Round The World
New
Delhi, 25 May 2016
India’s NSG Membership
NOT END OF ROAD,
DESPITE CHINA
By Amrita Banerjee
(School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi
China’s
announcement that it intends opposing India’s membership of the Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG) unless it agrees to sign the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) is a rude shock as it comes just a month ahead of the NSG’s annual
plenary session.
For the
past year, India
had made the NSG admission a focus of its international outreach, though its membership
has been a goal since the 2008 Indo-US civil nuclear agreement.
To achieve
this, New Delhi made a deliberate reach out to
many NSG members, including Ireland
and Sweden, members of the
pro-disarmament group New Agenda Coalition who have traditionally opposed India’s admission.
The NSG Chairperson Rafael Grossi’s visit to New Delhi in October 2015 wherein he spoke of
taking the request forward was seen as a positive sign.
Undeniably,
China’s behavior can be
analyzed as a combination of its fraught relations with India along-with its desire to be Pakistan’s “all-weather
friend” and not disadvantaged it. Consequently, Beijing
has cleverly linked New Delhi’s membership with Islamabad’s entry to this
elite club.
Also, bruised
by New Delhi’s successful diplomacy which recently
stalled US sale of F-16
fighter planes to it, Pakistan
found an opportunity to hit back whereby it coordinated with China to block India from its membership.
Obviously,
China’s position is aimed at
keeping India out of the NSG
if Pakistan
cannot be a member of it. However, in doing so, Beijing
ignores Islamabad’s
well-known proliferation record. In fact, the Chinese intervention which equates
India with Pakistan has
complicated the scenario further.
Defending
its move to block India’s
entry into the NSG, China
even claimed that several members of the 48-nation bloc shared its view that
signing the NPT was an “important” standard for NSG’s expansion and it was the
cornerstone for safeguarding the international nuclear non-proliferation
regime.
Notably, India, Pakistan,
Israel and South
Sudan are the four U.N. member states which are outside the NPT’s ambit.
While India has rejected China’s
contention that it must sign the NPT to get NSG membership, since France was included without signing it, Beijing’s insistence on NPT’s
signing exposes its double standards.
Indeed, if
Beijing was serious about stopping
non-proliferation in the world, it would have never pushed Pakistan’s case, which in the past has been
accused of nuclear smuggling and passing nuclear technology to Iran and other
countries clandestinely.
Besides, China continues its own civil nuclear technology
collaboration with Pakistan,
building many nuclear plants including a new 1100 mw plant in Karachi with US $ 6.5 billion assistance
which drew criticism from NSG members. Clearly, a question of international
ethics.
Moreover,
another issue is whether non-NSG member Pakistan should be allowed to
hijack its deliberations which purportedly should be an internal matter among
the members.
However, US
has reiterated its support for India’s
NSG’s membership while China
and Pakistan
have joined hands to oppose it. The position of Washington
is apparent as during his India
visit in January last year, President Obama reaffirmed that New Delhi had met the missile technology
control regime requirements and was ready for NSG membership.
Earlier, India got an
exemption from the NSG for nuclear imports in 2008, following its civil nuclear
deal with US, despite not being a NPT signatory. The 2008 exemption was the
outcome of unqualified lobbying on New
Delhi’s behalf by the then Bush Administration.
Remember,
then several Western countries were opposed to the exemption, but today,
prominent countries like Russia, Germany, UK and Australia are openly backing
the bid, notwithstanding India is not a NPT signatory, a key criterion for NSG
membership. These countries back New
Delhi on the basis of its non-proliferation record as
also the India-US civil nuclear accord.
Notably,
the intricacies in the case often raise the issue of benefits which would
accrue to India
from being associated with this group. One, the NSG membership would help
India’s nuclear energy programme and allow it to tap the global market by
accessing nuke energy resources, high-end technologies from various countries and
sell its abundant thorium, thereby facilitating nuclear trade.
Two, it would
increase India’s
stronghold as a nuclear capable nation besides strengthening its position among
other contenders for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.
Three, it
could also lead to a future scenario wherein an Indo-Japan and India-Australia
civil nuke deals could materialize. Additionally, India would get to play a
role in the decision-making process of this global body; address some of its concern especially vis-à-vis Pakistan's nuclear programme besides promoting its own
interests.
Four, the
membership would be a boon for a power hungry India which houses a huge
population but has limited resources at its disposal.
Five, being
a member of NSG would enable India
to balance power with strategic rival China
which presently has an upper hand in manipulating the geo-politics of Asia. For India’s
rise in the Continent, New Delhi
needs to play an important role at international platforms.
Undoubtedly,
India’s
NSG membership has its share of credible benefits as well as stumbling blocks, both
domestically and internationally. Firstly, New Delhi
has to reckon with the possibility that NSG members could object to an
“India-specific” ruling, whereby other non-NPT countries, including Pakistan and Israel,
might also benefit from any flexibility shown to India.
Second,
there is a possibility that India
could receive a “second class” membership and not be considered a “nuclear
weapons state” by the NSG. Last, and most important, membership of this body
which was set-up specifically in response to India’s nuclear test in 1974,
might eventually require New Delhi to curtail its nuclear weapons programme.
This was
underscored by US President Obama after the Nuclear Security Summit, wherein he
asserted that India and Pakistan’s nuclear
arsenals are taking them in the “wrong direction”.
Pertinently,
if India
aims to be part of the elite NSG club, it must have a realistic idea of what
the fee for full membership is. The Government must begin an internal debate to
appraise its own position on the NSG membership and resort to a cost-benefit
analysis to figure out how far it is willing to go to secure it.
True, the
Foreign Secretary has reportedly sought a more forceful American intervention
on India’s behalf; President
Mukherjee too is likely to raise this issue during his Beijing visit next week.
Hence,
this is not the end of the road for India’s NSG ambitions. Certainly,
it is a signal that more persuasive diplomacy is needed to bring around
naysayers such as China from blocking New Delhi’s bid as was done to bring it
on board to get India the NSG waiver in 2008. Possibly, NSG’s operation by
consensus could add to the benefits on the Indian side. ---- INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)
|