|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, May 25, 2000 |
|
Front Page |
National |
International |
Southern States |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Other States |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Previous
| Next
Ending the n-race
By Zia Mian, M. V. Ramana & Hui Zhang
AFTER THEIR nuclear tests in May 1998, the Governments of India
and Pakistan sought to placate international criticism by
announcing that they did not intend conducting more tests and
promising to control nuclear technology exports. They have also
not yet deployed nuclear weapons. But, India and Pakistan have
continued building up stocks of plutonium and highly-enriched
uranium for nuclear weapons in a fissile material race with
profound economic, environmental and health consequences for
their people. Stopping this race would benefit both countries.
Using newly available commercial satellite images they could
verify a production freeze independently with considerable
confidence.
In December 1999, India's Minister of State for Atomic Energy
announced plans to construct a new plutonium production reactor
comparable to its 100 MW Dhruva plant. The older 40 MW CIRUS
reactor (which produced the plutonium for the 1974 nuclear test)
is currently being refurbished. India's Rattehalli uranium
enrichment plant is likely to be used only to produce fuel for
the planned nuclear submarine, and is of less immediate concern.
Pakistan, for its part, has recently completed its 40 MW reactor
at Khushab and continues operating its older Kahuta uranium
enrichment facility.
India and Pakistan would be better off if they stopped the
production of fissile material for weapons purposes. However, the
atmosphere of mistrust and tension between India and Pakistan,
resulting from the May 1998 tests and the subsequent Kargil war,
makes even starting talks a problem. Their limited nuclear
weapons capabilities also put a premium on keeping secret the
scale and operational characteristics of their facilities,
severely restricting if not eliminating possible on-site
inspections to assess compliance with any agreement. Rather than
try to resolve these difficulties straight away, both India and
Pakistan could follow the example of the other nuclear states and
unilaterally declare a moratorium.
In parallel, India and Pakistan could call on the nuclear weapon
states (the U.S., Russia, the U.K., France and China) to
formalise their existing moratoria on fissile material production
and, along with Israel (the only other nuclear weapon state),
start negotiations on reducing existing fissile material
stockpiles. This initiative could, in turn, help free up the
global Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) that has been stuck
at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. The nuclear weapon
states refuse to discuss their stockpiles in that forum and most
non-nuclear weapon states insist that stocks must be addressed if
the FMCT is to have any disarmament value.
By instituting a moratorium, Pakistan and India would do more
than limit the health, environmental and economic consequences of
large- scale fissile material production. Pakistan could prevent
the escalation of an arms race that it can ill-afford, and would
certainly lose - by an ever- increasing margin - if India were to
build and operate its planned new reactor. Indian hardline
concerns would be addressed by a Chinese formal commitment to not
resume fissile material production as a response to U.S.
deployment of ballistic missile defence systems. India would also
be able to engage with the other nuclear weapons states to reduce
their nuclear stockpiles, thereby limiting the requirements on
the size of its own prospective arsenal, and shape a disarmament
agenda that it has long been claiming to support.
Unlike the other nuclear weapon states, India and Pakistan lack
the capability to independently assess whether the others (and
especially each other) were keeping their word. The U.S. and its
allies, and Russia, use various forms of high-tech spying,
including satellite imagery to closely monitor each other and
everyone else. However, recent developments in commercial
satellite imaging, notably the IKONOS satellite owned by Space
Imaging Inc., make it possible for anyone to buy pictures showing
structures on the ground about one meter in size.
While less capable than military satellites, commercial images
are now sufficient to detect nuclear facilities and, often, to
assess whether they are operating. For example, analysis of
IKONOS pictures released by the Federation of American Scientists
(available on the internet at www.fas.org) suggests the presence
of water vapour emerging from the large cooling towers used to
remove the heat generated by the operation of Pakistan's 40 MW
Khushab reactor. This telltale sign is the first independent
confirmation that Khushab is in fact operational. Under an
agreement to cease fissile material production, which would
require shutting down the Khushab reactor, evidence of water
vapour plumes would be a give-away. Thus, by independently obtain
images of each other's key nuclear facilities that are very
revealing, India and Pakistan can gain confidence in a declared
moratorium. They could, of course, gain even more confidence if
they were to allow for some monitoring within the country.
Similarly, the images of India's CIRUS and Dhruva, the two
reactors that are used to produce weapon-grade plutonium and part
of a larger complex near Mumbai, suggest characteristic patterns
forming as warm water carrying heat from the reactors is
discharged into the ocean and begins to mix with seawater.
Infrared images from commercial satellites such as Landsat 7 and
ASTER, launched last April and December respectively, would
enhance the already existing ability to monitor these cooling
water traces. Since discharges from both reactors flow into the
same body of water, it would not be possible to separately
identify which reactor is operating. A fissile material
moratorium would require both to be inoperative, and this could
be verified. The medical and commercial isotope production at
Dhruva, and possibly at Khushab, could be moved to nuclear power
reactors in the respective countries. To build confidence that
these power reactors are not contributing to the nuclear weapons
stockpile, they could be put under international safeguards. At
present, both power reactors in Pakistan, and four of the 12 in
India are safeguarded.
The shutdown of Pakistan's Kahuta uranium enrichment centrifuge
plant would be more difficult for India to verify from current
satellite images. One way around this problem would be to look
not at the enrichment plant itself but at the facility that
produces the uranium hexafluoride gas, which is fed into Kahuta's
centrifuges. The production of uranium hexafluoride is an energy
intensive, high temperature, chemical and electrochemical process
and may be detectable in thermal images. Since Pakistan has no
use for uranium hexafluoride other than producing fissile
material for nuclear weapons it would be feasible for its
production to stop under a moratorium.
Stopping fissile material production in South Asia, like any
other arms control or disarmament measure, is a question of
political commitment; the technical capability to verify such a
commitment is available. A halt now to fissile material
production for weapons in South Asia, announced unilaterally and
independently verifiable by commercial satellite images, offers
an opportunity for Pakistan and India to avoid the long,
dangerous, and expensive race that the U.S. and the Soviet Union
ran for 40 years.
At the same time, their initiative could help push the nuclear
weapons states to deal more urgently with the reduction of the
vast stockpiles of nuclear weapons and fissile material they have
accumulated. The fissile material gap could be closed by going
down rather than up.
(The writers are physicists, the first two at the Center for
Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, and the
third at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University).
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Previous : India woos the Islamic world Next : Help Sri Lanka | |
|
Front Page |
National |
International |
Southern States |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Other States |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyright © 2000 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|