FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Is Obama’s Vision of Nuclear Zero Leading to Nowhere?

Islamabad.

As the Second Cold War gathers pace between Moscow and Washington, over range of issues, optimism is fading over possibility of ‘a world free of nuclear weapons’ envisioned by nuclear pessimists since the dawn of nuclear age. The prospects had never been so promising, as had appeared to be, after President Obama’s speech at Prague in 2007 followed by the announcement to cancel deployment of missile defence shield in European theatre, presumably due to Russian concerns. However, the situation changed after U.S. adopted the off-shore rebalancing policy, referred to as ‘Asia-Pivot’, in 2011 which presumably was aimed at containing China and Russia. Obama’s recent pledge to grant India the privileged nuclear status amongst the non-NPT signatory states has further damped the prospects to envision a world free of nuclear weapons in foreseeable future.

Since the promulgation of new set of U.S. strategic priorities for the Asia-Pacific region, China and Russia appears to be in the process of reviewing and enhancing their nuclear and missile capabilities. China recently tested its improved variant of road missile ICBM DF-31B, capable of delivering multiple warheads Multiple Independently Targeted Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) on the U.S. mainland, while its improved version, named DF-41, is still under development. China is also arming its fleet of stealth submarines with JL-2 ballistic missiles to acquire an assured second strike nuclear capability. Beijing’s antagonism to Washington’s Asia Pivot has seemingly provoked the former to forsake its traditional policy of non-interventionism and neutrality. Chinese non-traditional approach on Ukraine crisis and implicit support to Russia in this new escalating cold war can thus be better understood in the context.

Russians are not lagging behind either. Their newly developed SLBM, Bulava with a strike range of 10000 kms and capability to carry up to 6 – 10 MIRVs of 100 – 150 KT each has become part of the nuclear inventory. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Sochi, criticized Washington for pursuing plans to develop hypersonic weapons under the Global Strike Programme and repudiated the U.S. allegations of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force (INF) which according to him was in response to U.S. unilateral abrogation of ABM treaty back in 2002. Russian emerging nuclear posture has also become a source of concern for the U.S. and NATO.

The U.S. nuclear initiatives also appear to be out of step with the contemplated roadmap towards a world free of nuclear weapons. Washington is in a process of revitalizing its nuclear arsenals at an astounding cost of $ 1 trillion spanning over a period of thirty years. Such plans risk undermining President Obama’s initiative for global nuclear zero and the future of new START initiative between Russia and United States.

In South Asia, Indian massive defence spending and conventional arms buildup risks offsetting the regional strategic balance. Agni-VI, capable of delivering multiple warheads through MIRVs is all set to become the new force multiplier for the Indian nuclear deterrent. Development of the two tier interceptor missile defence shield by India is also being keenly watched by Pakistan and China. Economic limitations thus far have prevented Pakistan from indulging into a costly conventional arms race but other options, like for example nuclear, remains plausible to compensate for the growing conventional asymmetries. Adoption of ‘full spectrum deterrence’ posture by Pakistan after developing low yield short range nuclear weapons (also known as (TNWs) tactical nuclear weapons) exhibits its greater reliance on the nuclear deterrence. Worst still, as a consequence to Indo-U.S. nuclear deal South Asia risks becoming the axiom of nuclear arms race. Apprehensive of these insecurities, Pakistan is already on its way to increase the stockpiles of existing nuclear warheads.

In Middle East, P 5+1 and Iran have failed to ink a nuclear deal after having missed the November 2014 deadline. The deadline has been extended once again for another seven months till July 1, 2015. To what extent the Iranian nuclear ambitions can be restrained in future, would largely depend on the mutual trust and security equation between Washington and Tehran. Unfolding of the nuclear diplomacy between Iran and P 5+1 is keenly being watched in Riyadh and Tel Aviv. Saudi Arabia is extremely apprehensive of the growing Iranian influence and has warned that if Iran develops a nuclear bomb, it would have a one of its own, without explaining how.

Militarily powerful Arab states on the periphery of Israel no longer pose an existential threat. However even this scenario has not restrained Israel’s nuclear ambitions, which is in pursuit of acquiring an assured second strike nuclear capability. Israel has plans to induct six nuclear capable “Dolphin Class” submarines in its Navy, four of which have already been procured from Germany. Development of (Inter Continental Ballistic Missile) ICBM, Jericho III, with a planned range of 10000 kilometers remains high on its priority. Such developments ostensibly would influence nuclear ambitions and choices of other states in the region.

South East Asia the situation is not promising either. North Korea has been hurling nuclear threats from time to time and has conducted missile tests which have apprehensively been watched by Japan and South Korea. North Korea is believed to possess an increased nuclear inventory of up to 20 nuclear warheads by 2016. Despite U.S. repeated assurances, its allies in Asian Pacific region still remains apprehensive of Chinese growing stature in South and East China Seas. The matter of horizontal nuclear proliferation thus could become a contentious issue in the region if either of the state contemplates nuclear weapon option in wake of the growing security threats.

The nuclear taboo has so far not been broken since the tragic episodes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yet it can’t be guaranteed that this would always be the case. Complex global security issues further accentuate the challenges posed by vertical and horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons. Due to renewed rivalry of the great powers the possibility of a world free of nuclear weapons, even in distant future, remains implausible while the risks of an accidental or a catalytic nuclear war have increased in recent years.

To mitigate these risks major powers, especially the U.S., China and Russia, shall have to take major initiatives by formulating a cooperative framework for debating and finding solutions to the contentious issues, (UN can also provide such a platform). State situated in troubled regions like India, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and Israel could subsequently be involved to take on the challenging issues along with the subject of nuclear proliferation, without which Obama’s dream of nuclear zero would remain a distant utopia.

Shams uz Zaman holds M.Phil degree in Strategic & Nuclear Studies from National Defence University Islamabad. He is visiting faculty member at Roots University International College, Islamabad and frequently writes in newspapers, magazines and research journals on nuclear and strategic issues. He has has also co-authored the book: “Iran and the Bomb – Nuclear Club Busted”.

More articles by:
April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Paul Bentley
A Velvet Revolution Turns Bloody? Ten Dead in Toronto
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail