Deeply disappointed with India’s stand on nuclear disarmament.
Its Foreign Secretary had nothing new to offer since a mere Working Paper of 2006, which is like an article anyone writes n submits to the #UNGA An idea. No action.
Even these words (pic) remain unchanged for years.
Such a pity that India has completely given up on any action on nuclear disarmament.
It is now pleased to be a nuclear armed state. When India had no nukes, it had a spine, a voice, n a will. Now it only has nukes n nothing else.
N they solve nothing with Pak n China either.
In the 1971 war that cleaved Pakistan into 2, India accused the US of ‘nuclear blackmail’ due to the presence of USS Enterprise in the Bay of Bengal. N cites it as a reason to acquire nukes itself, to prevent such blackmail in the future.
Now it loves that blackmailer.
N decided to join this blackmailer n become like it, abandoning all ideas India had about itself.
India forgets its own father of the nation:
“Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.”
Mahatma Gandhi
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The comparisons being made between #AUKUS n the India US civil nuclear deal (#IUSCND) of 2005-08 are not warranted just because nonproliferation questions apply to both.
But both stink.
Love India #AUKUS people but hate their governments. Be warned.
Quick read thread 1/20
#IUSCND was civil cooperation between non allies. #AUKUS is a pact between hardcore military partners. The object n purposes of the two are entirely different.
Comparing the 2 is like comparing apples n oranges.
2/20
Whatever the stated goals, the US gained a vassal state like India because of the #IUSCND. India got its ego pumped but has significantly lost its integrity as a serious player in international relations.
3/20
India shifts its position on #Palestine in the General Assembly debate.
1. At the UN Security Council @ambtstirumurti said at the end, “I reiterate India’s strong support for the just Palestinian cause n our unwavering commitment to the 2-state solution.”
2. India chose to speak again on the subject in the General Assembly debate.
That ‘unwavering commitment to the 2-state solution’ became “seek durable peace, in line with the vision of the two States living side by side within secure and recognized borders.”
3. The formulation
in the UN Security Council, which was explicit in its strong support to Palestine, was dropped in the General Assembly.
4. This was the ONLY bit that was changed from the UNSC formulation. General Assembly text is at para 8, the last one: pminewyork.gov.in/IndiaatUNGA?id…,,
But his analysis is flawed. While India may have ‘never faltered’ in REJECTING the #NPT on principles, it accepted it de facto once it went ahead with the Indo-US nuclear deal. Had to. 2005 IAEA vote. Saran led @MEAIndia
US accused Iran of violating #NPT n wanted Indian ‘yes’.
The same #NPT that not only is India NOT a part of, but as per Saran now, India ‘never faltered’ to ‘reject.’ N Saran was claiming he was averting a crisis for Iran! Like, India knows Iran’s interest better than Iran itself!!