Pakistan’s new army chief says will defend “motherland”

Lieutenant General Munir, appointed as the new Chief Of Army Staff of Pakistan, meets with Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, in Islamabad
Lieutenant General Asim Munir, who was appointed as the new Chief Of Army Staff (COAS) of Pakistan, meets with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif at the Prime Minister’s House, in Islamabad, Pakistan November 24, 2022. Press Information Department (PID)/Handout via REUTERS 

Pakistan’s new army chief says will defend “motherland” during visit to disputed Kashmir

Reuters7:11 PM MST

Dec 3 (Reuters) – Pakistan’s new army chief on Saturday said the military was ready to defend “every inch of our motherland” if attacked, during a visit to the Line of Control (LoC) that divides the disputed Kashmir region, which is claimed by both Pakistan and neighbouring India.

The visit came less than a week since General Asim Munir took charge of Pakistan’s powerful military, and were among his strongest public statements on arch-rival India since taking up the role.

“Let me make it categorically clear, Pakistan’s armed forces are ever ready, not only to defend every inch of our motherland, but to take the fight back to the enemy if ever war is imposed on us,” he said, according to a statement from the military’s media wing. “Indian state will never be able to achieve her nefarious designs.”

India’s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment.

The two South Asian nuclear powers both claim the Kashmir region in full, but rule only parts, and have fought two of their three wars over the area.

Both sides often accuse each other of breaching a 2003 ceasefire pact by shelling and firing across the LoC, a 740-km (460-mile) de facto border that cuts Kashmir into two.

Since early 2021, the LoC has been mostly quiet, following the renewal of a ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan.

Pakistan’s generals retain a strong influence over security matters and foreign affairs, according to analysts, and Pakistan’s army chief will play a key role in managing risks of conflict with India on its eastern border, while also dealing with potential friction with Afghanistan on its western frontier.

The Chinese Nuclear Horn Continues to Grow: Daniel 7

China's Leader Xi Jinping arrives to attend the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC summit in Bangkok on Nov. 19, 2022. (Jack Taylor/Pool Photo via AP)

China’s Leader Xi Jinping arrives to attend the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC summit in Bangkok on Nov. 19, 2022. (Jack Taylor/Pool Photo via AP)


China to Increase Nuclear Warheads to 1,500, Pentagon Warns

By The Associated Press

December 1, 2022 Updated: December 2, 2022

WASHINGTON—China is expanding its nuclear force and is on pace to nearly quadruple the number of warheads it has by 2035, rapidly closing its gap with the United States, the Pentagon said in a report released Tuesday.

The report builds on the military’s warning last year that China is expanding its nuclear force much faster than U.S. officials had predicted, highlighting a broad and accelerating buildup of military muscle designed to enable Beijing to match or surpass U.S. global power by mid-century.

Last year, the Pentagon said the number of Chinese nuclear warheads could increase to 700 within six years and may top 1,000 by 2030. The new report says China currently has about 400 nuclear warheads, and that number could grow to 1,500 by 2035.

The United States, by comparison, has 3,750 active nuclear warheads.

The Chinese communist regime’s growing arsenal is creating uncertainty for the United States as it navigates how to deter two nuclear powers, Russia and China, simultaneously, the Pentagon said in its recent nuclear posture review. And the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) buildup also creates uncertainty about its intentions, said Bonny Lin, director of the China power project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“Will the actual increase in capability start impacting how Chinese experts think about the use of nuclear weapons?,” such as whether it would change Beijing’s no “first use” policy, Lin asked. “That’s the uncertainty. We can’t assume that if they have more capabilities, that their policy is going to remain the same.”

China is closely watching how the international community reacts to Russia’s threat to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, said John Erath, senior policy director for the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation.

“If Russia is able to gain its objectives by means of nuclear threats, China will derive lessons from that and could be potentially making these kinds of threats against Taiwan or other neighboring countries in connection with China’s territorial ambitions,” Erath said.

The report was released as China is seeing its most widespread protests in decades, with demonstrators denouncing the country’s “zero-COVID” policy, but the timing is unrelated. Congress requires the Pentagon to prepare the report annually.

Its release also comes just two weeks after President Joe Biden met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on the sidelines the Group of 20 Summit in Bali, Indonesia, their first in-person meeting since Biden became president in January 2021.

During their nearly three-hour session, Biden objected directly to the CCP’s “coercive and increasingly aggressive actions” toward Taiwan, but also said the United States is not looking for conflict with the CCP.

However, the CCP considers Taiwan to be a “red line,” Defense Minister Wei Fenghe told U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in Cambodia last week, according to a statement provided by the Chinese Ministry of Defense.

Beijing has vowed to bring the self-governing island of Taiwan under its control, by force if necessary. Xi has given his military until 2027 to develop the military capability to retake the self-ruled island democracy that the CCP claims as its own territory.

“If realized, this 2027 objective could give the (People’s Liberation Army) capabilities to be a more credible military tool for the Chinese Communist Party to wield as it pursues Taiwan unification,” the Pentagon found in its 2022 report.

The United States has committed billions of dollars in military weapons to Taiwan to build up its defenses and help it rebuff any potential attack.

In reaction to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August, the Chinese regime has also launched more frequent and aggressive military actions that test Taiwan’s airspace and coastlines.

China has also made worrisome gains in building capabilities that “blind and deafen the enemy,” including knocking out communications and early warning satellites, expanding its use of artificial intelligence and intensifying their efforts in cyberwarfare, the report said.

The Pentagon, in its recently released national defense strategy, said China remains the greatest security challenge for the United States, and that the threat from Beijing will determine how the U.S. military is equipped and shaped for the future.

Failing state of Pakistan a major concern before the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Failing state of Pakistan a major concern for South Asia’s stability

Islamabad | Tuesday, 2022 5:15:09 AM IST

He said that Pakistan has been trying to come to solutions on all its fronts, and regretted that India has “not been able to strike a chord of friendship and cooperation with Pakistan”.

Nothing could be far from fact than Pak President’s assertion.

Margella Dialogue is a signature event organised by Islamabad Policy Research Institute hosting national and international scholars to discuss various contemporary issues.

If hypocrisy and double speak has to be learnt, Pakistan can be an exemplary case study. The state has been in a constant denial mode on realities about its crumbling economy and failing state institutions, not to mention the habit of preaching what it never practices.

Despite India’s firm and clear stand that Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) “was, is and shall forever” remain an integral part of the country, Islamabad continues not only to mischievously raise the issue in bilateral and multilateral forums, but also makes it a core issue in bilateral exchanges.

In the name of Islam in J&K, Pak has left no stone unturned including use of terror as its tool of India related foreign policy, providing safe havens to terror outfits, aiding infiltration across the border, breaking the ceasefire umpteen times and waging a proxy war against India without provocation.

Amid all these provocations, India has maintained peace. One only has to imagine the consequence had India used an iron fisted action, similar to what Israel does or Turkey is doing.

The Indian state, unlike Pakistan, was not constituted as a theological state but as modern democratic, socialist and secular state. India has many places in the country with huge Muslim population that enjoys equal constitutional rights.

The democratic process in the Union territory of J&K in the last seven decades has grown to be immensely participatory and stronger as it has happened in most other of the parts of the country.

Nobody has any right to interfere in internal issues of India and this equally applies to issues pertaining to J&K. Hence, reference to abrogated Article 370 of the Constitution tantamount to interference in the internal matters of the country.

Secondly, when the whole world is reducing barriers to trade and people-to-people exchanges, Pakistan is doing everything it can to vitiate business environment and scuttle trade. It has no respect either for democratic institutions and international conventions or human rights.

The way democratically elected governments have failed to complete their tenures in the country and it has fallen into the grey list of the FATF frequently and its terrorist leaders have been listed by the United Nations are clear evidence to the failed state of Pakistan. Now amid ugly political bickering, Pakistan is fast moving on the path of Sri Lanka to the morass of irreparable economic crisis.

Saying things which are untrue would not sell in this information age. Any amount of lobbying would also fail if the ground realities are different than claimed.

Today, India is not rising in the international reckoning only as the bright spot amid global economic instability, but also advanced countries are looking up to it for a larger role in bringing peace and prosperity in the world and build a more cooperative and pacifist global order. India’s G-20 Presidency has raised hope.

India has been doing everything for peace and prosperity in South Asia while Pakistan is broiled in internal political bickering and unprecedented economic and political crisis. There is utter confusion as to who represents Pakistan, Pak Army, its intelligence Agency ISI, or the democratically elected government. Given the complexity, confusion and ill intentions, it is next to impossible to fire stall any productive mechanism of cooperation and exchange.

Indian efforts for improving relations were never reciprocated by Pakistan. Anybody could imagine how much of heartbreak and shock would have occurred to India when the Indian Statesman, the former Prime Minister of India A.B. Vajpayee led Agra talks were responded by waging a bloody war in Kargil by Pakistan.

There are numerous other examples that shows Pakistan neither had nor displayed intent to build a productive relationship with India. India accorded Most Favoured Nation Status to Pakistan way back in 1996, but Pakistan did not respond with equal zeal and intent as in its priorities mischief mongering and proxy war remained a greater priority.

For years altogether Pakistan has been creating barriers to India’s access to the Central or West Asian countries through the shortest routes for trade, investment and people to people exchange.

Pak President also shed crocodile tears on global issues, especially by making a call that the world order should be based on rules, morality and ethics contrary to Islamabad’s own track record. He emphasized the need to shun destructive security paradigms and doctrines in international relations, but better than preaching others, Pakistan needs to practice such a doctrine.

These talks might suit India because it has displayed that it is a democratic, pacifist and responsible state. Who would learn from Pakistan the sermon on nuclear non-proliferation while its own nuclear arsenals are built either by stealing or nefarious collaboration to suit strategic interests of other countries?

There is endorsement and advocacy coming from many advanced states to give veto powers to emerging nations, especially India which is a credible democracy and a responsible state. But Pakistan is opposing this idea despite knowing that its credibility in international community is quite low. What is the credibility of a flood ravaged country which is still buying arms while facing one of the worst economic crises and hunger if its President talks about arms control?

–IANS sha/

The Dread of the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Why the state of science in Pakistan is so dreadful
President Ayub Khan looking at the glow of the nuclear reactor at Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology through a special viewer in a water pool in the mid-1960s. | Ayub Khan Archives/ Tahir Ayub

Why the state of science in Pakistan is so dreadful

From defence technology to space programme, the country has hardly made any progress.

Pervez Hoodbhoy,

Science matters. Many yearn for science-free times when wars were fought with swords by valiant Ertugrul-like horsemen. Quite a few want still earlier riyasats. But I have yet to meet a fellow Pakistani willing to have a bad tooth pulled out without anaesthesia or who sends emissaries instead of using a cellphone.

These days, electricity and gas loadshedding have triggered a collective nervous breakdown, while the price of petrol is all that people talk about. All of this would be utterly incomprehensible to those who lived a mere hundred years ago. Ancient civilisations had nothing even remotely similar to the science that exists today.

Like it or not, all modern science – that which is rapidly changing our world on a day-to-day basis – is the 400-year-old child of European modernity. Although many civilisations – Egyptian, Babylonian, Chinese, Indian, Greek and Arabian (chronologically ordered) – helped create that science, not enough was known earlier to create an overarching picture of a universe run by physical law. Nor did earlier civilisations use science to create functional technologies like we do today. Instead, significant advances in ancient science came from men of genius following scholarly interests rather than economic ends.

But now that civilisation on Earth has become science-based, the pursuit of science is systematic and relentless. Every country is rushing to acquire mastery over it and, even more, to use it to create technologies to fulfil social desires. Although science and technology are two different worlds, the boundary between them has blurred with time. For example, learning how cells divide was considered pure science in the 1800s. Today, it is crucial to discovering cures for cancer.

An attempt to situate Pakistan’s science and technology may be made using two different lenses; to compare today’s situation with what existed in 1947 (and even earlier); and to draw parallels between Pakistan and other countries in the region. As a starting point, I will take the advent of modern education in India (as opposed to traditional education) because that is where the bifurcation between modern and conventional ways of life began.

Pre-Partition situation

India during the Mughal rule saw spectacular achievements in architecture, art and administrative matters. But there was little curiosity in matters of the intellect, particularly science and philosophy. As a result, no university was built in those three centuries of otherwise brilliant rule. Although internal feuds and succession issues were undoubtedly a significant cause of decline, this lack of interest in intellectual pursuits eventually led to 40,000-50,000 Englishmen, armed with technology and the scientific method, overpowering and crushing what had been a magnificent empire. Few understood the secret source of English power better than Mirza Ghalib. Differing from those who craved a return to past glories or who suggested picking up arms against the firangis, his thinking was quintessentially modern:

Go, look at the sahibs of England; go learn from them their skills and ways; From their hands have sprung wonders and wonders; go try and see if you can excel them.

Science education in British India was spread by three principal agents: British government, Christian missionaries, and education reformers from both Hindu and Muslim communities. Whereas the Hindus had many well-known reformers, among the Muslims the only well-known one was Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. His vigorous advocacy of science and modernity as a means of uplifting Indian Muslims differed sharply from those who feared learning English and science would diminish their religious faith. He had disagreed with Ghalib earlier, but, upon reflection, he became convinced that India’s Muslims must abandon conservatism and travel new paths.

Sir Syed’s heroic efforts notwithstanding, Muslim enrolment in schools remained low. The University of Calcutta was the first secular Western-style university in India and set standards as far away as Punjab. The requirements being rigorous by the standards of the time, only a few Muslims applied or qualified for admission. Although the populations in Bengal were proportional in size, hundreds of Hindus but just two Muslims passed the first Bachelor of Arts examination in 1858.

Early years

Let us fast-forward to 1947. Of the 16 universities in British India, Pakistan inherited only one teaching university, i.e. the Punjab University in Lahore. Additionally, there were some 25-30 colleges in the areas that are now Pakistan. Most were in Punjab; Balochistan had none. Because Muslims had entered academia late and in fewer numbers, the senior faculty in almost all institutions of higher learning was predominantly Hindu at the time of partition. Once rioting began, they fled to India and Muslims from lower ranks filled their positions. Academic quality plummeted.

With time, education numbers slowly increased. By 1969 there were a total of eight universities in united Pakistan. The breakup and subsequent emergence of Bangladesh in 1971 temporarily froze further development. However, the quick post-partition promotions of junior faculty had profoundly debilitating consequences in terms of teaching quality. Mediocres rose to become department heads, deans, and vice-chancellors. They blocked bright young entrants lest their authority was challenged. As a result, rote learning became almost as common in universities and colleges as in schools and seminaries.

Nevertheless, in Pakistan’s early years, there were pockets of excellence in some science and technology fields. I will mention only four.

Pakistan’s space programme began in 1961 with the launch of meteorological rockets provided by the United States. Initiated and headed by Professor Abdus Salam, the Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission grew rapidly in the 1960s and was more advanced than the Indian programme at the time.

Pakistan’s nuclear programme was set in place with the assistance of the US and, until 1972, had been directed towards nuclear power production and basic research. Personnel in the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission were sent abroad in the 1960s for training. Canada provided Pakistan’s first nuclear reactor, the Karachi nuclear power plant. The returnees successfully maintained and operated the reactor even after the withdrawal of Canadian fuel and technical support. India’s 1974 nuclear test led to Pakistan’s open desire to match the Indian bomb, causing the reversal of the West’s nuclear assistance.

In industrial engineering, there was one outstanding institution, the Batala Engineering Company. Founded by entrepreneur CM Latif, Beco had relocated itself to Lahore from Batala (in what is now Indian Punjab) after partition. Beco produced a diverse range of heavy and light engineering products, such as diesel engines, machine tools and lathes. Like India’s Tata Industries, it was well set on the path of high growth, but was killed by the wave of nationalisation in 1972.

The creation of Islamabad University in 1967, and in particular the Institute of Physics associated with it, was the high point of academic research in Pakistan. Founded by Riazuddin, a student of Professor Salam, the institute maintained high-quality research in the frontier area of particle physics until its decline in the mid-1970s. At its peak, it compared favourably against a mid-quality physics department in the US.

Assessing the present

Globalisation means no country produces more than a fraction of what it needs and consumes. The more vibrant ones produce relatively more, have higher living standards for more citizens, are better organised, and have cleaner environments. Pakistan also has these aspirations, but is far more reliant on technologies developed elsewhere, such as automobiles, locomotives, aircraft, pharmaceuticals, computers, medical instrumentation, etc.

In principle, a small ecosystem could have developed around imported technologies, but there has been insufficient improvisation and innovation. For example, the once flourishing domestic electric fan industry has been pushed out by cleverer Chinese products. The small domestic output of finished products has led to a staggering trade imbalance that has compounded over time, leading to the current economic crisis.

I have attempted to compare Pakistan’s science and technology in 2022 with other countries in the region based on performance in various domains of science, but the attempt admittedly is qualitative and subjective because a proper methodical study does not exist (Table 1).



These aim at raising yields of sugar, cotton, wheat, rice, and other crops by adapting and promoting standard techniques of pesticide use, plantation patterns, sowing methods, etc. As highly practical and relatively simple sciences, they are offshoots of the 1960s Green Revolution and are crucial for feeding Pakistan’s rapidly expanding population.

Salimuzzaman Siddiqui was a leading organic scientist, who established the Pakistan National Science Council and later the Hussain Ebrahim Jamal Research Institute of Chemistry. Credit: Dawn Archives

Nearly a dozen Pakistani institutions, such as the National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, seem to have significantly improved local production and have reportedly developed better varieties of cotton, wheat, rice, tea and various fruits. Drip irrigation, food processing, and scientific livestock management are low-cost, but high-return investments.

Defence technology

Pakistan manufactures fission nuclear weapons and intermediate-range missiles. For both, the basic templates were provided by China, but local manufacturing capabilities had to be developed. The JF-17 fighter and Al-Khalid tank, produced with Chinese collaboration, are now force mainstays. In the 1980s, France provided three Agosta-90B submarines that were serviced locally. Over time a burgeoning Pakistani arms industry developed that now turns out a range of weapons from grenades to tanks, night vision devices to laser-guided weapons. However, the website of the Defence Export Promotion Organisation reveals little of what is being offered for sale. Pakistani arms exports have reportedly stalled in recent years. Poor quality control and lack of innovation are said to be responsible.

Space programme

The Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission has had six decades to mature, but as far as space exploration goes, it has practically folded up. The official website shows no future plans. Instead, it seems to have settled for routine testing of variants of missile series acquired from China. India, on the other hand, has clocked several major achievements, such as two successful orbiter missions to the Moon (2008) and one mission to Mars (2013). In 2017, India launched a record 100 satellites into orbit from the Indian Polar Space Launch Vehicle.

Civilian technology

Pakistan’s top 10 exports in 2021 were textiles, cotton, cereals, copper, fruits, minerals, sports goods, leather goods, software, and medical instruments. Only the last two items rely on science and technology. As of 2020, the last year for which data is available, Pakistan’s hi-tech exports were 70 times lower than India’s and 2,523 times lower than China’s (Table 2; the last entry is from the Mundi Index, which defines hi-tech exports as products with high research and development intensity, such as in aerospace, computers, pharmaceuticals, scientific instruments and electrical machinery).

The above, however, understates the use of science and technology in Pakistan’s domestic industrial production, which hinges critically upon imported machinery. This is used to produce textiles, Pakistan’s most important export, as well as cement, vegetable oil, fertiliser, sugar, steel, machinery, tobacco, paper, chemicals and food processing. Imported machinery has created an industrial ecosystem, but finished goods imported from China have adversely impacted many small industries.

Academic research

In developed countries, universities are the engines of scientific progress. Working in tandem with the industry, they help create new products and processes. On the other hand, in developing countries with small industrial bases, universities and colleges are primarily useful in creating a large pool of skilled people who can be gainfully employed in various sectors of the economy.

Irrespective of what area of science a student chooses, the key point that can make a graduate valuable is adaptability. A broad range of interests and knowledge – and a good understanding of subject basics – enables the students to be useful in different kinds of jobs.

Very few Pakistan institutions have done well at this. Hence, employers in the West Asia generally hire Pakistanis at lower levels relative to Indians, Iranians and Bangladeshis. Leaving aside the imported Cambridge system, rote-centred learning has discouraged students from logical thinking and stunted their cognitive capacities. The mathematical abilities of students and their teachers are generally poor. The only exceptions in the indigenous education system are exceptionally bright students at the right end of the Bell curve.

The poor quality of graduates emerging from Pakistani universities has caused employers to lose trust in grades and degrees. Many with PhDs are all but illiterate in their fields and unable to answer simple questions. At the same time, the number of publications produced by students has skyrocketed. Towards the end of studentship, many are credited with more papers than professors in the 1970s would have published over their lifetimes.

Professors and their students, encouraged by a disastrous policy by the Higher Education Commission to reward publication numbers, have created a system where at least 90% of so-called research papers are faulty, trivial or plagiarised. Whereas Chinese, Indian and Iranian speakers are invited to deliver lectures at top US campuses, Pakistan’s hyper-productive professors are nowhere to be seen there. Still, international university ranking organisations pick up numerical data and use their computers to create misleading rankings.

What not to do

The degradation in Pakistan’s scientific capabilities is alarming. Just how far Pakistan has fallen into the pit of ignorance and self-delusion was illustrated by a self-styled engineer trained in Khairpur’s polytechnic institute who claimed to have invented a ‘water kit’ that would extract energy from water. Never mind that this violated the rules of thermodynamics, and the rest of the world couldn’t do it. He promised a new Pakistan with limitless energy, no need for petrol or gas, and no more loadshedding.

Politicians and media stars can perhaps be excused for being jubilant. But even our famed scientists fell for it and praised the ‘water car’ publically. No practical joker could have demonstrated more dramatically the true state of science in Pakistan.

In this situation, one needs to carefully think about what to do, and, even more importantly, what not to do.

First, Pakistan does not need any more bricks and mortar for science; there is plenty of that around. A drive along Islamabad’s Constitution Avenue is lined with Pakistan’s most important buildings: Presidency, Prime Minister’s House, Supreme Court, National Library, etc. On the other side of the road stand science buildings bearing names such as Pakistan Academy of Sciences, Pakistan Science Foundation, Islamic Academy of Sciences, Pakistan Council for Science and Technology, Committee on science and technology of Organisation of Islamic Countries, Commission on science and technology for Sustainable Development in the South and others. A short distance from the Presidency is the head office of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, the largest single science-based institution in the country. About two miles away, on the campus of Quaid-i-Azam University is the National Centre for Physics.

Were any or all of these grand buildings to vanish suddenly into thin air, the world of science would simply shrug its shoulders. Shiny new cars parked in their driveways radiate opulence – a tragic waste of resources. So-called science ‘incubators’ in various cities have also proved ineffective. These were supposed to create new products for industry and business as well as new ideas for the world of academia. Nothing is visible. Do we need to spend more money doing this? Can we not understand that chickens may need incubators, but ideas hatch inside the head?

Second, we need to see through the numbers game that was started by the Higher Education Commission in 2002, and immediately dispense with it. This game had deceived Pakistanis into believing that scientific research had increased when, in fact, the opposite happened.

More ‘research’ papers and PhDs, and more universities and institutes do not at all translate into actual progress unless certain requirements are met. The most important of these are academic integrity and accurate assessment of scientific worth. As a result of incentivising corruption through cash rewards for papers and grants of PhD degrees, integrity has precipitously declined.

The way forward

The state of science in Pakistan, 75 years down the line, is visibly poor. There is little public understanding of science, our exports are largely low-tech textiles and raw materials, all significant weapons systems are imported, the space programme has almost ceased to exist, and scientific research carried out in universities and institutes carries little credibility or usefulness.

It is futile to blame a particular government; between one government and another, there has been little difference. The collective worldview, or weltanschauung, is at the core of the failure. This grim situation should energise us to drastically change our course. This must begin with changing the content and quality of education, beginning at the school level and then upward.

Instead of stuffing minds with propaganda, the goal must be to enhance cognitive capacity and creativity. How this can be done is well known: we can simply copy one of many successful countries. Attitudes acquired in school carry over to all higher levels – colleges, universities, research institutes, and every other organisation. Good education encourages questioning and seeking answers. Traditional education, on the other hand, lulls the mind into passivity by endless memorisation and repetition.

As they say, to make an omelette, you must first break an egg. That egg, in Pakistan’s context, is the traditional value system that clashes with the value system of modernity and science. Pakistan hungers for the fruits of science, but a massive upsurge of zealotry has rendered it attitudinally unfit for nurturing science. Unlike its products, science cannot be acquired without accepting the fundamental premise of strict objectivity and, above all, the scientific method. Yes, it is as plain as that – take it or leave it.

The China Horn is making South China Sea a nuclear missile launchpad: Daniel 7

China making South China Sea a nuclear missile launchpad

US claims China has fielded JL-3 sub-launched ballistic missiles in maritime area, bringing mainland US within closer range


China is one step closer to turning the South China Sea into a sanctuary for its nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBN), a move that would put the continental United States within range of its JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from the semi-enclosed and hotly contested body of water.

On November 18, US Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Samuel Paparo acknowledged to military reporters in Washington that China has fielded its JL-3 SLBM on its six Type 094 SSBNs, giving it the capability to hit the US from waters closer to America’s shore.

Paparo emphasized that these SSBNs were built to threaten the US and that the US Navy is keeping close track of them.

A year ago, the Pentagon said that the People’s Liberation Army-Navy (PLA-N) would gain the capability to target the US from China’s coastal waters, with Paparo declining to comment when asked if China’s Type 094 SSBNs have conducted deterrence patrols close to Hawaii.

The JL-3 has an estimated range of more than 10,000 kilometers, which allows China to target the US “from a protected bastion in the South China Sea,” US Strategic Command commander Admiral Charles Richard told the US Senate Armed Services Committee this March according to a US Congressional Research Service (CRS) report.

If true, the JL-3 is a significant improvement over the previous missile, the JL-2, which has a range of 7,200 kilometers. According to CRS, that gives China’s Type 094 SSBNs the ability to attack Alaska from the Bohai Sea. CRS notes that to strike the US West Coast, JL-2-equipped Type 094 SSBNs would have to be in waters east of Hawaii due to range limitations.

China’s JL-2’s on display. Image: Twitter

In response to the reports, China’s state mouthpiece Global Times last week slammed the US as having ulterior motives by hyping the “China Threat” to seek a greater presence in the Asia-Pacific in the form of more anti-submarine forces and its own Columbia-class SSBNs. It also claimed that spiking threat perceptions of China was a way for the US military to get more funding.

Global Times noted that China has yet to announce the commissioning of the JL-3. Although China carried out a JL-3 test launch in June 2019, the scheduled tests were standard and not aimed at any country or target, the Global Times report said.

It emphasized that China maintains a defensive national defense policy and a military strategy of “active defense.” The Global Times report also noted that while China has no plans to expand significantly its nuclear arsenal, it will continue to modernize it amid the changing strategic security environment.

China’s nuclear doctrine relies on a robust SSBN fleet. In a 2016 Carnegie Endowment for Regional Peace report, Liping Xia notes that a no-first-use policy, minimum nuclear deterrence, counter-nuclear coercion and limited nuclear deterrence are critical features of China’s nuclear doctrine.

Xia notes that China’s SSBNs are essential to its second-strike nuclear capability and with fleet upgrades allow China to be more confident of its no-first-use policy.

Echoing this view, Fiona Cunningham notes in a 2020 article for The Strategist that China’s nuclear force structure is optimized to ride out an adversary’s first strike and retaliate against strategic targets rather than credibly threaten the first use of nuclear weapons.

Cunningham mentions that although Chinese leaders have debated changing China’s longstanding no-first-use nuclear policy from time to time, there is no sign that China plans to change it anytime soon.

The JL-3’s deployment will mark a significant upgrade to the survivability of China’s undersea deterrent. A 2018 Carnegie Endowment for Regional Peace report notes that the JL-2 SLBM’s limited range means it cannot reach the US if launched from Chinese coastal waters. The report says that China’s SSBNs would need to sail into the Western Pacific to hit the US mainland with the missile.

A 2015 Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) report notes that the US and its allies could exploit chokepoints including the Miyako Strait, Bashi Channel and the Sulu Sea to track China’s SSBNs on their way to the Pacific Ocean.

These vulnerabilities go against the basic philosophy of an SSBN, which according to the CSIS report is to hide in the ocean’s vastness so that it would be impossible to detect or predict its location.

As such, the JL-3’s introduction may allow China to implement a South China Sea “bastion strategy,” obviating the need for its SSBNs to sail into the Pacific to launch their SLBMs. In this strategy, China would use the South China Sea as a sanctuary for its SSBNs, with the area protected by land-based aircraft and missiles, naval forces and fortified islands.

The South China Sea’s semi-enclosed configuration and proximity to China’s shores make it an ideal area to implement the strategy, with China’s large submarine base in Hainan showing that it is moving in that direction with its SSBN fleet.

Logistically speaking, it would be much easier for China to sustain short-range SSBN than open-water patrols with command and control facilities stationed in nearby waters.

As the South China Sea is straddled by major sea lanes of communication (SLOCs), the underwater noise environment makes it more difficult to detect China’s SSBNs, allowing them to hide amid the area’s unique underwater noise, thermal and acoustic features.

‘Dangerous rhetoric’ stoking nuclear tensions: Revelation 8

 ‘Dangerous rhetoric’ stoking nuclear tensions: UN chief

‘Dangerous rhetoric’ stoking nuclear tensions: UN chief

‘Dangerous rhetoric is raising nuclear tensions,’ Guterres warned

Fes – United Nations chief Antonio Guterres warned on Tuesday against “dangerous rhetoric” stoking tensions among nuclear-armed rivals.

“Growing divisions are threatening global peace and security, provoking new confrontations and making it all the more difficult to resolve old conflicts,” Guterres told a conference in Morocco.

“Dangerous rhetoric is raising nuclear tensions,” he warned.

“At the same time, we are dangerously close to the edge on the climate, while hate speech and disinformation are proliferating.”

He was talking as Russia’s war in Ukraine neared its tenth month with no end in sight, fanning nuclear fears.

Guterres said “forces of discord” were waking up “old demons” including anti-semitism and Islamophobia.

“In this troubled world, we must ease tensions, foster inclusion and social cohesion, and bring about more united and resilient societies,” he said.

Guterres was addressing a meeting of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations, which aims to “galvanise international action against extremism” — the first time the group has met on African soil.

In a declaration adopted on Tuesday evening, the meeting condemned “any advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.

It also expressed “deep concern about the use of new information technologies… for purposes contrary to respect for human values, good neighbourliness, equality, non-discrimination, and respect for others”, noting the particular vulnerability of children and youth.

The Fez meeting ends Wednesday. The forum’s next edition is to be held in Lisbon in 2024.

US should be cautious in delivering more military support to Pakistan

US should be cautious, hesitant in delivering more military support to Pakistan: Report
Representative Image. Image Credit: ANI

US should be cautious, hesitant in delivering more military support to Pakistan: Report

By fulfilling Pakistan’s wishes on the F-16, the Biden administration may be hoping it will help shore up the fragile governing coalition from outside interference. However, it is the machinations of Pakistan’s military that remain constant and will continue to shape what transpires within the country.

ANI | Updated: 20-11-2022 08:35 IST | Created: 20-11-2022 08:35 IST

The US should be cautious and hesitant in delivering more military support to Pakistan, such as the F-16s, where there is no guarantee that they will be used competently. Dr Sajjan M Gohel, the international security director at the Asia-Pacific Foundation think-tank and Marcus Andreopoulos, a senior research fellow at the Asia-Pacific Foundation, writing in War On The Rocks (WOTR) said that by fulfilling Pakistan’s wishes on the F-16, the Biden administration may be hoping it will help shore up the fragile governing coalition from outside interference. However, it is the machinations of Pakistan’s military that remain constant and will continue to shape what transpires within the country.

The Biden administration authorized the sale of military equipment worth USD 450 million to Pakistan to enhance the air-to-ground capabilities of the country’s current stock of F-16 fighter aircraft. This most recent sale is the latest chapter in a decades-long back and forth between Washington and Islamabad, in which bilateral relations have fluctuated erratically, said Gohel and Andreopoulos.

The contorted situation of the F-16 raises a perennial yet fundamental dilemma on whether Washington can ever really achieve its objectives with Pakistan regarding cooperation in preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorist groups, curtailing nuclear proliferation, ending hostilities with India, and containing China‘s expanding clout in South Asia. The answers will likely turn out to be disappointing, as they have in the past. In part, this is because multiple US administrations pass laws with the intention of taking a principled stand in holding Pakistan accountable for its ties to terrorism or nuclear proliferation but then subsequently seek to find workarounds when there is an impending strategic security concern. Pakistan has understood this all too well, reported WOTR.

For Pakistan’s establishment, statecraft of strategic depth outweighs the economic and social challenges that continue to engulf the country and which in turn heighten insecurity in the region. The security ramifications of how the United States handles the F-16 matter carry enormous geopolitical significance, ranging from nuclear conflict, conventional warfare, counter-terrorism, and containing Chinese influence, said Gohel and Andreopoulos.

The history of US negotiations with Pakistan illustrates that the temporary, tactical, and transactional nature of the relationship has enabled Pakistan to pursue its adversarial military doctrine of strategic depth in Afghanistan to hedge against India, in which the F-16s became a key tool, while also furthering the ambitions of a nuclear weapons programme. F-16 refurbishments are not going to resolve Pakistan’s crippling economic and humanitarian crisis and may instead contribute to the cychttp://andrewtheprophetle of military opaqueness and intransigence over the stable democratic civilian rule, reported WOTR.

Washington should stop using F-16s to try and leverage security and non-proliferation commitments from Pakistan. As Pakistan is mired in political, economic, and environmental instability, the risk is that providing Islamabad with more weapons will be counterproductive because they exacerbate regional tensions, said Gohel and Andreopoulos. Instead, Washington should recognize that these sales and upgrades prop up actors in the country that sometimes work against American interests, all but ensuring that clashes over the sale of this jet — and other American hardware — will continue long into the future.

Moreover, the nuclear risk is a by-product of Pakistan’s instability, which has occurred directly due to the troubling relationship its military sustains with violent extremists. Pakistan’s commitment to preserve its nuclear arsenal is also configured to level the defence battlefield with India. Ironically, instead of being a conventional deterrent, the F-16 could instead be used to carry nuclear warheads.

Expressing apprehensions over the Biden administration’s decision to upgrade Pakistan’s F-16 fleet, India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar implied that the primary use of the aircraft would be to wage war with India. Jaishankar’s concerns are not without merit. Tensions between Pakistan and India ignited in February 2019, after the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist group carried out a suicide bombing in Jammu and Kashmir that killed 40 Indian security personnel.

Pakistan had deployed F-16s against India as opposed to the Chinese-built JF-17 Thunder that they initially claimed to have used, violating the terms of sale from the United States. (ANI)

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Future cancelled, Prophecy Fulfilled: Revelation 8

Future cancelled

Every time a big crisis is averted, we heave a sigh of relief. But every tradeoff ends up being as bad

On November 15, Przewodów, a village on the outskirts of Poland neighbouring Ukraine, was reportedly struck by a missile. Early reports hinted at the possibility of the missile being of Russian make. For a heartstopping moment, it felt like the war in Ukraine was about to spill into Europe. If Russia went to war with Europe and Nato got dragged in, this could mean another world war. If the First World War was called the great war, this one could be dubbed the greatest or the last. A 2019 YouTube documentary by “Kurzgesagt — In a Nutshell”, reportedly made in consultation with scientists, claims there are about 15,000 nuclear weapons on the planet and around 4500 cities with a population of 100 thousand or more. It takes three nukes to destroy such a city, and at this rate, after destroying every one of them, you will still be left with 1,500 warheads to spare. If you think living outside cities will save you, don’t kid yourself. If radiation doesn’t kill you, hunger and disease most certainly will. That’s all, folks!

Mercifully the dogs of a wider war were thwarted by the revelation that the missile was of Ukrainian origin and had been mistakenly fired in the wrong direction. But this incident reminded us how close we are as a civilisation to the precipice. It took me back to 2016 when India claimed it had carried out a surgical strike in Azad Kashmir. Waking to the news, one could not be sure what would come next. Both countries are nuclear powers, and if Pakistan accepted this claim at face value, it could lead to a full-fledged conflict with the ensuing conflict’s potential to go nuclear. I think I have mentioned it in this space before, and to a father’s shame, that it was for the first time in their life, I looked at my children, whom I dote on, and asked myself if bringing them into this dystopian world was such a great idea. Another small mercy of life that Pakistan did not take this claim at face value and did what it could to expose the Indian propaganda. But the helplessness I felt on this occasion left its mark.

November 15, incidentally, was also the date when the eight-billionth baby was born on this planet; some say in Manila, Philippines, others say in the Dominican Republic. But we know the human population has crossed the 8 billion mark. And what a time to do that. Our world is getting more unstable with every passing day. Climate change is already rocking our boat. Humanity just emerged out of a pandemic that all but paralysed us. The inflationary supercycle has already made life difficult. And while we examine the prospects of another global economic depression, we are informed by the UK’s Chancellor of Exchequer that his country is already in recession. Remember the term I borrowed from the late Mark Fisher a few months ago? Slow cancellation of the future? When a generation is raised with the hope of a great future only to find it all disappear into wisps of smoke. Well, that slow cancellation is upon us.

Consider this. My generation (Gen X)’s childhood was consumed by the ravages of the cold war and adult life grappling with the consequences of the cold war (read the war on terror). Millennials (Gen Y) bore the brunt of the great recession of 2007. Now through the pandemic and all this mess, we are wrecking the future of another generation — Gen Z. Only time will tell what comes next. Remember, billionaires only got more prosperous during the great recession, the pandemic and even now. We, the common folk, are asked to pay for all this through our shattered dreams and adjustment to the gig economy.

We can all take solace in the fact that the world we live in is less violent than in the past. In his brilliant work, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined, Dr Steven Pinker does an incredible job of not only documenting the sheer volume of violence in the past to show dramatically it has declined but also explaining why it is so in terms of biochemical changes in the brain through the ages. Anybody interested in the subject must read this book. Especially the way Dr Pinker proposes to tackle our five inner demons that lead to violence, namely predation, dominance, desire for revenge, sadism and ideology, is worth your time. But let’s face it. Violence worldwide might have gone down, but it has not been abolished. What is more, if you are talking about a world at risk of nuclear annihilation, a large-scale onslaught of hunger and poverty and major man-made climatic catastrophes, you are merely counting small victories right now.

The worst news from all significant flashpoints like Ukraine, Taiwan, Kashmir, Middle East, North Korea, Iran and the Twitter headquarters is that there is no easy solution. These active and latent conflicts have grown without any off switch, a reset button, or guardrails. From G7 to G20, from the UN to other fora, all institutions meant to ensure collective security, close cooperation, and reconciliation are struggling to stay relevant. When the rich and the powerful choose not to behave, good-faith actors can only gawk in horror. If you want to see how the rich and powerful evade responsibility, look at the recent FTX crypto crash. 

While ordinary folks might have been lured into investing in such shoddy schemes, the founding principle of the much-hyped crypto-rush seems to be the protection of billionaires’ wealth from state entities by parking it in the ether. Something taught to them by the Russian oligarchs? That would explain the callousness with which some billionaires are ready to bulldoze everything democratic. And common johnnies invest thinking if their idols are investing here, it must be the hot new thing. How would they know they are only keeping their idol’s side hustles afloat and might soon be conned out of their life’s savings? More and worst subprime assets for you, then. Back to square 2007.

Every time a big crisis is averted, we heave a sigh of relief. But every tradeoff ends up being as bad. Through interventions, you might save the economy from a meltdown, a business from going under or people from losing jobs, but their safety nets are gone, and their growth plans, including children’s college funds. The world needed to wake up by now. It shows no signs of doing so. Consequently, the future we could rely on is already gone. Consider the future cancelled.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 19th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

How unsafe is the Pakistani nuclear arsenal? Revelation 8

How safe are Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal?

ANI | 26 Oct 2022, 07:30 PM IST

Pakistan’s nuclear use policy is unlike its nuclear armed neighbours India and China. Pakistan has not committed to a “No-First Use” policy. India and China have both made unambiguous pledges of never being the first country to resort to using Nuclear weapons. Pakistan on the other hand is one of the few nations in the world who have even publicly stated that they would use any weapon in their arsenal to repulse any attack on them. This asymmetric nuclear posture by Pakistan is meant to keep the World anxious about Pakistan’s intensions and with destabilising forces swelling in its country…the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal remains a global fear. (ANI)

Accidents Leading to the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Geopolitical Instability Which May Cause Unexpected and Worldwide Nuclear Weapons Accidents – International Viewpoint – online socialist magazine

The report referred to Kim Jong-un’s remarks: “war deterrent” and “nuclear response posture in unexpected situation at any time”. Kim Jong-un also said “we have no content for dialogue with the enemies and felt no necessity to do so”. The report showed that North Korea is promoting operations of tactical nuclear weapons targeting South Korea, Japan, and the US based on a long-term plan.

After launching long-range strategic cruise missiles on October 12, North Korea further escalated tensions by flying about 10 military aircrafts to their heavily fortified border and fired a short-range ballistic missile into the sea on October 13 and 14. And on November 2, North Korea launched about 25 missiles and sustained fire about 100 times from various locations into the Sea of the Yellow Sea and others for more than 10 hours. It was the first time that about 25 missiles were launched in one day. After that, the escalated tensions are tightened day by day and not alleviated. On November 4, South Korea’s military scrambled fighter jets after detecting about 180 North Korean military aircrafts [2].

North Korea’s unprecedentedly frequent missile launches and installation of the tactical nuclear operation units means steady progress from “nuclear development” to “possession of an operational nuclear weapon”. It also means North Korea’s refusal to engage in dialogue with the US. Korean crisis which seemed to have been eased in recent years still exists in the region as a potential crisis. And the crisis is still related to the three major powers (the US, China and Russia). The Russian Invasion of Ukraine provoked a fierce confrontation between the US and Russia.

On the other hand, the dynamics of militarization of the Asia-Pacific region are accelerating and the conflict between China and the US is sharpening [3]. The US is losing the initiative in East Asia against China. Under the current situation, Kim Jong-un may carry out successive nuclear tests to have diverse tactical nuclear weapons. North Korea’s diplomatic card against the US is changing from “denuclearization” to “nuclear disarmament”. Changes in North Korea’s foreign policies will bring a major impact on geopolitical chaos in East Asia.

Progressive ballistic missile development at extremely fast speed and miniaturization of nuclear weapons

Kim Jong-un has launched far more ballistic missiles and other missiles than any previous North Korean leaders. Kim Jong-il launched 16 missiles from 1994 to 2011. On the other hand, Kim Jong-un has launched more than 130 ballistic missiles from 2012 to present. Also, the number of nuclear tests that Kim Jong-un has already conducted (4 times) is twice as many as that of Kim Jong-il. Following is the number of nuclear tests conducted by nuclear power countries and their development periods to achieve the miniaturization of nuclear weapons and has developed nuclear warheads:

North Korea’s first nuclear tests were conducted in October 2006. Sixteen years have passed since then and six nuclear tests have already been performed. On 3 September 2017, North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test (H-bomb test) and stated it had tested a thermonuclear weapon (hydrogen bomb) [4]. Estimated power output (TNT) was more than 13 times higher than the fifth nuclear tests. Considering other related mature technologies of the country, there is a high possibility that North Korea had achieved the miniaturization of nuclear weapons and has developed nuclear warheads. Meanwhile, North Korea has significantly improved a wide variety of missile technologies according to the information provided by its own media:

• Launches of multiple missiles at any time and from any point: from 2014

• Improved accuracy for hitting a specific target by launching ballistic missiles from different locations: from May 2019

• Continuous launches of multiple short-range ballistic missiles within 1 minute: from November 2019

The impact of the situation in Ukraine

Tensions and political instability in the East Asia/Asia-Pacific area are also related to the continued escalation in Ukraine [5].

Against the backdrop of NATO and other overwhelmingly dominant forces in the world, the US is enthusiastic about building an “East Asian NATO” as part of the expansion of its territory since the 19th century. And the Trans-Pacific Partnership is expanding US hegemony in the region especially after the Covid-19 crisis although the US is losing the initiative against China.

On June 29, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean President Yun Seok-yeol joined the 2022 NATO Madrid summit for the first time. NATO invited the leaders of the countries, which the organization views as its “Asia-Pacific partner countries”. It was also an unprecedented move.

Meanwhile, North Korea aims to possess tactical nuclear weapons with various explosive powers amid the escalation of provocations and counter-provocations in Asia-Pacific region. Pyongyang has said in its own statements that that the current situation in Ukraine is an extension of the past political situations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. In the past international situation, North Korea has repeatedly “learned” that only possession of nuclear weapons effectively protects “enemy” countries from Western intervention [6].

The Russian Invasion of Ukraine of this year provoked a fierce confrontation between the US and Russia. And the conflict between China and the US is sharpening.

For North Korea, this situation is a great chance to force nuclear tests despite strong opposition from the international community including China. With its ethnic nationalism, Kim Jong-un regime’s political choices have provoked potential confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region at the expense of working population in the country. Its foreign policy reflects its repressive domestic policy.

The dictatorial regime cannot make other choices. Kim Jong-un may carry out successive nuclear tests, which is like the 1998 tests of nuclear explosive devices conducted by India and Pakistan, to possess diverse tactical nuclear weapons with the support of veto rights of Russia and/or China at the UN Security Council.

The neighboring countries adopting their confrontational policy

This year, North Korea made steady progress from “nuclear development” to “possession of an operational nuclear weapon” by frequent missile launches. And on October 13 and 14, North Korea flew about 10 military aircrafts to their border and fired a ballistic missile into the sea amid its frequent missile launches and installation of the tactical nuclear operation units.

The possibility of North Korea’s seventh nuclear tests had also generated a whirlwind of discussions about the redeployment of US tactical weapons on the Korean Peninsula have emerged in South Korea [7]. To prevent the seventh nuclear tests, the US Air Force and ROK Air Force conducted a large-scale joint air training event Vigilant Storm.

Japan is also working to strengthen its defense capabilities to possess “the ability to attack enemy bases”. This year, the Ministry of Defense of Japan asked for the largest ever budget $40.4 billion for fiscal year 2023 [8]. From the standpoint of defense budget, Japan aims to become the third in the world after the US and China. Japan has been strengthening its defense capabilities in remote island areas around Okinawa [9]. And Japan is planning to put an electronic warfare unit on one of the remote islands Yonaguni, which is just 110 km away from Taiwan [10] and is also planning to station anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles and hundreds of troops on Ishigaki island, 270 kilometers from Taiwan.

China, needless to say, continues to build up its military forces. One of the proposed amendments to the constitution following the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) represents an escalation in cross-strait relations. The new amendment states the CCP’s commitment to “resolutely oppose and contain Taiwan independence” to promote its “unification of the motherland” [11]. In this way, c

ountries around the Korean Peninsula have stepped up their military response, while their other approaches have disappeared.

Vicious spiral of militarization and nuclear escalation in the region

North Korea has no interest in dialogue with the US for denuclearization and is trying to gain status as a nuclear power country by the next Congress of the Workers’ Party of Korea. Meanwhile, diplomatic action of the US will be changed for “nuclear disarmament” according to the current level of tension in which North Korea is about to have diverse tactical nuclear weapons. Nuclear tests would have some impact on the neighboring countries such as China which shares a border with North Korea.

In a sense, the US and Japan, which are enthusiastic about building an “East Asian NATO”, want Kim Jong-un to conduct nuclear tests. If the seventh nuclear tests are pushed ahead, relations between North Korea and China will deteriorate temporarily. As result of the Kim Jong-un’s policy, the vicious spiral of militarization and nuclear escalation are about to be fueled in the region. It may raise the ghost of the pro-nuclear consensus which had already prevailed in East Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.

Meanwhile some other countries are trying to obtain neutral profits by taking advantage of this situation. Regardless of the energy output the nuclear tests, heightened and intensified regional tensions will endanger geopolitical stability which may trigger unexpected nuclear weapons not only in the Asia-Pacific region but in other parts of the world. Under these circumstances, a global anti-war movement carries a great responsibility especially in the areas/countries facing the danger of the military confrontation such as South Korea, Okinawa [12], and Taiwan.

The population in the areas/countries are victims of former colonial power Japan. It will also symbolize the normalization of diplomatic relations without the recognition of colonial rule, and the contradictions of the US-Japan and US-South Korea alliances caused by past colonial rule [13].