US asks India, Pakistan to restrain their nuclear, missile programmes

[bananas]

Source: Times of India

Expressing concern over the continuing buildup of nuclear weapons in South Asia, the US has asked India and Pakistan to restrain their atomic and missile programmes and play a positive role in the global non-proliferation community.

"The United States remains deeply concerned by the dangers posed by the continuing buildup of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems in South Asia," Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation Thomas Countryman said in his address to the 2015 Review Conference of the States Parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons in Geneva on Monday.

"Consistent with our shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons, the United States has repeatedly called on India and Pakistan to restrain their nuclear and missile programmes; end the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons; and support the commencement of negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament of a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty," he said.

"In that regard, it is with concern and deep disappointment that we note Pakistan's reluctance to support the start of such negotiations," the US official said.

<snip>

Read more: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-asks-India-Pakistan-to-restrain-their-nuclear-missile-programmes/articleshow/19816234.cms

[cosmicone]

1. Why should India restrain?

India has 1.2 billion people, is a constitutional and functioning secular democracy and is one of the largest economies.

Equating India with the tinpot banana republic of Pakistan is a mistake democratic administrations did repeatedly until GW Bush dehyphenated them and started a new relationship with India.

Obama sucks with this policy.

If you don't want Pakistani buildup, stop paying money to Pakistan!

[karynnj]

8. Bush also chose to make Pakistan essential to his invasion of Afghanistan

It is also likely that Bush was allied with Musharraf. Interesting that prefer GWB to Obama when Obama has taken stronger positions against the Pakistani terrorists that target India.

[cosmicone]

9. Bush was indeed fooled by Musharraf

but had no choice but to deal with him.

GWB spearheaded the US-India nuclear cooperation treaty and pushed it through the nuclear suppliers' group (NSG) using diplomatic pressure to prevent countries like Japan, New Zealand, Australia and Denmark from killing it. The Chinese objected at the last minute and GWB even put pressure on China to allow the treaty to be accepted by the NSG. Bush also allowed India to acquire a state of the art nuclear fuel reprocessing facility which the US doesn't even give to its closest allies.

When Pakistan asked for a similar deal, GWB emphatically refused, saying Pakistan and India have different types of governments and different histories.

GWB was quite prescient in understanding that in a world with a hostile China, the US needs an ally like India.

Pakistan is a dangerous country primarily because of its inherent hatred of India. The world realizes that what the brits did nefariously and out of spite (partitioning India) was a colossal mistake and that Pakistan, in its present form will continue to be a problem for its neighbors unless balkanized into several tiny countries.

Obama is again trying to be "even handed" in dealings between India and Pakistan which is a mistake. I am with GWB on this policy. Hopefully, Hillary Clinton will change it back in 2017.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. What about Israel's nuclear-armed missiles?

[Alamuti Lotus]

3. the largest nuclear arsenal in the world dreams of a world without nuclear weapons?!

I want to know what acting school these spokesbots go to in order to make such statements with a straight face.

It would have made for a better statement if he asked India/Pakistan to restrain their arsenals, and help bully Iran into submission. The escalation of tragic irony in the remarks would've thus come full circle into absolute bonkocity.

[closeupready]

4. Yeah, like that will happen.

[lsewpershad]

5. What about

US and Israrel's arsenal????????

[timdog44]

6. Many countries,

sovereign nations have nuclear capabilities. None should have them. Nuclear energy production is one thing. Weapons is another. Many who have the later have failed to sign the non-proliferation treaty. Guess who that might be? I would say that the three most dangerous owners of nuclear weapons, besides the good ole USA, are Israel, Pakistan and North Korea.

[kelliekat44]

7. we're askiing nicely becuase you haven't signed up for the nuclear non-proliferation treaty

and you are our friends unlike Iran who is a member of the Pact.