Does the US non-proliferation policy make any difference in South Asia?

28 Aug, 2001    ·   554

Report of IPCS Seminar held on 22 August 2001
Speaker: Raju G. C. Thomas

 

 

Allia Chalmers Professor of International Affairs, Marquette University

 

 

The two general purposes of the US non-proliferation policy are:

 

 

·                     To prevent enemies of the US , especially the rogue states, from acquiring nuclear weapons; and 

 

 

·                     To avoid a nuclear war anywhere in the world.

 

 

To achieve these objectives, Washington adopted the following crucial steps, which fall broadly under the umbrella of its non-proliferation policy, since the end of the Second World War:

 

 

·                     Baruch Plan

 

 

·                     Atoms for Peace Plan of President Eisenhower

 

 

·                     Formation of International Atomic Energy Agency

 

 

·                     Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty

 

 

·                     Zangger Committee

 

 

·                     London Club/Nuclear Suppliers’ Group

 

 

·                     INFCE – International Fuel Cycle Evaluation (also known as The Ford Mitre Report)

 

 

·                     Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act

 

 

·                     Glenn, Pressler and Symington amendments

 

 

The methods used by the US for preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons capability are characterized by both incentives and disincentives viz., aid and sanctions respectively. But these methods are not uniformly applied to all the states and have been highly subjective. As a result, the nuclear capable powers like Germany , Japan , Argentina , Brazil , South Africa , North Korea , Iran , Iraq , Ukraine , Belarus and Kazakhstan were proscribed from going nuclear. Washington also managed to prevail upon India from going nuclear between 1988 and 1995. But, paradoxically, Israel was allowed to go on its way to become a de facto nuclear weapons state. 

 

 

Surprisingly, the nuclear tests by India and Pakistan in 1998 somehow slipped through the CIA’s surveillance network, despite there being clear evidence and expectation that the Indian government led by the BJP would exercise its nuclear option. The US also failed in 1998 to draw a parallel with the 1974 Pokhran test as far as the linkages between a volatile domestic political situation and the timing of the nuclear tests by India was concerned. 

 

 

The US non-proliferation policy could not contain the development of nuclear weapons in South Asia ; instead the nuclear energy programme was targeted. Because of this India , was denied of a critical source of energy—nuclear energy. Both hydel and thermal sources of power have their own problems.  

 

 

Discussion

 

 

Comments

 

 

·                     China ’s nuclear and missile assistance to Pakistan , and the Pak-Libya and Pak-Saudi nexus in this sphere is not unknown. The US ’ blind eye to them had precipitated India ’s nuclear programme. The ‘ China factor’ in Pakistan ’s nuclear programme was ignored by Washington mainly due to the strong pro-Pakistan lobby in the US . To US officials, Pakistan is still an important Islamic state located in a strategic area. There is also a strong love-hate relationship between US and China .

 

 

·                     If the US continues to impose sanctions on the peaceful nuclear energy programme of India , it will be irrelevant for its non-proliferation agenda. The Russians are waiting to help us. But given their constraints, the Russians cannot go beyond Koondankulam in helping India in nuclear power generation. Hence, both India and Russia should go to the IAEA and other forums extolling nuclear energy as the ‘energy of the future’. 

 

 

·                     As far as nuclearisation of South Asia is concerned, it was in Pakistan ’s interest to provoke India to go nuclear and follow suit. Initiating the tests would have cost Islamabad more than what it paying now.

 

 

·                     Nuclear weapons are useless; biological and chemical weapons and cyber wars will mark the conflicts of the future. 

 

 

·                     Nuclear weapons are great equalizers among unequal states. It was this realization that made Pakistan go nuclear after forcing India to do so. 

 

 

·                     The US respects the economic and military power of India . Indo-US relations are growing through private contacts, especially via the NRIs (Non-Resident Indians).  

 

 

Questions and Responses: 

 

 

Q: Given the new political environment in the US , how could India be brought into the present non-proliferation regime?

 

 

R: Irrespective of the regime changes in the US , India ’s non-nuclear weapon status will remain unchanged. It is hard for the US to recognize India and Pakistan as nuclear weapon states as there is a fear of other states following suit. In this regard, whether to become a member of Nuclear Suppliers’ Group or not require some more thinking in India . 

 

 

 

 

Q: Is there a strategic space in the US for Indian interests being promoted without US interests being affected?

 

 

R: There is this space. But there is always the question of Pakistan . Anything conceded to India by the US has to be conceded to Pakistan too.

 

 

 

 

 

POPULAR COMMENTARIES