Norm Change and Contestation in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime: The India-US Nuclear Deal
Abstract
A major dilemma for the non-proliferation regime is to engage non-NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) states (India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea) more effectively in the broader nuclear non-proliferation regime without weakening or discrediting the NPT. The Indo-U.S. Civilian Nuclear Agreement claims to bring India, as a “responsible” nuclear state, closer to the nuclear non-proliferation regime. It was criticized by the non-proliferation community, concerned that global non-proliferation norms would be undermined by treating India “exceptionally”. The United States sought an India-specific exemption from the non-proliferation rules and discouraged others from seeking such exemptions to limit the damage to the regime. The implications of the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal for the non-proliferation regime have been hotly contested in academic and policy circles; it is a first attempt to engage any non-NPT state but non-proliferation experts described it as a catastrophe for the regime. Yet a significant gap remains in our understanding of this on-going issue. No attempt has been made to assess its implications beyond speculation or to analyze this issue in detail in order to have a clear picture of its actual effect on the non-proliferation regime. This research project will address the question: how and to what extent has the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal affected key norms and rules of the non-proliferation regime?
The United States did not act arbitrarily, but tried to modify the regime in such a way as to pursue its strategic objective regarding India because nuclear non-proliferation is also an important policy objective. This regime objective explains why the U.S., rather than establishing a set of rules that would apply to all states that have not signed the NPT, sought an India-specific exemption and is discouraging others from following suit to limit the damage to the regime. Therefore, demands by Pakistan, Israel and North Korea for a similar deal have received non-committal responses from the United States. This dissertation argues that, on balance, the deal has constructively and positively engaged India with the non-proliferation regime, and despite some drawbacks the benefits seem likely to outweigh the costs. This evolution of the non-proliferation regime to accommodate India in turn would enhance that state’s interest in strengthening the regime, and so marks a positive step.
On the theory level, this study highlights that in a regime analysis norm contestation theory in combination of realist constructivism, can account for changes and stability in international regimes, by looking at power structure, normative factors, domestic culture and elite perception. Realist constructivism provides a frame to help identify and organize some factors and processes that can help us understand and explain normative contestation and its outcomes – though the results of these processes may be highly contingent rather than easily predictable. Change is both conduct- and context-shaping and it is the interpretation of the powerful state, through normative structures, that rules most of the time.
Description
Keywords
Political Science--International Law and Relations
Citation
Bano, S. (2017). Norm Change and Contestation in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime: The India-US Nuclear Deal (Doctoral thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada). Retrieved from https://prism.ucalgary.ca. doi:10.11575/PRISM/27127