[sacw] S A A N Post | 20 Dec 00

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asians Against Nukes Post
20 December 2000

__________________________

#1. South Asia-Peace or Balance of Terror
#2. Pakistan: Can we sell the bomb?
#3. Russia to give 3 billion dollar loan to Indian atomic power unit

__________________________

#1.

South Asia-Peace or Balance of Terror

By A. Hamid Bashani

The top policy makers in South Asia are still thinking and acting under the
psychological influence of century old tragedies and its effects. In spite
of great internal and international pressure, they once again, could not
get meaningful results out of dialogues on Kashmir issue. Both countries,
it seems, have chosen to continue the same old style of putting the burning
issues under the carpet and pretend to achieve peace. Would they really
achieve it? Peace- a lasting peace based on justice, equality,mutual
respect and fellowship- is recognized ever more widely as an aspiration
common to people throughout the world.

During last three wars between India and Pakistan on Kashmir issue and
continuing militancy, hundred and thousand killed, disabled, orphaned and
widowed; human misery; land and property laid waste; the fruits of the
imagination; the labor of several generations destroyed; economic losses
and an incalculable squandering of resources- such is the dismal inventory
of the last few decades. Yet the danger facing the people of the Indian
sub-continent today are even greater than those which have gone before. The
destructive power of modern nuclear weapons is such that another war could
wipe out the entire population in South Asia.

Fifty years after the tragedy of partition, both India and Pakistan
officially posses nuclear weapons. The people of these two countries are
thus living in a kind of 'balance of terror' due to the fact that
precarious arms become ever more sophisticated, varied and numerous.

With the emergence of militancy in Kashmir since 1987, the arm race has a
built-in tendency to accelerate. The average figure for annual military
expenditure has almost doubled and billion rupee are spent every day on
arms, military, militancy and related activities.

This is not only an appalling misuse of human and materiel resources, but
is, in itself, a factor of tension, since the quest for supremacy in the
field of armament goes with effort to extend respective zone of influence
like Afghanistan. Furthermore, the development of instruments of
destruction and death, by adding yet another dimension to problems of
inequalities, misunderstanding and fears of our age, tends to foster
intransigence and, when differences arise, to encourage attempts to solve
them by force rather than by negotiation. Instead of solving the Kashmir
issue through peaceful and democratic means India and Pakistan has chosen
the path of confrontation and arm race. The effect of this policy is indeed
at too evident; growing internal instability in these two poor countries
and their deflection from the path of progress; the danger of worsening
conflicts between them, and a danger of nuclear war that could lead to the
annihilation of whole continent.

This is the time for India and Pakistan to understand that Kashmir issue
can not be resolved with selfish ambitions and arms race, principally this
is a human issue, the issue of a nation and can only be resolved by
establishing the foundation of understanding, mutual respect and continuing
dialogues. This is the time for the people of India and Pakistan to have
their respective governments realize that they do not need bombs; they need
a process of progress and justice to build a international society in which
everyone can find his true place and his share of the world's intellectual
and materiel sources.

This process can be started from Kashmir by recognizing the democratic and
fundamental rights of its people. Nuclear weapons can neither help to bring
the peace nor can they suppress the people's desire for freedom and social
justice.

______

#2.

The Friday Times
10 December 2000

Can we sell the bomb?

Farrukh Saleem's A n a l y s i s

Libya may or may not have blown up 270 people in thin air. But I dare not
contemplate what the world would do if we were ever found to be promoting
weapons of mass destruction. Are we adamant on making an Iraq, or a Libya,
Somalia, Yugoslavia, Haiti, Angola, Rwanda or Sudan out of this country of
ours? (All these states were penalized under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
The UN Special Commission carried out over 9,000
inspections throughout Iraq including of houses belonging to the top Iraqi
leaders)

We'll export the bomb. We'll actually use the bomb. We'll default on our
debt payments. The bomb is the solution to all our problems. Is it?

Why is it that all our tangents have become negative? Why don't we show the
world that we still have some elements of goodness left in us? Maybe not
all the leaders, but Pakistanis, by and large, long for admittance into the
civilized club of nations. Most of us wish to lead a cultured life and hope
to resolve conflicts through peaceful means. If Kashmir and Pakistan were
put on a ballot, a majority of Pakistanis would pick Pakistan over Kashmir.
Given a choice, most Pakistanis would choose integration with the global
village over an isolationist agenda.

The warriors among us, however, insist that if the West doesn't give us
money, we should export our nuclear technology, meaning we should sell the
bomb to Iran, Iraq, Libya or to whoever else is willing to pay for it.

First of all, let us determine our annual financial requirement. We
essentially need to fill two black holes. The budgetary deficit stands at a
tall Rs 200 billion. The trade deficit is an additional $3 billion. Now
assume that we can find a buyer by 1 January 2001, someone who can come up
with a hefty $2 billion for our ready-made bomb. So we make the deal and
the $2 billion injection takes us to the end of May 2001. But even in this
scenario, we are further assuming that the sale of the bomb will be
an all-cash deal. However, this assumption may be faulty. Peace-time
defense trade takes place in a buyers' market. For instance, the Agosta
submarines that we recently bought were sold to us by France for a mere 10
percent down-payment. If we sold our bomb for a 10 percent
down-payment, however, the proceeds would last for no more than a paltry 15
days.

Can Iran afford the bomb? Let us, for a moment, take a look at Iran's
financial position. The government in Teheran runs a budgetary deficit. In
1998, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into Iran was a pitiful $24 million.
In 1997, total debt servicing amounted to $6.2 billion (as opposed
to Pakistan's $3.5 billion). The present value of its debt is $13.8
billion, with the short term debt component running at $6.2 billion. On
the face of it, Iran can't really afford a bomb. But if it could,
one might well wonder what it would do with it. But to continue with our
wishful thinking=85.

Having sold our first bomb for full payment in cash, we should know that
the money would be gone in about four to five months. We would, therefore,
be looking for the next buyer right away. Anyone else around willing and
able to cough up $2 billion?

How about Iraq? The eight-year war with Iran resulted in economic losses to
it estimated at $100 billion. After the war Iraq borrowed heavily. External
debts now stand at a colossal $130 billion (Pakistan's external debt
amounts to $37 billion). After ten years of UN-imposed sanctions the
economy lies in ruins. Debts had to be rescheduled. The country is now
under the UN's oil-for-food programme.

Next comes Libya. The country has been so isolated since UN sanctions went
into effect on 15 April 1992 that little is known about its financial
affairs. International sanctions were indeed suspended in 1999 but they had
already brought Libya down to its knees. What is known is that Libya's
imports often exceed exports and the country, as a consequence, must find
sources for financing its trade deficit. The rate of unemployment is a
painful 29 percent and the government also runs a current account deficit.
The magnitude of its hard currency reserves is not known but it may just
have enough to buy a bomb.

What happens right after we conclude our first sale? To be certain, we
would have managed to elevate our status from a "rogue state" to that of a
"nuclear terrorist". Libya, it may be recalled, was merely accused
of "planting and bombing Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie."_ The US
Congress, as a response, passed the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) and
also froze all Libyan assets in the US. The rest of the world retaliated by
UN Security Council Resolutions 731, 748 and 883. These resolutions require
UN-member states to "deny permission for Libyan-owned, leased or operated
aircraft to land in or take off from their territory"; require all states
to "significantly reduce the number and the level of the staff at Libyan
diplomatic missions" and then demanded from all states to freeze
"funds or other financial resources owned or controlled, directly or
indirectly, by the Government or public authorities of Libya, or any Libyan
undertaking."

Libya may or may not have blown up 270 people in thin air. But I dare not
contemplate what the world would do if we were ever found to be promoting
weapons of mass destruction. Are we adamant on making an Iraq, or a Libya,
Somalia, Yugoslavia, Haiti, Angola, Rwanda or Sudan out of this
country of ours? (All these states were penalized under Chapter VII of the
UN Charter. The UN Special Commission carried out over 9,000 inspections
throughout Iraq including of houses belonging to the top Iraqi leaders.)

_____

#2.

Yahoo! India News - Top Stories
Friday December 15, 9:57 PM

Russia to give 3 billion dollar loan to Indian atomic power unit

NEW DELHI, Dec 15 (AFP) -

Russia has agreed to extend a 3 billion dollar long-term loan to India for
a nuclear power project in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, an
official said.

The Press Trust of India quoted Atomic Energy Commission additional
secretary R.M. Premkumar as saying that a report on the Koodankulam project
was being prepared and issues relating to technology transfers and
commercial terms would be taken up with Russian experts.

The Indian government is wanting to generate 20,000 megawatts of nuclear
power by 2020.

Premkumar said the combined generation of atomic power in the country is
currently estimated at 3,000 megawatts.

The official said work on the Koodankulam project, which is being built
with Russian cooperation in Tirunelveli district, is expected to start in
January 2001.

Copyright =A9 2000 AFP