2nd Nuclear Security Summit: Tightening Nuke Weapons Design and Programs

The two-day second Nuclear Security Summit concluded in Seoul (South Korea) on March 27. The first was held in Washington DC in April 2010 after US President Barack Obama mooted the idea in a speech in Prague in 2009. President Obama, who singled out nuclear terrorism as the most serious threat to international security in his speech, was in Seoul. Leading the Indian participation in the summit was Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
The gathering of 58 world leaders saw discussing the various issues surrounding nuclear security. The 9/11 attacks in 2001 appear to have spurred countries across the globe to discuss measures that are needed in the event of nuclear materials and facilities actually falling into the hands of non-state actors. Nuclear security is hence seen as a step to combat the threat of nuclear terrorism.
Joint Communique
Seeking strong national measures and global cooperation against nuclear terrorism, world leaders have underlined the central role of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in strengthening the atomic security framework and insisted that the rights of States to peaceful use of nuclear energy will not be hampered.
The leaders said: “We stress the fundamental responsibility of States, consistent with their respective national and international obligations, to maintain effective security of all nuclear materials, which includes nuclear materials used in nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities under their control.”
The communique, adopted by 53 world leaders and five multilateral organizations, also highlighted the fundamental responsibility of the States to prevent non-state actors from acquiring such materials and from obtaining information or technology required to use them for malicious purposes.
In the backdrop of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, the idea of nuclear safety came to the fore at Seoul, with India underlining the need for synergy between nuclear safety and nuclear security. The Seoul communiqué too touches on this aspect. After all, the release of dangerous radioactive materials in sufficient quantities from a legitimate nuclear power plant is no less dangerous than a terrorist stealing and unleashing a dirty bomb.
At a more practical and feasible level, at the Seoul summit, India pushed the expansion of its bilateral ties with South Korea to include the purchase of civilian reactors and military hardware from it, in addition to engaging in space cooperation under which this country would launch South Korean satellites. Maritime security was discussed too between Singh and President Lee Myung-Bak, in addition to stepped up Korean investment in Indian infrastructure.
India’s Stake
Addressing the summit, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that India had made a strong pitch for membership of four exclusive nuclear clubs contending that it would help strengthen its export control systems and maintain highest international standards of its nuclear program.
He added that India had never been a source of proliferation of sensitive technologies and the country was determined to further strengthen its export control systems to keep them
At the summit, the prime minister said on par with the highest international standards. He underlined that India had already adhered to the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NBG) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).
Singh said: "As a like–minded country with the ability and willingness to promote global non-proliferation objectives, we believe that the next logical step is India's membership of the four export control regimes."
India is keen for membership of the NSG, MTCR, Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group. At the same time, Singh said an agreed multilateral framework involving all states possessing nuclear weapons was necessary to attain the goal of a nuclear weapons free world.
"This should include measures to reduce nuclear dangers by reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in security doctrines and by increasing universal restraints on the first use of nuclear weapons," he said.
The prime minister also announced a contribution of one million dollars to the IAEA’s Nuclear Security Fund for the years 2012-13.
India has also made some progress, albeit slowly, on its commitment to set up a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership. It announced that the centre will have a 200 acre campus in Bahadurgarh, Haryana and comprise four different schools covering nuclear security, nuclear energy systems, and radiation safety.
On India's nuclear program, the prime minister said comprehensive reviews of nuclear safety measures have been undertaken at nuclear facilities.
Concern for Pakistan’s Arsenal
President Obama has voiced concern over safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, saying the world cannot allow non-state actors and terrorists to get their hands on the nuclear weapons and end up destroying cities.
“We can’t afford to have non-state actors and terrorists to get their hands on nuclear weapons that would end up destroying our cities or harming our citizens,” Obama told reporters alongside Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani before the two leaders held private talks on the sidelines of the summit.
The West is concerned over the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons as it remains vulnerable because the atomic facilities are located in areas where “Taliban and Al-Qaeda are more than capable of launching terrorist attacks”.
In their first meeting since the killing of Osama Bin Laden in a covert US raid on Pakistani soil in May 2011, the two leaders tried to rescue a troubled anti-terror alliance which has been full of mistrust and recriminations in recent times.
North Korea and Iran Warned
The US President has warned North Korea and Iran that their options are few and their friends fewer as those nations refuse to back down from actions the world sees as menacing.
Seoul warned that it might shoot down parts of a North Korean rocket if they violate South Korean territory, as worries about what Washington calls a long-range missile test overshadowed an international nuclear security summit.
Nuclear Terrorism
The leaders at the summit reached a consensus that nuclear terrorism is among the top global security challenges and that strong nuclear material security measures are the most effective way to prevent it. This may not seem like much, but getting 47 nations to agree on any nuclear issue, however innocuous, is not always easy.
In addition, 29 of the countries present made voluntary commitments to enhance nuclear security. Country-specific steps — colloquially termed “house gifts” — were taken ahead of the summit. Thus, Chile removed all its Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) — 18 kg — in March 2010, while the Philippines joined the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Several countries, including India, announced that they would create new “centres of excellence” to promote nuclear security technologies.
The outcome Seoul summit, as much as the first one hosted by US President Barack Obama in Washington in 2010, are traceable at the level of theology to President Obama’s Prague speech of 2009. And therein lies the weakness of the enterprise. In that address, the US President had highlighted the dangers of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands, and envisioned a world free of the atom bomb. But until such time as that happens, Obama was quite clear in his vision that the United States would stand ready with its own nuclear weapons to take care of any potential adversary.

Enhancing China-Pakistan Relations

Since establishing diplomatic ties in 1951, China and Pakistan have enjoyed a close and mutually beneficial relationship. Pakistan was one of the first countries to recognize the People's Republic of China in 1950 and remained a steadfast ally during Beijing's period of international isolation in the 1960s and early 1970s. China has long provided Pakistan with major military, technical, and economic assistance, including the transfer of sensitive nuclear technology and equipment. Some experts predict growing relations between the United States and rival India will ultimately prompt Pakistan to push for even closer ties with its longtime strategic security partner, China. Others say China's increased concern about Pakistan-based insurgency groups may cause Beijing to proceed with the relationship in a more cautious manner.
Since assuming office, President Asif Ali Zardari has declared relations with China as the cornerstone of Pakistan's foreign policy. To enhance and cement the bilateral relations, Zardari decided to visit China quarterly. The last visit of President Zardari to China was the fifth in a series of visits that started since assuming the office in 2008. Zardari's visit came at a time when Pakistan faces a difficult economic situation because of war against terrorism and when China has embarked on a policy to redefine its economic objectives with Pakistan in particular and the world in general.
It is important to mention here that since President Zardari assumed office, Pakistan and China have concluded 60 agreements. The main focus of the recent visit was on the new economic initiatives that have been launched recently. It includes building hydro dams, expanding banking operations, transfer of hybrid seed technology, roads and communication networks, cooperation in the agriculture sector by focusing on optimal utilization of water and development of new high yielding varieties of wheat and cotton, Thar Coal Project and dredging of Tarbela reservoir.
Proposed Civilian Nuclear Pact
The proposed China-Pakistan civilian nuclear agreement is a matter serious concern. The deal, under which China will set up two additional nuclear plants in Pakistan, will be in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), not signed by Pakistan. The NPT prohibits nuclear trade with the countries which are not signatories to the treaty. China’s argument that its commitment to supply the two nuclear reactors to Pakistan dates back to the period before 2004, when Beijing had not joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), is not convincing as the delivery of the controversial consignment will take place only now. The US rightly insists that the deal must be approved by the NSG — scheduled to meet next week — in the manner it gave its nod for the Indo-US civilian nuclear cooperation agreement.
However, the required NSG approval of the Sino-Pak nuclear deal is unlikely to come about in view of the dubious track record of Pakistan. It is too well known that Pakistan has been deeply involved in the proliferation of nuclear weapon technology to various countries. Pakistan’s disgraced nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan virtually ran a nuclear mart when he provided all kinds of support to North Korea, Iran and Libya (no longer in the race) to acquire weapons of mass destruction. China, too, has been guilty of nuclear proliferation, though its controversial role has not been discussed as much as that of Pakistan. China’s role in Pakistan’s emergence as a nuclear-weapon state cannot be ignored.
Infrastructure Projects
China and Pakistan have cooperated on a variety of large-scale infrastructure projects in Pakistan, including highways, gold and copper mines, major electricity complexes and power plants, and numerous nuclear power projects. With roughly ten thousand Chinese workers engaged in 120 projects in Pakistan, total Chinese investment--which includes heavy engineering, power generation, mining, and telecommunications -- was valued at $4 billion in 2007 and is expected to rise to $15 billion by 2010. One of the most significant joint development projects of recent years is the major port complex at the naval base of Gwadar, located in Balochistan. The complex, inaugurated in December 2008 and now fully operational, provides a deep-sea port, warehouses, and industrial facilities for more than twenty countries.
Advantage Pakistan
Pakistan has benefited from China's assistance with the following defense capabilities:
Missile Technology: The Pakistan Army has both short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, such as the Shaheen missile series, that experts say are modifications of Chinese imports.
Defense: The current fleet of the Pakistan Air Force includes Chinese interceptor and advanced trainer aircraft, as well as an Airborne Early Warning and Control radar system used to detect aircraft. Pakistan is producing the JF-17 Thunder multi-role combat aircraft jointly with China. The K-8 Karakorum light attack aircraft was also coproduced.
Nuclear Program: China supplies Pakistan with nuclear technology and assistance, including what many experts suspect was the blueprint for Pakistan's nuclear bomb. Some news reports suggest Chinese security agencies knew about Pakistani transfers of nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea, and Libya.

India-Japan Getting Toward Powerful Friend

"My shoes are Japanese" is a very popular song of 1950s. But even today, children hum its tune with the same ardor. The word "Japanese" might have been familiar to Indians but the country itself seemed to be a small island in Asia. Its economic progress has created history.
Japan was thoroughly ruined by US nuclear bombs. Yet, it later formed an alliance with that very country to take the manufacturing sector by storm. As a result, Japan has turned into a global economic powerhouse, to become the second most powerful economy. China and India are today competing to become a superpower in Asia. But Japan was the first country in the region to have a successful record of modernization.
If friendship between India and Japan had not reached the expected level, the United States has to be partly blamed for it. Our relations with Japan at this stage cannot actually be described as "cordial." But relations change with time. US-Japan relationship is no longer the same. China is determined to replace Japan as the second most powerful economy. Its growing military strength is giving jitters to Japan about a future crisis. At the same time, under Obama's leadership the United States has decided to accept China as the leader in Asia. The need to create a balance of power in the continent has, therefore, drawn Japan toward India.

Signing CTBT

During Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's recent India visit, differences surfaced between the two countries over India having not signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Yet, it carries out much significance because 45 countries of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) have adopted a considerably soft approach toward India. Most of them have signed civilian nuclear cooperation agreement also, under which they have promised to supply raw material for nuclear plants in India. This has been made possible as a consequence of the India-US nuclear deal during the Bush Administration. When in 1998, India conducted a nuclear experiment, a majority of the nuclear fuel supplier countries imposed major sanctions against India. These included Japan also.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Hatoyama exchanging views on the CTBT in New Delhi was quite on the predictable lines. The Japanese, being the first and only victims of the nuclear bomb, do not miss an opportunity to advocate for a strict control on the proliferation of nuclear weapon technology. But India cannot be blamed for the CTBT not coming into force. As Dr Manmohan Singh made it clear, a new situation will arise when the US and China first ratify the CTBT. Only then can anybody raise the question why India, too, should not put its signature on it.
Despite not having ratified the CTBT, India continues to occupy the moral high ground because of its unilateral declaration of a moratorium on nuclear tests and adherence to the No First Use policy. In fact, India’s record as a nuclear weapon power is much better than that of China, which has harmed the non-proliferation cause by disguisedly helping Pakistan to acquire weapon-production capability.
India’s latest stance on the CTBT remains what the NDA government articulated after the 1998 nuclear tests — New Delhi would not come in the way of the treaty coming into force if the US and China went ahead and put their signature on it.
During the Second World War, Japan was the only country that suffered the devastation caused by nuclear bombs. Since then Japan has made astonishing progress in the technical sector. From this aspect it is reckoned among the leading nations of the world. Nevertheless, it has stuck to its official policy since then. It has neither conducted nuclear experiments nor is it in favor of doing so.
In so far as India is concerned, various successive governments have consistently emphasized that nuclear experiments carried out by have been for peaceful purposes in the civilian sector. Nevertheless, the whole world is aware that India was constrained to take to this path in the wake of the nuclear experiments conducted by certain major nations, especially China. Which is why, India has been hesitant to sign the CTBT. The leading nuclear weapon nations are pursuing their unilateral policy. On one hand they have piled up huge nuclear weapons, on the other they have been restraining other countries to do so. What is actually desirable is that the world should be made nuclear weapon free. All the nuclear weapon stockpiled in the past should be destroyed and a ban should be imposed on doing so.

Agreement on Defense Sector
The agreements on defense and on fighting terrorism are a historic step taken to meet this "need." Japan's most serious problem today is rapid decline in population. The number of deaths exceeds by far the number of births. Japan's social system does not allow foreigners to settle there. Nonetheless, manpower is required to run factories and other enterprises. In contrast, India is beset with a population explosion. At the same time, it has a large number of skilled workers who can become Japan's most dependable source.
Although Japan fully appreciates the stance adopted by India, its policy to amass nuclear weapons is understandable. We are duly aware that Japan has surged ahead in all respects during the past few decades, which is amazing. Japan's stance has been quite cordial. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the two nations have not marched forward on the path of cooperation and friendship to the extent that was expected of them. It is regrettable that they have not been able to do so, so far. For instance, Japan promoted its friendship with China through extending mutual cooperation in various fields. According to one estimate, the volume of Japan's trade with China is 20 times more than with India. It is also true that Japan extended cooperation to India whenever it was sought from Japan in various technological sectors and vital projects.

Comprehensive Cooperation
The Japanese prime minister displayed tremendous response for the supply of the technology required in the introduction of bullet trains in India. There are still numerous sectors of technology in which India can seek comprehensive cooperation from Japan. Even otherwise, India needs to learn a lot from Japan. It needs the Japanese cooperation in its quest for accelerating the pace of progress for improving the economic lot of its people. It is to be hoped that India and Japan would succeed in taking a quantum leap toward their mutual friendship in the future.
Japan might now be hesitating to give nuclear equipment to India. But going by present indications, this partnership is bound to be forged in the future. Japan seems to be pressuring India to eradicate nuclear weapons. Its real targets, however, are China and the United States. Hatoyama's visit will certainly take this growing friendship between the countries to new heights.