It's Okay for You, But Not for You.

President Obama (I still get chills when I say that), had his first prime-time press conference last night. He tosses words out like he's making a gourmet omelet with them. His ability to synthesize knowledge, remember five questions and answer them all in order with such eloquence is awesome (in the true sense of the word). 

As he, himself, would advise, no one is perfect and mistakes are bound to happen. However, his oversight to an inherent contradiction is beyond permissive in my eyes. In his words: 

"With respect to nuclear weapons, you know, I don't want to speculate. What I know is this: that if we see a nuclear arms race in a region as volatile as the Middle East, everybody will be in danger. And one of my goals is to prevent nuclear proliferation generally. I think that it's important for the United States, in concert with Russia, to lead the way on this. And, you know, I've mentioned this in conversations with the Russian President, Mr. Medvedev, to let him know that it is important for us to restart the conversations about how we can start reducing our nuclear arsenals in an effective way so that -- so that we then have the standing to go to other countries and start stitching back together the nonproliferation treaties that, frankly, have been weakened over the last several years."

I shake my head rapidly from side to side, clean my ears and look straight again wondering 'Is this not the man that just supported the US-India Nuclear Deal?' In October 2008, George Bush executed one of his "successful" measures prior to running away from the wreckage he would leave behind: Passing the US-India Nuclear Deal. It permitted India to step up and run with the big players in the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty in 1968: USA, UK, France, Russia and China. Within the self-serving treaty is the agreement that no one will try and create nuclear weapons to the level of these five nations as to curb nuclear weapon production. Additionally, Article 1 sites that these five countries agree not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and "not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce" a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) to acquire nuclear weapons. Therein, lied the conflict, no one could sell to India to further build nuclear weapons unless the treaty was broken. 

Rather quietly, almost brushed under the carpet quiet, Congress & Senate passed through a deal permitting India for open trade. Bush very gregariously smiled with his pen to paper posing for all the cameras, exuding a "see dad, I can do something productive" glow as he, too, signed off on the deal. More importantly, in the heat of the final stages of the election race Obama returned to Senate to vote yes on the Deal. 

Isreal remains ambiguous, opaque to their nuclear creations, North Korea got called out and backed down on their creations and now Iran is under heat. So we play Good Cop/Bad Cop with the world, pushing our agenda and wondering why their is backlash down the road. Meanwhile India, in all its mad bargaining skills, hustled off a great deal with the US. Buisness is booming on the nuclear weapon front as India as it has purchased 6 of its anticipated 40 nuclear reactors by 2032. Some may argue for increased energy efficiency, however in an era of want to "start reducing our nuclear arsenal in an effective way," there lies many alternate, less-precarious, under invested means of maximizing energy use. 

So I may be the unpopular critic, especially against the motherland. However, getting in there like swimwear, when the rest are left to point fingers at is not a point of pride for me. It just now means that India is no longer the unpopular brown kid in the all white school. And, probably, I'll always route for the underdog and remain a voice against the unjust.