The nuclear arms control and disarmament issue area has always been premised on two parallel tracks: the US-favoured discriminatory approach embodied in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) with differing sets of rights and obligations for nuclear and non-nuclear weapon states, but also reflected in treaties like the PTBT and now the prevailing draft of the FMCT; and the non-discriminatory approach which has been embodied in a number of international agreements and initiatives
KAVEH L AFRASIABI - Several years ago, when a US Congressional report erroneously caused false alarms about Iran’s “weapons-grade” uranium enrichment, it was publicly rebuffed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and a top IAEA official criticized the report’s authors for making statements that showed “they are interested in fuelling the crisis, not solving it”.
WASHINGTON: One of the major tasks of Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli spy in the United States, was to collect information about Pakistan’s nuclear programme, shows a document released this week.
Between 1984 and 1985, Mr Pollard passed on to his Israeli handlers several sets of official US documents about a Pakistani reprocessing facility near Islamabad.
Mr Pollard, although an American citizen, spied for Israel while working for the US Navy’s intelligence service. In 1987, he was sentenced to life in prison for spying but can be released on parole on Nov 21, 2015.
Text of presentation of Gen. Assad Durrani at the 2012 Moscow Nonproliferation Conference
Courtesy: Centre For Energy and Security Studies
Frankly, the prospects do not look very bright; and for good reasons. Let’s start with the least important one: it is a treaty that does not even exist. From amongst the mandatory signatories; two have not signed (India and Pakistan); three have, but not ratified (US, China and Israel). And there is little chance that the situation would change anytime soon.
Asian Powers – traditionally would refer to powers located in Asia itself – but in today’s international strategic milieu one has to also consider global powers and extra-regional powers who may be located outside of Asia but have a major presence in this continent and impact the politics of the region
Peace and stability in South Asia has been dependent on the status of the relationship between Pakistan and India. In fact, the disunity of this sub-region has also been largely the result of the antagonistic relationship between these two states.
9/11 may have displayed the changed nature of warfare most graphically, but the change itself can be dated back to the advent of nuclear weapons which altered the whole conceptualization of war itself. What one has seen since then has been the development of a dialectical approach to war and strategy.
As India inches closer to an open military encounter with Pakistan, there are those who seem surprised by the development. Yet many of us had been expecting this development since December. In this column in January 2002, it had been stated that the massive mobilization undertaken by India has come at great economic cost and cannot simply be understood in terms of a political-diplomatic pressure ploy.
Shireen M Mazari – 26 November 2002
An ominous campaign has begun in the US media as well as amongst US allies, which ultimately hopes to target Pakistan’s nuclear assets. The US media has gone to town on “revelations” regarding Pakistan’s nuclear assistance to North Korea – despite the fact that no substantive evidence has been revealed.
Shireen M Mazari – 26 November 2002
An ominous campaign has begun in the US media as well as amongst US allies, which ultimately hopes to target Pakistan’s nuclear assets. The US media has gone to town on “revelations” regarding Pakistan’s nuclear assistance to North Korea – despite the fact that no substantive evidence has been revealed.
As 2006 comes to a close, the dye has already been cast for the major conflicts that will dominate the New Year. Just when one thought the US and its obedient ally Britain had finally realised the realities on the ground in Middle East and West Asia, and had seen the wisdom of dialogue instead of the use of force, we find both Bush and Blair going back to their war rhetoric – especially in terms of dealing with Iran. So one will see a growing divide between the US and UK on the one hand and Iran, Syria and other Muslim states on the other – with the Europeans and the Arab states facing increasing dilemmas in terms of alliances with the US and against Iran
As 2006 comes to a close, the dye has already been cast for the major conflicts that will dominate the New Year. Just when one thought the US and its obedient ally Britain had finally realised the realities on the ground in Middle East and West Asia, and had seen the wisdom of dialogue instead of the use of force, we find both Bush and Blair going back to their war rhetoric – especially in terms of dealing with Iran. So one will see a growing divide between the US and UK on the one hand and Iran, Syria and other Muslim states on the other – with the Europeans and the Arab states facing increasing dilemmas in terms of alliances with the US and against Iran
STR is not responsible for the accuracy or content of any information contained in websites linked to it. These links also do not constitute any endorsement of the parties by STR. Additionally, opinions expressed by staff members and contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of STR.
