At six fifteen a.m. the nuclear world became that much more dangerous.  Despite vigorous protest against nuclear weapon testing, India detonated a nuclear bomb twice the size of that dropped on Hiroshima.  Not only did this bomb usher in a new era of a nuclear arms race but it also escalated the already unstable relationship between India and Pakistan.  Two weeks later Pakistan responded with several test of its own in the Chagai Hills.  These two Earth shaking events have resulted in a transforming a fifty yearlong conflict between these two countries.  Fifty years that encompassed three wars, to the present year that now includes a full fledge nuclear standoff.  The question now is whether the history of conflict between India and Pakistan will lead to nuclear war and what can be done now to prevent this already unstable situation?

History Of Conflict

Strained relations between Pakistan and India can be traced back to AUGUST 14, 1947 when these two countries became sovereign nations.  Prior to the creation of these two countries much of the India sub-continent consisted of British colonies.  Upon the British relinquishing their control the sub-continent divided into two regions primarily based on religion.  The Islamic states integrated and formed Pakistan while the Hindu states formulated India.  The northern region of the sub-continent, Kashmir, had previously been a British colony but had been sold to Sir Hari Singh a Hindu prince in 1846.  In the formative years of the Indian sub-continent the region of Kashmir was torn as to which country to be embraced by.  The maharaja was Hindu, and felt loyalty to India, but eighty to ninety percent of the inhabitants were Muslim, and felt an attachment to Pakistan.  Both India and Pakistan had legitimate claim to Kashmir as it shared borders with both.  Tensions over the claim to Kashmir immediately broke out.  India felt that they needed Kashmir as a part if India or other countries would leave India and lead to the break up of the country.  Pakistan felt that Kashmir was vital to the creation of Pakistan and its security.  If Kashmir began part of India Pakistan felt that India would station troops along its west border and threaten the integrity of the Indian-Pakistan border.  Pakistan believed that Hindus and Muslims were two distinct groups that were not capable of integrating, let alone living under one flag.  Due to the majority of Kashmir being Muslim, Pakistan felt that a religious and cultural link between the Kashmir people.

Pakistan in an aggressive move to pressure the Maharaja to accede blockaded supplies and halted rail service.  Five thousand army service men from Pakistan crossed the Kashmir border to further press the issue and demand a decision form the Maharaja.  These acts by Pakistan only exacerbated the situation and only lead Pakistan into the arms of India.upon Kashmir joining the India empire, India responded in defending its newly expanded border by sending troops.  A war ensued in October 1947.  This conflict only widened the rift that already existed between these two countries and lead to two more wars in 1965 and then again in 1971.  Even today artillery shell cross the India-Pakistan border as small conflicts erupt between the two countries.

A Nuclear India And Pakistan

It is this tension that has made this section of the world a hot spot for many years.  In the past the India Pakistan conflicts have been fought with conventional weapons.  Thought the nuclear capabilities have been under development and waiting in the wings.  While Pakistan's nuclear endeavor has always been ambiguous and secretive, India first began its nuclear mission while still under British colonial control in 1944.  In 1956 India opens its first nuclear reactor and in 1974 India conducts its first peaceful explosion" of a nuclear device.  India then tested the Prithvi missile in 1988 which provides India the capabilities to deliver a nuclear device into Pakistan. 1996 India refuse to sign the nuclear-test-ban-treaty and in response to Indials refusal Pakistan rejected the CBTC as well.  In 1998 a month after Pakistan tests the Ghauri missile enabling Pakistan to deliver nuclear warheads, India conducts an underground nuclear test.  Two weeks later despite pleads from President Clinton to Pakistan not to responded with an underground test of their nuclear capabilities.  Pakistan could not remain idle, they had to assert their national security and demonstrate that they too had nuclear capacity.

Nuclear Implications

The implications of these nuclear tests are far reaching.  The fact that both Pakistan and India refused to sign the CBTC treaty in response to each other indications the extreme nature of the situation.  It is argued that India nor Pakistan conflict will never escalate to the point of nuclear war.  This follow along the lines of logic that weapons of mass destruction would ensure the certain demise of both countries, the theory of mutual assured destruction.  This is the theory that explained why the cold-war never escalated to nuclear holocaust.  Religious fervor, the violent history, and the proximity of India and Pakistan may call this theory into question.  Compounded by the lack of deterrence technology, neither country really grasps each others capabilities and thus must prepare for the worst.  However, the arm of these nuclear problem is long and there is a danger of it extending beyond the Indian sub-continent. When Pakistan's leader announced they were the first Islamic nation with a bomb it sent shock waves around the world.  The danger lies in the possibility that Pakistan may transfer weapons or other needed technologies to other Arab countries, such as Iraq and Libya, that have already shown scorn and a willingness to destroy.

International Response

The question now presented to the international community is to what degree should steps be taken to punish these two countries.  Economic sanctions are an option, however this course of action creates problems.  Such action has already commenced against both India and Pakistan.  The United State has removed $51.3 million in aid this year, blocked $4 billion in projects pending at the U.S. Export Import Bank, $10.2 billion in financing for U.S. firms doing business in India firm the Overseas Private Investment Corp., $20 million in farm -export credits, all military aid and the export of some defense items.  Japan has canceled $30 million in aid, Germany placed a hold on $168 million in development aid, and Denmark has frozen $28 million in aid.  Sanctions have also been placed on Pakistan.  However, U.S. official fear the repercussions that may arise because of Pakistan's economic instability.  The fear is that with too stringent of economic sanctions could bankrupt Pakistan.  In turn this could lead them to sell their weapons to the highest bidder, creating a much more serious security problem, terrorism.

Punishment may be a short term fix, it may ease the tension of nuclear proliferation However, to fully end the situation much must be done to fix the situation that exists between Pakistan and India.  Initially the issue of Kashmir must be resolved.  Secondly, India's feeling of a lack of respect within the international community must be addressed.  In doing so India will then feel comfortable signing the CBTC treaty which will lead to Pakistan signing the treaty.  Once India stands down Pakistan will no longer feel threatened coupled with the fact that tensions would have subsided over the dispute over Kashmir.  Lastly both India and Pakistan must be lifted from their third world economic status.  By doing so the government and people of these two countries will no longer feel that they must prove themselves to the outside world, no longer feel like the larger countries are ruling over them.  Improved economic status will give these countries a much louder and effective voice than nuclear armament.

The international response to the actions of India and Pakistan are in response to their violations of international treaties in regards to illegal testing.  The proper response to these violations are economic sanctions and dismantling of their nuclear programs such as those levied upon India and Pakistan.  However, neither India nor Pakistan are signatories to the relevant treaties, and their is no evidence that either country is willing to dismantle programs that they spent decades developing.  In fact these countries developed their programs in search of protection from risks to their security.  India is concerned with China and their army three times larger then their own.  While Pakistan feels threatened by India.  These are not rogue countries that we are dealing with such as Iraq, Iran, and Libya.  India and Pakistan are relatively stable legitimate governments that are addressing their security concerns.  The flaw with the international response is that India and Pakistan are not being distinguished from these rogue countries.  A new approach should be taken in regards to the varying type of countries.  A strict and zero tolerance should be asserted against these rogue countries whereas sanctions and denial of nuclear technology should be implemented.  On the other hand India and Pakistan should be dealt with as a country with nuclear status.  In response to the crisis at hand the international community should ask these countries to sign the test ban treaty but allow them to maintain their nuclear armaments to ensure their security.  In return for their compliance these international community would lift all economic sanctions.

Conclusion

Nuclear Proliferation is once again upon the world.  We can no longer hide behind the fairy tale of nuclear disarmament.  So what is to be done now that India and Pakistan have brought the world to their knees in fear.  Edward Teller believes that the world should slowly share nuclear technology, no longer hide behind secrets.  Once these demon is out in the open, the scientific communities of the world should unite in a common project in pursuit of a useful endeavor for mankind In doing so money will be taken away from nuclear weapons projects and diverted to a scientific project.  Teller suggests a global weather prediction project as the answer to a nuclear free world.

Bibliography

Haas, Richard N., and Gideon Rose.  "Facing the Nuclear Facts In India and Pakistan." Washington Post, 5 January 1997.  C 2

Hirsh, Michael, and John Barry.  "Nuclear Jitters." Newsweek 8 June 1998: 22-27.

Lamb, Alastair.  Crisis in Kashmir, New York: Longman, 1966.

Thomas, Evan, John Barry, and Melinda Liu.  "Ground Zero." Newsweek 25 May 1998: 29-34.

Wright, D. India-Pakistan Relations.. Boston: Bedford Books, 1989.

Zimmerman, Tim.  "India and Pakistan are Upping the Ante in the World's Most Dangerous Arms Race" Us News World Re2ort. -