Pakistan is a nuclear state, although not an acclaimed one but definitely the declared one. The nuclear history of Pakistan is a saga of commitment, secrecy, and dedication to the ultimate cause, which in this case is acquiring the nuclear weapon. The nuclear cat came out of the bag whence the saffron brigade started threatening Pakistan.
Pakistan is once again being isolated on the nuclear issue. India is now treated as a paradigm differential vis–vis Pakistan. This tuft hunting revolves around three different but calibrated moves:
First is the IAEAs efforts to sift the chaff from the wheat, that is the nuclear pariah from that of the real blue-eyed. India is considered as a deserving case as a recipient of unhindered nuclear fuel supply.
Secondly the nuclear black market is being put under the light with of course the Pakistani connections as the deliberate choice to nail it for good. To the good fortune of Pakistan, no person is caught with fissile material. Whoever is to date projected as a Pakistani nuclear mole is maximum a carrier of dual use equipment.
Thirdly, different proliferation controlling treaties are being revamped from that of missile controls to the fissile material or dual use nuclear equipment. What options are left to Pakistan in case if these measures are enacted with an urgency and speed other than the ages old concept of nuclear ambiguity?
No one likes to play in open woods. The real concern at present is the economic viability of the country because nuclear technology is a tool for the betterment of public but it is definitely not the surplus upon which the national granaries are filled. This is the nuclear age but lets see who is going to harness whom; the man or the pulverized powder.
ABID LATIF SINDHU
Gojra
A well well written article
There are many alternative routes to having nuclear technology and not necessarily nuclear weapons. It has become fashionable for the established nuclear powers to 'handle' a new nations fuel needs? Personally, a nation who develops nuclear technology has the right to all o its proprietary interests. Nuclear weapons function as a stop gap between diplomatic failure and domestic invasion. You can only keep your country if you can defend it. But a country with no developed infrastructure and the energy to power it, gets to have the recognition of international charity? Nuclear power has some opponents; usually people who love the environment and hate war. These same folks rarely know the names of the languages spoken by the people who are developing the technology that being protested? Again, if the world insists on 'inspecting' a country's nuclear technology… then charge admission like it an amusement park! Unless an inspector has the minimum of 10% of foreign trade and the equivalent of nuclear technology in the nation to be checked, this needs to un-confuse the arbitrary nature of IAEA authority!
Comments are closed.