July 28, 2008 ☼ Australia ☼ East Asia ☼ energy security ☼ Foreign Affairs ☼ India ☼ Indian ocean ☼ international relations ☼ non-proliferation ☼ nuclear energy ☼ Pacific ☼ uranium
This is an archived blog post from The Acorn.
Greg Sheridan has a very insightful piece on the India-US nuclear deal and the stakes for Australia (linkthanks V Anantha Nageswaran). He gets it right when he argues that Australia can’t hope to enjoy a close relationship with India if it maintains a discriminatory policy on uranium sales.
Then the deal must be approved by the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Here’s where Australia comes in. With something like 40 per cent of the world’s known uranium reserves, Australia is a key member of the NSG. So far, the Rudd Government has not said whether it will support the US-India deal at the NSG or oppose it.
It has however hinted that it would support the deal at the NSG, a hint Foreign Minister Stephen Smith repeated yesterday. Certainly Australia could kiss goodbye forever the idea of any decent relationship with India if it opposes the deal at the NSG.
Accepting the deal at the NSG would not commit Australia to supplying uranium to India. However, that will be the next big question…
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Andrew Robb has effectively homed in on the contradiction between the Rudd Government selling uranium to China - which has a terrible, though not recent, record of nuclear proliferation - while refusing to sell uranium to India, which has never passed on nuclear technology to anyone.
..the Rudd Government will face a deep contradiction between supporting the US-India deal in the NSG, then saying it will not sell uranium to India. It will face an even bigger contradiction between its concern with greenhouse gas emissions and taking action, by refusing uranium to India, that impedes the development of clean energy. [The Australian]
© Copyright 2003-2023. Nitin Pai. All Rights Reserved.