• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "C. Raja Mohan"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie India"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "South Asia",
    "India",
    "East Asia",
    "China",
    "Japan",
    "North Korea"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Arms Control"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie India

Beijing's Nukes

This is a good moment for India to actively intervene in the global nuclear debate, articulate its priorities, and seek to promote a nuclear consensus among the major powers.

Link Copied
By C. Raja Mohan
Published on Feb 13, 2013

Source: Indian Express

United States President Barack Obama's expected announcement Tuesday night (at the time of going to press), in his annual State of the Union address to the US Congress, on plans to reduce the American nuclear arsenal to about 1,000 weapons is unlikely to make a big impression on China.

Beijing has long called for drastic, verifiable and irreversible reductions of the arsenals of the US and Russia, which hold most of the world's nuclear weapons. China, however, is unwilling to make cuts of its own nuclear arsenal at this stage. It has insisted that other nuclear weapon states should join the process of reductions only when conditions are "ripe".

This approach leaves Beijing much leeway in responding to Obama's latest nuclear initiative. It allows Beijing to hold the high diplomatic ground on supporting the long-term goal of global zero, promising to join multilateral talks on nuclear reductions when it is convenient, and leaving room for its nuclear weapon modernisation in the interim.

According to a report in The New York Times earlier this week, Obama has plans to work out an informal agreement in the next few months with President Vladimir Putin of Russia to make deeper cuts in their nuclear arsenals.

Under a treaty called "New START", which the two countries signed in 2010, Washington and Moscow agreed to bring down their deployed nuclear warheads to 1,550 each by 2018. If Obama can get Putin to agree — this is by no means certain, given the current lack of warmth between the two — the two sides could trim the size of their bloated nuclear armouries by a third.

China knows that further negotiated nuclear cuts are possible only when Washington and Moscow sort out their differences on missile defence, which might yet take some doing. Like Moscow, Beijing also opposes the US development of missile defences.

China is also certain that fiscal pressures to significantly cut American defence expenditure are as much behind the logic of deep cuts as the traditional framework of arms control with Russia.

Much like the West that saw Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's nuclear disarmament initiatives nearly three decades ago as stemming from Russia's economic weakness, China could interpret Obama's moves as reflecting long-term American decline.

Asian Concerns

If China is unconcerned about deep cuts in American nuclear weaponry, some among its East Asian neighbours are deeply worried about the credibility of America's "extended deterrence".

America's Asian allies, especially Japan and South Korea, chose not to develop their own nuclear weapons, on the bet that the US "nuclear umbrella" works for them. During the Cold War, the US extended deterrence against the Soviet threat seemed credible for Washington's allies.

Today, amidst the rise of China and its increasing political assertiveness, many in Japan and South Korea wonder about the sustainability of US nuclear guarantees if Washington brings about rapid reductions in the size of its arsenal.

Many American arms controllers dismiss the Asian fears about extended deterrence as overblown. But for East Asia, living through a historic shift in the regional balance in favour of China, deep cuts in the US nuclear arsenal may reinforce their apprehensions about America's ability to sustain the regional balance of power.

Delhi's View

In contrast to some in East Asia, India has every reason to welcome Obama's plans to negotiate deeper nuclear cuts with Russia. Like China, India has seen deep cuts in the US and Russian arsenals as an important first step on the road towards nuclear disarmament.

When Obama came to India in November 2010, he and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reaffirmed their shared commitment to a nuclear-weapon-free world and called for "meaningful dialogue among all states possessing nuclear weapons to build trust and confidence and for reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in international affairs".

This is not very different from China's call for multilateral nuclear arms control at an appropriate stage. The differences are essentially about timing and the list of participants and other conditions.

Yet, there is no denying that India's disarmament policy shares much common ground with the stated positions of the US, France, Russia and China. This is a good moment for India to actively intervene in the global nuclear debate, articulate the priorities and seek to promote a nuclear consensus among the major powers.

This article originally appeared in the Indian Express.

About the Author

C. Raja Mohan

Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India

A leading analyst of India’s foreign policy, Mohan is also an expert on South Asian security, great-power relations in Asia, and arms control.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Deepening the India-France Maritime Partnership

      C. Raja Mohan, Darshana M. Baruah

  • Commentary
    Shanghai Cooperation Organization at Crossroads: Views From Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi
      • Alexander Gabuev
      • +1

      Alexander Gabuev, Paul Haenle, C. Raja Mohan, …

C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
SecurityMilitaryForeign PolicyNuclear PolicyArms ControlNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth AsiaIndiaEast AsiaChinaJapanNorth Korea

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is it NATO’s Job to Support Trump’s War of Choice?

    Donald Trump has demanded that European allies send ships to the Strait of Hormuz while his war of choice in Iran rages on. He has constantly berated NATO while the alliance’s secretary-general has emphatically supported him.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Time to Merge the Commission and EEAS

    The EU is structurally incapable of reacting to today’s foreign policy crises. The union must fold the EEAS into the European Commission and create a security council better prepared to take action on the global stage.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Russia’s Imperial Retreat Is Europe’s Strategic Opportunity

    The war in Ukraine is costing Russia its leverage overseas. Across the South Caucasus and Middle East, this presents an opportunity for Europe to pick up the pieces and claim its own sphere of influence.

      William Dixon, Maksym Beznosiuk

  • Commentary
    Is the Radical-Right Threat Existential or Overstated?

    Amid increased polarization and the influence of disinformation, radical-right parties are once again gaining traction across Europe. With landmark elections on the horizon in several countries, are the EU’s geostrategic vision and fundamental values under existential threat?

      Catherine Fieschi, Cas Mudde

  • Research
    Planetary vs International Security: Economic Growth at the Crossroads

    Economic growth is at the heart of a dilemma between planetary and international security.

      Olivia Lazard

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.