12.03.2019

Interview with Acad. Alexei Arbatov by Fyodor Anaschenkov, special for yabloko.ru

Photo by Ramil Sitdikov/RIA Novosti

The international community has been discussing with concern a new border incident between India and Pakistan. The two countries have been in a state of a “smoldering” conflict for 70 years. At the same time, both the sides possess nuclear weapons. Acad. Alexey Arbatov, head of the Centre for International Security of the Russian Academy of Sciences and a member of the Federal Political Committee of the Yabloko party, told us why nuclear weapons cannot be used even in a local conflict, and how joint actions of Russia, the USA and China can help in the regulation of the dispute.

Question: The international community have again begun talking about the possibility of a full-fledged war between India and Pakistan after a series of clashes at the borders. Are these countries ready to fight each other? Or is it rather a “cold war” and they avoid direct confrontation?

Acad. Arbatov: This is, certainly, a “cold war” and bilateral arms race, including nuclear missile weapons. Both the sides are building up their nuclear potentials for the mutual deterrence, but, as always happens, incidents and armed conflicts are not ruled out here. And if they cannot be stopped quickly, as it used to be several times in the past, then uncontrollable escalation of the conflict, up to an exchange of nuclear strikes, is quite likely.

In this case, a regional, not a global nuclear war will occur. But, given that each of the sides has more than a hundred nuclear weapons, the consequences of this war will be horrible for South Asia and will have global consequences, including environmental ones, for the rest of the world.

Question: If we imagine that a war will start between India and Pakistan, what will be the reaction of the world community? Will their allies enter the war? For example, it is believed that China is a close ally of Pakistan.

Acad. Arbatov: Most likely, all other states, including nuclear powers, will try not to intervene in this conflict, because it is fraught with the most heavy losses and unpredictable events in the future. Therefore, with a high degree of probability, it will limit itself to a war between the two countries.

But, I should reiterate, its likely consequences – both demographic and environmental – will affect all the states. Especially those who are situated in Eurasia. Here we are talking primarily about China, but also about Russia. Because it is close to a possible exchange point for nuclear strikes.

Such an “experiment,” thank God, has been never been set in history yet. But a lot of research has been conducted on this topic, including that in natural science. And they say that the consequences of nuclear strikes will be horrendous for the whole world, even if the rest of the nuclear powers do not get involved in this war.

I can immediately call a figure, which appears in different analytical assessments: the climatic consequences for the rest of the planet will be such that about one billion people will die of starvation in the coming year after a nuclear conflict. A billion people! This is in addition to the dozens of millions who will die in India and Pakistan.

Question: What role can Russia have here? After all, for example, India buys a lot of weapons from our country. Does this means that we are trying to be present in that region?

Acad. Arbatov: Certainly, Russia is present and wants to have political influence. I think it has a restraining effect on India, understanding all the consequences. Another question is how effectively can one restrain India and Pakistan?

The specifics of the situation is that Pakistan openly and confidently relies on the first strike with nuclear weapons. Because India surpasses it in conventional weapons and, if it wished so, could take the controversial state of Kashmir without using nuclear weapons.

But Pakistan could not stop India without nuclear weapons. Therefore, it deployed tactical nuclear weapons in Kashmir aimed for use on the battlefield. India will certainly respond to any such use with a massive nuclear strike. Its representatives have repeatedly spoken about this. India is one of two nuclear powers along with China, which has undertaken the obligation not to use nuclear weapons first. But if Pakistan applies it, India’s commitment will end.

Therefore, the direct account of the victims will be calculated in dozens of millions people. Moreover, those territories are exceptionally densely populated. In combination with low living standards in that region, this creates the conditions for a monstrous result.

On the whole, Russia is certainly trying to restrain India, and China – Pakistan. But there is a nuance: uncontrollable elements. In particular, there are terrorist groups on the territory of Pakistan that consider the fight against India as their holy destiny, as Islamic groups in the Middle East aim at destruction of Israel.

They often act uncontrolledly or with the tacit encouragement of certain circles in the Pakistani state, its army and leadership, that are prone to radical Islamism. Therefore, the situation is much more complicated than a confrontation between two powers, which could have been kept from conflict, if there were complete centralisation of decision-making on both sides.

The most likely scenario of escalation is a huge act of terror with thousands of victims in India and a massive strike with the systems of aviation, artillery and troops on Pakistan, which in response will use nuclear weapons, and an exchange of nuclear strikes will take place.

Question: The territorial dispute between India and Pakistan has been going on for many years. Is it possible to resolve it? Has there been any progress on this issue over the past decades?

Acad. Arbatov: There is a definite progress in the fact that a big war has not happened yet and a line of separation has appeared. But this territorial issue remains pending, although everyone is aware of its existence. But as long as India and Pakistan have no incentive to solve it, for example, for economic gain, then China, Russia and the United States cannot put enough pressure on them. Such territorial issues in relation to a large territory, moreover inhabited by Islamic peoples, are solved with great difficulty.

Look at the Kurils – this conflict is even more long-standing. And we are talking only about four tiny islands! And two civilised, highly developed states are involved in the dispute, the states that are very much interested in large-scale economic interaction with each other, that have common political interests related to the security of the region. And still they have not been able to solve the conflict.

And here, just imagine, are the states of a completely different type, other public sentiments, ideologies, extremism on both sides, and a large territory… So theoretically any territorial conflict can be resolved – and history has given many examples to that – but in practice we can not count on a peaceful resolution in the near perspective.

Moreover, as we know, the relations between the United States and Russia, and the United States and China are not in the best of times. And the unity of these superpowers as sponsors of a peaceful settlement of the conflict between India and Pakistan would be an indispensable condition. And when they are in confrontation with each other, then India and Pakistan do not experience any effective influence on their part.

In general, India and Pakistan are a unique case where the confrontation is mainly bilateral, and there is even an approximate parity of nuclear arsenals. Therefore, it would seem that the conditions are present in order to at least begin negotiations on the limitation of nuclear weapons and then on their reduction. But because of the disagreements of the great superpowers… I must admit that Russia is far from being in a favourable position so that to influence India and Pakistan.

About what can happen after the termination of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles between Russia and the United States, see the first part of the interview with Alexei Arbatov (https://www.yabloko.ru/publikatsii/2019/03/0).