------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today! http://us.click.yahoo.com/EHLuJD/.WnJAA/cUmLAA/1TwplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
May 6, 2005 Dear Friends, Indo-Pak relations are said to be improving. Atmospherics are certainly good, though it is hard to see how this improvement can be sustained without actual settlements of disputes between them. Hitherto there is no real indication that any of the parties is about to agree on anything specific, except possibly Siachin or Sir Creek; Baglihar and Kishen Ganga problem seem fated to be approached from contrary and rigid approaches. A Kashmir settlement, necessarily based on status quo, may itself caused other problems in Kashmir and in Pakistan. This is merely to underline the precariousness of the situation. Behaviour of the two bureaucracies is a strong dampening factor, though it need not be decisive, except perhaps over, or from the viewpoint of, security issues. Among the security issues there are several that can cause serious upsets. There are two functional problems that are not receiving adequate public attention: (a) There is the existence of two competing Nuclear Deterrents in South Asia, factually oriented against each other. (b) An unending arms race is going on between India and Pakistan in both conventional and atomic weapons, including missiles. Existence of nuclear weapons as the master cause of mistrust between India and Pakistan; its implications need to be understood. So long as South Asia continues to have two opposing nuclear weapons armed deterrents, India and Pakistan cannot really normalize, much less become friends. No government can relax so long as an adversary has atomic weapons at the ready aimed at itself. Needless to say such weapons are meant (only) for offence; they have no significance for defence. No matter what is public articulation, two statements are true: These weapons should simply not be used even against an enemy that is so close to the attacker physically and culturally, with myriad historical commonalities; they simply should not be. South Asia necessarily needs being made Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. Secondly, so long as the two countries do not apply the principle of unilateral nuclear disarmament, preferably simultaneously, Pakistan and India can not proceed to reconcile with each other. Asking the other to disarm while itself remaining nuclear armed is wholly unrealistic. Some claim that India and Pakistan can become genuine friends while both stay as nuclear powers; enough CBMs [Confidence Building Measures] can be devised to reassure each other that nuclear weapons will never be used in anger or by accident. This is against the dynamics of inter-state relations. Nuclear arms race having become a vested interest in either country - and it inexorably does create a vested interest - it has survived the east-west cold war between two superpowers. All the decade and a half long negotiations between the US and USSR did not even slow down the updating and modernizing of weapons and missiles. It is proceeding a pace today. How far would Indian and Pakistani negotiators be able to succeed? And on what basis. Time has come to recognize the fact that nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles are an expensive imposition on the peoples of Pakistan and India. No morally justifiable purpose requires them. Supposing India were to indicate to the world that it would, like South Africa, give up its nuclear weapons systems. Would its quest for recognition as a great power necessarily fail or gain more supporters in foreign chancelleries? Similarly, which vital interest of Pakistan, the current eight disputes included, would suffer if it were to give up its nuclear pride? Would India invade the next day? I suggest that peace activists of India and Pakistan should utilize this seventh anniversary of the 11 nuclear explosions of 1998 be suitably observed. In this connection, I suggest a joint statement or declaration by both sides' peace activists, in addition to what public events are arranged in either country. With best wishes, MB Naqvi _________________________________ SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN): An informal information platform for activists and scholars concerned about Nuclearisation in South Asia South Asians Against Nukes Mailing List: archives are available @ two locations May 1998 - March 2002: <groups.yahoo.com/group/sap/messages/1> Feb. 2001 - to date: <groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/messages/1> To subscribe send a blank message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> South Asians Against Nukes Website: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN): An informal information platform for activists and scholars concerned about the dangers of Nuclearisation in South Asia SAAN Website: http://www.s-asians-against-nukes.org SAAN Mailing List: To subscribe send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SAAN Mailing List Archive : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/ ________________________________ DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not necessarily reflect the views of SAAN compilers. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
