NEW DELHI: The real danger today is the return of the nuclear issues into the forefront of international politics.
Nuclear developments in recent times have generated a looming danger of the potential use of nuclear weapons. If such a doomsday scenario were to hit an already chaotic security environment, it will be for the second time in about eight decades there will be use of nuclear weapons since the dropping of two nuclear bombs by the United States on two Japanese cities.
The news headlines in recent times are truly scary, if put in perspective. Russia has threatened the use of nuclear weapons in the midst of a war with Ukraine that has turned into a deadly Cold War type confrontation between the United States and Russia. In the early 1960s, Washington and Moscow were responsible for taking the world to the brink of a nuclear war amidst the Cuban Missile Crisis. That time the nuclear warheads were not as potent as now and the delivery systems were not as precise as today.
While the crisis was resolved in time, there were several instances before and after the Cuban Missile Crisis when the threat of use of nuclear weapons hang upon mankind as the Sword of Damocles. While the nuclear arms control agreements were signed by the United States and the former Soviet Union, what was controlled was the number of warheads and not modernization of nuclear arsenals. Most of those arms control agreements have gone redundant and no new agreements are under contemplation. To add to the lurking dangers, China, France and the UK have not joined any initiative to limit the nuclear arms race and the emergence of new nuclear weapon powers cannot be ruled out in today’s circumstances.
The Big Five Nuclear Weapon Powers that were also members of the UN Security Council, did all they could to retain their nuclear arsenals, while backing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to discourage other countries from developing their nuclear weapon capability. Enormous efforts were made by the US and its allies to prevent India from exercising its nuclear option, while turning a blind eye to Pakistan’s quest for nuclear weapon acquisition. As of now, there are eight self-admitted nuclear weapon powers and there is Israel, which is yet to declare its nuclear weapon power status, but is believed to be nuclear capable.
The real danger today is the return of the nuclear issues into the forefront of international politics. While many times invoking its nuclear capability to warn the US and NATO against interfering too much in the Ukraine War, Russia has staged its nuclear drill. Moscow’s tactical nuclear weapon drill was perhaps in response to French President Emmanuel Macron suggesting sending NATO troops to assist Ukraine against Russia. And Macron ordered the flying of France’s nuclear-capable missile ASMPAR soon after the Russian drill started.
While Putin has reportedly upgraded the country’s nuclear arsenal with testing of new nuclear weapons, the United States has conducted three subcritical nuclear weapon tests to verify the reliability of its nuclear weapons. The talk of Poland housing US nuclear weapons has enraged Russia and Putin has warned of serious repercussions. China, in the meantime, refuses to be part of any nuclear arms control initiative and continues to expand its arsenal both in terms of quantity and quality. According to an American estimate, China already has about 500 nuclear warheads with triad delivery systems—land, sea and air.
North Korea’s consistent testing of missiles of all ranges has caused serious worries in Japan and South Korea—two East Asian countries that can go nuclear in short notice and have loud voices that strongly recommend development of independent nuclear capability and raise suspicions over America’s extended nuclear deterrence. China’s threatening war drills around the Taiwan Strait, expanding presence in the waters of South China Sea, territorial claims in East China Sea, open confrontation with the Philippines, and uncertainty surrounding Sino-US Cold War-type relations and strategic tie-ups among Russia, China and North Korea are compelling reasons that may cause further proliferation in East Asia.
Closer home, there is a strong chance of Iran developing its nuclear weapons. While Iran, for long, swore upon its intention to acquire only civil nuclear energy capacity, Israel always doubted Iranian intent, and the US has kept all options open to prevent Iran from going nuclear. The Israeli war against Hamas, Iran-Israel low intensity confrontations involving Iran’s use of Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas as resistance forces plus Israel allegedly assassinating Iranian military officers and nuclear scientists have changed the ground situation in the Persian Gulf.
Iran has openly threatened to change its nuclear doctrine in response to the current conflicts in the region. If Iran goes nuclear, can Saudi Arabia be far behind? Saudis do not have the nuclear infrastructure to build nuclear weapons, but they have money to buy it. Pakistan’s secret nuclear weapon acquisition is well-known history. Its current economic plight, over dependence on China, periodic pressure from the United States and the lure of Saudi money make it a potential seller of nuclear weapons.
Significantly, Pakistan has been persistently enhancing its nuclear capability and its delivery systems, despite facing Himalayan economic challenges and rushing to the International Monetary Fund for assistance. Recently, it tested its Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles or MIRV. In terms of quantity, its nuclear arsenal is reportedly larger than that of India.
Added to the growing risk of nuclear use is the possibility of the use of Artificial Intelligence in nuclear systems. It could reduce the human role in the use of nuclear weapons and pose a higher level of strategic uncertainty. The enlarging mistrust among major powers in the evolving global order presents the danger of secret use of AI in nuclear systems that are unverifiable.
Amplifying further the present-day nuclear threats is the fear of nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands of non-state actors. The fear of a dirty nuclear bomb in the hands of non-state actors has not materialised, but the potential of such an outcome cannot be ruled out. The IAEA recently reported that last year there were 168 incidents of theft, neglect or “improperly disposed” nuclear and radioactive materials. Thousands of such cases have been reported in previous decades. The reappearance of terrorist threats in India’s neighbourhood is a cause of concern and counter-terrorism measures are periodically redesigned and innovated. The quest for a “dirty bomb” by modern day terrorist outfits is a potential threat that should not be placed in the backburner.
Normative scholars and pragmatic security analysts in India need to be proactive in examining the current trends and making their recommendations to prepare India to confront the challenges.
* Chintamani Mahapatra is Founder Chairperson, Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies and formerly Professor at JNU.