Nuclear strike threat ridiculous

PRESIDENT Pervez Musharraf has once again stressed that Pakistan’s nuclear capability was in the nature of minimum deterrence and that in the event any aggressor opted for a nuclear strike, it will receive a matching response. While inaugurating the 4th International Defence Exhibition and Seminar (IDEAS) 2006 at Karachi on Monday, President declared that our defence strategy was based on defensive deterrence - both in conventional and unconventional spheres. It in fact emanated from Pakistan’s belief that peace could only be achieved through strength and not weakness.
These observations may be seen in the context of a threat of nuclear strike which some circles in South Korea have articulated to prevent North Korea from piling up nuclear arsenal. As expected, North Korea has reacted angrily by declaring that should any quarter launch a pre-emptive strike against its nuclear facilities a nuclear war shall start. It is indeed ridiculous to harbour an idea of a nuclear conflagration. The conflict between two nuclear powers will have far-reaching consequences. The conflagration, once starts, would entail unimaginable losses of human life and property. The supporters of nuclear proliferation say that the adversaries having nuclear capability would destroy one another. Such an eventuality would mean mutually assured destruction (MAD). It therefore does not suit the interest of humanity even to talk about a nuclear holocaust. It is ridiculous to believe that any one would dare to start a nuclear conflagration.
Man by instinct wants survival and not death. A nuclear war means destruction of humanity. Therefore to talk about such a war or to create conditions for such a catastrophe is sheer madness. Those discussing about a nuclear war must bear in mind the destruction that will follow. A nuclear war shall have no winners or losers. Both will perish. It is gratifying to note that President George W Bush has of late realized the futility of threat of use of force to stop Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. He wants resolution of the crisis emanating from Iranian and North Korean nuclear programmes through diplomacy.
The use of force can never solve problems in inter-state relations. Diplomacy is the only prudent option. The Pak-India composite dialogue is also focusing on finding ways and means for cooperation and not confrontation in the nuclear field. The leadership of two nuclear rivals has realized the need for resolving all outstanding issues through negotiations but these negotiations should not be endless in the interest of peace in South Asia and the prosperity of over a billion people who have continued to groan under the yoke of hunger, want and disease because their Government continue to waste resources in arms race which could have been profitably channelled towards improving their quality of life.
 

Himalayan bonhomie

IT’S business as usual once again between India and China. The Asian giants are making history as they reach out to each other across the wide gulf of history and geography. President Hu Jintao is visiting India as part of China’s continuing juggernaut to win friends and influence people. Earlier this month, Beijing hosted a long line-up of African leaders, offering aid and cheap loans in return for energy resources for its ever-voracious economy.
But India is not Africa or like any other country from the Third World. Just as China, the world’s biggest democracy is seeking to play a bigger and more decisive role on the world stage. More importantly, like China, India is one of the world’s fastest spectacularly growing economies today. Which pits it against its big neighbour in the north, across the Himalayas.
There was a time when the two countries saw each other with great suspicion and distrust. Even though they have come a long way from their war 44 years ago in 1962, they still do not exactly see each other as friends or allies. If China has been a traditional friend and close ally of Pakistan, India, once close to Soviet Union or Russia, is today part of a strategic nuclear-defence alliance with the US. Goes without saying, US and China are pitted against each other and fighting for the control of Asia and leadership of the rest of the world.
This doesn’t however mean India and China cannot be good neighbours. In fact, in a fast-changing post-globalisation world, it is possible for nations to be friends and allies with many dissimilar partners at the same time. So India and China too can take their working and mutually benefiting relationship forward despite their close ties with the US and Pakistan respectively. Delhi and Beijing have already gone to great lengths to bury the unpleasantness of their past encounters. They have been trying their best to resolve their border dispute amicably even as they keep talking on other issues.
Last year, the neighbours decided to re-open the Nathu-la Pass in the Himalayas, closed after the 1962 war, in an attempt to allow direct border trade between the two countries. The move was significant both symbolically and politically and reflected the desire on both sides to move forward.
Indeed, by coming together and cooperating with each other, the Asian giants could make a huge positive difference to their people — two billion plus — and the rest of the world. There is even talk of a nuclear cooperation deal between the two sides, along the lines of Indo-US agreement. This only goes to show that yesterday’s enemies could be friends today. We only wish this new bonhomie would remain limited to peaceful engagement and wouldn’t extend to weapons of mass destruction. Let’s build peace.

—Khaleej Times