Abstract
The following paper examines nuclear proliferation in India and in Pakistan, specifically considering the matter from a "collective goods" perspective. It then proceeds to delineate all of the various reasons why it is dangerously naive to think that the nuclear weapons race being waged by the two rivals will somehow lead to a long-term and relatively stable balance of power situation. The paper concludes by stating that mutual suspicion, constant meddling by other powers, religious and ethnic hatreds and deep-seated insecurities conspire to make nuclear proliferation on the part of these two international actors the last thing the global community should want.

From the Paper
" The following paper will look at nuclear proliferation in India and in Pakistan. Specifically, the paper begins by examining the matter from a "collective goods" perspective and then proceeds to delineate all of the various reasons why it is dangerously naive to think that the nuclear weapons race being waged by the two rivals will somehow lead to a long-term and relatively stable "balance of power situation". In the final analysis, mutual suspicion, constant meddling by other powers (China being one), religious and ethnic hatreds, deep-seated insecurities (certainly on the part of Pakistan) and the unpredictability of a world wherein..."

Tags:nuclear, proliferation, pakistan

Abstract
The paper examines the nuclear weaponry proliferation from a "collective goods" perspective and explores the many reasons why a nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan will not lead to a stable balance of power in the region. The paper discusses international terrorism, sectarian and ethnic hatreds, deep-seated paranoia and the fact that Pakistan is overly-reliant upon its nuclear weaponry for its defense. The paper therefore argues that India and Pakistan should be discouraged from their present nuclear build-ups.

From the Paper
"To start with, "collective goods" is really a term drawn from economics - albeit it is one that can be applied to a number of different disciplines depending upon the context within which it is being introduced. For our purposes, "collective goods" are really public goods wherein the item in question cannot be withheld from one consumer without also withholding it from all consumers. A classic example of this is national defense whereby a nation cannot defend its borders without also defending all individuals who reside within those borders at any one time - including foreigners or "undesirables". Additionally, the "flip-side" of collective goods is that, not only are they items which cannot practicably be denied to any one person, but they are also items which benefit those who simply refuse to pay for them; suffice it to say, the collective good makes "free-riders" out of many people (Yamagishi & Sato, 67-69). This concept has immediate application to the issue of nuclear proliferation in India and Pakistan."

Tags:collective, goods, tensions, defense, terrorism, ethnic, hatreds, paranoia

Abstract
In this article, the writer provides an analysis of nuclear proliferation in India, Pakistan, and the Middle East as viewed through the prisms of realism, liberalism, and constructivism. The writer looks at differences in the arguments based on their particular thinking.

From the Paper
"The issue of nuclear proliferation has become a pressing concern for the global community as more countries become nuclear powers. This concern has been filtered through different schools of political thought. Stable nuclear deterrence as elucidated by constructivist thinkers has three overarching requirements prevention of preventive war during periods where one side has a clear temporary advantage development of survivable second-strike capability and mechanisms to avoid accidental nuclear war. Realist thinkers would argue that in a dangerous and anarchic world countries have a built in incentive to develop nuclear ..."

Tags:nuclear, proliferation, treaties, iraq, iran, israel, pakistan, india, liberalism, constructivism, realism

Abstract
An examination of the ongoing conflicts between India and Pakistan and how the introduction of nuclear weapons has effected their conflicting relationship. The author reveals how nuclear proliferation has its bonuses in minimizing threat between the two countries yet simultaneously threatening global security.

From the Paper
"There is no larger threat to the world than nuclear warfare. A World War in which nuclear weapons were used would undoubtedly cease life as we know it on earth. This outcome would be attributed to the direct effects of the bombs and the indirect effects a nuclear winter would bring about. This fact leads the majority of people to believe that the less amount of nuclear weapons on the planet the better. Now let's say that you live in India or Pakistan, neighboring countries that have fought each other in the past. Many people have died in battles between these two countries. Within the last few years each of these countries has acknowledged the fact that they possess nuclear weapons by testing them underground for the world, and especially each other, to see. So was the introduction of nuclear weapons a good or bad thing for the future of relations between India and Pakistan? The introduction of nuclear weapons into the militaries of these two regional powers was a huge step in reducing the chance of all-out war between the two rivals due to nuclear deterrence. However, just because the threat of nuclear attack has slowly helped start India and Pakistan on the road to peace, it does not necessarily mean that the world would be better off if every nation had nuclear weapons."

Tags:cold, india, pakistan, war, security, destruction, human

Abstract
The author takes a look at the two newest declared nuclear powers: India and Pakistan. The author analyzes the potential solutions for resolving the conflict as well as short-term safety concerns. The author examines the CTBT, a Fissile Materials Production Cutoff Treaty, Permissive Action Links, and nuclear disarmament as potential solutions before arriving at his conclusion.

From the Paper
"Albert Einstein once remarked that, "Bullets kill men, but atomic bombs kill cities. A tank is a defense against a bullet, but there is no defense against a weapon that can destroy civilization. ... Our defense is law and order" (Calaprice, 2000, p. 177). The Nuclear situation that exists between India and Pakistan is one that deserves much more attention from US policymakers than it currently receives. The United States should play a significant role in any nuclear regime change that would take place in India or Pakistan. Because the United States is a trusted negotiator by both sides, it has a unique role that it can play (Bajpai, 2003, p. 125). The options that the US could pursue are not all direct actions. Sometimes the best way to influence policy is not through coercion but through leadership and example setting. While many options exist, the four policy choices that should be examined more closely are CTBT ratification, a Fissile Materials Production Cutoff Treaty, sharing Permissive Action Links with Pakistan or both countries, and finally nuclear disarmament as set forth by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)."

Tags:arms, control, ctbt, disarmament, fmct, non, npt, pals, proliferation, treaty, weapons

Abstract
This paper explains that, over the last fifty years, the most significant shift in India's energy consumption was the replacement of non-commercial energy with commercial energy, generated frequently
from oil, which is being compromised by the ever-increasing cost of oil. The author points out that India's nuclear power program is poised to take off rapidly because of the accelerated rate of growth of India's economy and its ever increasing need for reasonable priced energy. The paper relates that the Indo-U.S. agreement on the Nuclear energy is largely a result of President Bush's strong commitment to reducing dependence on fossil fuels, to cutting back emissions of greenhouse gases and to cutting radioactive nuclear wastes, which marks the beginning of a new era of geo-politics to rebuild a balance of power in Asia vis-a-vis China and Pakistan. Many charts and tables.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Current Global Nuclear Energy Scenario
Nuclear Energy in India and Its Economics
The Economics of Nuclear Power in India
Indo-U.S .Nuke Deal: Opportunities and Challenges
Implication at Home
The Impact on Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy
Regional Issues
Impact on the Middle East and Israel
Impact on Brazil, Libya, Argentina, Ukraine and South Africa
China
Proliferation Crisis in North Korea
Pakistan
Perceptions of India about Non-Proliferation
Issue of Separation of Civilian and Nuclear Facilities
Concluding Remarks

From the Paper
"India, however, breached the international taboo on "going nuclear" in 1998, by testing a series of nuclear explosive devices on May11 and 13 and officially declaring itself a new "nuclear weapons power". These events triggered Pakistan's nuclear explosive testing response two weeks later. Thus, suddenly emerged two self-declared, non-NPT nuclear weapons states radically changing the efficacy of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. This was followed by economic sanctions on both the countries. The problems in the US-India relationship arose from the 1994 Glenn Amendment to the US Arms Export Control Act. The Glenn Amendment requires that the US respond to the Indian nuclear tests with seven steps that are almost automatic in their application to India and Pakistan."

Tags:deal, security, pakistan, coal, facilities

Abstract
This paper relates that, unlike the nuclear powers of the Cold War, the new nuclear candidates will be unable to acquire an effective nuclear deterrence system due to the flaw in their command structure, absence of a second strike capability, and lack of a safety mechanism. The paper uses the wars in Afghanistan and Iran and the level of danger faced by the U.S. from a North Korean as examples of modern warfare and demonstrates that maintaining a flexible military force, combined with Americas' ability to act unilaterally and preventively when needed, serves as a better alternative to prevent nuclear proliferation.

From the Paper
"The War in Afghanistan had clear pre-set goals including a regime change, destruction of Al-Qaeda and the capture of its leader Osama bin Laden. The mobilization was rapid beginning with the aerial bombardment on October 7th, 2001. Taliban air defenses and Al-Qaeda training camps were first on the target list followed by the Taliban's communication infrastructure. Our forces carried out precision strikes with cruise missiles and F16/fighter bombers and the Air Force utilized its expertise in carpet bombing."

Tags:guerrilla, multilateral response, resources, vietnam war, technology

Abstract
This paper discusses the necessary elements for an effective U.S. policy stance on nuclear arms and nuclear proliferation control. It examines both political policy and military options necessary to counter nuclear program advancements in hostile countries.

Abstract
This essay examines the claims of India and Pakistan over Kashmir, and examines some of the more viable solutions towards ending the fifty year standoff, concluding with a proposition for self-determination. It also suggests solutions to avoiding a nuclear conflict.

From the Paper
"Few current events are capable of conjuring the level of passion characteristically aroused in the debate over the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The valley that has historically been characterized by the beauty and fertility of its land is now depicted in routine acts of violence, religious extremism, and human rights atrocities, and the issues at hand are as convoluted as the region's ancient history. Most aspects regarding Kashmir's current turmoil remain obscured to outsiders by ambiguity and propaganda. What have become evident, however, are the countless atrocities routinely perpetrated over the past several decades. Since 1947, Pakistan and India have twice declared war over the disputed territory, and have persistently engaged in low-level border skirmishes, which have left thousands dead. Because both counties now possess nuclear weapons, the international stakes in resolving the conflict have never been greater. Although both India and Pakistan have undoubtedly played a role in the violence, one's view of the crisis depends upon which account has been given, as both countries seem more interested in distorting the facts to aid their own cause, rather than viewing acts of violence individually and objectively."

Tags:asia, conflict, determination, extremism, foriegn, fundamentalism, hindu, independence, india, islam, jammu, jihad, mujahadeen, musharraf, nuclear, pakistan, policy, proliferation, religious, self, south, threat

Abstract
This paper states that China has recovered its larger economic, political and military stature in East Asia and is becoming a major power in the world. This ominous development is of supreme concern and interest to the United States. The author discusses China's complex relationship with Taiwan and its apprehension about Japan's agreement with the United States on a theater missile defense (TMD) system and on launching spy satellites. The paper explains the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the concern of China about the nuclearization of India, Pakistan and North Korea.

From the Paper
"Although almost all states in the world signed the NPT, the world remained insecure and at the brink of nuclear proliferation and disaster. Observers and critics believe that preventing this would require States with nuclear capabilities to reconsider their stand on a higher moral standpoint and discard their nuclear modernization programs. Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea, for example, needed to terminate their respective programs and agendas, using nuclear weapons."

Tags:missiles, military build-up, dictatorial defense budget