Antinuclear

Danger for our region in uranium sales to India

there are fundamentally sound reasons why the Labor Party has resisted sales to India up to this point. The foremost reason is that India is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Uranium sales to India a recipe for regional insecurity Sydney Morning Herald,  Leigh Hubbard February 18, 2011 The wheels are firmly in motion for the Labor Party to reconsider its position on the contentious issue of uranium sales to India if this week’s comments from Resources Minister Martin Ferguson and Paul Howes from the Australian Worker’s Union are any indication. While we welcome the debate around Australia’s management of our natural resources, we need a clear-eyed analysis of the dangers of proceeding down this course……
WikiLeaks cables this week revealed that behind closed doors, the ALP has indicated that the policy will be likely to change within three to five years.
It seems more than just coincidence that just weeks after Krishna’s visit, Ferguson has come out publicly stating that it is time for the ALP to ”modernise” its position on uranium sales to allow the capacity to assess the sales on a case by case basis. Nor is it coincidence that the comments coincide with the AWU Conference at Jupiters Casino this week.

However, there are fundamentally sound reasons why the Labor Party has resisted sales to India up to this point. The foremost reason is that India is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has developed a nuclear weapons program outside of the parameters of that important international treaty designed to prevent the spread of the world’s most inhuman weapons and advance disarmament.

The ALP’s policy is to allow the export of uranium only to those countries that observe the NPT, are committed to non-proliferation policies, have ratified international and bilateral nuclear safeguards agreements and maintain strict safeguards and security controls over their nuclear power industries. Ferguson would seem to be suggesting that future decisions should instead be based on his own discretion.

For a party based on the principles of workers’ rights and labour standards, the value of internationally binding treaties as being essential parameters of rigorous international democracy and diplomacy should be paramount. To ignore or circumvent them sets a dangerous precedent, weakens the moral authority of the international community and undermines the very value of the treaty itself. Decisions about who we sell uranium to should not be market-driven or the result of some political deal with the large miners — as one suspects occurred with the decision to sell uranium to Russia soon after the furore over the mining tax was resolved. The stakes are just too high.

That the US has decided to open the door to uranium sales to India should not spur Australia to do so. In fact, when the US agreed to these sales in 2008, it stated that it was doing so under the proviso that India would agree to various non-proliferation and disarmament commitments. India has not, however, followed up with such commitments, still refusing to take steps towards nuclear disarmament and refusing to sign treaties such as the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.There are other more prescient reasons for Australia to refuse such sales.

Pakistan is building up its nuclear arsenal dramatically and, according to a recent New YorkTimes article, may soon overtake Britain as the world’s fifth largest nuclear weapons possessor. As history has shown, the diabolical game of brinksmanship that often surrounds regional nuclear weapons development may mean that by supplying the raw ingredient for nuclear bombs to India, Australia will be effectively fuelling a new nuclear arms race in southern Asia.

Martin Ferguson Calls For Uranium Sales To India

February 18, 2011 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics international