A decade after the Kargil conflict and over seven years after the major Indian military mobilization along the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan, both countries were yet again on the verge of a military confrontation following the revelation of Pakistan's complicity in the Mumbai terror attacks of November 2008. Islamabad's recalcitrance in taking action against groups responsible for this attack forced New Delhi to plan punitive responses against terror camps within Pakistan, prompting the latter to mobilize troops and project a capability to repulse an Indian attack.
Though anticipated, the timing of the Islamabad High Court’s verdict to release disgraced nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan from house arrest has surprised many, since it came days before the first ever visit by Richard Holbrooke, President Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Zardari government has tried to play safe by citing this as a decision taken by an ‘independent’ judiciary. Such arguments are, however, unlikely to find many takers.
In early January 2009, the Financial Times reported “preliminary talks” between US and India on possible sale of systems for an Indian ballistic missile defence (BMD) shield. The daily quoted US embassy officials in New Delhi as saying that technical talks had taken place and that US defence officials had conducted computer simulations with Indian counterparts to demonstrate the capabilities of this technology. The Indian media, and some foreign ones, picked up the story and projected the report as an impending US-India deal on missile defence cooperation.
In August 2006, IDSA published a web commentary titled “Is Kerala emerging as India’s new terror hub?” The events of the past few months, especially the shocking revelation of militants from Kerala operating in Kashmir, have validated the concerns raised by this report.
Being a non-NPT state with advanced nuclear capability, India's contributions to the non-proliferation movement have often been scrutinized. India was for long treated as part of the 'proliferation problem'. Since the 1998 tests, there is a steady process of integrating India with the international nuclear community. However, India is reluctant to assimilate with many of the US-promoted counter-proliferation initiatives though it has largely adopted the normative standards of the NPT system.
On May 27, 2008, participants from 91 countries assembled in Washington to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) – a controversial counterproliferation initiative launched by President George W. Bush in Krakow, Poland on May 31, 2003, with a view to improve global coordination to intercept shipments of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and related materials by ‘rogue’ states and terrorist groups.
India's missile defence explorations had long been hindered by its limited access to advanced interception technologies and slow pace of indigenization. India is now developing lower- and upper-tier systems for air and missile defence applications, while also aspiring for longer range exoatmospheric interception capability. However, considering that India's requirements are skewed towards lower tier threats, it is prudent to have an all-inclusive architecture that can meet all realistic threats (including air-breathing), with limited financial and political implications.
Rarely would a defence R&D agency get an actual operational scenario to test the capability of a military system before attaining total technological maturity. The much-maligned U.S. Missile Defence Agency (MDA) silenced its long-time critics by utilising such an opportunity through a successful interception of a dysfunctional military reconnaissance satellite which threatened to hit the Earth with hazardous fuel.
A.Q. Khan’s Acquittal
Though anticipated, the timing of the Islamabad High Court’s verdict to release disgraced nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan from house arrest has surprised many, since it came days before the first ever visit by Richard Holbrooke, President Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Zardari government has tried to play safe by citing this as a decision taken by an ‘independent’ judiciary. Such arguments are, however, unlikely to find many takers.