By Dr. Roshan Khaniejo
In a recently published article in the magazine The Diplomat, titled ‘Tracking India’s Imported Uranium,’ Mark Hibb has cast aspersions on India’s uranium procurement, which to some might smack of outmoded Western hubris when it comes to the rise of Asian powers. He states that “uranium suppliers should insist that India adhere to international standards for information sharing” and “what message does that send about India’s likely behaviour were it to be invited to join multilateral regimes”. Firstly, as far as messages are concerned, there are nations who in spite of being members of NSG have flouted the rules (China joined the NSG in 2004 and it ‘grandfathered’ its right to supply reactors to Pakistan) and the NSG had succumbed to nuclear brinkmanship. So the fact is that the system we are talking about so much is not fair.
Secondly as far as India’s civil nuclear programme is concerned, since October 2009 India’s safeguards agreement with the IAEA has become operational. India as a Nuclear Weapon State understands its responsibilities (like any other P5 Nuclear Weapon States) in preventing nuclear proliferation. There are no covert activities involved here, so the question of diversion of fissile material is highly implausible. Moreover, India also has its own thorium programme and the exploration of Uranium mines at Tummalapalle mine in Andhra Pradesh has proved highly valuable in achieving its objectives. However; India is a developing country and its energy needs have grown substantially which require apart from the traditional sourced, the utilisation of alternative resources, mainly nuclear, solar, hydro etc. In this regard India requires uranium for commercial use in nuclear reactors for generating electricity. Needless to say that India has already agreed to IAEA supervision in the civilian sector (so technically by asking for other measures it is berating the IAEA). Hence, the need to harp the uranium tracking issue shows that someone is not in sync with reality.
Thus, can this be considered an inane topic, especially considering India has historically been one of the few countries that understood the repercussions of nuclear explosion early on and through its various initiatives in the UN and had also suggested ways and means to work for total nuclear disarmament. However, due to narrow political gains, the P5 nations have failed to work out a mechanism to achieve this goal. There are many so called P5 nations including the US who had directly or indirectly helped nations in becoming nuclear, so what control mechanisms are we talking about. One cannot have double standards .If one wants to make the world a safer place then the P5 nations and especially the US (as it is fond of preaching) should set an example by going in for total nuclear disarmament. Is it possible? We would really admire the US if it can do so, when knowing fully well that Russia and China will not comply. If the US achieves this goal then other countries will also get motivated to follow the lead, otherwise let’s stop playing games. Also this gives an impression that the author’s concern is dubious and not genuine. As there are many nations whose proliferation records are dismal, pursuing a non-genuine case questions the motivated behind the whole charade.
Nuclear proliferation is a serious issue and it needs to be addressed impartially through holistic approaches. The standards need to be the same for all nations. There cannot be few privileged nations using this technology for military purposes because then the objectivity in determining who is a genuine proliferator and who is not gets blurred (as has happened in this case) and the goal of total nuclear disarmament gets compromised.