Nuclear Apartheid- Iran and North Korea Challenge The World Order
North Korea has conducted their nuclear tests for delivery system for nuclear war head in spite of warnings from the west and UNSC. This reflects the failure of 6 year old negotiations by the group of five permanent members of UNSC and Japan & South Korea. The moot point is whether possession of nuclear weapon has helped any superpowers in last 60 years and what should be the response of international community to North Korea who has faced economic sanctions due to geopolitical equations and grand strategic models of cold war era.
Ever since the only nuclear attack on Hiroshima / Nagasaki ending the WW II, the United States of America has not only maintained their technological superiority but has piled up the nuclear weapons. Erstwhile Soviet Union always tried to compete and succeeded in surpassing the US till its collapse as a nation. With cold war now a part of the history, the compulsions of stockpiling nuclear weapons have changed. Since WWII no war has been fought and not a single nuclear bomb being detonated over the ground. Since the stockpile is built with objective of having a deterrent, the bomb would never be used again except by a maniac. The maniac could be president of a nation or a terrorist. How does it matter who presses the button? The damage would be done and forever.
Ineffective Deterrent:
A well planned & coordinated 9/11 attack by a bunch of motivated terrorists targeted Pentagon & WTC and succeeded. This was in spite of all the nuclear war heads, missile defense shield (of whatever present status), and electronics warfare techniques closer to “star wars” era with most modern warfare preparedness one can boast of. In fact Washington was never more vulnerable than it was on 9/11 with no role for missiles with nuclear warheads or bombs. The only significant thing airborne that day was Air Force One with the President aboard for wrong reasons.
In spite of the nuclear deterrent in their arsenal, the mightiest force on the earth, USA, has been ineffective even in smaller countries like Somalia, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Afghanistan. No one bothered for the deterrent as it is foregone conclusion that US will not use the nuclear weapon. So how much of the same does USA need to win a war? Thousands of nuclear warheads have not impressed the terrorists and yet they have created fear psychosis by mere possibility of making a dirty bomb which is enough to rattle the whole world. Then what is the strategic value of thousands of war heads deployed and ready to go?
Strategic Failures:
USA has been engaged in fighting conventional war in one or the other theater some where in the world, almost all the time since WWII. How many wars have been won by USA? Has the stockpile of nuclear weapons helped USA significantly? USA under George W Bush declared war on Iraq on the back of misleading story of Weapons of Mass Destruction only to be made to bite the moral dust as their bluff was called. It was only Iraqi Oil which was for the grabs and USA made the most of it. There was no threat what so ever to USA or world from Iraq. UNSC was most ineffective in preventing the war. In fact it made itself redundant in such a show of force and farce while rest of the world watched passively.
India had nuclear deterrent and yet Pakistan, with its own nuclear arsenal, did not bother about it while making audacious attack on parliament and then on Mumbai. So at best deterrents of both had nullifying effect.
Reduction In Nuclear Arsenal:
Over last 40 years USA and Russia, the superpowers with piles of nuclear warheads have done considerable progress in reducing the levels of numbers of war heads with implementation of SALT I treaty which is expiring this year end. USA and Russian teams are engaged in negotiations for preparation of summit between the presidents of the two countries in early July 2009. Implementation of SALT I treaty saw the stockpiles being reduced substantially from levels of about peak of 30,000 of US in 1965 and about 40,000 of Russia around 1985. These stocks had whittled down to peak of about 10,000 around 2002. President Obama and President Medvedev are likely to agree to reduce the nuclear stockpile to limit them to around 2000 each. Why not decimate these numbers by knocking off one zero? That will be a good progress and acknowledgement to the world that nuclear bombs have not made the world any safer.
Alternate Strategic Security Cover:
So the time has come to seek answer to the basic question: what is the changed strategic need to overcome fear of insecurity for the people of a country? It is not the nuclear bomb or even conventional bomb. It is the share in power, share in development, share in progress and share in prosperity. If a nation can provide inclusive growth to the people to take care of these factors, there is every chance of peace. One can not undermine the importance of having a nuclear deterrent for national security but what is most likely to work is to take disgruntled population along the path of opportunities.
Learning From Experience:
Look back at Vietnam today. It is not, nor was it in the past, any threat to any nation. Today it is on path to peace & prosperity after rebuilding from scratch after war. If Afghanistan is vacated by the superpowers, which have self-created strategic stakes, peace can return and development can start. USA talked about good and bad Taliban indicating readiness for a dialogue. Russians walked out of Afghanistan after bitter war and have not lost anything in retrospect. Yet Americans stepped in and do not know how to exit. They may have lost more resources in last twenty years in “operation Afghanistan” than strategic gains, if any. It is time they evolve an exit plan out of Afghanistan as they are doing for Iraq. US fought war in Iraq. Now it is planning withdrawal sooner than later. Peace will return to Iraq. Experience would tell USA not to do any adventure into North Korea.
Selective Punishment:
USA turned the guns on Iran but with Obama in White House there is a scope for dialogue to abandon path of nuclear confrontation. USA turned blind eye when China helped Pakistan to make nuclear bombs. China, the patron of Pakistan’s nuclear program, has been permanent member of UNSC and has encouraged Pakistan. USA seems to be overlooking freedom granted to A.Q. Khan, the proliferator-in-chief of Pakistan. As the reports come in, USA seems to have allowed Pakistan to acquire and manufacture nuclear weapons without informing congress as per Danielle Brian, executive director, Project on Government Oversight.
Today Pakistan is on the brink of economic and political collapse and yet it is being shored up ignoring the biggest proliferation of nuclear technology in the history. According Pentagon, Pakistan was major supplier of critical parts for nuclear technology to North Korea in their own program which is opposed by all the key players. And yet it has gone Scot free! UNSC’s resolutions and threats of sanctions have had no impact on North Korea. North Korea knows that US can not do anything more than they have suffered in the past. If Pakistan can get away with tags of nuclear proliferation and epicenter of terrorism, then any country can. Pakistan has got billions in aid recently. Similar approach with North Korea is likely to succeed.
Strategic Paradigm Shift:
This simply shows that the age old model of passing of UNSC resolution followed by sanctions has become outdated. There has to be a paradigm shift to manage nuclear field in view of 60 years of experience with nuclear weapons, and future needs of global security for peace, progress and prosperity. The global community should recognize the need to put development agenda as an alternative on table to discourage nuclear ambitions instead of coercion or threats. The Global Meltdown could not have come at more opportune time to teach lesson in geo-political governance. If trillions of dollars can be washed down the drain to bail out fraudulent companies, similar aid packages can be used to spend on development projects and to eliminate the need to develop nuclear weapons to give a false sense of security. New models have to be evolved for sustainable growth and security, learning from global experience of contemporary development in last 65 years since WWII.
Weapons Of Mass Development:
USA and Russia should lead the change with further drastic reduction in nuclear stockpiles to minimum levels of couple of hundred war heads to send strong signal to the global community that economic development and growth is the new mantra for security of the people. Why even hundreds of them, critics would ask? That is necessary till the new global order gets accepted by the world to save mother earth from nuclear disaster. Once “Weapons of Mass Development” replace “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, there won’t be any need to Talibanise a community to fight for their survival, for Palestine or Israel to keep fighting for 60 years in search of their nationhood or Iran to feel the insecurity from Israel to equip with the ultimate nuclear weapon. If this can be achieved in next ten or twenty years, then the remaining hundreds of nuclear warheads can be consigned to the dustbin of history. Is it day dreaming? Hope not- that is if nations learn from experience. Also hope Obama and Medvedev would not lose the steam.
Vijay M.Deshpande
Corporate Advisor,
Strategic Management Initiative,
Pune
June 19, 2009
Scroll down for my other blogs
Or
Visit my website http://www.strami.com/
0 comments:
Post a Comment