sickle_s.gif (30476 bytes) People's Democracy

(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)

Vol. XXVI

No. 06

February 10, 2002


(Part I appeared last week)

WINNABLE NUCLEAR WAR? – II

Time To End The Rhetoric

N D Jayaprakash

THAT is the alternative? If the Indian prime minister was indeed not talking of a nuclear war with Pakistan, let him come out with a categorical statement that he is totally against a nuclear war breaking out between India and Pakistan and that his government was prepared to take all measures to prevent such a catastrophe. What is stopping the government from initiating steps to ward off the possibility of outbreak of nuclear war? (Not that anybody is wishing that instead of a nuclear war, a 'conventional' war should breakout!) All that Vajpayee was prepared to do was to reiterate that India would not be the first to use nuclear weapons in the event of a war. But can it be denied that millions of lives will be lost on both sides if a nuclear war breaks out? Should millions of lives be sacrificed in trying to avenge the death of hundreds of victims of terrorist attacks? After millions of lives are lost will it make any sense in analysing as to who started the nuclear attack first and who retaliated? Will the outcome of such an analysis resurrect the countless victims or console those who survive a nuclear holocaust?

The policy of No First Use of nuclear weapon against nuclear weapon states and non-use against non-nuclear weapon states, which only India and China (and earlier the Soviet Union) have unilaterally adopted, is a very positive step as an initial confidence building measure towards achieving complete global nuclear disarmament. But if a No First Use policy becomes a mere cover for building a second strike capability then such a policy is clearly dishonest, highly misleading and totally contemptible. If the goal of global nuclear disarmament is not relentlessly pursued, there is every danger that a No First Use policy for all practical purposes would tend to move closer to a First Strike policy and become indistinguishable. From India's current posturing its No First Use policy seems to be heading in that dangerous direction. Therefore, it is high time that all conscientious people in this country and elsewhere stood up to campaign vigourously to put an end to the present frightening drift towards nuclear war because nuclear brinkmanship can be a very expensive proposition. The simple fact that the two tiny nuclear weapons senselessly used by the US Administration to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 are reaping victims to this day should open the eyes of all those who are still unaware of the havoc nuclear weapons can unleash.

DRAFT INDIAN

NUCLEAR DOCTRINE

There is yet another disturbing dimension to this debate. According to The Hindu (07/01/02), in an interview to a German newspaper, Fernandes has reportedly stated that: "India's nuclear doctrine states clearly that India will never be the first to use nuclear weapons." While the second half of that statement is India's formal position, the first half of it is very misleading. This is because, in the name of augmenting self-defence, the BJP-led government is trying to implement through the backdoor the proposals put forward in the Draft "Indian" Nuclear Doctrine (DND) released by the National Security Advisory Board in August 1999. It may be noted that the DND was supposedly released for public debate and discussion and has not been formally approved by either the government or the Indian parliament till date. The DND is unlikely to get the approval of parliament because it is essentially a nuclear war fighting doctrine.

The most abhorrent proposal in the DND is about the necessity of developing "the will to employ nuclear weapons and forces." The concept of 'nuclear deterrence', which India had comprehensively rejected for over fifty years, also finds a central place in the DND. What is missing from the DND is also very significant: there is no reference at all to India's long held principled stand that the use of nuclear weapons constitutes a violation of the UN Charter and a crime against humanity. There is not a word in it either about the need to take urgent steps to prevent nuclear war. Under the circumstances the tacit approval sought to be given to the DND in its present form can only be viewed with deep suspicion. Therefore, any move to give official sanction to the DND without radically revising its present thrust has to be thwarted. Otherwise not only will the global nuclear disarmament movement suffer a grave setback but also India's stature as an astute champion of this overriding cause would further diminish and dissipate.

REDUCING NUCLEAR DANGER

One way of getting out of the present quagmire is for India and Pakistan to first bilaterally put into practice the expressed desire of the two countries to persuade all nuclear weapon states to initiate steps for reducing the nuclear danger. It may be recalled that in November 1998, at the initiative of India and nine other nations and with the full support of Pakistan, the UN General Assembly had adopted the resolution on Reducing Nuclear Danger (A/RES/53/77). A revised version of this resolution (A/c.1/55/l.32/Rev.1) was again adopted by the UN General Assembly in October 2000 with the support of no less than 102 UN members. But even a cursory glance at the resolution would reveal that both India and Pakistan have either been acting contrary to its letter and spirit or at least have not made any serious effort to pursue its salient objectives in a spirited manner. The resolution had categorically stated:

--that the use of nuclear weapons poses the most serious threat to [hu]mankind and to the survival of civilization;

-- that any use or threat of use of nuclear weapons would constitute a violation of the Charter of the United Nations;

-- that nuclear disarmament and the complete elimination of nuclear weapons are essential to remove the nuclear danger;

Among other steps, the resolution called for:

-- a review of nuclear doctrines and, in this context, immediate and urgent steps to reduce the risks of unintentional and accidental use of nuclear weapons;

It also called upon:

-- Member States to take necessary measures to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons in all its aspects and to promote nuclear disarmament, with the objective of eliminating nuclear weapons.

Having been willing parties to this resolution, which was adopted after the nuclear tests of May 1998, nothing should prevent India and Pakistan from taking bilateral steps to reduce the nuclear danger. Both sides have an obligation to uphold its sanctity despite the fact that the other nuclear weapon states have so far opted not to be parties to the same. If India and Pakistan act in a concerted manner, the resolution on Reducing Nuclear Danger has the potential to rouse worldwide public opinion and force the other nuclear weapon states to fall in line.

Is it not a bitter irony that it is in the shadow of this enlightened resolution, to which both India and Pakistan are a party, that the whole game of nuclear brinkmanship is being enacted?

(Concluded)

gohome.gif (364 bytes)