Indo US nuclear deal and Pakistan

Indo-US nuclear deal implications to Pakistan foreign policy


By; Jawad Shafique Kiani
Department of IR NUML Islamabad.
[email protected]




Introduction of research: this master essay includes 4 chapters and chapters are addressing following research objectives:
To understand the importance of Indo-US nuclear deal for the region.
To understand the foreign policy of Pakistan after Indo-US nuclear deal.
Changes in relations with the states.
In future options for Pakistan




INTRODUCTION:
The US quest for strategic expansion in Asia became a major challenge for US foreign policy and regional states. US is focused to engage the regional powers in bilateral relations and establishing ties to get support for strategic advancement. 123 agreements is the part of US struggle to get support from local power. China has grown rapidly in last decade it become a challenge for US supremacy on the world in term of economy. To counter china the US need to support India to become a competent of it.
Indo-US nuclear is threat for Indo-Pak power equilibrium. As the former prime minister of Pakistan Gillani stated that India should enhance its nuclear arsenals by itself as Pakistan did by following Bhutto's idea of "Eating grass". US should propose an agreement which should favor both states. US agreement with India is refusal of NPT (nonproliferation treaty) which was largely influenced by the rules made by US.
The other perspective of the Indo-US nuclear deal is to enhance the India's nuclear capabilities to contain china in the region. As India will serve the interests of US in this region.US is providing the modern nuclear technology to India because she knows that strong nuclear India is not a direct threat to US. But this direct threat to other regional powers like China and Pakistan who are having serious concerns regarding the current developments between India and US.
India is non-signatory to the NPT though it is given access to the resources through Indo-US nuclear agreement, without considering security and safety measures. Why Pakistan is being ignored by US? There is a doctrine of double standards in the behavior of major powers regarding developing states. That's Pakistan is reluctant to join CTBT because Pakistan has a threat of insecurity of its rival and unjustified behavior of major powers. If western leaders recognize double standard as the congressman and potential presidential candidate Ron Paul said on Feb 2012, that Iran is encouraged to go nuclear because "we threaten them".
It is American struggle to elevate India in the region which creates challenging environment for Pakistan. The important international concern whether Pakistan has secure and safe nuclear devices or not. American accused Pakistan that former head of nuclear program A Q khan sold nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Pakistan safety and security arrangements are equal as other nuclear weapon states. The nuclear threat initiative (NTI) a Washington based non-profit organization ranked Pakistan "most secured" in case of nuclear security and safety.
Pakistan is grabbled with many problems in contemporary world like, energy shortage, and terrorism and economic. It can overcome energy shortfall by establishing nuclear plants for civil purposes. US should purpose like deal with Pakistan to eradicate its energy challenges. Indo-US nuclear agreement is elevating insecurity to Pakistan and Pakistan would have threat of Indian dominance in the region. It has affected strategic stability of the region. Pakistan own defensive nuclear program,Pakistan fears that India would increase its fissile material and may do stockpiles by taking benefit from NSG. Pakistan s opted for "full spectrum deterrence" which can provide security from a new offensive doctrine of India.
In contradiction to the Indo-US increasing nuclear cooperation the Pakistan and china are time tested friends who have shared a long common history and culture. China is helping Pakistan in energy sector, economic and also on Kashmir issue at international forum. When Obama visited India in last December 2014 Pakistan's chief of army staff also visited china to enhance the intensity of ties. Strategic instrument deal with Russia was also the attempt to response indo-US strategic elevation.
As the Indo-US nuclear deal is critical to Pakistan similarly CPEC (China Pak economic corridor) is the matter of critics in India. CPEC is the megaproject of the region that can benefit both Pak China economically and strategically.
As Indo-US evolving cooperation in the region, Pakistan must examine its partnership with US. Global structure of politics is changing, Pakistan has to alter its foreign policy, strategic opt and diplomacy. It is said that we can change friends but not neighbors. Luckily, china is Pakistan's neighbor by improving its ties with china it can achieve national, regional and global interests.
Pakistan foreign policy is Indian centered so it is a time when Pakistan should think for new strategic relations and options for its interests in the region. Pakistan did not learn from the bad adventure, when it was the US ally in war on terror, cold war was ended and no more alignment was needed in the era of non-alignment. Pakistan endured the loss of lives in war on terror, today grabbling with the problems like terrorism, killing of military person and civilians by Taliban and other terrorist groups. It is the result of giving support to US against al Qaida in Afghanistan and against Taliban in its northern areas. Pakistan army is still engaged in the operation against Taliban "Zarb e Azab".
Pakistan needs to get rid of the problems regarding its friends and enemies in international politics. Pakistan has to re-examine its foreign policy and it should be careful about choice of the friends. Because friends can be choice but enemies cannot.

To understand the implications of Indo-US nuclear deal for the region.
Chapter # 1
Nuclearization in south Asia and United states:
South Asia as a region and is very important for the whole world, because any little change in the region affects the world politics. Indo-Us nuclear deal is not only a stage of increasing nuclear cooperation between two states though it also affects the regional politics.
The south Asian security remained attached with the bipolar international political system since cold war. After the end of cold war this security dynamics remained in limbo.Than United States signed the strategic partnership with India and it became the strategic alliance of US further in the U.S. National Security Strategy of 2002, which emphasized on establishing relationship with India. The ambit of strategic vision includessharing the space, missile defense, civil nuclear and other technologies with India.The Indo-U.S. strategic, technology and nuclear cooperation frameworks compounding Pakistan's status against India.
It is important to understand the nuclear deterrence in south Asian politics. According to derrick Frazier the security system of subcontinent is not "hegemonic based" there is no single power, because it is "integrated based". India has three prolonged strategies "strength based", concerted based and integration based, all three approaches are followed by India towards south Asia. India is unable to adopt "hegemonic based" strategy to enforce its stretch over the region. There are few factors which do not allow India to become regional hegemon. First, Pakistan's capacity to nullify its quest for utilization of conventional strategic powers. Second, is other potent power of south asia china that would blunt India's will to enforce its hegemony.
Presently, the south Asian security order is not monopolized by any other state. India is a regional power who is significant and possesses little potential to compel china and Pakistan. However in spite of disadvantageous position Pakistan still possesses sufficient conventional and strategic strength vis-à-vis India. India –Pakistan military crises of 2002- drawing a state US in the region to defuse escalating tension between adversaries.
Since the opaque deterrence year's 1980s Pakistan needed to counter Indian strategic strength as followed in1998 Pakistan tested it's nuclear to regulate India's "unwanted" behavior. Deterrence has been created because it is the strategy to prevent conflict. Indo-US nuclear deal is the success of Vajpayee vision and struggle of former prime minister of India Manmohan singh, as they established relation with US (Bush administration).
Nuclear race is growing at a constant pace while turned much was diversified by three triangular competitors. All three adopted different military strategies. India is focused to respond to sever provocations that can be found backed in Pakistan. Pakistan military doctrine also keeps to limited troops and equipment into blocking point. Chinese army is enhancing capabilities against the involvement of offshore challengers. The governments of India and Pakistan assured that they have been secured their Nuke arsenals they have taken steps to enlarge the security and command and control arrangements of their nuke deterrents.
However, the cold war of stewardship of their nuclear arsenals is not productive. They have not followed a path to eliminate the nuclear risks. Miscalculations about nuclear arsenals lie between both states which can risk the peace and nuclear deterrence. The nuclear security is the problem of the region, Indian misperception of about Pakistan unsecure nuclear devices in Pakistan is misunderstanding. This misperception may help to India to enforce its strategy against Pakistan's will to win the membership of nuclear club.
China is also a regional power and its unprecedented rise is global reality, china become the largest economy in the world by 1990s. US expressed strong apprehensions about the ascension of china. US commission of national security 21st century also warns "potential of competition between US and china may increase as china grows stronger". The rise of china is the greatest uncertainty in the world. The bilateral relationship between US and India tilt Asian balance in the favor of United States, who now enjoys anonymous growth.


India's Nuclear Program and nuclear test

Self-reliance and security is the basic feature of Indian nuclear program. The built security was ultimate mean to become superior in the politics of south Asia. Two personalities are very important and responsible for Indian nuclear program. The first prime minister of India Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, and Doctor Homi Bhabha they gave the vision to create nuclear in India. Like all other states the nuclear program of India started after the world war second, nuclear research started in India in 1944, and the struggle became concrete after when Jawaharlal Nehru presented the atomic bill in national assembly. The atomic bill was laid by him. Before this the initiative taken by Doctor Homi Bhabha who called for opening an research institute for developing nuclear technology India in 1945 (Tata institute of foundation research institute). The idea to start nuclear program came from Nehru in 1950, when he inspired from the idea came from one of his friend from Cambridge, who advised to create the network of atomic laboratories under the TIFR. The need of nuclear weapons later led Nehru to the idea of armament and nuclear energy.

Indian quest for nuclear research and armament in the decade of 1950, it also encouraged from the proposal of United Nations "atoms for peace" program. Also conduction of nuclear tests by many states in the world increase the research in India. When United States nuclear tests in Namur island these were criticized by India and India also willing to join the non-proliferation regime. Firstly, India has shown lots of its interest to the elimination of nuclear tests. India 21 tons of heavy water from United States to run its nuclear reactors in 1956, this transfer of heavy water proved as the watershed for nuclear proliferation in India. In 1960s scenario changed lot of changes occurred in India's security climate, India started to develop the nuclear weapons to counter china. The defeat from china in the war of 1962 led the country to preparedness of military and weapons. The result of war tended India to announce its nuclear weapons to deter the china for which India has waited for long time. This time for declaration of the nuclear weapons proved very feasible to link the nuclear weapons with the security measures. In 1974 India tested its nuclear devices for very first time; it was the same inhumane atom bomb which once India used to call an atomic hallo caste. On 18 May India conducted first underground nuclear test which it called as the peaceful nuclear program. India tried to explain this explosion as the nuclear technological development and research. Some Indian added the view for this explosion that this atom bomb has a potential to create peace in the region. But it was not the case, India exploded for the creation of security regime against china and Pakistan, due to which nuclear arm race stated in the region.
India was also in the view that we have serious threat from Pakistan as the conflict lie there on border issues, but why India preferred to response with Nuclear weapons to deter the non-nuclear state.


1.2Indian nuclear diplomacy:
The Indian nuclear diplomacy is grown through three phases, which we may categorize like, nuclear idealism, nuclear ambiguity and struggle for nuclear legitimacy. The struggle of Indian nuclear diplomacy after 1998 can be traced as nuclear legitimacy as the Vajpayee and last years of Clinton regime, and in 2005 joint statement is a factual explanationof granting nuclear legitimacy to India. Negative side of Indo- US nuclear deal has generated mistrust for India in Russia and china and other regional states. India has rejected the perspective the cooperation is directed against china, Russia or any other state. But china and Russia remain skeptical on this stance.
Non-state Actors and Nuclear Proliferation with Special Reference to the
South Asian Situation
The issue of non-state actors and nuclear proliferation is the typical threat for the region south Asia. Forms of nuclear terrorism through purchase of fissile material to acquire nuclear weapons are the great threat for the region. In addition there is need to note the threat of nuclear in the hands of non-state actors, transition of technology, and nuclear "know how" or nuclear weapons themselves. There is the threat of horizontal proliferation and A Q proliferation case is the extensive example of this.
There are different controversies about proliferation, blaming politics about nuclear on each other. Pakistan's nuclear program is Indian centric it focused on one side security. On other end the Indian fear of Pakistan stockpiling and uranium based Pakistani nuclear set up. These are skeptical calculations lay both sides.
Indo-Pak nuclear opponents:
Within nuclearization of south Asia three choices can be implemented by Pakistan and India:
First, they adopt suitable arrangements and smooth weaponry system to move with the politics of deterrence.
Secondly, they must non-proliferation regime NPT.
Thirdly, to make dialogue on main conflicts, including root conflict Kashmir.
If, third option notbeen implemented than there are lot baggage of differences between India and Pakistan which will create spillover effect on the economies and developments in both states. Because to keep deterrence between both states weapons equation is important this will affect the economies. So the realistic argument is thatstates should not limited for the making weapons, weapons should be unlimited and which would not be peaceful for not only region but for world.
Indo-Pak and NPT
From the acquisition of nuclear weapons started in 1950s by US and USSR,led the nuclear environment through different crises. With the passage of time number of nuclear states increased and India and Pakistan became the nuclear. But with the proliferation the eradication of nuclear weapons remained the great debate among nuclear pessimists, which was produced by different mishaps which can be traced back in 1945 Hiroshima incident and Cuban missile crises. Battle between the nuclear optimists and pessimists continued. Nuclear pessimists stated a campaign against acquisition of nuclear weapons, a treaty Nonproliferation NPT wasproposed, which was opened for signatures in 1968, and it came into force in 1970. The states acquired nuclear weapons before the NPT will be the nuclear states and there status cannot be challenge by any new state. But India and Pakistan both are the late nuclear builder who did not followed the NPT. They withdrew from the treaty for the sake of their military concerns.
Nuclear Crisis or Near Nuclear Crisis?
Relation between India and Pakistan remained conflictual since the emergence of newly independent states. The causes of conflict are well explained in different writings. Since 1947 both sates fought four wars. As nuclear crisis of south Asia are concern there are few crisis escalated nuclear tension between India and Pakistan. Few evidences of nuclear tension had happened.

Brasstacks Crisis, 1986-87

Brasstack crisis appeared when India launched military operation or exercise in Punjab Rajasthan. Pakistani intellectual thought that would attack on Pakistan as a nuclear power, so Pakistan mobilized its troops on Indian side borders.
On January 1987, Pakistan put its nuclear "high alerted. Abdul Qadeer khan gave a statement to the Indian diplomat Guldeep singh, if India will attack, than Pakistan will respond with nuclear weapons ,the statement was heightened in the world first time. The Indian diplomats claimed that Pakistan would use nuclear weapons if attacked. Pakistan denied about the happening of this statement.
The Spring Crisis of 1990:
Again like Brasstack crises, in 1990 crisis took place when India did not moved its troops back from Rajasthan cantonment. Pakistan was alleged by India that Pakistan is involved in Kashmir Huriat fight against India; India also reinforced its troops in Kashmir. This increased the tension between India and Pakistan. From Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto called this thousand year war on Kashmir, and air forces of both sides high alerted. Mean time US played its role in defusing the crisis. Again it is said by New Delhi that Pakistan threatened the India by the nuclear statement and some satellite evidences found in Kahuta and Balouchistan about the nuclear preparation.
The Kargil Crisis of 1999
In the after math of nuclear test the relations between India and Pakistan intended to improve. President Vajpayee visited Pakistan inaugurated a bus service from Amritsar to Lahore. And several new projects were started. Intellectual of both sates mentioned that the tension between India and Pakistan is improving.
Kargil is the highest border range between India and Pakistan, and very important range near Gilgit. A post in about 5454 meter high from the sea. Some Pakistani soldiers about 800 wanted to go on the post which was left by Indian troops. When Indian saw Pak army on the post than a tension started they wanted to withdraw Pakistani troops back from the post. Political and army disagreement and miscalculation about the Kargil war resulted as a martial law in Pakistan.
Indo-US nuclear deal:

US made a nuclear cooperation deal with India in July 2005. The main aim of this US-India nuclear deal is to control the civilian nuclear trade with the countries which has not yet signed the Non-proliferation treaty of nuclear technology and have exploded atomic bombs. So the global arrangement in this context has to be bent and unclear to accommodate India. US president W. Bush manipulated and persuade the Congress of US and then conduct deal through the (IAEA) and nuclear suppliers group which is also known as( NSG) overcoming overt and covert opposition. But the Americans believed that all these efforts would be worthwhile. Pampering India with this deal considered the best way to give a clear message to India's elite ego and to cure its self-inflicted thinking of injury at dissent of discrimination and equal treatment while accessing to nuclear technology followingIndia's first nuclear blasts in 1974. The reality is that Indians wanted to have their nuclear weapons cake wanted eat it too.
Approaching the deal through means dishonestly showing military nuclear deal as a civilian nuclear deal. But this deal decisively pry Indians out of its autonomous nuclear policy and other security frameworks. After this deal India is needed to ensure its fight against nuclear proliferation and efforts for nuclear disarmament. And for getting new nuclear reactors India would have to help US corporations as well.
Indian leaders also aware from this fact that they will have to face serious opposition from the country's left parties.it is also a hard bargain of India with US to keep its fast-breeder reactors and military facilities out of the inspection by IAEA. Both sides know that this arrangement has some loopholes and it would not be symmetrical and perfect. Both the counties have to face opposition and to make compromises. On the other side Pakistan and India which are immediate neighbors of India are also having serious reservation regarding this nuclear deal between US and India and they are largely criticizing this deal because it is causing an unbalance in the region.
This deal is made possible after overcoming many hurdles, the UPA has also provided diplomatic capital and political energy to make this deal operational. The last obstacle has also crossed with passing the bill of civil responsibility for nuclear damage.
The narrative of manipulation, trick, deception and covertness in the Bill's formation and passage is possibly unmatched in the the past of law-making in the India. Never before a government has resorted to so numerous tricks, sleights-of-hand and absolute changing to bend a Parliamentary standing committee's report to its narrow parochial ends—namely, letting the supplier of nuclear plant and apparatus off the liability clip even if the design and manufacturing loopholes are responsible for a accident or mishap. The government also smuggled in word "and" among two sub-clauses of Clause 17 of parliamentary committee-recommended sketch to allow this. Finally, the Bill passed raises the operator's responsibility for an mishap from rupees 500 corers to rupees 1,500 corers ($320 million. But these are peanuts in relation to any likely damage by any serious nuclear accident, running into trillions of US dollars. Section 17(b) provides operator the right of sue to the supplier.
The US is not satisfied with this development and has brazenly mentioned India's law shortcomings with the international rules. It wants the rules and regulations under the Act to be made to permit for "voluntary surrender" of the right at least in respect of US companies. The US resents this fact that it made and proposed this deal and cleared it through doubtful global forums. But the nuclear agreements under the nuclear deal have gone to Russia and France. India has not accepted the US request and also signed the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) to claim conformity with global norms. The Convention is quiet on operator rights of recourse.
Indian negotiator can celebrate their success for ending US sanction on arms. However, India should think what this nuclear deal made changes in nuclear weapon regime, and strategically constructing relations with US, energy is being transformed through technology in the nuclear transformation. It is very difficult for India to ensure its nuclear safety to US. Indian possible nuclear deals with Japan and Russia are sidelined after 123 agreements. Japan will not participate in providing fuel to the India.
India became strategically important to United States as compare to china and Pakistan. If we consider the relation between US and china it is moreover a government to government relations for heavy business. When we consider US relations with Pakistan it is just military and security relations it seems very narrow as with India. But with India US shares the technology of political objectives more oriented to coupe China's economic and strategic expansion. One more factor could be involved in the developing relations between India and US that is both states are secular. But it is not a key factor.
India and United States are developing cooperation in many fields:

Space: India and United States agreed to cooperate in civil space, including such as satellite navigation, civil space and earth science. it can be conclude that satellite launched by United States, and technology given by United States could help India to develop military capabilities, ICBM, SLBM.

Intellectual property Rights: United States is funding international property rights development in India. IPR is essential important for the promotion of technology, creativity and economy.

Science: United States and India established a project of bi-national science and technology.
This Commission would develop partnership which worth $ 30 million, having strategic impact.




To understand the foreign policy of Pakistan after Indo-US nuclear deal.
Chapter # 2:
With the independence Pakistan was aimed to construct bilateral relations with major powers. In the early history of Pakistan we can see the official visit of Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan to United States in 1951. And US aid to Pakistan in case of wheat. We can say the Pakistan wished to establish relations with US. Pakistan wanted to get international support from world to resolve Kashmir issue; effects of cold war are undeniable on India and Pakistan.
An overview of Pakistan relations with US
Pakistan has its own domestic and regional reasons to join the cold war. After the partition both India and Pakistan seem inclined towards United States. With comparison with Pakistan India we can find its foreign policy and defense ties with USSR. India gained most of weapons from USSR. Ironically India and Pakistan does not remain the natural ally of United States. In the report 1949 Pentagon declared India as a center of south Asian politics and economy. India opted for the non-alignment between West and USSR, Because India wanted to get interests from both sides. Pakistan was unsure of its future joint US block and US leaded military alliance.Pakistan joined the SEATO and CENTO US military alliances. The relations between Pakistan and United State went through different altitudes. In 1976 America asked Pakistan to dismiss her Reprocessing plant agreement, otherwise United States would cancel all incentives. We need to keep in mind that some in 1979 Pakistani students burned US embassy in Islamabad. In 1980 United States cancel the F-16 fighter jets deal with Pakistan because of her nuclear ambitions. Pakistan and US relations are based on mutual interests with the passage of time both states. United States having its vital interests in south Asia and Pakistan act as the US supporter in the region.After 9/11 the Pakistan fought for United States in war on terror, Bush forced Pakistan to help NATO in Afghanistan. Later on the partnership went smooth till 2008. By 2008 Mumbai attack brought new turns in relations between both states. But the security threats from India remained the prior concerns in Pakistan relations with other states.
The relations between Pakistan and United States are developed since its independence. American started to pull their economic and strategic extensions to Pakistan. The relations became very different after 2011, after few incidences like OBL killing in Abbottabad and Gyari sector intervention by NATO forces.
Few basic concerns emerged in the relations of two countries:

U.S. concerns
1. Pakistan is alleged for playing double game in cooperation in War on terror.

2. US wanted to dictate Pakistan economic and politically.

3. US is concerned about growing anti-Americanism in Pakistan.

4. Radicalization in the Pakistan and fundamentalist Islam is the fear of US.

Pakistani concerns
1. Another let-down by the U.S. – playing its own double games by working with Pakistan when needed, and putting it under pressure through its military and economic aid.
2. America will exit from Afghanistan, and like its predecessor, will leave behind the proverbial Gordian Knot' that would become impossible for the regional countries to untie.
3. Will always deal with Pakistan for short-term transitory gains rather than working to build a long-term mutually beneficial relationship.
4. Following the raid in Abbottabad, unilateral military actions by the U.S. in future, both in terms of taking out the so-called militant safe havens' and, when necessary, Pakistan's nuclear assets

Are the relations between the two countries really heading for a major revision? With the U.S. concentrated on the exit of most of its military forces from Afghanistan by 2014, will these changes lead to the two countries drifting apart, or coming together to clean up the mess in Afghanistan left by 30 years of constant war? Will Pakistan and the U.S. find it expedient to work together under the shadows of mistrust on both sides, or will the U.S. once again abandon Pakistan in its hurry to withdraw from the trillion dollar war in Afghanistan? This paper will look at some of the challenges and opportunities for both Pakistan and the Rethinking Pakistan–U.S. relations 127
United States, as they try to juggle the relationship shaken to its very foundation by the events before and after May 2, 2011.

The rough road of relations*
The history of Pakistan-US relations has been a rough road over the last 60 years. Since the 1950s, the nature of their relations was based on the politics of the Cold War. For the Americans, this meant building up regional alliances against the communist expansion. Consequently, the relationship with Pakistan moved within the scales of confrontation with former USSR. With the end of the Cold War in 1990, America entered what academics have called the uni-polar moment pursuing a ―War on Terror' after the most devastating attacks on the U.S. homeland since World war Two in September 2001, in which Pakistan once again found itself to be on the frontline as America attacked the Taliban regime in Afghanistan warning Pakistan, one of the three countries that supported the Taliban government, that it ―was with us, or against us. Ironically, the foundations of the relations between Pakistan and America were laid down by Pakistan's defence and security necessities and American interests related to the then newly emerging phenomenon of Cold War with the Communist Bloc and the search for cooperative allies in this war. By 1955, Pakistan had entered into two defence pacts, the SEATO and the CENTO or Baghdad Pact and consequently received $2 billion from the U.S. from 1953 to 1961. President Dwight D. Eisenhower famously called Pakistan America's ―most allied ally in Asia. However, Indo-Pak wars of 1965 and 1971 considerably undermined Pak-U.S. relationship, as the US suspended assistance to Pakistan, resulting in a drift in relations. In fact, South Asia became a low priority area in terms of U.S. foreign policy, and relations between the two countries remained in a state of limbo until the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.
Ironically, the foundations of the relations between Pakistan and America were laid down by Pakistan s defence and security necessities and American interests related to the then newly emerging phenomenon of Cold War with the Communist Bloc and the search for cooperative allies in this war. Strategic Studies 128
The invasion revived Pakistan-U.S. relations and Pakistan was viewed as a frontline ally in the effort to block Soviet expansionism. In 1981, the Reagan Administration pledged for Islamabad a five year, $3.2-billion aid package along with unspecified amounts of military hardware and training, including the coveted F-16 fighter jets. Pakistan became a key transit country for arms and supplies to the Afghan resistance, as well as home to millions of Afghan refugees, who are still on Pakistani soil 30 years after the Soviets left Afghanistan. Despite the renewal of U.S. aid and close security ties, many in Congress remain troubled by Pakistan's nuclear weapon programme. In 1985, Section 620E(e) popularly known as the Pressler Amendment was imposed on Pakistan requiring the president for an annual certification that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear explosive device during the fiscal year for which aid is to be provided. With the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989, Pakistan's nuclear activities again came under intensive U.S. scrutiny and, in 1990, the administration of President G.H.W.Bush again found it expedient to suspend aid to Pakistan. Serious problems arose on the nuclear front with the arrest of a Pakistan-born Canadian citizen named Arshad Pervez in Philadelphia in July 1987. U.S. House and Senate committees' clamoured for cutting off aid to Pakistan, and to pressure the country into rolling back its nuclear programme. Among the notable results of the aid cut-off was the non-delivery of F-16 fighter aircraft purchased by Pakistan in 1989. With the Soviets retreat from Afghanistan, and the Iron Curtain's crumbling, Pakistan-U.S. relations took a downward turn as American foreign policy became concerned with the dramatic events that were fundamentally altering the global balance of power. The Indian nuclear explosions in 1998 followed by Pakistan's tit-for-tat nuclear tests brought ever more stringent U.S. policies towards Pakistan. In responding to the Indian tests, Pakistan, according to President Clinton, ―lost a truly priceless opportunity to strengthen its own security, to improve its political standing in the eyes of the world. The nuclear explosions brought the most extended U.S. engagement in South Asia since the 1960s. These were reinforced by the Kargil war incident between India and Pakistan in May 1999, and heightened tensions between the two South Asian nuclear-armed states. American concern in the region increased once again with the Taliban victories in Afghanistan and reports by the U.S. intelligence community that Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of terrorist bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, was living in Afghanistan under Taliban protection. Rethinking Pakistan–U.S. relations 129
American relations with Pakistan were transformed in a dramatic fashion by the 9/11 attacks on the United States and the ensuing enlistment of Pakistan as a pivotal ally for counter-terrorism operations in the U.S.-led war on terror. The unstinted support of Pakistan in the U.S. war on terror brought American interest and aid back to Pakistan as U.S. jets bombed Taliban targets in Afghanistan.
For Pakistan, the message was loud and clear even as the Bush and later the Obama administrations pursued the Taliban and Osama bin Laden through increased military operations across Pakistan into Afghanistan to route out the Taliban government. Ten years after the war on terror began, the focus of U.S. military operations has now shifted to militant safe havens'inside Pakistan. The northwest territories of Pakistan, the frontline'of the so-called non-NATO ally, are now actually turning into the main frontline of Obama's war in Afghanistan. As he moves the central front of America's war out of Afghanistan, and into Pakistan, two concerns remain of paramount importance:
1. Bringing down the level of insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
2. Destroying the militant safe havens'in Pakistani areas bordering Afghanistan's eastern provinces.

In 2011, the Obama administration and Congress are showing their disapproval with Pakistani authorities on the subject of peace talks with militants operating within the country. These militants, according to the Americans, must be eliminated even if it means violation of Pakistan's sovereignty. The Americans have made it amply clear that if Pakistan remains reluctant to take action against the militants in its territory, the Americans would have no hesitation in doing that. This has been evident in the increased U.S. drone attacks inside Pakistan's tribal regions. Such tactics by the U.S. have called forth statements by Pakistani political leadership calling for defining clear terms of engagements to avoid operational irritants that are today hampering relations with the U.S.
9/11 and Pakistan Foreign policy
After three years of Pakistani nuclear test 9/11. Pakistan has compelled by Bush government to play role in war against terrorism. Pakistan started to support against Al-Qaida and Taliban, Pakistan itself taken measures and waged war in northern frontier against Taliban. In the meantime Pakistan faced certain hurdles, which are severely recognized by Pakistan foreign minister Sartaj Aziz. Indian involvement in Balouchistan and supporting Taliban and Pakistan tried to highlight this fact internationally. But on the other hand Pakistan is always been asked for doing more by United States against terrorism. Pakistan is facing the deficit in trust by Afghanistan's new government, which we can say the India which means anti Pakistan.
NUCLEAR PAKISTAN AND THE US FACTOR.
The peaceful nuclear explosion of 1974 created regional imbalance and produce the alarming situation for Pakistan to make the bomb. In cold war when U-S was in war situation against USSR and Pakistan was serving its frontline ally, U-S did not pay attention in Pakistan's nuclear program. United states for its political and economic interests continued to aid Pakistan to fight as the frontline ally. Though after the culmination of the cold war in 1992, U-S changed its behavior to aid Pakistan, now aid become conditional to development of nuclear. Pakistan never compromised on its nuclear ambition.
PAKISTAN'S REACTION TO INDIA-US NUCLEAR DEAL.
The deal has grown worldwide criticism by various groups, anti-nuclear organizations, non-proliferation activities and others. Pakistan claimed that Indian nuclear capacity is bigger than Pakistan the U-S could promote the Indian nuclear capacity and through this deal Indian can go for stock piling and can make more nuclear weapons. According to world nuclear association, currently there are 21 nuclear power reactors in India are operating and 6 are under construction, and approximately there are 35 nuclear reactors in India. On the other hand 3 power plants are working in position and 4 are under construction in Pakistan. This difference creates the nuclear imbalance in the region and this deal prevails nuclear imbalance.
INDIA-PAKISTAN FISSILE MATERIAL
It is estimated India by more HEU and PU-239 stocks than Pakistan. Pakistan stands at minimum credible difference and nuclear weapons, and it is meant to counter India if it shows aggression.
India-US nuclear deal is highly encouraging Pakistan to increase the nuclear capacities, regarding India in future. It is stated in a journal of Pakistan, "ifIndia, being a non-signatory to NPT, can be given access to resources through the India-US nuclear deal without considering its safety and security record then. Why are others ignored?"
Pakistan concealed all militants and arm groups in its territory to make the efforts of war on terror more effective. Pakistan banned Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Lashkar-e-Jangwi, and other jihadi groups to counter the propagation of terrorism. And also banned the groups, those were involved in Kashmir. In the same discussion, Pakistan asks, what about India? India is a threat to Pakistan's sovereignty and you are making it stronger: India is willing to take away Kashmir issue without meeting our basic requirements. The U-S should need to compel India to meet the demand, such as Kashmir
INDIA-US and US-PAKISTAN
India-US relationship developed in "strategic" term, as they show the security and defensecompulsion. When strategic relations develop between two states, both actors develop and use defense power to serve political goals. Today India is considered as the big power of Asia and signifies as the natural ally of United States. It remained as the doctrine from first prime minister to minimize military relations with United states as India is fearful of military coup of the state's governments. India political personalities always tried to overcome the military influence over the states matter and its international affairs.
Nehru's policy of non-alignment and stance of U-S over Kashmir developed bilateral relations between Pakistan and U-S, and scholars termed it as the "missed partnership " of India.
US-India deal also but serves the interests of United States because India's depending of the oil of iran was leading it to sign the India- Pakistan- Iran gas pipeline. US wanted India to restrict the construction of gas pipeline by providing energy resources, United states want to eliminate the dependency of India on Iran. But on the mean time United States lifted the restrictions on Iran, that may be helpful to the project. United States believes that US-India nuclear deal will end the dependency of India on Persian gulf.
On other side, Pakistan in the war position, terrorism effected Pakistan-US relations became more suspicious after the killing of OBL in Abbottabad and the U-S attack on sallala check post. Both the incidents directly challenging to the Pakistan's security and defense, U-S intervention and violations to Pakistani borders is undefined and skeptical, whether, Pakistan's sovereignty is not worthy for United states. In the decade the United States undermined the strategic relations with Pakistan andupholds in relations with India is seemed to be happen.
U-S withdrawal is also challenging for Pakistan's foreign policy, in what ways a country should behave. U-S leaving Afghanistan without any peace talks, it will create security issues in Pakistan. it will create problems for creating the image as a credible country.
Stabilizing Afghanistan is in the Pakistan's interests. The role played by Pakistan in Afghanistan, is advantageous or disadvantageous? As a neighboring state and U-S frontline ally a country must have to justify its position. The foreign policy of the state must have to serve the United States, rehabilitation of Afghan refugees, escalation of war with Pakistani Taliban and Afghan Taliban, and the Haqqani group.
In contemporary times WOT lead Pakistan to two military operations in own territory and Haqqani groups and Afghan Taliban are perceived to be helpful for militants against Pakistan. Pakistan brought the US lead war to the homeland, and genesis of all problems at all levels come to the security threats. The reconciliation and normalcy of the relations must be in the front priorities of Pakistan. Pakistan must have to see what US ,India, Afghanistan demand from it and what it must demand to them.
PAKISTAN'S RID OF DECTATORSHIP AND CONSTRUCTING DEMOCRACY
In 2008, the democracy replaced the military government in Pakistan, the military had coped the government for ten years, it can be considered as the one man show, and Musharraf signed different agreements to help the NATO forces, strategically and shared information on war on terror. Change in political setup in Pakistan may cause to re-construct its foreign policy with democratic lens. The problems erupted in the result of one man show.
In Musharraf regime the population of frontier suppressed due to operation "Rah-e-Rast" and killing of many terrorists which were so close to the local population created the feeling against the government and in the favor of Afghan militants and India also played role in encouragement of the militant minds, in frontier provinces, move consistently in Balochistan.
This caused the terrorists attacks on states institutions, 2012 mehran base attack, and 16 December 2014 attack on APS in Peshawar. Democratic government attempted to normalize the situation in these areas.
Pakistan changed its foreign policy a low profile, formulated through democratic institutions rather than individual approach, focused on political, domestic, social and economic consolidations. This is only a way to get success to foreign policy which is failing on regional matters
PAKISTAN FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM IN OWN TERROTRY
The ongoing security crisis and insurgency in Afghanistan and eruption of TTP are the problems of serious concerns for US and Pakistan; these issues have the ability to disturb the relations.US often claims Pakistan for helping the Al-Qaeda militants and ask Pakistan to do more to contain their movements. Pakistan has deployed 183000 army men on its western borders and also carried operation against militants.
America has many times asked to expand its war on terror to the disturbed areas in Pakistan. thus Pakistan also obeyed the US demand to expand militants supersession in Waziristan and US allowed to make drone attacks on militants which late proved to be disastrous for the local population and created a vacuum between government and general will. Later Pakistan accused US for violation of Pakistan borders and killing of local population.
If we take US-Pakistan relation in context of Indo-US nuclear deal, this deal could inspire Pakistan to find new trusted alliances in future. This deal will start a new arms race which can be harmful for the region.
China Pakistan relations and Indo-US nuclear deal:
As it is said that "Pakistan China friendship is deeper than oceans and higher than Himalayas".
Pakistan China have long standing ties, based on economics, strategic and political. Pakistan China relations have best served to contain the increasing India's influence in the region. Friendship with China enables Pakistan to safeguard its security and states integrity. It is known fact that Pakistan only a non-communist country to which china acknowledges as a trustworthy friend. Without any condition this friendship is also known as the all-weather friendship.
The core objective of Pakistan foreign policy is to sophisticate Indian hegemony on the region. In the changing scenario both Pakistan and china need the effective nuclear and missile cooperation to conceal the emerging global and regional challenges, especially and particularly with the conclusion indo-US nuclear deal.
The sea port in the Gwadar, with ideal strategic position has been constructed with Chinese assistance and investment. China always played its role to support development of Pakistan army. China also supported Pakistan to build the karma air base, defense institutions and shipyards. China and Pakistan expressed Indian nuclear test of 1974 as the most disastrous for the region.
In the time after the Indo-US nuclear deal, China has supported the Pakistan naval and missile technology. Beijing has also mediated the transfer of North Korean taspodog and Nodong ballistic missiles to Pakistan. As the Rao Qamar Suleiman, Air chief Marshal told that Pakistan would have four Chinese surface to air missiles, for improvementof the armed forces. Moreover, the struggle of both countries to establish the joint manufactured of medium Tech JF-17 is the contemporary development in Sino-Pak strategic cooperation. The missile technology will not only eliminates the Pakistan's disability but also enables Pakistan to create balance of power with India.
Pakistan China relations also grown under the shanghai cooperation organization, when first time china offered joint military actions against terrorism with Pakistan in 2005. Chinese foreign policy towards Pakistan is based on its interest to counter Indian hegemony and influence over the region.
In nuclear china is continuously supporting Pakistan. China has supported Pakistan in construction of chashma 3 and chashma 4 to ends up its energy crises. These reactors are working with the cooperation of China National Nuclear cooperation (CNNC) and Pakistan atomic energy commission (PAEC). Both plants are working under the effective measures suggested by IAEA.
In 2003, China has also announced the loan for Pakistan civil nuclear developments. The loan firstly, gives $104 million with the annual interest of 1 percent, secondly it will provide $ 1 billion with 2 percent annual interest and thirdly china will provide $ 474 million for annual interest of 6 percent. All the exports under the deal will follow NSG instructions.
India always tried to sabotage the Sino-Pak relations. Chinese support to Pakistan on Kashmir issue is critical to Pakistan. India is critically watching the Gwadar sea port, becauseChinese naval interaction with neighboring states like Pakistan could endanger the Indian sea routes to the Persian Gulf and its hegemony in IndianOcean.
Though the changes occurred in the global politics and US foreign policy towards Pakistan may change, but the Sino-Pak relations are on the same degree.
Pakistan Russia relations after Indo Us nuclear deal:
Russia is again a forefront nation under the rule of Vladimir Putin. The relations between Pakistan and Russia could never be developed. Pakistan has enjoyed a friendship with united states as an aligned state in cold war and war on terror. India was backed by USSR in the wars of 1965 and 1971, and also in Tashkent talks. But the situation of Pakistan was very different when US did not supported Pakistan in any of the war with India. It was perceived at the beginning of the relations with US that US will help Pakistan in warfare with India. This is something never happened. This angered the Ayub Khan and motivated him to write the book "friends, not masters".
Pakistan experienced several dealing with Russia and found, Russia kept its words. Fast-forward to now; Russia erupted as the prosperous nation under the Putin. Pakistan is also a nuclear nation and very prominent famous in world politics. In bilateral paradigm, development in the both states over the current decades shows that Russia needs Pakistan and vice versa.In its quest to find the more durable partner Pakistan had the will to discover Russia.
Pakistan and India are natural enemies thus to maintain balance of power two countries cannot rely on the same strategic partner. This is why Pakistan has to build relation with Russia, from this view it is better for Pakistan to join the bloc with china and Russia. Pakistan and china are already alliances and strategic partners it readily leads Pakistan to the friendship with Russia. Both countries have to revive bilateral relations. Popular opinion in Pakistan is now supporting Pakistan and Russia friendship.
In contemporary times, situation is changing, the enmity of cold war turning into warm ties. Russia lifted its self-imposed arms embargo on Pakistan, in nov 2014 Russia concluded a landmark " military cooperation agreement" with Pakistan, includes the transferring of Mi-35 helicopters, direct importing of Klimov RD – 93 engines from Russia. Russia has also planning to build 68o miles gas pipeline in Pakistan that is estimated 2.5 billion dollars.
The Pakistan's quest for the friendship with Russia, the Chinesesupport leads : cause the emergence of three state power axis or triangle in the region. Pakistan will have access to Russian technology, and Russia will find the new market for weapons. With the growing economies of china and Russia, Pakistan can get a chance to improve its economy.
Pakistan national action plan:
The national action plan is the initiative of current government to crackdown against terrorism in all levels, domestic and foreign levels and initiatives. The plan is under the framework of 21st amendment of national constitution. The plan emphasizes on speedy trial through military courts for terrorist personals.
National action plan is the rapid reaction to the Peshawar attack in 2014. This plan has highly effected Pakistan interior and exterior policies and aimed to solid ate the sovereignty of the state.
Chapter 3: India-US nuclear deals pros and cons for India
India-US nuclear Deal:
Under the deal which was initiated in Washington 19 July 2005, through which India would buy 125 fighters jets from United States. The agreement was not only about the nuclear energy but it also foundation of strategic cooperation between two big democracies. Bush aimed to end the India's Uranium shortage and wanted to increase the capacity of Indian nuclear plants. The deal is feasible for strengthening the strategic partnership between them. By-Products shall not be subject for verification by any other authority. Thus By-products materials mean radioactive material. This deal also allows India to "conversion". India and US are agreed to "Dual use Item" the items that can be used both for nuclear and non- nuclear technology development. Besides this "high enriched uranium" is also involved in bilateral agreement which would have isotopes of 235. Sharing of information that are not the public domain would be done. Parties are subjected to cooperate in "major critical components" like sensitive nuclear facilities and heavy water.
The deal components are apparently based on "peaceful purposes". The article 1 (part M) includes that the information, equipment, nuclear material is to be shared for research in medicine, agriculture and industry.
US assured to supply fuel to India and seek to negotiate with IAEA along with India. United States also assured to help Indian efforts to develop nuclear fuel reserves for safeguard in future disruption of supply.
Article 7 is focused on storage and retransfer of nuclear material to third party.
Indian weapons regime and zero accountability:
Many officials of pentagon assumed the through deal they are lifting sanctions from India, that would lead India to import conventional weapons cost billions of dollars. This assumption later became true; US exported weapons to India of worth $ 5 billion from 2011- 2014, and became first massive exporter to India. India overhauled its army and military capability through "pushing back china" policy of US.
India's new policy of 2003 confessed on, that response to the Pakistan's nuclear posture, the first strike would be massive and unimaginable damage causing.
Besides this, it is in the focus that India is constructing "thermonuclear bomb" in response to china's threat. The deal Washington concluded with India is very controversial, on one hand it is promised for civil developments and on the other hand India carried out its secret ambitions of making bomb and expanded its nuclear weapons work. India also promised it would refrain from conducting further nuclear test. In April 2006, then secretary of the state Condoleezza Rice stated to the senate for foreign Relations Committee that deal would not be helping to the arms race in the region or to enhance Indian military capability.
Opponents of this deal never compelled India to allow inspection of its nine reactors sites that are working for countries military, those are using mostly plutonium for nuclear arms. But deal also emphasized to open its 10 reactors for inspection, but these sites has never been known to the international nuclear community and IAEA. The Indian government never allowed for inspection of these reactor plants through strict security.
By May 2009 after few months of ratification by congress, Karnataka government leased 4'290 acres in Chitadurga district to DRDO and 1500 acres to Indian institute of science, from where India's nuclear industry documents found. After this Indian nuclear ambitions can be traced. Sirikumar Banerjee then chairman India's atomic energy commission offered signal of India's nuclear ambition as he gave interview t Indian CNN in 2011, stated that enrichment plants would be used to produce nuclear fuel, Enriched uranium to power India's heavy water reactors. Banerjee also added that the plants would also helpful in strategic weapons and the personals will keep International inspectors away. This is the way through which India is increasing its nuclear weapons and highly involved in Vertical proliferation under the umbrella of Indo-US civil nuclear deal.
The nuclear city project "Challakere" is also skeptical to the international commentators, for this project the High court of Karnataka demanding a full accountability, when the issue raised by Environment support group legal team in 2012. The land is seized for the civilian population by the authority. While IAEA kept away from the information of this land. Villagers are also being hemmed in.
Serena Kelleher-Vergantini, an analyst of at institute of science and international security also examined the India's nuclear ambitions through different projects. By examining the image of Kaval and Mysore plant. He studied that the 20 square miles area and foot print are enough for scientists to expand production of industrial quantity of Uranium. The second site, shows the astonishing facts that two new buildings are enough to keep new generation Carbon fiber centrifuges machines through which they can enrich Uranium. And that Uranium can be used in making Hydrogen bomb with the explosive force of 100,000 tons of TNT.
More presently, India has constructed Vessel INS Arihant that is fueled with 80 megawatt Uranium reactor and it is developed by BARC and will be enter into military use in this year and it was tested in 2014 under sea.
Other second INS Aridlaman is under construction which would carry 12 nuclear-tipped missiles. The INS will be helpful to India for creating deterrence against Chinese submarines that sailed across the bays around India and Bengal.
The rest of the Uranium will be used for civil purpose (medicines and power reactors). India is highly involved in stocking Uranium. The submarine like Arihant requires 143 pounds of Uranium, which is the capacity of Centrifuges that India is only using in Mysore plant. Kelleher concluded that 352 pounds of Uranium India can store annually, as much amount of Uranium is enough to make 22 H bombs.
India was firstly only depended on the minimum deterrence capability but new India doctrine of 2003, and US "Pushing back China" and Indo-US nuclear deal are pushing factors for India's becoming massive nuclear weaponry state in the region.Nuclear war can be burst out in the region.
In global share of imports of arms, India lies at 12 % and Pakistan lies in 5 % during 2008-2012. In 2010 India has also purchased 57 Hawk jets trainers for 1 billion from UK. In the same year India purchased 12 AW101 helicopters. In 2011, India upgraded its Mirage-2000 combat fighter and secured the help of France. United States also willing to sell 10 c-17 globe master III air crafts to India.
The number of weapons imports is increasing in India. It is focused on the purchasing of conventional weapons for creating maximum hegemon on the regional states. Respectively US crossed Russia in exporting the weapons between 2011-2014 US lie at 32.9 % and Russia lie 24.9 % of world's weapons exports.
The growing and aggressive posture has threatened the regional stability after the establishment of Modi's government in India. India became aggressive after conclusion of Indo-US nuclear- Israeli Ballistic Missile defense cooperation and after Indo-US nuclear dealings. It is viewed that India is much aggressive after Kargil adventure and willing to wage limited war against Pakistan and finding strategic space for it. Indo- US nuclear deal gave confidence to the Indian Nuclear ambitions and pushed Pakistan to make full spectrum deterrence against any aggressiveness of the enmity.
Pakistan in the deterrence to Indian nuclear program:
Pakistan-India strategic competition dated back since 1947; the graveness's are pushing Pakistan to maintain status quo against India. The four wars have been fought between India and Pakistan on Kashmir issue. Pakistan kept its foreign policy and security policy as a defensive setup against India. Every time India tried to dominate the Pakistan and to make success of "Mahabharata" ideology.
Pakistan expands nuclear arsenals in context with security threats from Pakistan. Pakistani weapons lie from 90-110 that are been created for minimum deterrence. Increasing Indian nuclear weapons can break the balance of power and can compel Pakistan to use the nuclear weapons against India. As ex- President of Pakistan, Parveiz Musharraf quoted "we have not made the nuclear bomb for Shab-e- Barat occasion; we will use atom bomb at the time when we need.
China in nuclear paradigm of arms race:
In contrast to United States china kept in small nuclear force, that was only based on the land based missiles with separate war heads. With the end of cold war china assumed US as the strategic competitor in the world as China made progress. China made a new form of land based solid fueled ballistic missiles, submarines that take ballistic missiles (includes intercontinental range ballistic missiles) for going into the war fields. China also built the weapons capable to reaching continent United States.
China will continue its "no first use" policy. But china can use its nuclear bomb against any attack or threat. China has continued and also put forward about disarmament. China has following stances on nuclear arms:
All states with nuclear weapons should reduce weapons in numbers.
All nuclear states should accept the idea of not first use and legally obey this rule.
Nuclear weapons states should promise not to use or threaten any non-nuclear state with nuclear weapons.
States with nuclear weapons must not develop nuclear weapons in other states for the sake to implement the idea of nuclear weapons free zone; nuclear state must keep arsenals in home. No nuclear test must be conducted in outers pace.
China has repeatedly called for the destruction and ban of nuclear weapons like nuclear weapons conventions. China also opposes the nuclear deterrence policy. It thinks to stop proliferation of nuclear weapons is the first step to elimination of such weapons. China in 1996 declared not to conduct any further nuclear test and signed the Comprehension test ban treaty (CTBT) and actively participated. This treaty was first international legally binding agreement for prohibition of any nuclear test. China followed the regulation of CTBT. On other side, china opposes any state if any abuses or interfere in china's security.

US efforts of pushing back china and helping India led China to increase weapons by numbers and technology. Today it is believed that china has 250 nuclear warheads. China has 16 metric tons of uranium and 18 metric tons of plutonium , so there is no doubt china can make strategic weapons if chooses.
India continues…… Arms progress:
The safeguard agreement implies restriction to US cooperation with India. It would impact the Indian military progress. In previous three decades India has protected its military program, and Indian will continue to do so. India has voted previously Iran in IAEA, for which India stated that it has coreenergy interests in Iran. Giving vote in the favor of Iran at its aggressiveness can show the India wish to see the nuclear state in neighborhood. Nonproliferation regime is not successful to make sure India will not go for further nuclear expansion. It is also taken as the wrong perception that this deal is the pragmatic way to stop Indian proliferation and bringing it back to Nonproliferation community. Some of the commentators of nuclear regime also perceive that exported nuclear fuel may be used for energy reactors but the enriched uranium India already has would go for use in further making further nuclear weapons. A congressional research service report, it suggests that it is difficult for states to keep India away from proliferation.
It was not necessary to improve Indian energy sector through conclusion of nuclear deal, because India has coal industry for energy production, it also uses the non and renewable resources for energy production. The grants that are been given to India through this agreement are dangerous and only mean to transfer of technology for US to India.
Effects of US-India deal have on the NPT:
Article 1 of the NPT possesses that the nations with nuclear weapons technology will not help other states in acquiring nuclear those do not have. David Albright, president od institute for science and international security, says that the Indo-US nuclear agreement could create a risk for the security of US as it allowing India's nuclear plants to proliferate the banned nuclear research in the globe. This new turn in relations between US and India could encourage other nuclear states like china and Russia to sell their nuclear technology to non-nuclear states, thus nuclear terrorism may generate that would threaten US security. NPT was already failing and the countries like Iraq, North Korea, Iran and Libya has deceived the NPT, as being its signatories.
PAKISTAN INITIATIVE IN RESPONSE TO OVERHAULING OF INDIAN HEGEMON IN THE REGION:
Pakistan is a firmed believer that there is a need of taking arms control measure in the region to by initiating confidence building measures. This needs Pakistan and India are the immediate neighbors they share about 1600 kilo meter long boundary with each other. They have also fought four wars in a short history of half a century, mostly the relation between the two states are remained hostile. There are many core issues that are still needed to be addressed. These are big causes of deadlock between two states, including Kashmir conflict, water issues, LOC issues, and more importantly nuclear deal is fueling the fire of current strategic competition in the region. So Pakistan has concerns regarding India-US current relations.
US supports for India as permanent member of Security Council and Pakistan's response:
After the decade of defense agreement India seeks the permanent membership of SC of UN to create influence in the world politics generally and in the south Asian region specifically.
But on the other side of the picture the china and Pakistan which is immediate neighbor of India are having serious reservations on India big chair in Security Council. Because these two countries feel that if India will get the membership then it will be easy for India to pursue its ambitions which will not in the favor of these two countries. As Pakistan and china also have border issues with India and nuclear ambitions and weapons ambition of India may cause the rift in the developing dialogues between Pakistan and China with India.
Indo-US nuclear deal Vs. CPEC
Civil nuclear deal among the US and the India had discriminated the Pakistan despite country's demand from US and EU to deal Pakistan equally, this why Pakistan consider china as all-time friend. Moreover, CPEC initiations and the current lifted sanctions on Iran are such developments which are opening various opportunities for Pakistan, Afghanistan, China and various other countries of this region including Russia as well. Pakistan has welcomed the Iran deal with US because it will be in the greater interest of the region. India which didn't pay attention on the relations with Iran and Russia during the sanctions period on Iran, now after this deal when it is expected that it will be easy for Iran to get access to the world markets by seeing this India is now tilting towards Iran.India which remained a major security and energy partner of Iran in pre-sanction period but during the sanction period India had cut-off trade with Iran under US pressure, so at that time Iran established good relations with china and Pakistan. Iran- Pakistan gas pipeline initiative is also a development in this regard. After lifting sanction from Iran it will be difficult for India to re-conceal relations with Iran. The CPEC initiative providing a great opportunity to china and Pakistan to increase cooperation with Iran to strengthen their relation. The china's "one belt one road" initiative will connect Iran with various regions and through this initiative many energy projects pipelines and highways will also be built in Iran. The Gwadar port development and the CPEC project in Pakistan are damaging the interests of India. With the completion of CPEC in Pakistan it will be easy for Pakistan and china to do trade with Iran and to invest in Iran. This cooperation is putting a serious threat to Indian influence in this region, because this can lead India to the isolation. So that's why India is been looking over these projects carefully and also working upon to create opportunities to make strong relations with Iran. In this context the US concluded deal with India also contradictory to its attempt to lifting sanctions from Iran JCPOA, because it creates hindrance for India to ultimate change of policies to Iran. Because for investing in IranIndia would face strong critic from Russia, Israel and China.
CPEC brought Chinese 46 billion dollars in Pakistan as investment and china is making infrastructure in Pakistan so it means any attack on Pakistan would similar as attacking china. It will increase stability and will ensure the security of pakistan in future. Both the countries are having strong military power and moreover both are nuclear powers. As earlier mentioned that India do not has friendly relations with Pakistan and china, so this big development between these two countries is creating economic and security threat for India. For this purpose china will develop Pakistan military, air force and submarines. So CPEC is the ultimate a counter development of Indo-US nuclear deal.
CHAPTER 4.
Future options for Pakistan:
Pakistan needs to strengthen relations with China and Russia:
India shows enmity against any type of development in Pakistan because India never wished to see the stable Pakistan due to their grievances with Pakistan. now India has developed the ties with USA and Russia will not sit to see the response from any alternate of India for it, Russia is developing the relations with Pakistan to balance its approach in the region, now we can better see the two countries those remained enemies in 1980S (USSR-Pakistan) now they are developing as a friends, Russia is selling its equipment to Pakistan and want to buy agricultural products from Pakistan.China is the strategic partner of Pakistan and China is also sharing same strategic partner with Russia thus in strategic view point Pakistan is standing with China and Russia, Sri-lanka is also a arms consumer of Pakistan, this leaves India isolated in south Asia. Iran is also expecting great initiatives from Pakistan China economic corridor and interested to join Pak-China economic corridor it will help Pakistan to boost its economy.Population of Pakistan is small it has the opportunity to grow faster than India.India ever narrated Pakistan as a terrorist country so Pakistan has a support and Appreciation for steps taken against terrorism from china. Pakistan should increase bilateral relations with China and Russia for economic incentives, and strategic strength in the region.
Democratization:
Democracy has an uncertain dilemma in Pakistan, the country suffered with lot of military overtakes and dictatorships in its short history. In Pakistan democracy has been never rooted and strengthens in true means. The democracy demands the freedom of speech, self-respect and equality of all human beings. Media, judiciary and national constitutions should be free and should be the mirror image of the population of the state. Unfortunately, Pakistan has suffered by military regimes that has expressed the "one man show" has ruined the public wishes and opinions in different times. Democratic peace theory has been never propelled in between the relations between India and Pakistan, so that this caused tensions. For balancing the relations and power in the region it is very important to strengthen the democracy in the state and in its institutions. In Pakistan, the decade until 2008 remained a great influence of military in public institutions that has suppressed the general will and freedom of the common person. After the elections of 2008, Pakistan people's party won the election and the decade of "one man show" replaced by democratic government. The establishment of democracy brought many changes in the state, like taking of Chief justice in the court back to his seat, the freedom of media and many other developments. During the Musharraf's regime the country tried to establish trade ties with India to minimize the grievances of the Kargil war and other disputes. These ties Included Sri-Nagar Bus service and Trade, Lahore- Amritsar trade, and opening of crossing points between Indian held Kashmir and AJK. These initiatives later interrupted and closed due to Mumbai attacks and some were closed due to Indian aggression on LOC. Comparative study of democracy or Military regime in the Pakistan suggests that Pakistan should adopt the pure democracy to compete with India. The current government in Pakistan is also a democratic that was replaced in 2012 with PPP, the current shift from democratic government to democratic government promises for the boosted economy and better relations with neighbors.
Democratic Pakistan could establish relation with EU and western states for cooperation and could get a influence in international political and economic institutions like WTO and UN. And this will help Pakistan to counter India from spreading propaganda against Pakistan in the west.EU is very strictly following the Copenhagen criteria and do not allow any state to establish ties with EU in case of non-democratic nature. EU and UK wanted to work with Pakistan to counter terrorism and for human development. This is only possible if Pakistan promises to strengthen democratic norms in the Government and public institutions.
INDO-PAK should manage the issues with dialogue
There is the need for confidence building between India and Pakistan. CBMS's should be bilateral and aimed to overcome the tension between the hostilities. CBMS's are leading the countries to the friendship and harmony and creating the opportunities to forget the tensions for development. In case of India and Pakistan these CBMS's are mostly known as Pak-India dialogue. In the history of 60 years, both countries made dialogue on different areas. Including the military hotlines, like after the war of 1971 both countries realized to build a communication link between the director generals of India and Pakistan in war and peace time for consensus. Later hotline between both states established in 1990. Military hot line is not proved so fruitful in Kargil war. Similarly we can see the hotline between Prime Ministers developed between both states, firstly by Prime minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto in 1987 with her counterpart Rajiv Gandhi, and later Nawaz Sharif also established a Hotline with India which had worked in many crises situation between the states. In Kargil war the prime minister hotline remained much successful. Some agreements on not to use force are also discussable in the relation between these two states. After the war of 1965 the Tashkent declaration also promised to refrain oneself in the internal affairs of one state. Later, simla accord also emphasized the importance of dialogue between India and Pakistan and negated the use of force between them. But the implementation of simla accord never came to its use. It is to believe that the agencies of both states are involved in internal terrorism on both sides. Both countries never showed objectivity on the serious concerns like Kashmir. The same dialogue between two states is also made for the non-violation of air space between both countries. This dialogue holds the promise of not to violate the air space of one's state up to 10 km. in 1991 this dialogue was negotiated and in 1992 it came to an implement. The dialogue has also made on no attack to both states nuclear facilities in 1988. By this agreement both countries are bound to exchange the list of location of nuclear agreement to each other. The very first when the list was exchanged between the both states in 1992 it is to say that both states left off their location of the facilities under the security threats. Both India and Pakistan made several agreements to manage the relations between them but several times the hostilities occurred between them so they reversed their agreements like agreement on use and production of chemical weapons was violated by India by joining (CWC) chemical weapons convention.
International community always tended both states to solve their issues through dialogue process. In the contemporary world the both states need to develop their relations as they are two major powers of the region. The Kashmir is the bone of tension between these states. Nor India is agreed to talk on Kashmir and nor Pakistan want to negotiate on Kashmir. Without resolving the Kashmir issue the dialogue process cannot be prevailed as it is many times argued by Pakistani leaders and international political commentators. Both states need to open the trade door to each other for mutual assured development of economy in the region. The relation destroyed during the Mumbai attacks when non-state actors are alleged to involve in Mumbai attacks by Indian government. Pakistan in this stance also showed a positive response to trial the issue. India must have to admit the Pakistani seriousness in making the dialogue with India. But India continued to underestimate the Pakistan since independence and the blame game is been played by both sides. The both states became the nuclear flashpoint for the world as both are carrying nuclear weapons. The normalization of the relations between India and Pakistan is the world's most desired priority.
In the current scenario the visit of India foreign minister Ms. Sawraj is welcomed by Pakistani counterpart. Before this the India wanted to talk with Pakistan on all issues except Kashmir dispute but Pakistani dialogues with India is much focused to address the Kashmir issue. It is the need of time Pakistan should create more CBM's to address the Kashmir issue. On Kashmir issue Pakistan can only make dialogue through the help of international community and support for its stance. The effectiveness of the dialogue is aligned with the diplomacy channels. Diplomacy channels by Pakistan should follow step by step approach to resolve all issues related to trade, water, border disputes and Kashmir issue.
In the context of above reading and Indian aggression and ignorance Pakistan can overcome its disputes with India through dialogues and strengthen its relations with the world through worldwide diplomacy.
Pak should propose same nuclear deal with US
Potential nuclear deal between Pakistan and India is the current debate of experts of nuclearization in south Asia. To know the nature and pros and cons of the nuclear deal is very important for Pakistan. Recent visit of Prime Minister to the United States was very important in this reference. US have shown its willingness to make a nuclear deal with Pakistan but potential US deal with Pakistan is not similar as it made India.
In Pakistan the nuclear community works on nuclear issue and the it assures the safeguards of Nuclear project under IAEA, in Pakistan the deal is seems to be very incentive, like wise India negotiated but in US media and policy want to draw restrictions to Pakistan nuclear projects, which is not acceptable for Pakistan. "American want to reshape the deterrence as they think Pakistan will obey the US restricted nuclear project, but Pakistan constructed the deterrence with India after the struggle of many decades" said Maria Sultan; Pakistani defense analyst.
If deal holds no such nuclear sanctions and power unbalancing conditions than Pakistan would be able to access the International market for fuel, technology and nuclear material. That would be helping factor Pakistan to erect its nuclear power balance vis-à-vis India. The architects of Pakistan nuclear policy should refuse the US restrictions on short and long range missiles program because Pakistan cannot undermine the Indian nuclear threat in near future.
US would have some fears regarding Pakistan nuclear potentials, including Shaheen iii and many long ranges and short ranges missiles. US would have perceived threat Pakistan that Pakistan would portray threat to the security of Middle East and many other states through its missiles technology. But there is nothing in Pakistan nuclear policy to threat the state through its missile technology, India is a case in this paradigm to which Pakistan has to create deterrence through its conventional and non-conventional weapons.
Pakistan should propose the deal with US if it forgets about its terms to limit the Pakistan short range missiles. If US accepts Pakistan proposal for nuclear deal than NSG would consider the Pakistan as a member in global nuclear order and recognize the normalization of Pakistan nuclear regime. There are three reasons for Pakistan: socioeconomic, technology and political. The reasons for Pakistan to make nuclear cannot ignore the quest of Pakistan for energy, to meet the gap of 4000-6000 megawatt Pakistan needs to build civil nuclear energy plants. And the latest technology will benefit to civilians and scientific community.
Indian factors regarding Potential Pak-US nuclear deal is very obvious. Pakistan want nuclear deal not like one India made but Pakistan is striving to see itself equal to India. Indian can influence itself in the NSG and could get the member ship in NSG to block the entry of Pakistan into NSG, minimally, Pakistan would not get any incentives from NSG. Pakistan wants to get parity with India politically and diplomatically and more importantly in military terms.We can name it as the prestige and as the Scot D. Sagan wrote in its journal "why sates go nuclear"? In which he argued that prestige is very important factor.Prestige is important in all means, whether in military, politically and diplomatically. To keep Pakistan away from the nuclear inferiority it is very important not shut the doors for US on nuclear deal because Pakistan not only need a deal but the secure nuclear future.
Conclusion:
Indo-Us civil nuclear deal is the very important shift in the relation between India and US. Despite enjoying large era of strategic relation with Pakistan, this US shift has changed the politics of south Asia. China factor for shifting the policy of United States to the world also drawn lot of changes in relations with US and Pakistan which could be term as the "ignorance" of strategic capability of Pakistan for US. The deal also increased the arm race in the region because of its ineffectiveness on the check and balance on Indian reactors by international community. More and more non-nuclear states urge to find their way to access the NSG waivers. This deal also encouraged the new strategic shift for construction of new strategic block in Asia. This block would involve the three states, Pakistan, China and Russia. US have certain miscalculations about the India capabilities, and great democracy, but prior to that know how deal is done. The India is also very skeptical to the US sincerity. The BJP in India firstly opposed the deal at the time of ratification. BJP was in the view that US want to disarm India through this deal. Current government in India is BJP which would is not willing to stop the nuclear proliferation. Thus this deal would use for strategic incentives and proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Nuclear policy makers in Pakistan are very critical to the Indian nuclear deal thus this deal would race the nuclear proliferation in Pakistan too for creating deterrence against vertical proliferation in India. The deal for civil nuclear development Pakistan needs more than India to meet its energy gap. In contrast with India, Pakistan has small number of energy producing resources. Pakistan has managed the politics of isolation with ideal decisions, and its foreign policy goals. Pakistan has managed the relations with United States, Russia and China to fight against isolationism and deter India with minimum deterrence building. Indian construction of new era of strategic partnership may prove to be very unfruitful for Indian wish to become big power of the region in contrast to China. Because china has a great new strategic plan, which would strengthen the roots of china in the world. China has a plan to construct the Silk Road and silk maritime route. This plan includes Pakistan, Vietnam, Maldives, east African coasts and Mediterranean region. CPEC in Pakistan is also the part of china's great Silk Road plan. This project is potent to hinder the Indian growing hegemon in the region. It is likely to seem that India would go in isolation in regional politics after constructing strategic partnership with US.



Changes in relations with the states.
Strategic Arbitration of Unites States in the region after the emergence of china.
https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=zot7AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA171&dq=indo-us+nuclear+deal+and+regional+politics&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRzty-z9HJAhUiJqYKHX1tCygQ6AEIHjAB#v=onepage&q&/of=false