Asia & the Pacific

A sampling of articles in the Spring 2016 issue of the Belfer Center's journal International Security.

Pakistan has developed tactical nuclear weapons to deter India from executing its Cold Start war doctrine. India, however, has disavowed that doctrine. Further, the use of such weapons against Indian troops inside Pakistan would kill and injure countless civilians, while risking massive nuclear retaliation by India. In this International Security article, Jaganath Sankaran argues Pakistan should reconsider the role of tactical nuclear weapons in its military strategy.

"We should look at what happened from a different point of view. This was another successful special operation: recovery of a prisoner of war, with Taliban shooters in the hills overlooking the scene somewhere — nowhere — in Afghanistan; and with American C-130 gunships prowling overhead. In came the helicopter, and in a few minutes Sgt. Bergdahl was whisked away. No one got hurt."

"What did his supervisors know and when did they know it?...The killings are an unambiguous crime. It's possible that the killer just woke up in the middle of the night and went on a shooting spree, but for all we know, his superiors had grave concerns about his mental stability but were unwilling, or unable, to act on them. We have already learned that the soldier was in the midst of serious marital problems and was having difficulties reintegrating back and forth to civilian life after four tours of duty — a series of disclosures that suggest he was already on someone's radar."

"At the height of the cold war, President Dwight D. Eisenhower decided against direct military intervention on the side of the French in Vietnam in 1954 because he was convinced that it was more important to preserve the strength of the American economy. Today, such a strategy would avoid involvement of ground forces in major wars in Asia or in other poor countries."

The United States has a complex, multi-agency structure to plan, synchronize, and execute foreign policy and national security. By statute, the State Department is the lead agency for foreign policy. However, in practice, the much larger and better-funded Department of Defense conducts much of America's foreign policy activity, often with little coordination with the State Department or other relevant agencies. Over the past two decades, the military's Geographic Combatant Commands have taken an increasing lead in planning and executing foreign policy activities around the world. This has often effectively put a military face and voice on America's foreign policy, sometimes to the detriment of broader U.S. goals and relationships. More effective U.S. foreign policy requires greater interagency coordination at all levels and a greater role for the State Department as America's lead agency for foreign policy.

"...[E]xtremist elements in Pakistan have a clear incentive to precipitate a crisis between India and Pakistan, so that Pakistan's nuclear assets become more exposed and vulnerable to theft. Terrorist organizations in the region with nuclear ambitions, such as al-Qaida, may find no easier route to obtaining fissile material or a fully functional nuclear weapon than to attack India, thereby triggering a crisis between India and Pakistan and forcing Pakistan to ready and disperse nuclear assets—with few, if any, negative controls—and then attempting to steal the nuclear material when it is being moved or in the field, where it is less secure than in peacetime locations."

Vipin Narang, a research fellow with International Security Program and Project on Managing the Atom, discusses nuclear security and terrorism.