10.02.2018 Views

12-18 February 2018 - 16-min

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>12</strong> - <strong>18</strong> <strong>February</strong>, 20<strong>18</strong> 3<br />

I<br />

P<br />

Editorial<br />

◆◆<br />

By Dr. Ankit Srivastava<br />

Editor - in - Chief<br />

@AnkitNDT<br />

ankits@newdelhitimes.com<br />

NEW DELHI TIMES<br />

India’s Membership of Exclusive Clubs<br />

ndia has applied for membership of the<br />

exclusive club of nuclear powers - the<br />

Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) - which<br />

is currently under its active consideration.<br />

Member states are reportedly deliberating<br />

on membership criteria for states that are<br />

not party to the Nuclear Non-proliferation<br />

Treaty (NPT). China continues to oppose<br />

India’s membership bid.<br />

To compound India’s problem, a paper<br />

released by Harvard Kennedy<br />

School’s Belfer Centre for Science<br />

and International Affairs in<br />

January offers a Pakistan-centric,<br />

one-sided view, by hyphenating<br />

India with Pakistan. Author John<br />

Carlson, a former director general<br />

of Australian Safeguards and Nonproliferation<br />

Office, argues against<br />

admitting India without proper<br />

safeguards.<br />

Forsaking a utilitarian global view<br />

of India’s membership, Carlson<br />

rather singularly focuses on<br />

interests of Islamabad. Excessively<br />

focussed on Pakistan, he blames<br />

Indian system of creating an unverified grey<br />

zone between military and civilian material<br />

that do not meet NSG standards. Carlson’s<br />

◆◆<br />

By NDT Pakistan Bureau<br />

@NewDelhiTimes<br />

info@newdelhitimes.com<br />

NSG remains the Last Frontier<br />

partisan obsession with Pakistan’s interest<br />

becomes evident from his words, “Pakistan,<br />

which has raised concern about the strategic<br />

threat posed by India’s unsafeguarded<br />

materials and facilities and is also seeking<br />

to join the NSG”. Why should India’s<br />

membership be viewed solely from the angle<br />

of Pak interests or its strategic perception?<br />

Castigating India-IAEA safeguards agreement<br />

as ‘not an appropriate model to apply’, the<br />

study prescribes for NSG membership a<br />

clear separation between civilian and noncivilian<br />

nuclear programmes and application<br />

of safeguards to the civilian materials<br />

and facilities against military use. This<br />

apparently Islamabad-funded study even<br />

argues that if India is reluctant to amend its<br />

safeguards agreement, ‘perhaps Pakistan<br />

can lead by example by concluding an<br />

agreement that avoids these problems.’<br />

Pakistan traditionally perceives India’s fast<br />

breeder reactors and similar materials and<br />

facilities as military programmes that pose<br />

strategic threat.<br />

Islamabad disapproves India’s current<br />

Separation Plan of operating a ‘civilian<br />

and military programs closely linked’ fuel<br />

cycle model and criticises running of dualpurpose<br />

facilities that have been shunned<br />

by the nuclear-weapon states decades ago.<br />

It urges India to scuttle this stage of nuclear<br />

development.<br />

India’s 2006 Separation Plan placed under<br />

IAEA safeguards 14 out of 22 power<br />

reactors then in operation or<br />

under construction, together<br />

with no<strong>min</strong>ated upstream and<br />

downstream facilities - 35 in all.<br />

All future facilities - ‘civilian’<br />

and not engaged in activities<br />

of strategic significance - were<br />

to be placed under safeguards.<br />

The overarching criterion was<br />

whether subjecting a facility to<br />

IAEA safeguards would impact<br />

adversely on India’s national<br />

security.<br />

Currently, India has three<br />

classes of nuclear facilities:<br />

1.civilian and designated for IAEA<br />

safeguards; 2.functionally civilian but can<br />

be dual-use; and 3.purely military. Eight<br />

out of the 22 heavy water power reactors,<br />

fast breeder reactors and enrichment and<br />

reprocessing facilities are not designated for<br />

safeguards.<br />

There is perfect separation plan within the<br />

civilian safeguarded, dual-use unsafeguarded<br />

and military programmes, but Carlson<br />

apprehends a theoretical possibility that<br />

civilian facilities could be transferred into<br />

safeguards and safeguarded material could<br />

be used in normally unsafeguarded facilities,<br />

and unsafeguarded material could be used in<br />

safeguarded facilities.<br />

On both safeguarded and unsafeguarded<br />

programmes India retains the flexibility to<br />

optimise fissile material production. Carlson<br />

argues that such flexibility contradicts the<br />

international assurances IAEA safeguards<br />

are intended to provide and jumps to<br />

presumptive conclusion that the NSG is<br />

unlikely to have a consensus on admitting<br />

India, unless civilian nuclear facilities<br />

are separated from non-civilian nuclear<br />

facilities.<br />

A developing India has huge energy needs<br />

and has a clean non- proliferation record<br />

unlike Pakistan.<br />

The Carlson report laughingly equates<br />

Pakistan - an irresponsible nuclear proliferator<br />

- with a highly responsible country like India.<br />

Carlson’s partisan ranting doesn’t matter<br />

much. The world has moved on. The<br />

consensus is there within NSG; China for<br />

its narrow self-interest remains the sole<br />

exception.<br />

Injustice galore, Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir<br />

akistan observes Kashmir Solidarity<br />

Day, or Kashmir Day, as a public<br />

holiday every 5th of <strong>February</strong> to showcase<br />

its support for people in Kashmir valley<br />

wherein imaginary tales of India’s so called<br />

excesses are discussed. The year 20<strong>18</strong> was<br />

no exception. “Kashmir is the unfinished<br />

agenda of Partition!” “Kashmir is Pakistan’s<br />

jugular vein!” and “Kashmir and Pakistan<br />

are like one soul in two hearts!”- were the<br />

routine slogans mouthed on the occasion.<br />

The international terrorist Hafiz Saeed<br />

- a Punjabi but self-proclaimed leader<br />

of Kashmiris – grabbed the platform to<br />

advocate for jihad in Kashmir, so did the<br />

disgraced Nawaz Sharif whose daughter<br />

shouted, “Kashmir banay ga Pakistan”<br />

(Kashmir will become Pakistan).<br />

Hard fact is Kashmir no more evokes<br />

the same passion in Pakistanis as it did in<br />

the 1980s and 1990s. Gallup Pakistan’s<br />

periodic polls on Pakistani perceptions of<br />

the Kashmir conflict revealed in 20<strong>16</strong> of<br />

growing Pakistani disenchantment with<br />

Kashmiri cause. Increasing number of<br />

Pakistanis today accept the reality explaining<br />

(POK) is a no man’s country<br />

the downward spiral in participation in<br />

Kashmir Day celebrations. Politicians<br />

and terror leaders repeat the rhetoric just<br />

to maintain the fervour. Pakistan utilised<br />

terror commander Burhan Wani’s death to<br />

unleash a new spell of violence in Kashmir<br />

to propel Kashmir issue to the forefront of<br />

international psyche.<br />

Pakistan’s pledge of solidarity with Kashmir<br />

valley gives erroneous impression that<br />

Kashmiris in POK are a happy, satisfied<br />

and emancipated lot. Pak discussions<br />

on Kashmir regularly ignores POK but<br />

becomes relevant only when people face fire<br />

from Indian forces fighting infiltration when<br />

Pak army uses them as human shield for<br />

cross border violations.<br />

The year 2017 marked the highest number<br />

of ceasefire violations across LoC since the<br />

2003 ceasefire agreement and POK suffered<br />

heavily. Year 20<strong>18</strong> had over 200 ceasefire<br />

violations so far. Government and Pak<br />

army prefer to stay safe from POK, except<br />

occasional visits, leaving men, women and<br />

children to face the brunt of cross-LoC<br />

shelling. Locals in Khuirratta and Kotli<br />

protested against injury to nine people<br />

during recent shelling, but were forced to<br />

retreat. Pakistan army provokes Indian army<br />

by shelling but leaves civilian population<br />

defenceless during retaliatory fire without<br />

bunkers and basic amenities, making them<br />

lambs for slaughter. The civilian government<br />

is largely absent from POK. Without<br />

facilities of relocation, compensation and<br />

allowance, people are left on their own.<br />

Government remains obsessed, like a<br />

maniac, on snatching Kashmir valley from<br />

India!<br />

Health care facilities in POK are primitive<br />

with no fully functional hospital despite<br />

Pak army’s frequent ceasefire violations<br />

and resultant casualties in Nakyal Sector.<br />

Government has totally abandoned its<br />

primary responsibility towards healthcare<br />

like treatment of injuries. Poor quality of<br />

medical services and alar<strong>min</strong>gly low doctorto-patient<br />

ratio is inadequate to save lives.<br />

Corruption also eats into compensation on<br />

casualties.<br />

POK is dotted with river dams that fulfil<br />

the rest of Pakistan’s energy needs but<br />

yield no royalties; POK is not a province<br />

of Pakistan. There is an acute shortage of<br />

water and power. For implementing projects<br />

that benefit other parts of Pakistan POK<br />

is deemed a part of the country. Taken for<br />

granted, no permissions sought from the local<br />

government. Roads are full of rubble with<br />

primitive sewage pipelines. Neelum Valley<br />

still agitates for a road from Athmuqam to<br />

Taobat. POK literally is a no man’s country.<br />

Posters in Lahore and elsewhere instigating<br />

sympathies for Kashmiris are mere hallow<br />

commitment to the Kashmiri cause, with<br />

jingoistic displays of ‘solidarity.’ Even<br />

on Kashmir Day, nobody stands up for<br />

Kashmiris in POK as Pakistan does not<br />

consider them Kashmiri enough. Their basic<br />

rights, like those of Mohajirs in Karachi, are<br />

never considered important, deserving of<br />

intervention and attention.<br />

Since 1947 Pakistan has blundered on<br />

Kashmir times beyond number. It harbours<br />

no sympathy for POK people but wants<br />

them just for strategic gains.<br />

The Pak puppet regime in Muzafarbad<br />

has worsened over years. Obsession with<br />

Kashmir valley, just for political mileage, has<br />

ruined Pakistan exacting huge cost: stunted<br />

economic growth, loss of development focus,<br />

misery to people, rise of fundamentalist<br />

terror groups, national frenzy, and loss of<br />

credibility on world forum. Welfare of POK<br />

people has become hostage to the political<br />

games Pakistan plays.<br />

Pakistan has never introduced local<br />

government in POK to nurture a strong<br />

inclusive leadership but it shamelessly<br />

demands plebiscite in Kashmir valley!<br />

Status quo still remains the only viable<br />

alternative to Kashmir problem.<br />

India’s only International Newspaper<br />

www.NewDelhiTimes.com

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!