At 12:40 PM 6/20/01 -0000 Ritu Ko wrote:
>By JDG's definition, both India and Pakistan should be on the list of rogue
>nations. :o)
>I am interested in understanding the "we can have them, you can't" arguement
>as it appears in the NPT. IF anybody can help, it would be appreciated
>[considering the years I have spent trying to see the logic in that concept,
>an explanation would be more than appreciated. Actually it would be joyously
>welcomed].
Actually, I don't have much of a problem with India having nukes, and
suspect that someday this right will be enshrined internationally. I
think that India has demonstrated that they have a sufficiently vigorous
democracy to be trusted with them.
The logic of the NPT is all about preventing the Iraq's and the DPRK's and
the Iran's of the World from getting nuclear weapons. Most people don't
think that a complete ban on nuclear weapons will ever happen, thus the NPT
is sort of a way of enshrining that only a few countries should be
permitted to keep them, to keep the number of nukes as small as possible.
Ideally, those countries that kept nukes would be the most trusted
countries. Unfortunatelly, the Soviet Union/RF and PRC had to be included
on this list so as to convince them to not be too aggressive about giving
nukes to the highest bidder.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
