– By Sneha Cathy Sebastian
Introduction:
The International Atomic Energy Agency was established with the longstanding vision to deter nuclear warfare and reigning in on their development across the world. IAEA’s ultimate aim is to ensure safe development of nuclear technology across nations. Established in 1957, it was a response to the fears and expectations that arose from the discovery of nuclear technology and its varied uses.
Having the same vision for peaceful development of nuclear technology, India was one of the founding members of the IAEA. India’s membership in the organisation was ratified on July 16, 1957. India’s vision is clearly seen through a statement passed by Dr Homi Jehangir Bhabha, architect of the Indian nuclear programme. He said, “when nuclear energy has been successfully applied for power production in say, a couple of decades from now, India will not have to look abroad for its experts but will find them ready at hand”. For the past three decades, India has relied on its own efforts to design and execute projects for the peaceful utilisation of atomic energy. Today, India is one among the very few countries in the world to have a complete fuel cycle.
Over the years, India has worked closely with other member states of the organization to ensure the ratification of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and secure development of nuclear technology.
Some of the major developments through the years include India adding six nuclear reactors under nuclear safeguards agreement between 1971 and 1994. Further, another development was IAEA approving the India-Safeguard Agreement in 2008 which acts as an umbrella agreement and facilitates India to add nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards. This agreement also stated that 14 new reactors would be added under safeguards by 2014.
In 2014, India granted IAEA complete watchdog access to the reactors due to it being a necessary step under the Indo-US nuclear deal. Presently, India has 22 operational reactors and 14 are under IAEA safeguards. India mainly imports uranium needed for these reactors from Russia, Kazakhstan, and Canada.
As of today, India has become the 35th country to join the IAEA Response and Assistance Network (RANET). This is a group of states that help mitigate the consequences of nuclear and radiological emergencies. Through this, states can register their emergency preparedness and response capabilities. This helps IAEA’s Incident and Emergency Centre to immediately mobilize assistance during an emergency.
After the G20 summit in Rome last year, India stated that enhancing your nuclear power capacity depended on reducing dependence on thermal power. For this to be possible, there needs to be access to new technology and supply of nuclear material. Therefore, India needs to join the Nuclear Supplier’s Group (NSG). However, India has been denied entry due to China’s opposition due to the fact that New Delhi hasn’t signed the NPT.
Since time immemorial, India has only aimed to use nuclear power for peaceful developmental purposes. India has proven this by actively advocating the importance of developing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes while also granting IAEA watchdog access to local nuclear reactors.
Analyses:
The world has 440 nuclear reactors; however, all of these are not under IAEA safeguards. WHY?
Why do countries keep developing nuclear weapons if they’ve signed the NPT? If countries are truly using their reactors to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, why haven’t they added the reactors to the watchdog’s list? Why does India continue spending money on developing nuclear arms if it’s not going to use them?
Many people have different explanations for these questions, but my chain of thought is as follows.
Many people believe its unwise and inefficient for countries to develop their nuclear arsenal if they’ve promised to not use it. I used to have similar beliefs initially. However, I’ve realised that nuclear weapons along with capable diplomacy acts as a deterrent against adversaries. Over the years, the “fear” surrounding the effects of using nuclear weapons has led to countries opting for a diplomatic solution rather than going to war. The potential threat of global destruction acts as a major reason for anti-nuclear weapon activism. Therefore, in a way, nuclear weapons are built to deter war.
Listing a nuclear reactor under IAEA safeguards grants the watchdog organization complete authority to monitor your activities. However, some countries think this is an infringement of their sovereignty. Failing an IAEA inspection makes a country vulnerable to sanctions being placed on them by other peaceful nations. By not listing some reactors, it makes the country less vulnerable to the above stated scenario.
India builds nuclear weapons for the same reasons as other countries: to deter war. Although India claims to develop nuclear technology for peaceful developmental purposes, there has been abundant secrecy surrounding the amount of money spent on nuclear defence systems. According to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, India spent $2.48 billion on nuclear weapons in 2020 (but these numbers cannot be trusted). At times, civilian and military nuclear facilities intertwine, hence, it becomes difficult to accurately assess the military nuclear facilities’ expenditures. Over the years, India has continuously increased its defence expenditure while ignoring other pressing issues. Over the past 2 years, during the Covid-19 pandemic, our defence budget and health infrastructure budget is highly disproportionate. Our defence budget places us among the top five military spenders while our healthcare budget places us among the lowest spenders worldwide. Any countries race to develop their defence capabilities while ignoring pressing national issues can lead to civilian unhappiness in the future. In other words, countries should mandatorily reveal accurate figures of nuclear expenditures.
Ergo, the development of nuclear weapons seems crucial to deter war. Theoretically, the obscurity surrounding its development must be eradicated and transparency must be achieved. This is easier said than done because countries don’t trust each other and believe secrecy of one’s defence capability is an integral part of deterring foreign aggressors and ensuring national security. This can be explained by the belief that, if you’re unsure of your opponent’s strengths, you think-twice before making a move.
Conclusion:
After gaining an insight on these issues, one might think countries should stop developing their nuclear weapons. A utopian ideal of a “nuclear free world” arises. But is it really possible? Anti-nuclear activism has been on the rise for the past few decades given the widespread challenges of unemployment, financial instability, poverty etc. around the world. Though ‘ideally’ governments should decrease defence expenditure and focus on these issues, most governments don’t do so. If they did, the question of their national security would be challenged. As we’ve established the fact that governments are not willing to shrink their defence budgets, the only other feasible solution lies in introducing stricter controls and supervision over nuclear reactors around the world. These measures have already been taken and proven to be effective to a certain extent. The current ‘arms control and diplomacy’ measures are essential strategies to deter war. Nevertheless, better methods can be developed and added to these strategies to increase their effectiveness.
On a personal note, I believe, new methods of war-deterrence (that doesn’t include the use of nuclear weapons) must be introduced. Possibly, policies and laws that make war and national aggression futile and extremely expensive. Some suggestions are, reducing the sales of uranium and plutonium or increasing their costs to countries that don’t play by the rules. Another measure can be widespread awareness campaigns among the citizens of the country. One last recommendation would be for countries to develop anti-nuclear technology. This technology can disarm the nuclear payload of the missiles. Few countries have already developed this technology. One example is the Directed-EMP (electromagnetic pulse). It’s a pulse which when it hits the incoming missiles deactivates all the electronic circuitry in the missile which stops the activation of the nuclear payload. Increasing investment in such technology will make governments realise that building more offensive nuclear arsenal will not give them a huge advantage as it can be neutralised. This awareness will induce them to spend more money on the harmless use cases of nuclear energy like clean energy production.
These ‘new’ methods are quite difficult to develop. Nonetheless, I hope to see them come into existence sometime in the near future.
References :
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull21-5/21505090211.pdf
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/iaea-board-approves-india-safeguards-agreement
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2009-03/iaea-approves-india-additional-protocol
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005-05/features/npt-withdrawal-time-security-council-step
https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/nuclear-weapons-free-world-it-achievable
onducted a total of five underground nuclear tests, breaking a 24-year self-imposed moratorium on nuclear testing. Pakistan followed, claiming 5 tests on May 28, 1998, and an additional test on May 30. The unannounced tests created a global storm of criticism, as well as a serious setback for decades of U.S. nuclear nonproliferation efforts in South Asia. On May 13, 1998, President Clinton imposed economic and military sanctions on India, mandated by Section 102 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), and applied the same sanctions to Pakistan on May 30. Some effects of the sanctions on India included: termination of $21 million in FY1998 economic development assistance; postponement of $1.7 billion in lending by the International Financial Institutions (IFI), as supported by the Group of Eight (G-8) leading industrial nations; prohibition on loans or credit from U.S. banks to the government of India; and termination of Foreign Military Sales under the Arms Export Control Act. Humanitarian assistance, food, or other agricultural commodities are excepted from sanctions under the law. 
The first ministerial level meeting of QUAD was held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Before this, the QUAD had
AusIndEx is an exercise between India and Australia which was first held in 2015.The Australian 
On recommendations of the Japanese government, the four countries met at Manila, Philippines for ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) originally, but also ended up having a meeting of what we call the first meeting of four nation states on issues of 
On his official visit to India, Japanese PM Mr. Shinzo Abe reinforced the ties of two nations, i.e., Japan and India with his famous speech about 
In 2007, Japanese President Shinzo Abe resigned from his post citing health reasons. This had a significant impact on QUAD as he was the architect & advocate of QUAD. His successor, Yasuo Fukuda, did not take up QUAD with such zeal leading to dormancy of the forum. (
Japan earthquake and tsunami of 2011, also called Great Sendai Earthquake or Great Tōhoku Earthquake, was a 9.0 magnitude earthquake which struck below the floor of the Western Pacific at 2:49 PM. The powerful earthquake affected the northeastern coast of Honshu, Japan’s main island, and also initiated a series of large tsunami waves that devastated coastal areas of Japan, which also led to a major nuclear accident. Japan received aid from India, US, Australia as well as other countries. US Navy aircraft carrier was dispatched to the area and Australia sent search-and-rescue teams. 
India and Australia signed the 
The India-Japan Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy was signed on 11 November, 2016 and came into force on 20 July, 2017 which was representative of strengthening ties between India and Japan. Diplomatic notes were exchanged between Dr. S. Jaishankar and H.E. Mr. Kenji Hiramatsu, Ambassador of Japan to India. (
The foreign ministry
The Officials of QUAD member countries met in Singapore on November 15, 2018 for consultation on regional & global issues of common interest. The main discussion revolved around connectivity, sustainable development, counter-terrorism, maritime and cyber security, with the view to promote peace, stability and prosperity in the 
The 23rd edition of trilateral Malabar maritime exercise between India, US and Japan took place on 26 September- 04 October, 2019 off the coast of Japan. 
After the first ministerial level meeting of QUAD in September, 2019, the senior officials of US, Japan, India and Australia again met for consultations in Bangkok on the margins of the East Asia Summit. Statements were issued separately by the four countries. Indian Ministry of External Affairs said “In statements issued separately by the four countries, MEA said, “proceeding from the strategic guidance of their Ministers, who met in New York City on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly recently, the officials exchanged views on ongoing and additional practical cooperation in the areas of connectivity and infrastructure development, and security matters, including counterterrorism, cyber and maritime security, with a view to promoting peace, security, stability, prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region.”
US 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue was held on 18 December, 2019, in Washington DC. Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mark T. Esper will host Indian Minister of External Affairs Dr. S. Jaishankar and Minister of Defense Shri Rajnath Singh. The discussion focussed on deepening bilateral strategic and defense cooperation, exchanging perspectives on global developments, and our shared leadership in the Indo-Pacific region.The two democracies signed the Industrial Security Annex before the 2+2 Dialogue. Assessments of the situation in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and the Indian Ocean region in general were shared between both countries. (
The foreign ministers of QUAD continued their discussions from the last ministerial level meeting in 2019, on 6 October, 2020. While there was no joint statement released, all countries issued individual readouts. As per the issue readout by India, the discussion called for a coordinated response to the challenges including financial problems emanating from the pandemic, best practices to combat Covid-19, increasing the resilience of supply chains, and enhancing access to affordable vaccines, medicines and medical equipment. There was also a focus on maintaining stability in the Indo-Pacific region amidst growing tensions. Australian media release mentions “We emphasised that, especially during a pandemic, it was vital that states work to ease tensions and avoid exacerbating long-standing disputes, work to counter disinformation, and refrain from malicious cyberspace activity. Ministers reiterated that states cannot assert maritime claims that are inconsistent with international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).”
On September 24, President Biden hosted Prime Minister Scott Morrison of Australia, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, and Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga of Japan at the White House for the first-ever in-person Leaders’ Summit of the QUAD. The leaders released a Joint Statement which summarised their dialogue and future course of action. The regional security of the Indo-Pacific and strong confidence in the ASEAN remained on the focus along with response to the Pandemic. 
The QUAD Vaccine Partnership was announced at the first QUAD Summit on 12 March 2021 where QUAD countries agreed to deliver 1.2 billion vaccine doses globally. The aim was to expand and finance vaccine manufacturing and equipping the Indo-Pacific to build resilience against Covid-19. The launch of a senior-level QUAD Vaccine Experts Group, comprised of top scientists and officials from all QUAD member governments was also spearheaded. 
Although the Tsunami Core group had to be disbanded on fulfilment of its purpose, however the quadrilateral template that formed remained intact as a successful scaffolding of four countries, as stated by authors Patrick Gerard Buchan and Benjamin Rimland in their diplomatic brief about QUAD ( you can access the brief at 
Secretary of State Colin Powell stated that the Core Tsunami Group was to be disbanded and folded and clubbed with the broader United Nations led Relief Operations. In a Tsunami Relief Conference in Jakarta, Secretary Powell stated that 
Soon after the Earthquake and Tsunami crisis, humanitarian reliefs by countries, viz., US, India, Japan, and Australia started to help the 13 havoc-stricken countries. The US initially promised $ 35 Millions in aid. However, on 29
At 7:59AM local time, an earthquake of 9.1 magnitude (undersea) hit the coast of Sumatra, an Indonesian island. As a result of the same, massive waves of Tsunami triggered by the earthquake wreaked havoc for 7 hours across the Indian Ocean and to the coastal areas as far away as East Africa. The infamous Tsunami killed around 225,000 people, with people reporting the height of waves to be as high as 9 metres, i.e., 30 feet. Indonesia, Srilanka, India, Maldives, Thailand sustained horrendously massive damage, with the death toll exceeding 200,000 in Northern Sumatra’s Ache province alone. A great many people, i.e., around tens of thousands were found dead or missing in Srilanka and India, mostly from Andaman and Nicobar Islands of Indian territory. Maldives, being a low-lying country, also reported casualties in hundreds and more, with several non-Asian tourists reported dead or missing who were vacationing. Lack of food, water, medicines burgeoned the numbers of casualties, with the relief workers finding it difficult to reach the remotest areas where roads were destroyed or civil war raged. Long-term environmental damage ensued too, as both natural and man-made resources got demolished and diminished.
No responses yet