Published by the Press, Information & Culture Wing, Embassy of India

(May 1999)

South Asia Region

India's Foreign Relations

Economy & Trade

Upcoming Events

Opinion: Warning from NATO

Feature: Interview with Prime Minister Vajpayee

Archives | Search | Index

Warning from NATO

After Yugoslavia, the US may want to proceed to consolidate its dominance over the rest of the world, warns K Subrahmanyam

After a year has passed since India conducted its Shakti tests there are still people in this country who question the wisdom of going in for nuclear weapons. Some of them clutch at various straws - a statement of the Canadian Parliamentary Committee, the stand of the German Green Party, or a document released by a section of American Scientists. Unfortunately the nuclear and military policies of the most powerful military alliance of the world are not determined by such enlightened people but the politico-military establishment of the United States of America.

The world has to take note of the developments presently enacted over Yugoslavia. Some hundreds of aircraft devastate every day the oil refineries, oil storages, city water supply, bridges, chemical plants and industrial establishments, displace and make refugees of hundreds of thousands of population and cause enormous pollution amounting to chemical warfare and yet assert this is not a war on the people of Yugoslavia but a humanitarian mission to rehabilitate the Kosovar refugees whose homeland is pounded by NATO bombs and missiles.

One should recall that more explosives than was produced up to that point of time in history were dropped on the three peasant countries of Indo-China allegedly to rescue them and the rest of the world from the evil of communism. Atom bombs were dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the justification that those bombings were bringing the war to an end and helped save American lives. The world was not told that the Japanese were already seeking terms for surrender. Just as the world is not now told that Milosevic has accepted the autonomy for Kosovars, an international monitoring force for Kosovo and is withdrawing part of his forces from Kosovo and he only objects to NATO occupation of Kosovo without any UN mandate.

The nuclear weapons are legitimated in the name of non-proliferation. The Vienna Convention on the law of the treaties which avers that a nation is not to be compelled to accept obligations arising out of a treaty to which it is not a party was trampled upon in the name of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Yet there are people in this country who are for India being totally unarmed and defenceless and subjecting itself to vulnerabilities of asymmetry in military capabilities which could pose a threat of either a strike by modern information technology based weapons or with nuclear weapons. Missiles, surface to surface, sea launched and air launched have become standard weapons of war but some of our people would prefer not to have any missiles at all.

The NATO in its latest document "The Alliance's Strategic Concept" proclaims "The fundamental purpose of the nuclear forces of the Allies is political; to preserve peace and prevent coercion and any kind of war. They will continue to fulfil an essential role by ensuring uncertainty in the mind of any aggressor about the nature of the Allied response to military aggression. They demonstrate that aggression of any kind is not a rational option". In other words the most powerful nations of the world in terms of conventional and sophisticated military technology consider that they need nuclear weapons to create uncertainty in the minds of aggressors and convince them that aggression of any kind is not a rational option. Is it not, therefore, rational for a less powerful nation like India to equip itself with the instrumentality of deterrence to project the uncertainty in the minds of potential aggressors? Those who object to India taking this insurance should explain whether they accept the double standards of nuclear weapon powers and their allies that they need nuclear weapons for their security but others should not have the same standard of security.

Once upon a time, not long ago, Yugoslavia, opposing Stalin was close enough to NATO to be licensed production of a range of Western armaments. Today that Yugoslavia is being devastated without any means to defend itself. Are the opponents to Indian nuclear weapon programme in a position to assure this country that India will never face either nuclear threat or sophisticated missile attacks with smart munitions? Or do they perhaps consider Indian freedom and autonomy do not have much value and is not worth defending?

In the fifties there were a number of critics of India spending even its modest 1.8 per cent of GDP for defence. Subsequently when the military debacle happened in 1962 they were the first to denounce the government for its credulity and negligence.

One can understand the logic of those who may adopt the view that India should unreservedly accept the US hegemony and adjust itself to a status befitting a protectorate as a large number of other countries, big and small have done. Then India need not worry about its autonomy and may as well sign the NPT and CTBT and accept the globalisation of the international economy on terms dictated by US. Then the world will consist of Russia, China and US with 180 semi-Puerto-Ricos covering the rest of the globe. That will internally be consistent in terms of its logic. But what is puzzling is the stand of those who want India to have political, economic and security autonomy but without any capabilities to guarantee that autonomy.

In this country people talk of Swadeshi and fighting against the adverse impact of globalisation without investing in science and technology or focusing on increasing our share of global trade. People talk of good governance and doing away with corruption without addressing the basic problems of electoral reform. Similarly people talk of ensuring our security and freedom from external intervention without bothering about providing the nation with minimum deterrent insurance. Perhaps that comes out of the tradition that chanting of mantras influence other people and make them good, virtuous and charitable.

The war in Yugoslavia is intended to consolidate US dominance over Europe and give notice to the rest of the world that in the name of humanitarian values the US with the docile Europe at its disposal can now proceed to consolidate its dominance over the rest of the world.