August 28, 2007	Tuesday	Sha’aban 14, 1428

MELBOURNE: Australia’s deal to export uranium to India — which is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty — will strengthen India’s nuclear capabilities and could lead to a heightened arms race on the subcontinent, say activists.

Dave Sweeney, from the Australian Conservation Foundation (AFC), says that Australia is rewarding unscrupulous behaviour. “In giving the go-ahead to uranium sales to India, the federal government is telling the world (that) if you break your promises, breach international law and build nuclear weapons, Australia will respond not with sanctions, but with priority picks of our uranium,” Sweeney told the news agency.

The deal, agreed to in principle by Australian Prime Minister John Howard and his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh, signals a departure from Australia’s hitherto policy of not exporting uranium to countries that are non-signatories to the NPT.

The agreement comes less than a decade after India carried out several nuclear tests, followed closely by Pakistan testing its “Islamic bomb”, demonstrating that both South Asian rivals had nuclear capabilities.

The deal follows an agreement in March between India and the United States, which plans to provide India with uranium and nuclear technology. Under the agreement India is also allowed to reprocess fuel.

It also comes after Australia’s agreement in January to supply China with uranium. But unlike India, China is a signatory to the NPT.

In addition, Australia is currently negotiating a deal to export uranium to Russia, with progress expected to be made at September’s APEC meeting in Sydney.

In a statement issued to the media, Howard said that uranium exports to India will be subject to strict conditions. These include an agreement between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on safeguards; a consensus among members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group to make India an exception to its guidelines regarding international civil supply; and that Australian uranium would not contribute to any Indian military purpose.

However, activists argue that India’s military will directly benefit from Australian uranium exports.

Steve Shallhorn, chief executive of Greenpeace Australia Pacific, says that providing uranium for civil purposes will directly assist India’s nuclear capacity by enabling Indian uranium to be used by the military.

India “refuses to open its nuclear programme to full inspections and will use Australian uranium to free up its own supplies for weapons production,” says Shallhorn.

As the deal only involves civil nuclear sites, India’s military nuclear facilities will not be subject to the safeguards.

Shallhorn points out comments made by Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, to ABC radio earlier this month, in which the minister confirmed that eight of India’s 22 nuclear facilities will not come under the bi-lateral safeguards agreement between Australia and India.

“This would be like the tax office asking a known criminal which bank accounts he wants them to audit and which transactions to ignore,” says the Greenpeace chief.

Shallhorn also hit out at the Australian government for what he regards as a deal for short-term financial gain at the expense of regional security.

“The government is more interested in making a fast buck for big mining corporations than in our legitimate national security interests or stabilising the already dangerous nuclear arms race on the Indian subcontinent,” says the Greenpeace boss. The AFC’s Dave Sweeney argues that “India’s civilian and military programmes are intimately linked”.

“Australia selling uranium to India would directly fuel India’s nuclear weapons programme and contribute to regional insecurity,” says Sweeney.

Shallhorn says that the deal will contribute to a renewed arms race between India and Pakistan.

“The regional nuclear arms race which continues today will now be fuelled by Australian uranium,” he argues.

It is also feared that an increase in India’s nuclear weapons capabilities could lead to its other regional rival, China, increasing its own nuclear capabilities in order to maintain the status quo.

Prime Minister Howard, in his statement, argued that India — rather than destabilise the region with nuclear proliferation — has a strong record of nuclear non-proliferation.

“As well as assisting India to pursue economic development while addressing environmental challenges, the decision recognises India’s strong non-proliferation record and will help to bring India more fully into the non-proliferation mainstream,” said the Australian PM.

This view of India’s non-proliferation record has been criticised by political opponents of the government as well as by members of civil society. Senator Christine Milne of the Australian Greens says that “to claim that India has a clean record on nuclear issues is wrong, disingenuous and dangerous”.

The Greens argue that India deliberately misused civilian nuclear technology obtained under a peaceful-use agreement by the US and Canada to provide material for its weapons programmes. This enabled India’s 1974 nuclear weapon test, the first nation outside the UN Security Council’s five permanent members to have taken such a step.

“Foreign Minister Downer also says that India is not a proliferater, which is false,” says Shallhorn, arguing that India was one of the first countries to cause nuclear weapons proliferation.

The Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), an anti-nuclear watchdog, has raised concerns about India’s proliferation record.

In an April 2006 report co-authored by David Albright and Susan Basu, ISIS expresses its concern that India “has conducted illicit procurement for its nuclear programme”.

Based on a July 2005 “European Intelligence Assessment”, ISIS argues that Indian “nuclear entities and trading companies have procured nuclear dual-use equipment and material overseas without specifying that the end-user is an unsafeguarded uranium enrichment plant”.

ISIS stated that “proliferant states are known to target Indian industries”. —Dawn/The IPS News Service