[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Nuclear Policy



I'm in close agreement with Kush's position here.

It is worth noting that the US senate has NOT ratified the CTBT, or
START3 which calls for a 67% reduction of nuclear armaments by the US
and Russia.

-Charu

Kush Khatri[SMTP:free_voice@yahoo.com] wrote:

>Sanjeev:  Yes, the power of the atom bomb was known but not its use in
>real war situation.
>No one will diagree with the fact that nuclear weapons are an anathema
>and a constant danger to humanity. But I disagree that the recent
>testing of nuclear devices is going to move the world closer to
>nuclear disarmament. It is not.
>WE MUST DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DANGER AND A NUCLEAR MILITARY THREAT. 
>That nuclear weapons are dangerous goes without saying.  But did India
>face a real nuclear threat from China or any other declared nuclear
>state?  NO.  
>Should India pursuade the world to disarm?  It is a question of
>priorities and resources.  Our priority should be economic
>development, improving quality of life for ALL our citizens and
>reaching a zero population growth.
>In the meanwhile, India could continue to do what it was doing.  it
>did the right thing in not signing the CTBT and keeping the option of
>developing nuclear weapons open.  Thereby, it was putting pressure on
>the world.  In any case reducing nuclear weapons danger is not just
>India's burden, NOR SHOULD IT BE INDIA'S PRIORITY.