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

Re: Some American views on nuclearization

On Fri, 22 May 1998, Antony Joseph wrote:

> I do see a lot of America hating, Pakistan hating etc as  motivation as well
> as topic within our discussion. 

No one hates America, and I personally love Pakistan and Pakstanis. They
are my brothers and I will not have anyone hate them, if I can have my
way. In fact, we are talking of brotherhood and bringing world peace in
the Manifesto. 

The reason why I keep putting up these Heritage foundation stories is
because we need to keep these in mind always. Know the views of a very
powerful lobby in the US policy level, even if it represents a minority. 

Then there was this article in the Newsweek (25th May) that blames India
for not being "pragmatic" and ridiculing India for trying to be a Great
Power at a Cheap cost. This kind of rhetoric has to be seriously
countered. I don't believe India should claim itself to be a "great power" 
without complete elimination of poverty and without becoming No.1 in per
capita income in the world. And, to the best of my knowledge, no one has
claimed that, so ridiculing India is completely uncalled for. 

Second, asking India to be "pragmatic" is completely impossible. India can
never and should never be "pragmatic," for the convenience of anyone.  The
point is that those who consider themselves to be undefended after having
precisely 8,420 fully deployed nuclear bombs (and an additional 2,300 as
reserve), out of which 3,456 are kept in perpetual readiness to be
launched from hidden sub-marines floating below the sea, which means that
these 3,456 bombs can be delivered to any part of the world at a moment's
notice, should try to avoid being santimonious to India. 

This view does not mean that there is any "hatred" for the views of the
Heritage Foundation or the Americans. Far from it. I think they are doing
what everyone tends to do: expand their self-interest.

Unfortunately, in **our** self-interest, we cannot be party to the
consequences of their self-interest, if it means losing out permanently on
this technology, and being forced to listen to the dictates of an unequal

We have to strike a hard bargain to give up our bomb/s: the only bargain
acceptable is complete nuclear disarmament of the entire world.  I hope
you don't think that implies hatred for anyone. It implies love for the
entire mankind. If the world, however, considers this demand to be
'idealistic' then I believe India should not rest with less number of
bombs what the rest of the world has. 

Further, I think we on this group are not policy makers and have nothing
to worry about defending anything that India has done or might do. We are
looking to define an "ideal" manifesto, and if you have any dispute with
the wording of the clause on defence, please propose it for debate.