Pakistan offers to get rid of nukes

MSNBC ^ | 5/5/03

[areafiftyone]

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, May 5 — Pakistan is ready to get rid of its nuclear arsenal if uneasy neighbor India also does, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said Monday. The offer was made amid a burst of measures to improve relations between the neighbors after two years of tension.

“AS FAR AS PAKISTAN is concerned, if India is ready to denuclearize, we would be happy to denuclearize,” Aziz Ahmed Khan said. “But it will have to be mutual.” Pakistan and India declared themselves nuclear powers after detonating atomic devises in 1998. Neither arsenal is open to inspections and it’s not known exactly what either Pakistan or India possesses. The two South Asian neighbors have fought three wars since the end of British rule of the subcontinent in 1947. Two of those wars have been over the disputed Kashmir region. Over the past few days, the nations have dramatically move to re-establish ties. On Friday, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee ended a two-year chill by saying New Delhi would name an ambassador to Pakistan and resume air links. Pakistan quickly agreed to talks and resumption of full diplomatic ties.

[Pearls Before Swine]

Never happen. India has nukes for two reasons: Pakistan AND China. Even if Pakistan were honorable and honest, and the Indians felt that it was stable over the long term (a big if with the strong Islamist sentiment), they would still feel they had to deter China.

[backhoe]

-The India-Pakistani Conflict... some background information- --

[redbaiter]

Wasn't one of the criticisms of the Iraq war that it would send the Pakistan/India situation spiralling out of control? The score is now Rummy 5,417, naysayers 0.

[John123]

they would still feel they had to deter China.

Correctamundo! It is a little known fact that China occupies an area that is claimed by India. And, India occupies an area that is claimed by China.

[b4its2late]

Highly unlikely.

[Polybius]

Never happen. India has nukes for two reasons: Pakistan AND China. Even if Pakistan were honorable and honest, and the Indians felt that it was stable over the long term (a big if with the strong Islamist sentiment), they would still feel they had to deter China.

It is in the national interests of the U.S. to stop and, if possible, roll back the proliferation of nuclear states beyond the traditional Big Five.

Promising India that it will have the full protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella, as do other U.S. allies, in the event of a Chinese nuclear attack would address the concern of such a Chinese attack to a much greater extent than India's own deterrence ever could.

[Grampa Dave]

This is great: Wasn't one of the criticisms of the Iraq war that it would send the Pakistan/India situation spiralling out of control? The score is now Rummy 5,417, naysayers 0.

You should make the last part your tag line!

[usafsk]

Lousy idea. Do you really want to risk Chinese retaliation on behalf of India? That's the outcome of your idea. The nuclear balance here is clearly in the favor of India and will remain so. It would be better to make them a partner in ballistic missle defense, which is the Pak's best delivery platform.

[PhiKapMom]

It just gets better and better!

[Grampa Dave]

I guess over the weekend that Rummy was devastating to shrieking head hosts like Wolfie Blizten.

I don't watch those shows, but apparently Rummy was great.

[hchutch]

I think Pakistan got the hint.

Question is, will Syria, the Palestinians, and North Korea take the same hint or will they choose suicide by Dubya?

[Pearls Before Swine]

It is in the national interests of the U.S. to stop and, if possible, roll back the proliferation of nuclear states beyond the traditional Big Five.

I agree.

Promising India that it will have the full protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella, as do other U.S. allies, in the event of a Chinese nuclear attack would address the concern of such a Chinese attack to a much greater extent than India's own deterrence ever could.

I disagree with the wisdom of this. In the short run, it would produce the effect you state it would. However, in the long run, we should minimize the number of nuclear guarantees we give. Injecting the US into more and more nuclear theaters on behalf of other nations, at the same time we lack a credible missile defense and are cutting our stategic weapons, is an act of foolish hubris. It will have the long-run effect of uniting our potential adversaries against us.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[azhenfud]

"Injecting the US into more and more nuclear theaters on behalf of other nations, at the same time we lack a credible missile defense and are cutting our stategic weapons, is an act of foolish hubris. It will have the long-run effect of uniting our potential adversaries against us."

Not only that, but such policy would place the U.S. at first-strike position against any aggressor, rather than being an incidental target and weaken the U.S.'s ability to broker peace should conflicts arise.

[JmyBryan]

Bump for later

[IndianChief]

India has nukes for two reasons: Pakistan AND China

Imo, India has nukes for two reasons: China AND China. We didn't test to deter Pakistan, but to deter China.

[Polybius]

Lousy idea. Do you really want to risk Chinese retaliation on behalf of India? That's the outcome of your idea. The nuclear balance here is clearly in the favor of India and will remain so. It would be better to make them a partner in ballistic missle defense, which is the Pak's best delivery platform.

Do you really want to risk Russian retaliation on behalf of Norway? That's the outcome of our decades old treaty with Norway.

Once India is included in America's nuclear umbrella, a Chinese nuclear attack against India becomes a non-option for the Chinese. The disarmament of India then allows the roll back of the world's first "Islamic Bomb" which could very easily become the world's first "Islamist Bomb".

As for missile defense, I will quote my former Commanding Officer of a CGN (nuclear powered guided missile cruiser), "The best protection our Battle Group has is the elimination of the enemy by our carrier aircraft before they ever become a threat to us. Once we (our CGN) come into play and we are forced to try to shoot down the Bad Guy's bullets, we're in deep sh*t."

[m1-lightning]

Maybe China could be talked into entering that agreement as well.(/sarcasm)

[Cinnamon Girl]

Hmmmm. What's this about? Looking to score some more cash from us?