Pakistan: NPT is Discriminatory, Wouldn't Sign it!

Once again Islamabad has made it clear to world community that Pakistan will not sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) because the discriminatory nature of the treaty. This was stated by Foreign Secretary Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry who is leading the Pakistani team at a meeting with US officials on Tuesday on security, strategic stability and non-proliferation issues.

“Pakistan has the right to defend itself, so Pakistan will not sign the NPT. Why should we? It is a discriminatory treaty. ” replied foreign secretary when he was asked whether Islamabad would sign the NPT on Washington's demand.

Earlier he  made it clear in equivocal manner that Pakistan's nuclear program for military purpose was a response to Indian ambitions and acquisition of nuclear arms capability by Pakistan smashed Indian dreams of creating a regional hegemony.  

Though 190 states have already signed the treaty, Without ending nuclear hypocrisy on global level, NPT or any other nuclear control regime would fail to meet its objectives. Indian and Israeli nuclear programs must also come under international monitoring and inspections along with Pakistan and all P5 nations. 

This is why US officials choose not to criticize Pakistan's stance on NPT despite the fact it is against the US desires.

Responding to a question about the safety of Pakistani nuclear program and facilities, Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry stated, “We have established a multi-layer system and a strong command and control system.” He also reiterated Pakistan's nuclear doctrine of maintaining credible minimum deterrence but ensured that the country is not involved in nuclear arms race like the US and former Soviet Union used to be throughout the Cold War.

“Pakistan is not asking for a parity with India but we do want a system of check and balance. Such a balance is necessary to promote peace,” he said.

“Pakistan believes in the concept of comprehensive strategic stability, which includes conventional weapons balance, nuclear restraint, resolution of the outstanding issues,” he said.

Mr Chaudhry said that Pakistan had proved its ability to fully protect its nuclear assets by not allowing the current wave of terrorism to reach anywhere near a nuclear facility.

“The measures we have taken, no other country has and it is recognised by other countries too. We have fulfilled our responsibility. There is zero tolerance for such activities.”

The foreign secretary said that Pakistan also had a right to the civil nuclear cooperation arrangement that the United States had with India.

“Our energy needs are more acute. Our power generation met international standards. All our facilities are under IAEA safeguards. And so we have a right to have access to civil nuclear technology,” he said.

Mr Chaudhry rejected the suggestion that Pakistan should focus on other sources, such as hydel. He said the safest approach was having a mixed bag of energy options, from hydel to nuclear.

He explained that by 2030, Pakistan planned to generate 162,000MW of electricity and nuclear would only be a small fraction of this total, 8,800MW.

The foreign secretary rejected a suggestion that IS and other militant groups could seize Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

Putting Iran's Framework Deal in Context

Shahzad Masood Roomi


Finally, after months of negotiations between Iran and P5+1 countries, an agreement has been reached on Tehran's nuclear program and its future. The deal has been praised by every state as it will pave the way for Iran to end its isolation in international community and on the other hand, Iran's nuclear program will come under IAEA inspection. Under the deal, Iran will also reduce its uranium enrichment capacity for a time period of 10-15 years in exchange for phased sanctions relief. After the deal both parties would work for drafting the final agreement which is to be finalized by 30 June.

Iran has agreed to redesign of its heavy water plant at Arak (IR-40) as well so that it cannot produce weapon grade plutonium. The number of centrifuges installed will be reduced by two third and its stockpile of low-enriched uranium will be reduced as well.

ANALYSIS:

Strategically speaking, the framework deal between Iran and P5+1 is a big win for Iran in its long term implications and a defeat for Israel (if you are not getting me, please recall the address of Israeli PM to US congress in which he was telling the US to back off). In order to understand the broader contours of final deal (which BTW is NOT signed yet, only parameters of the framework have been agreed upon on which the final deal would be signed) in its correct context it must remain clear that as long as Iran is able to preserve its uranium enrichment right as signatory of NPT, it will be a win for Tehran and this is exactly what Iran has successfully managed to achieve in interim deal (signed in 2014) and in this 'framework' deal.

Next, this deal makes it clear that Iran is not going to rollback its nuclear program but has agreed to put it in low gear for a time span of 10-15 years. Now if someone is anxious about the aspect of this deal which is going to impede bomb making capability of Tehran, please keep in mind, Iran never intended to make a  bomb in the first place. (Fatwa given by their spiritual leader in this regard) ... But even if they want to build a bomb, it is clear that maximum this deal can do in this regard is to stall the enrichment capability for a decade (means this is not a roll back but slow down in their nuclear program) which is No time in any nation's age. Iran has successfully secured their entire nuclear program and phased off the sanctions which for years have affected Iran adversely. Inflation is sky high there due to very limited exports. But now, Iran will be able to export their oil and gas.

This agreement is a good news for Pakistan as well as international sanctions on Iran will be lifted allowing Pakistan and Iran to pursue Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. All the world monitory institutions would agree to extend the credit facility.

Lastly, it must be clear that 2016 is election year in the US, and after Yemen which President Obama declared his success story in war on terror is in complete chaos, Democrats would need one major global issue which they can sell to US public as success story during those elections. Who much this work, only time will tell. But for now, the world has reached on an agreement without going to war over it is a big achievement in itself.

Snapshot of Interim Deal Signed between Iran and the US

Is a new war in making in Middle East over Iranian nuclear program?

The deadline, given by the US, for conclusion of talks over Tehran's nuclear program has passed. Though it is expected that this deadline would be extended. Many around the world wonder why after signing an interim deal, which was suppose to provide the basis for this final deal, things have become so tense between the two camps. The extract from Daily Telegraph's report answers this question.

"When John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, secured an interim agreement in Geneva last November, his only aim was to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Now Mr Kerry is no longer interested in freezing Iran’s progress; he is after “rollback”. Put bluntly, he wants Iran to start dismantling key elements of its nuclear programme, particularly its capacity to enrich uranium."

This is a clear negation of interim deal and also answers our main question about the potential threat of another war in Middle East. It seems that 5+1 states have changed their stance from what they agreed in interim deal earlier this year and Iran has left with no choice but to take a strong stance. These developments not only have stalled the progress in talks but has brought the region on the blink of another conflict.

Editor's Note:

There was no mention of rolling back Iran’s nuclear program at the time when this interim deal was signed earlier this year. 5+1 nations agreed and accepted Iranian right to continue Uranium enrichment activities for civilian usage. The focus was on keeping Iranian Uranium enrichment below the level of weapon grade. But now, in November 2014, it looks like the US wants a complete rollback of Iranian program and this has become a new bone of contention between both parties. This snapshot of interim deal –highlighting the important points agreed by both sides at that time –reveal the present change of stance by 5+1 nations. This new demand of complete rollback of Iranian nuclear program can derail the entire negotiations.  

The snapshot PDF can be accessed from link given below:

Violations of International Law in Confronting the Production, Storage and Use of Nuclear Weapons

Shahzad Masood Roomi

Abstract: 

“In a complex geostrategic global environment issues like nuclear non-proliferation and enforcement of multiple international nuclear laws and treaties becomes even more critically important.  Nations faced with serious security challenges consider nuclear weapons an ultimate deterrence against their superior adversaries in conventional weapons. This security driven global political construct have compounded the issue of nuclear proliferation even more.

From a moral standpoint, the issue of nuclear non-proliferation and control regimes seems like a straight forward global obligation but today’s complex geopolitical realities are being dictated by the strategic goals of major power players in the world. Getting into the brass-tacks of historical perspective of nuclear proliferation in context of grand geo-strategy of major political forces in the world explains why the issue of nuclear proliferation is still endangering the global peace and why have we not been able to make the world a place without nuclear weapons despite adopting various control regimes. It is noteworthy fact that all members of P-5 club (US, UK, USSR, China and France) became nuclear states through proliferation in one form or other. This also explains why many of the nuclear control treaties have not been rectified by these major political players.   

So far, nuclear control regimes have failed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and keeping the evolving strategic developments in Middle East, Asia Pacific and South Asia in mind, it seems that this trend would continue as long as these issues would be used not for their indenting purposes but to achieve some vested interests of international power brokers.

This paper examines how on one hand the campaign of nuclear non-proliferation was used by various nuclear states as a policy tool to further their own political and strategic agendas while on the other hand they proliferate or facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons to their allies (Israel, India) in order to secure their long term strategic goals. In this backdrop, the paper also examines the loopholes in existing nuclear control regimes and how these are being exploited. In the end, paper purposes various suggestions on regional, multilateral and international levels to make the world more secure place by making the existing control regimes more transparent and effective.”

Read Complete Paper at following link:

https://www.academia.edu/7658504/Violations_of_International_Law_in_Confronting_the_Production_Storage_and_Use_of_Nuclear_Weapons