China blocks India’s NSG entry, but it's critical that we maintain diplomatic aggression

News has just come in from Seoul that the plenary session of the elite Nuclear Suppliers Group ended on expected lines without any decision on India’s entry. The meeting did not come to consensus on opening up the NSG membership to  the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) countries. In that sense it is a setback to the aggressive diplomatic bid mounted by India, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But, foreign policy experts say that this is forward movement in that India has won over many countries that were ranged against it, limiting the opposition to China (because of its Pakistan axis) and a few other countries. [caption id=“attachment_2852816” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Former foreign secretary Shyam Saran. Reuters[/caption] Firstpost spoke to Shyam Saran, senior diplomat and former foreign secretary, who has also served as the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy for India-US civil nuclear issues and lateras Special Envoy and Chief Negotiator on Climate Change. Firstpost asked him whether he feels that NSG bid appears to have emerged as the single-most critical foreign policy priority for the Modi government and what can it change for India. He replied to this and to some other questions related to India’s probable entry into the elite club through email. On importance given to NSG membership “I do not think that NSG membership has “emerged as the single most critical foreign policy priority for the Modi government”. A major power like India has an entire spectrum of issues where its interests are involved. NSG membership is only one of them. It has acquired prominence because India’s membership of the NSG is on the agenda at the meeting of the NSG plenary at Seoul (23-24 June, 2016). Making a concerted effort to mobilise support for India’s membership is part of normal diplomacy. It is possible that India’s bid may not succeed this time but the efforts needs to continue. On what the membership can change for India “NSG membership may not have any substantive impact because India is already able to engage in full civil cooperation with NSG member states thanks to the clear waiver it obtained in September 2008 from the group’s restrictive guidelines. Since then India has concluded a number of long-term nuclear fuel supply agreements with various supplier countries and has also engaged in negotiations for the supply of modern nuclear power plants from Russia, France and the US. What the NSG membership would do is to formalise India’s exceptional status. It would also enable India to participate in any exercise to modify or amend NSG guidelines in future. Currently, as part of the waiver, India has agreed to conform to the existing guidelines of the NSG, but would have limited influence over future amendments which could turn out to be inconvenient to it”. On China’s opposition to India’s bid “It is true that China has opposed India’s membership of the NSG and is in a position to block this since the NSG functions on the basis of consensus. China had also opposed the decision to give a waiver to India in 2008, but it had not taken a public stand. It preferred to work through countries like Ireland, Austria, New Zealand and a few others, who have an almost evangelical position on the NPT. In the end, when China saw that even these countries were dropping their opposition to the waiver decision, it joined the consensus. It did not want to be the last man standing. In the present case, China has taken a very public stand in opposing India’s membership of the NSG and it appears that it is prepared to be the only country to do so, if such a situation were to arise”. “China appears to be taking this stand on behalf of Pakistan which has also applied to become a member of the NSG. It is for Pakistan to convince the members of the NSG that it deserves membership. It is not reasonable to link its bid with that of India. China is free to lobby for its client state’s membership but why block India’s application which enjoys overwhelming support? “Even if, as a result of China’s opposition, India’s membership bid is unsuccessful at Seoul, it should not be regarded as the end of the road. In the following weeks and months, India should engage in quiet but active diplomacy, to mobilise greater support within the NSG, including winning over China. I do not think that China would risk a setback to India-China relations by persisting in such opposition, especially when there are several areas of strong convergence between the two countries. Opposing India at the NSG while welcoming it in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation appears to be inconsistent”.