The Hindu : India and proliferation security

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Oct 06, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

India and proliferation security

By Raja Mohan

NEW DELHI Oct. 5. India will soon have to make up its mind on whether to join the new and far-reaching plans of a United States-led coalition to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction through muscular military action.

In what is being called the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), eleven nations led by the U.S. have issued last month a set of agreed principles for interdiction — on the basis of reasonable suspicion — of air, sea and land cargo linked to weapons of mass destruction.

India is believed to be examining the legal implications of the PSI and making an assessment of it in the larger context of its non-proliferation policy and its long-standing commitment to preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

At the United Nations General Assembly last month, the U.S. President, George W. Bush, explained: "Through our Proliferation Security Initiative, 11 nations are preparing to search planes and ships, trains and trucks carrying suspect cargo, and to seize weapons or missile shipments that raise proliferation concerns."

Pointing to the need for "the broadest possible cooperation" to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction, President Bush said that "we're working to expand Proliferation Security Initiative to other countries". This is where India comes in. The Western nations are making diplomatic approaches to India to seek its cooperation.

The PSI unveiled by President Bush in May 2003 has moved rapidly with meetings almost every month. The 11 nations participating in the PSI are the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Australia, Poland, Italy, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands.

The PSI is being proclaimed as a "broad partnership" of countries which, "using their own laws and resources", will "coordinate their actions" to halt shipments of dangerous technologies to and from states and non-state actors of proliferation concern.

At the operational level, this means that states enforcing the PSI will take military action to stop the movement of ships, trucks or aircraft to check the suspected cargo. The 11-nation grouping has already launched military exercises to practice a variety of scenarios for interdiction.

Although it has not been presented as specifically directed at North Korea, there is a widespread assessment that the PSI has been borne out of the proliferation experience of the North Korean nuclear and missile programmes.

India itself has been a victim of North Korean proliferation and its links with the nuclear programme of Pakistan. The North Korean transfer of medium range missiles to Pakistan has brought many Indian cities within the reach of Islamabad's atomic arsenal.

In 1999 India had seized a shipment of North Korean missile components en route to Pakistan. But the ship was not interdicted but seized when it had docked at an Indian port on the West coast.

The PSI is now proclaiming the right to interdict ships not merely in coastal waters but also on international waters, which traditionally guaranteed freedom of high seas. There are some critics of the PSI who say there may not be enough legal basis for it under the present international law. Some are terming it as a "vigilante approach" to non-proliferation.

There are indications that the U.S., which is now claiming there is legal basis, will move the U.N. Security Council for a new resolution authorising additional powers for enforcing non-proliferation.

In his address to the U.N. at the end of September, President Bush asked the UNSC "to adopt a new anti-proliferation resolution" that "should call on all members of the U.N. to criminalise the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to enact strict export controls consistent with international standards, and to secure any and all sensitive materials within their own borders."

In Europe, the PSI is being hailed as a return to multilateralism by the U.S. after the trans-Atlantic quarrel over Iraq. Although China and Russia are not part of the PSI today, they are unlikely to stay out of it for too long.

In defining its response to the PSI, India would indeed note that the body of international legal obligations for states on non-proliferation is expanding dramatically. It will have to make an important choice between staying out of the new legal regimes and joining them.

India has always pointed to its own credible record on non-proliferation and has taken a recent initiative to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. New Delhi also insists that it must be treated as part of the solution, rather than part of the global non-proliferation problem.

New Delhi would need many clarifications before making up its mind. In particular, India would want to know who exactly the 11 nations have in their mind when they talk of "states of proliferation concern".

India has been painfully aware of the reluctance of the international system in the past to confront the proliferation of WMD to and from Pakistan. India will have serious questions to ask about the credibility of the PSI, its international legality and the nature of its implementation before coming to a final conclusion.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

Chasing the monsoon

A warning on global economy

Need to engage Pakistan

We influential people

India and proliferation security