A strong case to drop India uranium ban

by Dhruva Jaishankar - 2 December 2011 2:00PM

This post is part of a debate - click here to see how this debate started and developed.

Dhruva Jaishankar is Program Officer for Asia at the German Marshall Fund, a Fellow at the Takshashila Institution and an occasional columnist for The Indian Express.

It should be no surprise that New Delhi would welcome an Australian decision to export uranium to India. Isolating India on nuclear matters proved a major — and some might say unnecessary — hurdle for US-India relations. Indo-Australian strategic relations too have been held hostage to the uranium ban; in fact, India specifically advocated that Australia be excluded from multilateral security dialogues, the uranium ban being one significant factor influencing New Delhi's position.

While cogent cases have already been made for reversing Australia's stance on diplomatic and security grounds, MV Ramana's criticism, citing non-proliferation concerns, is intriguing.

In the strictest sense, he is right: Australia on its own can't guarantee that India will adhere to world-class safety standards or non-proliferation norms. But he's incorrect in assuming that Australia won't make a difference. In fact, there's already been a shift in India's behaviour following the Nuclear Suppliers Group's decision to exempt it in 2008. India's approach to the non-proliferation regime at the Conference on Disarmament at Geneva on such matters as a fissile material cut-off is but one notable example.

India's shift in position has also helped convince a previously sceptical Obama Administration of the merits of the controversial deal brokered under George W Bush. Moreover, the US-India nuclear deal has not resulted in the dire predictions made by many non-proliferation specialists (including those cited by Ramana) about India rushing to build nuclear weapons once unencumbered by the global nuclear export regime. In fact, India's decision not to upgrade or even replace its primary sources of weapons-grade plutonium suggests a continuing commitment to its existing deterrent.

The decision is ultimately Australia's to make, but, combined, the diplomatic, security, and non-proliferation dividends make for a compelling case in India's favour. As the world reaches out to India, Australia can't afford to be left behind.

Photo by Flickr user US Embassy New Delhi.

Lowy Institute for International Policy
Australia in the Asian Century

An Interpreter feature which ran from March to September of 2012, published to debate the Gillard Government's 'Australia in the Asian Century' White Paper, then in its research and consultation phase. Click here to see every post published in this series.

For commentary on the published White Paper, click here.

Australia's Defence Challenges

An Interpreter feature exploring Australia's defence challenges as the 2013 Defence White Paper planning process begins. Click here to see every post published in this series.

Selected Interpreter posts also appear in:

 
Business Spectator Caing online The Diplomat
 

Keep up-to-date with The Interpreter through:

iPhone App   iPhone App

RSS Feed   The Interpreter RSS Feed

Email Digest  

To receive a digest of posts from The Interpreter via email, enter your email address:

Receive a daily digest ->
Receive a weekly digest ->

Preview   |   Powered by FeedBlitz

Interpreting the Aid Review

This is the archive of a Lowy Institute blog which ran from January to April of 2011. It was published to debate the Gillard Government's independent aid review, which was then in its research and consultation phase. We offer this archive as a service to researchers and the general public.