Pakistani and Indian scholars on Thursday asserted civil nuclear co-operation between the two arch rival South Asian nations, but called for removing the existing mistrust through dialogue at all levels including security and intelligence agencies.
They were speaking at a two-day workshop "Pakistan-India: Towards a Security Route to Co-operation?" organised by Strategic Technology Resources that opened here on Thursday.
Indian defence analyst Subrata Ghoshroy and former head of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) Parvez Butt presented their papers in the first session that was devoted to civil nuclear co-operation chaired by Mushahid Hussain Syed. Syed pointed out that after the nuclear tests in 1998 there was a view that Pakistan and India should cooperate in the nuclear field.
Most of the discussants were unable to get out of their traditional mode of thinking and seriously examined the possibility of co-operation between Pakistan and India in the civil nuclear field. But some discussants did point to the possibility of small beginnings through co-operation in nuclear medicine and agriculture.
However, in their research papers presented by Subrata Ghoshroy and Parvez Butt, both agreed that civil nuclear co-operation was possible between Pakistan and India as long as it was mutually beneficial. Ghoshroy, while speaking on Indo-US nuclear deal, said that the deal had less of an energy driven incentive and more of other strategic drivers like India coming out of nuclear pariah status, the US gaining Indian support for US strategic goals especially the containment of China, and support in IAEA against Iran.
Referring to advantages in bilateral nuclear co-operation between Pakistan and India, Ghoshroy said that besides co-operation in nuclear safety and nuclear technology exchanges, the mutual co-operation in energy and water was highly desirable. Dr Shireen Mazari, while participating in the discussion, pointed out that civil nuclear co-operation in the power sector between Pakistan and India was possible under the IAEA umbrella and safeguards would not require Nuclear Suppliers Group's (NSG) approval since it is a supplier carter.
She said that it was important to imagine as how such co-operation could lead to benefit even in the IAEA where the two countries together could enforce NPT commitments for supplying assistance in peaceful nuclear energy to developing countries. Also, they could become part of the IAEA plans for a fuel bank, she added. Mushahid Hussain pointed out that in January 2006 the US used political pressure on India to get it to vote against Iran in the IAEA.
In his concluding remarks, Mushahid pointed out that Pakistan made a strategic mistake by not vociferously objecting to the Indo-US nuclear deal. But he felt that this deal is going to fall apart in the next few years owing to the strong opposition inside India.
He regretted that after 9/11 incident, nuclear weapons have become fashion again and even states like France and Britain who face no threat have decided to upgrade their nuclear arsenal. He further said that it was the active support of the US and Israel that South Africa secretly undertook its nuclear test in September 1997.
He also strongly recommended dialogue process between the security establishment and spy agencies of Pakistan and India to remove the existing mistrust. Earlier, Ghoshroy urged nuclear scientists of the two countries to come forward to remove the trust deficit between the two nuclear countries for the possible mutual co-operation in this sector in future.
In his opening statement to the second session titled "Towards Strategic Stability", chaired by Dr Inamul Haq, former ambassador Tariq Usman Hyder said that India did not seem much interested and was moving away from idea of Nuclear Confidence Building Measures with Pakistan, as New Delhi feels that it is in "Big League" now.
An Indian expert, Dr Suba Chandran, dwelt upon three issues that can hurt both Pakistan and India in future that is Afghanistan, water issue and radicalism. Dr Suba also spoke of the constraints having impact on Pakistan and India including the external role of US and China play in the region, as the US scuttle corporation between the regional players on the Iran, Pakistan and India (IPI) pipeline.
During discussion, a panelist wanted to know how to move thing forward beyond idea floated in track-11 diplomacy. Another participant said that track-II was limited because decision makers and bureaucrats paid little heed to what is discussed. Dr Shereen Mazari suggested some proportional number crunching on missiles especially, short range which are Pakistan specific as well as medium range and submarine launch missiles.
The economic rational was viable in the context of limiting weapons' development, she added, suggesting that the idea of regional CTBT was not required as both the countries has already committed not to test further. Raiz Khokar said that the growing arrogance on part of India needed to be removed for bringing stability in the region.
An Indian expert responded that many people in India do realise that it cannot move forward globally unless it mends fences within its neighbours. India wanted to be in Afghanistan to scuttle Pakistan influence there. However, India has money and Pakistan has the links in Afghanistan, but Pakistan has failed to convince India, how Afghanistan has become a strategic trap for Pakistan.
Comments
Comments are closed.