Ever since
India
went nuclear in 1998, the question has become critical for strategic analysts whether
China
would use nuclear weapons against
India
in any future scenario. Opinion on this issue is divided into two categories. The first group sees very little chance of a nuclear attack on
India
by
China
unless
India
fires the first nuclear salvo. The argument put forward by them is that
China
has a defensive nuclear doctrine and follows a policy of ‘no-first’ use of nuclear weapons against nuclear weapons states (NWS). This group sees
China
as a ‘satisfied power’ that is happy with its ‘status-quo’ position on the Sino-Indian border.
India
, therefore, figures very low in the Chinese threat cosmology and there is a very low probability of both countries going to war over the border question. Even otherwise, the stakes are too low for
China
to use nuclear weapons in any such war, if it happens.
However, there is another group that is apprehensive of the Chinese nuclear posture. They reason that there has always been a gap between
China
’s policy and practice. The same holds true for nuclear weapons. From a country that used to denigrate nuclear weapons as ‘paper-tigers,’
China
quickly gave up this practice the moment it acquired nuclear weapons. Further, if the border issue is not resolved, the Chinese attitude towards
India
could become more aggressive and
China
might resort to a nuclear attack in Arunachal Pradesh to ‘teach
India
a lesson.’ In doing so,
China
might justify its attack on various grounds. It may argue that it does not recognize
India
’s rights to Arunachal Pradesh that rightfully belongs to
China
. In using nuclear weapons against its ‘own territory’
China
may claim the issue to be a ‘domestic’ one, and may even dispute the fact that it has attacked
India
. It might even brush aside the allegations that it has violated the 1996 Agreement with
India
on Confidence Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Control (LAC) on the pretext that Art. I of the Agreement only prohibit use of military capability and not nuclear capability.
In posing the bogey of a possible Chinese nuclear attack on Arunachal Pradesh, the second group is making a narrow interpretation of the 1996 Agreement, apart from being grossly pessimistic and ignorant of international law. Art. I needs to be read in a broader perspective; it also needs to be read alongwith other articles of the Agreement. The term military capability is a broad term that also includes nuclear capability. Art. I should be read in that spirit. As for the claim that
China
could dub Arunachal Pradesh a domestic territory while launching a nuclear attack, Arts. II-VIII provides safeguards against such an eventuality. Article II of the treaty clearly stipulates that ‘pending an ultimate solution to the boundary question, the two sides reaffirm their commitments to strictly respect and observe the LAC in the India-China border areas. No activities of either side shall cross the LAC. Art. III commits both nations to reduce their military forces along the LAC to a minimum level. Art.V provides that no combat aircraft shall fly within ten km. of the LAC and that no military aircraft of either side shall fly across the LAC except by prior permission. If these provisions are read along with the 1993 Agreement to maintain Peace and Tranquility along the LAC, it becomes clear that
China
cannot explain its violation of LAC, as it is duty bound to observe and implement both the agreements signed by it.
Moreover, it is a known fact that the Chinese claim to Arunachal Pradesh is symbolic which
China
had been willing to barter for Aksai Chin under its proposals for ‘Mutual Understanding and Mutual Accommodation’. It is dubious if
China
is serious enough about Arunachal Pradesh to contemplate a nuclear attack. Even if it is assumed that
China
considers Arunachal Pradesh as its own territory, the truth is that both countries have taken steps to ameliorate the chances of
China
launching a nuclear attack. Respecting the LAC is a step in that direction..
After the 1962 War, both countries have managed to live together in a relatively peaceful atmosphere, despite the lingering border problem. Both countries have respected the LAC. In the last decade, both countries have developed a mechanism to define the LAC so that no untoward incident takes place. There is a high probability that the LAC may be agreed to as the final border between the two countries. Pending that, there is little possibility of
China
violating the LAC, leave aside the chances of a nuclear attack on Arunachal Pradesh.
Facebook
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
