| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
152070
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article argues for an updated strategy to limit the spread of sensitive nuclear technology around the globe. Traditional efforts by the United States to deny countries access to enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) technology are becoming difficult to enforce, while the threat of sanctions against US allies with legal nuclear-energy programs is not credible. As a result, the United States should shift toward a strategy of “buying out” an ally’s ambition for sensitive nuclear technology. Offering military, political, and economic assistance in exchange for stringent nonproliferation commitments will only work when offered at the earliest stage of technical development, before the country builds capabilities that will be difficult or expensive to give up. While there are some practical challenges to implementing such a strategy, the conditions are right to see if lucrative nuclear-energy offers—notably spent-waste management solutions—can induce countries with new civil nuclear programs to foreclose the option to develop ENR technology in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
103980
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
121573
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
WITH THE recent downturn in U.S.-Russian relations, observers in both Washington and Moscow have remarked upon the cyclical nature of this key bilateral relationship. As Fyodor Lukyanov, a leading Russian commentator, noted in late 2012, "If we look at the relationship since 1991, it's the same cycle all the time, between kind words and inspiration and deep crisis. Yeltsin, Clinton, Bush, Putin, Obama, it's the same pattern." Indeed, the phases of high hopes and expectations in the years 1991-1994, 2000-2003 and 2009-2011-followed by deep disappointment in the intervening and subsequent years-do seem to represent a cyclical pattern.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
169937
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Rupa Publications, 2019.
|
| Description |
xiii, 194p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789353337285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 059811 | 539.7092/KAK 059811 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
147745
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Academic Foundation, 2010.
|
| Description |
167p,: tables, fighureshbk
|
| Standard Number |
9788171888276
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058812 | 327.54047/KUN 058812 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
146585
|
|
|
|
|
| Contents |
China's negotiating strategy on the territorial dispute is to stall resolution of the dispute till it is in
a much stronger position in terms of comprehensive national strength so that it can then dictate
term. The rapidly blossoming strategic partnership between China and Pakistan is also a major cause for concern. During any future conflict with either China or Pakistan - even though the probability is low, India will have to conted with a two- front situation as each is likely to collude military with the other - a situation for which the Indian armed forces are as yet unprepared. Hence, it is in India's interest to strive for the early resolutiion of the territorial dispute with China so that India has only one major military adversary to conted with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
108569
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
155183
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The India–Canada relationship has witnessed a number of highs and lows despite the two nations sharing common political views. This is perhaps best seen in the civil nuclear cooperation shared between the two. It is interesting to note that the relation between the two nations fractured twice due to nuclear issues in the past; today, nuclear cooperation is an important pillar, helping them to cement a new partnership. This article is an attempt to trace the civil nuclear relationship between India and Canada and to chart its future path. It has to be understood that the nuclear agreement between India and Canada is not restricted in its scope to just benefits for the two countries in developing nuclear technology and trade. It has larger economic and strategic benefits. India’s growing political and economic strength is promising. It is in Canada’s interest to pursue a closer relationship with India. It is in India’s interest to further strengthen this partnership in view of the resources and technology that Canada could provide India to achieve its development goals, especially its green agenda as ratified under the Paris Climate Change Agreement (2015).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
100002
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
135813
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
India and Japan are both important players in Asian political scene. During the cold war era, ideological difference and alignment perhaps prevented both countries from closely honing their economic and strategic complementarities. After India liberalized its economic policies in the early 1990s, this equation changed noticeably, and moved towards a stronger relationship in economic and strategic domains. through the growth momentum was not at the desired level-as compared to India’s economic engagement with, for example, China, South Korea and Australia- recent political changes in both the countries is expected to pave the way towards greater cooperation. Moreover, the strategic factor seems to have emerged as the prime driver in the bilateral ties between the two countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
138021
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
135492
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Ensuring energy security is imperative to sustain and upscale India’s growth story and there is an obvious need to adopt integrated approaches to energy policymaking. The article argues the need to diversify the supply side of India’s growing energy needs and underlines the importance of India-US cooperation on energy security with a special focus on clean energy. The paper assesses the various modalities of India-US Energy cooperation and argues in favour of deepening energy cooperation with the US
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
160173
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, KW Publishers Pvt Ltd, 2018.
|
| Description |
90p.pbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789387324381
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 059440 | 327.540597/DAS 059440 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
115751
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
142785
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Reverberation refers to the role that external domestic and international variables can play in shaping the win-set of a negotiation between two countries. These variables create political considerations, political mandates, and political constraint outside of the technical discussion that influence the negotiation. This article looks at the degree to which political variables “reverberated’ onto the 2015 civil nuclear agreement between the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK), the end product of a four-and-a-half-year negotiation specifying the terms under which the ROK could use US-supplied technology and materials to pursue sovereign nuclear power generation and nuclear energy provision to third countries. It will argue that while the potential was high for this technical negotiation to become politicized in a domestic context in South Korea and potentially erode alliance relations, the two countries managed to keep the disagreements in the experts’ space, without negative reverberating effects on political leaders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
103033
|
|
|