Australian uranium can go to India’s nuclear weapons: Australia doesn’t care
Indian weapons programme will not deter uranium sale: Australia THE HINDU, NARAYAN LAKSHMAN, 25 FEB 12, Commenting on its decision to allow uranium exports to India, the Australian government this week said that if India hypothetically diverted its domestic uranium into weapons uses following such exports that would be “very upsetting and very bad,” but that development nevertheless “would not alter the direction of the Australian government’s policy.”
Responding to a question from The Hindu on whether resistance to nuclear trade with India in certain international institutions was problematic for this policy decision by Australia, the country’s Ambassador to the United States, Kim Beazley, explained that Australian policy in this regard was driven by two considerations.
The first, Ambassador Beazley said during a media interaction organised by the National Press Club’s International Correspondents Committee, was a statement of principle: “Yes, we are prepared to sell uranium to India. Previously our position was [that we were] not prepared to sell uranium to India.”….The Ambassador also supplied details explaining why Australia had shifted its stance on the matter, outlining several broad issues.
First, Mr. Beazley noted, the Gillard administration believed that so long as Australia had a nuclear agreement with India that was similar to what the U.S. had, that relationship would be “roughly within fingertip-touching distance” of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
Second, he said, Australia “went down and signed that agreement with the Indians basically not because we need the sales. We sell enough uranium… So that’s not important to us. What is important to us is the character of the relationship we have with India, that’s why we made the changes.”
India had clearly conveyed to Australia that it “found us selling to the Chinese and us selling to the Russians and not selling to them to be something of an insult and that had to be dealt with.”
The Ambassador said that it had then become evident to their administration that Australia could not have the sort of relationship with India that it desired if it were operating on a basis that the Indians felt insulted by. “That policy had to change,” Mr. Beazley noted. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2931333.ece?homepage=true
Nuclear submarines for Australia? – drawing us further into the American military machine
the Australian fleet could be maintained at a US base in the Pacific Ocean or a US nuclear submarine base could be established in Australia.” That is, the proposal could provide the rationale to construct a new facility on Australian territory jointly operated with the US military.
All these moves would be viewed in China as highly aggressive.
US ambassador suggests nuclear submarine sale to Australia, World Socialist Website, By Oliver Campbell 29 February 2012 A front page article in the Australian Financial Review on February 22 reported that the US ambassador in Canberra, Jeffrey Bleich, has floated the possibility of Washington selling or leasing nuclear submarines to Australia—a first for any country.
While Defence Minister Stephen Smith restated the Labor Party’s position that it would not consider the “nuclear option”, the report is a further indication of Washington’s moves to strengthen military ties with Australia as it aggressively confronts China….. Continue reading
Nuclear subs for Australia – a multi-billion dollar dead-end
Senator Scott Ludlam, 22 Feb 12, The Greens today vowed to oppose any future move to purchase nuclear submarines for the Australian navy. Senator Scott Ludlam said the Greens welcomed Labor’s opposition to purchasing nuclear submarines but were alarmed by the Coalition’s reported plan to ‘consider the nuclear option’.
“Coalition figures have reportedly said Tony Abbott will consider purchasing nuclear submarines if in government. This idea is defective on every point. “We do not have a nuclear industry to support a nuclear submarine fleet, and nor should we. As such the subs would have to be maintained at aUSbase in the Pacific or aUSnuclear submarine base would need to be established in Australia.
“The giant Virginia Class nuclear submarine costs roughly $2.5 billion. We’ve just had the Gonski report recommend an additional five billion dollars for the nation’s schools. The Coalition has rejected the Gonski recommendations, but apparently would be content to blow that amount of money on two nuclear submarines.”
Senator Ludlam said the purchase of nuclear submarines would likely exacerbate any tensions in the Asia-Pacific region and do more damage than good to Australia’s security.
USA wants to sell or lease nuclear submarines to Australia
US offers Australia nuclear subs: report, Business Spectator, 22 Feb 2012 The United 
States has signalled that it is willing to lease or sell a nuclear-powered submarine to Australia, as the local Defence Department searches for a replacement for its Collins class vessels, according to The Australian Financial Review.
US Ambassador to Australia, Jeffrey Bleich, told the newspaper Washington viewed Australia’s
submarine program as crucial to security in the Asia-Pacific region.
While Defence Minister Stephen Smith has previously ruled out the purchase of a nuclear sub, Coalition leader Tony Abbott would be expected to consider the option if he becomes prime minister, the AFR said…..
At anti-submarine warfare forum, Yankee urges Australia to lease US nuclear submarines
Australia urged to lease subs,Canberra Times, DAVID ELLERY, DEFENCE REPORTER, 11 Feb, 2012 Australia would save billions of dollars if it leased used US nuclear submarines to replace the troubled Collins-class fleet, an American naval expert says.
”If you want to utilise the submarine force for long-range missions the nuclear submarine is the queen of the seas,” Sam Tangredi, a former US naval captain turned academic and strategic analyst, told The Canberra Times.
Dr Tangredi, who was in Canberra to speak at an anti-submarine warfare forum at the Australian Defence College, said taking over some of the submarines due to be retired early by the US Navy as part of its defence cuts was almost certainly the cheapest way to build an interim Australian underwater capability….
US nuclear submarines regularly use Australian ports and the defence posture review has suggested upgrading the submarine wharf at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia to make it better able to take American SSNs.
Defence Minister Stephen Smith recently reaffirmed nuclear submarines were off the agenda as far as replacing the Collins was concerned…. ”People can put the [nuclear] argument forward but that’s the only option that’s not on the table.”… http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/australia-urged-to-lease-subs/2451846.aspx
Nuclear submarines in our ports, a new target for terrorism?
NUCLEAR SUBMARINES NOT WELCOME IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA , 1 feb 2012, Plans to host American nuclear submarines at Garden Island should be rejected, Senator for Western Australia Scott Ludlam said. Senator Ludlam said the Australian Defence Force posture review – an inquiry into Australian defence bases – was off target with the suggestion that US nuclear submarines should be serviced at Garden Island. The risks of routinely floating nuclear reactors in and out of Cockburn sound shouldn’t be underestimated. Western Australian police and emergency services personnel are completely under-resourced to cope with even a minor reactor leak.
Call for more US nuclear sub facilities Canberra Times, BY DAVID ELLERY, DEFENCE REPORTER, 31 Jan, 2012 American nuclear submarines could call Australia home if a proposal by two of Australia’s leading Defence experts is included in the 2014 Defence White Paper. Former Defence Department secretaries Allan Hawke and Ric Smith have called for billions of dollars to be spent to protect Australia’s approaches and keep the fast emerging ”energy belt” safe from attack.
One of their suggestions, released in the interim report of the Force Posture Review, is for the submarine facilities at Fleetbase West – Perth’s HMAS Stirling – to be upgraded so they can be used to support US nuclear submarines….
Current Labor policy rules out any consideration of a nuclear option in $36billion replacement of the Collins fleet. Continue reading
Australia’s uranium will promote India’s nuclear weapons, says former Liberal Prime Minister
Uranium to India irresponsible, says Malcolm Fraser, Herald Sun 26 Jan 12,, FORMER prime minister Malcolm Fraser has warned the Gillard Government’s decision to allow exports of uranium to India will contribute to a global spread of nuclear weapons.
Mr Fraser has used Australia Day to launch a petition signed by 713 Order of Australia recipients, urging the Government to ban nuclear weapons.
Signatories include former prime ministers Bob Hawke and Gough Whitlam, former foreign ministers Gareth Evans and Andrew Peacock, and former high court justices.
“What we want to do is keep the idea of a nuclear-free world alive,”
Mr Fraser told ABC radio today. He criticised the Government’s decision to allow uranium exports to India, given the developing nation had not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
“There is no doubt that exports to India will make it easier for India to divert uranium for weapons purposes,” Mr Fraser said. He believes US policy under former US president George Bush has contributed to the spread of nuclear weapons, and countries like Iran and North Korea have responded accordingly. “They will be safer if they have nuclear weapons,” he said.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/uranium-to-india-irresponsible-says-malcolm-fraser/story-e6frf7jx-1226254068007
700 prestigious Australians call for international nuclear weapons ban
Top Aussies call for nuclear weapons ban, news.com.au AAP January 26, 2012 MORE than 700 prominent Australians have called on the Government to show leadership on outlawing nuclear weapons, saying the need is
urgent. Australians for a Nuclear Weapons Convention is a group of 713 Order of Australia honorees who say there is a growing consensus among world leaders on the urgent need for a ban on nuclear weapons.
“The increasing risks of nuclear weapons proliferation and use in our region and beyond mean there has never been a more important time for Australian initiative and leadership in global efforts to free the world from nuclear weapons,” the group says.
They want Australia to support UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon’s call for negotiations on an international treaty that would outlaw and eliminate all nuclear weapons.
Former prime ministers Malcolm Fraser, Bob Hawke and Gough Whitlam, and former foreign ministers Gareth Evans and Andrew Peacock are among the signatories…….
Mr Fraser’s Government established the convention that Australia would only sell uranium to countries that had signed the non-proliferation treaty.
Eight former state premiers and four former armed forces chiefs as well as prominent media, literary, sporting and community personalities also endorsed the statement. “We wanted to show that nuclear disarmament isn’t a left-wing issue.
This is something that has support across the political spectrum,” campaign director Tim Wright said. “Nuclear disarmament is something that we as a nation should care about and that the government should show leadership on.
“This is an urgent threat that needs urgent attention.”
He said while Australia had been a leader in non-proliferation activities in the past, its position was undermined by current defence policies stating the importance of the US having nuclear weapons and moves to sell uranium to India, which makes nuclear weapons. “Although the government does state that it supports nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, that position isn’t matched by its actions,” he said….
Mr Wright said while the Australians for a Nuclear Weapons Convention campaign was open only to people appointed to the Order of Australia, others could take part in activities run by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). http://www.news.com.au/national/top-aussies-call-for-nuclear-weapons-ban/story-e6frfkvr-1226253965331#ixzz1kazsDzNb
Nuclear submarines would make Australian Navy a subordinate arm of US Navy
there are two principal reasons to question any suggestion Australia might acquire the American Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines. The case has not been made — and it is doubtful that it can be made — that this very high level of submarine capability is a strategic priority for Australia.
More importantly, the likely need for direct American support for the nuclear power plant would put at risk Australia’s capacity for independent sovereign action.
In effect, the submarine arm of the Royal Australian Navy would become a subordinate arm of the US Navy. Independence would become subservience. Would this be in our national interest?
Hardly.
We need submarines, not subservience to the US, BY: PAUL DIBB AND RICHARD BRABIN-SMITH The Australian January 19, 2012 THERE are two sides to the submarine debate. Both are critical but one is more important than the other.
The government must surely demand that the Department of Defence get the technical aspects right, such as the relationship between capability, cost, and risk. But first it is vital to have a clear view on the strategic drivers, as these set the context for considering what level of capability is a priority.
So what would it mean if, following the ideas of Henry Ergas and Ross Babbage in The Australian (January 13 and 17) we acquired the highly capable nuclear-powered Virginia-class submarines from the US? Continue reading
Mr Fraser said. “The Cold War was still in progress. It was a different world. “We’ve gotten far too close to the Americans.”……
In 1985, the then PM Bob Hawke withdrew support for the missile tests after a meeting with US Secretary of State George Shultz.
US planned to fire missile at Australia, secret Cabinet papers from 1980s reveal By 
Samantha Maiden The Sunday Telegraph January 01, 2012
- Fraser agreed for US missiles to be fired at Australia
- Were to be fired into Tasman Sea off Cape Pillar
A SECRET US plan to test MX missiles by firing them from California to the coast of Australia was signed off on by then prime minister Malcolm Fraser. And it can be revealed that the federal Cabinet agreed to keep the intercontinental ballistic missile tests secret because it was “preferable for the matter not to become an election issue”. Continue reading
Australia’s part in the USA war machine, and the arms bazaar
Happy Christmas (the war is not over) The Drum, Kellie Tranter 22 Dec 11 “……..You’ll be chuffed to know our country is doing its bit for ‘world peace’ this Christmas.
The Australian Army is preparing for longer “campaigns”; we voted against Palestine’s admission to the UNESCO and we lobbied to weaken the international ban on cluster bomb munitions.
We also decided to sell uranium to India, a country standing outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a country whose nuclear program is stimulated by its neighbour (Pakistan) having the fastest-growing nuclear weapons program in the world, and a country whose government has been prepared to bribe MPs to secure the votes for a nuclear future, as evidenced by the Indo-US nuclear deal in 2008.
Last but not least, Australia was the fourth largest purchaser of US arms in the 2011 fiscal year.
Tune into the radio for the morning history trivia question. Seldom does a day pass when the answer doesn’t relate to the beginning of a war, the fighting of a war, the ending of a war or some remembrance of a war. Is mankind preordained to a fate of perpetual war mongering?
Mainstream media reports “voila”, the end of the Iraq war, as promised. But the public announcements don’t mention that the United States has left behind in Iraq the world’s largest “embassy”, housing 16,000 people. Or that private security contractors (which may include the infamous Blackwater, renamed Xe and now Academi) will be returning to Iraq because the United States government failed to negotiate immunity for its troops or to renegotiate the Status Of Forces Agreement which requires all US forces to be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012. And we don’t hear a peep about the rules of engagement for private US security contractors.
But are the US soldiers going home? Or are they joining the US and NATO forces who allegedly have landed outside of Syria and are training militants to overthrow the regime of president Bashar al-Assad. Don’t worry about that – it’s Christmas time: we’ll just have to wait for the White House to spin the bottle on the world map to find out which country our young soldiers will go to next. Syria? Iran? China?
In the spirit of “dealing toughly with your banker” earlier this year the Pentagon revealed a new battle concept – The Air Sea Battle concept- which reportedly is the “start of what defence officialssay is the early stage of a new Cold War-style military posture toward China”.
Naturally Australia and the United States each attempted to reassure China that expanding military US ties with Australia are not aimed at containing China, and so far China has remained rather stiff upper lipped, but wars are fought on borrowed money so it will be interesting to see how US Treasury Bonds go (or don’t). Guan Jianzhong, the head of China’s biggest ratings agency, Dagong Global Credit Rating, offered a fairly frank assessment of the US economy.
But fortunately we should be kept safe and warm this Christmas by the Australian Intelligence Community. ASIO costs us $438 million per year, but we have the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, the Office of National Assessments, the Defence Intelligence Organisation, and the Defence Imagery & Geospatial Organisation as well! And the list is growing: the relatively newCyber Security Operations Centre is housed inside the Defence Signals Directorate, an organisation that partners with the United States National Security Agency, now notorious for itsOrwellian domestic spying program…. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3742938.html
Definitely no nuclear submarines for Australia
Navy chief rules out nuclear subs, Canberra Times, BY DAVID ELLERY, 17 Dec, 2011 Nuclear submarines are off the menu for the Royal Australian Navy, according to its chief, Vice-Admiral Ray Griggs….Admiral Griggs told an Australian Strategic Policy Institute dinner in Canberra on Thursday night, ”In terms of nuclear submarines the Government position has been very clear – it has been consistently [that] the only thing that is ruled out is nuclear.”
Red Cross and Red Crescent gaining international support towards a Nuclear Weapons Convention
Since 1945, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement have consistently voiced deep concerns about these weapons of mass destruction and the need for the prohibition of their use. Its role in developing the International Humanitarian Law led to the creation of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, the universal rules of war, in 1977. As many as 194 nations of the world, including Australia, have ratified the four Geneva Conventions.
RED CROSS MOVEMENT WANTS NUKES ABOLISHED By Neena Bhandari IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis, 10 Dec 11 SYDNEY – Even as Australia’s ruling Labour revoked early December its long standing party policy banning uranium sales to India and Pakistan was swift to stake its claim too, the disarmament movement received a boost with the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement adopting a resolution to work towards a legally binding global convention on nuclear abolition.
The Australian Red Cross (ARC) had worked with the Japanese and Norwegian Red Cross to draft the resolution early 2011, which was passed in Geneva on November 26. The decision to support the initiative was taken by the Council of Delegates of the Movement comprising representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross(ICRC), the 187 Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies and the International Federation.
“We were overwhelmed by our colleagues in a range of countries from Iran, Jordan and Lebanon to Mozambique, Malaysia and Samoa amongst others, who co-sponsored and supported the Red Cross Movement’s resolution to urge governments to never use these horrible weapons again. It shows that the resolution has traction and there is a global sense that the Red Cross Movement needs to speak out on this vital issue of nuclear abolition,” ARC’s Head of International Law and Principles, Dr Helen Durham, told IDN. Continue reading
Australia wants uranium money – never mind that it goes to nuclear weapons
states – the U.S., U.K., China, France, Russia – although not one of them takes seriously its obligation under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to pursue disarmament in good faith.
policy and binding Labor platform policy. That’s pretty low. Continue reading
First uranium to India, now military ties – Australia-India
India trip follows Australian ruling party’s uranium backflip, Radio Australia, December 7, 2011 Only days after the ruling Australian Labor Party ended its ban on possible uranium sales to India – Australia’s Defence Minister Stephen Smith will visit New Delhi and Mumbai for talks on greater military cooperation….
It’s Mr Smith’s fourth ministerial visit to India but his first in the Defence portfolio and he is emphatic that India’s nuclear neighbour and arch rival, Pakistan, will not be getting any Australian uranium.
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/connectasia/stories/201112/s3385778.htm
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 