Book Review “Indian Unsafeguarded Nuclear Program: An Assessment”

By: Sarah Khan

A study titled ‘Indian Unsafeguarded Nuclear Program’, published by the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad (ISSI) and co-authored by four nuclear scholars, Adeela Azam, Ahmad Khan, Muhammad Ali and Sameer Khan unveils a new and comprehensive assessment of the Indian nuclear weapon capacity. The study was launched at the ISSI, which was attended by foreign diplomats, scholars, journalists and students.

The book is comprised of four chapters. The first chapter gives detailed account of India’s domestically sufficient uranium available to meet its long term needs. Introduction of new technologies for uranium exploration and installation of new milling facilities will further enhance country’s ability to efficiently mine locally available uranium. Optimal utilization of domestic uranium reserves will allow India to keep its existing and few upcoming reactors operational for more than a century. In second chapter the writer has stated that India’s unsafeguarded uranium enrichment capacity will grow significantly by 2017. The Highly Enriched Uranium produced at Rattehali plant will be in excess to the projected requirement of fuelling the entire fleet of Indian nuclear powered submarine. The growth rate of the Indian enrichment capacity indicates that India has the fastest growing unsafeguarded uranium enrichment program in the developing world has surpassed Pakistan. The book reveals that India already has sufficient material and technical capacity to make 356 to 492 nuclear bombs.

Chapter three explores the historical role of key individuals, major powers and technology as the main internal and external drivers which helped India develop its unsafeguarded nuclear reactor program. The research also explains how and what has driven the unsafeguarded Indian nuclear reactor program while also offering a new, original and comprehensive assessment of the Indian nuclear bomb making capacity. Fourth chapter has evaluated the Indian reprocessing program. The military aspect of Indian reprocessing program is often ignored. Despite the fact that several states continue to reprocess spent nuclear fuel for civilian purposes not only its economic feasibility is questionable but its ability to significantly reduce environmental hazards is also uncertain. Almost all Indian reprocessing facilities remain outside the IAEA safeguards and are ostensibly a potential source of vertical proliferation and military use. This work is in contrast to several earlier studies which took a much modest view of the Indian nuclear bomb making potential.

The book gives a fresh perspective on India’s unsafeguarded nuclear and makes a significant addition to the existing knowledge about the size, history and capacity of the Indian unsafeguarded nuclear program. This book has used government documents, speeches, and parliamentary debates, research of leading Indian and international nuclear experts and international assessments related to the Indian nuclear program, dating back to the several past decades.

The book recommended that the member States of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) should consider the large and swiftly expanding Indian nuclear bomb making capacity while dealing with New Delhi’s NSG membership case and ensure that the Indian membership of this export control arrangement does not, in any way, help India further expand and accelerate its nuclear weapons program.

The study provides deep insight into the true history, size, extent and capabilities of the different aspects of the complex Indian nuclear program, which New Delhi has kept outside the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. It includes compelling evidence that India has the largest and oldest unsafeguarded nuclear program in the entire developing world and amongst States not party to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Change of command: Civil-military ties

Dr Zafar Nawaz Jaspal

THE appointment of the Chief of Army Staff is always very sensitive due to the decisive role of the Army in the polity of Pakistan. The trends in the prevalent internal and external environment of the country also make the appointment of the current Chief of Army Staff (COAS) critical. So, the announcement of the promotion of General Qamar Javed Bajwa on November 26, 2016, as a four star-General and COAS has commenced thought-provoking debate on the civil-military relations in the country. The cautious conclusion is that General Bajwa would prefer the status quo and refrain from political adventurism.
Conversely, the domestic dynamics, especially the serious rift among the political parties and amateurish political culture of the state, are too unpredictable and may oblige COAS to contravene his mandate. The probability of the latter necessitates the critical analysis of the change of guards in Army and civil-military relations in Pakistan. The honourable retirement of General Raheel Sharif and appointment of a new COAS not only quashed the tradition of extension, but also accentuates that individuals are not indispensable. Moreover, Pakistan Army as a professional organization is immensely capable to breed able commanders or generals.
The appointment of new COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa and General Zubair Hayat Chairman as Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) also manifested that it is prerogative of the elected Prime Minister to decide who is capable to lead the armed forces. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif amply exercised his constitutional power of the nomination of the COAS (4th in order of seniority) and CJCSC and President Mamoon Hussain endorsed the former’s recommendation. Nevertheless, still a few tricky cum challenging issues have potential to spoil the smooth functioning of the civil-military relations. The developments in the realm of domestic politics, counter-terrorism and upsurge on the eastern and western borders could encourage antidemocratic forces to pursue their agenda.
The COAS General Bajwa, certainly, endeavours for the logical conclusion of the ongoing Zarb-i-Azb. In this context, the biggest challenge for him would be refurbishing of the counter-terrorism strategy’s tactics. Without revamping the tactics, the counter-terrorism strategy would be victim of stagnation. Perhaps, inertia would complicate the pursuit of the objectives in the prevalent asymmetrical warfare in the country and also frustrate the man on the horseback. Therefore, he needs to act intelligently and swiftly. The recent three terrorist attacks in Balochistan necessitate the broadening of counter-terrorism operations including serious actions in certain parts of Punjab. Whether he would be able to persuade the ruling PML-N for such actions or simply follow the policy of his predecessor, i.e. chasing and killing the terrorist in entire country except Punjab.
The most important undertaking for the new COAS is to avoid military interference in the politics. Ironically, today, parliamentarians are debating the national issues on the private TV channels instead of at the floor of the National Assembly and Senate. One leading political party has boycotted the parliament for indefinite period and seems convinced to win 2018 general elections by maintaining political jingoism and protests on the streets. Political history of Pakistan reveals that such political tactics not only obstruct the smooth functioning of the political system but also make it vulnerable to the extra-constitutional upheavals.
Importantly, today, the Army seems amenable to judicial dictates, sensitive to media trials, and also reiterating that it supports democratic political system, legal and constitutional legitimacy of an elected government and also espouse for the PML-N government to complete its term in office. Simultaneously, the prevalent trends in the Pakistani polity manifest that the Army still plays an affective umpire, final arbiter or broker’s role in the civilian domain and is also determined to hold on its public vision as the ultimate custodian of Pakistan’s integrity.
The political elite in Pakistan are divided and engaged in free for all struggle for power. The integrity of the elected ruling elite is at the mercy of the apex court decision on the Panamagate cases. The political parties are a mirror image of dynasties. The steady degeneration of the civilian institutions and civilian law enforcement agencies have created space for Army’s role in restoring the writ of the state in Karachi, Federal Administrative Tribal Areas, Balochistan. Even in Islamabad, Rangers accompany the police mobiles during the patrolling.
Thus, the Army’s position of pre-eminence in the national polity would continue under the stewardship General Bajwa. To conclude, the national interest of the country pleas that the new COAS General Bajwa should not permit the derailing of the Zarb-i-Azb gains and focus on the rehabilitation of the affecters of the operation; assist civilian ruling elite in restoring and maintaining the writ of the state internally within the ambit of the constitutional framework; and above all forcefully thwart the military challenges at the eastern and western borders of Pakistan.
— The writer is Associate Professor, School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

Pakistan, India and politics of NSG

Maimuna Ashraf

THE last Vienna Plenary meeting of NSG ended without reaching any consensus on the issue of NSG candidature for non-NPT states. India was lately giving the impression that it has won the support of majority of the states including Mexico, Switzerland, Brazil, Russia and New Zealand. But the fact is that New Zealand doesn’t stand a chance against the US pressure. Similarly the countries in Latin American have different interests.
However three major countries Ireland, China and Austria have not shown any change in their stance against the Indian membership. However, India wants to send the message out that NSG issue is still alive and India is diligently working for its membership. It’s almost a decade that membership of NSG has become much contested, especially because of India and Pakistan interest into NSG.
Most of the countries were given the impression by the US and India that Pakistan has been brought in by China as a reaction to Indian membership application to spoil the Indian case. Contrary to this, Pakistan had its Export Control Act in 2004. Since then it has been updating its NSG list. Islamabad announced its NSG compliance list in 2005 followed by two subsequent reviews in 2007 and 2012 that ensures the working on this issue long before India had applied for NSG membership.
Hence when India applied, Pakistan had already done its homework and was ready to apply which it did instantly. Also it wouldn’t have been possible for Pakistan to apply within 6 days of Indian application. Pakistani side gave a detailed dossier spanning over 300 pages within 6 days which shows that preparations were already there. So Pakistan has to tackle this impression as well. The right time to insist on a stringent criterion for non-NPT states was in 2008. At that time NSG countries missed an opportunity where they could have asked both Pakistan and India to simultaneously adhere to strong non-proliferation commitment. This could have injected nuclear restraints in South Asia. But now India has access to all kinds of nuclear technology and has the capability to live without the membership of NSG. For India it is a matter of prestige. For now, it will not be easy for India to meet any new criteria as it can live without it. Earlier this year, Pakistan’s foreign affairs advisor indicated that Pakistan is willing to enter into a bilateral non-testing agreement with India.
Back in 1998 as well, Pakistan proposed simultaneous adherence to CTBT by both Pakistan and India. Later India refused by making it clear that it is not going to join CTBT. Now Pakistan has found a middle ground i.e. the bilateral agreement which is still better than unilateral moratoriums because unilateral moratoriums are voluntary however India is not willing for such a bilateral agreement as well because it does not comply with its interest.
India is of the view that NSG membership is very significant for their prestige and for this purpose India went openly for an alliance with US. Even after the meeting scheduled on 11-12 November 2016, the trends are not in favor of India. However Pakistan also needs to maintain its resilience in its policy regarding the issue of NSG membership. Viewing the increasing number of countries supporting universal criteria for non-NPT states, it can be accessed that Indian membership in NSG doesn’t seem forthcoming which is ultimately good for Pakistan. However, if Pakistan could not win the membership simultaneously with India, it should still not give up on its ambitions as it needs recognition in the long run. Pakistan can gradually and eventually get there by constant efforts but it should not rush and must keep the pace of responsible nuclear weapon state.
— The writer is member Strategic Vision Institute, a think-tank based in Islamabad.

Japanese tourist raped in India

NEW DELHI - A man was arrested Sunday for allegedly raping a Japanese tourist at a popular beach resort in southern India, in the latest case of sexual assault against a visitor.

The 35-year-old woman was found bleeding by hotel staff in the town of Kovalam early Sunday and is undergoing treatment at a hospital in the Kerala state capital Thiruvananthapuram.

The woman sustained internal injuries but doctors have declared her out of danger.

Police identified the accused as a 25-year-old whose family runs a handicrafts store in the tourist hotspot. "He has been sent to judicial custody and we are waiting for the victim to recover to record her full statement," local police officer Vipin Kumar told AFP.

Japanese officials in New Delhi have been informed about the incident, he said.

The woman came to India two weeks ago and arrived in the beach town on Saturday, hours before the alleged assault took place.

It was unclear how the two met, police said.

Sexual attacks on tourists in India are widespread, with several western countries warning visitors about the risk.

Last year a Japanese woman was drugged and raped by a tourist guide in the western city of Jaipur, less than a month after six men gang-raped a 22-year-old Japanese tourist in the eastern city of Kolkata.

An Indian court in June convicted five men for gang-raping a 52-year-old Danish tourist in New Delhi in 2014. They were jailed for life.

India is facing intense scrutiny over its efforts to curb violence against women in general following the fatal gang rape of an Indian medical student in New Delhi in December 2012, which sparked a global outcry.

This news was published in The Nation newspaper. Read complete newspaper of 28-Nov-2016.

Graceful Exit

By Sarah Khan

Power transition in any form is a difficult and challenging task. Unfortunately, there have been a few examples of smooth power transition in civil and military realms in Pakistan. But General Raheel Sharif has set an unprecedented example by announcing timely retirement despite tremendous calls for extension in service from general public. His services for Pakistan are comprised of a long list but the decision to step down as per schedule is the biggest contribution for strengthening of institution/ system in Pakistan. It is a universal truth that no individual is indispensible. Rather one man’s rule for longer period and extensions at the top level creates frustration among all ranks which proves counterproductive for the overall system and creates hurdles for prosperity and development.
After several ups and down in political history of Pakistan, finally a system has evolved which is strengthening democratic norms and values in Pakistan. The political instability due to military interventions in the past has crippled the economy and development of Pakistan. Under visionary leadership of General Raheel Sharif, military did not intervene in political affairs of various political parties despite calls for martial law and military intervention. Although, the political system is yet evolving but General Raheel Sharif has set a direction for peace and development by taking strict actions for eradication of militancy and terrorism in Pakistan. Before his retirement he has ensured implementation of National Action Plan in letter and spirit. Karachi considered as economic hub of Pakistan, was unstable due to activities of RAW in the city. General Raheel took bold steps in order to counter RAW activities in Sindh. The development China Pakistan Economic Corridor was closely monitored by ex-COAS and he ensured to overcome every hurdle in operationalization of the said project.
In 2013, when General Raheel was appointed as COAS, Pakistan was going through extreme crises both internally and externally. Most of international reports had termed Pakistan as ‘most dangerous country’ and ‘failing state’ in the World. But after assuming the command of prestigious Armed Forces of Pakistan, General Raheel took so many commendable steps which have ensured a bright and prosperous future of Pakistan. Since 2013, the overall image of Pakistan Armed Forces has been improved nationally and internationally and our Armed Forces have regained the lost image and fame after successfully clearing FATA from militants. General Raheel’s personal involvement for successful operationalization of CPEC, eradication of terrorism at large scale, strengthening of ties with emerging powers including China, Russia and Turkey and decision to timely step down are some of the services which will be harbinger of peace, stability and strengthening of institution and system in Pakistan. His predecessor General Qamar Bajwa has to follow suit in order to keep Pakistan on track of peace and prosperity.

The Raheel Sharif model

By Mohsin Raza Malik

General Raheel Sharif, the 15th Chief of Army Staff, is scheduled to relinquish command of Pakistan Army by the end of this month after completing his 3-year fixed term in office. Unlike his predecessor, he has already declined an offer for an extension in his tenure. Though he served as COAS for a relatively shorter period, has earned a reputation as a courageous, pragmatic and professional military commander. In fact, in a short period of 3-years, he proactively played his role in evolving a comprehensive strategy to counter terrorism which had been the most critical challenge for Pakistan for the last one-and-half decade. Thus he has just proved that the courage, resolution and commitment matter the most when it comes to curbing the menace of terrorism.

There have been a number of so-called military intervention models in Pakistan, evolved and practiced by various commanders of the most powerful institution of the country- The Army. These ‘models’ generally vary according to the nature and intensity of invention made by the Khakis in the civilian domain. They have also been the primary determinants of Civ-Mil relations in Pakistan. They can conveniently be categorised into two broader categories: an aggressive model, and a passive model. The former involves a full-fledged military intervention, which usually resulted in toppling a civilian regime e.g. the ‘Zia model’, the ‘Musharraf model’. And the latter relates to an informal intervention which also leans towards the general tendency of the military commanders to impose their decisions on the political leadership while staying within their institutional domain. In this respect, the so-called Kakar and Kayani models are the two major instances.

The policies and practices of General Raheel Sharif as a COAS have given rise to another unique military model in Pakistan. It is relatively extensive, multi-faceted and a multi-component model. This model is different from all the previous ones. Unlike others, it is necessarily a military non-intervention model. Under this model, the military establishment has exercised maximum restraint in absolutely toppling a civilian regime, or otherwise unnecessarily interfering in the civilian affairs. The military establishment did not intervene despite the fact things had once reached the threshold where the past military commanders had been considering themselves justified in intervening is some way, either aggressively or passively. We have seen that General Raheel Sharif played a positive and constructive role in ending the political impasse in the country following the PTI-PAT sit-in in Islamabad in 2014. He constantly maintained his neutrality and impartiality in this prolonged political crisis.

However, despite strictly maintaining political neutrality, the military establishment didn’t remain thoroughly indifferent to the affairs of the state. It has constantly been showing its institutional concerns over certain undesirable developments in the country. At times, it also conveyed it strong displeasure over certain things like the ineffective or non-implementation of National Action Plan, poor civilian response to foreign-funded terrorism, the state of corruption, the Panamagate scandal, the news-leak issue etc. Thus it constructively engaged the civilian leadership. Moreover, the military establishment has also been taking the daring initiatives and making the crucial decisions relating to the national security. It by no means let the political expediency and civilian inertia eclipse the vital national security matters in the country.

Apart from its typical Civ-Mil aspect, the so-called Raheel Sharif model has another important military component that relates to the professional role of a military commander. General Raheel Sharif has emerged as a composed but resolute and pro-active military commander. He just came forward with strong professional commitment, unwavering resolve and a pragmatic and goal-oriented approach. Therefore, now he is being not only greatly admired and respected domestically, but his professional excellence is also being globally acknowledged.

General Raheel Sharif took command of one of the largest armies in the world at the most critical juncture of its history. The security situation in Pakistan was volatile and rather chaotic. A sophisticated Fourth Generation War was posing a severe existential threat to Pakistan. But regrettably, despite being in a state of war, there hardly existed the required degree of resolution and commitment on the part of both military and civilian leadership in the country to fight this war. Instead, they was considerable confusion over the nature and handling of this war. Pakistan army did not conduct any significant military operation since the conclusion of Operation Rah-e-Nijat in South Waziristan agency in December 2009. Resultantly, various militant groups got the opportunity to reorganize and reunited in the tribal areas.

In this particularly uncertain and confusing situation, Pakistan Army, under the command of General Raheel Sharif, courageously and sagaciously decided to inflict a decisive onslaught on the miscreants by launching Operation Zarb-e-Azab in North Waziristan in mid-2014. This military operation somehow broken the backbone of militancy in the country after destroying the hideouts of militants and dismantling their command and control structure. Now the entire tribal area has been successfully retrieved from these militants. Besides this, the Pak Army is also conducting the Intelligence Based Operations (IBO’s) as well as combing military operation across the country. Obviously, after the unfortunate APS Peshawar incident, these operations have intensified.

As a matter of fact, General Raheel Sharif has played a pivotal role in evolving the current counter-terror and COIN strategies in Pakistan which essentially comprise a number of kinetic military actions coupled with some preventive measures in the form of NAP. These strategies have gone a long way in absolutely cubing the menace of terrorism and extremism in the country. The Operation Zarb-e-Azab is being considered to be an effective and the greatest counter-terror maneuvering in the world in the recent times. Now other terror-hit countries are also trying to replicate these counter terror strategies.

Trying a terrorist in the court of law is purely a responsibility of the civilian government but Pakistan Army has also readily assumed this task by setting up various military trial courts. Moreover, Pak Army’s role regarding the relief and rehabilitation of IDP’s of North Waziristan is also commendable. Presently, the military establishment is also actively supporting the para-military and law-enforcing agencies in Karachi to rid the city of undesirable criminal elements. All these daring actions of the army necessarily reflect the strong determination and commitment of its outgoing commander.

For the first time in country’s history, we have observed an army chief openly speaking against the alleged foul play of the Indian intelligence agencies, the RAW, in Pakistan. The higher military and civilian authorities in Pakistan have conveyed a strong message to India to call off its disruptive activities in Pakistan through its hostile intelligence apparatus. Moreover, the military establishment has also taken keen interest in the successful and early completion of the CPEC. It has already raised a Special Security Division (SSD) to provide security to the Chinese in Pakistan.

Through his professionalism and unwavering resolve, General Raheel Sharif has just proved that a single individual can substantially strengthen an institution. At the same time, by refusing to accept extension in tenure, he again has tried to show that there are not individuals but institutions which are the permanent entities. Thus institutions always matter and make all the difference. This move also contain a serious message for the politicos who are running their political parties in an authoritarian and arbitrary fashion. The cults of personality have overshadowed the political ideologies of these parties. Political parties have somehow become the ‘family limited companies’ controlled by different political dynasties.

The so-called General Raheel Sharif model has not only helped improve the security situation in Pakistan but has also earned a good name for the army as an institution. It has substantially improved the institutional capacity of Pakistan Army to effectively cope with both the internal and external challenges. It has also strengthened the democratic institutions in Pakistan. Therefore, this model should be idealised and followed by the succeeding military commanders in the lager interest of the country as well as their own institution.

Politics of the Nuclear Suppliers Group

The most prominent take-away from the current meeting is that, unlike popular perception, it is not just China that stands in the way of India’s membership, but a general desire among the participating governments of NSG to ensure that unlike the past NSG

 

By SaimaAmanSial

The Nuclear Suppliers Group, once dubbed merely as a ‘denial regime’ and a ‘cartel’ working for the denial of nuclear technology in South Asia is increasingly gaining preeminence as a multilateral group of significant standing. The change in perspective is driven by the growing nuclear energy demand in the South Asian states as well as a desire by these states to be given the status of an established nuclear weapon state. However, these demands have been met lopsidedly by the US-led industrially advanced states by welcoming India only in the club, as manifested by the Indian nuclear cooperation agreements; facilitated by the 2008 decision of NSG to grant India a waiver for export of nuclear technologies for its nuclear energy program.

Japan, widely known earlier for its opposition to a nuclear deal with India based on its India's non-NPT status and its own nuclear history, has recently finalised the nuclear deal with India contrary to its long standing nonproliferation stance. The Indo-Japan nuclear agreement is weak from the nuclear nonproliferation standpoint as is incorporates similar commitments India had already taken in the Indo-US nuclear deal — like the non-testing — but which it failed to uphold by rejecting Pakistan’s proposal for a bilateral non-testing agreement proposed this August.

This exceptionalism is not new as the decision for granting the NSG waiver to India in 2008 was clearly an offshoot of the increasing US reliance on building India as a strategic counterweight to China. This geostrategic interest of the US originally manifested itself in the Indo-US strategic alliance of early 2000s. Notwithstanding domestic fears in the US about the strategic bet on India being over-sold, US aided India in gaining the status of nuclear weapon state despite India’s candidature as a nuclear weapon state outside NPT. The Indo-US nuclear deal opened the floodgates of foreign supplied nuclear fuel, nuclear technology for India at virtually no consequential nonproliferation gains.

The US sold the deal on strong nonproliferation arguments that the regime would be stronger with India being a member. However, with the deal materialising, India is seen clearly as disregarding the essential norms of nonproliferation by keeping its nuclear reactors outside IAEA safeguards, continuing to produce fissile materials, refusing to accept the CTBT signatures, and continuing to pursue modernisation of nuclear armament.

Keeping the past noncommittal Indian behaviour on pursuing nuclear norms in perspective, the current drive towards NSG expansion brings forth a different debate. Prominent states who stand in the way of new membership include those that seek stringent nonproliferation norms to govern nuclear commerce. Though these states desire an inclusive nonproliferation regime that includes the states outside NPT, however, they want the evolution to be based on a uniform criteria. They argue that before fast-tracking new membership in the NSG, a thorough debate should be undertaken to evolve a new criteria.

This has also been the main stay of the debate in the 2016 plenary of the NSG in June and the consultative meeting held in Vienna on Nov 11-12. Despite India’s strategy of creating media hype about the consensus being forged on its application, the meetings this year have brought forth divergent results. The NSG participating governments have been unable to forge a consensus in their consultations in arriving to a mutually acceptable decision on criteria. Reportedly twelve members at the meeting called for a criteria-based approach including Turkey, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Italy, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, New Zealand, Belgium, Brazil and Russia apart from China. These states have ardently been opposing non-NPT states in the NSG, advocating that that bringing in these states within the regime without an evolved criteria will weaken the norms than strengthen them. China has also firmly affirmed its stance of conditional admittance of NPT outliers, i.e. first, develop universal criteria for allowing non-NPT signatories to become NSG members and then discuss country-specific applications.

It is no secret that India has left no stone unturned in convincing China to support India’s NSG application, however, China has thus far stuck to its principled position in this regard. A Press Statement of the Chinese Foreign Ministry on the latest consultative meeting of the group stated that it is the first time ‘since the NSG's inception in 1975, for the group to formally take up the issue of non-NPT states' participation in an open and transparent manner.’ This is surely a good precedent for the evolution of the group in particular and the nonproliferation regime in general. Chinese statement also strongly emphasised on application of a nondiscriminatory and uniform formula ‘applicable to all non-NPT states; without prejudice to the core value of the NSG and the effectiveness, authority and integrity of the international non-proliferation regime with the NPT as its cornerstone; and without contradicting the customary international law in the field of non-proliferation.’

The most prominent take-away from the current meeting is that, unlike popular perception, it is not just China that stands in the way of India’s membership, but a general desire among the participating governments of NSG to ensure that unlike the past NSG waiver to India, new entrants should play their role in norm-building and norm upholding of the nonproliferation regime. This is also necessary at a time when states like Japan with known nonproliferation stance are now giving in on nonproliferation commitments based on commercial considerations.

Needless to say, that an equitable and criteria-based approach for membership extension is the only way to make outliers answerable to the nonproliferation norms without prejudice to the commercial considerations and subjective notions of ‘like-mindedness’.

The writer is a former Nuclear Nonproliferation Fellow Monterey California, USA and Fellow Nuclear Nonproliferation Education and Research Centre (NEREC), South Korea.