Headlines

AUSTRALIA: Non-Proliferation the Word, Weapons-Enrichment the Game

Bob Burton

CANBERRA, Nov 30 2004 (IPS) - The Australian government has been accused of being hypocritical in touting its nuclear proliferation control credentials while supporting the development of uranium enrichment technology, which security experts claim could also be used to produce materials for use in nuclear weapons.

The Australian government has been accused by Greenpeace Australia of being hypocritical in touting its nuclear proliferation control credentials while supporting the development of uranium enrichment technology, which security experts claim could also be used to produce materials for use in nuclear weapons.

Releasing a report Tuesday into the operations of a private Sydney-based company, Silex Systems Ltd, Greenpeace Australia nuclear campaigner, James Courtney, said the Australian government’s support for the company was disturbing.

”It sends an extremely dangerous message to our near neighbours in the South-east Asian region, that the Australian government has the technical capacity to develop nuclear weapons and is actively involved in nuclear research which is classified by the United States government because of its direct application to the development of nuclear weapons,” he said.

”If any other country, be it Iran Syria or Iraq, was involved in this research it would be taken as a sign of a covert weapons programme by the Australian government … It is extremely hypocritical of the Australian government to be supporting the development of laser enrichment technology in Australia,” added Courtney.

The release of the Greenpeace report titled ‘Secrets, Lies and Uranium Enrichment’ coincides with Australian Defence Minister, Senator Robert Hill, opening the eighth meeting of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) conference in Sydney. The PSI is a U.S.-led initiative aimed at isolating countries such as North Korea, which it accuses of being involved in nuclear proliferation.

In his opening speech Hill warned delegates that ”in an increasingly globalised world, WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction)-relevant technology and know-how stand to become even more accessible … Present non-proliferation regimes, which have been negotiated between states, are ill-equipped to tackle the problem of WMD falling into the hands of non-state actors.”

The stated aim of the PSI conference, which has attracted delegates from 19 governments, but only Thailand, Singapore and Japan from the Asian region, is to ”determine the best ways to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction.”

Hill told the conference: ”Australia will step up its efforts to encourage stronger controls and security for radioactive sources in our region.”

However afterwards Hill refused to answer journalists’ questions about the operations of Silex. ”I don’t think it is appropriate to me to refer to particular companies,” he said.

Hill did acknowledge that some ‘dual use’ nuclear technology, which can be used for both weapons production and in nuclear power operations ”may have been exported from Australia innocently” for use in weapons research programmes.

The technology – which theoretically would be a much cheaper form of enrichment – alarmed the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) as long ago as 1981 because of the risk that it could dramatically increase nuclear proliferation. In its now declassified report, ‘Uranium Enrichment, Threat of Nuclear Proliferation Increasing’, the CIA stated that the development of laser enrichment technology ”alarmed” policy makers.

”Any country might acquire the necessary technology to set up a garage sized plant to produce weapon grade uranium anywhere in the world,” the CIA warned.

Silex, however, dismisses concerns that its technology may result in nuclear proliferation. ”Silex technology is now and always will be heavily regulated by Australian and U.S. government authorities to avoid any proliferation issues,” it said in a statement.

Greenpeace’s Courtney argues that the extent of Australian government support for Silex is extraordinary. ”The Australian government has given unprecedented support to this company. They have provided access to materials, they have cooperated with the United States to allow the transfer of sensitive technology and equipment and they have turned a blind eye from scientists coming from South Africa to work on this project,” he said.

While the laser enrichment technology, if successfully developed, would be cheaper than the convention centrifugal enrichment technology, the financial prospects for Silex look bleak.

In April 2003, after forking out approximately 20 million U.S. dollars into researching the technology with Silex over a six-year period, the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) – the world’s largest enrichment company – pulled the plug on the project.

In January this year the French Atomic Energy Commission brought its 20-year long research effort into laser enrichment to an end while Japan arrived at a similar conclusion in October 2001.

Despite the diminishing support for the technology, Silex remains determined to soldier on. Last week at its annual general meeting the company informed shareholders that it lost 9.2 million dollars for the year.

”Shareholders should appreciate that Silex has not yet commercialised any of its exciting technologies, some of which are still in the late development stage,” it warned.

Despite the mounting financial losses, the company told shareholders that by early next year it plans to have completed a review to determine the financial viability of its technology, which it said would determine ”our prospects for securing a new commercial partner.”

Meanwhile, the company reported that it has been ”engaged for some months in third party discussions with two large overseas organisations.”

Australian Greens Senator for New South Wales, Senator Kerry Nettle, who plans to move a motion in the Senate to legislate against uranium enrichment later this week, wants Defence Minister Senator Hill to stop evading questions.

”(Can the minister) tell us about how it fits in with the responsibility this government has to ensure that we don’t have a proliferation of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons technology throughout our region?” she asked. ” Also how does it fit in with our commitments to the Proliferation Security Initiative that the minister was talking about this morning?”