• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Joseph Cirincione"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Military",
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

Viewpoint: India's Nuclear Testing

Link Copied
By Joseph Cirincione
Published on May 18, 1998
Program mobile hero image

Program

Nuclear Policy

The Nuclear Policy Program aims to reduce the risk of nuclear war. Our experts diagnose acute risks stemming from technical and geopolitical developments, generate pragmatic solutions, and use our global network to advance risk-reduction policies. Our work covers deterrence, disarmament, arms control, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy.

Learn More

Source: Carnegie

Viewpoint

by Joseph Cirincione

May 18, 1998

Joseph Cirincione is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. He worked for nine years for the House National Security and Government Operations committees, and is an authority on global nuclear issues. He wrote this article exclusively for Aviation Week & Space Technology.

 

The global non-proliferation regime hit a nuclear iceberg last week. We didn’t see it coming, and the damage is more severe than it may appear from the upper decks. India’s nuclear tests burst a gaping hole in the interlocking network of treaties and agreements the U S has painstakingly constructed during the past 30 years.

India’s resumption of testing marks the fourth serious proliferation crisis since the end of the Cold War. The first was Iraq in 1991, with the discovery after the Persian Gulf War that Baghdad was much closer to developing nuclear weapons than previously realized. The second was the creation of three nuclear states of Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, spawned by the break-up of the Soviet Union in late 1991. Then came North Korea in 1994 with its diversion of nuclear weapons-grade material from the research reactors, possibly enough for two weapons. In each case, the damage was contained using the diplomatic, legal and economic tools provided by the non-proliferation regime.

The South Asian crisis is potentially the most serious of the crises precisely because the nations involved have remained outside the regime and the U. S. has so little influence in the region. The immediate danger is that Pakistan will test a nuclear device. This may ratchet up the crisis, provoking further Indian steps such as the construction or even deployment of nuclear weapons.

Mutual deployment of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and India would create the most unstable military confrontation of the nuclear age. With an on-going war over Kashmir and no buffer zone between the nations, each would then have weapons on airplanes or missiles capable of striking with as little as 3 min. warning. The chance for accident or miscalculation could rise to near certainty.

Sustained action must be taken now. First, every effort must be made to deter a Pakistani test. The Administration was correct to send its top officials, particularly Gen. Anthony Zinni, to confer with Pakistani authorities. U.S. sanctions against India must be carried out to the fullest extent to underscore that if Pakistan tests, it will be the most expensive ones Islamabad has ever conducted.

Second, the Administration must also try to lure India back from the brink. U.S. officials should pin down India’s vague references to signing elements of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). If India will agree now to stop further tests and sign the treaty (with Pakistan to follow), the crisis could be turned into a net plus.

Third, for this very reason, the Senate should accelerate its ratification of the pact, to set an example to the rest of the world and South Asia in particular. The President should be making this case personally and forcefully to the Senate and the nation. The situation demands presidential leadership and vision. If the Senate refuses to ratify the CTBT, or if China drops out of it, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) could begin to unravel.

Fourth, the President should make crystal clear that India is under a grand illusion if it believes that nuclear weapons will confer great power status upon it. No nation should be allowed to shoot its way onto the U. N. Security Council. The President and other world leaders should state that any additional permanent members of the Security Council would have to be a party to the NPT (as 185 nations are), and participants in good standing in the global non-proliferation regime.

Fifth, the Administration should start putting its resources where its threat assessments are. The intelligence agencies, the Joint Chiefs and the secretaries of State, Defense and Energy all cite the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction as the most serious threat to our national security. We need to allocate the financial and human resources necessary to detect the threats, negotiate solutions, pay for the security and disposal of the threatening materials, and more quickly reduce our stockpiles. This can be done by reallocating resources from Cold War hangovers to new programs for the new threats. One quick fix would be to reprogram the $143 million of now-canceled aid to India to pay for oil for North Korea. This would fulfill America’s part of an agreement that calls for exchanges of oil for plutonium. That is a great deal no matter how you look at it, but one that is hung up now by congressional cut-backs.

About the Author

Joseph Cirincione

Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    The End of Neoconservatism

      Joseph Cirincione

Joseph Cirincione
Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation
Joseph Cirincione
MilitaryNuclear Policy

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 Endowment for International Peace

  • large boat sitting off a coastline
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Impacts of the Houthis’ Advance Could Extend Well Beyond Saudi Arabia

    The Horn of Africa countries are among those facing a new security calculus.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Dr. Lesley Anne Warner

      Andrew Leber, Lesley Anne Warner

  • Greenland United States Denmark Agreement Nuuk
    Commentary
    The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time

    The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.

      Marc Pierini

  • The nuclear missile formation passes through Tian'anmen Square during a military parade on September 3, 2025 in Beijing, China.
    Paper
    Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its Allies

    The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.

      Tong Zhao

  • Army professional employing AI tech to improve military combat systems
    Commentary
    On Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain and the Implications for Human Rights

    The world is at a critical inflection point, where a combination of ever more powerful AI systems, accelerating proliferation, and a corresponding norms vacuum is setting up a dangerous set of conditions.

      • Steve Feldstein

      Steve Feldstein

  • Research
    In Pursuit of Nuclear-Powered Submarines: Australia, South Korea, And Japan

    A look at why states without nuclear weapons are seeking naval nuclear propulsion, whether they can legally and technically deliver it, what it will cost them, and what responsible stewardship of the capability would look like.

      Jamie Kwong

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.