Home / Chair's Blog / Canada rewards its nuclear thief

Canada rewards its nuclear thief

Canada’s largest Uranium producer, Cameco Corp, shall provide 3,220 metric tonnes of uranium concentrate for Indian nuclear power reactors over five years, beginning this year. Deal is worth $ 350 million;  it comes at the end of two years of negotiations that followed the 2013 civil nuclear deal between the two countries.

Canada is one of the world’s largest producers of uranium, it  supplied the first Indian reactor CIRUS in 1954. India payed back by using Canadian technology and stealing fissile material out of this reactor to carry out a nuclear test in 1974. To prevent recurrence of such thefts,  Nuclear Suppliers Group was formed soon after Indian test. Canada had banned all exports of nuclear materials to India in 1974.

India has 21 operational nuclear reactors and six under construction, which use uranium as fuel. The nuclear component of India’s energy production is  6,000 MW.  India plans to have 45,000 MW of nuclear electricity by 2032.

At a press conference, Prime Minister Narendra Modi described uranium as “not just a mineral but an article of faith” (for India).

India does not release data on local uranium production, but it is estimated to be around 350-400 MT. Total Indian reserves are estimated at 181,600 MT, mainly in Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand and Meghalaya. Selling of Canadian uranium to India is  raising fears.  New nuclear deal  will have reverberations around the world and is likely to raise concerns with those tracking nuclear proliferation. Canada’s  Green Party has expressed serious concern over the deal with India.

Canadian Green Party’s Indigenous Affairs Critic Lorraine Rekmans said: “Selling uranium to India could cause us to violate the NPT if India uses it to manufacture weapons, and make us part of the global insecurity problem.” India’s un-safeguarded  8 nuclear power reactors churn out enough fissile material for producing at least 100 warheads annually.

About admin

Check Also

Civil and Military judicial systems: Need for bridging the gap

Military judicial systems, the World over, are known for delivering swift, speedy and credible justice during extraordinary times. Especially so when the routine of the run judicial system is unable to deliver justice due to any of the accepted multiple genuine reasons. Post 9/11 setting threw up such extraordinary environment when circumstances had rendered the normal judicial channels ineffective, particularly when it came to punishing hard core terrorists. This situation prevailed for about fifteen years and none of the terrorist was awarded meaningful penalty for heinous crimes, it was often observed that those arrested on these accounts were promptly granted bail and were repeatedly caught committing same crimes again and again. Under these conditions National Action Plan was formulated to counter terrorism and military courts were setup for a limited time. These courts served the purpose and award of meaningful punishments to had core terrorists helped in quelling the waves of terrorism promptly.Military courts were established for two years and during this period civil judiciary was expected to fix its weaknesses and be able to re-takeover the task. However, it failed to do so, so the military courts were asked to carry out the task for another two years; this period is to end in January 2019. However, civilian courts are still no better than what they were in January 2015. It is yet another testimony of the lack of faith in the country’s criminal justice system and the sheer ineptness of political system to reform it. Reasons that led to setting up of military courts continue to persist. And it goes to the credit of swift action by military courts alongside military operations that terrorism is on its fag end. Certainly Army’s Judge Advocate General’s team will have to answer many question, as to why pointed out technical gaps and procedural voids were not plugged-in during the trial proceedings. While at the same time, PHC bench needs to account for basing such decision mainly on technicalities, while mainly ignoring the substance matter, and that too in case of heinous crimes. There are many rungs between capital punishments and outright acquittal and one does not have to go berserk to jump straight from capital punishment to acquittal option without preferring to choose from whole assortment of lower degree punishments. Under the circumstances remanding the case for retrial should have been a win-win situation for all sides. Hopefully, a worthwhile solution would be found out. Army needs to undertake capacity enhancement of its JAG branch to avoid recurrences. And PHC should avoid outright choking of one of the parliament approved and constitutionally established judicial sub-system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *