Arms race in South Asia

In 1993, more than five years before India and Pakistan came out of nuclear closet, director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had said: “The arms race between India and Pakistan poses perhaps the most probable prospect for future use of weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons”. One could not visualize then that the US and India would one day become strategic partners, though the US had always espoused ambitions to have India on board right from 1950s yet India always looked the other side ie the former USSR. Former president Bill Clinton, at the fag end of his tenure had visited India and promised to make it not only a regional but a world power. The die was cast during his tour when he stayed in India for three days and with a lot of persuasion by former president Pervez Musharraf he agreed for a stop-over in Pakistan. Since then the US and India have come closer to the detriment of countries of South Asia who are already wary of India’s attitude and hegemonic designs. Despite the sane voices opposing the Indo-US nuclear agreement and also some US lawmakers’ questioning the wisdom of providing atomic fuel and technology to India that always refused to sign NPT, the US administration had gone ahead with the programme.

This agreement had created asymmetry in South Asia by enabling India to enhance the production capacity of nuclear bombs from 6 to 10 a year to several dozen per year. India is also on a shopping spree for sophisticated and lethal weapons’ systems and has also allocated $30 billion for purchase of tanks and planes. In addition to that, India has planned $100 billion worth nuclear installations. As recently as in May 2009, Israel has supplied the first Indian Air Force AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) platform, which is set to alter the dimension of the see-through capability of the IAF beyond conventional visions of ground-based and tethered electromagnetic sensors.

Now with the induction of India’s nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant, imbalance in South Asia has been exacerbated. This will enhance offensive operational capability of India and there is a perception that it would jeopardize the security paradigm of the entire Indian Ocean region and threaten Indonesia, Malaysia and other countries of the region. Pakistan’s Foreign Office statement said: “The continued induction of new lethal weapon systems by India was detrimental to regional peace and stability. Without entering into an arms race with India, Pakistan will take all appropriate steps to safeguard its security and maintain strategic balance in South Asia in the interests of peace and security in the region”. This nuclear-powered submarine is fitted with India’s K-15 ballistic missiles that can be launched from under water with the capacity to carry both conventional and nuclear warheads.

According to defence experts, a distinct advantage of a nuclear-powered submarine is that while it can remain under water for a long duration, a diesel-fired submarine has to rise to the surface every day for ejecting the carbon-dioxide produced by the diesel-generator to avoid problems to the crew. With the Indo-US nuclear deal and AWACS deal with Israel, Indo-US-Israel nexus is obvious. Last year, Israeli Army Chief Avi Mizrahi was in New Delhi with a view to enhancing cooperation in training of Indian forces in anti-insurgency operations. Both sides had also discussed holding joint exercises and mulled measures to boost defence cooperation. Mizrahi had also visited Indian Held Kashmir and met top army officers deployed there. He also met Indian Naval Chief and the Chiefs of Staff Committee Chairman Admiral Suresh Mehta. According to press reports, both countries had clandestine relations much before that, as India did not like to annoy Muslim countries especially Arab countries and Iran because it benefited immensely from bilateral trade relations with them.

In 2007, India had bought the USS Trenton - the giant American landing platform dock - for about Rs 215 crores and had been re-christened as INS Jalashwa. It was originally commissioned into the US Navy in 1971. It is equipped with four landing mechanised craft and can carry up to 1,000 troops along with vehicles, tanks, artillery, ammunition and tracked landing vehicles. Pakistan may not be able to match this heavy spending on nuclear installations but Pakistan would definitely maintain minimum deterrence, come what may. But India’s arming to the teeth has purpose and that is to extend its hegemony over the neigbouring countries. India has dispute with China, as the latter claims that India has occupied its large swathes of land in Aruna Chal. India has dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir. India’s attitude and behaviour with other small neighbouring countries has persistently tended to violate the norms of peaceful co-existence. Instead of recognizing their equal status and sovereignty, India’s domineering attitude demands of her neighbouring countries to act according to her dictates.

India’s neighbours like Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan are expected to formulate their external and internal and even defence policies according to its wishes, as India arrogates to herself the role of determining the extent of sovereignty its neighbours will enjoy. India considering Pakistan as an obstacle in its insidious designs has been trying to destabilize it through organizing and coordinating the activities of saboteurs in Balochistan from consulates in Afghanistan’s provinces adjacent to Pakistan’s provinces. Recently, President Karzai is reported to have acknowledged the existence of training camps in Afghanistan and promised to see to it that they are closed. Pakistan has however taken measures to counter India’s machinations, and has already proved that it has the will and determination to take militants, extremists and saboteurs head on.

There is a perception that the US wanted to use India as a countervailing force against China. In view of China’s economic and military might, India would never try to flex muscles with China. However, India would increase its military strength to bully its smaller neighbours. Some analysts are of the opinion that if the US faces any obstacle in advancing its global interests or feels threatened from any emerging force or group of nations, it would go up to any extent. It is however imperative to undertake a major review of our foreign policy and reassess our national interest in the drastically changed post-cold war scenario, as the US continues with its policy that has led to asymmetry in the subcontinent by providing India with latest equipment. And this policy is bound to make the Kashmir issue more complicated. Already on 9th October 2000, the US Ambassador to India Richard Celeste had said; “We anticipate India as a true global leader looking down the road 10 to 20 years”.

In order to implement that vision, a 10-year defence pact between India and the US was signed that had paved the way for joint weapons production, cooperation on missile defence, and more recently cooperation in nuclear field. As regards relationship with Pakistan, the US needs Pakistan’s cooperation till situation is brought under control in Afghanistan.

The US leadership must be remembering that despite its best efforts, it had failed to bring India on board during Cold War era. The US should have realized that since 1950s Pakistan has been an ally of the West intertwined in various pacts; in 1980s it was a frontline state against the former USSR when it invaded Afghanistan posing threat to US interests in the region, and even now Pakistan is a key partner in war on terror.

Mohammad Jamil
Email: mjamil1938@yahoo.com