INDIA’S nuclear ambitions have long attracted regional and international interest. Since its first successful nuclear test in 1974, India has steadily built its nuclear arsenal and infrastructure, positioning itself as a significant player in the global nuclear landscape. However, concerns about the safety, security and oversight of India’s nuclear program are raising alarm bells not only among neighbouring countries but also within the international community. Worries include the possibility of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands and the potential misuse of India’s growing nuclear technology. Adding to these concerns is the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) increasing scrutiny of India’s activities, particularly regarding its financial governance and connections to nuclear proliferation. As these concerns grow, it is crucial to question whether India’s nuclear program is truly as safe and secure as it claims. India’s nuclear infrastructure is expansive, encompassing both civilian and military applications. Despite this, India has yet to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which many countries rely on as a safeguard for global nuclear stability. Without such commitments, India’s nuclear activities remain opaque, lacking the level of transparency that global nuclear watchdogs deem essential for ensuring safety.
Several instances have cast doubt on the safety of India’s nuclear facilities. Reports have emerged of mishandling radioactive material, leading to accidents that have put both workers and civilians at risk. In 2014, a major radioactive leak occurred at India’s Kaiga Nuclear Power Plant, raising alarm about the country’s safety protocols. Although Indian officials downplayed the incident, it highlighted systemic problems within India’s nuclear safety regime. Moreover, personnel at Indian nuclear plants have reportedly been exposed to dangerous levels of radiation due to inadequate safety measures, raising questions about India’s ability to protect its citizens from the hazards of its nuclear activities. Further compounding these safety concerns is the lack of proper oversight and regulatory independence. India’s Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), tasked with overseeing nuclear safety, is under the direct control of the Department of Atomic Energy, which operates India’s nuclear facilities. This conflict of interest prevents the AERB from functioning as an independent watchdog and inhibits its ability to enforce safety regulations effectively. With such issues at the heart of India’s nuclear framework, the international community has every reason to be concerned about the safety and security of India’s nuclear program.
In addition to concerns about nuclear safety, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has increasingly scrutinized India’s financial actions, particularly regarding terrorism financing and the risks of nuclear proliferation. While FATF’s primary focus has historically been on ensuring that countries adhere to financial standards to combat money laundering and terrorism financing, it has become more concerned about how certain states, including India, might be inadvertently—or deliberately—facilitating the flow of funds that could be used for nuclear proliferation activities. Moreover, India’s growing nuclear cooperation with countries like Israel, which is itself not a signatory to the NPT, raises red flags. While these partnerships are framed as efforts to bolster energy security or defense capabilities, they also blur the lines between civilian and military nuclear applications, making it harder for international regulators to ensure that nuclear technologies are not diverted toward unsanctioned uses.
FATF’s concerns also extend to India’s financial infrastructure, which may not be equipped to handle the complexities of tracking and regulating nuclear-related transactions. Given that India has received billions in defense-related deals and nuclear cooperation agreements, the possibility of funds being misused for illegal or dangerous purposes cannot be ruled out. These concerns are heightened by India’s complex and often opaque financial systems, which are not immune to corruption and money laundering, further raising the stakes in the global arena. India’s nuclear program is not just an internal issue but a matter of significant regional concern. Pakistan, India’s nuclear-armed neighbour, has repeatedly expressed worries about the safety and intentions behind India’s nuclear advancements. Pakistan, too, faces international scrutiny for its nuclear program, but it remains deeply concerned that any misstep by India could lead to catastrophic consequences for the region.
Furthermore, India’s strained relations with China, another nuclear power, add to the precarious nature of the region’s security environment. Any potential escalation between India and its nuclear-armed neighbours increases the risk of miscalculations that could spiral into a full-blown nuclear conflict. With both China and Pakistan watching India’s nuclear moves closely, the international community has a vested interest in ensuring that India’s nuclear activities are transparent, safe and secure. India’s nuclear program, while significant, is fraught with concerns over safety, security and international oversight. With FATF increasingly scrutinizing India’s actions and the global community worried about the potential for nuclear proliferation, it is crucial for India to take concrete steps toward greater accountability. Only through transparent cooperation, both regionally and internationally, can India mitigate the growing fears surrounding its nuclear ambitions and ensure that its nuclear program does not pose a threat to global security.
—The writer is Islamabad based expert of strategic affairs
