Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) have always been in focus since more than a decade. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) had already unanimously adopted a resolution asking all non-NPT states to join the treaty.
The 15-member council, while urging “other states” outside the NPT to join the controversial treaty as “non-nuclear states” to help rid the world of atom bombs, also urged all countries to sign and ratify the CTBT and refrain from conducting atomic tests. India has not signed the CTBT yet.
The Security Council had adopted a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution. Through this resolution, the Security Council had called upon all nations to sign the NPT. The countries that have not so far signed it have been asked to do so. Under this treaty a ban has been imposed on making nuclear bomb in the future.
The “other states”, which were not named in the resolution, were a clear reference to Pakistan and India, which have not signed the NPT, but are known to have atomic arsenals, and Israel, which neither confirms nor denies having nuclear arms but is believed to have a sizeable stockpile of warheads.
The resolution also calls for talks on drafting a treaty to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. The mandate of the council came when it approved the resolution 1887 that calls on countries that have not signed the nuclear NPT “to comply fully with all their obligations”. The resolution will strengthen the NPT.
India’s Stance
A convergence of international factors — political, economic and military — has led to a situation where correct and timely decisions on the treaty can enhance India’s standing as a nuclear weapon state as well as brighten its economic prospects.
The reverse is also true. It is, therefore, important that the ongoing debate in the country on the CTBT is set on the right parameters.
Hitherto, the debate has been fudged by hangovers from the past. The NPT and CTBT have criss-crossed, their lines of distinction blurred in public perception. Another term in current international lexicon, the Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty (FMCT), adds to the confusion.
Little is understood about the FMCT and the clout that India could wield by a correct posturing on this treaty, which is still in the making. Even more than the substance of these treaties — distinct in themselves — it is the history surrounding them that has influenced opinion in this country. It would be in order, therefore, to have a glimpse of this history and a closer look at what these treaties mean to India.
India has decided to affix its signature on the treaty. India has refused to abide by the Security Council resolution asking all non-NPT nations to sign the pact, saying it cannot accept the “externally prescribed norms or standards” on issues that are contrary to its national interests or infringe on its sovereignty. India said it could not join the NPT as a non-weapon country even as it reiterated its commitment to no testing and no-first-use besides non-discriminatory universal non-proliferation.
The Indian Air Force chief recently expressed apprehension of a possibility of a nuclear attack on India. In the past also India was asked to sign the NPT, but it declined to do so pleading that unless and until nuclear-weapon nations destroy their nuclear arms, the treaty would be useless. Now, India has yet again refused to sign the NPT. At that time India stated that some other nations are in possession of nuclear weapons, hence it will need to make its own nuclear weapons for the sake of self-defense because in view of the need of self-defense it is not advisable to sign the NPT.
Now, India, once again declining to be a signatory to the treaty, vehemently opposed the UN security calls. It pleaded: "We cannot implement the regulations thrust upon other nations, for these impinge upon the sovereignty and national interests." It will not be in the country's interests to accept such decisions.
India has already taken a categorical stand not to make first use of the nuclear weapons to which it is completely committed. India's permanent representative at the United Nations, Hardip Singh Puri, has in a communication to Susan Rice of Security Council raised questions on its role in the implementation of international treaties.
India’s refusal to sign the NPT is based on unexceptionable grounds of national security. While Pakistan has been a ‘rogue state’ which has fuelled nuclear proliferation by sharing its know-how for making nuclear weapons with China, North Korea, Libya and Iran, India has had an absolutely clean record of eschewing both proliferation and aggressive intent. It is this country’s misfortune that it is flanked by a nuclear-armed China which has had expansionist designs in the past and a hand-in-glove nuclear Pakistan which is most untrustworthy and sinister. If, in the circumstances, India seeks to retain its right to stay nuclear to deter its recalcitrant neighbors, it can hardly be faulted. India’s stand that the nuclear weapon states must work towards total disarmament to carry conviction is also perfectly legitimate.
There has been an important transformation after Pokhran II: India is now unambiguously a weapon state, with transparent and credible nuclear weapon capability. The thermonuclear test, backed by advanced Indian nuclear technology, further uplifted India’s status, completely changing India’s situation vis-a-vis the CTBT. Hurdles to India to being a full signatory to the CTBT are not per se in the draft of the treaty as such but in the continuing shadow cast by the NPT. In the event, the right course would be for India to declare its adherence to the CTBT unambiguously, while reserving the final step of signing and ratifying to an assurance from the United States — and others — that in implementation of CTBT, India’s nuclear status will be equal to the five recognized weapon powers.
Demand for Amendment to NPT Treaty
Simultaneously, eight nations of the world, including India, have demanded an amendment in the NPT treaty. The Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution on nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. The resolution passed by 15-member SC that the remaining nations should sign the NPT. The resolution adopted under the leadership of the United States, China, and Russia also has affirmed it.

Many nations, including India have not signed the NPT. The plea put forward by them is that developed nations have built their nuclear weapon reserves and the NPT is being thrust upon other nations, which is absolutely unjustified. The question arises whether countries in possession of nuclear weapons will not browbeat countries that do not have such weapons. For instance, Pakistani rulers in the past have been holding out, lamenting nuclear attacks on India.
Obama’s Indication
US President Barack Obama first signaled his dedication to the cause of the NPT at Prague way back in April 2009. While stressing non-proliferation, and indicating his preference for reducing the US stockpile of nuclear weapons, the US leader revealingly also said, "Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defence to our allies." This underlines that the US proposes one set of standards for itself, and another for India. This country’s long-held position has been that it is in favor of comprehensive nuclear disarmament, and that non-proliferation is not a substitute for this. President Obama is yet to offer disarmament as an attainable goal.
So long as that remains the case, it will continue to be on the wrong side of political morality. India too has been lax in not publicly countering the American stance under Obama right after Prague. It has also been remiss on another count. After the passage of UNSC Resolution 1887, its official view is that it won’t sign the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state, whose obligations are of a different order under the NPT from those who have come on board as nuclear weapons states. This is at variance with this country’s original stance that the NPT ought to be rejected on grounds of being an inequitable arrangement that allows nuclear weapons only in the hands of a few.
Even now, India has voiced the apprehension that it is faced with a threat from Pakistani terrorists that intend to carry out a nuclear offensive against India because it is apprehended that some of the nuclear weapons of Pakistan have found their way to Al-Qaida and other groups. The United States had stated that Pakistani terrorists pose a big threat to India.
Even as the United Nations desires to make the world free of nuclear weapons as per the secretary general, it is high time to move forward. India has declined to sign the NPT, saying that it will not do so until nuclear weapon nations destroy their nuclear weapon reserves. The Indian stand is fully justified.
In varying degrees, the five NPT weapon powers are unwilling to give up their superior status which finds no place in the CTBT as such. A new brand of doublespeak nuclear diplomacy is at work. China wants India and Pakistan to give up their nuclear weapon status, citing a Security Council resolution, while France and Russia are veering round to de facto acceptance of India's nuclear weapon status provided this country accedes to the CTBT. The US, the decisive power in creation of the global non-proliferation regime, is mid-way.

US Persuading China, Russia To Support Sanctions on Iran

Through their diplomacy, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva and Turkish Prime Minister, Tayeb Erdogan have persuaded Iran to hand over half of its semi-enriched uranium to Turkey and in return, it will be given enriched fuel for research and medical requirements for one year. While it will be able to enrich up to 20 percent of the remaining uranium.

Thus, Iran concluded an agreement on seven conditions with Turkey and Brazil. Keeping in view the US campaign to impose sanctions on Iran, the Brazilian president and Turkish prime minister, convinced Iran to abandon its previous stance so that some crisis may not emerge in the Gulf because the US was getting ready to launch a sudden air attack on Iran under the pretext of Iran's nuclear weapons program and was urging the five permanent members of the UN Security Council to impose the stringent sanctions on Iran. So far as Britain and France are concerned, they are bent on dismantling Iran's peaceful nuclear program out of their ethnic and religious prejudice, but Russia and China differed on imposing stringent sanctions on Iran.

Warning and Threats
And the US had overcome these differences by making deals. The US assured that it would not take up the issue of human rights violations in Russia while deferred its demand from China to revise its currency exchange rate. It appears that the US has persuaded Russia for the UN Security Council resolutions against Iran. Its proof is its (Russia's) dissatisfaction over the agreement concluded by Turkey and Brazil. It led to bitterness between Iran and Russia and the Russian foreign policy advisor, responded to the criticism of Russia by Iranian President Ahmedinejad with impoliteness. He warned the Iranian president that no president can retain his power by the force of his rhetoric as, what he said, was clear from 2,500 years of Iranian history.

This comes true in case of Russia that the Soviet Czar and his successor communist rulers failed to rule over Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan for more than 150 years and the local population drove them out and now their leadership is also being removed. In addition to these Turk- origin states, the white-skinned Christian population also came out of its empire. Ukraine, Georgia, Lithuania broke away from the Soviet Union and became independent states. Now, Shishtan, Tataristan, and Dagestan are about to get freedom.

We are surprised at the Russian behavior. It does not talk about imposing sanctions on Israel, which has neither signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) nor the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), nor Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). However, according to an estimate, it has 200 nuclear bombs while according to CIA estimate this number is 400. It hurls threat every other day to attack Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iran's nuclear program. To US, Russia, France, and Britain, Israel's nuclear stockpiles are not a threat to the world peace while the Iranian peaceful nuclear program is a grave threat for the western states. What sort of logic is this Putin! Medvedev?

Poland has deployed its anti-missile system in Poland adjacent to the Russian border, which Russia considers as a threat to itself. However, the Polish foreign minister has supported the deployment of the US forces in his country. The United States says that the missiles are being deployed to defend Europe from possible missile attack by Iran, and these are not a threat to Russia, but Russia considers them as a threat for its security.

In addition, The US had declared the Russian attack on Georgia on 7 March 2009 as threat to the world peace and expanding North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Now, the number of Atlantic Treaty has increased to 28 from 16 in the wake of the end of cold war. The imperialistic forces will use their collective military power for seizing the natural resources of Afro Asia, and Latin American states. The US influence has reached up to Georgia and Ukraine while is has military bases in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, where it was hard to imagine during the cold war that the US will dare break into the Soviet Union. However, this is a fact that the United States has completely cornered off both China and Russia.

Blackmailing North Korea
Meanwhile, it is blackmailing North Korea, the old ally of China, to suppress China. It says that North Korea sank a South Korean warship in March. At the same time, it has used the Security Council to impose sanctions on North Korea with a view to destroy its nuclear arsenal and factories.

Hillary Clinton is going from post to pillar from Moscow to Beijing, so that Iran and North Korea may be disarmed to establish the US domination. The newspapers give an impression that China is also vacillating like Russia due to the US pressure.

If the information of the western media is to be believed, it (China) has also agreed to support the US draft resolution to impose sanctions on Iran. If it is correct, it is axing its own feet because China is an important buyer of the Iranian gas while Russia has built nuclear power houses in Iran and it has to work on more projects. If Russia and China supported the fourth US resolution on sanctions on Iran, they will lose the confidence of Afro-Asian and Latin American states.

Trade and Political Interests
Now, that Russia and China are compromising with the US and European Union under the compulsion of their expediency and for the sake of their trade and political interests, Turkey and Brazil have risen against the hegemony of five-member mafia (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China) on nuclear energy. This is an important change in the international scenario.

The question is that all these five riders have stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and are threatening and blackmailing other countries on this basis. They have declared themselves exempted from NPT, CTBT, and FMCT, while bullying the other states to follow these treaties. Now if we closely see, these five powers are holding the remaining 187 member states of the UN as hostage while according to the article one of UN Charter, all the member states of the world body have equal rights and independence.

Violation of UN Charter
The NPT is a flagrant violation of the UN charter. Then, why all remaining states should accept it? Now, even if the NPT is accepted in principle, then why it is not being implemented on Israel and India? While both the states have neither sign the treaty nor implemented the same.

Despite this, the 45- member nuclear supplier groups has exempted 35 percent nuclear reactors of India from the inspection of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), under the US pressure, and given free a hand to them to produce nuclear bomb. Because of this, India voted against Iran's nuclear program in the IAEA board of governors and under the US pressure, it quit the Iran- Pakistan-India gas pipeline project.

Enriching Uranium Production
If China and Russia support clamping down of sanctions on Iran, it will be a great injustice with Iran because according to the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) sources themselves, Iran had frozen its nuclear program in 2003 and is not enriching uranium more than 20 percent. It is the clear evidence that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes because 93 percent uranium has to be enriched for production of bombs.

It appears that the days of this five-member mafia in international politics have been numbered and no matter even if these powers get resolution against Iran adopted at the Security Council, they should know that it will have no importance than a mere piece of paper. If the non-aligned countries become active at this juncture, then it will become imperative for the United Nations to cancel Article 27 about the cancellations of rights.

NPT Conference

The one-month-long Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Conference kicked off in the United Nations on 3 May। The purpose of this conference is to take steps for the implementation of the NPT. In this regard, the resolve has been displayed that the United States will put pressure on India and Pakistan, which are not presently signatory to this treaty, to sign the treaty.

Realism and Justice
The nuclear threats facing the entire world are no secret to anyone। If some mistake or accident led to the usage of these nukes, no one will be able to save the world from an endlessly perennial destruction.

Therefore, it is the duty of the international community that it should take steps to bring through the world from this serious menace। However, these steps should be based on realism and justice.

Objective of Conference
A few days ago, Nuclear Security Summit took place in the United States। The purpose of this conference was to purify the world of nuclear weapons. But, with the passage of time, the verity has been blossomed out that the global powers expend such conferences in order to persecute the developing countries.

The declarations of such conferences are for the most part unjust with the sole aim of harboring the objectives of the global powers। Now, take the issue of NPT; the global powers have ambidextrous policy in this regard.

Discriminatory Attitude
On one hand, a peaceful country like India is forced to sign NPT, and on the other, in spite of all kinds of irresponsibilities, Israel has never been brought under pressure, until today। In fact, the global peace confronts dire threats from Israel than any other country.

It will have to excogitate equitable policies, if the United Nations is willing to see this conference successful.

Washington Nuclear Security Summit: Future Prospects

The 47-nation Nuclear Security Summit ended in Washington on 13 April with the adoption of a short final communiqué and seven-page work plan aimed at promoting the effective security of nuclear materials worldwide. The communiqué includes general commitments while the more specific work plan constitutes a political commitment by participating countries to carry out applicable measures, on a voluntary basis, in all aspects of the storage, use, transportation and disposal of nuclear materials.

Washington Communique
Unlike most nuclear documents springing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) system, the Washington communiqué makes no legal distinction between nuclear weapon states and the rest. Nor is there any reference to the NPT. Instead, it reaffirms the fundamental responsibility of States, consistent with their international obligations, to maintain effective security of all nuclear materials. These materials are defined as including nuclear materials used in nuclear weapons, and nuclear facilities under their control.

The document calls for wider support for existing international instruments on nuclear security such as the 1979 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and its 2005 amendment, the Convention on the Suppression of Nuclear Terrorism. However, there is no reference in the documents to UN Security Council Resolution 1887 on nuclear security and non-proliferation, passed last year at the urging or US President Barack Obama. Indian officials say the reference in that to NPT adherence meant it could not be included in the communique.

Supporting G8 Statements
But the communiqué and work plan have words of support for the G8-led Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction. This initiative includes the annual G8 statements on non-proliferation, the last of which sought to prevent India from accessing enrichment and reprocessing technologies.

The work plan covers a wide range of issues from nuclear detection and forensics to exchange of information to detect and prevent illicit nuclear trafficking, and the promotion of nuclear security culture.

The document recognizes that Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) and separated plutonium -- basic ingredients of a nuclear weapon -- require special precautions and that participating countries agree to "promote measures to secure, account for, and consolidate these materials." It also says that they agree to encourage the conversion of reactors from HEU to low-enriched uranium, a stated priority of the US in the run-up to the Summit.

Nuclear Safety Summit: Endeavors Must Continue

For the past several years deliberations at the international level have been held from time to time to bring about reduction in nuclear arms arsenal amassed across the world. As a part of such endeavors the heads of states of the United States and Russia reached a vital agreement to destroy 30 percent of their nuclear weapons potential in the coming years.

Significant Issue and Commitment
This step taken by the world's two superpowers for the reduction of nuclear weapons has spread awareness on this highly significant issue and commitment to this cause has been discernible in various countries. Yet, there are many such countries that are still engaged in making nuclear bombs, which is a matter of deep concern in rest of the countries.

At present, all eyes are on Iran where the government is proactively engaged in the manufacture of nuclear weapons. Even as the United States and certain other major European countries have come down heavily on Iran from time to time, Iran remains adamant. Doubtless, even the use of a small part of the world's nuclear arsenal would destroy the world to a great extent.

Possibility of Nuclear Weapons
However, now in simultaneous with this, another big concern is being voiced at the global level that in case nuclear weapons fall into the hands of some terrorist organizations that are currently holding out a challenge in a way to many big countries, then the entire world scenario will undergo a massive change. This appears possible owing to the fact that terrorist organizations are proactive in some countries in possession of nuclear weapons. They have carried out incident due to which the governments of the countries concerned are apprehensive.

In such a situation, there is the possibility of nuclear weapons finding their way to terrorist organizations. And in view of the possibility of other countries making efforts to make nuclear weapons, a two-day Nuclear Security Summit is being held in the United States, which is being attended by top leaders from many countries. The participation of the prime ministers of India and Pakistan in this summit can be termed significant. It is highly significant that India has succeeded in the creation of an impression that, from the viewpoint of security, it is a greatly responsible country. Although it is in possession of nuclear potential, it cannot use it for negative objectives.

Revolutionary Step
We conceive of a world free of nuclear weapons but it can be made possible only if big nations make up their mind to eliminate their nuclear reserves first. Then, only other nations can be prevailed on not to make nuclear weapons. It is owing to the fact that big countries have not taken the revolutionary step in this direction that India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) so far.

Yet, it can be termed a satisfying development that the awareness regarding the risks of massive nuclear destruction has considerably increased. This trend needs to be continued in the future also, so that the vision of a world free from nuclear weapons is actually realized.

Iranian President Unveils Third Generation Centrifuges

Iran celebrated the Fourth National Nuclear Festival in Teheran on 9 April, attended by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ali Akbar Salehi, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, along with key state and military officials. During the ceremony at Teheran's Milad Tower, Ahmadinejad unveiled the first model of the third generation of machines for uranium enrichment, the so-called third generation centrifuges. The first model of the fuel for Teheran Research Reactor was also unveiled.

Iranian Islamic Republic of Iran News Network Television (IRINN) in Persian began a live relay of a speech by Iranian President Ahmadinejad at a ceremony at Teheran's Milad Tower to celebrate the country's latest achievement in the nuclear sphere. Ahmadinejad said that the third generation of centrifuges is twice as powerful as the existing ones. He also talked in depth about Iran's negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over the supply of fuel for Teheran's nuclear reactor and the 'various Western propaganda' over this issue.

Ahmadinejad said that today Iran has reached a point where no power can stop its progress and deprive the country of using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Benefits of Nuclear Energy
The Iranian president also talked about the benefits of nuclear energy. He said nuclear energy is a clean, eco-friendly, and cheap energy, which is a good substitute for fossil fuels. Ahmadinejad said that from the beginning the "world powers" monopolized nuclear energy and stopped this energy from being used by other countries for peaceful purposes. Ahmadinejad said: 'The first countries to acquire nuclear energy did so in a bid to dominate other nations and for military purposes. Nuclear energy is a divine blessing. However, from the very beginning the arrogant and selfish countries and those who want to dominate other world countries have adopted a negative and inhumane approach toward this clean and useful energy. The president talked in depth about the reasons behind the nuclear arms races and talked about the reasons why attempts to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons have failed.'

Ahmadinejad asserted: 'For the past 60 years, they have been saying that they want to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons. But all the policies they have adopted have helped the spread of these weapons. Is it possible for one to possess nuclear weapons and at the same time invite others to dispose of their own? This is impossible. The stockpiling of nuclear weapons is the biggest incentive behind the spread of nuclear weapons.'

Era of Nuclear Weapons
Ahmadinejad said that those who are trying to acquire nuclear weapons are 'politically retarded' because they will never be able to use such weapons and stressed that the era of nuclear weapons has come to an end.

He also referred to US President Barack Obama's comments, in which he had said that the United States would not use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear country or those countries who are committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and described these comments as a lie, saying: 'Did Japan possess nuclear weapons when you attacked it? Did the Iraqi nation posses nuclear weapons when you used depleted uranium against it? Which one of your promises have you fulfilled which makes it necessary for you to make new promises? Who will believe your promises? No one will.'

Ahmadinejad said that today is the era of culture, rationality, and possession of nuclear weapons does not bring power to any country. President Ahmadinejad reiterated that as far as Iran's nuclear issue is concerned, the country is prepared to interact and negotiate with anyone, but at the same time he stressed that no country will be able to block the country's nuclear progress.

New US Nuclear Policy

US President Barack Obama has announced a new nuclear policy, which maintains that the United States reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in case of extreme circumstances. The United States will disband a large number of its nuclear weapons and only maintain a bare minimum for its defense.

The new nuclear policy has imposed a number of sanctions on the use of nuclear weapons, but Iran and North Korea have been restricted from availing any remissions under this policy. China's nuclear program has been declared murky.

Aim of New Policy
Before announcing this policy in an interview with The New York Times, President Obama said that he felt Pakistan has made its nuclear installations safe. Nuclear extremism is the biggest threat and the United States reserves the right to use nuclear weapon in defense of its allies. At the same time, dependence on nuclear weapons will be minimized and the defense of the United States will be based on conventional weapons.

The aim of this new policy is to give incentives to countries, which are willing to withdraw the option of nuclear weapons and refrain from nuclear intentions. Countries like Iran and North Korea, which violate the NPT, will not be able to benefit from this policy.

Discouragement for Other Countries
To discourage nuclear proliferation, Obama's new nuclear policy seems to be very positive, which says that the United States will abandon making nuclear weapons and maintain their use to a bare minimum. This policy is craftily drafted.

According to this policy, the United States wants to be the sole nuclear power and does not want to give the right to any other country to use nuclear technology for its defense. The fact of the matter is that in the Second World War the United States used nuclear bombs against the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and showed the way to countries of the world how to defend themselves through nuclear technology.

Hegemony on Nuclear Technology
Despite facing the brunt of nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan rose as an economic giant and compelled the United States to buy its products. But the question arises what lesson did the United States learn from this catastrophe? It seems that the United States only nurtured its ambition of expansionism and the desire to be a superpower.

Outside of this nuclear club no other country has the right to defend itself with nuclear technology. The United States wanted to make itself the sole merchants of nuclear technology.

The aim of the NPT and CTBT was also to maintain the US hegemony on nuclear technology. Moreover, India and Israel have fully been patronized by the United States in their nuclear initiatives. They have been encouraged and helped to attain nuclear technology.

Double Standard Game
Does this not speak of the double standard of the United States? Many countries' nuclear tests were considered violations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and strict economic sanctions were imposed on them.

India, however, got some benefits, and has, so far, entered into 123 nuclear. Israel is an established nuclear partner of the United States. Our nuclear installations were threatened with attack by the Israeli Air Force, but this plan was foiled by our vigilant Air Force.

Assessment
The foundation of proliferation was laid by the United States itself. The United States does not want Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea to progress in this field. Likewise, Iran, after continued threats from the United States, decided to go nuclear. Only nuclear China can challenge the United States and strike a balance of power in the region.

Now, the United States, in order to impose its nuclear position, has set the stage for a reduction of nuclear arms, thus curtailing many countries' nuclear capabilities, depriving them from their right to defend themselves with nuclear technology.

UN Security Council Adopts Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) are once again in focus. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has unanimously adopted a resolution asking all non-NPT states to join the treaty at a summit chaired by US President Barack Obama.
The 15-member council, while urging “other states” outside the NPT to join the controversial treaty as “non-nuclear states” to help rid the world of atom bombs, also urged all countries to sign and ratify the CTBT and refrain from conducting atomic tests. India has not signed the CTBT yet.
The Security Council has adopted a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Resolution. Through this resolution, the Security Council has called upon all nations to sign the NPT. The countries that have not so far signed it have been asked to do so. Under this treaty a ban has been imposed on making nuclear bomb in the future.
India’s Stance
India has decided to affix its signature on the treaty. India has refused to abide by the Security Council resolution asking all non-NPT nations to sign the pact, saying it cannot accept the “externally prescribed norms or standards” on issues that are contrary to its national interests or infringe on its sovereignty. India said it could not join the NPT as a non-weapon country even as it reiterated its commitment to no testing and no-first-use besides non-discriminatory universal non-proliferation.
The Indian Air Force chief recently expressed apprehension of a possibility of a nuclear attack on India. In the past also India was asked to sign the NPT, but it declined to do so pleading that unless and until nuclear-weapon nations destroy their nuclear arms, the treaty would be useless. Now, India has yet again refused to sign the NPT. At that time India stated that some other nations are in possession of nuclear weapons, hence it will need to make its own nuclear weapons for the sake of self-defense because in view of the need of self-defense it is not advisable to sign the NPT.
Now, India, once again declining to be a signatory to the treaty, vehemently opposed the UN security calls. It pleaded: "We cannot implement the regulations thrust upon other nations, for these impinge upon the sovereignty and national interests." It will not be in the country's interests to accept such decisions.
India has already taken a categorical stand not to make first use of the nuclear weapons to which it is completely committed. India's permanent representative at the United Nations, Hardip Singh Puri, has in a communication to Susan Rice of the Security Council raised questions on its role in the implementation of international treaties.
Amendment to NPT Treaty
Simultaneously, eight nations of the world, including India, have demanded an amendment in the NPT treaty. The Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution on nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation. The resolution passed by 15-member SC that the remaining nations should sign the NPT. The resolution adopted under the leadership of the United States, China, and Russia also has affirmed it. The United Nations has decided to hold its session in 2010 also.
Many nations, including India have not signed the NPT. The plea put forward by them is that developed nations have built their nuclear weapon reserves and the NPT is being thrust upon other nations, which is absolutely unjustified. The question arises whether countries in possession of nuclear weapons will not browbeat countries that do not have such weapons. For instance, Pakistani rulers in the past have been holding out, lamenting nuclear attacks on India.
Obama’s Indication
President Obama first signalled his dedication to the cause of the NPT at Prague in April this year. While stressing non-proliferation, and indicating his preference for reducing the US stockpile of nuclear weapons, the US leader revealingly also said, "Make no mistake: As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defence to our allies." This underlines that the US proposes one set of standards for itself, and another for India. This country’s long-held position has been that it is in favor of comprehensive nuclear disarmament, and that non-proliferation is not a substitute for this. President Obama is yet to offer disarmament as an attainable goal.
Even now, India has voiced the apprehension that it is faced with a threat from Pakistani terrorists that intend to carry out a nuclear offensive against India because it is apprehended that some of the nuclear weapons of Pakistan have found their way to Al-Qa'ida and other groups. The United States had stated that Pakistani terrorists pose a big threat to India.
Even as the United Nations desires to make the world free of nuclear weapons as per the Secretary General, it is high time to move forward. India has declined to sign the NPT, saying that it will not do so until nuclear weapon nations destroy their nuclear weapon reserves. The Indian stand is fully justified.