| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
047560
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Department of Atomic Energy, 1998.
|
| Description |
277p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 043185 | 333.7924/SUN 043185 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
131312
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014.
|
| Description |
xiv, 230p.Hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9780198702931
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 057786 | 355.825119/RAB 057786 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
074901
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The rapid and parallel rise of China and India on the world stage has resulted in rife critical comparisons of the two Asian giants. However, an exploration of potential scope for Sino-Indian cooperation to their mutual benefit may prove a more fruitful exercise. Whether in the economic or strategic sense, or whether pertaining to aspirations towards global power status, Sino-Indian interests are certainly converging. Already, progressively deeper Sino-Indian interactions signal a ripening of mutual trust. This could pave the way for the establishment of specific platforms of mutual collaboration, lesson-learning and aid which would not only be useful in themselves, but may serve as important confidence building-measures for the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
046556
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Atlantic publishers and distributors, 1999.
|
| Description |
xvi, 109p.
|
| Standard Number |
8171568092
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 045475 | 355.825119/GUP 045475 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
009229
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
July-Aug 1995.
|
| Description |
28-32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
128932
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
174855
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Can positive domestic messages generated by a foreign policy of engagement toward another country change public views regarding that state? How resistant are such changes to events that contradict the positive messages? I argue that while positive government messages about an adversary can significantly improve public opinion, highly consequential foreign policy events that contradict the messages influence public opinion at the cost of elites’ ability to shape it through their messages. Such differing effects can lead to a polarization of opinion when the content of the messages and the nature of events diverge from each other. Leveraging the unpredictability of North Korea’s foreign policy behavior, the South Korean government’s sustained policy of engagement toward it during the years 1998–2007, and North Korea’s first two nuclear tests to examine the relative impact of consequential foreign policy events and elite messages on public opinion, I find strong evidence consistent with this argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
058259
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
152846
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
046566
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Commonwealth Publishers, 2000.
|
| Description |
vii, 315p.
|
| Standard Number |
8171696155
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 045432 | 355.82511909/DES 045432 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
016527
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
July/aug 1993.
|
| Description |
28-32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
101867
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On April 5, U.S. President Barack Obama declared the entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as one of the highest priorities of the nuclear disarmament policy. On April 15, B. Obama -for the second time since 1999 - urged Congress to ratify the document.
On September 16, the U.S. State Department announced the resumption of American participation in the Conference on Facilitating the Entry into Force of the CTBT. U.S. experts started talking about the high probability of Congress ratifying the treaty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
113790
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After the 1998 tests, both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons, weapon usable material and significant civilian and military nuclear infrastructure. Both are seriously engaged in revising their plans and refining their weapons and delivery systems. They are spending enormous sums on the production, deployment, targeting, defence, supervision and control of their nuclear weapons and delivery systems, as well as on the infrastructure that would generate the fissile material, warheads, aircraft, missiles and command and control systems necessary for their nuclear programmes. But they observe utmost secrecy in all these matters. Hence, it is very difficult to comparatively assess their nuclear programmes. Much of the available literature is speculative and unreliable, and requires careful examination. The article compares the two nuclear programmes in terms of their respective nuclearisation routes, motivations, weapons capabilities, inventories, nuclear doctrines, command and control and delivery systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
015982
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Spring 1993.
|
| Description |
140-155
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
011447
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Jan-March 1997.
|
| Description |
78-87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|