THE federal government has cleared the way to sell Australian uranium to Russia - rejecting fears that the nuclear material could find its way into atomic weapons.

In a long-awaited response to a report calling for Australia to delay ratifying a Howard-era treaty with Russia, the government said yesterday that there was only a remote chance Australian uranium would be diverted to weapons programs.

Anti-nuclear campaigners blasted the response, accusing Labor of ignoring the 2008 recommendations by Federal Parliament's treaty committee.

In a 13-page response, the government said it was satisfied that safeguards built into the estimated $1 billion deal to sell uranium to Russia would ensure nuclear material would be used appropriately. ''The government permits supply of Australian uranium only where it is satisfied the uranium will be used exclusively for peaceful purposes,'' the response said.

It said Russia had stopped the production of fissile material - the highly enriched uranium used in nuclear weapons - and had ample stockpiles in its existing weapons. ''The risk they might divert nuclear material subject to safeguards from civil programs to nuclear weapons programs is remote.''

The decision to clear the way for yellowcake sales to Russia is bound to renew the focus on Australia's refusal to sell uranium to India.

India has made plain it believes Labor is discriminating against it by refusing Delhi access to Australian uranium stocks while agreeing to sell to countries such as China.

Labor MP Kelvin Thomson, who chairs the treaties committee, had previously warned that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who signed the 2007 deal with former prime minister John Howard in Sydney, would not care about Australia's attitude to the safeguards.

''If he changed his mind about the uses to which he was going to put it, I don't think we'd have any effective comeback at all,'' Mr Thomson said in September 2008.

The committee's main concern centred on the lack of international inspections of Russian nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The report also came amid tension over Russia's war with neighbouring Georgia.

But yesterday Mr Thomson said the government had made a serious and considered response to the committee's concerns. He said Australia had made a request for further IAEA inspections and, although these were unlikely to go ahead, that did not mean the deal should be scuppered.

The government response also stated Russian troops had withdrawn from deep within Georgia and cited moves by the US and Russia to do a fresh deal on reducing nuclear warheads.

Nuclear activists said Russia could still not be trusted, and warned Australian-sourced nuclear material could be diverted to third countries such as Iran.

David Noonan of the Australian Conservation Foundation said nuclear facilities continued to be run by the Russian military with little oversight.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith and Resources Minister Martin Ferguson said a decision on final ratification of the deal was yet to be made.

Australian Uranium Association executive director Michael Angwin said he was yet to study the report carefully but it looked to be a considered and reasonable judgment.

Meanwhile, former foreign minister Gareth Evans has defended Kevin Rudd's decision not to attend next month's nuclear summit in Washington.

The Prime Minister has previously sought a leading role on nuclear disarmament issues. But with an election looming, he has signalled he will not go to the summit, to be sponsored by President Barack Obama.

Asked if he was disappointed in Mr Rudd, Professor Evans blamed the media and a political culture which he said made it ''so difficult for people to do the right thing when it comes to participation in international debates''.