse of trying to develop nuclear weapons - has been a source of tension between Moscow and western nations.

Human rights and arms control organisations have also accused Russia of an unethical willingness to do business with repressive regimes.

The military have ruled Burma since 1962. Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, whose NLD party won general elections in 1990, has been under house arrest in the capital, Rangoon, for several years.


I shook my head when i read this, somewhat unsuprised.
What next nuclear reactors or submarines for Mugabe?

[Hellfish]

That's retarded.

[Mu-Meson]

Bloody Putin!! I'd bet that he would have willingly built a nuclear reactor for Hitler in 1939.

[JJC]

Bloody Putin!! I'd bet that he would have willingly built a nuclear reactor for Hitler in 1939.

I wouldn't be surprised if in near future we will read how Russians are helping Chavez with nukes.

The Russian gov with their irresponsible actions such as this are creating problems for future generations but at whose expense? Will the Russians ever stop and think that one day their own actions will bite them in the ass as well, or they will continue to believe that as long as they befriend every thug on the block they will somehow be spared? Then they compain when the West does not treat Russia with love.

I'm sure we will hear the usual for Kremlin - "This is just peaceful nuclear energy development."

[Ecchi Oni]

I wouldn't be surprised if in near future we will read how Russians are helping Chavez with nukes.

The Russian gov with their irresponsible actions such as this are creating problems for future generations but at whose expense? Will the Russians ever stop and think that one day their own actions will bite them in the ass as well, or they will continue to believe that as long as they befriend every thug on the block they will somehow be spared? Then they compain when the West does not treat Russia with love.

I'm sure we will hear the usual for Kremlin - "This is just peaceful nuclear energy development."
Irresponsible? It's business. If Burma has nukes who will give a flying f**k? You also need delivery systems. As for nukes for Hitler in 39... why not? As long as he bombs UK and US no harm's done :p
Weeboo yank fags seem to forget that politics is about double standarts and cynicism.

[Ordie]

Why would Myanmar bring undue attention to itself?

Being in the isolated backwoods and acting as a buffer state between India, South East Asia and China helped the Burmese status quo to do whatever they want without impunity for the past 50 years.

Human rights, police state and on-going rebellions are not enough for the world to care. Moreover they are not a mass producers of oil or any other raw materials for anyone to give a damn.

If they build a reactor, then the world would start to point out human rights, rebellions, opium trade etc...

Then the next thing you'll have sanctions and other consequences.

[Ecchi Oni]

Being a buffer state between India and China would make you WANT nukes, so you don't become a battlefield.

[Hellfish]

Being a buffer state between India and China would make you WANT nukes, so you don't become a battlefield.

Burma is dirt poor. I'm sure there's a lot more important things they could do with the money.

[IraGlacialis]

Burma, Myanmar, Burma...
You Brits never know when to to let go of your former colonies. ;)
(actually I also call it Burma)

Seriously, I consider this worrying, considering the tinpot of a dictator Than Shwe is. The only thing that tempers my worry is Burma's economic status, then my worry turns to pity.

[Knez Eru]

I thought only heavy water reactors can be used to produce weapons-grade material. And apart from the initial cost of constructing the reactor, nuclear energy is extremely cost-effective. Now Burma won't have to depend on oil or coal imports to supply its electrical infrastructure.

[Rictor]

I'm sure we will hear the usual for Kremlin - "This is just peaceful nuclear energy development."

Show me proof that it isn't. People who you consider to be "bad guys", even if they are indeed genuine bad guys, are not suddenly excluded from participating in a peaceful nuclear energy program as permitted by the NPT.

Although considering less than stellar record with Bushehr, Burma is being a bit naive to trust Russia.

[TR1]

Burma is dirt poor. I'm sure there's a lot more important things they could do with the money.

That isnt Russias problem.
if they want the reactor, and they pay for it, its as good as theirs.

[Sergei]

I wouldn't be surprised if in near future we will read how Russians are helping Chavez with nukes.

The Russian gov with their irresponsible actions such as this are creating problems for future generations but at whose expense? Will the Russians ever stop and think that one day their own actions will bite them in the ass as well, or they will continue to believe that as long as they befriend every thug on the block they will somehow be spared? Then they compain when the West does not treat Russia with love.

I'm sure we will hear the usual for Kremlin - "This is just peaceful nuclear energy development."

Who in your opinion should decide whether a country can get nuclear energy or not? Cheney or Rice? :)

Those countries will always stay poor and will never catch up with the developed countries if they are not going to have modern economy with efficient energy like nuclear. But I guess the whole point of some politicians in the West is to keep the rest of the folks throughout the world as poor as a church mouse, right?

[manilaboy]

im curious...what produces cheaper electricity in the long run? nuclear or petroleum based? after all the health issues and disposal methods for each of the systems are summed up.

[caridon]

im curious...what produces cheaper electricity in the long run? nuclear or petroleum based? after all the health issues and disposal methods for each of the systems are summed up.

Acording to ExternE Nuclear power has only one competitor. and that is hydro. ExternE is the biggest comparison done by the EU and takes into account everything from polution, health,waste storage,fuel questions and many more.

Oil is much worse

se www.externe.info for more info.

[odiniz]

Bloody Putin!! I'd bet that he would have willingly built a nuclear reactor for Hitler in 1939.

Would like to inform, that next contract is going to be with Mexico.
Sorry for troubles.

[odiniz]

Bloody Putin!! I'd bet that he would have willingly built a nuclear reactor for Hitler in 1939.

Would like to inform you officialy that Mexico is going to sign next contract.
Hi, neighbours!

[oldsoak]

Who in your opinion should decide whether a country can get nuclear energy or not? Cheney or Rice? :)

Those countries will always stay poor and will never catch up with the developed countries if they are not going to have modern economy with efficient energy like nuclear. But I guess the whole point of some politicians in the West is to keep the rest of the folks throughout the world as poor as a church mouse, right?

Sergei, its not a question of keeping them poor, its whether they have the maturity to deal with nuclear power. We are not talking about a country with a series of checks and balances like the PRC, Russia or the West. We are not worried if Russia sells the technology to Slovakia or Finland or the PRC for example. Myanmar lacks that system.

[Kilgor]

Sergei, its not a question of keeping them poor, its whether they have the maturity to deal with nuclear power. We are not talking about a country with a series of checks and balances like the PRC, Russia or the West. We are not worried if Russia sells the technology to Slovakia or Finland or the PRC for example. Myanmar lacks that system.

Not to mention the theft of nuclear materials, and waste.

[Lokos]

All good and well. Except, like the article says, this nuclear facility is going to be monitored by the UN, and it cannot be technically used for the production of nuclear weapons or material usable in the production of nuclear weapons.

Lokos

[Serjey]

well nuclear reactor is very VERY CHEAP energy, for exanple Russia has sevral Nuclea reactors and provides energy to whole russia and sevral ex-soviet countries. Whats the big deal in building nuclear reactor, it doesnt mean that they will ever have enough tecnology and experience to build nuclear weapon.

P.S. BTW its not polite to blame russia about nuclear weapons, cuz russia has never used it against people, USA did.

P.P.S. Yes, its buissiness

[Sergei]

Sergei, its not a question of keeping them poor, its whether they have the maturity to deal with nuclear power. We are not talking about a country with a series of checks and balances like the PRC, Russia or the West. We are not worried if Russia sells the technology to Slovakia or Finland or the PRC for example. Myanmar lacks that system.

I don't see a problem here. Russia can provide all the training in the world to the best trainees Burma has to offer. It is not like they are dumb or something. They can learn the trade easily just like everybody else.

[Kilgor]

well nuclear reactor is very VERY CHEAP energy, for exanple Russia has sevral Nuclea reactors and provides energy to whole russia and sevral ex-soviet countries. Whats the big deal in building nuclear reactor, it doesnt mean that they will ever have enough tecnology and experience to build nuclear weapon.

P.S. BTW its not polite to blame russia about nuclear weapons, cuz russia has never used it against people, USA did.

P.P.S. Yes, its buissiness

Cheap ?

Reactors can cost billions (ones made by the west and japan anyway), and for a poverty country run by corrupt military despots that can be alot of money.

I just hope for the long suffering peoples of Burma that the econo budget reactor they are getting built is a hell of alot safer than the soviet designs of not so long ago.

[Serjey]

Cheap ?

Reactors can cost billions (ones made by the west and japan anyway), and for a poverty country run by corrupt military despots that can be alot of money.

I just hope for the long suffering peoples of Burma that the econo budget reactor they are getting built is a hell of alot safer than the soviet designs of not so long ago.
Reactor is not cheap ofcourse, its expencive, but it produses cheap energy.
//Its like to buy an expencive flat then live there almost for free, than rent this flat for years and always have to pay lots of money for using of this flat//