Posts Tagged 'Pakistan'

HomeTag: Pakistan

Visiting Scholar Yogesh Joshi: Navigating Pakistan’s Nuclear and Domestic Politics

pakistan-nwJogesh Joshi, visiting scholar at the Sigur Center and Ph.D. candidate at Jawaharlal Nehru University, and Frank O’Donnell recently co-wrote an article for the East-West Center:

Pakistan is on the verge of a historic moment. For the first time in its national existence, a civilian government completed a full term of office in March of this year. A caretaker government is now administering the country until new elections are held this May. Many argue that if all goes well, successful national elections and a smooth power transition would help ensure that democratization is progressing in a country which has hitherto been ruled mostly by its generals.

However, democracy or no democracy, one trend which continues to unnerve the international community is Pakistan’s nuclear program. The country reportedly has the world’s fifth largest nuclear arsenal and it is projected to expand beyond that of France in the next few years. But this vertical proliferation is not only quantitative in nature; it is also qualitative, insofar as Pakistan is slowly but steadily diversifying the fissile base of its nuclear arsenal from uranium to plutonium. Plutonium-based weapons, unlike uranium ones, are more suitable for miniaturization because they require less fissile material. It also allows for both better concealment and swifter movement of nuclear arsenals. (more…)

Continue Reading →
1
MAY
0

Categories: Blog

Tags: , , ,

RPI Author Deepa Ollapally: Misguided Resistance to India’s Possible Entry into Nuclear Suppliers Group

NSG and IndiaBy Dr. Deepa Ollapally, Project Co-Director, Nuclear Debates in Asia; Associate Director, Sigur Center for Asian Studies and Associate Research Professor of International Affairs, GWU

The argument that inducting India into the NSG as a member would seriously damage the NPT regime is rather disingenuous. The global nonproliferation regime has been most battered by signatory countries like North Korea and Iran that have been trying to do an end-run around the NPT, and by the 1995 NPT Review process itself that extended the NPT indefinitely without sufficiently strong conditions to ensure credible leverage over the P-5’s own disarmament agenda. The regime is languishing in a weakened state without any quick or easy solution. There is no chance that India will sign the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state and gain NSG membership. Given that India is now in a “half-way house” in a clearly imperfect NPT regime, the question that should be debated is whether it does more damage to the goals of nonproliferation to have India inside or outside the NSG. The answer to that question is not difficult.

Nearly all independent observers agree that India holds an exceptionally good record on nuclear trade and follows global norms even without NSG membership. But having India in the NSG will increase transparency of India’s actions and presumably aid international coordination—outcomes no one can argue with. On the other hand, Pakistan has not been able to shake off the fallout from highly incriminating allegations in 2002 about its trade of sensitive nuclear information with North Korea in exchange for ballistic missiles. It is practically impossible to find any credible analyst willing to confidently vouch for Pakistan’s clean record on nonproliferation—in the past or future. That China, a country linked to controversial nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, is raising obstacles to considering Indian membership in the NSG is telling. Indeed, one can only conclude that China is much more motivated by political competition with India and supporting India’s rival Pakistan, than by any real concern for nonproliferation protocols.

For more on the debate over India’s possible NSG membership, click here.

Continue Reading →
26
MAR
0

Categories: Blog

Tags: , , , ,

The NATO Summit and Afghanistan’s Future: Comments from Russia, India and China

Last week, leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization met in Chicago to discuss the future of NATO’s role in Afghanistan. This post highlights commentary on this topic from the Russian, Indian and Chinese press.

RUSSIA

Commentary in Russia generally called for greater Russian integration into NATO structures, while encouraging continued dialogue on NATO’s European missile shield plans.

  • The state-run Itar-Tass news agency took an optimistic view of Russia-NATO relations in a review of the 15 year partnership, praising the continued growth of “mutual understanding and openness” between Russia and NATO.

On Afghanistan however, Russian views were highly critical. Several commentaries called for an increased role for the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in Afghanistan. The CSTO, headquartered in Moscow, is a military alliance made up of seven former Soviet republics: Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

  • “Another NATO Summit, trying to find solutions for a destabilized Afghanistan,” lamented  Pravda “Why is Afghanistan destabilized? Because NATO destabilized it…the more NATO rears its demonic head, the greater the need for an enlarged and effective CSTO.” 

INDIA

The main theme in Indian commentary was Pakistan’s role in hindering NATO efforts to stabilize Afghanistan:

  • C. Raja Mohan argued that “ the US should play hardball” with the Pakistani army, and outlined four possible ways the US might “confront [Pakistan's] double-game in Afghanistan.” Expressing a great-power realist viewpoint, Mohan said that the US, despite its weakening position in Afghanistan, still has enough levers to compel Pakistan to stop supporting the Taliban.

Another concern was India’s relationship with NATO. An op-ed in the Indian Express lamented the absence of any structured engagement between India and NATO:

  • “Given that the [NATO] alliance was built on principles and values that its members ostensibly share with India, there are no reasons why India’s defense establishment should not be considering similar opportunities for interaction. India is certainly not interested in a formal partnership, but shared interests and realms of activity…lend themselves, at the very least, to an agenda for consultations and dialogue.”

CHINA

The officially-sanctioned press cast NATO as   increasingly marginalized but also overly aggressive in recent military ventures. The People’s Daily argued that NATO “should not maintain its unsustainable life by exaggerating others’ military threats.” A commentary published by Xinhua pointed to various post-Cold War NATO missions and said that “NATO warmongering has triggered many disputes in the international community and even within the alliance itself.”

Continue Reading →
31
MAY
0

Categories: China, India, Russia

Tags: , , ,

Indian and U.S. experts exchange mixed views on India as a global power

India’s foreign policy has become increasingly contested in domestic Indian politics, calling into question some of the assumptions and expectations that American policymakers may have about the future of US-India relations. This divergence in opinion was highlighted at the “India as a Global Power: Contending Views from India” conference, which took place on January 23, 2012 and was co-sponsored by the Sigur Center for Asian Studies and the Center for a New American Security.

Assessing India’s Threat Environment
The conference’s Indian speakers disagreed on a wide range of issues, one of which was the question of India’s threat environment. Bharat Karnad, Professor at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, identified China’s military build-up and proliferation activities as the top threats to Indian security. Former Indian Foreign Secretary Lalit Mansingh also expressed grave concern over China’s naval presence in the Indian Ocean, though he did not consider it an imminent threat.

In contrast, Mani Shankar Aiyar, Member of the Indian Parliament, was more optimistic that India could forge cooperative solutions with China on issues of common interest, such as freedom of the seas. He instead argued that Pakistan remains the most prominent threat to India. T.N. Ninan, Chairman and Chief Editor of the Business Standard, while concurring on both the Chinese and Pakistani threats, emphasized economic development as India’s top priority and said energy security and international pressure to act on climate change could hinder India’s growth trajectory.

Whether or not India could or should become a global power appeared to frame the debate on threats to national security. (more…)

Continue Reading →
7
FEB
0

Categories: India, United States

Tags: , ,

Ten years after 9/11: What are key Asian states saying?

This past weekend, the U.S. commemorated the ten year anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Across the globe, other countries also took a moment to reflect on this day.  In this post, we examine views from Russia, India, China and Japan.

RUSSIA

InRussia, commentators asserted thatU.S.unilateralism in the “war on terror” has interfered in the internal affairs of sovereign countries. At the same time, they concede that the Kremlin also lost an opportunity to deepen U.S.-Russian relations in the 9/11 aftermath.

  • The Russian Foreign Ministry stated that although the 9/11 attacks were “provocative and cruel,” they also led to broad international cooperation that has helped to bring global counter-terrorism cooperation to a higher level. The Foreign Ministry emphasized thatRussia supports an international coalition of nations, as opposed to some form of unilateralism, as the best mechanism for battling against the specter of terrorism.

Multiple commentaries described the 9/11 tragedy and subsequent global fight against terrorism as a missed opportunity for the Kremlin to boost ties with the West:

  • The Moscow Times, which tends to express opinion that the Rising Powers Initiative characterizes as Pro-Western Liberal, favoring modernization and integration with the West, noted that although U.S.-Russian cooperation got off to a strong start after 9/11, it quickly fizzled. “Moscow was counting on getting something in return fromWashington…butWashington simply tookMoscow’s assistance for granted, interpreting it as a response that any civilized country would have taken to support a partner hit by a major terrorist attack.”
  • RIA Novosti military commentator Konstantin Bogdanov remarked, “If there’s anything that the ten years of the ‘war on terror’ have demonstrated, it’s that the world leader is incredibly isolated. America is stubbornly and methodically trying to impose its own designs on a desperately recalcitrant world.” As the state news agency, RIA Novosti’s views are close to the current government position and reflect what the Rising Powers Initiative has identified as the Great Power Balancers viewpoint—those that seek great power status in relations with U.S. and China.

INDIA

In India, 9/11 was an occasion to reflect on the country’s own problems with terrorism, in the context ofAmerica’s war on terror over the past ten years.     (more…)

Continue Reading →
16
SEP
0

Categories: China, India, Japan, Russia, United States

Tags: , , , ,

Asian reactions to the death of Osama bin Laden

How is the Asian region responding to the death of Osama bin Laden? In this blog post, we examine the domestic viewpoints of India, Iran, Russia, China and Japan, especially their reflections on terrorism, U.S. presence in Afghanistan, and the role of Pakistan.

INDIA

In India, most commentaries focused on India’s relations with Pakistan and Afghanistan, while some reflected on the ongoing democratization processes in the Middle East.

  • The Hindu described the revelation of bin Laden’s presence in Pakistan as a “moment of truth…similar to the discovery that the 2008 Mumbai attacks were launched from its territory,” but it nevertheless urged restraint in Indian diplomacy: “While it may be tempting to see bin Laden’s killing at Abbottabad as confirmation of India’s worst fears, New Delhi must resist the temptation to crow, and must push ahead with the peace process with the civilian government of Pakistan.” The Indian Express had a similar view, saying “India has to continue to be innovative and largehearted in engaging with as large a section of the Pakistani establishment as it can.
  • The Times of India wondered whether the U.S. would accelerate its troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, and expressed deep worry that this could “easily lead to chaos with serious security ramifications for the region, including India.” The Indian Express urged more cooperation with the U.S. on Af-Pak peace: “The death in Abbottabad is a reminder of the realism needed to negotiate the new great game being played for Afghanistan after the drawdown of American troop presence….Given its limited leverage within Pakistan, India must also be engaged with the US and the international community on steps towards Af-Pak peace, to prevent the re-emergence of Afghanistan as a hotbed for extremism and also to enable political stability in Pakistan.
  • Other commentaries in the Hindustan Times, Economic Times, and Indian Express all noted that al-Qaeda had originally sought to overthrow the regimes of Egypt and Saudi Arabia, but now the pro-democracy movements of the “Arab spring” are showing the region’s disenfranchised youth an alternative to religious radicalism in pushing for political change.

 IRAN

An analysis by Semira N. Nikou of the United States Institute for Peace notes that the general reaction in Iran “discounted Osama bin Laden’s death while at the same time calling for a faster U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, since the pretext for going to war was eliminated.”

  • Ramin Mehmanparast, the Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson, said the “US and their allies have no more excuse to deploy forces in the Middle East under pretext of fighting terrorism.” In a similar tone, defense minister Ahmad Vahidi emphasized the casualties from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, commenting that Americans had “inflicted much damage to the region to kill only one individual.”  (more…)
Continue Reading →
17
MAY
0

Categories: China, India, Iran, Japan, Russia

Tags: , , , ,

Obama’s India visit: Beyond strategic symbolism

By Deepa M. Ollapally

Before India’s political pundits write off President Obama’s visit as nothing more than symbolic, they would do well to consider US- India relations under the Obama administration in its entirety. But in order to do that, they need to first shed their single minded focus on strategic affairs.

There is growing apprehension in India (and among some US analysts) that Indo-US relations have reached a plateau, and that no big strategic breakthroughs are on the horizon. First of all, it is unrealistic to expect strategic transformations at every summit.

Obama’s two predecessors were able to make history after the end of the Cold War by changing the course of US-India relations from one of decades-old disaffection to solid cooperation. Obama has inherited an excellent foundation for relations between the two countries, and there is little question that the US president has embraced India. (more…)

Continue Reading →
5
NOV
0

Categories: India

Tags: , , , , , ,