ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Special / Chintamani Mahapatra

US winking at Chinese arms sales forced India's hand

After 24 years of nuclear ambivalence, the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition government finally conducted five nuclear tests at the Pokhran test sites and announced that India had nuclear deterrent capability.

While it is difficult to identify people who are really unhappy about this event in India, international reaction has been critical. The United States is "deeply disappointed," France is concerned, Britain has expressed its desire to take the issue to the European Union, Japan has announced its decision to withdraw the ODA (Official Development Assistance) to India, Pakistan is enraged, and the United Nations secretary general has "regretted" the conduct of nuclear tests by India. Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand and Japan have recalled their envoys for consultations in protest against the Indian action.

China, significantly, has kept a low profile. When Buddha smiled for the second time, why did Beijing maintain silence? Was it because, China remains unaffected by the event? In fact, China happens to be one of the important actors inducing India to exercise its nuclear option. First of all, the Sino-Pakistan co-operation in nuclear and missile development programmes have been going on for several years and the international community has conveniently overlooked the fact. Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme and missile development are not considered to be detrimental to their national security interests by the G-7 countries. And China's rapid economic performance has been too attractive for those countries to annoy China on the ground of proliferation concerns.

While trumpeting the cause of human rights, the G-7 countries have been competing with one another to win contracts in China. The United States and the two nuclear weapon powers of Europe -- Britain and France -- are committed to defending NATO area, Japan feels secure under the US nuclear umbrella, and Russia, notwithstanding its economic woes, is the second most militarily powerful country in the world. Pakistan is an ally of China. And hence, it is India which has to be careful about the uncertain evolution of China.

While the Americans, Europeans and the Japanese are engaged in a trade and investment race, the Chinese have taken advantage of this development by shopping for high technology items to modernise their nuclear and missile arsenals. Against the backdrop of series of US intelligence reports about Chinese nuclear and missile assistance to Pakistan and others, the Clinton administration decided to implement the dormant 1985 nuclear co-operation agreement between the United States and China.

A recent CIA report about the persistent Chinese support to Pakistan's WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) programme during the second half of 1996, was endorsed by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Robert Einhorn in his testimony to the senate governmental affairs subcommittee in April 1997. Einhorn said that Beijing had not stopped its co-operation in such fields with Pakistan.

In September 1997, Chinese President Jiang Zemin held a summit meeting with Bill Clinton in Washington. A few months later, in January, Clinton gave a certification to the US Congress that China is no longer a proliferation promoter and in March, the nuclear co-operation agreement between the US and China went into effect. Less than a month later, Pakistan test-fired the so-called Ghauri missile, once again bringing to light Sino-Pakistan co-operation in nuclear and missile development programmes.

While the Clinton administration has reportedly imposed some token sanctions against Pakistan, China is still off the hook. On the contrary, the US government is making all kinds of compromises with China to make Clinton's trip to China in June a success. India's missile development programme as well as the nuclear tests should be read against the backdrop of all these developments.

What will be the implications of these tests on Indo-US relations? The Clinton administration has imposed sanctions against India under the provisions of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act of 1994. Section 102 of this act deals with "nuclear processing transfers, illegal exports for nuclear explosive devices, transfer of nuclear explosive devices and nuclear detonations." Any non-nuclear weapon state attracts sanctions if it either "receives a nuclear explosive device, or detonates a nuclear explosive device."

While India has detonated five nuclear explosive devices, is it a non-nuclear weapon state? According to this act, the definition of the non-nuclear weapon state is same as the one provided in Article IX of the NPT. India is clearly a non-nuclear weapon state according to this definition. But India is not a signatory to the NPT and can claim that its status has all along been different, particularly since 1974 Pokhran nuclear test.

However, the Clinton administration can delay imposition of sanctions for about 30 days on the ground that "imposition of sanctions on that country would be detrimental to the national security of the United States." He can also waive the sanctions, if imposed, on the ground that such sanctions "would be prejudicial to the achievement of United States nonproliferation objectives or otherwise jeopardise the common defence and security."

Imposition of sanctions or lifting of sanctions is ultimately a political decision. The Clinton administration would have to assess the benefits of Indo-US ties which have been improving fast in the post-Cold War era. Even in the field of promoting non-proliferation, India's contribution is no less. While it is true that India's nuclear tests would not go down well, it is also true that the process of arms control has almost halted since the Clinton administration assumed office.

No new initiative has been taken in the area of arms control, old agreements signed during the Reagan and the Bush administrations face problems of implementation, the five nuclear powers continue to possess thousands of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, and all five of them believe in the value of nuclear deterrence.

Soon after the test, India announced its desire to participate in arms control and disarmament efforts. If invited, New Delhi can contribute to the cause of arms control and non-proliferation from the position of strength. More than China, India has been championing the cause of the developing world. And it will continue to do so. Before imposing sanctions, the Clinton administration should weigh the pros and cons. In the process of seeking to punish India, it should not promoting proliferation by default.

Dr Chintamani Mahapatra is a fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.

Tell us what you think of this analysis