In the summer of 2021, the world learned that China was dramatically expanding its nuclear arsenal. Satellite imagery showed Beijing building as many as 300 new ballistic missile silos. The Pentagon now projects that China’s stockpile of nuclear weapons, which had for years rested in the low hundreds, could spike to 1,500 warheads by 2035, confirming suspicions that Beijing has decided to join Russia and the United States in the front rank of nuclear powers.
Security experts are only beginning to sort through the implications of China’s nuclear breakout. They would do well to consider Ashley Tellis’s new book, Striking Asymmetries, which assesses the implications of Beijing’s actions from the vantage point of the rivalries between South Asia’s three nuclear powers: China, India, and Pakistan.… Seguir leyendo »
It's safe to say that India-Pakistan relations are nearly on a war footing.
Saber rattling has been near constant in recent weeks after terrorists -- from Pakistan, according to India -- stormed an Indian military base in India-controlled Kashmir and killed 18 soldiers. India's home minister denounced Pakistan as a "terrorist state." Pakistan's defense minister threatened nuclear war.
Then came Thursday, when India claimed to have carried out a "surgical strike" across the border into Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. The operation, according to the Indian government and military, targeted terrorist "launch pads" and killed several dozen militants. New Delhi's detailed (and perhaps exaggerated) account said the operation lasted four hours.… Seguir leyendo »
Recientemente, salió a la luz que Estados Unidos estaba intentando negociar con Pakistán un acuerdo para restringir el programa de armas nucleares de rápido crecimiento de los paquistaníes. Suena a buena noticia: cualquier medida a favor de la no proliferación parece un paso positivo. Desafortunadamente, en este caso el esfuerzo ha tenido algunas consecuencias peligrosas no deseadas.
Todo comenzó el mes pasado, cuando los medios estadounidenses informaron que prácticamente ya se había alcanzado un acuerdo. Primero, David Ignatius de The Washington Post informó, en base a conversaciones con altos funcionarios de Estados Unidos, que ya se había llegado a un acuerdo sobre una cantidad de medidas que tomaría Pakistán para reducir su dependencia de las armas nucleares como elemento de disuasión.… Seguir leyendo »
The current international attention on the nuclear deal with Iran obscures another much-trumpeted nuclear accord signed a decade ago — between the United States and India. On the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-India nuclear deal, six words sum it up: Built on hype, deflated by reality. Indeed, it has become the forgotten nuclear deal.
When it was unveiled by U.S. President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Washington on July 18, 2005, the deal was touted as a major transformative initiative — one that would serve as a “basis for expanding bilateral activities and commerce in space, civil nuclear energy and dual-use technology.”… Seguir leyendo »
During U.S. President Barack Obama’s recent India visit, a stalled, decade-old civil nuclear deal took center-stage, with the two sides announcing a breakthrough on the contentious issues blocking its implementation — a development that promised to potentially open the path for a Japan-India nuclear deal. It now appears that the breakthrough was more hype than reality and that there is little prospect of the U.S.-India deal’s early commercialization.
With Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi by his side, Obama announced that “we achieved a breakthrough understanding on two issues that were holding up our ability to advance our civil nuclear cooperation.” The two issues identified were nuclear accident liability and the administrative arrangements to govern the bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement — the successor to an accord the United States unilaterally terminated after India detonated a nuclear device in 1974.… Seguir leyendo »
When the Bharatiya Janata Party announced it would “revise and update” India’s nuclear doctrine if elected this month, the proposal was widely interpreted to mean that the party would renege on India’s 1998 pledge never to use nuclear weapons in a first strike. The party has since backtracked, ostensibly because of the media backlash. That’s unfortunate. Although the “no first use” doctrine, known as N.F.U., may seem prudent in theory, India has diluted the concept to the point of absurdity, with dangerous consequences: a buildup of its conventional forces, which has caused Pakistan to harden its nuclear stance.
In August 1999 a panel of independent experts convened by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee issued a draft nuclear doctrine containing a commitment to N.F.U.… Seguir leyendo »
The nonproliferation regime is in crisis with North Korea’s defiance and Iran’s continuation of its nuclear program despite opposition from the international community. Yet while a lot of discussion is happening about what can be done about these two states, no one seems willing to take on the elephant in the room: China.
Not only has China played a crucial role in the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, its nuclear engagement with Pakistan potentially remains the most destabilizing factor in the global management of nuclear weapons technology.
Last month Beijing confirmed its plans to sell a new 1,000-megawatt nuclear reactor to Pakistan in a deal signed in February.… Seguir leyendo »
An Aesopian nuclear competition is under way between Pakistan and India. Pakistan, whose economy and domestic cohesion are steadily worsening, is the hare, racing to devote scarce resources to compete with a country whose economy is nine times as great. India is the tortoise: Its nuclear program is moving steadily forward without great exertion.
The tortoise will win this race, and could quicken its pace. But the hare continues to run fast, because nuclear weapons are a sign of strength amid domestic weaknesses and because it can’t keep up with the growth of India’s conventional military programs.
At present, there is rough nuclear parity between India and Pakistan, with Pakistan having a larger arsenal and India having more advanced air- and sea-based capabilities.… Seguir leyendo »
"We urge all nuclear-capable states to exercise restraint regarding nuclear capabilities," a State Department spokesman said last month after India successfully blasted its new long-range Agni 5 missile into the Bay of Bengal. But he quickly softened the admonishment: "That said, India has a solid nonproliferation record."
Washington's oddly relaxed approach to India's nuclear program goes back to 2008, when Congress approved the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. Under it, India agreed to separate its military and civil nuclear facilities and to place the latter under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards in exchange for a U.S. guarantee to work toward full civil nuclear cooperation with New Delhi.… Seguir leyendo »
When the Commonwealth heads of government meet in Australia later this month, one prominent leader is almost certain to be conspicuously absent: India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. India is a strong backer of the association of former British colonies (and some new entrants without that shared heritage, notably Mozambique and Rwanda), so no displeasure with the Commonwealth is implied. Instead, rumors in New Delhi suggest that the decision to send a delegation led by India’s ceremonial vice-president, albeit an able former diplomat, might be a not-so-subtle rebuke to the summit’s host, Australia.
On the face of it, it is hard to imagine two countries with less cause for conflict.… Seguir leyendo »
In 1947, a British lawyer with no experience in the region arrived in India to draw lines on a map. Within several weeks, Cyril Radcliffe had severed the future Pakistan from India, helping to create the conditions that have since resulted in three wars and the arming of both nations with nuclear weapons. People ask what America would do if Pakistan lost control of its nukes. Wrong question. Ask instead what India might do.
That country has as many as 100 nuclear weapons and the missiles, as well as the airplanes, submarines and surface ships, to launch them. Pakistan also has around 100 nuclear weapons but lacks India's extensive delivery systems.… Seguir leyendo »
Less than a month ago, unnamed U.S. officials hit the front page of the Financial Times by indicating that the U.S.-India nuclear pact was "almost certainly dead." This past weekend the corpse suddenly twitched back to life, thanks to sharp political maneuvering by India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, and his Congress Party. Now, the deal will almost certainly be signed by India's government -- putting the onus back on the United States to get it implemented.
For that to happen, Congress must stop trying to use the deal as leverage to force India to back the U.S. line on Iran. And the Bush administration, as well as Sens.… Seguir leyendo »
El futuro del polémico acuerdo entre Estados Unidos e India en materia nuclear en el ámbito comercial sigue rodeado de incertidumbre pese a la ilusión que despertó la aprobación del texto en el trámite en el Congreso. Porque este texto, rebosante de condiciones y cláusulas, no ha hecho más que aumentar las posibilidades de que su aplicación conlleve un dilatado y problemático proceso.
El acuerdo ha suscitado juicios y expectativas desmedidos sobre sus posibles frutos. Cada detalle, prácticamente, se ha exagerado: su impacto sobre el actual sistema internacional de no proliferación; su papel a la hora de que India afronte con mejores perspectivas sus crecientes necesidades en materia de energía; su influencia en el refuerzo de la asociación estratégica EE.… Seguir leyendo »
By Jimmy Carter. Former president Carter, a Democrat, is founder of the Carter Center (THE WASHINGTON POST, 29/03/06):
During the past five years the United States has abandoned many of the nuclear arms control agreements negotiated since the administration of Dwight Eisenhower. This change in policies has sent uncertain signals to other countries, including North Korea and Iran, and may encourage technologically capable nations to choose the nuclear option. The proposed nuclear deal with India is just one more step in opening a Pandora's box of nuclear proliferation.
The only substantive commitment among nuclear-weapon states and others is the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), accepted by the five original nuclear powers and 182 other nations.… Seguir leyendo »
By Ivo H. Daalder and Michael A. Levi, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC. and a fellow for science and technology at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, respectively (THE WASHINGTON POST, 10/03/06):
The nuclear deal with India that President Bush agreed to in New Delhi last week is a missed opportunity for American leadership on nonproliferation. But the deal is far from the disaster that its detractors claim.
It can still be improved upon in ways that strengthen nonproliferation -- not least by foreclosing the sale of uranium enrichment and reprocessing technology and making sure that any future Indian reactors will strictly serve civilian purposes.… Seguir leyendo »
Por Pascal Boniface, director del Instituto de Relaciones Internacionales y Estratégicas de París (LA VANGUARDIA, 10/03/06):
La visita de George W. Bush a Nueva Delhi se ha presentado como un hito, un momento crucial, en las relaciones entre ambas potencias. También es verdad que no han menudeado las visitas de presidentes estadounidenses a India. Antes de Bush, Bill Clinton en el 2000 y Dwight Eisenhower en 1959 visitaron la capital india.
Durante la guerra fría, India fue líder de los países no alineados. Cultivaba, no obstante, una estrecha relación estratégica con la Unión Soviética, su principal proveedor militar, a la par que unas relaciones muy distantes y notablemente frías con Estados Unidos.… Seguir leyendo »
Back behind my high school one day, we all assembled to watch a fistfight. To my immense pleasure, a bully was being bested by his victim. Then the bully's friend stepped in and ended matters with a swift kick to the other guy's midsection. It was an unfair ending to what was supposed to be a fair fight, but it taught me a valuable lesson: You treat your friends differently than you do your enemies.
This elemental principle of life, love and other matters seems utterly lost on so many critics of George Bush's agreement to provide India with civilian nuclear technology.… Seguir leyendo »
George Bush’s visit to India was such good news that it is hard to know where to begin. No, he was not greeted with garlands, dancing girls and hippies chanting peace and love. There were no pictures of him and Laura by the Taj Mahal, though Bush did say “we pledge to be invited back”. This was India modern not exotic. The only chanting was from chief executives waving contracts and the only tigers were generals patrolling fast breeder reactors.
Bush came to Delhi as the nearest he gets to a supplicant. Despite its Hindu majority, India has one of the world’s largest Muslim populations, it is a democracy, a nuclear power, an emerging global trader.… Seguir leyendo »
This is an extract of Special to washingtonpost.com
In addition to all the predictable reactions (pro and con) to the landmark nuclear agreement reached in India yesterday, a powerful and unexpected new concern has emerged based on a last-minute concession by President Bush.
It appears that, to close the deal during his visit, Bush directed his negotiators to give in to India's demands that it be allowed to produce unlimited quantities of fissile material and amass as many nuclear weapons as it wants.
The agreement, which requires congressional approval, would be an important step toward Bush's long-held goal of closer relations with India.… Seguir leyendo »
By David Ignatius (THE WASHINGTON POST, 01/03/06):
Juxtaposed this week are the two poles of the emerging world: India and Iran. They are alpha and omega, the dream and the nightmare. One symbolizes the promise of globalization, the other the threat of global disorder.
What they share, unfortunately, is a passion to be members of the nuclear club. India has nuclear weapons; Iran wants them. Between them stands the United States, trying to set rules that will apply to both -- rewarding the good boy while maintaining an ability to punish the bad one.
F. Scott Fitzgerald famously observed that intelligence "is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time."… Seguir leyendo »
Utilizamos cookies para el correcto funcionamiento de la página web y analíticas para estadísticas.ACEPTARPolítica de privacidad
