Oped»
Get them out of here
KATHMANDU, JUN 12 -
Aproposal to establish a nuclear-weapons-free zone in South Asia was mooted in the 1970s. The UN General Assembly had been considering a resolution on the subject for some years. The debate was interrupted in May 1998 after India and Pakistan carried out nuclear device explosions. Unsurprisingly, Pakistan had been one of the main sponsors of the resolution on the aforementioned issue. Pakistan asserts that it needs nuclear weapons to counterbalance its arch-rival neighbour’s conventional military superiority. India tries to justify its possession of nukes by arguing that it is essential to maintain a strategic balance with China’s nuclear capability. Hence, a vicious circle of claims and counter-claims seems to be fuelling the nuclear arms race in South Asia.
Thawing of bilateral relations between India and Pakistan, which unfortunately had reached its lowest ebb in December 2008 following the Mumbai terrorist attacks, is vital for a stable South Asia. Resumption of India-Pakistan talks at the foreign secretary level has revived hopes that their relations will improved.
Arguably, the old resolution on establishing a nuclear-weapons-free zone in South Asia can be resurrected. The 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) signed on May 28 emboldens prospects for the declaration of such a zone. The signatories to the NPT have agreed to hold a conference in 2012 on establishing a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. Consensus among the NPT’s 189 members to organise a UN conference for the above purpose has provided a positive, clear and loud message that nuclear proliferation anywhere is not acceptable to the international community. Para 105 of the NPT Final Document adopted on May 28, 2010 is testimony to this, which says, “The Conference underscores the importance of the establishment of nuclear-weapons-free zones where they do not exist.”
The history of the resolution to establish the Middle East as a zone with no weapons of mass destruction reveals that complex negotiations are required. Back in 1995, the year of review and extension of the NPT which had then completed 25 years of operation, the treaty members had adopted a Middle East resolution. The objective of that resolution was to set up a nuclear, chemical and biological weapons-free Middle East. Adoption of this resolution was not smooth because of Israel’s security sensitivities although the NPT-recognised five nuclear powers had to agree to get an indefinite extension of the NPT. These internationally-acknowledged five nuclear powers are also permanent members of the UN Security Council.
President Obama’s deep commitment to achieve the goals of nuclear disarmament ever since he became a candidate for US president has reinvigorated the debate on disarmament. His personal initiative in building trust and support, especially among the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, was instrumental in reaching an agreement on weapons of mass destruction-free Middle East resolution. Convening of a conference aimed at the establishment of such a zone is not only symbolic but substantive as well, which has obtained US approval. However, negotiations on such a sensitive issue involving all the stakeholders including Israel, the only nuclear-capable but a non-NPT member country in the Middle East, can be an ice-breaking event in terms of nuclear disarmament.
India is preparing to construct more nuclear power reactors in the aftermath of the 2008 US-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. Besides the US, both France and Russia have displayed their growing interest in promoting nuclear trade with India. Through her bilateral nuclear cooperation deal with the US, India has been privileged to override rules that govern nuclear commerce despite being a non-signatory to the NPT. In the aftermath of India’s 1974 nuclear explosion, the international community felt that there should be guidelines for conducting nuclear trade to avoid possible nuclear proliferation. The 1974 peaceful nuclear explosion conducted by India led to the formation of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which now consists of 45 nuclear supplying countries. This group oversees the export of nuclear fuel, material and technology to non-nuclear weapons states and tries to ensure that the nuclear fuel supplied is not diverted to military purposes.
Against the background of China’s likely export of nuclear power reactors to Pakistan, all eyes are now fixed on whether nuclear commerce rules will be upheld. At the last NPT conference (May 3-28, 2010), nuclear suppliers and the US, in particular, have been criticised for violating rules concerning export of nuclear material, technology and equipment. It has been evident from the India-US nuclear deal that nuclear export norms were completely ignored for understandable reasons. This was done at the behest of the US. In doing so, it perhaps kept in mind the strategic realignment aimed at challenging China. Maybe the US believes that its nuclear deal with India will help it to achieve that objective. Pakistan has sought further collaboration from China for the construction of new nuclear power reactors, whose bilateral cooperation in the said field is not new. The nuclear power reactor Chakma-1 has been under construction with Chinese assistance, which is being completed within this year.
Ironically, the Indo-US Nuclear Cooperation Agreement has induced Pakistan to pursue its civil nuclear programme with China at a time when the latter has now become a new beehive for the nuclear industry. China’s previous commitment to assist Pakistan to develop nuclear power plants and the latter’s growing interest in seeking further cooperation in building new power reactors may not be mere coincidence. The US, being the first to break the rules of the Nuclear Suppliers Group by approving India-specific exemptions, will have no moral authority to block China’s nuclear reactor offer to Pakistan. Obviously, the China-Pakistan proposed nuclear deal will go ahead with the Nuclear Suppliers Group remaining silent having set a bad precedent by not denying treaty exclusive nuclear trade privileges to a non-NPT member like India.
Peaceful nuclear power programmes have been a precursor to the development of nuclear weapons. History is testimony to this, and South Asia itself presents such an example. Nobody knew about the clandestine nuclearisation of South Asia until 1974 when India demonstrated its peaceful nuclear explosion, which, though paradoxically, prompted the world to develop nuclear export rules and guidelines. How sincerely these rules have been observed is no mystery any more. Let us not forget that North Korea used the cover of supposedly civilian nuclear work before it flounced out of the NPT in 2003; it has since announced two nuclear explosions in 2006 and 2009. Iran’s nuclear programme has become controversial only because it has been suspected of developing nuclear weapons. The latest sanctions resolution adopted by the UN Security Council concerning Iran only substantiates this.
Given the three painful wars fought and the ongoing nuclear competition between India and Pakistan, the proposal to make South Asia free of nuclear weapons should be revived. All the countries in the region will benefit if this proposal can be implemented. If the Middle East can become a region free of weapons of mass destruction with the support of the countries in the region, there is no reason why South Asia should be an exception. What is needed is commitment of the countries in the region backed by nuclear powers like, in particular, the US, Russia and China.
(Thapa was foreign policy advisor of former Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal)
Posted on: 2010-06-13 10:13
Headlines
Advertisements
