India as the Only External Threat to Pakistan

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Synopsis of the Proposal
Introduction
Statement of need
India As a threat to Pakistan
Reference List

Synopsis of the Proposal

The current arms race between New Delhi and Islamabad is based on the perception that India has failed to acknowledge the existence of our nuclear weapon program. We and India have had a decade of the long-standing territorial dispute over Kashmir that has resulted in numerous wars and skirmishes. As a self-defense mechanism, we have pursued a nuclear program to protect Our territorial integrity from any external threat posed by India (Korb & Rothman, 2012).

The fact that India intends to have Us under its control has convinced our military that India will attack them one day. Moreover, India has failed to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty citing us as its external threat. India has also used its influence with other nuclear-armed nations such as the United States and Russia to denuclearize us. This is a clear indication of the fact that India wants to control us after its nuclear weapons are brought under the control of NPT.

Although the nuclear-armed states have criticized us, it has shown impressive restraint to ensure the safe use of nuclear weapons. Moreover, our nuclear weapons are only used as a self-deterrence, rather than a threat to India. India has an officially declared doctrine of massive reiteration with nuclear weapons against us. Therefore, this paper proposes that India is the only potential external enemy and that we will not sign the NPT if India is not a party to the treaty (Adnan, 2014).

Introduction

We intend to make it clear that we would not be subjected to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if India will not be a party to it. The threat of India to Islamabad has a long history that resulted in mistrust between the two nations. After the war in 1971 that led to the creation of Bangladesh ended in defeat, our military has been convinced that India will do all it can to destabilize us (Korb & Rothman, 2012). The defeat and the creation of Bangladesh compelled our military to contemplate acquiring nuclear weapons. This decision was seen as the only option to ensure that our territorial integrity is respected.

The sole reason for developing nuclear weapons was to neutralize India’s conventional capability and to ensure that we are respected in all aspects by India. India has used its nuclear capability as a tool against us for more than four decades. However, nuclear weapons serve as the only deterrence against India. For instance, according to Viyyanna (2010), intelligence information shows that India funds the Taliban to destabilize us. Therefore, the threat of the Taliban is a proxy war created by India to keep the government busy and distracted (Sankaran, 2015). We feel that India is the only external enemy because it is expected to be one of the largest economies in the world that are widely dominated by non-Muslim religion. Moreover, the existing dispute over Kashmir has led to mistrust between the two countries. Thus, we believe that India is a threat that must be deterred.

Statement of need

We view Kashmir as a highly delicate territorial dispute that can be used by India to attack us. India has kept the government busy with the Taliban threat by facilitating their terrorist acts through weapon supplies (Rehman, 2014).

In this case, both countries support opposite sides which can potentially spill into a hot war. Although the Indian government does not support terrorist activities directly, they fund the Taliban to destabilize the government. For instance, we have strongly condemned the Taliban terrorist attack that killed more than 100 students (Abdul, 2014). Although this attack may have been in the response to government offensive against the Taliban, India through conspiracy theories has been held responsible for the attack. India has used its economic capability both in international politics and at home to diminish our nuclear capability. Although India is not recognized as a nuclear state, it has used all means and influence possible to ensure that we are denuclearized. If we sign the treaty, India can potentially take advantage of our weakness.

India As a threat to Pakistan

Anwar (2015) noted that New Delhi plans to increase its military budget to $100 billion over the next five years. The threat from India is real, and the only way that we can be able to protect its territorial integrity is by not signing the NPT if India is not a party. The increased budget is intended to improve India’s nuclear capability and destabilization ability against us. The repeated threat of using nuclear weapons against us has prevented Islamabad from signing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. If we sign the nuclear treaty, we will have no option rather than to get rid of its nuclear weapons or else face international sanctions.

We cannot give up our nuclear weapon capability if India does not because it would put the country in a seriously disadvantaged position. Moreover, we pay enormous sums of money to China to transfer the technology and build the bombs. If we sign the treaty and India does not, it will allow India to provoke us. Consequently, that would evoke international sanctions against Islamabad. Moreover, the NPT is unfair to the non-nuclear states. Nuclear-armed states have taken advantage of nonnuclear states without international intervention. Ukraine that was denuclearized after the dissolution of the Soviet Union can be viewed as an example.

After the dissolution of the USSR, Ukraine signed the NPT and made a decision of being a nuclear-free state. Recently, nuclear-powered Russia decided to annex Crimea using the nuclear threat to deter Ukraine and the international community from intervening. Russia can also annex Donetsk because it has nuclear weapons. If Ukraine had nuclear weapons, Russia would have considered the risk involved and possibly deter them from violating the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

The same situation may apply to us considering that we live under the perennial threat of a nuclear attack and the infiltration of Kashmir and Bangladesh. India could use the same logic to annex some parts of our state using the same judgment applied by President Putin. We have signed a bilateral agreement with India of a no first use of nuclear weapons. However, it would not be giving up its nuclear weapon program unless India is willing to do the same.

In the past, we have supported the Nonproliferation of other nations in South Asia that resonated well with the treaty of Tlatelolco, Mexico. The treaty through its proposals aims to champion a nuclear-weapon-free zone. Following our progressive gesture, India also read from the same script and conducted a peaceful nuclear explosion as a show of goodwill. This was a good move towards ensuring that the Asia Pacific region is free of nuclear weapons.

Our government then proposed a general inspection of all countries in the Asia-Pacific region that had nuclear weapons. However, we made it clear that it would only sign the treaty after the IAEA inspections, and safeguard tools were implemented (Adnan, 2014). Nevertheless, some nations, including India, were reluctant to comply with the terms of the agreement. Consequently, our stance changed to encourage nuclear stockpile at home.

Although there are significant disagreements on particular issues, India and we have signed bilateral agreements not to attack each other with nuclear weapons. We have made a positive effort to control nuclear tests such as the signing of CTBT, which India has declined (Korb & Rothman, 2012). Before the proposal, India had accumulated many nuclear weapons that were perceived threat to the NPT. Worried by this development, we thought that our secret military decided to develop its nuclear program as a defense strategy. We also made it clear that it would desist from any nuclear test if a bilateral agreement to mitigate any nuclear war with India could be reached.

We extremely welcome the idea of the United Nations to control the procession of nuclear weapons amongst its member states through the treaty. The worrying trend of most nations acquiring or building nuclear weapons is no longer an open subject. Unfortunately, this trend is not only a threat to peace and stability currently enjoyed in many countries around the world, but it is also a threat to humankind. The effects of these weapons are known to be severe.

However, as a state, we feel that the unjustified number of nuclear weapons currently in the procession of different nations is a result of the ineffective laws and regulations governing the criteria of its acquisition and to say the least, selective application of the said rules. Considering the destabilization capability of India with its publicly declared doctrine of a massive nuclear retaliatory attack against us, the possibility that India will attack us is very likely. Therefore, it would only be logical to propose that India is the only external threat to us.

Reference List

Abdul, C. (2014). Kashmir and denuclearization: India versus Pakistan or together? Web.

Adnan, M. (2014). ‘Nuclearization of South Asia 1998: Pakistan’s domestic constraints. South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 29(1), 41-60. Web.

Anwar, I. (2015). Pakistan will not sign NPT. Web.

Korb, L. J., & Rothman, A. (2012). No first use: The way to contain nuclear war in South Asia. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68(2), 34-42. Web.

Rehman, I. A. (2014). A warning about Pakistan’s illusion of power. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 70(6), 73-78. Web.

Sankaran, J. (2015). Destroying Pakistan to deter India? The problem with Pakistan’s battlefield nukes’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 70(4), 74-84. Web.

Viyyanna, S. (2010). Pakistan against signing the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!