New Delhi is abuzz with rumours of Pakistan inking a civilian nuclear deal with the US (akin to the 2005 one with India). Here’s my take on why there’s much ado about nothing.
The Possibility
Very Unlikely. For starters, to get a civilian nuclear deal through, there must be unanimous approval from the IAEA, and waiver from the NSG. Neither of which looks probable given Pakistan’s record of proliferation (Read: Abdul Qadeer Khan) To quote Nicholas Burns, Bush’s Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, way back in ’05;
India’s trust, its credibility, the fact that it has promised to create a state-of-the-art facility, monitored by the IAEA, to begin a new export control regime in place, because it has not proliferated the nuclear technology, we can’t say that about Pakistan.
Of course, times have changed with regard to Pakistan’s increasing leverage in Washington, but the other players in the nuclear arena will be wary of such a deal with Pakistan.
Even the Obama Administration will be mega-cautious in favouring a deal towards Pakistan – given the President’s commitment to disarmament, the actions would virtually amount to rewarding a ‘rogue’ Non-NPT nation, with instances of proliferation. That the deal will be for peaceful, civilian purposes can hardly withstand this glaring fact. This in turn, will severely damage his reputation and credibility in convincing Iran (and North Korea) not to follow a policy of nuclear enrichment, even though Iran maintains that it is only for energy purposes.
For a deal to come through, the IAEA must be allowed monitoring of nuclear facilities in Pakistan – whether Islamabad has the leverage to allow selective monitoring remains to be seen, but the Pakistani Army is not going to remain hush if the legislature decides to comply with full-scale monitoring.
U.S nuclear vendors cannot sell their reactors in their destined countries unless liability for third party acts, or accidents or incidents of terrorist sabotage is capped – in fact, a liability pool must be created to protect the US firms from being sued. This issue is now raging across India, and the UPA Govt. has decided to put the Nuclear Liability Bill in the backburner. The Pakistan Administration’s failure to secure the biggest of cities like Karachi (port city – greater relevance for nuke reactor), Rawalpindi from terrorist threats will play heavily in private operators’ minds when they lobby for or against a deal with Pakistan.
The Impact
For a moment, lets assume the deal comes through. Currently, Indian hawks are crying themselves hoarse over the apocalyptic impact of a US-Pak deal. It would certainly mean that Obama is desperate to appease Pakistan, and that Pakistan as a powerful regional ally/player has arrived. But that must not, and need not, worry the Indian establishment.
For one, Pakistan is already a nuclear power – militarily. Even without a future testing of nuclear weapons (which will terminate any civil nuke deal with the US), New Delhi would be more than aware of Pakistan’s current nuclear deterrent. It is improbable, and going by most reports, unscientific, to think that the enriched uranium will be processed by Pakistan for military ends. Given the stringent conditions of monitoring and evaluation, any military advantage for Pakistan is out of the question.
Secondly, there’s the concern of reactors and nuclear installations falling into the wrong, ‘non-state’ hands. Well, that holds true for military sites as well, and we can only trust the Army to do a decent job to protect the civil reactors as well. In any case, it is not expected that terrorist outfits in the subcontinent (or anywhere in the world, for that matter) have the know-how to guide such technology for warfare.
If anything, India should be relieved that the nuclear deal would bring in some semblance of development and more importantly, political success, for the democratic constituents in Pakistan’s polity. The deal will be touted as a major success for the ruling coalition, and will bring in stability for good. That the real effects of development will only begin to percolate after a good 20-25 years is another matter altogether.
So, for now, we need not yet fret about a largely symbolic gesture of a nuke deal between our neighbour and the U.S.
(Don’t forget to subscribe to The Khyber, our not-for-profit newsletter on the latest happenings in South Asia)
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Facebook comments:
Powered by Facebook Comments