ISSN 2330-717X

FMCT And Indo-Pak Deterrence Stability – Analysis

By

The majority of countries are currently putting pressure on Pakistan that it should not block negotiations on the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) at the special Ad Hoc Committee – ‘Conference on Disarmament (CD)’ of the United Nations. The Fissile Material Cut-Off – which if negotiated – would ban the future production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons purposes.  The CD is a particular platform of the UN that deals with arms control and disarmament affairs of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

CD has ten important issues related to WMD’s that it wants to resolve with the consent of all its members. Of the ten issues, CD has been successful in resolving two issues with mutual consensus of all its members. Firstly it banned the use of biological weapons in 1975 which was later termed as “Biological Weapons Conventions”. And secondly it banned the use of chemical weapons in 1997 referred to as ‘Chemical Weapons Convention”.

There are 65 members of CD including Pakistan and every member has a right to veto power. All countries have the right to halt the negotiations if the national interests of any member country is targeted. Without consent of any country the negotiation cannot move to the next stage. Presently, the negotiation of a ban on fissile material is continuing on the CD forum. Fissile material can be defined with respect two types of school of thoughts regarding banning on fissile material. The first one gives the idea of FMCT which means the ban on further and future production of nuclear material but does not talk about existing stockpile. All P-5 and other major countries including India are supporters of this thought. The second school of thought, led by Pakistan and also silence support from G-21 countries talks about Fissile Material Treaty (FMT), which means ban on further and future production as well as to dismantle the existing stockpiles. Pakistan’s concept of FMT is more relevant to American President Obama‘s mission “Nuclear Zero”. But there is no supporter of FMT except from G-21; all major countries have adopted dual and duplicitous policies.

The actual purpose of FMCT is to target Pakistan. Presently there are nine nuclear weapons states (NWS) in the world. Among these nine NWS the P-5 namely USA, Russia, UK, France and China have significant and sufficient quantity of nuclear material, and for this reason these countries have almost halted their further production of fissile materials.

However, on the other side the remaining four countries are producing fissile material continuously. At present India has twenty nuclear power plants and it is expanding its program after Agreement-123 with USA which it signed in 2005. According to Agreement-123 USA is obliged to provide nuclear technology and its fuel to India. India is portraying to world that it will use imported nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, but it is also a fact that India can use its indigenous uranium resource for military purposes.

Upon this backdrop, India has no objection with FMCT and indeed has expressed it support. Israel also continues producing fissile material production, but it has no concerns withFMCT. This is because firstly Israel has no nuclear rival in Middle East and secondly Israel is American’s baby. If at any time Israel is in need the USA will provide them all modern warfare technology. To make USA happy Israel is also in favor of FMCT.

At present Pakistan has roughly 70 to 80 nuclear weapons as well as sophisticated delivery system i.e. missiles and aircrafts. These nuclear weapons could be enough for nuclear deterrence stability between Indo-Pak contexts, thus if both rivals have same quality and quantity of nuclear weapons and other warfare technology. Stable nuclear deterrence occurs as both sides believe that if anyone initiates war its enemy could inflict the unacceptable damage. But if one rival achieves some advancement in its weapons quality, quantity and modern warfare technology and the other not, then this superiority can enhance the courage of superior rival and the threat of war would be accelerated.

In order to keep a stable nuclear deterrence, the quantity of nuclear weapons must be sufficient that can guarantee to inflict desirable damage to enemy by hitting almost all targets in its list. For this purpose, the quantity of nuclear weapons must fulfill following requirements (a) it should be protected from enemy’s first strike (b) Enemy could not destroy all nuclear missiles in the air through its Anti Ballistic Missiles (ABM) system, some nuclear missiles must be save from ABM system and inflict the unacceptable damage to enemy. (c) In the event of nuclear war, if some nuclear weapons are destroyed in enemy’s first strike and some are destroyed through ABM; the remaining numbers of nuclear weapons must be sufficient to hit all listed targets on enemy’s soil.

In this regards, if Pakistan is bounded by FMCT then its 70 to 80 nuclear weapons could be less for stable nuclear deterrence, because the major Indian warfare advancements are disturbing the stable nuclear deterrence in the region. Such as, (a) India has developed its ABM system and successfully tested it, which is main factor which has disturbed the deterrence stability in the region. (b) India is working on its nuclear submarine program in order to ensure its nuclear second strike capability and credibility. (c) In 2005, India did agreement-123 with USA for civil nuclear energy, which is also known as Indo-US nuclear deal. Through this deal India can enhance the quantity and quality of nuclear weapons. Recently US President Obama visited to India and gave his consent of inclusion to India in Export Control Regimes i.e. Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG), Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), Australia Group (AU) and Wassenaar Arrangement (WA).

The inclusion of India in these four regimes would enable India to enhance its nuclear technology and nuclear weapons quantity and quality, missile technology, chemical and biological weapons and dual use items capabilities respectively. (d) India is working on deployment of its satellite system in space with the assistance of USA and Israel. Through this satellite system India will be enabled to get the capabilities of precise and accurate early warning system such as reconnaissance and surveillance of Pakistan’s forces maneuvers. (e) India has adopted precarious doctrine “Cold Start Doctrine” according to this doctrine India will attack on Pakistan in 72 to 96 hours and achieve its war objectives without crossing nuclear thresholds. (f) At his time India has twenty nuclear power plants, from which eight are not under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. These eight nuclear power plants are being totally used for military purposes, beside this, according to International Panel for Fissile Material (IPFM) 2010 report currently India has approximately 500 kilogram of plutonium for weapon purposes, enough for 100 nuclear weapons. India is also producing highly enrichment uranium (HEU) for nuclear submarine purpose. (g) Indian presence in Afghanistan and its anti-Pakistan activities are not a hidden story. Prior to this, Pakistan was facing threat from its eastern boarder, now facing from both boarders i.e. western and eastern boarder. Indian consulates are in Afghanistan creating anarchy in Pakistan on one side, meanwhile on the other side these consulates are trying to make Afghanistan powerful against Pakistan. (h) India has intention to work on ‘Blue Water Navy’. In future, during any crises or war India can do naval blocked of Pakistan through its blue water navy. Karachi and Gawadar ports are economic hubs of Pakistan. If India do naval blocked of economic hub of Pakistan, then it would be great loss for Pakistan. (i) According to 2010 report of Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), India is number one arms importer of the world.

It is a strange phenomena that the world specifically the major powers are exporting their modern warfare technology and weapons to India and all these factors are disturbing nuclear deterrence stability in the South Asian region. On one side the major powers are playing the orchestra of nuclear disarmament and arms control, however on the other side these powers have adopted a dual and hypocratic policy regarding arms race and proliferation. If one were to do comparative analysis of warfare technology and weapons of Indo-Pak, then one thing is clear that India is far superior in terms of technology. This is because India has ABM system, nuclear submarine program and permission of entry into export control regime. Meanwhile on the other side Pakistan has no ABM system, nor nuclear submarine program. These two factors are deemed very important for nuclear deterrence stability.

At this time if the world pressurizes Pakistan in signing FMCT then it will be a big challenge for Pakistan’s security. Pakistan has given excellent proposal namely Fissile Material Treaty (FMT) alternative of FMCT. This means ‘all existing stockpile of fissile material should be disposed off as well as ban on future production of fissile material’. This proposal strongly reflects the Obama’s mission of ‘Nuclear Zero’. Due to insincere policies of big powers, the plan of disarmament has become only an idealistic theory. The orchestra playing by big powers that first they would take arms control measures (FMCT) and then take measures for disarmament is a thoughtful hypocratic policy and its only purpose is to target Pakistan. Until the world does not treat Pakistan and gives it its due rights, Pakistan must block FMCT, because it is need of time to oppose the FMCT.

Please Donate Today


Did you enjoy this article? Then please consider donating today to ensure that Eurasia Review can continue to be able to provide similar content.


Avatar

M. Suleman Shahid

M. Suleman Shahid is a Research scholar at the Strategic & Nuclear Studies Department, National Defence University Islamabad, and may be reached at [email protected]

29 thoughts on “FMCT And Indo-Pak Deterrence Stability – Analysis

  • Avatar
    April 21, 2011 at 2:10 pm
    Permalink

    Very nice article and fairly put article. Being an Indian I can understand Pakistan’s concern but Pakistan should also take note that India is more concerned about China. The deterrence is for China and not Pak. Specifically the nuclear submarine retains second strike capability in case of an all out war with China. Pakistan’s fear though understood are misplaced.

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 21, 2011 at 8:13 pm
      Permalink

      Dear Satya,,,First of all I’m very thankful to you that being an Indian you admitted the concerns of Pakistan. Dear Satya, India has conducted ten military exercises from 2004 to 2010 near the Pakistani boarder. all these exercises happened in Desert and plain areas. Whether, Sino-Indo boarder is srrounding in mountains. the 80% of Indian army is deployed near Pakistani boareder. the developing purpose of cold start doctrine is against Pakistan. India is constructing more than 60 dams on Pakistani river which is violation of International law. so Dear Satya, how Pakistan cannot concerned about India. Dear Satya, now the time is that both countries must come at table talk and move forward for arms control agreement.

      Reply
      • Avatar
        April 21, 2011 at 10:22 pm
        Permalink

        Mr. Shahid,

        Thank you for your kind words. Here is my understanding why Indian forces are organized mostly towards Pakistan. Fortunately, before the Mumbai attacks India never took a threat from sea seriously. Now there are two borders that are hostile from India’s perspective. The one with China contains 7 out of the 16 of the worlds highest mountain peaks. Yes, there was a war in 62 but the Chinese had to stop after coming inside Indian territory upto a certain extent – not out of pity but because it was impossible for them to carry on their logistical supplies. Technology has changed things but still its one of the most hostile battlefields. Plus Indian relations with China are economically very sounds and trade is around $60 billion and that makes them interdependent. Plus Indian armed forces have significantly improved since 62 and are technologically competent to China. It will not be rational for India and China to into a conflict while both of them are growing at tremendous rates to fight poverty and lift their people above poverty line.

        On the other hand, we’ve had 3 full blown wars with Pakistan and a battle in Kargil. India still gets attacked by terrorists based in Pakistan and the widespread view here is that Pakistan has failed to take any significant action against these people. Now, time and again India has been tested and has shamelessly yet rationally kept away from military strikes on these terrorist groups based in PoK. Why? Because let alone military strikes, even the words hinting to that are reciprocated from Pakistan warning of a nuclear conflict while India’s nuclear arsenal is only for deterrence against a hostile nations nuclear arsenal (No first use).

        Here is where most sensible Indians have realized – however small may be scope of Indian military action, Pakistan may very well escalate it to a nuclear war. Thus it is not in our best interests to go for an aggressive war. But that’s just one school of thought which is the predominant one.

        I definately agree that we should start co-operating economically. I mean guys you can let us go to Central Asia through your country and charge us a high fee. It’ll still be way profitable for us than the sea route. :) And you can send students to our country. We still have the world’s most competitive institutions like IITs and IIMs.

        I mean put Kashmir on the back burner just like India and China have put Arunachal Pradesh. Lets work together for the betterment of our people and let some other generation, which will not be emotionally attached to Kashmir, settle it.

        Many in Pakistan still have to realize that you can’t take Kashmir forcefully. Its not possible. Be it any government, any party in India, Kashmir is not going anywhere. Same is true for Baluchistan. Whatever Baloch’s do can never get them freedom. No modern state lets it territory secede without foreign intervention from a more powerful state.

        But this is just my opinion.

        Good day!

        Reply
        • Avatar
          April 23, 2011 at 5:53 pm
          Permalink

          Dear Sattya,

          India withdrew from Iran Pak and India gas pipeline. Pakistan has given the route for gas pipeline and assure Indian leadership. On the other hand, India did not continue and choose the path of nuclear technology and making deals with USA, France and Russia etc. Then the claim to get transit route for the central Asia make the weak case of India. How Pakistan can believe that India is serious for her deals with Pakistan? I think it is not possible for Pakistan because of many reasons. Some are as given.
          1. India did not agree to resolve the Jammu and Kashmir issue till date according to U.N resolutions while this resolution was passed on the demand of India.
          2. India withdrew from gas pipeline
          3. India is violating clearly Indus Water treaty by building of dams on Pakistani rivers Chanab, Jhelum and Indus.
          4. India is responsible for insurgencies in Baluchistan.
          etc.
          First of all India should resolve burning issues then let be hopeful Pakistan would allow you to move from India to Russia and Europe. Be Hopeful………….

          Reply
          • Avatar
            May 15, 2011 at 5:44 am
            Permalink

            1. Pakistan insists on the 1948 UNSC resolution, when even the UN does not. What more, the previous secretary general Kofi Annan himself declared that the 1948 resolution was IRRELEVANT. The Shimla agreement signed by India and Pakistan supersedes the 1948 resolution.

            2. Yes, India did forgo the Iran-Pak-India gas pipeline but that has nothing to do with India’s nuclear energy program. India has 30% of the world’s thorium deposits. Thorium has several advantages over uranium. It is more abundant, much safer, and once thorium reactor technology is mature, the whole world will move thorium reactors. So why should India not?

            3. India did not violate the Indus water treaty, and even as we speak, India is negotiating with Pakistan to redesign the proposed Wullar Dam.

            4. India is not supporting rebels in Balochistan. Pakistan made a mess of it. Just ask Baloch leaders, Sardar Mengal or Sardar Akbar Bugti – whoops Pakistan assassinated Sardar Bugti in 2006!

            Only a few months back, Pakistani newspapers MADE UP a FALSE story about Wikileaks revealing India’s hand in Balochistan. But the Pakistan newspapers apologized later on, acknowledging that it was a mistake.

            Yes, it is India who would like to resolve all outstanding issues with Pakistan, just like it is doing in Bangladesh. Remember last time Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif were close to such a deal? What happened: Kargil! The entire international community condemned Pakistan for violating the LOC.

            The next time Singh and Musharraf were close to a deal on Kashmir, what happened? Musharraf was ousted!

            The problem with Pakistan is that with a vastly unpopular civilian government, a powerful Islamic fundamentalist lobby (that went into raptures over the assassination of a liberal governor Taheer of Punjab), a very powerful army that exerts control over the government, and an intelligence agency, the ISI that even may have given bin Laden a safe haven, and sponsored the Mumbai terrorist attack, there is no single power center with whom India can negotiate with, about Kashmir, can it?

        • Avatar
          April 25, 2011 at 1:22 pm
          Permalink

          Dear Satya, I’m fully agree with you that both India Pakistan must go ahead in good relation, but to be a realistic, how can Pakistan can put Kasmir on the back burner? You know that all rivers of Pakistan flown from Kasmir, and India is constructing many dams on these rivers try to infertile to Pakistan and you know Pakistan’s economy mostly depends on agriculture. Dear Satya, both India and Pakistan must come close to each other and first of all try to resolve Kashmir issue according to international law as well as water and all other disputes. second, both India and Pakistan must come on the arms control negotiation table and try to do arms control agreements. if India makes and gets more and more and modern weapons without taking to Pakistan into confidence, then it would be cause of deterrence instability and arms race, and you and me both know our countries are not so rich that can sustain arms burdens. so first of all we both countries must think about these issues such as Kashmir rather than put it on back burner. thanx

          Reply
  • Avatar
    April 21, 2011 at 2:47 pm
    Permalink

    How long will the Indian Public continue to be befooled by its Hawkish leadership wanting a regional super power status in South Asia. while they profess to be acquiring a deterrence against the Chinese what capability have they acquired. Their forces are organised to essentially fight in the plains and deserts while the borders with China is all mountainous. More than 80% of their army and airforce outfits are hosed close to pakistani borders and all their war fighting concepts and doctrines are geared to fight a short and decisive war with Pakistan. Still one would like to believe that the world’s largest arms buyer is doing it just for ‘DETERRENCE’ against China’s might….No doubt the people below the poverty line are ever increasing……….

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 21, 2011 at 10:28 pm
      Permalink

      Read my reply above for details and YES there have been exercises not as many but few near the chinese border. As far as you taking delight in our poor people. Let me tell you some facts – India’s GDP PPP is 4 trillion growing at 8.5% and Pakistan’s is $450 billion growing at < 4%.Our defence budget to GDP ration is < 2% yours is more than 3.5%. You need to worry about your economy. Ours is very promising and world has taken note of it.

      Reply
    • Avatar
      April 25, 2011 at 1:51 pm
      Permalink

      Thanx Dear MACK for comments on my article, Dear it is true that Indian concentration is much focus on Pakistan than China, but the poverty problem exist in both countries India and Pakistan. so Pakistan should also avoid fron unnecessary arms stock. it is my understanding

      Reply
    • Avatar
      May 15, 2011 at 5:52 am
      Permalink

      Who says that the Indian defense is geared towards war in plains and deserts?

      In fact India is most rapidly expanding its navy. Something that will be beneficial to all. It wants to make the Indian ocean safe by dealing with piracy! Next, India is concentrating on its air force.

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 22, 2011 at 3:51 am
    Permalink

    I am sorry Mr SAtya you didn’t get the message right. I never mentioned that Pakistan is doing wonders by spending so much on its defence or the economic grwth is any time better. The only issue is yhat when the Indians as you also claimed are creating a military deterrence against possible Chinese threat/ adventure then the physical manifestation of your military preparation/ response be accordingly visible. which it is not!!! Rather it poses a much potent and imminent threat on the Pakistani Eastern Borders.We need to set this ‘Equation’ right……Merely expressing intents of improving relations, Peace can not be brought to the region nor take away the apprehensions and the misgivings from the minds of the Pakistani Diaspora….

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 22, 2011 at 11:43 pm
      Permalink

      I would urge you to read about India’s policy towards China. Let us talk about what India has acquired and developed in the last 10 years. We’ve raised two mountain warfare divisions in Arunachal Pradesh (2009 I think). We’ve stationed two squadrons of Su 30 MKIs in Tejpur, Assam (2010 I think). China built roads in Tibet, India followed by building in Arunachal Pradesh (2008-11). We’ve tested our missile shield for short range ballistic missiles (in endo and exo atmosphere) and are now working on defense from ICBMS which you should know is not a threat from Pakistan (because you don’t have them) but China (2009 0 onwards). India and China are in sort of competition in space and we’re really proud of our space research organization (2007 onwards). We recently unveiled a nuclear submarine which gives India a second strike capability in case a country destroys our land assets in overwhelming missile strikes (again a threat from a qualitatively superior China) (2010). Su30 MKI, the front line fighter/bomber of IAF has a strike range of 3000km without refueling and 6000km with refueling (2002 onwards). There are 150 of such heavy class fighter bombers (no.s expected to go till 280) while China even today has over 200 Su30s (a little less technologically advanced version). This fighter is again China specific. India and Russia are working on 5th generation fighter aircraft PAKFA which took its first flight in 2009. India will manufacture 200 of these fighters too. This is again China specific because China too is working on their J10? fighter.

      We’ve leased 4 long range strategic bombers “bear” from Russia again a technology Pakistan doesn’t have.

      All these long range fighter/bombers and strategic bombers are definitely not for Pakistan but for giving IAF some means to strike in China’s heartland.

      I think the only acquisition I’ve seen Indian military do regarding Pakistan is T90 tanks and howitzer (towed) guns.

      I hope you guys compete with us in economy (8-9%) just like we’re doing with China (10%). I mean our economy is 1/3rd of China and so is the ratio of our air force to theirs. On the other hand, your economy is 1/9th of ours but your airforce is just 1/2 of ours. I see hostile intent there.

      Good day!

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 22, 2011 at 5:36 am
    Permalink

    Is it not logical that if the US-India deal has given India a chance to increase its fissile material production capacity, and if India and Pakistan are nearly at par with each other in terms of fissile material and weapons, Pakistan should readily agree to a global ban on fissile material in order to offset any advantage to India from the US-India deal?

    Reply
    • Avatar
      May 15, 2011 at 5:55 am
      Permalink

      Actually, it is NOT logical that India will be able to make more fissile material due to the Indo-US deal. All civilian nuclear reactors are going to be placed under strict IAEA control. The IAEA safegard is stricter than with China BTW.

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 22, 2011 at 5:15 pm
    Permalink

    Since beginning and expounded of Indian Cold Start Doctrine Local, Regional, and International media propagate misunderstanding of disinformation vis-à-vis nuclear deterrence in South Asia. According to given Report it looks that Arm race Episode has been put in region by conducting Short Range Ballistic Missile.
    India’s doctrine envisages division of its offensive capability in to eight smaller integrated battle groups (IBGs) could not disturb nuclear deterrence in South Asian region. Here are some points which I love to get answer by readers. 1. Will India cross our Red line zone (Territory)? 2. Will India attack our Forces? 3. Will India disturb nuclear deterrence in South Asia? If India wants to do so, India will shaken the nuclear threshold. And if once nuclear threshold has been challenged what consequences would be? Probability 1st use option of Nuclear weapons. Lets have a look Pakistani threshold (unofficial) Territory and Force. Back to CSD if India attacks Pakistani forces for Territory, what options for Pakistan? Arms Race, Probability to use of nuclear weapon, restoring stable nuclear deterrence.
    Though in contemporary nuclear age no nation can take risk for short terms goals and pay heavy price of its nation. i-e CSD. India is rising as an economic giant in Asia and she is not in position to have a nuclear war in region. So Pakistan should not worry for CSD, neither we should jump in Arms Race by putting step of success into realm of arms race by saying that we are responding Cold Start Doctrine.
    FM(C)T. is all about Myth the practical steps and contemporary strategic security environment does not permit for FMCT-FMT. if once they did and stop the future production what about existing arsenal? by the way it is good effort to highlight core issue in world politics, i appriciate you and your struggle. keep it up

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 25, 2011 at 1:40 pm
      Permalink

      Thank you so much Dear Tufail, I’m fully agree with you that both Pakistan and India should join arms control agreements. It is true that it would be very difficult to India that it cross nuclear threshold and disturb nuclear deterrence stability. so why both countries cannot come close to each other. we should seriously think about arms control agreements.

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 23, 2011 at 1:42 pm
    Permalink

    First of all I appreciate the author of this article who did good job and enabled us to understand the real debate on FM(C)T as well as highlighted the logical factors which make some sense about the stance of Pakistan on FMT and regional stability. If we talk about the nuclear arms race in India, the founders of India were against nuclear technology but after the death of Mr. Nehru India’s nuclear scientist got success to convince Mrs Indra Gandhi to make nuclear device And then exploded and termed it as “peaceful nuclear explosion”. “India became the first and only country in the world to explode an atomic bomb made from materials imported for peaceful nuclear purposes. India made the bomb with plutonium extracted from spent reactor fuel”

    (http://www.wisconsinproject.org/pubs/articles/1986/nuclearcoverup.htm)

    This cheating opens the eyes of South Asia states as well as the entire world, a nuclear weapons race has set in. Pakistan expressed her deep concerns and tried her best to keep the region free of nuclear weapons but India did not show commitment in this regard. Thats why Pakistan also had to go to start her nuclear program. Pakistan’s stance very clear on FMT negotiations.

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 25, 2011 at 1:43 pm
      Permalink

      Thank you so much Dear Abdul Ghafar for such appreciation and also given such nice comments

      Reply
    • Avatar
      May 15, 2011 at 5:22 am
      Permalink

      You are conveniently overlooking the most crucial reason why India went nuclear, which is China!

      Yes, indeed India was against nuclear weapons. India originally never wanted any. But China detonated in 1963, just a year after it attacked India. It then also tested a hydrogen bomb. India had no choice but to start its own nuclear program! India did test in 1974, just a single fission bomb, as a small safeguard against potential Chinese aggression.

      But China decided to encourage Pakistan to match India’s military prowess by actually providing it with the design of a nuclear weapon. China and Pakistan did something terrible, something that nobody in the world does – NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION.

      Then, Pakistan’s nuclear spy Abdul Qadir Khan smuggled URENCO nuclear centrifuge technology to produce fissile materials for bomb building. In 1987, Pakistan announced that it had the ability to make nuclear weapons without actually detonating any!

      India has a large space program, launching many rockets every year. It even sent a spacecraft to the moon, and is planning a manned mission. India can use its experience with large rockets to design ICBMs, but is not doing so on its own volition.

      Pakistan has no rocket launching capability whatsoever. On the contrary it violated international norms by importing missile technology from North Korea, in exchange for nuclear know-how.

      Yet Pakistan matches India’s nuclear missile capability.

      India has 100% indigenous nuclear technology, has built the world’s first thorium reactor, and currently has the only operating fast breeder reactor, again entirely indigenous. India is a part of the international research consortium to harness fusion energy at CERN, Europe.

      Pakistan has no indigenous nuclear technology of that sort. Yet, Pakistan tested ONE MORE nuclear than India in 1998, it has MORE nuclear warheads than India, Pakistan’s arsenal is the world’s FASTEST growing arsenal, and YET, Pakistan is the ONLY country in the world to OPPOSE a peaceful international treaty to stop producing nuclear weapon material.

      Pakistan is also guilty of one of the worst genocides after WW-II. It killed up to 3 million people in Bangladesh. Until 2001, Pakistan wholeheartedly supported the disastrous, fundamentalist Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Even now the world is worried that Pakistan would resume patronizing the Taliban against the present secular government in Kabul, once the Americans leave.

      Today, Pakistan is a nation teetering on the brink of economic bankruptcy. It survives on international aid. It is a highly unstable nation and a fundamentalist government can take over control. Every warhead that Pakistan possesses makes the world a more dangerous place. That does not apply to Indian, US, Israeli, or Chinese warheads – JUST PAKISTANI ONES!

      Reply
      • Avatar
        May 18, 2011 at 9:59 am
        Permalink

        Dear Sanjoy Das, First of all I’m very thankful to you for your participation and giving comments about my article and reply to other readers. Dear if you are analyst or researcher (please don’t mind)try to become realist rather than hawkish.Dear you say, “India has 100% indigenous nuclear technology”. please try to read history, the fissile material of first Indian nuclear test was granted by CIRUS reactor which was given by Canada and USA for peaceful purposes. so how you can say that India has 100% indigenous nuclear technology? Second you are saying that India is china centric, then why India conducts its military exercises near Pakistani boarders rather than Chinese boarders? Dear it is true that there are many elements in Pakistan who don’t want good relation between India-Pakistan, but it is also true that there are many elements in India who also don’t want. we both have to admit the reality rather than blaming each other. once again thank you so much dear and be always happy

        Reply
        • Avatar
          June 1, 2011 at 7:28 am
          Permalink

          Dear Mr. M. Suleman Shahid,

          I am indeed trying to be as fairly balanced as possible.

          Allow me to counter both issues.

          A. India’s indigenous nuclear technology:

          CIRUS is a miniscule component of India’s nuclear program. Furthermore, it is equally likely that the plutonium for the 1974 tests might have been obtained from the indigenous DHRUVA reactor as well. In the same manner, India has been a victim of broken promises by the USA too. The US stopped supplying fissile material to Trombay despite an accord. But I was talking about the civilian program as well. India designs and operates its own reactors, and is a world leader in thorium reactors, fast breeder technology, etc. 100% of not, India’s nuclear program is more homegrown than even China, which obtained Soviet help.

          B. India conducts military exercises along the Pakistani border rather than the China because of the Himalayas, and because China is viewed not as an immediate threat but a long-term one. Lastly, India does not want to displease a stronger foe.

          But India also routinely conducts naval joint exercises in the South China sea with the US, Japan and Russia. That is certainly not directed towards Pakistan.

          India’s foremost nuclear missile deterrent consists of Agni missiles, which are directed against China. The Pak-specific Prithvi missiles are actually not very successful. The Indian defense research establishment has concentrated on ICBMs, which certainly are unnecessary with respect to Pakistan.

          India invested heavily in Admiral Gorshkov, an aircraft carrier. It is also building its own aircraft carrier. These investments have nothing to do with Pakistan. In fact India’s main goals are to acquire a blue water naval capability.

          India has not yet developed stealth aircraft, but went ahead and designed a stealth warship (Shivalik class)

          Reply
  • Avatar
    May 19, 2011 at 7:49 pm
    Permalink

    I have seen all these statement,
    I think India and Pak should sit down and discuss peace. India should sign a treaty to ensure that Pak is supplied with enough necessary water,
    LOC should be international border.
    I think that Pak and India are both brothers (be it ennemy) but they are brothers at the end of the day.
    Forget religions differences, all lead to same GOD ! Forget the past and start new !
    I think you should look at the smile of a child and start to think about new generations,
    do not give them a war please !
    So try to restrain the maximum, cool down head ! and start making economic efforts because both india and Pak are poor countries !!! Please stop these each other accusations and worry about future economy ! Pakistan should put extra-effort to stop terrorism, show sincere good will and do not make a mistake to have chinese communists in your country because they are nobody’s friend ! They do not like any religion at all !!! Remember that ! They just want to use Pakistan to have access to Islamic
    countries – these oil producers arab nations. In fact, we chinese presence in sacred muslim
    lands and seas of Arabia will cost a heavy price to the muslim world in the future !
    We hindus and muslims sometimes have communal riots but at least we have one common thing :
    we believe in GOD, Love, Peace and Compassion !
    But not the chinese ! they are from different colour, race and without religion ! They eat whatever moves and remember they have killed many islamic insurgency in China ! But in India, we have 200 millions muslims who are indian citizens and have a good muslim leader as Abdul Kalaam ! You see: we have a lot of muslim personalities in India. Now ask yoursel : Isn’t India near Pakista than china ? Please compare without any hate and you will see what i mean !!! Peace India and Pakistan may live forever ! Kashmir should be considered the common ground of friendship between 2 brothers!
    Let’s talk business muslim and hindu brothers !

    Reply
    • Avatar
      June 11, 2011 at 5:16 pm
      Permalink

      Dear IAG….
      Thanx for your response. dear I’m very happy to read there are many people in India that wants good relations of Indo-Pak, but I’m much disappointed that you are saying that we Pakistani should leave to Chinese. I think India and China both are much inter depended on each other in term of trade. So first of all you should leave to China but we want good relations with all neighbours. Dear you are talking about killing of musllims in China, but what about genocide of muslims in India especially in Gujrat? Dear plz adopt the realistic approach.

      Reply
      • Avatar
        June 18, 2011 at 12:36 pm
        Permalink

        Dear Suleman,

        With respect to your specific comment:

        >Dear you are talking about killing of musllims in China,
        >but what about genocide of muslims in India especially
        >in Gujrat? Dear plz adopt the realistic approach.

        First of all, although I have a Hindu name, I am an ATHEIST. I enjoy eating beef which is taboo to Hindus, admire M F Hussein’s painting of nude Hindu goddesses which are certainly esthetic, never in my life went into a Hindu temple, hate the obnoxious, pot-bellied brahmins and am a fan of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. To me belief in “god” is plain and simple STUPID. I hate religions – all of them. I am a man of modern science & progress.

        Around 10 years ago, there was a sudden surge in popularity of the right-wing that led the BJP into power. While some in the BJP, such as Vajpayee were OK, the BJP needed the help of extremist saffron organizations such as the Shiv Sena and scumbags such as Narendra Modi within the BJP. This was when Godhra happened. That is a shame on Indian democracy.

        I have many Gujarati friends. I know Gujaratis to be very hard-working and generally peaceful. But they are also Hindu fanatics. Among people of all Indian states, I would rank Gujaratis to be the most “fanatic” about Hinduism. My own state of Orissa is only marginally better, but the animosity in Orissa is with Christians, not Muslims. However, there are 26 other states in India, and Hindu extremism is virtually unknown in most states.

        The recent Ayodhya verdict which gave 1/3rd of the Masjid area to Muslims and 2/3 to two Hindu groups was praised by the BBC News, the New York Times, and some other newspapers. The decision was jointly made by 2 Hindu judges and 1 Muslim judge of the Allahabad high court. Nevertheless, I think that the decision was BIASED in favor of the Hindu majority and I unequivocally CONDEMN the Indian judicial system for pronouncing a biased verdict. The evidence was not strong enough for a temple. The entire site should have been awarded to the Muslim community with enough money for them to build a bigger masjid, and Hindus could have built a temple in an adjoining area.

        (Actually, my secret wish is that NO religion should be granted land, but that is besides the point.)

        The Indian government undoubtedly panders to religions for votes. It did not give 10% security to M F Hussein who drew nude paintings of Hindu Goddesses. His house was vandalized by Hindu fanatics. A recent biography of Gandhi which portrays Gandhi as a homosexual was banned in India. Likewise, the Indian government also banned Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses”, and the Jyllands Posten Mohammed cartoons. It even placed the Bangla novelist Tasleem Nasreen under house arrest.

        To me, it is SHAMEFUL that a country that masquerades itself as the “World’s largest democracy” does not uphold the freedom of speech and press.

        That said, I can confidently state that India is MOSTLY secular, with no particular religion being favored by the government. The November 2010 “International Religious Freedom Report” has raised NO concern about religious discrimination in India. There are details about many countries though – from Russia and China, down to Myanmar and Nepal. Of course Pakistan is quite prominently placed in that report. Likewise, Freedom House’s 2010 report (which includes religious freedom) ranks India in a select group of “Free” nations. Most of Asia is either “Partly Free” or “Not Free”.

        The US Republican party is as biased towards Christianity as the BJP is towards Hinduism. Some nations like Russia, Peru, Venezuela, Greece, Poland, are probably LESS secular than India. Of course Saudi Arabia takes the cake!

        I wish that Pakistan could also be a secular country, but tragically it is overtly Islamic. With the horrible blasphemy laws, oppression of Ahmediyyas, Islam being a compulsory subject in school, and with some government positions that can only be held by Muslims. It is a shame, don’t you think?

        In India, I can write “Blue god Krishna is a moron!” or “Hindu goddess Durga is a bitch!” and even draw cartoons “denigrating” them 100% freely. At best, the Indian government would succumb to Hindu pressure and put me under house arrest for a day or two or just ban my writings/drawings from being published. But the Indian government would never imprison me, nor would I experience any tangible death threats.

        But could I write something “blasphemous” about Mohammed or Islam in Pakistan? Why not?

        This is the 21st century after all!

        Reply
        • Avatar
          July 3, 2011 at 3:01 pm
          Permalink

          Respected Sanju;
          I think it is not our topic that what is wrong and true in our culture and religion. Remember, I’m proud to be a Muslim.I agree that there are some fake Muslims, due to them Islam become sign of critique. Dear if you are are secular, its doesn’t mean that you rise the voice against other religions and theories. I think you would know the actual meaning of liberty- “you can do every thing in circle of law but no one should disturb due to your activities”. so you have no rights to give strange comments about Islam or any other religion. If you want to continue further negotiation with me then you have to clear your mind about false report about any religion and concentrate on topic.
          Best Regards
          M Suleman Shahid

          Reply
  • Avatar
    June 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Sanjoy Das.

    First of all I would really appreciate you that less or more you adopted the Realistic perspective, but Dear all the Indian war technology development is directly threat to Pakistan including your Blue Water navy program. can you give us surety that India will never attack on Pakistan or would not try to involve to destabilize us? If you give us such surety and we believe on it, then it will be unacceptable madness of us. yes we both India-Pakistan can come on table talk and try to solve all disputed issues and really this is time of arms control in South Asia. It is pity that poverty is dancing in both country and we are spending much more money on defence. thank you so much my respected colleague

    Reply
  • Avatar
    June 18, 2011 at 9:21 am
    Permalink

    Dear Suleman,

    As I said, India’s concern is China. I say it with confidence as I am an Indian myself. The Tibetan government in exile is in India. China claims Arunachal Pradesh (which has Tawang Buddhist monastery, Dalai Lama’s birthplace), to complete its occupation of Tibet. China is right now bullying Vietnam in the disputed Spratly islands, as well as the Philippines. Earlier this year, it threatened Japan in the disputed Senkaku islands. India is watching these developments with alarm. India is in global competition with China, and China is far ahead militarily and economically.

    Yes, India’s Navy could also be a threat to Pakistan. But the question that you should ask is this: Why is India building up a BLUE water naval capability instead of WHITE water capability, if it were Pakistan-centric?

    Likewise,
    (i) India’s missile development focusing so much more on the Agni-V, and later ICBMs, instead of Prithvi.
    (ii) India built a stealth warship long time ago, while a stealth plane is a distant dream.
    (iii) India holds joint maritime exercises with USA, Japan etc. in the Bay of Bengal, instead of the Arabian sea.
    (iv) India has a major naval base in the Andaman islands (east), but not the Lakshadweep islands (west).

    Isn’t it amply clear that India’s main worry is China? The Indian military eye on Pakistan is only TACTICAL, while its focus on China is STRATEGIC.

    Of course India is worried about Pakistan, but that fear arises from potential terrorism attacks in India and loose Pakistani nukes. Call it media hype if you may, but that is what global newspapers say and that is what Indians read.

    I agree that Pakistan has a point in Kashmir. But all big nations are known to cling on to their territories with militant zeal. China does the same thing in Tibet and Xinjiang, Russia in Chechnya and Dagestan, Turkey & Iran in Kurdistan, Saudi Arabia in its vassal state Bahrain, and the UK from the Gibraltar to the Falklands. Pakistan tried its best to hang on to Bangladesh inspite of the wishes of the Bengalis themselves.

    As unfair as it may seem, territorial disputes involving regional/global powers can only be resolved without redrawing international borders. The key to solving the Kashmir issue is to convert the LOC into a SOFT international boundary, with Kashmiris able to travel across the border without visas.

    India has made peace overtures towards all other South Asian nations – Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Nepal. India’s thinking has become more economic nowadays. No more the “Mera Bharat Mahaan”. Our Prime Minister holds an economics Ph.D. from Oxford. India wants more market access, more economic growth, and more development. All this can be ensured by ensuring regional peace and stability.

    This includes India longing for a stable Pakistan. A stable Pakistan at peace with India, would:
    (i) make India less prone to terrorist attacks, muffle the voices of the Hindutvadi lunatics
    (ii) Allow Indian business houses like Tata, Reliance, Infosys, to enter Pakistani markets
    (iii) Help gain access to oil and gas from Central Asia and Iran,
    (iv) Reduce Pakistani resistance to a UNSC permanent seat, and
    (v) Deprive India’s main competitor, China, its Pakistani leverage vis-a-vis India.
    Undoubtedly, a stable Pakistan that is at peace with India has far too many benefits for India.

    Rest assured, this is what India wants.

    The way forward is to stop the mindless animosity and work towards the common economic development of all South Asia!

    Reply
  • Avatar
    July 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm
    Permalink

    Respected Sanju;
    I think it is not our topic that what is wrong and true in our culture and religion. Remember, I’m proud to be a Muslim.I agree that there are some fake Muslims, due to them Islam become sign of critique. Dear if you are are secular, its doesn’t mean that you rise the voice against other religions and theories. I think you would know the actual meaning of liberty- “you can do every thing in circle of law but no one should disturb due to your activities”. so you have no rights to give strange comments about Islam or any other religion. If you want to continue further negotiation with me then you have to clear your mind about false report about any religion and concentrate on topic.
    Best Regards
    M Suleman Shahid

    Reply
  • Avatar
    September 26, 2011 at 6:43 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Suleman,
    Many have died be it hindus or muslims…
    genocide is everywhere … if you raise the question of genocide in gujerat then i rise the question of hindu genocide in bangladesh still happening today….there is no end…to this…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.