WhamBam

To Indians, it was sheer hypocrisy on the part of N5. There is no way a country of a billion people can be left to the non-existent mercies of her overt and covert enemies. Pakistan was already a nuclear weapon power. You seriously do not believe that they developed the weapons in those 5 days after India's explosions. They had already got a proven design and tech. from China and this was confirmed by US.

China was quite vehement in continuing the sanctions on India. I am talking about China in particular because the reaction of other N4 can be understandable from a colonial mindset which China has also suffered for long but now wanted to impose on India. Frankly US and China were the most vehement with others filling in. Of course I am not counting Australia and Sweden here

I don't think any one in India has a problem if the friendship is not so obviously directed against India. Where do you think all the Pakistani missiles are coming from? Who are they directed against?

Could you be a bit more clear here?

Who instigates the "things" in the first place?

Officer of Engineers

Perhaps but they were all living up to the letter of the NPT which neither India nor Pakistan signed. After the tests, there were attempts by both parties to be declared as Nuclear Weapons States under the NPT. They were rejected out of hand.

Except that those Pak nukes were duds. The Chinese proliferation were before the NPT. And the proof came from Lybia where Khan had sold Chinese blueprints to Khadafy and he showed them to the world.

This being said, Pak's pursuit of nukes came after 1974.

I'm not sure why you're including Australia and Sweden. They are not the N5 as part of the NPT. Be that as it may, the N5 lived up to the NPT regardless of what India or Pakistan felt.

A result of the Cold War. China was extremely fearful of Soviet encirclement. She cannot afford a two front war, let alone a 3 front war. The majority of her army was facing the USSR. She went to war to pre-emptively take out Vietnam and Pakistan was used to break the Indian Front.

Intent aside, could India take on China without taking out Pakistan 1st? And what kind of shape would India be after taking out Pakistan. To paraphrase Mao, Beijing is more than willing to fight India down to the last Pakistani.

Pakistan obviously but note that both China and the US told Pakistan to back off even when they were taking body blow after body blow.

__________________
Chimo

WhamBam

To quote the Indian prime minister at the time, "Nuclear Weapons State" is not a title that we seek from anyone outside. It is a status conferred on India by her Scientists and Engineers. This whole thing about Nuclear Weapons Status being granted by someone is so hypocritical. What the world needs to worry is the weapons going in unstable hands.

A major country like India in a dangerous neighborhood simply can not avoid having them if it is to survive and have an independent sovereign existence. So I feel it makes total sense for both China and India to have nuclear weapons for their self defence as long as any country in the world possesses them.

Officer of Engineers

Think you've misunderstood. Nuclear Weapons State is a legal status granted under the Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty of which neither India nor Pakistan is a signatory. There were attempts to get them sign as a Nuclear Weapons States but that was rejected.

WhamBam

That's why we are coming from different places here. India can not accept the NPT which places her in a permanent disadvantageous position and renders her a second class nation for all time to come. This is no jingoism but the sad reality of our times.

For the N5 it is an article of faith. But even the N5 have shown no intention to disarm eventually which is one of the features of NPT.

WhamBam

No sir I understand the legallese. It's just that India does not accept the discriminatory law itself.

Officer of Engineers

Canada was a nuclear weapons power and she gave up that status. Do you consider Canada a 2nd class nation?

Whatever India's view on the NPT, this does not relieve NPT signatories from living up to the Treaty at least by the letter of the Law, if not by spirit. This being said, India knew full well of the reaction and went ahead with the tests. India cannot complain about others living up to their committements to the NPT.

I can point to the various SALT and START treaties and SRF treaties as a sign that the N5 are disarming.

The US-Indian nuke deal states otherwise.

subba

ROFL ! Zeng Sir you should go to the racism in US thread..and check out the bonhomie..

WhamBam

Of course Canada is no second class nation. But is it a world power? Frankly there is no comparision between India and Canada because os the enormous difference in their size. Besides canada has the US to protect her. It is not living in a dangerous neighborhood.

You are right. I was just pointing to the hypocricy of preaching to others what you do not practice.

"Do as I say. Not as I do."

Of course you know and I know it has nothing to do with eventual "disarming". It was just coming back from an unsustainable stockpile size which was no longer required.

More on the part of N5 than India.

Officer of Engineers

Such comparisons are ludicrous. India is only strong within her neighborhood. Canada is far stronger militarily in Europe than India, China, Pakistan, Vietnam combined could ever be. A single Canadian battlegroup could kill every Chinese division that could come into Europe which would be ... zero.

Canada does not rely on the US for her protection. She relies on 3 oceans. Both Canada and the US are force projection powers, meaning that our military is geared towards expeditionary forces, not home defence.

Not trying to put down India but you have to be extremely careful when discussing these comparisons and state a proper baseline for comparison. The only baseline I used when I brought up Canada was the "2nd nation status" of a non-nuclear weapons power.

Not sure what you mean. The NPT consists of alot more member states than just the N5. Are you saying the non-N5s NPT members are not living up to the treaty. After all, they were also punishing India and Pakistan as demanded by the NPT.

Perhaps but the evidence is there.

Frankly, looking at the Law Passed by the Congress and Senate, India might as well have signed the NPT.

subba

OOE sir, i don't think the deal is concluded. But it's outside NPT's ambit. The bilateral agreement will be the 123 agreement. The Hyde is being discussed but that is US law. Whats binding on India will only be the 123..that is if the deal goes through.

Officer of Engineers

The Hyde Act obligates the US to withdraw from the 123 Agreement in event of any breach of the Act and includes going back into India and ripping out equipment and taking books off shelves.

WhamBam

While I may not agree with all you said here, frankly this comparision is not required here and is distracting from the thread. The discussion was about the Chinese reaction and her attitude to India.

Isn't it obvious that this will be so? No point in arguing on it further.

Good. We are both happy and all is well with the world.

subba

Right i read it too that way. But the full civil cooperation agreement also brings into a contradiction within article 4 of th NPT wherein NPT member states by signing the treaty do not have 'entitlement' to nuclear tech and fuel necessarily. By bringing a special provision for India, the US is undermining signatories to the NPT.

Officer of Engineers

Not exactly. India is a non-NPT signatory and what the US has done is to adhere to the NPT on behalf of India through US Laws.

I know I hate lawyers too.