Pakistan demands equal access to Australian uranium after sales to India

[Spitfighter]

^^ Lol of course. They were never going to get it anyway.

 

[xdrive]

Pakistan can demand all they like. They won't get it.

Maybe they could take steps to reducing their proliferation and reducing the threat of terrorists taking over their nukes.

 

[Patriot]

Pakistan can demand all they like. They won't get it.

Maybe they could take steps to reducing their proliferation and reducing the threat of terrorists taking over their nukes.

Well your uranium is not really required this step is to just expose your hypocrisy just as we exposed US Hypocrisy about nuclear deal with India and later got 2 nuclear reactor from Chinese and used that argument.In any case Pakistani Nuclear Program will continue to flourish much to the dismay of Indians and their lackeys.In fact Pakistan Benefited the most from Indo-US Nuclear deal.

 

[NirmalKrish]

Well your uranium is not really required this step is to just expose your hypocrisy just as we exposed US Hypocrisy about nuclear deal with India and later got 2 nuclear reactor from Chinese and used that argument.In any case Pakistani Nuclear Program will continue to flourish much to the dismay of Indians and their lackeys.In fact Pakistan Benefited the most from Indo-US Nuclear deal.

DUDE we are not the one who is crying it’s your foreign ambassador to Australia which is cringing. So take the bitter news with a pinch of salt and GROW up, rather than posting useless cr ap

 

[Developereo]

Well your uranium is not really required this step is to just expose your hypocrisy just as we exposed US Hypocrisy about nuclear deal with India and later got 2 nuclear reactor from Chinese and used that argument.In any case Pakistani Nuclear Program will continue to flourish much to the dismay of Indians and their lackeys.In fact Pakistan Benefited the most from Indo-US Nuclear deal.

Don't bother. This thread was intended as a gift to Indians.

 

[blain2]

What's the point in demanding something when u know that u will never get that

Never say never. Aussies aren't the only ones with surplus uranium export.

 

[blain2]

Pakistan can demand all they like. They won't get it.

Maybe they could take steps to reducing their proliferation and reducing the threat of terrorists taking over their nukes.

How do you take steps to reduce proliferation of the past? Lets start making sense instead of repeating the same useless arguments. Pakistan has more safeguards in place than Russia, India, China combined. We take our nuclear weapons security very seriously and even the cases of proliferation in the past have indicated that the source was one person and he too parted with half-useless content to the third parties.

Pakistan has come a long way and will continue to plow its way through on its enrichment program whether Australia relents or not. Secondly, the point behind such statements is to register the Pakistani point of view although the FO knows fully well the response of the suppliers and their short sightedness in dealing with this problem of nuclear proliferation.

Not saying something and still getting pressurized by the idiots pushing the now-dead NPT makes no sense from the Pakistani point of view. Every time such deal is made with India, it allows Pakistan to let off pressure on getting onboard with the discriminatory FMCT and resisting it even more. On the backend, as the geo-strategic alignment changes, China and Pakistan will have to come to some sort of bilateral understanding on selling Pakistan the requisite uranium, China being an NPT signatory notwithstanding.

 

[bad man smells]

Never say never. Aussies aren't the only ones with surplus uranium export.

sir i read somewhere that once aussies were concerned with the growing size of indian navy.....they felt threatened....have u ever heard something of this sort before?

 

[blain2]

A counterpoint.

Pakistan should have its share too
From the Newspaper | Opinion | By Claude Rakisits
Yesterday

THE governing Australian Labor Party at its biannual national conference which was held in Sydney on Sunday decided by a thin majority to support the Australian prime minister’s motion to scrap the party’s nonsensical and contradictory uranium export policy banning the sale of uranium to India.

This is a welcome development. It would appear, listening to the prime minister’s and her ministers’ comments on this issue, that the reasoning behind the change of policy was to maximise the prosperity and the strength of Australia’s relationships in the Indian Ocean region.

This is after all the ‘Asian century’, as it was repeatedly trumpeted at the latest APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) meeting held in Hawaii in November. So Australia might as well take advantage of its geo-political position.

Changing Australia’s uranium policy also makes complete sense commercially. Why let the Canadians corner the market when we have most of the world’s uranium?

It also makes a lot of sense strategically. If selling uranium to India brings India even more into the western camp, the better it is for Australia.

But, of course, as with any policy changes, there will be a reaction. In this case, having opened Pandora’s uranium box, Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd can expect a call by the Pakistani high commissioner making a case for selling Australian uranium to Pakistan as well.

And there would be a case to be made for saying yes to Pakistan’s request. There are several reasons for this. But before agreeing to sell uranium to Pakistan, the latter would need to meet a couple of stringent conditions.

But let me first deal with the reasons why Australia should consider selling uranium to Pakistan as well.

First, Pakistan, like India, is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). And, like India, it has no intention of signing up to it. But then the NPT was pretty much made irrelevant when the US decided to sign a civilian nuclear agreement with India in 2006 even though the NPT specifically prohibits its members from engaging in nuclear trade with non-NPT members.

Second, Pakistan, like India, is exceptionally energy deficient. The present chronic power shortage reduces economic growth by about two and half per cent of GDP every year. Given its fast-growing population, Pakistan cannot afford this dead weight if it is to make any headway in meeting the massive developmental needs of its 180 million people.

Pakistan has two Chinese-built nuclear plants, with another two to be built over the next few years. Providing uranium would assist Pakistan meet its energy needs. It would confirm that Australia is indeed sincere in wanting to help it with its economic development. Moreover, selling uranium (a clean energy) would assist Pakistan be less dependent on coal (a dirty energy), thus assisting Pakistan to reduce its carbon footprint.

Third, if Australia were to refuse Pakistan’s request, it would strengthen the hand of the anti-western religious extremists and militants now wreaking havoc in Pakistan. They would argue that this confirmed that the West is anti-Muslim and only interested in assisting Pakistan’s arch enemy, India. It would weaken an already fragile democracy.

Accordingly, selling uranium to Pakistan would strengthen a pro-western civilian government (which could do with a bit of propping up) and help it sell the message that it is in Pakistan’s interest to side with the West, particularly in fighting terrorists and other extremists.

One should not forget that Australia is the second biggest provider of military training in counter-insurgency to Pakistan.

But before Australia does eventually agree in principle to export uranium to Pakistan, Islamabad would need to meet two critical conditions which would demonstrate its peaceful nuclear credentials and hopefully reassure the Australian government.

First, Pakistan would need to make a formal pledge to the Vienna-based Nuclear Suppliers Group that it would not share sensitive nuclear technology or material with others and that it would uphold its voluntary moratorium on testing nuclear weapons. This is a pledge India gave in 2008 and has adhered to since then.

Second, Pakistan would need to lift its blocking tactics in the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament which prevents the implementation of the agreed programme of work on the international ban on the production of new nuclear bomb-making material.

Some would say that, given Pakistan’s track record with Dr A.Q. Khan’s network of selling nuclear programmes to the likes of Libya, Iran and North Korea, Pakistan was the biggest nuclear proliferator. And, in many ways, that’s true. But Dr Khan was put under house arrest for many years. I believe Pakistan has learnt its lesson and, accordingly, the international community needs to move on.

Nevertheless, in addition to the above conditions, before Australia would agree to export uranium to Pakistan it would want verifiable and enforceable safeguards to ensure that there is no diversion of the uranium for military use.

Needless to say, were this to happen Australia would immediately stop all uranium exports as well as all military cooperation with Pakistan.

If Islamabad did meet the above conditions and Australia did export uranium to Pakistan, the important message Australia would be re-enforcing is that Pakistan, because of its geo-strategic position, has an important role to play in the stability of the Indian Ocean region and Australia is ready to assist it meet that challenge.

Moreover, Australia must not forget that Pakistan, because of its legitimate interests in developments in Afghanistan, will be a critical player in a final resolution of the war in that country. The death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato air strike recently is a sad reminder of Islamabad’s direct and indirect involvement in events in Afghanistan.

So the fundamental question the Australian government will need to now address is the following: if Australia sells uranium to India, then — and if preconditions are met — it needs to be consistent across the board in its application of its new uranium policy. Failure to do so would simply be hypocritical.

The writer is a senior lecturer in strategic studies in the School of Humanities and Social Studies at Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
claude.rakisits@deakin.edu.au

 

[Mytime]

Most in Pakistan would be embarassed by the timing of this request by Pakistani High Commissioner to Australia Abdul Malik Abdullah ... He should have considered that the public sentiments in Pak is against west and NATO in its peak ... Without Americas approval Aus will not be able to provide Uranium to Pakistan ... the timing of this request is a goof up to say the least

 

[NirmalKrish]

A counterpoint.

Pakistan should have its share too
From the Newspaper | Opinion | By Claude Rakisits
Yesterday

THE governing Australian Labor Party at its biannual national conference which was held in Sydney on Sunday decided by a thin majority to support the Australian prime minister’s motion to scrap the party’s nonsensical and contradictory uranium export policy banning the sale of uranium to India.

This is a welcome development. It would appear, listening to the prime minister’s and her ministers’ comments on this issue, that the reasoning behind the change of policy was to maximise the prosperity and the strength of Australia’s relationships in the Indian Ocean region.

This is after all the ‘Asian century’, as it was repeatedly trumpeted at the latest APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) meeting held in Hawaii in November. So Australia might as well take advantage of its geo-political position.

Changing Australia’s uranium policy also makes complete sense commercially. Why let the Canadians corner the market when we have most of the world’s uranium?

It also makes a lot of sense strategically. If selling uranium to India brings India even more into the western camp, the better it is for Australia.

But, of course, as with any policy changes, there will be a reaction. In this case, having opened Pandora’s uranium box, Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd can expect a call by the Pakistani high commissioner making a case for selling Australian uranium to Pakistan as well.

And there would be a case to be made for saying yes to Pakistan’s request. There are several reasons for this. But before agreeing to sell uranium to Pakistan, the latter would need to meet a couple of stringent conditions.

But let me first deal with the reasons why Australia should consider selling uranium to Pakistan as well.

First, Pakistan, like India, is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). And, like India, it has no intention of signing up to it. But then the NPT was pretty much made irrelevant when the US decided to sign a civilian nuclear agreement with India in 2006 even though the NPT specifically prohibits its members from engaging in nuclear trade with non-NPT members.

Second, Pakistan, like India, is exceptionally energy deficient. The present chronic power shortage reduces economic growth by about two and half per cent of GDP every year. Given its fast-growing population, Pakistan cannot afford this dead weight if it is to make any headway in meeting the massive developmental needs of its 180 million people.

Pakistan has two Chinese-built nuclear plants, with another two to be built over the next few years. Providing uranium would assist Pakistan meet its energy needs. It would confirm that Australia is indeed sincere in wanting to help it with its economic development. Moreover, selling uranium (a clean energy) would assist Pakistan be less dependent on coal (a dirty energy), thus assisting Pakistan to reduce its carbon footprint.

Third, if Australia were to refuse Pakistan’s request, it would strengthen the hand of the anti-western religious extremists and militants now wreaking havoc in Pakistan. They would argue that this confirmed that the West is anti-Muslim and only interested in assisting Pakistan’s arch enemy, India. It would weaken an already fragile democracy.

Accordingly, selling uranium to Pakistan would strengthen a pro-western civilian government (which could do with a bit of propping up) and help it sell the message that it is in Pakistan’s interest to side with the West, particularly in fighting terrorists and other extremists.

One should not forget that Australia is the second biggest provider of military training in counter-insurgency to Pakistan.

But before Australia does eventually agree in principle to export uranium to Pakistan, Islamabad would need to meet two critical conditions which would demonstrate its peaceful nuclear credentials and hopefully reassure the Australian government.

First, Pakistan would need to make a formal pledge to the Vienna-based Nuclear Suppliers Group that it would not share sensitive nuclear technology or material with others and that it would uphold its voluntary moratorium on testing nuclear weapons. This is a pledge India gave in 2008 and has adhered to since then.

Second, Pakistan would need to lift its blocking tactics in the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament which prevents the implementation of the agreed programme of work on the international ban on the production of new nuclear bomb-making material.

Some would say that, given Pakistan’s track record with Dr A.Q. Khan’s network of selling nuclear programmes to the likes of Libya, Iran and North Korea, Pakistan was the biggest nuclear proliferator. And, in many ways, that’s true. But Dr Khan was put under house arrest for many years. I believe Pakistan has learnt its lesson and, accordingly, the international community needs to move on.

Nevertheless, in addition to the above conditions, before Australia would agree to export uranium to Pakistan it would want verifiable and enforceable safeguards to ensure that there is no diversion of the uranium for military use.

Needless to say, were this to happen Australia would immediately stop all uranium exports as well as all military cooperation with Pakistan.

If Islamabad did meet the above conditions and Australia did export uranium to Pakistan, the important message Australia would be re-enforcing is that Pakistan, because of its geo-strategic position, has an important role to play in the stability of the Indian Ocean region and Australia is ready to assist it meet that challenge.

Moreover, Australia must not forget that Pakistan, because of its legitimate interests in developments in Afghanistan, will be a critical player in a final resolution of the war in that country. The death of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a Nato air strike recently is a sad reminder of Islamabad’s direct and indirect involvement in events in Afghanistan.

So the fundamental question the Australian government will need to now address is the following: if Australia sells uranium to India, then — and if preconditions are met — it needs to be consistent across the board in its application of its new uranium policy. Failure to do so would simply be hypocritical.

The writer is a senior lecturer in strategic studies in the School of Humanities and Social Studies at Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
claude.rakisits@deakin.edu.au

Cookies must be enabled | The Australian

NT wastes no time on uranium decision

THE Northern Territory has wasted little time in exploiting a change in Labor Party policy that clears the way for uranium exports to India.
The NT government is preparing to send a trade mission to the sub-continent in a bid to promote trade and investment in the territory.

The move pre-empts bilateral negotiations between Canberra and New Delhi, likely to begin in early 2012.

The ALP national conference at the weekend lifted a ban on uranium sales to India, despite it not being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Trade Minister Craig Emerson says adequate safeguards will be put in place before uranium is exported to India.

As India's sometimes testy neighbour Pakistan demanded equal access to Australian uranium, Defence Minister Stephen Smith said he had no reservations about the decision to lift the ban.

..."I think this is a deeply significant decision," he said, adding it would advance Australia's interests.

India's decision to enter into a civil nuclear agreement with the US four years ago had changed the nature of the discussion about exports.

That agreement was approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
"That effectively put India under the international nuclear regulators for the first occasion," Mr Smith said.

India gave a series of undertakings including a moratorium on future nuclear testing, signing up to the agency's additional protocol and splitting its civilian nuclear technology from the military program.

Pakistan's high commissioner to Australia, Abdul Malik Abdullah, said if Australia was going to change its export policy it should be equitable and non-discriminatory.

Both Pakistan and India are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, previously a Labor requirement for uranium sales.

Australia has the largest known reserves of uranium in the world and the decision to lift the ban on sales to India could be a boon for the NT and South Australia.

The Territory is home to the Ranger mine, which produces about eight per cent of the world's mined uranium, about 260km east of Darwin.

Another large uranium resource, known as the Jabiluka deposit, is located 22km from Ranger but is not being mined due to opposition from the local Aboriginal people.

In SA, there are three mines and more than $1 in every $5 spent on exploration in the state is focused on uranium deposits.

But uranium mining won't proceed in Queensland, despite its premier supporting a lifting of the export ban.

"I went to the last election with a commitment - that I intend to keep - that we would not be opening up uranium mining in Queensland," Anna Bligh said.



Who has the final say the lecturer or defence minister? I will leave it with you to ponder, I am Australian citizen I endorse the compressive ban on uranium sales to Pakistan period, and proud of my government.