NSG membership Wrangling

That the blatantly discriminatory draft proposal prepared by former NSG chairman Rafael Mariano Grossi for Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) membership - for which India and Pakistan applied at about the same time-is inspired purely by political considerations is more than obvious from its pro-India suggestions. As per the draft, the 2008 IAEA waiver India won, paving the way for it to engage in civil nuclear trade, should qualify it for membership while Pakistan needs to wait and take additional measures. This is the same advice the US has been giving Pakistan while campaigning hard on India's behalf. In an undisguised attempt to make an exception for India, Grossi also indirectly counselled Pakistan, "one non-NPT member state should reach an understanding not to block consensus on membership for another non-NPT member state." Pakistan can ill-afford to make the same mistake when in '08 it gave its nod to China to allow the waiver, which is now being used against it.
As expected, the Foreign Office in Islamabad promptly came out with rejection of what it called the 'Grossi formula' reminding the NSG that it is important for its own credibility "and the future of the non-proliferation regime that the NSG be seen as a rule-based organisation rather than a grouping which is driven by commercial and political considerations that trump its non-proliferation objectives." Ironical as it, the NSG came into existence in direct response to India's 1974 nuclear explosion to control nuclear technology and materials. Yet special concessions are being sought to make the same country - even as it continues to refuse to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) - a respectable member of the nuclear club. Notably, at is last June annual plenary meeting the Group had reiterated "full, complete and effective implementation of the NPT" would remain bedrock of non-proliferation regime. Indeed, Pakistan has not signed the treaty either, but it makes no secret of the fact that its nuclear programme is India-centric, and hence if India signs on it would do likewise. In this and every other respect, the two countries have similar credentials. As for the Dr AQ Khan proliferation episode that is used against Pakistan; two facts are unignorable. First, all recognised nuclear states have been involved in proliferation at one or another point. The US itself supplied heavy water and Canada natural uranium for India's nuclear reactor that led to the 1974 nuclear explosion, forcing its traditional rival, Pakistan, to initiate its own efforts in the field. Second and more important, for a long time now, the international nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, has had nothing but praise for this country's nuclear safeguard measures and security record.
Yet the NSG membership issue has remained stalemated due to US' and some other countries' insistence on exceptionalism. The Grossi formula is unlikely to resolve anything. Fortunately for Pakistan, NSG's decisions are based on consensus. China of course is a strong defender of Pakistan's position. Six other countries - Turkey, Austria, Brazil, New Zealand, Switzerland and Mexico - have also been supportive of criteria-based membership. Hopefully, they will continue to stay on side. Even if the US successfully persuades some of them to change their minds, China is expected to stay firm on its principled and praiseworthy position.