AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
When the nations establish a set of guidelines governing trade, and specifically exclude nations meeting a particular criteria, and have no provision for exemptions for those excluded nations, then granting an exemption without any adjustment to the established guidelines is a violation of those guidelines, which in turn renders the entire initiative (of setting guidelines) irrelevant. Therefore the nations that entered into that agreement to follow certain guidelines can eitherDeciding not to trade with one country and trade with another does not require anyone to publish a set of metrics based on which they took that decision.
a. Not protest when those guidelines are violated by other members, since everyone violated them already.
b. Establish set criteria formalizing a system of exemptions based on the template of the original exemption, in order for the original exemption to not be a violation of guidelines.
On a bilateral level nations can restrict or pursue trade with whomever they wish based on their interests, nations then have the option to trade with others that might wish to do so. That argument however is not a good one to make at a multilateral level in case of an entity governing global trade in a particular product, since there are no 'alternate avenues' available to nations to trade in (except for resorting to black markets). A lack of uniform standards and equal rules for all States then creates an atmosphere under which States do in fact start ignoring other established standards and agreements.
The NSG guidelines do not state 'no trade with NPT non-signatories except by exemption'. They do not establish a process or metrics for such an exemption, nor was such introduced to provide cover for the Indian exemption. It was an arbitrary decision ramrodded through the NSG by the US, Russia and France in order to make billions off Indian nuclear business, in violation of the NSG guidelines.There is an exception process requiring consensus they followed for India and every one agreed. Now if some nations in the same consensus process dont think Pakistan deserves that exceeption, you cant force them to justify their stand thru publishing a set of metrics..
Therefore either the NPT non-signatory condition no longer applies, or the NSG has to introduce criteria governing exemptions to validate its first exemption - so yes, for a body that controls global nuclear commerce, nations interested in that commerce have a legitimate position to demand clarification and transparency on the NSG's exemption process, and that includes establishing uniform metrics governing exemptions such as the one granted to India.
Since there are no established metrics and criteria for exemptions, and the NSG charter and guidelines continue to prevent nuclear commerce with NPT non-signatories, Pakistan is indeed prevented from asking for an exemption.Now if Pakistan doesnt get an opportunity to ask for that exception, then yes, you can call it discriminatory.. But not getting that exception because some of the members dont think Pakistan deserves it, is not. Thats discretionary.
Can you point me to the part of the NSG guidelines that outline the process a nation like Pakistan is to follow to obtain an exemption?