board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

The Non-Non-Proliferation Treaty

Post Reply   Page 1 of 1  [ 1 post ]
Author Message
Lidless
Post subject: The Non-Non-Proliferation Treaty
Posted: Thu 09 Mar , 2006 5:34 pm
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
I find it astonishing and yet not surprising that the US has decided to change or ignore the rules of the world again without consultation with other countries first.

OK, the NPT was pretty much as dead as a dodo, but one would think that something of this importance should be discussed with other countries first.
Quote:
Historic, that's how US President George Bush has described the deal on nuclear cooperation concluded with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Thursday, 2 March.

Under the agreement, India is to receive assistance from the United States in the field of nuclear energy production for 'peaceful purposes'. In exchange, India will allow more intensive monitoring of its nuclear operations by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna.

The accord between the two nations is indeed historic, but that word can be interpreted in both a positive and a negative sense. It certainly is historic that a nuclear cooperation agreement has now been concluded with a country such as India, which developed nuclear weapons illegally as long ago as the 1970s and has never signed up to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). The new agreement indeed appears to be at total odds with the provisions of the NPT and, in a sense, also reward illegal conduct on the part of certain countries. Seen in this light, the deal with India appears to set a precedent.

Other precedents have, however, already been set, albeit that they have been less formal in nature. For example, the United States and other countries have already turned a blind eye to the development of nuclear weapons by other states that have also never ratified the NPT, one of them being Israel. The same applied to a certain degree in the case of Pakistan, India's traditional archenemy. Although sanctions were imposed on Pakistan for its illegal production of nuclear weapons, later developments showed that scarcely anyone took them seriously.

Therefore, the new agreement can also be seen as historic in the sense that the sole remaining world superpower - the US - is allowing the formal rules governing the production of nuclear weapons to slip into the background. Washington came to the understandable conclusion many years ago that these 'formal rules' are far from watertight - as evidenced by the nuclear ambitions of North Korea, Iran and - at an earlier stage - those of Libya.

Now, instead of stressing those rules, Washington has come to take a much more pragmatic approach. Efforts to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction currently come in the shape of measures like the 'Proliferation Security Initiative', which includes operations such as stopping and searching suspect ships at sea.

On the other hand, nations regarded as more friendly can count on a more relaxed approach, with India now providing a good example of how this works. The country has gone from being clearly anti-American during the Cold War era to become an ally of Washington, a key economic partner and, in geopolitical terms, the most important regional counterweight to China - regarded by the US as a 'potential opponent'. Moreover, according to Washington, India has never engaged in the illegal export of nuclear materials or knowledge. This approach on the part of the US is indeed one of 'Realpolitik'.

The new agreement will see the US assist India with the further development of nuclear energy for peaceful uses, thus helping the country to help meet its rapidly expanding energy requirements. In exchange, India must allow many more nuclear reactors to be placed under the supervision of the IAEA and draw a strict line between nuclear reactors with a purely non-military purpose and those which also provide the raw materials for nuclear weapons. Currently, only four of the country's 15 reactors are subject to international supervision and inspection.

The new agreement has yet to be approved by the US Congress, and doubtlessly the IAEA will also want to study it in detail. It remains to be seen whether Congress and the international community attach greater importance to this form of 'Realpolitik' than to the equally 'historic' non-proliferation treaty.
Of course, there are other reasons involved in the decision to do this. India is pretty much the world's largest democracy (and therefore market), it shows the US being friendly to Muslims ("well-behaved" Muslims at least), a slap in the face to Pakistan who haven't been the best hunters of terrorists, and a message to Iran about having detailed inspectors.

Giving support to India was correct in my opinion, though not the way it was unilaterally done. I just dislike the "we ourselves will break the rules" attitude by the US that have plagued the rest of the world this century.

Of all the assumptions that followed the cold war, none was sillier or more short-sighted than that one superpower would be able to bestraddle, let alone stabilise, the world. That died on the heights of Tora Bora and in the ruins of Falluja. Bush in India is instead a quiet acknowledgment of Gandhi's ironic reflection, that western civilisation might indeed be a good idea.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 1  [ 1 post ]
Return to “The Symposium”
Jump to: