------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> <font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hvoeles/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705444597:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123729495/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992 ">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font> --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
The News International August 10, 2005 Dark clouds on the Indo-Pakistani horizon M B Naqvi The writer is a well-known journalist and freelance columnist. Pakistani and Indian officials met in Delhi to discuss and arrive at agreed Confidence Building Measures in pursuit of what is called a Nuclear Restraint Regime. The result was formalisation of previously agreed pre-informing of the test flights of missiles. Just that and nothing more substantial. These meetings virtually coincided with the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings. The world has, instead of turning away from the evil weapons, become more nuclearised. There are at least nine nuclear powers and more may be on the way. They pose unacceptable threats to not only the stated enemies of each nuclear power but also to the people and controllers of atomic weapons in each state. India and Pakistan are prone to nuclear conflict, as well as being vulnerable to letting wrong fingers reach the button. This has to be avoided at all costs. The background has to be noted. Right now, there is a veritable maelstrom of geopolitical struggles in Asia. There is, on the one hand, the US with its drive to supposedly promote democracy, stability and gain control of strategic raw material to underpin its domination of the world economy despite its economic weaknesses. On the other side, are the Security Cooperation Organization that brings Central Asian Republics in an alliance with China and Russia that have had their own rapprochement a decade ago. This SCO has already served notice to the US that it should wind up its bases in Asia and stop dreaming about dominating Asia. They want a more "democratic" relationship among states. That is, lines are being drawn among Asian nations. Closer to home we have seen India in a close embrace with the US in recent weeks. India and America will closely cooperate in the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea in various tasks that America thinks is its duty to perform. The Indians will assist them. The Americans have promised to make India a global military power and new technologies will be inducted into India from the US. Co-production of aircrafts and other sensitive technologies is on the cards. India's cooperation in nuclear control measures has been sought by America and promised by India. America will provide nuclear reactors for civilian power generation. America is already treating India as a virtually declared nuclear power and a close friend of America like Britain and France have been. Which is why it is lifting the various sanctions that were imposed on India after the May 1998 nuclear tests at Pokhran -- if its legislature agrees. Pakistan's reaction was predictable. It was one of consternation: Pakistan had hitched its wagon to the American star and American support for its security is the basic assurance that Islamabad had. That is now under question. Doubtless, the Americans promise, and are sure to provide, Pakistan with some war material as and when they adjudge is needed. But Pakistanis will try to get what the Indians are trying to obtain. The Indo-Pakistan nuclear arms race is sure to become even more intense. The competition in acquiring conventional armaments too shall increase. Pakistan will try and obtain everything from guns and tanks to nuclear reactors from no matter where. Either the Americans shall be forced to supply more equipment to Pakistan at the risk of annoying India, or Pakistan will seek even closer military and other cooperation with China. Pakistan thinks it has a strong China card in hand. Pakistan might buy from Russia too. One result of all this may be that the Peace Process, still underway, will probably stumble and break down. It may even die. Why? Because intensification of the nuclear arms race and missiles will actually produce a radical mistrust. This is because each addition in India's nuclear arsenal means further weakening of Pakistan's defences. And vice versa; each increase in Pakistan's nuclear arsenals equals India's increased vulnerability. For, there is absolutely no defence against a nuclear attack, all talk of ABMs and missile defence systems notwithstanding. The main problem between India and Pakistan needs to be clearly formulated. Differences originate in their adversarial attitudes and purposes. History has created these. These issues need to be sorted out and agreements have to be arrived at. Among the issues, eight have been recognised. It is a good working elaboration. But one thinks that while even Kashmir -- historically the most intractable -- seems now amenable to some solution as things were evolving up to last year. Others were thought to be easier and amenable to solve. No doubt, difficulties in finding solutions are increasing rapidly, particularly of disputes over water. After all is said and done about the seven disputes being discussed, one consequential issue stands out: it is the existence of two rival Nuclear Deterrents confronting each other eyeball to eyeball. This is a problem that defies solution, other than that both countries agree to disarm their nuclear weapons and the missiles that are supposed to carry them. Doubtless both have invested heavily and the money that could have improved the lives of millions has been thrown down this drain. These two nuclear deterrents have created vested interests: local versions of industrial-military complexes, albeit mostly bureaucratic. The influence and incomes of these vested interests depend on the continuation of the nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan. In both countries, these groups are powerful and possess ample resources. Their ability to ensure an unending flow of resources into nuclear programmes is certain. And yet the goal needs to be kept in mind. It is de-nuclearisation of South Asia and making it a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. The Americans have done a grievous disservice by popularising the suggestion that India and Pakistan need not destroy their nuclear weapons and missiles. They should keep them despite the consequent compulsion of an unending arms race between them. So long as an Indian deterrent is being updated and proliferated, vertically and horizontally, Pakistan too would act likewise. This nuclear arms race -- and with that goes the number and quality of missiles -- is a compulsion in South Asia because of adversarial assumptions and attitudes. They have in fact intensified all arms races and America's own war industries have made profits at a time when the outlook for them was becoming clouded. The two countries are chasing a solution of the problem of two sets of inimical Deterrents sitting close to each other. The logic of this situation increases mistrust exponentially, resulting in the arms' races that multiply mistrust. CBMs are fair weather birds; they work while the relationship is normal. As tensions grow over the aggravation of one or more disputes, CBMs are forgotten and generals on either side rush to prepare for action. Hasn't the world seen 1999's half war and 2002's very real threat of a general war? The situation was saved by America and not by the CBMs already in place. Who remembered them in either Islamabad or New Delhi? No, CBMs are not even half a solution. The Subcontinent needs a full solution. The question is what should India and Pakistan do? India needs to have a long-term Pakistan policy, even if it wants to be a great military power with enough political influence, with or without a permanent seat in the UNSC. Pakistan does not need to be congenitally programmed to oppose India in all things. Pakistanis should let India go its way and let Indians fare as well as they can. Let us not have a similar ambition. Let Pakistan be content with economic development and actually reducing poverty of the masses. _________________________________ 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/
