Nuclear politics and Environment: Traces of colonial mindset and practices

Climate change is one of the pressing issues of our world today. In the COP26 summit held at Glasgow, India pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2070 (net zero targets). The only country/region whose calculated year is the last in the timeline. The answer to the question of what will take so long for India is her ambition and current growth position in the world. India has become the fastest economy in the world, and hence, is the world's third largest carbon emitter. This fact is in congruous with India’s rapid scale of development and energy requirement. Because of the same, it has often been criticised by the western countries for being an irresponsible country in the age of sustainable development. For whose response, New Delhi criticises its non-membership of the Nuclear suppliers group which made it unable to access the global market of fissile material and hence, setting a limit to its potential of harnessing the power of nuclear energy generation. The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) is a group of 42 nuclear material exporting countries that decide on the matter of who gets to access the fissile material. But why is there a need to limit and restrict the supply? And that too from a country like India whose commitment towards peace is highly well-known and praised. To understand why fissile material is fortified, a brief understanding of nuclear history and its politics is required.

On 14th August 1945, President Truman received a letter from the Japanese government declaring their acceptance of the Potsdam declaration and surrendered unconditionally to the allied forces. But on 26th july of the same year, when the potsdam conference convened, japan outrightly rejected the decree. Then what had changed which forced the ferocious empire to make a U-turn? Well, it was a secret American genie that had out degreed the ferocity and valour of the Japs’ (Nuclear Museum, Truman Library).

16th July 1945, the spectacle of mushroom-cloud and the vision of the ‘sun in the night sky’ was observed by dozens of scientists, generals, and civilians of New Mexico, USA. The detonation of the world's first atomic bomb. Whose military testing happened on the territory of Japan. The emerging situation was unprecedented in both social and natural sciences. Robert Oppenheimer uttered while witnessing the explosion “Now I am become death, the destroyer of the worlds”. Whereas Isador Rabi said “a new understanding of man, which man had acquired over nature”. (atomic heritage foundation)

After over 8 years of trinity detonation, in December of 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower stood at the podium of the general assembly and delivered the famous Atoms of Peace speech. The discussions followed were the discourses over the statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The agency of articulating and debating over it was granted to only a few countries. Some scholars would even draw replications of colonial politics to the politics in the immediate discourses of the nuclear age. IAEA’s primary foundational objective was to facilitate the initiative of peaceful uses of the atom and develop adequate institutions and mechanisms in place to govern it. The negotiating body of the statute of the IAEA, led by the USA, consisted of very few nations: the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, France, Canada, South Africa, and Belgium. The latter two are for uranium extraction in Africa. This very composition originated from the mindset of colonialism where colonists were thought to be superior and capable of making decisions and guiding whereas, the colony must remain suppressed and follow the instructions given. The positionality of African countries was at the bottom of the power pyramid where their role was confined to ensuring ample supply of uranium or nuclear materials. 

When the turn came to decide the countries on the board of governors of IAEA, its selection process also reflected enduring legacies of colonialism and the perpetuation of power imbalances in the post-colonial era. Same as above, African countries were given no agencies but just to use them to exploit their endowment of natural possessions. This behavior is what Tarak Barkawi calls the big brother attitude. The powerful countries, historic colonizers in this case, take control and authority over the common affairs of the world, posing themselves as big brother and regard their younger people as unworthy of intellectual and managerial contribution. India’s Homi J. Bhabha reprimanded the composition of the board and said that this would further the divide between the nuclear have and have-nots. Even later, In response to the rigidity of the established order, India and China conducted their nuclear tests despite the threat of economic and political backlash from the West. (Barkawi, 2004)

It is imperative that behind the denial of India’s membership in the NSG, there is a colonial mindset and power play involved. Also, lack of trust despite being the largest contributor to the peacekeeping force and an unconditional helper to countries in need. 

Bibliography:

Barkawi, Tarak. 2004. ‘On the Pedagogy of “Small Wars”’. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-) 80 (1): 19–37.

Net zero targets. (n.d.). https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/india/net-zero-targets/

Potsdam Declaration - Nuclear Museum. (n.d.). Nuclear Museum. https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/key-documents/potsdam-declaration/#:~:text=The%20Japanese%20government%20initially%20rejected,threat%20referenced%20the%20atomic%20bomb.

The President’s news Conference | Harry S. Truman. (n.d.). https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/public-papers/100/presidents-news-conference

Atomic Heritage Foundation. https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/key-documents/trinity-test-eyewitnesses/