Came across this on rediff.com
It talks about why Vajpayee did not sign the nuclear deal. It is basically an interview with Dr.Ashley Tellis who worked with US and Indian officals to seal the nuclear deal.
Here's a question that has rankled me:
When asked what it is that the US government wanted from the Vajpayee government, he refuses to divulge it.
I am curious. I want to know what has India offered the US in return besides the provisions that are in the agreement.
Furthermore, he says that, according to US law, barring the five permanent members of the Security Council, if any other country conducts nuclear tests, sanctions would have to be applied.
And this could be done against India, too!
I still fail to get it:
Why should only the permanent members of the Security Council be given a pass regarding nuclear weapons? One of these countries - China, is not even a democracy! Nuclear weapons are dangerous and their proliferation should be curbed but the restriction should apply equally to all countries.
Added as an afterthought:
I think the reason the major powers are trying to curb nuclear weapons is because ultimately, it will lead to an arms race and pose a serious threat to human civilisation itself. But the problem is, what about the world's existing nuclear warheads in some countries? Some of the others who do not have them, (either the ones with dangerous ambitions or the ones that feel threatened by the 'nuclear haves' as a newspaper piece had once called the countries that possess them), will keep clamouring for them until something more powerful is invented.