| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
057865
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
181069
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On March 4, 2020, members of India’s indigenous communities, known as Adivasis (i.e., original inhabitants), gathered at Jantar Mantar—an iconic protest site in New Delhi—to register their objections against the Citizenship Amendment Act–National Register of Citizens–National Population Register (CAA–NRC–NPR). The protesters, who came from different parts of India, opposed them mainly on three grounds.
First, they were concerned that a large segment of Adivasis may not be able to prove their citizenship due to the lack of identification documents and, therefore, could lose their citizenship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
182272
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Most successful U.S. presidents have actively led efforts to advance arms control agreements and reduce the risk of nuclear war. Although much has been achieved over the years, there are still 14,000 nuclear weapons and nine nuclear-armed states; progress on disarmament has stalled; and tensions between the United States and its main nuclear adversaries—Russia and China—are rising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
022416
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2002.
|
| Description |
133-148
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In early 2002, the Bush administration's Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) was unveiled officially and through leaks of confidential portions to the press. The release provoked immediate controversy. Yet supporters of the NPR have oversold its benefits while its critics have exaggerated its dangers. The NPR is neither a transformational nuclear strategy nor a dangerous path to nuclear armageddon. What is striking about the document is not so much the bold new directions that it charts, but its tinkering with policies that it claims to have rejected. This suggests that a great deal of the public and international response has been shaped as much by context as content. In the near-term, the most serious consequences of the NPR are the diplomatic and geopolitical problems it causes for America's standing and image in the world, rather than its direct effects on international security and the prospects for war and peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
023508
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Fall/winter 2002.
|
| Description |
67-81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
193522
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is a need for mainstreaming South Asian Non-NPT Nuclear Weapon States. India is an emerging market and Pakistan has the potential to become a future market for nuclear energy. Furthermore, they have nuclear weapons, making it important to take them on board in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime (NPR). Given the reality that they are not ready to roll back their nuclear program, there is a need to explore options for mainstreaming them especially in nuclear export control mechanisms. This article investigates the policy imperatives for the international community to address the South Asian Non-NPT-NWSs in the NSG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
105009
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
his article examines the preparation of the US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) by the Obama Administration. In doing so it seeks to answer a puzzle: why is there such a gap between the vision of a 'world free of nuclear weapons' set out by President Obama in his Prague speech of 2009 and the significantly more modest outcomes of the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review? The question is answered by employing the Bureaucratic Politics Paradigm developed by Graham Allison and Morton Halperin. It is argued that the answer lies in the fierce bureaucratic battles that are playing out within the administration, with both routine decision making and the outcomes of political games affecting the eventual NPR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
096319
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
058576
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
062282
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
098321
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) emphasis two realities, first the challenge of
nuclear terrorism and proliferation; and second, it affirms the end of the Cold
War rivalries. But the "resetting" of relationship with Moscow had created an
enemy vacuum for the U.S. To fill this gap, North Korea has been constructed
as an enemy which justifies the continuity of the "nuclear umbrella" in the
Northeast Asian region. But as an asymmetrical, surrogate enemy it is actually
the pretext to maintain 'critical bases' in Northeast Asia which functions as
hubs for U.S. global military power projection. The U.S. interprets its security
in terms of its primacy and any perceptible shift from this position makes it
feel insecure. This ontological security seeking of the U.S. makes the existence
of security dilemma de rigueur in Northeast Asia and prods the U.S. to take a
hard line approach towards North Korea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
096320
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
058608
|
|
|