India set to take lead on abolishing nuclear weapons

By Shastri Ramachandaran*
IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis

NEW DELHI (IDN) – The Government of India appears to be in right earnest about taking the lead in pursuing universal disarmament. The renewed vigour – for reviving the climate and conditions wherein the basic ideas and objectives of nuclear disarmament can be advanced – is evident in a series of engagements being lined up to carry forward former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi’s Action Plan (RGAP) for a nuclear-weapons-free world order.

The Plan, mooted in 1988 and known as ‘RGAP 88’, attracted much global attention when it was launched as the logical culmination of the Six Nation-Five Continent Initiative to pre-empt the outbreak of nuclear war at a time when the confrontationist rhetoric of the two superpowers was at its peak. India’s late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi could not succeed in making the United Nations General Assembly accept his idea in 1988.

Now, 23 years later, RGAP 88 has acquired new life with the Informal Group on RGAP coming out with its 284-page report in August 2011. Its nomenclature, ‘Informal Group’, can be misleading as there is nothing informal about it. On the contrary the IG, set up by India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in October 2010, is the Prime Minister’s Advisory Group to revitalize the RGAP on Disarmament.

Headed by former Union Minister and Member of Parliament Mani Shankar Aiyar, a career foreign service officer-turned-politician who was close to Rajiv Gandhi, the Group includes distinguished diplomats, strategic affairs and nuclear experts and academics.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had set up the Informal Group in the wake of US President Barack Obama’s speech in April 2009, in which he spoke about “America’s commitment to seek peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons”. President Obama, who deserves credit for being the first head of a nuclear-weapon state to commit himself to a nuclear-weapon-free world, had warned of the dangers of proliferation. He spelled out that the risk of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists was “the most dangerous legacy of the Cold War.”

The report, which recommends action on how best the idea of universal disarmament can be carried forward, is premised on the realisation that possession of nuclear weapons has not resulted in a (greater) sense of security to India. The case for moving towards a nuclear weapon-free world is more compelling today than during the Cold War because more states have nuclear weapons and more could be tempted to join. Therefore, the report has called for a massive campaign within the country to spread awareness of the dangers of nuclear conflict and a terrorist nuclear attack.

Drawing attention to the fact that India faced the biggest and most tangible threats, whether by way of a nuclear attack or nuclear terrorism, the report argued that “the best security for India lies in universal nuclear disarmament”. The members of the Advisory Group acknowledged explicitly that they drew confidence from the US support to nuclear abolition, which was not forthcoming in 1988.

The report, which was presented to the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister S M Krishna recommends, as the first step for revival of RGAP 88, the appointment of a Special Coordinator with the mandate to work out a consensus for constituting a committee on nuclear disarmament.

Seven-point Roadmap

The report contains a seven-point roadmap with 14 recommendations, which includes India reiterating its commitment to “eliminating its own arsenal as part of a universal, non-discriminatory and verifiable global process”; promoting consensus on reducing salience of nuclear weapons in security doctrines, No-First Use and binding negative security assurances; “keep the fires burning” in the Conference on Disarmament to press for discussions aimed at mobilising countries for total elimination of nuclear weapons; and, thereafter, moving to a Convention banning the use or threat of nuclear weapons. These are towards clearing the decks for “negotiating a Nuclear Weapons Convention that would discuss a world without nuclear weapons in a specified time-frame.”

The report recommends that India – as a State with Nuclear Weapons (SNW) which is  resolved to maintain a credible minimum nuclear deterrent –should initiate bilateral dialogues on disarmament with all the countries possessing nuclear weapons. To sharpen the advocacy of disarmament, the report calls for the government’s active participation in civil society initiatives, strengthening the Disarmament Division in the Ministry of External Affairs and raising the country’s profile in the UNGA.

The Group wants the Government of India to take the lead in global efforts for elimination of nuclear weapons, bringing to the issue the moral force of 60 years of campaigning for the cause and its growing clout in the global arena. The report argues that the time is ripe for India to revive its traditional championing of disarmament. Besides, the prevailing global climate is viewed to be opportune because processes for reduction of nuclear arsenals are gaining.

It may be mentioned that the Advisory Group’s report takes the RGAP 88 forward by including elements of a Working Paper which India had submitted to the UNGA in 2006.

There are no dearth of national and international reports, proposals, committees and groups on the issue of nuclear disarmament. Yet if this Advisory Group’s report and recommendations deserve attention it is because of new dimensions to the issue and exceptional features of the report.

To take the second aspect first, the unique feature of the report is not the underlying philosophy, intent, language, approach or even the rhetoric.  But that it grasps the nettle in terms of the specific, practical steps needed for actualising the goal of nuclear abolition. The sequenced moves, spelled out in a step-by-step way, towards the goal of nuclear elimination offer a measurable yardstick of progress – or lack of it. This provides the advantage of setting specific stages for the campaign, which can serve as signposts.

The new dimensions that the report focuses upon are the altered and favourable international climate for a disarmament campaign, the US support for nuclear abolition, the Indian government’s forthright commitment to take the lead and a prescription of engagements for pursing the cause within the country and through bilateral, regional and international exercises beginning January 2012. This prescription forms part of the sequenced stages.

The fact that the Chairman of the Group, Mani Shankar Aiyar has begun acting on the proposed roadmap within the country and at the international level testifies to the earnestness of the efforts underway.

India at Conference in New York

At the international level, UN Day (October 24) this year provided an apt platform to draw attention to the report. At a conference organised in New York by the Global Security Institute, the East West Institute and the James Martin Center for Non-Proliferation, speakers, including UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Aiyar, made a strong pitch for eliminating nuclear weapons.

The conference is a landmark not for the perorations but as a stage for revival of the campaign to build a new awareness for nuclear abolition. The high-level conference also turned the spotlight on the Secretary General’s Five Point Proposal, a comprehensive agenda for eliminating nuclear weapons, first presented three years ago.

“We know that the world of tomorrow is shaped by the decisions we make today. A world free of nuclear weapons is a concrete possibility,” Ban Ki-moon said, according to news reports of the event. In his keynote address, Ban emphasised the need for increased transparency and accountability, as well as the urgent need to strengthen the rule of law in nuclear disarmament obligations, and reiterated his 2008 call for work on a nuclear weapons convention.

“No country is more threatened than India is by the growing nuclear arsenals in our neighbourhood and the prospect of terrorists accessing nuclear materials or even weapons. Unilateral nuclear disarmament is, therefore, difficult to envisage,” Aiyar said at the conference. Elimination of nuclear weapons is the only way to ensure that they are not used for “mass genocide” by terrorists and “mass suicide” by states, he said, adding that “there is no third way.”

According to a PTI report, Aiyar pointed out that while unilateral nuclear disarmament would not be easy, India “could rid itself of these weapons” within the framework of an international convention for the universal elimination of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. “India must continue to pursue its vision of a non-nuclear world since a Nuclear-Weapons-Free-World would be good for the planet, good for the region and good for India’s national security.”

A week earlier, at the Inter-Parliamentary Union meet, the report’s call for a full-scale revival of the nuclear abolition campaign evoked a lot of interest, said Dr Vidya Shankar Aiyar who serves as Advisor to the Informal Group.

Update

Bringing IDN up to date on developments following the presentation of the report to the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Dr Vidya Shankar Aiyar said that India’s National Security Advisor, Shivshankar Menon, had been most encouraging in his support to the initiatives proposed in the Report.

The Group’s Chairman, Mani Shankar Aiyar, is now working to schedule a meeting with senior officials of the Ministry of External Affairs in the presence of the Foreign Minister. This is in preparation for a national-level conference that the Advisory Group, together with the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA), plans to convene in January 2012. This national conference is expected to bring together the community of strategic affairs specialists, experts on nuclear and disarmament issues and think tanks.

Thereafter, the Advisory Group, according to Dr Vidya Shankar Aiyar, proposes to hold conferences in the neighbourhood and develop a level of regional cohesion before bringing around the Permament Five (P-5) of the UN Security Council for developing an international platform.

All this may be cause for optimism. However, the obstacles on the path cannot be discounted, and the report itself takes realistic note of the challenges ahead. The challenges include resistance from powerful sections of the US establishment which do not share Obama’s position, the distinct lack of enthusiasm among some of the P-5 such as the US and Russia and differences even among those who agree on the larger objective but are divided on the steps to be taken.

*The author, an independent political and international affairs commentator based in New Delhi, is a former Editor of Sunday Mail, has worked with leading newspapers in India and abroad, including China, Denmark and Sweden. He was Senior Editor & Writer with China Daily and Global Times in Beijing. For nearly 20 years before that he was a senior editor with The Times of India and The Tribune. Besides commentaries for newspapers, radio and television, he has written books, monographs, reports and papers. He is co-editor of the book State of Nepal and co-author of Media, Conflict and Peace. He is a regular contributor to IDN.

© IDN-InDepthNews – December 2, 2011

Share

Related Posts

LONDON – So far so good, at least on the wider level. While internally Iraq seems on the edge of chaos, the much heralded clash of civilizations between the Muslim and Judaeo-Christian worlds has yet to become apparent. We have anger and despair aplenty in the Arab and Muslim worlds. But very little rushing to the standard and there was no great pilgrimage of warriors to join the fight, as happened when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan twenty years ago, and then, having driven the Red Army out, were left to ferment in that mountainous redoubt. With the armaments supplied by the CIA the mujahidin were transformed into Al Qaeda that became, for a relatively brief moment as these things go, ‘the greatest threat to the homeland that America has ever known.’ Nevertheless a ‘Cold War’ between much of the Muslim world and the West is certainly in full swing. Winston...
The Challenge of Nuclear Weaponsin the Twenty-first CenturyA Path Forward The peoples and governments of the world face an urgent challenge relating to weaponry of mass destruction and particularly to nuclear weaponry.  At the crossroads of technology, terrorism, geopolitical ambition, and policies of preemption are new and potent dangers for humanity. Despite ending the nuclear standoff of the Cold War era, nuclear weaponry is again menacing the peoples of the world with catastrophic possibilities.  We recognize the need for any government to pursue its security interests in accordance with international law; and further, we recognize that distinctive threats to these interests now exist as a result of an active international terrorist network having declared war on the United States and its allies. Nonetheless, we reject the assessment of the current US administration that upgrading a reliance on nuclear weapons is in any sense justified as a response. We find it...
By Karin Wegestal MP, the Social Democratic Partyon behalf of the Swedish Committee for Solidarity with the Yugoslav People During the last decade, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has received more than 500,000 refugees from Croatia and Bosnia, and another 300,000 internally displaced persons, mainly from the province Kosovo and Metohia. For a country with about ten million inhabitants, such an influx of homeless people is obviously a very heavy burden – even under peaceful conditions. But in addition to that, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has been the subject to sanctions from the western powers for close to ten years and its infrastructure was badly hurt through Nato’s intense bombardment during 78 days in 1999. The result of all this is that Yugoslavia, once the most developed industrial country in Eastern Europe, is today the poorest country in Europe. In Serbia excluding Kosovo, with about ten million inhabitants and...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...