Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

SOUTH ASIA

INDIA: "Profit And Loss"

According to the centrist, independent Asian Age (6/8): "The first UN Security Council resolution since 1965 has raised points that are causing Pakistan worry: One, the reference to 'root causes' of the Kashmir issue, and not just the root cause.... And two, it speaks of 'mutually acceptable' solutions which effectively negate plebiscite and self-determination as an option. Needless to say, the last will never be acceptable to India. Pakistan, on the other hand, cannot push on this front now for India can always refer to a UN resolution for a change to bolster its case. In this sense, the resolution is a loss and a gain from the Indian point of view."

"China's Hi-Tech War Machine"

An editorial the right-of-center Indian Express said (6/8): "India is a factor in Chinese strategy only marginally--a country that must be kept down so that it won't ever become a challenge to China. If at any time India does raise its head defiantly, Beijing will come crushing down on it. The powers China considers necessary to upstage in order to establish its world hegemony are the United States in the West and Japan in the East.... America is naive today as it consults its former enemy against an open society like India. It, too, will realize sooner rather than later that China has only one interest--China's supremacy."

"Losing Balance In The Aftershocks"

The right-of-center Indian Express also stressed (6/8): "The government has been so slow with its diplomatic initiatives. It had many things to go for it, including a lukewarm reaction from Russia and France in the wake of the tests, absence of joint sanctions by G-8, a silent Islamic world. Instead of consolidating its initial advantages, it frittered away the opportunity, and then the Pakistani explosions changed everything.... But for Advani to link the nuclear explosions to Kashmir was to walk into the trap of the Western nations which have all along maintained that the troubled state would be a flashpoint. This has only further internationalized the Kashmir issue and Pakistan is pushing home its advantage by agreeing to talk under a multilateral regime. It is now apparent that the decision to test was taken in haste and the government gave little thought to the fallout."

"Focus On Kashmir"

An editorial in the nationalist Hindustan Times argued (6/5): "The time perhaps has come when the Vajpayee government has to adopt a more 'proactive' policy in the diplomatic field by going beyond conciliatory words and making a more positive move towards resuming the dialogue with Islamabad. There is no harm in this respect to take the initiative and even send an envoy to Pakistan to start the process. The task will not be easy because the heightened tension in the subcontinent has given Pakistan an opportunity once again to bring Kashmir into international focus.... It should be left, therefore, for Indian and Pakistanis to work towards a settlement through a sincere and transparent process."

"Pokhran And Sanctions"

The centrist Hindu had this analysis (6/5) by Rajeev Dhavan: "What Pokhran had done is to challenge the monopoly of the nuclear club, which is potentially a far more dangerous and unreliable global death squad than India has ever been or can conceivably be perceived to be.... More deeply, we need to consider the emerging scenario of world government. Pax Americana threatens to rule the skies with unilateral glee. Every single institution of world governance is dominated by America with a far greater vulgarity than that attends controversies over its president's personal life....

"It is not India's testing at Pokhran that was illegal, it is the sanctions that are being sought to be imposed that are illegal. They are not an expression of international concern but declaration of global empowerment--a straightforward exercise of international bullying with little justification or legality.... Past nuclear treaties have grown out of the peculiarities of the arms race of the Cold War. If we need to start, we need to start afresh. The nuclear club must be scrapped; and a rational policy evolved at arm's length."

"Understanding China: Sun Tzu And Shakti"

Pundit K. Subrahmanyam opined in the centrist Times of India (6/5): "China's unwillingness to consider India as a global player, as Russia does, and its equating of India with Pakistan, a nation with which it is in an active proliferation relationship, are indicative of China's long term attitude towards this country. The only way India could hope to change this attitude was by becoming a declared nuclear weapons power."

"Shadow Of Pak Bomb Spreads To Middle East"

In the "Global Watch" column of the pro-economic-reforms Economic Times (6/4), pundit K. Subrahmanyam observed: "Many ask the questions why should China proliferate to Pakistan.... That in turn will give a valuable United States hostage and make (the Middle East) turbulent and preoccupy the United States, leaving South and Southeast Asia to be dominated by China's growing power.... Pakistan is attempting to use the implicit threat to Israel as a leverage to blackmail the United States and compel it to intervene in the Kashmir dispute.... If the United States wants to ensure that the situation in (the Middle East) is not aggravated by the impact of the Pakistani bomb and the Chinese proliferation activity, it should look at the Indian nuclear arsenal as a countervailer to China and Pakistan, and as a stabilizing factor."

"Take Five"

According to an editorial the centrist Pioneer (6/4): "The pronounced pro-Pakistan tilt in the U.S. perception of South Asia...of the 1970s has been brazenly revived by President Clinton who, for all practical purposes, appears to be condoning Pakistan's nuclear adventurism.... Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has, therefore, done well to rule out third-party intervention in the region."

"China Takes The Hard Line"

Strategic affairs editor C. Raja Mohan penned this analysis for the centrist Hindu (6/4): "A number of factors suggest that China's response to the nuclear tests in the subcontinent has gone well beyond the early pique at India's formal justification for its nuclear tests and indicate a more fundamental shift in China's thinking about the regional balance and global nuclear politics. These factors include the muted Chinese reaction to the nuclear tests of Pakistan, its insistence on blaming India for the nuclearization of the subcontinent, its accusation that New Delhi is seeking regional hegemony, and its demand that New Delhi sign the nuclear NPT....

"China may now have built up considerable leverage in the overall relationship with the United States on the eve of the U.S. president, Mr. Bill Clinton's visit to China this month. Equally important, it has given China some influence in the shaping the great power diplomacy on South Asia.... China's search for a role in the resolution of Indo-Pak disputes is entirely unacceptable to India.... How can a state actively involved in the disputes of the subcontinent, sit in judgment over them, observers here want to know."

PAKISTAN: "The Only Solution Of Kashmir Issue--UN Resolutions"

Second largest Urdu-language Nawa-e-Waqt told its readers (6/8): "The current resolution passed at the security council has again breathed real life into Kashmir issue.... If the five permanent members and major powers on the security council want to resolve the Kashmir issue, then there is no need for long-winded discussions, nor should Pakistan wish to waste its time with India on useless and disadvantageous talks and thereby ridicule itself. The solution is already present at the UN. The government of Pakistan should come forward to address world opinion, rather than becoming entangled in talks with India."

"The Line-Of-Control Standoff"

An editorial in Peshawar's independent Frontier Post stressed (6/8): "The nuclear standoff in South Asia has made it absolutely necessary for the international community to find an early solution to the core issue. Japan has offered to play a mediatory role while Clinton has hinted at a possibility of Washington too assuming such a role. But going by the Indian track record, it is almost certain that a solution to the Kashmir dispute without a third-party mediation is impossible.... The international community must move swiftly to douse the nuclear flash point."

"Geneva Declaration"

The centrist News concluded (6/7): "While the communique calls on Pakistan and India to resume 'direct dialogue' to find mutually acceptable solutions and 'address the root causes of the tension, including Kashmir,' it says little about how this can be achieved in the face of India's defiance and stubbornness.... Disappointing, too, is the communique's flat reassertion of the 'nuclear club-is-closed' position.... If the members of the nuclear club, which also happen to be the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, really want to achieve the goals of peace and security and of global nonproliferation, they need to resolve the contradictions and weaknesses in their own positions before they can expect others to listen to them."

"Resolution Of Kashmir Issue--A Golden Opportunity For Pakistan"

An editorial in the second-largest Urdu-language Nawa-e-Waqt (6/7): "Five 'leading nations' may or may not accept that Pakistan and India are nuclear powers. However, it is a matter of some satisfaction that the five permanent members of the Security Council have agreed not to threaten Pakistan and India with sanctions.... The United States has apparently decided to begin a campaign of formal links with the leaders of both countries to help bring about a resolution of Kashmir and to reduce tensions between Pakistan and India. Two members of the U.S. Senate will travel to India and Pakistan this week. They will present their ideas on the Clinton might help to resolve the Kashmir dispute and will assess the opinions of both countries' leadership.... Thank God the government decided at the right moment to undertake the nuclear tests and thus has secured important advantages in this direction. The plus is that now the whole world feels the urgency of finding a solution to the Kashmir issue."

"Time For Sober Reflections"

Karachi's independent, national Dawn (6/6): "It is significant that after doing a spot of nuclear brinkmanship of the most terrifying kind, New Delhi and Islamabad want the interrupted peace process to be revived.... It would be wise and practical for Pakistan to take New Delhi at its word and send a positive signal by agreeing to resume the dialogue which has remained stalled since September 1997.... A number of countries have offered to mediate--the United States, Japan, Bangladesh--knowing that it would be difficult for the two neighbors to disengage from the intense feeling of mutual distrust and antagonism.... If third-party mediation is not acceptable to India, the two South Asian countries should attempt bilaterally to make a fresh move towards peace and normalization."

"Madness In May"

Irfan Husain opined Karachi's independent Dawn (6/6): "With eyes wide open, we have stumbled into a trap out of which there seems no escape. The people who danced with joy in the streets of Pakistan's cities have little idea of the high price they will have to pay for their short-lived celebrations. And let us make no mistake about it: it is the common man who will have to bear the brunt of the sweeping economic sanctions we face. When food grows scarce and prices shoot up, those who took the decision to push the button will still be able to afford all the luxuries they enjoy today, Nawaz Sharif's brace words notwithstanding."

"Gains From Pakistan's Tests"

An op-ed column by Nasim Zehra in the centrist News emphasized (6/5): "The international community, after decades of discriminating against Pakistan, has been forced to treat Pakistan and India at parity on the non-proliferation issue. There is no question of the imposition of any international sanctions regime against Pakistan; finally there is recognition that the issue of Kashmir cannot (be ignored) in the context of establishing peace and security in South Asia."

"BJP Is Not India; India Is Not Just The BJP"

Under the above headline, the center-right Nation had these thoughts by Kuldip Nayar (6/5): "Vajpayee should at least shut up the lunatic fringe of Hindu fundamentalists, like...Ashok Singhal, heading the Parishad, (who) has advocated the establishment of Hindu Raj in India and a war against Pakistan. India is not a Hindu state. Neither its constitution, nor its functioning point to such a narrow denominational attitude."

"No Room For Hawks In Nuclear Age"

Imtiaz Alam opined in the centrist News" (6/5): "The nuclear arms race set in motion by India and reciprocated by Pakistan has actually lowered the threshold...(of) security they were supposed to maintain.... Pakistan should curb this infantile tendency to expand the enemy front by clubbing Israel and the United States together with India. We should strictly refrain from expanding the list of perceived enemies. Finally, it's better that hawks...start thinking like doves and engage in informed debate after getting baptised by the nuclear 'explosions', instead of promoting fascist tendencies as exhibited by the activists of a 'Jamaat' in Islamabad."

"An Opportunity To Be Seized"

Maleeha Lodhi had this to say in the centrist News (6/5): "South Asia's most serious security crisis also provides an opportunity to establish a durable regional security regime by addressing both the sources and symptoms of longstanding tensions and hostility. A just settlement of the Kashmir dispute must form the core of efforts to stabilize the region. The question is whether this opportunity can be grasped, before the region arms races into an even more uncertain and dangerous future."

"International Response"

An editorial in Lahore's center-right Nation held (6/4): "It has taken the nuclear tests by India and Pakistan to focus the international community (on Kashmir.)... In the subcontinent, it will not be possible to defuse rising tensions without resolving the Kashmir issue. In the world at large, it will not be possible to save the tattered non-proliferation regime without tangible progress towards universal disarmament."

BANGLADESH: "Indo-Pak Talks In Sight?"

According to the Independent Daily Star (6/8): "For the first time in 50 years, arch rivals India and Pakistan find themselves in similar positions, having some notes to exchange against the backdrop of their nuclear tests.... (It) seems...that, with their nuclearization and acquisition of mutual deterrence capability, India and Pakistan are moving closer to a significant dialogue than ever before.... But while Sharif favors mediation in Kashmir...India persists in her traditional policy of a bilateral approach...(and) has already rejected mediation offers from Japan and the Group of Five. In spite of all this, we wholeheartedly welcome the healthy exchange of invitations for talks taking place between New Delhi and Islamabad. This has already served to reduce the tension in South Asia somewhat. It is really time they sat across the table to hold talks for an early peace in South Asia, which is at an all-time high priority now."

"Awakening Of Humanity Needed, Not Nuclear Arms"

Pro-government, Bangla-language Sangbad's editorial judged (6/8): "The head Imam of the Baitul Mukaddas in Jerusalem has termed Pakistan's nuclear explosion as the beginning of an Islamic renaissance.... Are those who describe Pakistan's nuclear explosion as an Islamic renaissance aware of Israel's strength? Small Israel in the midst of big Muslim Middle Eastern countries is surviving on the strength of modern science and technology. The entire Muslim world is lagging behind in knowledge and arms power. For this reason, assistance from 'Christian' U.S. troops is needed to free Kuwait from Iraq's hand, or for the defense of Saudi Arabia.... We are against an Islamic or Hindu bomb. There is no way to argue in favor of weapons of mass destruction, labeling them with religion or nationalism. There should be a reawakening of reason, well-being and humanity."

NEPAL: "Ramifications For Middle East"

Government-owned Gorkhapatra pointed out (6/5): "If India or Pakistan ever provide nuclear cooperation to the oil-rich Arab nations, the map of (the Middle East) will change.... This will create a military polarization in (the Middle East), thereby forcing the superpowers to return to a cold war situation once again.... Even after the tests in South Asia, the big nuclear countries are still in a stupor and do not appear to have taken the situation seriously.... By now they could have forced both India and Pakistan to talk with them, but because of the differences among themselves and their national interests, a collective initiative in this direction is being delayed."

SRI LANKA: "And Now Pakistan Goes Berserk"

The English-language, independent Island maintained (6/7): "Brandishing nuclear weapons and releasing right-wing fascistic forces in poor countries sounds like an extremely dangerous return to barbarism. So what happened to peaceful co-existence, non-alignment, non-violence (ahimsa) and pancasila (the Indonesian state philosophy) as guidelines for rulers? And what will happen to SAARC and trade cooperation and cultural exchanges, not to mention the World Cup in cricket? What will happen is that at least those sane, national beings in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh will continue to forge contacts, and despite all odds, will continue to foster democracy, peace, human rights, the liberation of women and the creation of a non-nuclear zone in South Asia."

EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

CHINA: "Dialogue Better Late Than Never"

Zhang Guocheng observed in official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 6/5): "Both Pakistan and India have already expressed their willingness to have a dialogue....

"It is believed that if the two sides really show sincerity, it is not too late. As the old saying goes, better late than never."

HONG KONG: "Major Powers Lose Clout"

The independent, English-language Hong Kong Standard told its readers (6/8): "If the South Asia nuclear race has proved anything at all it is that the world's major powers have lost the diplomatic clout they once had.... The subsequent assumption that the United States, as the sole superpower (after the fall of the Soviet Union), would now be able to dictate terms to the smaller and the weaker in a new world order, has proved largely fallacious."

"U.S. Hypocrisy Turns Sanctions Into Farce"

The independent, English-language Hong Kong Standard said (6/4): "President Clinton's widely touted economic sanctions against India and Pakistan for daring to conduct nuclear tests seem laughable.... It is not that economic sanctions are intrinsically funny, certainly not to those who have had to face the brunt of them, such as Iraq now and South Africa in the bad old days of apartheid.... The irony is that while sanctions are imposed for conducting nuclear tests, under the broad interpretation of the law, U.S. firms are still able to export items that can be used for military ends, such as long-range missiles with nuclear warheads.... President Clinton's hypocrisy is becoming so unbearable that it is time he stopped pontificating to the world."

JAPAN: "Big Five Should Outline Disarmament Timetable"

An editorial in liberal Asahi asked (6/6): "How can the five nuclear nations prevent the development of nuclear arms by other countries, while clinging to their own nuclear arsenals? The NPT's inherent inconsistencies are now being questioned. Nuclear development by India and Pakistan can never be recognized. At the same time, the five existing nuclear powers are also to blame for not doing more for nuclear disarmament, and for allowing other countries to develop nuclear arms.... The five countries should outline a concrete timetable for negotiating nuclear disarmament."

"India And Pakistan Must Abandon Nuclear Illusions"

Top-circulation, moderate Yomiuri's editorial stated (6/5): "India and Pakistan may be able to continue their arms buildup race because the peoples of both nations have indicated a willingness to accept a great deal of sacrifice.... Even if possession of nuclear weapons gives each country a boost in pride and improves their military status in the region, it is an absurd act in that it imposes economic hardships on the people. The excitement over greater national glory must cool down sooner or later."

"Promotion Of Nuclear Disarmament Is Best Pressure "

Liberal Mainichi's editorial judged (6/4): "It would be a mistake...to underestimate the role the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has played or to take a negative view of global efforts to reduce nuclear arms. Instead, the international community should learn an 'important' lesson from the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests, and make a fresh determination to strengthen the NPT system and promote nuclear disarmament. Such a constructive stance would place the 'best, possible' pressure on both India and Pakistan to dissuade them from escalating their nuclear arms buildup race.... Prime Minister Hashimoto has proposed the establishment of an international forum to strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation system and promote nuclear disarmament. Japan, while maintaining its non-nuclear policy, should take a more active role in launching such a forum."

AUSTRALIA: "Subcontinent's Loose Cannon"

Foreign editor Greg Sheridan commented in conservative Australian (6/5): "Led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, numerous senior Republicans have criticized the Clinton administration for over-reacting to India when it has allowed China, not only to develop a full nuclear arsenal, but to assist Pakistan to develop its nuclear capacity.... What is motivating the Republicans is the realization that India, despite its unjustified tests, is a basically stable democracy of long standing, which China certainly isn't... Probably more than China or India, Pakistan's intermittent support for international terrorism and its extraterritorial involvement in numerous Muslim insurgency groups are cause for profound worry."

PHILIPPINES: "India Vs. Pakistan"

Political Science Professor Francisco Nemenzo of the University of the Philippines had these remarks in leading Business World (6/5): "We must bear in mind that a lot of American companies--and that includes Microsoft--have an interest in India.... This (business sector) will be a very powerful pressure group in the United States for it to slow down (on sanctions).... India and Pakistan...will look for a way out. Probably, both India and Pakistan will agree to sign on to the test ban treaty.... This could be used as an excuse to lift sanctions, which are mandated by U.S. law. But...(India and Pakistan) already have nuclear capability."

THAILAND: "And Now There Are Seven"

The lead editorial in the independent Nation contended (6/7): "The world must now take this opportunity to call on the nuclear powers to give up their weapons of mass destruction. Indeed, those who possess such weapons of death...should be treated as global pariahs.... The nuclear five have acted as if they are military giants, when in fact they are moral pygmies. No wonder, the Saddam Husseins of the world find the club so seductive."

EUROPE

SWITZERLAND: "'The Five' Preach To India, Pakistan"

André Naef wrote in the centrist Tribune de Genève (6/5): "The foreign affairs ministers of the five permanent Security Council members have asked New Delhi and Islamabad to henceforth abstain from all nuclear testing.... The five ministers didn't dodge the Kashmir dilemma, the main source of tension between the two warring brothers of the Indian subcontinent. But only in very general terms did they offer assistance--so as not to offend the sensibilities of India, which rejects any idea of international mediation.... Overall, it remains to be seen how the two countries now under cross-examination will react to this 'sermon' given by the Five--who say they are resolute about pursuing this process and about meeting as often as required. 'It was an indispensable and urgent meeting,' commented French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine, reaffirming the Five's special vocation on nuclear matters. On that issue, it remains uncertain whether India and Pakistan are on that same wave length."

BRITAIN: "Nuclear Club Tells Rivals To Talk"

The conservative Daily Telegraph had this from Geneva (6/5) by diplomatic editor Ian Black: "The big five themselves...resisted any notion of giving India or Pakistan formal status as nuclear weapon states as this would destroy the NPT--the world's most important arms control pact--and raise similar questions about the status of Israel.... Many experts believe that one likely outcome of the Asian crisis will be new confidence-building measures amongst the nuclear weapons states."

"A Bomb In Every Backyard?"

The independent weekly Economist's lead editorial stressed (6/5): "The decades-long effort to halt the spread of the bomb, as well as other weapons of mass destruction, has taken a severe blow.... Regardless of what India and Pakistan have done, the security of the rest of the world depends on redoubling all anti-proliferation efforts."

"Arms And The Many: North Korea May Be Next Nuclear State"

The conservative Times observed (6/4): "North Korea may be the next nuclear state.... It is conceivable that Pyongyang could overtly help Pakistan to accelerate its missile program, in return for access to Islamabad's nuclear weapons technology.... At this dangerous juncture, the least hint of an ambivalent American reaction would be the height of folly."

FRANCE: "India's Insecurity: China"

Jean-Francois Revel told listeners of privately run RTL radio (6/5): "For India, its biggest fear is China.... And what India can see is that Tiananmen has been forgiven...that Europe, the United States and Russia have made China their main economic, technological and diplomatic partner in Asia. Hence in its feeling of isolation, frustration and insecurity.... India is wondering why Western democracies prefer a totalitarian China to a democratic India.... If the European Union and the United States want to put a stop to nuclear proliferation in Asia, they need to balance their diplomacy on the continent with a diplomacy worthy of its name and of a great nation, India."

"Nuclear Weapons: From Deterrence To Standardization"

Daniel Vernet noted in left-of-center Le Monde (6/5): "Deterrence during the Cold War made sense because the world was dominated by two blocs which were ideologically and militarily antagonistic.... The non-use of nuclear weapons was an end in itself.... The problem today is that the game is becoming increasingly complicated, with regional complexities helping to confuse the binary logic. What could be conceived as feasible when you were three or five, becomes less viable when the numbers increase.... As more nations acquire nuclear weapons, they become the norm, with the risk that they may become an extension of conventional weapons."

"Nuclear Deterrence Challenged"

Pierre Lellouche emphasized in left-of-center Liberation (6/4): "We have just changed worlds.... The repercussions of Pakistan's 'Islamic bomb' on the rest of the Muslem world are already apparent.... These changes, which are only beginning, will directly affect the security of the world and Europe.... Meanwhile, Europe remains silent on nuclear issues and prefers to talk about the euro.... It is high time we raise the issue of Europe's joint security policy and the problem of France and Europe's defense."

"The Washington-Beijing Axis"

Jean-Jacques Mevel pointed out in right-of-center Le Figaro (6/4): "Paradoxically, the crisis triggered by India and Pakistan could give the Clinton-Jiang Zemin summit the substance and legitimacy it was lacking until now. China has made it clear that the United States and China were jointly responsible for calling the emergency Geneva conference. Clinton immediately responded in kind with the announcement that he would ask for renewal of the most favored nation status for China...confirmation that the world's peace and security lie in a 'strategic partnership' between Washington and Beijing."

RUSSIA: "Coherent Communique"

Sergei Guly commented in reformist Noviye Izvestia (6/6) on the P-5 meeting in Geneva: "This does not happen often--for all their big differences, the five member-nations adopted a quite coherent communique. It contrasts sharply with mid-May's Birmingham statement on the same subject. But, of course, some of it is 'empty,' which, however, comes as an 'obligatory' part of the ritual. Failing to get the nuclear novices to take the most important, first, step would be fatal to the hard-won NPT treaty, a keystone of a stable world order."

"Capitulation"

Igor Sedykh opined on page one of reformist Segodnya (6/6): "It ended in capitulation. The five nuclear 'legits,' in effect, acknowledged that they did not rule the world any more. Albright was atypically complacent, totally oblivious of the White House's initial statement on sanctions. It is easy to see what, for instance, Baghdad might think about all this. It looks as if you may get sanctions lifted by proving competent in nuclear bomb-making."

"Nukes Bound To Spread"

Georgy Bovt and Valeria Sycheva commented in reformist Segodnya (6/5) on the foreign ministerial of the five 'official' nuclear powers in Geneva: "Everyone said correct and stern words. But those words meant little to those they were addressed to, New Delhi and Islamabad. Nobody can make them forget how to make the bomb. There is no abolishing the deadly know-how. Nuclear weapons will spread on, no matter how the 'Five' decide to punish the 'delinquents.' In that sense, the Geneva meeting was doomed to failure right from the start."

"New World Needs New World Order"

Reformist Izvestia (6/4) published this opinion by Stanislav Kondrashov: "While the world has changed, the world order has not. Hence India's and Pakistan's daring challenge to the CTBT. That challenge calls for concerted constructive initiatives by the world community and its five 'legitimate' nuclear powers, above all.... Russia and the United States, the inheritors of the global USSR-U.S. confrontation, have pronounced themselves partners but they have yet to learn to use the full potential of cooperation and coordination in removing new threats to peace. Besides, America's claims to world hegemony as a superpower impede interaction by restricting Russia's residual but still considerable influence. All occupants of this multipolar world need to pitch in. A policeman armed with a baton and ever-ready to impose sanctions is not the answer. There are far better guarantees of a new world order."

"Time To Build Joint Anti-Missile Defense"

Sergei Blagovolin, a deputy director of the World Economy and International Relations Institute, insisted in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (6/4): "What is needed now is urgent action to build anti-missile defense systems in probable theaters of war.... The time has come to boost cooperation in military technology...not arms sales. Hopefully, Russia and its possible partners have enough political will and a sense of self-preservation to embark on that road."

GERMANY: "Exclusive"

Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger penned the following editorial for right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (6/6): "Pakistan and India in particular will certainly criticize the refusal of the five official nuclear powers not to accept them in their 'nuclear club' as a continuation of the unfair division of the world into two classes....

"But...even though Islamabad and New Delhi signed neither either the NPT nor the CTBT, they nevertheless violated the aims (of those treaties) and set in motion a regional arms race. There is no question that there are potential imitators. A world with an exclusive nuclear club may be discriminating, but a world in which the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction would depend on the discretion of countries which are driven by nuclear ambitions, would be a deadly serious affair."

"Badly Neglected"

Detlef Mueller stressed in right-of-center Berliner Morgenpost (6/5): "The only remaining superpower and the Russians must blame themselves for the dilemma (posed by the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests.) Moscow has badly neglected its former ally. The Kremlin has been too busy with itself. But Washington, too, has given its ally in Islamabad a long leash for much too long, and offered the military dollars again and again without questioning the use of the money. The quickly arranged foreign ministers conference in Geneva will not change the crisis situation in South Asia to any great degree. Their intention is too obvious, i.e., they only want to defend the monopoly of the exclusive nuclear club but they do not really want to tackle the problems in the region."

"Asian Equations"

Guenter Nonnenmacher opined in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (6/4): "The effects (of India and Pakistan's nuclear tests) on the Asian security system will...last much longer. India in particular made clear that it demands international recognition as an independent power in addition to China. The calculation that there will be the 'coming economic power' China in Asia, in addition to the already existing economic power, Japan, and that the region, for its balance, is dependent on the foreign 'balancer' United States has proven to be too simple. The strategists in the White House know that the call for sanctions is a helpless call and will fade again. They must adapt to a situation in which their calculations on Asia have become more difficult."

BELGIUM: "China's Role"

Pierre Lefevre argued in independent Le Soir (6/5): "The greatest danger of proliferation is still between India and Pakistan.... The present tendency, however, is toward restraint. With Washington, Beijing has taken the lead in containment and conciliation efforts. (This) is an indication that (China) wants at any cost to avoid being carried away in an escalation that would be contrary to its present major interests--which first require its integration in the world's economy. The new Sino-American cooperation and Bill Clinton's upcoming visit to China are particularly timely. Both powers have found in those tests the substance of this constructive strategic partnership which they want to establish across the Pacific."

CANADA: "Nuclear Rules Need Changing"

Columnist Richard Gwyn wrote in the liberal Toronto Star (6/5), "Until now, the five nuclear powers--the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France--have established a two-tier system, and confirmed it by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.... The real change that's happened in these past four weeks...is that the two-tier system is no longer sustainable.... Sooner or later...some comprehensive convention is going to have to be developed. The United States and the rest aren't going to give up all their weapons. But the rules on how many they retain are going to have to be set by world community rather than just by these states themselves. Other states, such as India and Pakistan, are going to have to have a guarantee of nuclear protection.... The global surveillance system is going to have to encompass all states. In particular, Israel will have to open up its systems and stockpiles to international inspection rather than, as at present, being protected from surveillance by the United States."

"Give Peace A Chance"

The right-of-center Calgary Herald concluded (6/3): "It's disappointing but sadly not unexpected that India has rejected a UN offer of mediation to ease tensions with neighboring Pakistan.... Precisely because of the overheated rhetoric and proven nuclear capability on both sides, the relationship between the two nations needs to be calmed down. Yet for the same reasons, that's not likely to happen soon. . . . This is all the more reason for the UN to persist in its diplomatic endeavors to slow the escalating rhetoric, reduce regional tensions and perhaps bring the billigerents to a peace table. The situation is entirely too unstable to be allowed to persist."

HUNGARY: "P-5 Wracks Its Brains"

Senior columnist and author Tibor Varkonyi told readers of influential Magyar Hirlap (6/5): "What the five are doing now is just symbolic; the biggest responsibility lies with them for this current tension. It is their fault.... India probably would not posses a nuclear bomb if Moscow had not provided assistance. Beijing's interest in Pakistan is an old-time one, and the United States is primarily concerned over the issue because, as the only superpower, its presence is needed in every region."

"Buddha's Birthday Present"

Centrist conservative Magyar Nemzet had this op-ed piece by foreign affairs analyst Edit Zsigovits (6/4): "The two grumpy neighbors, India and Pakistan...,have reshaped the world, which fact is to be acknowledged, like it or not, the only remaining superpower after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States as well. The Clinton administration probably realized the responsibility of the described fact after its failed efforts to get Pakistan, the otherwise ally and protégé, to renounce further nuclear testing. Many now, mainly on the Western hemisphere, refer to the genie that can hardly be forced back into the bottle."

POLAND: "Cutting Corners To Become A Power"

Tadeusz Miller, writing in centrist Rzeczpospolita, held (6/8), "The economic sanctions may not alter Indian foreign policy but they will slow down economic growth which already proceeds at a snail's pace. Foreign investors are not standing in line in Delhi and the 'verbal war' with their neighbors will further downsize the economic attractiveness of the country. How can it be of any benefit to the illiterate, to the underfed children and women who often have to cover a dozen kilometers to fetch a jug of potable water?"

"The Price Of Peace"

Maria Wagrowska observed in centrist Rzeczpospolita (6/4): "The Indian subcontinent can be regarded as a 'political laboratory' in which the United States, Russia and China will be able to 'test' their new relations. In the old era, India was close to Moscow whereas Pakistan was close to Washington and London.... The subcontinent thus reflected the bipolar division of the world into zones of influence, which in some ways has been preserved until now. The crucial question is to what extent the past [bipolar] division can be obliterated."

SPAIN: "South Asia: Apocalypse Not!"

Conservative ABC noted (6/7): "In the hands of passionate nationalists imbued with religious fervor, as is now the case, such weaponry holds untold risks.... In disconcerting counterpoint to the process of economic globalization and the United States' leading role on he world stage, regional antagonisms have now replaced what was once a global conflict between the United States and the former Soviet Union.

"And it is precisely this new and uncontrolled dynamic of proliferation in the absence a bipolar system which urges a radical curtailment in the spread of nuclear weapons. The blinding nature of nationalist passions obscures the fact that in a nuclear war there can only be losers, and not just the parties to the conflict, but all the rest as well. This apocalypse must be halted now."

TURKEY: "Pandora's Box"

Sukru Elekdag wrote in mass-appeal Milliyet (6/8): "The meeting (of the five nuclear powers in Geneva) ended with rather a softly worded joint communique, in which India and Pakistan were asked to stop nuclear weapons development programs.... It is, however, unrealistic to think that Pakistan and India will heed this call. Pakistan is trying to have deterrent force against India. And India's plan is to assume a deterrent role against China. And they both rely on their nuclear power to do that. On the other hand, the weak reaction from the 'big five' will likely cause more problems: Iran and North Korea will take advantage of this soft reaction, and accelerate their nuclear programs."

MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

EGYPT: "Egypt's Nuclear Budget"

Opposition Al Wafd pointed out (6/5): "While poor countries compete to produce nuclear arms, Egypt has stopped the budget for its nuclear (program.) The situation is different now that the rumors about Israel's nuclear arms have been confirmed. With an appropriate reduction in government spending [in other areas] we can supply the finances for any respectable nuclear program. For the sake of Egypt's national security, [we must] reconsider the Egyptian nuclear program."

"U.S. Responsible For Nuclear Crisis In Asia"

Ibrahim Nafie, editor-in-chief at pro-government Al Ahram, said (6/4): "We and the world need to say very frankly that the United State is the only responsible party for the nuclear crisis in Asia, and for other hidden crises. The United States' management of nuclear proliferation over the past 30 years has lacked seriousness. Democracy was lacking in every dialogue in which the United States participated on the NPT. It insisted on its own opinion on mobilizing the world for extending the treaty eternally, without listening to any opposition from Egypt and other countries."

ISRAEL: "Window Of Opportunity Closing"

Senior analyst Zeev Schiff wrote in independent Haaretz (6/5): "We must not ignore the fact that the non-conventional military threats have increased.... Indian and Pakistani membership in the nuclear club will certainly have an impact on the Middle East, whether through Iran or one of the Arab states. And there is precious little Israel can do about it.... The dangers are great, so great in fact that Israel will probably stick even more firmly to its nuclear policy."

"Nuclear Nonsense"

Senior analyst Yoel Marcus opined in independent Haaretz (6/5): "The Pakistani bomb does not change our political-military situation one bit. It calls neither for hasty concessions to the Arabs--as the peace camp is demanding, nor for being even tougher with them--as the national camp is advocating. Conventional, not nuclear weapons remain the real threat: slingshots, rocks, knives, homemade bombs, Katyusha rockets, Molotov cocktails, shoulder-held missile launchers, and bombs detonated in coffee shops or on buses....

"We must do everything to arrive at peace agreements with the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians not out of fear of the Muslim nuclear bomb, but...because we want to finally live in peace in this land."

AFRICA

ZIMBABWE: "India, Pakistan Must End N-Tests"

The government-controlled Daily Chronicle maintained (6/2): "The world should talk India and Pakistan into a pact that bans nuclear development for aggressive purposes to reduce the tension that has been created by these explosions. The two countries owe it to the world to move away from the brink."

LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN

ARGENTINA: "Pakistan, A Country Ruled Only By The Bomb"

Maria Laura Avignolo, on special assignment in Pakistan for leading Clarin wrote (6/4): "Pakistanis have incorporated the atomic bomb in their souls as a means of salvation of their country, after years of international ostracism and fear of an Indian attack. Not to respect the bomb is understood (by Pakistanis) as treason against the motherland. For the bomb, Pakistanis are willing to live in the most absolute austerity."

BRAZIL: "India's Bomb"

Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo made these observations (6/5): "The United States judged that the strength of its incomparable military power and hegemony could serve to manage the problems of the survival of humanity--the foremost among them being nuclear. That is why they created the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Americans became more worried about consolidating the neo-liberal economic model than of assuming the mandate given to them by history to prevent any threat of nuclear confrontation in local conflicts. The community of nations has to treat this (nuclear) problem with an iron hand.... Brazil's dream of being included in the UN Security Counsel was buried, as a side effect of the Indian nuclear tests. We are left with a great dream: condemn, protest, fight and engage with our heart and souls to exterminate totally all nuclear arms from the face of the earth."

"Under The Atomic Mushroom"

Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo judged (6/4): "It is tragicomic, the pride with which two immense, poor, socially collapsed countries...exhibit their recent feat.... We hope that India and Pakistan reach an agreement. However, a barrier has been broken: It will be easier for poor countries to test their own nuclear arms, and each time this happens there will be two. The statistical possibility of an accident or delirium increases; the old shadow of the atomic mushroom is back under the 'pax americana.'"

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

6/8/98

# # #