Understanding India’s Entry into the Wassenaar Arrangement Plus

Introduction

On December 07, the then 41-member Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) unanimously approved of India’s entry into the WA. Like the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which India joined in June 2016 as its 35^th member, the WA is a multilateral body designed to control the transfer of certain technology. India’s membership will be formally announced in December 2018 during the WA’s next plenary meeting in Vienna, Austria. For India, entry into the WA is a positive on several fronts, from foreign relations – with most of the world’s leading powers accrediting India for having sufficient export controls (i.e. reputation) – to further linking the Indian defence industry to key suppliers and buyers of critical technologies.

On the other hand, India’s entry into the WA poses challenges for Pakistan in terms of serving as a clear indictment of where it stands vis-à-vis India (e.g. India is in the WA and MTCR while Pakistan is not) and further easing India’s ability (an already well-established reality) to develop next-generation weapon systems. In the long-term, as Indian suppliers, buyers and funding permeates across companies engaged in the WA and MTCR, that entry will also serve as a probable block on Pakistan’s access to technology and support for its own defence programs. With the U.S. as a factor in the WA and MTCR, it is unlikely that Pakistan will enter either, even in an optimistic future scenario of effective foreign relations engagement and fiscal strength (China possesses both as well, but it too is not a member of the WA or MTCR).

What is the Wassenaar Arrangement?

The WA’s purpose is to push for “transparency and greater responsibility in transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies, thus preventing destabilising accumulations.” While WA members “seek” to prevent using the technologies guided under the WA for bolstering military capabilities, the goal of the WA is to control transfers from WA members to non-WA members and entities. The WA works to prevent terrorists and malicious non-state actors from accessing conventional weapons and dual-use technology. The WA also requires its members to report to the WA on its sale of arms and technology to non-WA members on a semi-annually basis, if not more frequently. Besides the U.S., U.K. and Russia, most of the WA’s members are NATO (including Turkey) and close U.S. allies, such as Japan and now India.

India’s Foreign Relations Gain

On the surface, India’s entry into the WA serves as accreditation of India’s standing in the international political stage. Like the MTCR, the WA emphasizes its role in mitigating the illicit transfer of weapons and technology to malicious actors and recalcitrant states. Functionally, there are two components to gaining WA membership: First, aligning one’s own export control policies to those of the WA, which will see one refrain from selling to questionable parties. In this respect, expectations can vary, from blocking the sale of certain dual-use technology (e.g. diesel engines that can power commercial ships and naval ships alike) to a specific country. It can also be as stringent as refraining from dealing small arms to a certain market out of concern that those small arms could reach non-state actors. Second, WA membership requires that every existing WA member – which includes the U.S., U.K. and Russia – approve of the new entrant.

In reality, the second requirement to WA membership is the important one. Like it had in the MTCR, the U.S. is explicitly backing India’s stature in these key multilateral bodies. India has not been able to secure membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) due to China (the NSG also requires the consensus of its members for new entrants). However, India will try leveraging its memberships in the WA and MTCR in a bid to convince China to change its stance on the NSG. Interestingly, that might not be that sound of a strategy considering that China’s entry in the MTCR and WA is actually contingent on the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, Western Europe. However, with the U.S. and China at odds in the Pacific Ocean, it would be grossly erroneous to suggest that the U.S. would approve of China’s membership in the MTCR and WA, at least without finding other ways to first restrict China’s access to research and development (R&D), dual-use technology and new technology partners – i.e. rendering the MTCR and WA meaningless to China.