[Guest Post] Between Security and Peace: How can India lead the Global Nuclear Disarmed Movement? by Vivek Yadav



In this world full of competition there was always two countries which lead the competition to a great height. Those two countries were: USA and USSR (presently known as Russia). These two super powers has always done their best to make themselves look superior. As we all know to make one country powerful, there is always a conflict to prove themselves. Starting from the very beginning when there was a conflict between the two super power countries namely USA and USSR (presently known as Russia).
This all started when Cuba was an ally of the Soviet Union and received both diplomatic and financial aid from it. Nikita Khrushchev, the leader of the Soviet Union, decided to convert Cuba into a Russian base, in 1962, he placed nuclear missiles in Cuba. The installation of these weapons put the US, for the first time, under fire from close range and nearly doubled the number of bases or cities in the American mainland which could be threatened by the USSR.
Three weeks after the Soviet Union had placed the nuclear weapons in Cuba, the Americans became aware of it. The US President, John F. Kennedy, and his advisers were reluctant to do anything that might lead to full-scale nuclear war between the two countries, but they were determined to get Khrushchev to remove the missiles and nuclear weapons from Cuba. Kennedy ordered American warships to intercept any Soviet ships heading to Cuba as a way of warning the USSR of his seriousness. A clash seemed imminent in what came to be known as the Cuban Missile Crisis. The prospects of this clash made the whole world nervous, for it would have been no ordinary war. Eventually, to the world's great relief, both sides decided to avoid war. The Soviet ships slowed down and turned back.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was a high point of what came to be known as the Cold War. The Cold War referred to the competition, the tensions and a series of confrontations between the United States and the Soviet Union, backed by their respective allies. Fortunately, however, it never escalated into a 'hot war', that is, a full-scale war between these two powers. There were wars in various regions, with the two powers and their allies involved in warfare and in supporting regional allies, but at least the world avoided another global war.
The Cold War was not simply a matter of power rivalries, of military alliances, and of the balance of power. These were accompanied by a real ideological conflict as well, a difference over the best and the most appropriate way to organizing political, economic, and social life all over the world. The western alliance, headed by the US, represented the ideology of liberal democracy and capitalism while the eastern alliance, headed by the Soviet Union, was bound up to the ideology of socialism and communism.
The main questions which arises are, whether these two countries were so powerful, then why do they need allies at all?
After all, with the nuclear weapons and regular armies, they were so powerful that the combined power of most of the smaller states in Asia and Africa, and even in Europe, was no match to that of the superpowers. Yet, the smaller states were helpful for the superpowers in gaining access to:
1) vital resources, such as oil and minerals,
2) territorial, from where the superpowers could launch their weapons and troops,
3) locations from where they could spy on each, and
4) economic support, in that many small allies together could help pay for military expenses.
They were also important for ideological reasons. The loyalty of allies suggested that the superpowers were winning the war of ideas as well, the liberal democracy and capitalism were better than socialism and communism, or vice verse.
These two superpower countries started to form blocs. Sometimes, countries outside the blocs, for example, the non-aligned countries, played a role in reducing Cold War conflicts and averting some grave crises. Jawaharlal Nehru- one of the key leaders of the NAM- played a crucial role in mediating between the two Korea. In the Congo crisis, the UN Secretary-General played a key mediator role. By and large, it was the realization on a superpower's part that was by all means should be avoided that made them exercise restraint and behave more responsibly in international affairs. As the Cold War rolled from one arena to another, the logic of restraint was increasingly evident.

The Soviet Union lagged behind the West in technology, infrastructure and most importantly, in fulfilling the political or economic aspirations of citizens. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 weakened the system even further. Though wages continued to grow, productivity and technology fell considerably behind that of the West. This led to shortages in all consumer goods. Food imports increased every year. The Soviet economy was faltering in the late 1970s and became stagnant.
India and Post-Communist Countries: India has maintained good relations with all the post-communist countries. India's relations with Russia are an important aspect of India's foreign policy. Indo-Russian relations are embedded in a history of trust and common interests, Indian heroes from Raj Kapoor to Amitabh Bachchan are household names in Russia and many post-Soviet countries. Russia and India share a vision of a multi polar world order. 
For the safety and protection weak countries keep the nuclear weapon but the superpower countries ban the making of a nuclear weapon and decided that only the superpower countries having the veto power can make nuclear weapons and other countries are not allowed to make any nuclear weapons for anything. 


The two sides understood that war might occur in spite of restraint. Either side might miscalculate the number of weapons in the possession of other side. They might misunderstand the intentions of the other side. Besides, what if there was a nuclear accident?
What would happen if someone fired off a nuclear weapon by mistake or if a soldier mischievously shot off a weapon deliberately to start a war? What if an accident occurred with a nuclear weapon? How could the leaders of that country know it was an accident and not an act of sabotage by the enemy or that a missile had not landed from the other side?
Challenge to Bipolarity: The roots of NAM went back to the friendship between three leaders- Yugoslavia's Josip Broz Tito. India's Jawaharlal Nehru, and Egypt's leader Gamal Abdel Nasser- who held a meeting in 1956, Indonesia's Sukarno and Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah strongly supported them. These five leaders came to be known as the five founders of NAM. The first non-aligned summit was held in Belgrade in 1961. This was the culmination of at least three factors:
1) cooperation among the five countries.
2) growing Cold War tensions and its widening arenas, and
3) the dramatic entry of many newly decolonized African countries into the inter-national arena. By 1960, there was 16 new African members in the UN.
The first summit was attended by 25 member states. Over the years, the membership of NAM has expanded. The latest meeting, the 14th summit, was held in Havana in 2006. It included 116 member states and 15 observer countries.
The policy of staying away from alliances should not be considered isolationism or neutrality. Non-alignment is not isolationism since isolationism means remaining aloof from world affairs. Isolationism sums up the foreign policy of the US from the American War of Independence in 1787 up to the beginning of the First World War. In comparison the non-aligned countries, including India, played an active role in mediating between the two rival alliances in the cause of peace and stability. Their strength was based on their unity and their resolve to remain non-aligned despite the attempt by the two superpowers to bring them into their alliances.
Non-alignment is also not neutrality. Neutrality refers principally to a policy of staying out of the war. States practicing neutrality are not required to help end a war. They do not get involved in wars and do not take any position on the appropriateness or marlity of a war. Non-aligned stated, including India, were actually involved in wars for various reasons. They also worked to prevent war between others and tried to end wars that had broken out.
After Second World War, the Soviet Union became a great power. The Soviet economy was them more developed than the rest of the world except for the US. It had a complex communications network, vast energy resources including oil, iron and steel.
Mikhail Gorbachev, who had become General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1985 decided to normalize relations with the West and Democratic and reform the Soviet Union had some other effects that neither he nor anyone else intended or anticipated. The people in the East European countries which were part of the Soviet bloc started to protest against their own governments and Soviet control. A coup tool place in 1991 that was encouraged by Communist Party hardliners. The people had tasted freedom by the then and did not want to the old-style rule of the Communist Party. Boris Yeltsin emerged as a national hero in opposing this coup. Power began to shift from the Soviet center to the republics, especially in the more Europeanize part of the Soviet Union, which saw themselves as sovereign states. In December 1991, under the leadership of Yeltsin, Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, three major republics of the USSR, declared that the Soviet Union was disbanded. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was banned. Capitalism and democracy were adopted as the bases for the post-Soviet republics.
The question which was worst asking that time was How did the second most powerful country in the world suddenly disintegrate?
There is no doubt that the internal weaknesses of Soviet political and economic institutions which failed to meet the aspiration of the people, were responsible for the collapse of the system.
Why did the system become so weak and why did the economy stagnate?
This led to a huge economic burden that the system could not cope with. At the same time, ordinary citizens became more knowledgeable about the economic advance of the West. They could see the disparities between their system and the systems of the West. After years of being told the Soviet system was better than Western Capitalism, the reality of its backwardness came as a political and psychological shock.
What they mean by a multi polar world order is the co-existence of several powers in the international system, collective security?
Decision making through bodies like the UN that should be strengthened, democratized, and more than 80 bilateral agreements have been signed between India and Russia as part of the Indo-Russian Strategic Agreement of 2001.
India stands to benefit from its relationship with Russia on issues like Kashmir, energy supplies, sharing information on international terrorism access to Central Asia, and balancing its relations with China. Russia is important to India and has repeatedly come to the assistance of India during its oil crises. Russia is important for India's nuclear energy plans. Russia and India have collaborated on various scientific projects.
Beginning of the New World Order: In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait, rapidly occupying and subsequently annexing it. After a series of diplomatic attempts failed to convincing Iraq to quit its aggression, the United Nations mandated the liberation of Kuwait by force. The US President George H.W. Bush hailed the emergence of a 'new world order'.
A massive coalition force of 660,000 troops from 34 countries fought against Iraq and defeated it in what came to be known as the First Gulf War. However, the UN operation, which was called 'Operation Desert Storm', was overwhelmingly American. An American general, Norman Schwarzkopf, led the UN coalition and nearly 75 percent of the coalition force were from the US. Although the Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein, had promised 'the mother of all battles', the Iraqi forces were quickly defeated and forced to withdraw from Kuwait.
The First Gulf War revealed the vast technological gap that had opened up between the US military capability and that of other stated. The highly publicized use of so called 'smart bombs' by the US led some observers to call this a 'computer war'. Widespread television range coverage also made it as a 'video game war', with viewers around the world watching the destruction of Iraqi forces live on TV in the comfort of their living rooms.
Incredibly, the US may actually have made a profit from the war. According to many reports, the US received more money from countries like Germany, Japan and Saudi Arabia than it had spent on the war.
In absolute terms, the US today has military capabilities that can reach any point on the planet accurately, lethally and in real time, thereby crippling the adversary while its own forces are sheltered to the maximum extent possible from the dangers of war.
But even more awesome than the absolute capabilities of the US is the fact that no other power today can remotely match them. The US today spends more on its military capability than the next 12 powers combined. Furthermore, a large chunk of the Pentagon's budget goes into military research and development, or, in other words, technology. Thus, the military dominance of the US is not just based on higher military spending, but on a qualitative gap, a technological chasm that no other power can at present conceivably span.
India's Relationship with the US: During the Cold War years, India found itself on the opposite side of the divide from the US. India's closes friendship during those years was with the Soviet Union, India suddenly found itself friendless in an increasingly hostile international environment. However, these were also the years when India decided to liberalize its economy and integrate it with the global economy. This policy and India's impressive economic growth rates in recent years have made the country an attractive economic partner for a number of countries including the US.
1) The US absorbs about 65 per cent of India's total exports in the software sector.
2) 35 per cent of the technical staff of Boeing is estimated to be of Indian origin.
3) 300,000 Indians work in Silicon Valley.
4) 15 per cent of all high-tech start-ups are by Indian-Americans.
After some years the US decided that there should be no use of nuclear weapons. If there would be more use of nuclear weapon this country would be destroyed into pieces. The US also decided that only a few countries could have the power to make a nuclear weapon and can only use those weapons when there is no other option left.
Few countries were added to the list of powers and those countries were given the Veto Power. Those countries were: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States.
Conclusion: Under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru India was the first country to sign treaty to ban the nuclear weapons. Most of the countries were associated with India's disarmed diplomacy.

Post a Comment

1 Comments

  1. We indians are not safe in our own country , we all take advantage of somebody's problem. Specifically by our own law then why we should care? Talking about such a high commitments first commit peace to our own citizens.Then think about this. First keep and give safety to every indian , then think about all this. We have to wait here for years in our own courts and we are unable to get the justice. And we talk about all this. Sorry. Apna ghar sambhaliye pehle.

    ReplyDelete