‘No first use’ and policymaking

http://www.dawn.com/2008/12/23/letted.htm#2

                 BEFORE analysing the likely effects of the off-the-cuff ‘no first use of nukes’ statement by President Zardari, one needs to define the theory of nuclear deterrence and maintaining an ambiguity regarding the use of the weapons.

                    Some recent episodes in decision making have served to expose the immaturity of the Pakistani polity. One needs to emphasise the importance of grooming the persons who are to be the president and the prime minister, the process of the delegation of powers, and the importance of institution-building.

                  The theory of deterrence was propagated in the early days of the Cold War in which the threat of mutual annihilation prevented them from taking overtly hostile actions. It was appropriately called MAD — Mutually Assured Destruction. There is disparity between Pakistan and India in conventional weapons, and a greater part of Pakistani weaponry is American-made. So we are dependent on the US for ammunition and spare parts.
                Pakistan cannot afford a conventional or nuclear war. The nukes were acquired to avoid both. The nation has spent trillions of dollars in acquiring its nuclear capability.
                The aim was that it would deter India from waging even a conventional war. Now a declaration by the President of Pakistan that we are not going to use it first has removed the ambiguity and the deterrence. Now India can talk of surgical strikes and the stupid idea of a limited war.
                It was in that context that one argued for grooming the persons who are to be the president and the prime minister. They are to be told that they cannot be the master of everything. They cannot take unilateral decisions. They can complement the policy formulated by the experts and officials who have the expertise for that particular job: defence, economy, education, health, foreign relations, law, etc. A person becomes a leader when it masters the art of selling the policy formulated by the experts to the public and to the international community. In today’s specialised world personal whims of a leader have no place.
               It is the time the state’s institutions are strengthened so that national decisions are taken after due process and in an organized manner. Policymaking must climb up the ladder and reach the high offices where the leaders should make the choice.

               This way the leadership would avoid the embarrassment of retracting on its publicly stated statements: bringing ISI under Defence Ministry, no first use of nuclear weapon, sending the ISI Chief to India.

              When Zardari or Gilani speaks, it’s the president or the prime minister who speaks: which means the nation speaks. They must know what to say and when to say.