Sukriti Nigam

Vikalp Wange

Between Security and Peace: How can India Lead the Nuclear Disarmament
Movement?

“True security is based on people’s welfare- on a thriving economy, on strong public health and
education programs, and on fundamental respect for our common humanity. Development,
peace, disarmament, reconciliation and justice are not separate from security; they help to
underpin it”.

-Ban Ki-Moon.

We belong to a country whose first prime minister Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru has talked Nuclear
Disarmament in early 1940, which shaped the foreign policy of India; he said “We believe that
complete disarmament of all nation- states should be aimed at, as an urgent necessity, if the
world is not to be reduced to barbarism”. But still we have given total confirmation to the notion
of “Total Nuclear Disarmament”. Never the less India has given timely support to all the treaties
and conventions around the world.

India believes in the policy of No-First-Use-Agreement, that means India won’t launch nuclear
weapons unless, it is shot first. Well this is a good policy but this doesn’t say that that it would
not develop nuclear weapon. Well this stand is appreciated on the world level. The problem
comes in where it comes to commitment from side of India, on the first-hand India accepts
international treaties which talk about nuclear disarmament, then dishonor it. This has been done
by many Prime Ministers including Indira Gandhi, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, etc., the tension around
the Indian territory has forced the governments to take such steps.

Since independence, pursuit of nuclear disarmament has been an important objective of India’s
foreign policy. India believes that the existence of nuclear weapons poses threat to international
peace and security. Creating a nuclear-weapon free world by eliminating all nuclear weapons
through a multilaterally negotiated treaty which is effective and verifiable will enhance global
security and the safety of every man, women and child. Supporting its contention that extensive
restraints will automatically eliminate threats that countries with nuclear power poses the world
and further. This is evident with their strong support to the Treaty of Tlatelolco and Lahore
declaration.
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
The stance changed due the fact the neighboring countries were creating a menace in India
territory, Pakistan captured few parts of Jammu and Kashmir and China took part from the Leh
region and these region till this current date are one of the most disputed areas in India. These
problems and the growing relationship between the two countries forced India to step in the
Nuclear Business and from there India has been know as a nuclear power. Though after
successive tests, India reaffirmed that it still supports Nuclear disarmament, but the situations
had forced to take such steps. After 1998, India stated its position in Ministry of Defense’s
Annual Report (Third Report, Standing Committee on Defense, Thirteenth Lok Sabha, New
Delhi, Lok Sabha Secretariat, December 1998.), The Stance that of India on emergence as a
nuclear power were considerably cleared, it is clear that India is only a nuclear power to
Maintain peace and harmony in its region and does not have intention of using it.

In pursuit of nuclear disarmament, India has taken many initiatives. India was among the first
countries to call for a ban on nuclear weapon testing, as early as 1954. Such a ban would have
prevented the nuclear arms race which the world has witnessed in recent decades. During this
period, the UN General Assembly adopted nearly hundred resolutions on this, highlighting the
concern of the world community on this issue. During the negotiations on CTBT
(Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva in 1954, India
participated actively and constructively, putting forward its proposals, in keeping with its long-
standing position. It is a matter of regret that the text, as has finally emerged, does not do justice
to the negotiating mandate. It is not a comprehensive ban but merely a ban on nuclear explosive
testing. It also lacks a definitive commitment to nuclear disarmament. India remains committed
to pursuing global, nuclear disarmament with a view to creating a nuclear weapon free world and
a non-violent world order. As the first nation in the world to call for a Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty, India supported the idea behind the CTBT, but in discussions on the Conference on
Disarmament, it also wanted to ensure that the CTBT did not legitimize existing nuclear arsenals
as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does.

According to the 2015 SIPRI Yearbook, the Indian arsenal comprises 90 to 110 warheads. (
SIPRI Yearbook, World Nuclear Forces, (Oxford University Press 2015))Estimates in 2013 put
India's highly enriched uranium (HEU) stockpile at 2.4 ± 0.9 tons, and its weapons-
grade plutonium stockpile at 0.54 ± 0.18 tons.( Countries: India, International Panel on Fissile
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
Materials, 4 February 2013.) Though we haven’t used stockpile and would not in near future, it
this does hinder the process nuclear disarmament.
The basic point here is that first if India does clear its own stock it cannot give an example to
others. Here an interesting side comes up India is always under danger from terrorist groups and
even countries and if at this point of time we start removing our stockpile, it would bring us at a
weak foot, the writer believes from here only diplomacy could work. If India gets support of the
big four a lot things could get sorted but the big four don’t go together at each point this creates a
problem.

Given India’s continuing interest in disarmament, it is worth looking a little more closely at how
it has responded to the changing global sentiment in favor of disarmament. If Indian interest
appears to be subdued, that is easily explained. Earlier, India was one of the few voices calling
for universal disarmament. Now that there are so many others making the same demand, India’s
voice is just one of many. There is also a natural tendency to focus on those who were at the
centre of Cold War nuclear confrontations. India is not one of them. But in fact India has
continued to show initiative in this area. In 2006, it proposed the adoption of a Nuclear Weapons
Convention. In March 2008, India’s Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament (CD),
Hamid Ali Rao, presented a seven-point agenda for nuclear disarmament, which called for:

 Unequivocal commitment to the goal of total elimination of nuclear weapons;

 Reduction in the salience of nuclear weapons in security doctrines;
 A no first use agreement among all nuclear-armed states;
 An agreement not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear armed states;
 A convention prohibiting the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons;
 A convention proscribing the development, production and stockpiling of nuclear
weapons; and
 Verifiable and non-discriminatory elimination of all nuclear weapons.

Indian has had a very conventional approach nuclear power has though enabled us to become
part of super powers and also has brought rise in the ingenious research on controlling its
repercussions. India has nuclear plants which help in producing electricity and other
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
developments as well; India has made its own waste management system which enabled us to
control the negative outcomes.

India has achieved self-reliance in the management of all types of radioactive waste arising
during the operation of the nuclear fuel cycle facilities. Decades of safe and successful operation
of our waste management facilities are testimony to the Indian waste management practices
being on par with international standards. Apart from having made immense technological
progress in this field, a valuable human resource base has been created consisting of scientific
and technical man power well-versed in the design, construction, operation and maintenance
aspects of these facilities. In line with global scenarios, technologies are constantly upgraded for
minimization of discharges to the environment. (Sadhan , Indian programme on radioactive
waste management Vol. 38, Part 5, October 2013, pp. 849–857).

After these all efforts India is now trying to be part of various treaties and groups so that it can be
able to come into the business of buying and selling of Nuclear Weapons and can also sell the
material needed for it. Though this step are against the concept of disarmament but is helping
India in getting growth it needs in international diplomacy.

Institutional mechanism called a Counter Nuclear Smuggling Team is set up, to devise a
coordinated multi-agency approach to deal with the threat of individuals or a group of
individuals acquiring nuclear or radioactive material for malicious purposes. India is making a
robust diplomatic effort now to seek membership to the Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG), the next
step in the world's acceptance of India in the global nuclear scheme. Keeping this goal in mind,
they had carefully selected the world leaders of Canada, Kazakhstan, Britain, New Zealand,
Switzerland and Japan for bilateral meetings with the Indian PM, to garner support for India‟s
entry into this 48- member club, which is concerned with reducing nuclear proliferation by
controlling the export and re-transfer of materials. While fully supporting the implementation of
UNSC Council Resolution regarding non-proliferation and the United Nations Global Counter
Terrorism Strategy, India has enacted various national laws, namely the Indian Atomic Energy
Act, 1962, the Weapons of Mass Destruction and their Delivery Systems Act, 2000, the
Unlawful India's Nuclear Weapons Policy and Nuclear Doctrine 116 Activities (Prevention) Act,
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
1967 as amended in 2012 and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, 2008, which
conform to international laws on curbing nuclear terrorism.

While arguing for NSG membership, India has portrayed itself as a responsible nuclear power,
pointing to its positive record on nonproliferation and consistent support for complete nuclear
disarmament (Saibal Dasguptal, China not convinced India's MTCR entry will help non-
proliferation, TNN, 28 June 2016.)

India signed the Additional Protocol, which entered into force in July 2014. It has maintained a
unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing and supports negotiations of a Fissile Material Cut-off
Treaty (FMCT) that is “universal, non-discriminatory, and internationally verifiable.”( Kallol
Bhattacherjee, India Joins Missile Technology Control Regime. Top 5 Things to Know,The
Hindu, 28 June 2016). At the same time, India has remained firmly outside of the NPT, arguing
that “nuclear weapons are an integral part of our national security and will remain so pending the
global elimination of all nuclear weapons.”( Permanent Representative of India to the
Conference on Disarmament, "Statement by India in the CD Plenary after the Adoption of
Decision on Programme of Work Contained in CD/1863," 29 May 2009.) New Delhi has not
signed the CTBT, and continues to produce fissile material for its nuclear weapons program.
Although it has reiterated its commitment to no-first-use of nuclear weapons, India’s nuclear
posture of credible minimum deterrence is still evolving, and the country is developing a
strategic triad of nuclear delivery systems. (Jawad Iqbal, Nuclear tensions rising in South Asia,
BBC, 14 April 2015.)

Here India’s stance confuses the writers India wants to a torch bearer in the process of nuclear
disarmament and on the other hand becomes part of such treaties which are going affect this
stand. This dilemma has been going on from a very long period of time and would go on. The
main agenda which comes in how can India be a torch bearer in the process of global nuclear
disarmament.
The major problem which is to be seen is the technology reaching the terrorist groups like ISIS,
Taliban, etc. this is the main problem, if assess the past events and even present. As technologies
advance, even the people advance with it. When the whole world would be possessing nuclear
weapons no doubt these weapons can reach wrong hand. With advent of internet, lot of problems
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
has started, hacking, government sites vandalized, etc. and no control over the net has to seen.
The dark web can make things available for anyone and everyone. The technology gets in wrong
hand we can see many more incidents happening around us.

Peace and security can only be made of everyone comes on a common stand point and talk sense,
every country wants peace and security for its self and its people and if only the big fours try to
handle the situation in batter way a lot of things would ease out. If the bigger countries stop
pressuring the small countries to stop testing and developing of nuclear arms and technology.
But also do for themselves that would be far better than just passing a mandate.

R. Rajaraman, a well-known pro-disarmament academic, who echoed this view, was critical of
the big four claim that the new nuclear states may not be able to achieve the stability of the Cold
War era by replicating mutually assured destruction. He noted further that their emphasis on
nuclear terrorism as the main reason for disarmament “may not be universally shared” and that
“some non-nuclear weapons states might view the existing state-owned arsenals as a bigger
threat.” (R. Rajaraman, „Get Rid of Nuclear Arms, Times of India, 5 March 2008.)

India now has a nuclear capability but can it maintain it? The writers believe no it cannot. Indian
being a developing country cannot cope up with the advancement in the field of technology
related to weapons. India has already used a lot of its resources to reach till this possession, the
expenditure in the field of nuclear weapons cannot be measured as there is no solid data available
related to it. One study quotes a figure between 15 and 150 billion US dollars. If India wishes to
expand it the cost would be much higher. To put in comparison with other countries, United
States nuclear program has cost an excess of 5.5 trillion dollars and India’s neighbor to the north,
China has spent around 100 billion dollars. For country like India whose 30 percent of the
population lives under the poverty line and 5,350 (2016 estimate) cannot afford the exorbitant
costs with limited resources. Instead of enhancing peace, stability and security, a
disproportionate level of expenditures on nuclear weapons may have the opposite effect of
bringing more instability and insecurity

Furthermore, India should bring in the concept of Treaty of Tlatelolco, which talks about Nuclear
Weapon Free Zones and other sub agendas like strengthening a world at peace are based on the
sovereign equality of states, total prohibition of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass
Sukriti Nigam
Vikalp Wange
destruction of any type, keeping peace and security in the military denuclearized zones, use of
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, right to the greatest and most equitable possible access to
this new source of energy in order to accelerate economic and social development, etc. if India
brings in such treaty in the South Asian countries and with the support of United States of
America, Russia and United Kingdom such treaty could be passed in the South Asian region a lot
of problem will ease down. The South Asian region is the area, which is firstly the most densely
populated area and has lot of powerful countries due to which there is always tension between
them; if such a treaty is brought in the countries, they can then ratify it and move towards global
disarmament. This treaty also supports the contention of India on nuclear disarmament that
extensive restriction on countries for use of nuclear power will ultimately lead to elimination of
nuclear threat.

Global Nuclear disarmament is a very vague term to conclude and India helping in achieving it
can say to be a very futuristic thought. Nuclear disarmament can happen when the countries
come a single stand point and don’t have there on terms in it. This can only be done when larger
countries like United States and China take the first step toward nuclear disarmament because the
other countries would feel more secured if it goes this way. Peace and harmony should the main
agenda of the countries; we have seen very bad consequences of nuclear attacks, japan still faces
problem due to the radiation of the nuclear attack. If the countries keep this though in mind lot
things can change. First step could be to make the procurement system more secure and definite
and the world should not be dived in different groups there should be a common ground. Second
could be not adding no new countries in the system for example North Korea and by avoid this
we can control the repercussions. Third, could be making rules over denuclearization i.e. how
should be removed at once and how the process could move further and at last we can get what is
known here as Global Nuclear Disarmament. Though countries should still carry on with nuclear
plants as they are greener way of producing energy but should ither activities related to it.