I received an email yesterday that called on all Americans to write to their representatives to tell them that they should oppose the US-Indian Nuclear Deal that President Bush and Prime Minister Singh agreed to in 2005. I sent a response that indicated that I disagree with the move to oppose this deal. In fact, I consider the deal to be a wise move for the United States. I also indicated though, that while in the short term this seems to be a good course of action, we should actively move toward nuclear disarmament as a longer term strategy. Such a strategy would not only include the U.S. and India, and all existing and would-be nuclear powers. I thought that I would include my reasoning for these positions as I wrote them in my reply as my newest blog...
This is one policy that I actively support President Bush on. It is not that I do not recognize the validity of many of the point's made by those who oppose the deal It is indeed a slippery slope, which increases the acceptance of the number of nuclear powers in the world. It also "rewards bad behavior" for a state who violated international norms against the proliferation of nuclear weapons (though it should be noted that they were not party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that would have banned them from doing so). And it certainly does put us in an increasingly awkward position in arguing that states like Iran and North Korea cannot develop nuclear weapons themselves.
That being said, it is the right policy for the following reasons:
1. India has been a nuclear power since the 1970s. We cannot turn back the clock and wish this were not so. It is the status quo, and we have to deal with it.
2. Pakistan is too, and is India's perennial rival. To not have a nuclear deterrent while Pakistan does would be strategically unwise for India (one could make the same case for Iran with respect to Israel, I know).
3. As the power of China and Russia grows along with tensions between the US and these powers, as do a variety of other destabilizing trends in the regions of South Asia, East Asia, and the Middle East (all of which India is in proximity to), we need India as a strategic partner. We have more shared values (India is the world's largest democracy) with them than many of their neighbors. They will increasingly be an important ally in a highly problematic part of the world in coming years, and we should be treating them as such right now. This policy does that.
4. India will soon join the club of Great Powers. Membership in this club by and large carries with it the allowance for nuclear weapons. The exceptions are Germany and Japan (who both are provided with a nuclear umbrella by the US). It would be unfair to deny India this prerogative as well. Again, right or wrong, this is the way the world functions right now. We cannot expect that India or any other state of its size and growing power will accept the disrespect that comes from
denying them recognition for what they are. Such would also alienate them, which we have already done enough of to others.
5. We can have more influence over India's nuclear weapons as partners, rather than competitors.
6. As long as this is the game that we find ourselves in, we must play it - at least in the near term. If we wish to change the game (as I avidly support doing), we should not begin by attempting to turn back the clock on or alienating India. We should bring together all of the nuclear powers in the world as well as those states who seek to become nuclear powers. We should create a contemporary agreement that does not accept a double standard between those who have nuclear weapons and those who do not.
We should eliminate nuclear weapons completely. They create a ticking time bomb scenario that eventually will destroy entire nations and perhaps all of humanity. This not a hyperbole or scare mongering. It is the logical outcome of the direction that we are headed, and we are
frankly fortunate that it has not happened already.
If we wish to secure ourselves as well as humanity, we should begin to act like the Superpower that we are. We should provide leadership in drafting this agreement, and getting other states (allies and foes alike) on board. dismantling of our own nuclear arsenal. We have by far the largest, and therefore this would be a show of good faith. We should not complete the process until we verify that we and others are remaining on a pre-scheduled time table that does not create an asymmetric scenario in which we or others are insecure and then back out.
I am not alone in the general view that nuclear weapons must be eliminated. Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara, Sam Nunn, William Perry, and Goerge Schultz all agree with me. They represent the elite of the military-political establishment from the Cold War on both sides of the
aisle.
The alienation of India, or at least the resistance to developing closer working relationships with it, is a self-defeating policy idea that is motivated by otherwise good intentions. Support the deal with India, and push for nuclear disarmament!
This is one policy that I actively support President Bush on. It is not that I do not recognize the validity of many of the point's made by those who oppose the deal It is indeed a slippery slope, which increases the acceptance of the number of nuclear powers in the world. It also "rewards bad behavior" for a state who violated international norms against the proliferation of nuclear weapons (though it should be noted that they were not party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty that would have banned them from doing so). And it certainly does put us in an increasingly awkward position in arguing that states like Iran and North Korea cannot develop nuclear weapons themselves.
That being said, it is the right policy for the following reasons:
1. India has been a nuclear power since the 1970s. We cannot turn back the clock and wish this were not so. It is the status quo, and we have to deal with it.
2. Pakistan is too, and is India's perennial rival. To not have a nuclear deterrent while Pakistan does would be strategically unwise for India (one could make the same case for Iran with respect to Israel, I know).
3. As the power of China and Russia grows along with tensions between the US and these powers, as do a variety of other destabilizing trends in the regions of South Asia, East Asia, and the Middle East (all of which India is in proximity to), we need India as a strategic partner. We have more shared values (India is the world's largest democracy) with them than many of their neighbors. They will increasingly be an important ally in a highly problematic part of the world in coming years, and we should be treating them as such right now. This policy does that.
4. India will soon join the club of Great Powers. Membership in this club by and large carries with it the allowance for nuclear weapons. The exceptions are Germany and Japan (who both are provided with a nuclear umbrella by the US). It would be unfair to deny India this prerogative as well. Again, right or wrong, this is the way the world functions right now. We cannot expect that India or any other state of its size and growing power will accept the disrespect that comes from
denying them recognition for what they are. Such would also alienate them, which we have already done enough of to others.
5. We can have more influence over India's nuclear weapons as partners, rather than competitors.
6. As long as this is the game that we find ourselves in, we must play it - at least in the near term. If we wish to change the game (as I avidly support doing), we should not begin by attempting to turn back the clock on or alienating India. We should bring together all of the nuclear powers in the world as well as those states who seek to become nuclear powers. We should create a contemporary agreement that does not accept a double standard between those who have nuclear weapons and those who do not.
We should eliminate nuclear weapons completely. They create a ticking time bomb scenario that eventually will destroy entire nations and perhaps all of humanity. This not a hyperbole or scare mongering. It is the logical outcome of the direction that we are headed, and we are
frankly fortunate that it has not happened already.
If we wish to secure ourselves as well as humanity, we should begin to act like the Superpower that we are. We should provide leadership in drafting this agreement, and getting other states (allies and foes alike) on board. dismantling of our own nuclear arsenal. We have by far the largest, and therefore this would be a show of good faith. We should not complete the process until we verify that we and others are remaining on a pre-scheduled time table that does not create an asymmetric scenario in which we or others are insecure and then back out.
I am not alone in the general view that nuclear weapons must be eliminated. Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara, Sam Nunn, William Perry, and Goerge Schultz all agree with me. They represent the elite of the military-political establishment from the Cold War on both sides of the
aisle.
The alienation of India, or at least the resistance to developing closer working relationships with it, is a self-defeating policy idea that is motivated by otherwise good intentions. Support the deal with India, and push for nuclear disarmament!
