Australia to sell uranium to India

[MidGe]

Australia is poised to sell Uranium to India although India has not signed the non-proliferation treaty. How is that possible? How much is due to US pressure? Australian government has always said they would not sell uranium to non-signatories of the non-proliferation treaty.

I remember India president being received in a more formal and elaborate way than any head of state for a long time by the US president. What next? Australia selling uranium to Pakistan, that great other US ally? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Australia is poised to sell Uranium to India although India has not signed the non-proliferation treaty. How is that possible? How much is due to US pressure?

[/ QUOTE ]

I imagine that'd be a pretty marginal consideration - although it
probably provides diplomatic support.

[ QUOTE ]
Australian government has always said they would not sell uranium to non-signatories of the non-proliferation treaty.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's simply a matter of australian government policy changing.

[ QUOTE ]
I remember India president being received in a more formal and elaborate way than any head of state for a long time by the US president. What next? Australia selling uranium to Pakistan, that great other US ally? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That would seem remarkably unlikely - India is a fairly stable democracy, while Pakistan is a dictatorship with far less reliability, I imagine.

[antisocialgrace]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Australia is poised to sell Uranium to India although India has not signed the non-proliferation treaty. How is that possible? How much is due to US pressure?

[/ QUOTE ]

I imagine that'd be a pretty marginal consideration - although it
probably provides diplomatic support.

[ QUOTE ]
Australian government has always said they would not sell uranium to non-signatories of the non-proliferation treaty.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's simply a matter of australian government policy changing.

[ QUOTE ]
I remember India president being received in a more formal and elaborate way than any head of state for a long time by the US president. What next? Australia selling uranium to Pakistan, that great other US ally? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That would seem remarkably unlikely - India is a fairly stable democracy, while Pakistan is a dictatorship with far less reliability, I imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course what you really mean is that Pakistan is Muslim while India is not.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course what you really mean is that Pakistan is Muslim while India is not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see that your ability to make entirely unhelpful, baseless and offensive accusations transfers from the internet gambling forum to the politics forum.

You have accused me of discriminating on the basis of religion. That is incredibly offensive, and entirely inaccurate. You continue to behave like a lying liar who lies - I never meant that "Pakistan is Muslim while India is not," and that sentence is simply untrue.



The Australian Governmet's policy has nothing to do with the religion of the relevant nations, and has entirely to do with promoting the national interest. It is entirely reasonable for a country to negotiate uranium sales with one country (with appropriate safeguards) while not negotiating uranium sales with another country.

[antisocialgrace]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course what you really mean is that Pakistan is Muslim while India is not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see that your ability to make entirely unhelpful, baseless and offensive accusations transfers from the internet gambling forum to the politics forum.

You have accused me of discriminating on the basis of religion. That is incredibly offensive, and entirely inaccurate. You continue to behave like a lying liar who lies - I never meant that "Pakistan is Muslim while India is not," and that sentence is simply untrue.



The Australian Governmet's policy has nothing to do with the religion of the relevant nations, and has entirely to do with promoting the national interest. It is entirely reasonable for a country to negotiate uranium sales with one country (with appropriate safeguards) while not negotiating uranium sales with another country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify this is your way of saying Pakistan is Muslim and India is not.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Australia is poised to sell Uranium to India although India has not signed the non-proliferation treaty. How is that possible? How much is due to US pressure?

[/ QUOTE ]

I imagine that'd be a pretty marginal consideration - although it
probably provides diplomatic support.

[ QUOTE ]
Australian government has always said they would not sell uranium to non-signatories of the non-proliferation treaty.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's simply a matter of australian government policy changing.

[ QUOTE ]
I remember India president being received in a more formal and elaborate way than any head of state for a long time by the US president. What next? Australia selling uranium to Pakistan, that great other US ally? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That would seem remarkably unlikely - India is a fairly stable democracy, while Pakistan is a dictatorship with far less reliability, I imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course what you really mean is that Pakistan is Muslim while India is not.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would actually be a reasonable concern to hold.

[MidGe]

Yes it is a matter of current government policy changing. The problem is that, of course, they got elected on a different policy.

Secondly, I don't see much difference between India and Pakistan as you do. Still the primary issue is that if a country refuses to sign the non-proliferation treaty it must be because they intend to proliferate. Why else? The public at large in Australia does not support sale of uranium under these conditions.

I am sure that our foreign policy, especially towards Pakistan and India has been somewhat shaped by pressure from Washington, in the same wqay that our policy in Iraq.

I am just curious about what actual pressure can be applied by the US towards Australia, and what other promises may have been made by the US towards Pakistan and India specifically with respect the nuclear energy, arms and supply of raw materials for it. Methinks it is an actual weakness of the US itself which has brought this about.

[bobman0330]

Midge,

Why do you think Australia should refuse to sell uranium to India? What purpose would it serve?

[MidGe]

Because it has been standing policy for this country not to sell uranium to non-signatories countries and because the majority of Australians think so too.


Not selling to unless being a signatory puts pressure on countries in need of uranium to sign the agreement.

[bobman0330]

Fair enough, but do you really think there's any chance that India will sign the NPT (which would require giving up their weapons)? And if there isn't such a chance, what are you really accomplishing, besides making it harder for a poor country to meet its energy requirements (and do so carbon-free, no less)?