In the wake of recent tensions and cross-border fighting, India's Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has called for United Nations supervision of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. This demand, amplified by news coverage and analysis by Palki Sharma, follows India's "Operation Sindoor" and escalating concerns about the safety and security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons.
Singh, speaking from Srinagar, questioned the safety of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, branding the nation as "irresponsible and rogue". He stated that Pakistan's nuclear weapons should be placed under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This call echoes Prime Minister Narendra Modi's earlier message to Islamabad, signaling a firm stance against what India perceives as "nuclear blackmail".
The demand for UN supervision arises from long-standing concerns about the stability and control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. These concerns are fueled by the presence of separatist fighters in Balochistan and Taliban terrorists in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, who aim to topple the government in Islamabad. The possibility of these groups gaining control of nuclear weapons presents a chilling prospect. Former US presidents, including Donald Trump and Joe Biden, have also voiced concerns about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Trump spoke in 2017 about preventing nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists. Biden has called Pakistan "one of the most dangerous places in the world" due to a perceived lack of cohesion in its nuclear program.
Pakistan has rejected these concerns, asserting that its nukes are for defense, not offense. In response to Singh's comments, Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused him of "profound insecurity and frustration" and claimed his comments showed "sheer ignorance" of the IAEA's mandate. They also worry that the IAEA and the international community should be more concerned about nuclear material theft in India.
The feasibility of UN supervision is complicated. The IAEA's mandate primarily covers countries that have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Pakistan has not signed. While the UN Security Council could potentially impose sanctions or place the nukes under supervision, China, a permanent member and Pakistan's ally, could veto such a proposal.
"Operation Sindoor" is a significant backdrop to these developments. Launched in response to a terror attack in Pahalgam, it involved strikes against terrorist infrastructure sites within Pakistan. India claims the operation targeted terror camps and eliminated over 100 terrorists, while Pakistan claims 31 Pakistanis were killed in the strikes. India has described the operation as a shift in its counterterrorism doctrine, demonstrating a willingness to retaliate against state-sponsored terrorism.
Rajnath Singh hailed "Operation Sindoor" as the largest counter-terror operation in India's history, affirming the country's readiness to dismantle cross-border terror networks.
Despite the current ceasefire, tensions remain high, with both countries trading accusations of nuclear weapons mismanagement. The situation is further complicated by the involvement of external actors. While India maintains that the issue is bilateral, the US has historically played a role in mediating tensions.
The call for UN supervision of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is a significant development in the ongoing India-Pakistan dynamic. It reflects India's growing concerns about regional security and its willingness to take a more assertive stance. Whether the international community will heed this call remains to be seen, but the issue has undoubtedly placed a spotlight on the precarious nature of nuclear security in the region.
