Buy Tom's Books
  • Great Powers: America and the World After Bush
    Great Powers: America and the World After Bush
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett
  • Blueprint for Action: A Future Worth Creating
    Blueprint for Action: A Future Worth Creating
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett
  • The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-first Century
    The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-first Century
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett
  • Romanian and East German Policies in the Third World: Comparing the Strategies of Ceausescu and Honecker
    Romanian and East German Policies in the Third World: Comparing the Strategies of Ceausescu and Honecker
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett
  • The Emily Updates (Vol. 1): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    The Emily Updates (Vol. 1): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    by Vonne M. Meussling-Barnett, Thomas P.M. Barnett
  • The Emily Updates (Vol. 2): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    The Emily Updates (Vol. 2): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett, Vonne M. Meussling-Barnett
  • The Emily Updates (Vol. 3): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    The Emily Updates (Vol. 3): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett, Vonne M. Meussling-Barnett
  • The Emily Updates (Vol. 4): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    The Emily Updates (Vol. 4): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    by Thomas P.M. Barnett, Vonne M. Meussling-Barnett
  • The Emily Updates (Vol. 5): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    The Emily Updates (Vol. 5): One Year in the Life of the Girl Who Lived (The Emily Updates (Vols. 1-5))
    by Vonne M. Meussling-Barnett, Thomas P.M. Barnett, Emily V. Barnett
Search the Site
Powered by Squarespace
Monthly Archives
« Some green sprouts in China | Main | Chaos expands globally as Sri Lankan war ends and women elected to Kuwaiti parliament; global economy blamed »
4:05AM

Recklessly rising India?

ARTICLE: Nuclear Aims By Pakistan, India Prompt U.S. Concern, By R. Jeffrey Smith and Joby Warrick, Washington Post, May 28, 2009

A disturbing pair of reports on Pakistan and India. Why India needs nuclear-tipped cruise missiles is beyond me, but most of their ongoing military modernization betrays a profoundly immature view of the possibilities of great-power war. On this score, they disappoint immensely. Because if they're that stupid on their force structure, how out of control might they be on the actual employment?

As for Pakistan, here it's just dumber following dumb--with our money no less.

To me, this is enough information for the U.S. to back away from the Bush program of helping India on nuclear power. This is a great power behaving like it's 1959 instead of 2009, and if it's pursued to a certain degree, we'll start having conversations with the Chinese about hedging against and containing India's reckless rise.

Won't that be pathetic?

Reader Comments (7)

Given that our own force structure is just starting to evolve into sane, how do you think we should go about encouraging them (India) to do the same?
May 29, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDirk2112
Well the RAND corp was created principally initially to help design nuclear strategy for US! How many Indians and Pakistanis and Chinese does Rand give access to its reserach on nuke strategy? Rest in peace Herman Kann!
May 29, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterWilliam R. Cumming
Safe handling and control of atomic weapons becomes more difficult as they become smaller and more portable. It means the people who acrually "own" them, and can point and shoot them, are further down the chain of command.

A carrier strike force just left the harbor here in San Diego on deployment. As they left, I thought about the huge responsibility that the strike force commander has and how he has to depend on the 7,000 sailors and marines that sail with him. We have been extraordinarily lucky for the last half a century. It was a San Diego based warship that mistakenly shot down an Iranian air liner a few years ago, killing hundreds of innocent civilians. It was not supposed to happen, but it did. Most recently, we learned that an air force crew flew across the country carrying nuclear tipped cruise missles that they thought were conventional. Not supposed to happen...not even supposed to be possible.

I don't know why India is trying to become the regional gun slinger. Maybe it's because they have watched us over the years.

I don't know why India and Pakistan are so hell bent on building up such a dangerous arsenal. Are we their role model?
May 29, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterTed O'Connor
Pakistan has always kept a low bar for itself as regards developement : India.A 60 year long race from two hyper-competitive tortoises .But now that India has a 'Shining' , it's taking a break so that it soak up a new regional strategy: rudderless navel gazing.Musharraf had the 'Kargil' tough man credibilty with his own public ..to push through on a deal on kashmir with India..he tried but the Indians were asleep on the helm.Busy Shining.
May 29, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJavaid Akhtar
I don't understand why we are so perplexed with the India and Pakistan conflict oriented cultures when they were influenced for so long by Victorian England and then American righteous globalization ventures and cultures ... even as we preserved our domestic conflict angers over long past internal historic experiences.
May 30, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLouis Heberlein
Location , location , location. India is protected node on the old trade routes.Pakistan is the part where invasions come and go.I mean..go over history...who has'nt had a go.The geography lends itself to a historical narrative.
May 30, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJavaid Akhtar
I understand the Dangers of Nuclear mishaps and dangers of mis-handling....but how can a country with such a big nuclear arsenal think it is ok for them to have them and they can handle this safer and wiser than anyone else....but no one else should have them...as they don't know how to use or they don't see a need for them to have them....If the countries with nuclear piles really want others to stop becoming nuclear...they should first shun and remove their nuclear stock piles. or maintain only minimum deterrent..before starting to preach....
July 25, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterRamesh

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>