CIAO DATE: 04/03

Nuclear Weapons in South Asia: Risks and Their Reduction

R. Rajaraman
Professor of Theoretical Physics
School of Physical Sciences
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi

50th Pugwash Conference On Science and World Affairs:
"Pugwash Workshop on South Asian Security"
1-3 November 2002

Geneva, Switzerland

With India and Pakistan having officially turned nuclear in 1998, the size and scope if their community of nuclear analysts, particularly outside the government, also has to change qualitatively. Considerable expertise on nuclear weapons and arms control has already existed for decades in both countries. But the bulk of this expertise resides within government agencies - in India for instance in its defence and foreign services and its departments of atomic energy and space. Without questioning either the competence or the integrity of governmental experts, it is nevertheless vital that decision making on an important area like nuclear armament should involve the same process of checks and balances as, say economic or political issues. There should be constant and ongoing dialogue between experts within and outside the government, the latter providing the counterweight in ensuring an informed public debate.

With this in mind, if you consider how much nuclear expertise we have, for instance in India, among people who are not now and were not in the past government functionaries, only a small (albeit very distinguished) set of people is available. Some of those are present right here today. Even amongst them, the expertise has mainly been on the international politics of nuclear armament, the history of the cold war and the strategic nuances of the various test ban and arms control treaties. The main functional role of this expertise has been in the area of diplomacy, in recommending the posture our country should adopt with respect to different arms control negotiations and treaties. In comparison there have been very few active scientists, particularly from the academia who have taken the time to educate themselves and contribute to the national debate on the nuclear weapon issues. The fact the almost all of basic research in the country is supported by the government has also led to a tacit stifling of independent opinions.

This is to be contrasted with the situation in Europe and America. For instance consider the US where it all started. Most of the leading scientists in the Manhattan project went back to the academia after the war. While remaining on call as consultants to the government defence services, they also provided a major source of counter-balancing opinion, first on the H bomb, then on Star Wars and most recently on the missile defence system.

 

Full Text (PDF, 24 Pages, 84 KB)