The 48 member states of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), an international coalition that aims to prevent nuclear proliferation by controlling nuclear-related exports, gathered at the annual plenary session in Seoul on June 23 and 24, where the topic of India’s candidacy for NSG membership was deliberated.
Although the NSG failed to develop consensus approving Indian membership this time around, India should not give up on its goal of joining the grouping. Becoming a member of the NSG is important to New Delhi for firmly establishing its nuclear nonproliferation credentials as well as for giving it a role in establishing the rules governing nuclear trade.
China was the most outspoken against India’s joining the group and tried—unsuccessfully—to quash any discussion of the matter at the NSG plenary. China’s main argument against granting membership to India was that doing so without New Delhi having signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) would undermine global nonproliferation efforts. This is a somewhat spurious argument by China since it already approved in 2008 a waiver for India to receive nuclear fuel and technology for civilian purposes.
China also linked India’s membership to Pakistan joining the group, a non-starter for most NSG members, given Pakistan’s past poor record on nonproliferation.
China nonetheless sought to downplay its opposition to India, with the foreign ministry noting that despite the conflict of interests at the NSG, the “China-India relationship is in a generally good state. Common interests between the two countries far outweigh their differences. The Chinese side will work with the Indian side to steer the bilateral relations, and deepen cooperation in different fields.”
Austria, New Zealand, Turkey, Ireland, and Brazil also opposed granting India NSG membership at this time. Brazilian officials reportedly favor basing decisions about new entrants to the NSG on non-discriminatory criteria. Unanimity among the 48 member states is required for decisions to pass under NSG consensus voting rules.
Indian leaders might have been particularly hopeful about their 2016 NSG chances after India’s acceptance into the Missile Technology Control Regime just days before. The opposition Congress Party has criticized the Modi government for submitting the NSG application and engaging in “desperate” diplomacy that failed to attain the goal. Other commentators, however, acknowledge that it was a worthwhile diplomatic gambit that got the ball rolling on the issue and will pay off in the long-run.
India did not receive an affirmative answer on its NSG membership application because discussion of its candidacy was on the condition that no decision be made during this meeting. Still, India has arguably made progress toward its goal of attaining membership. Votes of support for India’s application far outnumbered objections. Outreach by India and the U.S. has convinced more than 40 nations to back India’s candidacy, leaving only a handful left to persuade.
The United States should continue to voice its support for India’s membership in the NSG and continue to encourage other countries to do the same. Switzerland, which has sent mixed signals on India’s candidacy, will host the next plenary session in 2017. When 47 of the NSG members have voted for Indian membership, the remaining one will likely feel pressured to bend the same way.
