Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: note on potential nuclear war in Kashmir
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:19:52 -0400
------ Forwarded Message From: "K. N. Cukier" <kn () cukier com> Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:17:53 -0400 To: dave () farber net Subject: note on potential nuclear war in Kashmir Dave, I don't want to clutter IP, go off topic to tech themes, or appear as a hypersensitive peace-nick. But I'm extremely wary of a situation that I think is quite important to IP's readership and the US political and scientific communities. There's a real chance of the first nuclear weapon detonation since World War II happening any day now, between India and Pakistan. The situation has been tense before, but it's at its worst now. This must become a top priority for Washington, which has significant influence on the situation. If Kashmir goes nuclear, it will be a foreign policy failure of the US. An atomic explosion will, of course, kill millions and wreak incredible long-term environmental damage that will spill onto many other countries throughout the region. Once the delicate, informal pact for the non-use of atomic weapons is broken, it may usher in other detonations by other states of even greater magnitude, or in more populated areas -- so the use of nuclear weapons should be deterred at all costs. It makes Kashmir a test of a much broader problem with far higher stakes. Of course, no one would disagree with any of this; we all want to prevent a nuclear strike. But we've lived too long considering an atomic detonation as an abstraction, not as a reality. (Truly consider: the air becomes a furnace of fire, land uninhabitable for centuries, rivers poisoned, and atmospheric havoc and soot block out the sun as sub-zero temperatures set in -- this, to greet the cancerous living). Ordinary development issues in the third world are tough: Imagine a relief response after a nuclear exchange.... In the US, policy makers have their attention diverted to many other issues that affect the security of Americans. That is obviously essential. Yet it's vital that US policy makers, scientists, business people and media realize how much hangs in the balance right now on the Indian-Pakistan border, and how what happens there effects others everywhere, including Americans at home and abroad. There are things people can do: Put it on the mainstream US political agenda so Washington understands it must act. A handful of US officials know the gravity of the issue and are hard at work. But it's not a top priority for Washington -- and must be. I'm hoping this note might put constructive pressure on the administration to treat the problem with the added seriousness it deserves. US officials have a means to influence the situation and should be held accountable if they don't act to ensure that tensions are reduced to the point of a convention war (which although terrible, doesn't wreak such lasting, global damage). Below, IPers might be interested in an extremely good comment from the International Herald Tribune earlier this month on the topic. For an Indian anti-nuclear weapons view, I recommend Arundhati Roy's 1998 essay "The End of Imagination." Yours, KNC __________ International Herald Tribune, Friday May 6, 2002 A war approaches that could kill millions By David Ignatius PARIS: Sometime this month, the Indian intelligence service - known as RAW because of the initials of its more genteel official name, the Research and Analysis Wing - will complete a report on whether Pakistan has complied with an Indian ultimatum that it halt terrorist infiltration into Kashmir and hand over alleged terrorists. The Indians will doubtless report the truth, which is that President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, for all his good intentions, has so far failed to meet the two demands the Indian government made last December, after pro-Pakistani terrorists bombed the Indian Parliament. But what will the Indian government do then? It has up to 500,000 troops poised along the 2,900-kilometer (1,800-mile) border with Pakistan, in what experts say is the highest state of mobilization in 30 years. With a three-to-one superiority in conventional forces, the Indians could burst across the border and, in a matter of days or even hours, effectively cut Pakistan in half. And many hawkish Indians will demand military action when RAW and other security agencies issue their reports, perhaps next week. What would Pakistan, a state with nuclear weapons and sophisticated missiles to deliver them, do in response to an Indian military move? Pakistan is vague about its nuclear doctrine, so it's hard to be sure. But many analysts fear Pakistan's missiles are targeted against Indian cities, and that facing an Indian conventional onslaught, it would launch a retaliatory nuclear attack on, say, New Delhi, that would leave millions dead. India would probably retaliate with its own nuclear weapons, probably dropped from bombers - killing millions more. Welcome to what a senior State Department official calls "the other crisis." It's difficult these days to focus on anything other than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its grisly daily death toll. But in this case it's essential. Because if the India-Pakistan situation gets out of hand, the death toll could run, not to dozens, but to tens of millions. The Indian subcontinent is the only part of the world where nuclear war is today a serious possibility. U.S. and European officials are increasingly worried about what could happen there this summer. They warn that all the ingredients are in place for a disastrous chain of miscalculation on the order of August 1914, when overarmed European nations blundered into World War I. The State Department is alarmed enough that it is hurriedly sending a senior official to India and Pakistan, probably next week. Secretary of State Colin Powell is expected to call top officials in the two countries to caution against miscalculation. Intelligence reports make clear why U.S. and European officials are so worried. Western analysts believe Musharraf doesn't have the political clout to comply with the Indian demands. They argue, for example, that Musharraf still doesn't fully control the Pakistani intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, even after firing its chief, General Mahmoud Ahmad, in October. The Indians believe the agency is deeply involved in the long-running terrorist campaign to free Kashmir from Indian control, and the list of 20 alleged terrorists they have given to Pakistan for extradition includes people who are reputedly close to the agency. Musharraf cannot meet the other Indian demand, an end to Pakistani infiltration of Kashmir. He already ordered such a halt in a widely praised speech Jan. 12, but analysts say the flow of potential terrorists into Kashmir has continued. Indeed, they say it has increased in recent weeks as the Himalayan snows have begun to melt and transit routes have opened. It's almost inevitable that pro-Pakistani terrorists will strike again inside India - triggering demands for retaliation by the fully mobilized Indian forces. Another factor worrying U.S. and European analysts is the political weakness of India's prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Though he has restrained Indian militants in the past, Vajpayee is in poor health. The dominant Indian political figure now is Home Minister L. K. Advani, a hard-liner who has no interest in making a deal with Musharraf for outside mediation that could defuse the Kashmir time bomb. India has maintained its costly mobilization since January, and analysts note that it has scheduled the rotation of troops and equipment to keep its forces at peak levels through June and July - when analysts fear the danger of military action will be highest. A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would mean loss of life on a scale the world has never before seen. The simple but unpleasant fact for the Bush administration is that to reduce this danger, it must play a more active diplomatic role. As in the Middle East, the United States is the only power with enough leverage on both sides to make a difference. The apocalyptic scenarios may prove wrong, but the Indians and Pakistanis will have trouble averting them on their own. This is the real thing, Mr. President - one of those moments when history is watching and will not forgive inaction. Copyright © 2002 the International Herald Tribune All Rights Reserved ------ End of Forwarded Message For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- IP: note on potential nuclear war in Kashmir Dave Farber (May 24)