UN member states are keen to see a nuclear weapons-free world, but the new US president may have other plans.
Resentment against China has continued for far too long and gone too far. By focusing on just one issue in its ties with China, India risks having the world perceive its interests as monochromatic and emotional rather than based on realism and strategic foresight.
‘The NSG is a non-proliferation regime. It is not a disarmament forum. Questions relating to the universality of the NPT are addressed at other fora where Mexico actively participates.’
By arming countries in China’s periphery, India could undermine the security system Beijing has so ruthlessly installed to further its goal of domination.
China may have denounced the verdict, but it cannot continue to bully its neighbours. The international community must now work to make it part of the solution.
The Hague: In a few hours, when the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague releases its verdict on the South China Sea dispute, China will likely thumb its nose at a verdict “unilaterally” pursued by the Philippines. The Philippines may have a territorial dispute with Beijing, but […]
The countries are far beyond poised for partnership as matters stand today. Perhaps a more apt title could have been Poised for Alliance, which would be eye-opening and more forward-looking.
Brushing Aside Criticism for Blocking India’s NSG Bid, Chinese Media Says Country ‘Still Stuck’ in 1962 War Mindset
Continuing to justify China’s stand to block New Delhi’s bid, Chinese media has repeated the argument that signing the NPT is a must for India to join the NSG.
Apart from telling the Nuclear Suppliers Group about its nonproliferation record, India also outlined the additional measures it had taken beyond what the group requires.
In the second part of his interview with The Wire, former foreign secretary Shyam Saran discusses why China acted the way it did at the NSG and what India can do about it.
In the first of a two-part interview, former foreign secretary Shyam Saran discusses India’s bid to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group with Siddharth Varadarajan, founding editor of The Wire.
“India doesn’t seem to understand that the ‘process’ is where the game is being played and that’s why the minor objectors are more problematic than China in some ways,” says an analyst.
Whatever narrative India internalises will have interesting implications for Indian foreign policy – and by extension the Asian security order – for years to come.
China successfully stared down the US in Seoul while trying to control the nuclear order – once an American playing field where Washington set the rules.
But it is clear that several other members of the NSG helped play spoiler in the Indian quest for membership.
Making an effort to not paint Beijing into a corner, Swaraj said, “China has not opposed India’s membership. It has talked of criteria-based approach”.
Sartaj Aziz claimed that Pakistan has already convinced countries including Russia, New Zealand and South Korea to support the criteria-based approach and that they have always had the backing of China.
Reiterating the link between the NSG and NPT, China said that the 1968 treaty “provides a political and legal foundation for the international non-proliferation regime as a whole.”
New Delhi: Pushing back against criticism that Prime Minister Narendra Modi is locking India into a tighter strategic embrace with the United States, senior officials insist that his recent visit to the US and four other countries demonstrated a more independent, assertive role for Indian foreign policy. A day after Modi returned […]
Mexico’s support to India is seen as crucial in its bid to become member of the elite NSG, whose members are allowed to trade in and export nuclear technology.
India must be held accountable for the commitments it made in 2005, when the nuclear deal with the United States was first struck, and not for the sins of others.
UN member states are being urged to make use of the disarmament commission to engage in constructive dialogue geared towards realising a nuclear-weapon-free world.
The contents of the agreements are very different but in both cases, Washington was driven by concerns about strategic shifts occurring in the wider regions of South Asia and the Middle East