Letters and Editorials 5052 Views by Usman Ali Khan

India-Australia Uranium Puzzle






Uranium mining and export have always been deeply divisive issues within Australia. It is no exaggeration to say that sale of uranium is the most important outstanding issue in Australia-India bilateral relationship. Most importantly no one knows what would be the lasting impact of the policy on India-Australia relations?

“In the case of uranium, there is fundamental policy mismatch between Australia and India. It is not a position directed against India. It is our position that we hold that we do not supply uranium to countries that are non-signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.”

- Australian Minister, Simon Crean to journalists, New Delhi on May 4, 2010.

 
Oddly enough, by July of 1959, India and Australia came close to in purchasing Australian uranium. Then foreign minister, Richard Casey, approved the sale under certain conditions including that the uranium must only be used for peaceful purposes. A year later, Rio Tinto Mining Company agreed to supply India with 400 tons of uranium oxide. But eventually the deal fell through because India refused to allow inspections of its nuclear facilities.

At the heart, uranium deal is a big business. Currently India imports uranium from Russia, France, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Brazil, South Africa and Namibia. It is in talks with Canada and several other countries as well. Australia’s relation with India has been variously described as a tale of missed opportunities and chronic neglect.

The question of uranium exports to India has cut fissures in Australian society because it never exported uranium to a non-NPT state before. This deal if signed will harm the Nuclear Non-Proliferation norms almost as deep as minerals extracted from mines. Climate change may well turn out to be the silver bullet that the Labor party is looking forward when it debates on changes to its non-proliferation requirements for the sale of uranium. However, the sale of uranium cannot be left on back burner. As former Indian High Commissioner to Australia, G Parthasarty eloquently put it:  

“We will manage with Australian cooperation if available and without it if necessary.”

And that is not a good place to be for any relationship.

It is a true fact that NPT ranks among the ones to control agreements in history. Only three states refuse to sign (India, Israel and Pakistan) with a withdrawal (North Korea). However, with the entire struggle going on NPT is not an end in itself. It is a mean to a much higher goals; emancipation of humanity from the dangers of nuclear war.

Discarding this prescient logic, prospective uranium sale can be a cure-all which promises to creating Australian jobs, lift millions of Indians out of poverty, combat climate change and repair bilateral relations simultaneously. Meanwhile, India’s sound non-proliferation record together with Australian and IAEA safeguards is held bar against Australian uranium contributing to nuclear weapons production.

Concurrently, India stands outside international non-proliferation norms, neither to sign NPT and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty nor allow comprehensive IAEA safeguards over all nuclear facilities. Entangled with producing weapons-grade fissile material, expanding and diversifying nuclear arsenal; India also refuses to rule out conducting future nuclear tests.

In 2012 the Indian Auditor General concluded that the Atomic Energy Review Board, India’s civil nuclear regulator lacks independence, oversight capabilities and punitive powers. As such, the Indian agency charged with ensuring compliance and proper conduct within the civil nuclear sector, is largely neutered rendering the detection or reportage of diversion unlikely. So alarmingly this deal, would in turn allow India to divert more of its own uranium resources to significant production of plutonium for nuclear weapons. As also recently satellite photographs obtained by Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) suggest India is expanding its uranium enrichment programme; how then can Australia maintain its credibility when expressing concerns over Israeli, North Korean, Pakistani, or potentially Iranian nuclear weapons?

No doubt Australia has an impressive contribution to global nuclear dialogue but its well-earned reputation for leadership in nuclear disarmament and nuclear security can be tarnished if Canberra continues to sell uranium to a country which lies outside the global nonproliferation framework and is not a signatory to CTBT.

In the meanwhile radioactivity problem also persist in India uranium industry. Residents say they suffer from a number of diseases linked to radiation pollution, including congenital deformities, sterility, spontaneous abortions and cancer - yet mining continues unabated near these Indian villages, without proper security measures in place. Nuclear materials have turned up unexpectedly in India's scrap yards and have been accidentally mixed with a community's drinking water supply.

One must find it really hard to understand the uranium need of India in order to overcome its energy needs. With the coming BJP government in India and the interplay between both (India-Australia) is much startling for the region and would have significant security implications. The deal thus represents a step backward for non-proliferation and disarmament. However, apprehension over uranium sales to India could threaten the country's leadership, reducing the credibility and clarity of its otherwise strong voice. In sum, this is a bad proposal that should be scrapped.


Comments

There are 0 comments on this post

Leave A Comment