| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
059723
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Jan-Feb 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
089700
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The CTBT and FMCT had receded from international agenda in recent years. In India, too, these two compacts had retreated from the forefront of our cocerns. It is the Indo-US nuclear deal, with associated IAEA and NSG decision, that monopolized our attention for three years. No doubt both these issues figured during deal related discussions, but essentially in the bilateral India-US context.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
053014
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
118123
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
013384
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Feb 1998.
|
| Description |
1685-1701
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
048523
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Geneva, UNDIR, 1999.
|
| Description |
iii, 110p.
|
| Series |
UNIDIR/DF/99/1
|
| Standard Number |
12207287
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 041608 | 355.825119/HOF 041608 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
137837
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
116643
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Most of them having breathed a sigh of relief at the outcome of the US presidential election, legions of America-watchers around the world now wonder how President Barack Obama will use his renewed mandate in the foreign policy arena. They are acutely aware that foreign-policy issues played little role in the election campaign. Even the presidential candidates' debate that was supposed to bear on global matters pivoted back to domestic economic and education issues. No foreign-policy initiatives were enunciated during the campaign. The logical conclusion is that Obama will carry on as he has been in the foreign-policy realm, avoiding impossible issues such as the Israeli-Palestine quagmire and managing inescapable problems through the application of reasoned pragmatism. Knowing first-hand the aphorism attributed to Harold Macmillan of how it is 'events, dear boy, events' that blow governments off course, his policies are likely to be reactive rather than proactive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
128200
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What is needed is a multi-layered dialogue to engage a critical mass of policy-makers, opinionmakers and civil society from across the ME's political and socio-cultural spectrum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
139045
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In 2005 the Bush administration decided to normalize India’s participation in international nuclear cooperation. In a joint statement with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, President George W. Bush announced that he would work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India.[1] Singh affirmed that India was “ready to assume the same responsibilities and practices and acquire the same benefits and advantages as other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology, such as the United States,” and announced a number of nonproliferation and disarmament commitments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
105625
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
137585
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
115792
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
128018
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the immediate aftermath of nuclear weapon tests in May 1998, Pakistan opted
for a policy of minimum deterrence, which entailed that Pakistan would not need
a larger number of nuclear deterrent forces, as a small number of them would be
sufficient to deter. The concept of a minimum deterrence existed even before
Pakistan tested nuclear weapons. However, later Islamabad realized that minimum
could not be sustained as earlier conceptualized. It needed to be evolving and
dynamic. Minimum deterrence (MD) transformed into minimum credible deterrence
(MCD) which had policy implications for Pakistan's force-building structure.
Among its force building, Pakistan not only upgrades its deterrent forces, but also
builds more nuclear reactors which makes Islamabad reluctant to withdraw its
veto from the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). It requires more fissile
materials in order to enhance its deterrent credibility. Why does Islamabad do
this, and if its policy approach remains consistent with the minimum deterrence it
conceptualized earlier? This article examines the rudimentary factors that increase
Pakistan's security concerns and elaborates on Pakistan's post-1998 shifting policy
approach toward fissile materials in the region's changed strategic environment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
119749
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article is toevaluate Pakista's role in global arms control and disarmament. It discusses how Pakistan supported the international disarmament process and why it later shifted its perception for acquiring nuclear weapons. Also, it broadly analyses Pakistan's concerns about then arms control and disarmament process both at the international and regional level. The author considers that these conserns became the hurdles that keep the two nuclear rivals of South Asia away from the creation of Arms Control Regime (ACR) needed for strategic stability and the security of armed forces in the South Asian region.
Practically, the ACR does not exist in the South Asian strategic environment. This article is a call to address certain tangible and intangible variables which hinder the process of creation of an ACR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
095269
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since May 2009, Pakistan, largely alone, has blocked the start of international talks on a fissile material cutoff treaty (FMCT) at the 65-member Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva.[1] The treaty would ban the production of fissile materials for weapons purposes; fissile materials, namely plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU), are the key ingredients in nuclear weapons. Pakistan has prevented these negotiations despite having accepted last year a CD program of work that included an FMCT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
095265
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As initiatives for nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation have been emerging in rapid succession, the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference is approaching. The review conference is a unique forum for evaluating the operations of the NPT "with a view to assuring that the purposes of the Preamble and the provisions of the Treaty are being realized," as the treaty puts it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
122277
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
123542
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
007144
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Summer 2000.
|
| Description |
120-135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|