Slow death of NPT regime

The POST, Sun, Oct,19, 2008.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

In its enthusiastic pursuit to have India recognized as a nuclear weapon state though indirectly, the US has systematically worked and managed to secure the removal of all hurdles that were obstructing the attainment of this objective. In the process it badly damaged all the principles and rules on which the edifice of non-proliferation regime was built. The primary rationale of NPT regime is to prevent further proliferation. The basic pillar of this regime is the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 while the other important elements of the NPT regime are the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and the NSG (Nuclear Supplier’s group). The IAEA carries out inspections at nuclear facilities and NSG regulates commerce.

The NPT regime has met considerable successes over the years. Not only more than 180 countries faithfully adhere to the NPT regime but also abide by its legal framework. Apart from three known nuclear weapon states (India, Pakistan and Israel), the NPT has been able to discourage almost all new nations to opt for nuclear weapons. In fact both horizontal and vertical proliferation has been effectively checked. However the recently changed policy of the Americans to indirectly recognize India as a nuclear weapon state and also meet its needs for uranium by securing the consent of NSG has further damaged the edifice of NPT regime. This is the first time that NSG has agreed to supply uranium to a Non NPT member. The irony of the situation is that the NSG agreed to supply nuclear material to a state which has encouraged the proliferation in South Asia. Pakistan would not have become a nuclear weapon state, if the US and its partners had honestly worked in preventing India to become a nuclear weapon state.

Whenever any organization begins to make exceptions to accommodate the interest of a nation-may be a powerful nation, it invariably tends to initiate the process that destroys the organization eventually. How can NSG deny logically the supply of nuclear material to all others who seek such material? The American efforts to strengthen India’s nuclear program-ostensibly on the excuse of meeting India’s energy requirements-have injected seeds of possible future destabilization of existing nuclear equation in South Asia. The incumbent American administration has gone out of the way to lobby both IAEA and NSG to bend rules in order to accommodate India. Despite being cognizant of the pressures applied by the Americans on the members of the above mentioned important organizations, it is indeed disappointing that other members eventually succumbed to the irrational and illogical pursuits of the Americans. The transformation of both IAEA and NSG from important international regulatory bodies to mere rubber stamp organizations is indeed alarming.

The discriminating attitude demonstrated by the American administration towards Pakistan is indeed alarming. When Pakistan asked for a similar nuclear deal, it was immediately rejected on the ground that Pakistan’s record on nuclear commerce is questionable. Not only Pakistan has made nuclear commerce a somewhat punishable offence but also took substantive measures to prevent any such future eventuality but apparently nothing convinced them. Many in Pakistan believe and quite rightly so that the Americans had decided to get India on their side and they are doing everything to accommodate India in one form or the other. Perhaps that is why one does not come across any criticism of many ugly aspects of Indian policies in US media. However one has to acknowledge that the European looks at developments somewhat differently and do tend to highlight many undesired developments in India such as the recent persecution of Christians by the Hindu militants etc.

It appears that the American administration was dead set to attain its objective and close the deal irrespective of the implications involved. The process for signing of the agreement was speeded up to have the agreement signed before the Presidential election hoping to give some boost to Republican candidate. Whether or not the signing of the deal would enhance Republican candidate’s position remains to be seen. However the Bush administration interprets that the future historian would look at look at it as the crowning achievement of the Bush era. But what needs to be stressed here that many historians would also look at this period which irreparably damaged the NPT regime.

Ii needs to be stressed here that many non American historians are likely to highlight the glaring contradiction in Bush administration’s contradictory policy. On one hand it encouraged and rewarded a proliferators and a non NPT member whereas on the other it threatened a NPT member to inflict punishment in an attempt what it believed to be drifting on the path towards the acquisition of nuclear weapons. Iran has been constantly subjected to threats of aerial strike if it did not stop alleged efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Despite Iran’s repeated denial that it is not trying to get nuclear weapons, the very few Americans and Europeans appear to be convinced by Iran’s interpretation. Not only UN sanctions have been applied to Iran, yet the Iranian appeared to be firm in maintaining their legitimate right to acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Given the Indian vision for itself and grand future designs it harbors, there is every likelihood that India would opt for further testing when it feels the necessity of undertaking such an eventuality. India has only tested a hydrogen bomb design once and in order to perfect this capability one has to test more than once. If this dreaded eventuality materializes, then it would be rather difficult to dismiss the notion that other effected state/states would not embark upon the undesired path.

Despite its commitments to 123 Agreement which did not impose any restriction on further testing though the Leaders of incumbent American administration vociferously drummed the warning that the US would immediately scrap the deal if India conducts further tests, India is known to follow policies that it consider best for its national interests. Such a threat is unlikely to influence Indian policy pursuits. India vehemently opposed the NPT on the grounds that it is a discriminatory treaty, yet it has supported and accepted a discriminatory policy pursuit of NSG primarily because it enhances and promotes its national interest. Given the past American record and the aggressive Indian policy pursuits,, though contradictory in nature, it is not too far fetched to assume that India would be able to convince the Americans that India’s nuclear expansion should not be seen as a negative development and the US should help India in strengthening its powers in order to counter rapid rise of China.

Whatever one may provide justification for recently concluded Indo-US nuclear deal, it is indeed difficult to contest the allegation that the deal has not only enhanced the chances of nuclear arms race but had badly damaged the incumbent edifice of NPT regime. Admittedly it may not be viewed as a death blow to the existing NPT regime but one cannot deny the fact that it has struck a sever blow which can be viewed as the initiation of a process of slow death of the NPT regime.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.