India bows to Western concerns over Agni missile
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 3:10:57 PST
Copyright 1996 by Reuters
NEW DELHI, Dec 6 (Reuter) - The Indian government appears to
have quietly bowed to Western pressure by deciding to shelve the
Agni ballistic missile, risking a backlash from hardline Hindu
rivals and the military establishment, analysts said on Friday.
The decision to put the intermediate-range missile on hold
drew stinging criticism from the opposition Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP) and appeared bound to revive a simmering debate over
the nation's ambiguous nuclear arms policy.
``I am very disappointed with this decision,'' said Jasjit
Singh, director of the state-funded Institute for Defence
Studies and Analyses.
``The Agni missile development programme must go on,''
senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh told Reuters.
The decision to shelve the surface-to-surface Agni missile
which has a range of 2,500 km (1,500 miles), was quietly
conveyed in a Defence Ministry report to parliament, released on
Thursday.
The ministry said research on the rocket had been completed
after three tests ending in early 1994, and there were no plans
to produce the 14-tonne, 19-metre (60-foot) Agni.
But the ministry said the government reserved the option to
build the missile if India's security was threatened.
Analysts said the decision was inextricably linked to
U.S.-led opposition to India's missile programme, which
Washington says could upset regional stability.
``The widely held perception is that India's missile
programme has slowed down under U.S. pressure,'' defence analyst
Brahma Chellaney of the Centre for Policy Research said.
``U.S. pressure is the obvious interpretation,'' Jasjit
Singh added.
BJP spokesman Krishan Lal Sharma said: ``Development and
deployment of this missile should not be delayed or stopped
under pressure.''
The U.S. embassy in New Delhi said it would reserve comment
until it had studied the defence ministry's report.
The Agni, believed capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, is
considered a potential deterrent against China, which is a
declared nuclear weapons power.
India's 250-km (150-mile) Prithvi missile would be more
suited as a deterrent against Pakistan, analysts said.
The decision to shelve the Agni was made public only days
after Chinese President Jiang Zemin visited India.
Analysts said the defence ministry's report to parliament
was written in August, well before Jiang's trip, but the timing
of the news still raised eyebrows.
``The message people might read is that Jiang came here and
reassured us to such an extent that we don't need missiles
against China,'' Chellaney said. ``The timing is inappropriate
and embarrassing to the government.''
The BJP accused Deve Gowda's centre-left government, which
has sought to improve ties with India's neighbours, of ignoring
an alleged security risk posed by Pakistan and China.
``If China supplies M-11 missiles to Pakistan and China has
ballistic missiles, it is prudent to take into account the
capabilities of nations with whom we have unsettled boundary
disputes and a history of arguments,'' Jaswant Singh said.
Portions of India's borders with both Pakistan and China are
in dispute.
The decision to hold back on the Agni compounded confusion
over New Delhi's nuclear weapons stance, defence analysts said.
India carried out a nuclear test in 1974. Its long-standing
policy, called recessed deterrence, has been to say it does not
have a nuclear weapon but retains the option to build the bomb.
``There is no reasoned thinking on the form that a nuclear
deterrent should take,'' retired rear-admiral K.R. Menon said,
noting that New Delhi had opposed the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT) to ban nuclear weapons tests.
``Why oppose the CTBT if we do not mean to convert our
nuclear weapons capability?'' Menon said. ``If I were in
Washington, I would be completely foxed by Delhi's thinking.''
``Recessed deterrence needs an operationally tested
missile,'' Jasjit Singh said, adding that missiles needed two or
three dozen tests, not three as with the Agni, to be
operational.
``It is meaningless to say you are keeping the nuclear
option open unless you have a reasonable missile,'' he said.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
