nuclear-news

The express intention of the change in policy platform is to lift the ban on uranium sales to India, who are among those three states globally that remain outside – and have no intention of joining – the NPT. With the opposition Coalition having been in support of such a move for some time, the vote is expected to have immediate policy ramifications.

Of little consequence now, the Greens do have a well-known policy position on uranium that clearly states: “The Australian Greens will […] prohibit the exploration for, and mining and export of, uranium”.

Misrepresenting India’s record – it is a grave error to cite India’s nuclear weapons record – which is sub-optimal, not “exemplary”, as is often recycled – as evidence in support of a policy change that is predominately driven by political, commercial and diplomatic pressures.

Indeed, according to the Australia and Japan-led International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament report in 2009:

“10.5… One criticism – frequently voiced since the India agreement – is that [Nuclear Suppliers Group] members may be driven by commercial incentives to be less rigorous in their approach to countries not applying comprehensive safeguards or not party to the NPT.”

“10.7 The main substantive problem with the deal is that it removed all non-proliferation barriers to nuclear trade with India in return for very few significant non-proliferation and disarmament commitments by it. The view was taken that partial controls – with civilian facilities safeguarded – were better than none.”

Driven by dollars

Two years after these dire warnings – incidentally by an International Commission co-chaired by our former Foreign Minister Gareth Evans and instigated by then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd – Gillard also appears to be primarily “driven by commercial incentives” and a perceived diplomatic dividend.

Indeed, proponents of the platform change generally made no acknowledgment that India were the first and only state in the world to acquire nuclear weapons as a result of international cooperation on the basis of it being for peaceful purposes – nor her belligerent testing in the mid-1990s; her rather public nuclear arms race with Pakistan; her failure to fully comply with international safeguards and monitoring initiatives; her problems with the US despite a comparable bilateral agreement in place concerning technology and expertise. Nor the rather significant point that none of the cited measures are enforceable under international law – they are considerably difficult to monitor, verify and enforce.

It is worth noting, that six years later, some prominent arms control experts in the United States are still lamenting the lack of international security and arms control benefits to have flowed from the US-India deal:

“[…] nonproliferation norms took a hit from the U.S.-India civil nuclear deal and, at best, will take time to reinforce. The deal has added to the IAEA’s woes and has made the NSG a weaker institution.”

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/this-blog-harms/2011/12/05/alp-downplay-arms-control-considerations/

The power of lobbyists

There are numerous lessons to be learned from the US experience, particularly since the similarities in the way the matter was debated there.

There as in here, well-funded and resourced lobby groups successfully denied Australian’s of a debate, and a complacent and shameful standard of media proliferated falsehoods and empty rhetoric as if reasoned evidence such that even Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd – who as recently as last month strongly opposed any deal with India – begrudgingly toed the line of the party leader given the announcement was made whilst he was in Dehli.

For instance, following the vote, Nitin Pai, editor of Pragati – The Indian National Interest Review, and Fellow at The Takshashila Institution tweeted that:

@Rory_Medcalf And let me say that the consistent policy advocacy by a certain Sydney based think tank surely played an important role…..

What is clear to me is that Australia’s prospects of being awarded a seat on the UN Security Council next year are bound to have suffered already..

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/this-blog-harms/2011/12/05/alp-downplay-arms-control-considerations/