Share this story!            

Time to destroy nuclear weapons

After Kargil, India
invented the notion of a limited war between nuclear weapon states. It was a strange and satisfying realisation that a war between nuclear states need not go all the way. But we now know that were it not for the US, Kargil may not have remained a limited conflict. After dealing with crisis after crisis, the problem-solvers abroad may just decide (wrongly) that it is time to call India’s bluff on “coercive diplomacy” and let us face the consequences

C Rammanohar Reddy

The war clouds began moving away the past week, so we can breathe a little easily. We may know only years from now how close we were in the summer of 2002 not just to a war but to the Armageddon of a nuclear conflict. But the conduct of India and Pakistan during the past month holds out the very real possibility that there may come a standoff when the two countries accidentally or deliberately use their nuclear weapons. We believed in the lie of the experts who decided we need nuclear weapons, it is time for the citizenry to tell them otherwise.

After Kargil, India invented the notion of a limited war between nuclear weapon states. It was a strange and satisfying realisation that a war between nuclear states need not go all the way. But we now know that were it not for the US, Kargil may not have remained a limited conflict. The Pakistani army — independently of the civilian government — was preparing (or sabre-rattling) for a nuclear war in July 1999. The next time round there may not be a Clinton to call a Nawaz Sharif and ask him to back down. The next time round there may not even be a Rumsfield or an Armitage burning the air-routes. It is bad enough that we now depend on others to sort out our problems. After dealing with crisis after crisis, the problem-solvers abroad may just decide (wrongly) that it is time to call India’s bluff on “coercive diplomacy” and let us face the consequences.

There is no need to exhibit any injured pride about the West showing concern about the (in)ability of the two countries to handle nuclear weapons. It was perhaps a deliberate ploy to whip up fears of a nuclear war in South Asia. But there is no point in the strategists telling us how India was one of the first countries to be opposed to nuclear weapons, implying that India’s weapons are meant for deterrence and not use. Such pious statements are meaningless when there is so much loose talk about exercising the nuclear option. It does not help either when the Government says India will not be the first to fire nuclear weapons — that they will be used only in retaliation — when there are enough politicians, strategists and defence experts egging the Government on to “finish” Pakistan, assuming that it will then sit by and not open its nuclear arsenal.

If Pakistan has been quick this time to play the nuclear card — as it apparently did in 1990 and in 1999 — our attitude has been no less cavalier. We have had Yogendra Narain, Defence Secretary, say blithely, “We must be prepared for mutual destruction.” And earlier the Army Chief talked about nuclear war. This is not a game of poker in which the decision-makers know the right moment when to call Pakistan’s “bluff”. What if, like most players of poker, they call wrongly in a confrontation — five, 10 or 15 years from now? Part of this game has been to pretend that Pakistan does not have a nuclear capability. Indian atomic scientists for years said Pakistan was incapable of conducting a nuclear test. Whether with Chinese help or on their own, they successfully tested in 1998. We were also told that Pakistan could not deliver nuclear bombs. But again whether with help from North Korea or elsewhere, they have an array of missiles for the purpose. Now we are told that we need not worry — the US will destroy Pakistan’s bombs if that country came close to use. The US is the only super-power in the world, but it is not all-powerful. Six months after a war began in Afghanistan, it has not been able to collect enough information to capture more than one ranking member of a terrorist organisation. So where is the guarantee it can do (if it wants to) what we hope for?

With some innocence, which would be touching were it not for the terrible implications it could lead to, we have assured ourselves that our and Pakistan’s nuclear weapons pose no danger. They were sold to us as providing the ultimate security. Yet, in four years we have had one war (Kargil) and have now come close to another one. When will we finally realise that these “destroyers of worlds” pose a fundamental threat to India as we know it? And when will the Pakistanis also realise the same? In the event of a nuclear war, Pakistan may be reduced to ashes while India may still have some smouldering bricks. But that is of no consolation to those of us who will be unfortunate to survive. And when will we realise that the only salvation lies in the two countries dismantling their nuclear weapons, destroying their fissile material and once and for all snuffing out the lobbies of scientists, strategists and politicians who have taken us to the edge of the abyss? —The Hindu

Home | Foreign

Share this story!