<p>Ahead of the meeting between Donald Trump and North Korea leader Kim Jong-Un on June 12 in Singapore, the US President has assured "protection" to North Korea.</p>

<p>His assurance has come as a reward to North Korea in return for its adoption to denuclearisation.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The assurance has also come in the wake of the North Korea's recent claim on the need of a nuclear weapon. North Korea had recently argued its need of nuclear weapon in order to secure itself.</p>

<p>According to media reports, Trump said that in return for abandoning nuclear weapons, the United States would provide it with protection against any kind of attacks.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Trump also negated reports that claimed the cancellation of the meeting between North Korea and the US. The reports said that the meeting between the two countries was cancelled due to the ongoing military deal between US and South Korea.</p>

<p>North Korea has dismantled its nuclear site Punggye-ri after United States, Japan, South Korea and China collectively put forward the need for denuclearisation.</p>


The assurance has also come in the wake of the North Korea's recent claim on the need of a nuclear weapon. Earlier, North Korea had argued its need of nuclear weapon in order to secure itself

Ahead of the meeting between Donald Trump and North Korea leader Kim Jong-Un on June 12 in Singapore, the US President has assured "protection" to North Korea. His assurance has come as a reward to North Korea in return for its adoption to denuclearisation. The assurance has also come in the wake of the North Korea's recent claim on the need of a nuclear weapon. North Korea had recently argued its need of nuclear weapon in order to secure itself. According to media reports, Trump said that in return for abandoning nuclear weapons, the United States would provide it with protection against any kind of attacks. Trump also negated reports that claimed the cancellation of the meeting between North Korea and the US. The reports said that the meeting between the two countries was cancelled due to the ongoing military deal between US and South Korea. North Korea has dismantled its nuclear site Punggye-ri after United States, Japan, South Korea and China collectively put forward the need for denuclearisation.

Trump offers protection to North Korea in return for denuclearisation

<p>North Korea will never completely give up its nuclear weapons, a top defector said ahead of leader Kim Jong Un's landmark summit with US President Donald Trump next month.</p>

<p>The current whirlwind of diplomacy and negotiations will not end with "a sincere and complete disarmament" but with "a reduced North Korean nuclear threat", said Thae Yong-ho, who fled his post as the North's deputy ambassador to Britain in August 2016.</p>

<p>"In the end, North Korea will remain 'a nuclear power packaged as a non-nuclear state'," Thae told the South's Newsis news agency.</p>

<p>His remarks come ahead of an unprecedented summit between Kim and Trump in Singapore on June 12 where North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes are expected to dominate the agenda.</p>

<p>North and South Korea affirmed their commitment to the goal of denuclearisation of the peninsula at summit last month, and Pyongyang announced at the weekend it will destroy its only known nuclear test site next week.</p>

<p>But it has not made public what concessions it is offering.</p>

<p>Washington is seeking the "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation (CVID)" of the North and stresses that verification will be key.</p>

<p>Pyongyang has said it does not need nuclear weapons if the security of its regime is guaranteed.</p>

<p>But Thae, one of the highest ranking officials to have defected in recent years, said: "North Korea will argue that the process of nuclear disarmament will lead to the collapse of North Korea and oppose CVID."</p>

<p>The North wanted to ensure Kim's "absolute power" and its model of hereditary succession, he added, and would oppose intrusive inspections as they "would be viewed as a process of breaking down Kim Jong Un's absolute power in front of the eyes of ordinary North Koreans and elites".</p>

<p>At a party meeting last month when Kim proclaimed the development of the North's nuclear force complete and promised no more nuclear or missile tests, he called its arsenal "a powerful treasured sword for defending peace".</p>

<p>"Giving it up soon after Kim Jong Un himself labelled it the 'treasured sword for defending peace' and a firm guarantee for the future? It can never happen," Thae said.</p>

<p>In his memoir that hit shelves Monday, Thae added: "More people should realise that North Korea is desperately clinging to its nuclear programme more than anything."</p>

<p>Tensions on and around the peninsula had been mounting for years as Pyongyang's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes saw it subjected to multiple rounds of increasingly strict sanctions by the UN Security Council, the US, EU, South Korea and others.</p>

<p>Trump last year threatened the North with "fire and fury".</p>

<p>But since the Winter Olympics in the South, Pyongyang and Washington have agreed to the unprecedented Singapore meeting.</p>

<p>Kim has also twice visited China after not paying his respects to President Xi Jinping in the six years since he inherited power from his father, and met the South's President Moon Jae-in in the Demilitarized Zone that divides their countries.</p>

<p>North Korea's sudden change in attitude was probably driven by the mounting international sanctions imposed over its weapons programmes that had begun to take a toll on the livelihoods of ordinary citizens, Thae said.</p>

<p>As of last year the UN Security Council sanctions included measures on sectors such as coal, fish, textiles and overseas workers.</p>

<p>"North Korea did not foresee the destructive power of these sanctions," Thae told the interview. "These sanctions are threatening the livelihoods of millions of North Koreans at the root."</p>

<p>But Pyongyang had a long history of making overtures that ultimately came to nothing, he warned.</p>

<p>"North Korea's diplomacy has always been a repeat of hardline and appeasement," Thae said.</p>

<p>"It is North Korea's diplomatic tactic to push the situatio</p>


North Korea will never give up its nuclear weapons, a top defector said ahead of Kim Jong Un's landmark summit with US President Donald Trump

North Korea will never completely give up its nuclear weapons, a top defector said ahead of leader Kim Jong Un's landmark summit with US President Donald Trump next month. The current whirlwind of diplomacy and negotiations will not end with "a sincere and complete disarmament" but with "a reduced North Korean nuclear threat", said Thae Yong-ho, who fled his post as the North's deputy ambassador to Britain in August 2016. "In the end, North Korea will remain 'a nuclear power packaged as a non-nuclear state'," Thae told the South's Newsis news agency. His remarks come ahead of an unprecedented summit between Kim and Trump in Singapore on June 12 where North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes are expected to dominate the agenda. North and South Korea affirmed their commitment to the goal of denuclearisation of the peninsula at summit last month, and Pyongyang announced at the weekend it will destroy its only known nuclear test site next week. But it has not made public what concessions it is offering. Washington is seeking the "complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation (CVID)" of the North and stresses that verification will be key. Pyongyang has said it does not need nuclear weapons if the security of its regime is guaranteed. But Thae, one of the highest ranking officials to have defected in recent years, said: "North Korea will argue that the process of nuclear disarmament will lead to the collapse of North Korea and oppose CVID." The North wanted to ensure Kim's "absolute power" and its model of hereditary succession, he added, and would oppose intrusive inspections as they "would be viewed as a process of breaking down Kim Jong Un's absolute power in front of the eyes of ordinary North Koreans and elites". At a party meeting last month when Kim proclaimed the development of the North's nuclear force complete and promised no more nuclear or missile tests, he called its arsenal "a powerful treasured sword for defending peace". "Giving it up soon after Kim Jong Un himself labelled it the 'treasured sword for defending peace' and a firm guarantee for the future? It can never happen," Thae said. In his memoir that hit shelves Monday, Thae added: "More people should realise that North Korea is desperately clinging to its nuclear programme more than anything." Tensions on and around the peninsula had been mounting for years as Pyongyang's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes saw it subjected to multiple rounds of increasingly strict sanctions by the UN Security Council, the US, EU, South Korea and others. Trump last year threatened the North with "fire and fury". But since the Winter Olympics in the South, Pyongyang and Washington have agreed to the unprecedented Singapore meeting. Kim has also twice visited China after not paying his respects to President Xi Jinping in the six years since he inherited power from his father, and met the South's President Moon Jae-in in the Demilitarized Zone that divides their countries. North Korea's sudden change in attitude was probably driven by the mounting international sanctions imposed over its weapons programmes that had begun to take a toll on the livelihoods of ordinary citizens, Thae said. As of last year the UN Security Council sanctions included measures on sectors such as coal, fish, textiles and overseas workers. "North Korea did not foresee the destructive power of these sanctions," Thae told the interview. "These sanctions are threatening the livelihoods of millions of North Koreans at the root." But Pyongyang had a long history of making overtures that ultimately came to nothing, he warned. "North Korea's diplomacy has always been a repeat of hardline and appeasement," Thae said. "It is North Korea's diplomatic tactic to push the situatio

North Korea will never fully give up nuclear weapons: Top defector

<p>US President Donald Trump has said that Iran will face some "serious consequences" if they restarted its nuclear program.&nbsp</p>

<p>On being asked what if Tehran restarted its nuclear efforts, Trump said, "I would advise Iran not to start their nuclear program I would advise them very strongly," "If they do, there will be very severe consequences," as quoted by Arab News.</p>

<p>After the US' withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani had warned that his country could resume uranium enrichment "without limit" but would refrain from doing so for now.</p>

<p>In announcing the US pullout on Tuesday, Trump called the accord as an "embarrassment" that was "defective at its core".</p>

<p>Trump announced Tuesday he is quitting the Iran nuclear deal, pitting him against the United States' closest allies and leaving the future of Tehran's nuclear ambitions in question.</p>

<p>The 2015 agreement, which was negotiated by the Obama administration and included Germany, France and Britain, had lifted most US and international economic sanctions against Iran. In exchange, Iran agreed to restrictions on its nuclear program, making it impossible to produce a bomb and establishing rigorous inspections.</p>

<p>France’s foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, claimed that the deal, initially involving seven parties, could yet continue. But Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who helped engineer the deal to ease his country’s economically crippling isolation, told French counterpart Emmanuel Macron in a phone call that Europe had only a “limited opportunity” to preserve the pact.&nbsp</p>


After the US' withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani had warned that his country could resume uranium enrichment 'without limit' but would refrain from doing so for now

US President Donald Trump has said that Iran will face some "serious consequences" if they restarted its nuclear program. On being asked what if Tehran restarted its nuclear efforts, Trump said, "I would advise Iran not to start their nuclear program I would advise them very strongly," "If they do, there will be very severe consequences," as quoted by Arab News. After the US' withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani had warned that his country could resume uranium enrichment "without limit" but would refrain from doing so for now. In announcing the US pullout on Tuesday, Trump called the accord as an "embarrassment" that was "defective at its core". Trump announced Tuesday he is quitting the Iran nuclear deal, pitting him against the United States' closest allies and leaving the future of Tehran's nuclear ambitions in question. The 2015 agreement, which was negotiated by the Obama administration and included Germany, France and Britain, had lifted most US and international economic sanctions against Iran. In exchange, Iran agreed to restrictions on its nuclear program, making it impossible to produce a bomb and establishing rigorous inspections. France’s foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, claimed that the deal, initially involving seven parties, could yet continue. But Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who helped engineer the deal to ease his country’s economically crippling isolation, told French counterpart Emmanuel Macron in a phone call that Europe had only a “limited opportunity” to preserve the pact.

'Severe consequences' to be faced if Iran resumes nuclear programme: Trump

<p>India&#39;s two-nuclear powered neighbours are in news again. General Bipin Rawat, the Indian Army Chief, gave a statement that India is capable of calling Pakistan&rsquo;s nuclear bluff. The statement was a generalised one but was taken very seriously by not only the political leadership of Pakistan but also their Army.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Pakistan had been threatening India with its nukes all the time. Their leaders start giving statements that Pakistan is a nuclear-powered nation and India should not mess up with it. To understand the reality, we must know the truth and myths behind Pakistan&rsquo;s nuclear capabilities.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>A nation does not become nuclear empowered just by testing a few warheads under standard testing conditions. It needs a robust Nuclear doctrine and reliable mechanism for the delivery of these warheads to the right place in the enemy&rsquo;s territory.&nbsp; Any nuclear-powered country would need land, sea or aerial means to deliver these weapons. This translates into possession of land and sea-based missiles, including aircrafts modified with suitable missile systems to launch the weapons and locating them at a place which cannot be detected easily.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>It is well known that in any war, the locations of these strike capabilities are targeted first, creating decoys and preparing for contingencies is a critical factor. In the case of Pakistan, we can be sure that the country will take, at least, few days to assemble its nukes for an attack and that will be too late.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>At present, in addition to the ballistic missiles, the only second method of delivery Pakistan has is through its aircrafts, for instance, few F-16s and J-17 can deliver them through toss bombing. But for such daring operations, and that too in the absence of a nuclear-powered Air to Surface Missile, these aircrafts have to come closer to Indian targets. In the current scenario, that does not look possible. This is mainly due to the technical superiority of Indian Forces in terms of Radar surveillance and possible situation of air superiority in the initial phase of war itself.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Further, if we take the examples of its missiles, there are serious doubts about the so-called nuclear deliverables of Pakistan. While Pakistan tested its various missiles over the last two decades, the operational status of them is still not very clear.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>If we take the medium and long-range missiles, Ghauri series of missiles are liquid fuel-based and their readiness time is very high, while Ababeel and Shaheen series are not yet operational. Abdali and Ghaznavi are only capable of carrying conventional warheads. Nasr as well as Babur are operational but has a payload capacity of lesser than 500 Kgs and it can carry only tactical warheads of 10-30 kilotons. Out of these, operational versions of Babur have a range of about 400-450Kms while Nasr is just 60-80Kms. While Nasr can be used in the initial stages of war due to its limited range, the operational number of Babur Missile is very less due to import of some of its critical components from China. All of these are land-based missiles and there is no operational missile with Pakistan, which can be launched from the sea or air-based platforms, leaving the country with very few options.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>There are other things also which matter for a nuclear strike and these are pertaining to availability and readiness of nuclear warheads. These things include: safeguarding its triggers, devices and pits (Uranium or Plutonium fuel for the warhead) which any country keeps in partially dis-assembled storages at various locations across the country. How can they be made available in a ready form in minimum possible time is an important concern.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>So far, in case of Pakistan, important things are still in the hands of its scientists under Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA); very little is known about the operationalisation or availability with Defence forces in the form of ready to launch warheads.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Not only this, the country needs a robust communication mechanism which works on a diverse mechanism of Radio, Satellite and other communication links. These are required to pass the concerned nuclear code and directions from the top leaders to the missile launch sites. In case of Pakistan, these instructions will come from NCA (National Command Authority) and Strategic Planning Division (SPD).&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>In the absence of any communication satellite of Pakistan, the country relies only on radio and line communications for the passage of this information which will be the first to be jammed or destroyed in the scenario of a war. Pakistan can claim that they can take help of Chinese satellites or their communication tools but relying on these satellites is like handing over the control of Nukes to China itself.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>When we talk about the safeguarding the nuclear assets, Pakistan is a unique nation where the differentiation between the country&rsquo;s loyal forces and terrorists is very negligible. This was evident from the active involvement of a large number of Pakistani Naval officers on PNS Zulfiqar in September 2014 which was later claimed by ISIS. Imagine any such vessel loaded with nuclear warheads comes under control of the terrorists, what would be the outcome?</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>The past terror incidents have been horrible when Pakistan Aeronautical Complex at Kamra was attacked not once but twice in 2007 and 2009. The General Headquarters at Rawalpindi was attacked in 2009 and was kept in seize for several hours. In May 2011, the Mehran Base at Karachi which is known to stock nuclear weapons in its vicinity was attacked too. In 2012, Peshawar airbase was attacked too.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>In the wake of ISIS looking for alternative territories for its operations, Pakistan is an ideal location and the possibilities of its nukes going into the hands of terrorists very high.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).</em></p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


While Pakistan tested its various missiles over the last two decades, the operational status of them is still not very clear.

India's two-nuclear powered neighbours are in news again. General Bipin Rawat, the Indian Army Chief, gave a statement that India is capable of calling Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. The statement was a generalised one but was taken very seriously by not only the political leadership of Pakistan but also their Army. Pakistan had been threatening India with its nukes all the time. Their leaders start giving statements that Pakistan is a nuclear-powered nation and India should not mess up with it. To understand the reality, we must know the truth and myths behind Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities. A nation does not become nuclear empowered just by testing a few warheads under standard testing conditions. It needs a robust Nuclear doctrine and reliable mechanism for the delivery of these warheads to the right place in the enemy’s territory. Any nuclear-powered country would need land, sea or aerial means to deliver these weapons. This translates into possession of land and sea-based missiles, including aircrafts modified with suitable missile systems to launch the weapons and locating them at a place which cannot be detected easily. It is well known that in any war, the locations of these strike capabilities are targeted first, creating decoys and preparing for contingencies is a critical factor. In the case of Pakistan, we can be sure that the country will take, at least, few days to assemble its nukes for an attack and that will be too late. At present, in addition to the ballistic missiles, the only second method of delivery Pakistan has is through its aircrafts, for instance, few F-16s and J-17 can deliver them through toss bombing. But for such daring operations, and that too in the absence of a nuclear-powered Air to Surface Missile, these aircrafts have to come closer to Indian targets. In the current scenario, that does not look possible. This is mainly due to the technical superiority of Indian Forces in terms of Radar surveillance and possible situation of air superiority in the initial phase of war itself. Further, if we take the examples of its missiles, there are serious doubts about the so-called nuclear deliverables of Pakistan. While Pakistan tested its various missiles over the last two decades, the operational status of them is still not very clear. If we take the medium and long-range missiles, Ghauri series of missiles are liquid fuel-based and their readiness time is very high, while Ababeel and Shaheen series are not yet operational. Abdali and Ghaznavi are only capable of carrying conventional warheads. Nasr as well as Babur are operational but has a payload capacity of lesser than 500 Kgs and it can carry only tactical warheads of 10-30 kilotons. Out of these, operational versions of Babur have a range of about 400-450Kms while Nasr is just 60-80Kms. While Nasr can be used in the initial stages of war due to its limited range, the operational number of Babur Missile is very less due to import of some of its critical components from China. All of these are land-based missiles and there is no operational missile with Pakistan, which can be launched from the sea or air-based platforms, leaving the country with very few options. There are other things also which matter for a nuclear strike and these are pertaining to availability and readiness of nuclear warheads. These things include: safeguarding its triggers, devices and pits (Uranium or Plutonium fuel for the warhead) which any country keeps in partially dis-assembled storages at various locations across the country. How can they be made available in a ready form in minimum possible time is an important concern. So far, in case of Pakistan, important things are still in the hands of its scientists under Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA); very little is known about the operationalisation or availability with Defence forces in the form of ready to launch warheads. Not only this, the country needs a robust communication mechanism which works on a diverse mechanism of Radio, Satellite and other communication links. These are required to pass the concerned nuclear code and directions from the top leaders to the missile launch sites. In case of Pakistan, these instructions will come from NCA (National Command Authority) and Strategic Planning Division (SPD). In the absence of any communication satellite of Pakistan, the country relies only on radio and line communications for the passage of this information which will be the first to be jammed or destroyed in the scenario of a war. Pakistan can claim that they can take help of Chinese satellites or their communication tools but relying on these satellites is like handing over the control of Nukes to China itself. When we talk about the safeguarding the nuclear assets, Pakistan is a unique nation where the differentiation between the country’s loyal forces and terrorists is very negligible. This was evident from the active involvement of a large number of Pakistani Naval officers on PNS Zulfiqar in September 2014 which was later claimed by ISIS. Imagine any such vessel loaded with nuclear warheads comes under control of the terrorists, what would be the outcome? The past terror incidents have been horrible when Pakistan Aeronautical Complex at Kamra was attacked not once but twice in 2007 and 2009. The General Headquarters at Rawalpindi was attacked in 2009 and was kept in seize for several hours. In May 2011, the Mehran Base at Karachi which is known to stock nuclear weapons in its vicinity was attacked too. In 2012, Peshawar airbase was attacked too. In the wake of ISIS looking for alternative territories for its operations, Pakistan is an ideal location and the possibilities of its nukes going into the hands of terrorists very high. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

Opinion: Is Pakistan telling the truth about its nuclear weapons?

<p>The use of nuclear capability as insurance for its defence was cited as the main reason by every country, which added nuclear weapons to its armoury, ever since it was invented. It spiralled into a competition, which came under some control after the realisation of its devastation in Japan, and potentials of mutually assured destruction (MAD).</p>

<p>When Israel went nuclear, it developed a survival capability to dissuade all hostile neighbouring Arab countries. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) required checking proliferation of nuclear weapon technology was selectively leaked by some irresponsible countries, leading to a situation where humanity suffers from a threat of nuclear blackmailing by states, as well as militants if tactical nukes accidentally fall into their hand. Interestingly, both countries accused of nuclear blackmailing happen to be Frontline states of China.</p>

<p><strong>North Korea</strong></p>

<p>When President Trump started his visit to Asia, after a series of provocative statements by the US and North Korea, it was being speculated that some concrete action plan will emerge in his handling of North Korea. During this marathon visit, as President Trump came closer to reality, it is quite clear now that it will end with no worthwhile option on the table, except the efforts to outsource the problem to China again, (which is also part of the problem) despite being disappointed earlier, with reasonable suspicion that it will not work.</p>

<p>North Korea has its own point of view for all its missiles/nuclear tests/ misadventures so far, which revolves around its own security concerns and survival of regime of Kim. It justifies it as a defensive measure against the backdrop of US threat of past regime changes efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and other countries not following its dictate, as they happened to be Non-nuclear/incapable of threatening some part/colony of US.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>North Korea has been able to create a capability which dissuades the strongest military power US (having all instruments of military deterrence) to take any military action.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=North Korea has been able to create a capability which dissuades the strongest military power US (having all instruments of military deterrence) to take any military action." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The threat from US regional allies has also been given as an excuse. The Korean War is also an unforgettable historical event when the US might be used against them. The blackmailing part is that their leadership is ready to endanger lives of its own people, by continuing with nuclear tests, despite mountain collapsing, to save the current autocratic regime, using &lsquo;Hate America&rsquo; theme as the rallying point.</p>

<p>By doing so they expect that the world should behave on their terms to save lives of people of other countries, despite the risk of suicidal destruction of their own country, like in case of fidayeen attacks. Sanctions had little effect to the extent that North Korea is now signalling to be ready to talk to the US, but without preconditions.</p>

<p>The reality, therefore, is that by getting the missile and nuclear technology from some country/countries who would have obviously violated NPT, North Korea has been able to create a capability which dissuades the strongest military power US (having all instruments of military deterrence) to take any military action.&nbsp;It is also using its nuclear capability claims, to threaten Japan and South Korea and blackmail the US to talk without preconditions.</p>

<p><strong>Pakistan</strong></p>

<p>Pakistan has also been using this Nuclear Blackmailing/Dissuasion Theory against India for quite some time. It acquired nuclear and missile capability from some country/countries, which must have violated NPT at that time, and the world community ignored it. Today, Pakistan is hosting and training a maximum number of terrorist organisations in the world. It blatantly launches the proxy war against India through militants and has been able to dissuade India to use its conventional capability to prevent it, by nuclear blackmail/ threat to use nukes.</p>

<p>It has thus been able to prevent full use of hard power by India, against the inhuman use of proxy war by militants on innocent people; hence this theory seems to be working.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The danger of this technology passing into the hand of terrorists to share the technology and steal some fissile material, sufficient for mini nuke/ dirty bomb is not impossible in future.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The danger of this technology passing into the hand of terrorists to share the technology and steal some fissile material, sufficient for mini nuke/ dirty bomb is not impossible in future." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>It is surprising that the whole world rightly criticises North Korea, but not many are talking of Pakistani tactical nukes, despite the fact that the risk of tactical nuclear/dirty bomb sneaking to militants is much more from Pakistan. The stage is slowly setting in Pakistan, for the next level of terrorism with tactical nukes/dirty bombs.</p>

<p>The danger of this technology passing into the hand of terrorists by coercion of scientists/security personals/handlers, to share the technology and steal some fissile material, sufficient for mini nuke/ dirty bomb is not impossible in future.</p>

<p>The Nuclear Security Summit held in the US on 02 Apr 2016, exhibited grave concern of global powers, about the danger of mini-nukes falling in hands of terrorist organisations. A possibility of Pakistan covertly passing the tactical nuclear technology/ dirty bomb to terrorists to explode it in India, as part of a proxy war, and later deny it, is an option which cannot be ruled out, as its overt use by their Army may be difficult to be justified to the world community.</p>

<p><strong>Implications</strong></p>

<p>Despite best efforts a worthwhile solution to control unilateral missile and nuclear tests by North Korea has been found by World community, as the sanctions alone are unlikely to yield results, may be due to selective leakages.</p>

<p>A status quo in this regard will render world helpless, and it will become a new normal. Surprisingly, when newly elected Pakistani Prime Minister is talking of use of tactical nuclear weapons against India, not much criticism appeared on world media (perhaps many countries still feel that it is a local affair). Let me enumerate some of the implications of silent acceptance by the global community of this &lsquo;Nuclear Blackmailing Theory&rsquo;.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>There is a need to collectively have some global mechanism in place to prevent miniaturisation of nukes/tactical nukes/dirty bombs over and above the existing UN conventions.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=There is a need to collectively have some global mechanism in place to prevent miniaturisation of nukes/tactical nukes/dirty bombs over and above the existing UN conventions." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Iran may be encouraged to go nuclear looking at the fate of Iraq, and over arming of Saudi Arabia.</p>

<p>Japan may go in for creating its own military capabilities and later go nuclear.</p>

<p>South Korea may ask for tactical nukes from the US to protect itself from North Korea if China and Russia are not able to push North Korea to negations table.</p>

<p>Vietnam may also get an idea to request for nuclear technology.</p>

<p>India may have to speed up enlarging stockpile of existing nukes, not to suffer disadvantage on the deterrence capability, despite being well placed to respond to any tactical nukes threat of Pakistan. There is a need to collectively have some global mechanism in place to prevent miniaturisation of nukes/tactical nukes/dirty bombs over and above the existing UN conventions.</p>

<p>There is a need to implement some mechanism towards safety and security of nukes and accountability of fissile material. While a large number of analysts may be convinced that North Korea is the biggest challenge in terms of nuclear blackmailing, but in my opinion, the bigger global challenge is yet to come in the form of tactical nukes/dirty bombs/biological and chemical weapons being acquired by terrorists.</p>

<p>No country should assume that it&rsquo;s safe forever from blackmailing by terrorists having acquired such capability, even if it appears fiction today.</p>


No doubt North Korea is the challenge in terms of nuclear blackmailing but the bigger global challenge is yet to come in the form of nuclear weapons possessed by terrorists.

The use of nuclear capability as insurance for its defence was cited as the main reason by every country, which added nuclear weapons to its armoury, ever since it was invented. It spiralled into a competition, which came under some control after the realisation of its devastation in Japan, and potentials of mutually assured destruction (MAD). When Israel went nuclear, it developed a survival capability to dissuade all hostile neighbouring Arab countries. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) required checking proliferation of nuclear weapon technology was selectively leaked by some irresponsible countries, leading to a situation where humanity suffers from a threat of nuclear blackmailing by states, as well as militants if tactical nukes accidentally fall into their hand. Interestingly, both countries accused of nuclear blackmailing happen to be Frontline states of China. North Korea When President Trump started his visit to Asia, after a series of provocative statements by the US and North Korea, it was being speculated that some concrete action plan will emerge in his handling of North Korea. During this marathon visit, as President Trump came closer to reality, it is quite clear now that it will end with no worthwhile option on the table, except the efforts to outsource the problem to China again, (which is also part of the problem) despite being disappointed earlier, with reasonable suspicion that it will not work. North Korea has its own point of view for all its missiles/nuclear tests/ misadventures so far, which revolves around its own security concerns and survival of regime of Kim. It justifies it as a defensive measure against the backdrop of US threat of past regime changes efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and other countries not following its dictate, as they happened to be Non-nuclear/incapable of threatening some part/colony of US. North Korea has been able to create a capability which dissuades the strongest military power US (having all instruments of military deterrence) to take any military action. × The threat from US regional allies has also been given as an excuse. The Korean War is also an unforgettable historical event when the US might be used against them. The blackmailing part is that their leadership is ready to endanger lives of its own people, by continuing with nuclear tests, despite mountain collapsing, to save the current autocratic regime, using ‘Hate America’ theme as the rallying point. By doing so they expect that the world should behave on their terms to save lives of people of other countries, despite the risk of suicidal destruction of their own country, like in case of fidayeen attacks. Sanctions had little effect to the extent that North Korea is now signalling to be ready to talk to the US, but without preconditions. The reality, therefore, is that by getting the missile and nuclear technology from some country/countries who would have obviously violated NPT, North Korea has been able to create a capability which dissuades the strongest military power US (having all instruments of military deterrence) to take any military action. It is also using its nuclear capability claims, to threaten Japan and South Korea and blackmail the US to talk without preconditions. Pakistan Pakistan has also been using this Nuclear Blackmailing/Dissuasion Theory against India for quite some time. It acquired nuclear and missile capability from some country/countries, which must have violated NPT at that time, and the world community ignored it. Today, Pakistan is hosting and training a maximum number of terrorist organisations in the world. It blatantly launches the proxy war against India through militants and has been able to dissuade India to use its conventional capability to prevent it, by nuclear blackmail/ threat to use nukes. It has thus been able to prevent full use of hard power by India, against the inhuman use of proxy war by militants on innocent people; hence this theory seems to be working. The danger of this technology passing into the hand of terrorists to share the technology and steal some fissile material, sufficient for mini nuke/ dirty bomb is not impossible in future. × It is surprising that the whole world rightly criticises North Korea, but not many are talking of Pakistani tactical nukes, despite the fact that the risk of tactical nuclear/dirty bomb sneaking to militants is much more from Pakistan. The stage is slowly setting in Pakistan, for the next level of terrorism with tactical nukes/dirty bombs. The danger of this technology passing into the hand of terrorists by coercion of scientists/security personals/handlers, to share the technology and steal some fissile material, sufficient for mini nuke/ dirty bomb is not impossible in future. The Nuclear Security Summit held in the US on 02 Apr 2016, exhibited grave concern of global powers, about the danger of mini-nukes falling in hands of terrorist organisations. A possibility of Pakistan covertly passing the tactical nuclear technology/ dirty bomb to terrorists to explode it in India, as part of a proxy war, and later deny it, is an option which cannot be ruled out, as its overt use by their Army may be difficult to be justified to the world community. Implications Despite best efforts a worthwhile solution to control unilateral missile and nuclear tests by North Korea has been found by World community, as the sanctions alone are unlikely to yield results, may be due to selective leakages. A status quo in this regard will render world helpless, and it will become a new normal. Surprisingly, when newly elected Pakistani Prime Minister is talking of use of tactical nuclear weapons against India, not much criticism appeared on world media (perhaps many countries still feel that it is a local affair). Let me enumerate some of the implications of silent acceptance by the global community of this ‘Nuclear Blackmailing Theory’. There is a need to collectively have some global mechanism in place to prevent miniaturisation of nukes/tactical nukes/dirty bombs over and above the existing UN conventions. × Iran may be encouraged to go nuclear looking at the fate of Iraq, and over arming of Saudi Arabia. Japan may go in for creating its own military capabilities and later go nuclear. South Korea may ask for tactical nukes from the US to protect itself from North Korea if China and Russia are not able to push North Korea to negations table. Vietnam may also get an idea to request for nuclear technology. India may have to speed up enlarging stockpile of existing nukes, not to suffer disadvantage on the deterrence capability, despite being well placed to respond to any tactical nukes threat of Pakistan. There is a need to collectively have some global mechanism in place to prevent miniaturisation of nukes/tactical nukes/dirty bombs over and above the existing UN conventions. There is a need to implement some mechanism towards safety and security of nukes and accountability of fissile material. While a large number of analysts may be convinced that North Korea is the biggest challenge in terms of nuclear blackmailing, but in my opinion, the bigger global challenge is yet to come in the form of tactical nukes/dirty bombs/biological and chemical weapons being acquired by terrorists. No country should assume that it’s safe forever from blackmailing by terrorists having acquired such capability, even if it appears fiction today.

Is nuclear blackmailing going to be a new normal?

<p>It is said that science fiction is about making the improbable seem possible. Writers of the genre postulate a world of the future. And while some of their ideas can end up remaining a fantasy, there are a number of times when their predictions have been right on the money.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Here&rsquo;s 9&nbsp;times sci-fi writers were spot-on about technological advancements:&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Debit/Credit Cards</h2>

<p>When Edward Bellamy wrote Looking Backward in 1888, people only relied on paper money. His book introduced the concept of universal credit where citizens of his future utopia carried a card that allowed them to spend on goods and services without paper money changing hands. The book was a huge success.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_1-20161212084822.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Looking Backward by Edward Bellamy (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Earphones</h2>

<p>When Ray Bradbury published his dystopian classic Fahrenheit 451 in 1953, portable audio already existed, but the headphones were ungainly and heavy. In his book, he talked about &ldquo;little seashells&hellip; thimble radios&rdquo; that brought an &ldquo;electronic ocean of sound, of music and talk and music and talk&rdquo;. Who would have then imagined that one day devices like in-ear earphones would become an integral part of people&rsquo;s daily lives.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_6-20161212085416.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Electric Cars, Violence And Hookup Culture</h2>

<p>John Brunner&rsquo;s Stand On Zanzibar was another piece of literature that was way ahead of its time. Published in 1969, his book painted a world that we are all too familiar with today: America plagued by random acts of violence like school shootings and terrorist attacks, cars powered by rechargeable electric fuel cells, men and women eschewing marriage for short-term and low commitment hookups. What was he thinking?&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_8-20161212085717.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Stand On Zanzibar by John Brunner (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Geostationary Satellite Communications</h2>

<p>In 1945, a pioneering science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke wrote a manuscript called The Space-Station: Its Radio Applications. He introduced for the first time, geosynchronous satellites being used for telecommunications relays and most importantly for television signals. Imagine a world without our televisions and scores of channels.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_9-20161212085813.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The Space-Station: Its Radio Applications by Arthur C. Clarke (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Moon Landing</h2>

<p>Jules Verne wrote From The Earth To The Moon and predicted many aspects of the 1969 manned lunar landing of Apollo 11. Verne&rsquo;s astronauts were launched from a Florida site in an aluminium capsule. In the book, he even gave accurate calculations as to the amount of force that would be needed to propel the rocket out of Earth&rsquo;s atmosphere. We have gone much beyond the Moon now!</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_3-20161212084933.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>From The Earth To The Moon by Jules Verne (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Nuclear Weapon</h2>

<p>Robert Heinlein&rsquo;s 1940 short story Solution Unsatisfactory predicted a future world where America develops an atomic weapon that ends World War II unilaterally. After they use it, it spurs the rest of the world into a nuclear arms race to keep up. The story was written even before the United States entered World War II and five years before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_10-20161212085934.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Solution Unsatisfactory by Robert Heinlein (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Security Cameras</h2>

<p>George Orwell wrote the book 1984 in 1949. In it, he spoke about the concept of a dystopian state monitored by an interconnected web of security cameras. It seemed absurd back then, but it is a reality now with round-the-clock security surveillance, cameras in both public and private spaces, GPS tracking and online tracking by government agencies. Orwell wrote about it all in his book.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_5-20161212085316.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>1984 by George Orwell (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Tanks</h2>

<p>H.G. Wells wrote the story The Land Ironclads which was published in the Strand Magazine in 1903. His story took the then-current technology of metal-hulled warships and put them on land, creating war machines- tanks. Wells&rsquo;s conceptualised modern day tanks were approximately 100 feet long and rolled on eight pairs of wheels, each of which had its own independent turning axle. A tower in the top of the machine let the captain survey the scene. In reality, the first tanks were deployed on the battlefield in 1916 during the battle of the Somme.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_4-20161212085043.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The Land Ironclads by H.G. Wells (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<h2>Video Chat</h2>

<p>The first demonstration of consumer video conferencing was in the form of &lsquo;picturephone&rsquo; at the 1964 New York World&rsquo;s Fair. The technology has now come a long way with FaceTime and Skype becoming the standard means of long-distance communication. But all of this traces back to Hugo Gernsback&rsquo;s novel Ralph 124c 41+. The story was first printed in Modern Electrics magazine in 1911. It spoke about a device called the &ldquo;telephot&rdquo; that let people have eye contact while speaking across long distances.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://wion.azureedge.net/photos/books_7-20161212085540.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>Ralph 124c 41+ by Hugo Gernsback (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>(Contributed by: Zeba Khan)</p>


Paperless money, security cameras, nuclear weapons and more just stepped out of a book into our reality

It is said that science fiction is about making the improbable seem possible. Writers of the genre postulate a world of the future. And while some of their ideas can end up remaining a fantasy, there are a number of times when their predictions have been right on the money. Here’s 9 times sci-fi writers were spot-on about technological advancements: Debit/Credit Cards When Edward Bellamy wrote Looking Backward in 1888, people only relied on paper money. His book introduced the concept of universal credit where citizens of his future utopia carried a card that allowed them to spend on goods and services without paper money changing hands. The book was a huge success. Looking Backward by Edward Bellamy (WION) × Earphones When Ray Bradbury published his dystopian classic Fahrenheit 451 in 1953, portable audio already existed, but the headphones were ungainly and heavy. In his book, he talked about “little seashells… thimble radios” that brought an “electronic ocean of sound, of music and talk and music and talk”. Who would have then imagined that one day devices like in-ear earphones would become an integral part of people’s daily lives. Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (WION) × Electric Cars, Violence And Hookup Culture John Brunner’s Stand On Zanzibar was another piece of literature that was way ahead of its time. Published in 1969, his book painted a world that we are all too familiar with today: America plagued by random acts of violence like school shootings and terrorist attacks, cars powered by rechargeable electric fuel cells, men and women eschewing marriage for short-term and low commitment hookups. What was he thinking? Stand On Zanzibar by John Brunner (WION) × Geostationary Satellite Communications In 1945, a pioneering science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke wrote a manuscript called The Space-Station: Its Radio Applications. He introduced for the first time, geosynchronous satellites being used for telecommunications relays and most importantly for television signals. Imagine a world without our televisions and scores of channels. The Space-Station: Its Radio Applications by Arthur C. Clarke (WION) × Moon Landing Jules Verne wrote From The Earth To The Moon and predicted many aspects of the 1969 manned lunar landing of Apollo 11. Verne’s astronauts were launched from a Florida site in an aluminium capsule. In the book, he even gave accurate calculations as to the amount of force that would be needed to propel the rocket out of Earth’s atmosphere. We have gone much beyond the Moon now! From The Earth To The Moon by Jules Verne (WION) × Nuclear Weapon Robert Heinlein’s 1940 short story Solution Unsatisfactory predicted a future world where America develops an atomic weapon that ends World War II unilaterally. After they use it, it spurs the rest of the world into a nuclear arms race to keep up. The story was written even before the United States entered World War II and five years before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Solution Unsatisfactory by Robert Heinlein (WION) × Security Cameras George Orwell wrote the book 1984 in 1949. In it, he spoke about the concept of a dystopian state monitored by an interconnected web of security cameras. It seemed absurd back then, but it is a reality now with round-the-clock security surveillance, cameras in both public and private spaces, GPS tracking and online tracking by government agencies. Orwell wrote about it all in his book. 1984 by George Orwell (WION) × Tanks H.G. Wells wrote the story The Land Ironclads which was published in the Strand Magazine in 1903. His story took the then-current technology of metal-hulled warships and put them on land, creating war machines- tanks. Wells’s conceptualised modern day tanks were approximately 100 feet long and rolled on eight pairs of wheels, each of which had its own independent turning axle. A tower in the top of the machine let the captain survey the scene. In reality, the first tanks were deployed on the battlefield in 1916 during the battle of the Somme. The Land Ironclads by H.G. Wells (WION) × Video Chat The first demonstration of consumer video conferencing was in the form of ‘picturephone’ at the 1964 New York World’s Fair. The technology has now come a long way with FaceTime and Skype becoming the standard means of long-distance communication. But all of this traces back to Hugo Gernsback’s novel Ralph 124c 41+. The story was first printed in Modern Electrics magazine in 1911. It spoke about a device called the “telephot” that let people have eye contact while speaking across long distances. Ralph 124c 41+ by Hugo Gernsback (WION) × (Contributed by: Zeba Khan)

9 predictions by science-fiction writers that actually came true

nuclear-weapon

Nuclear Weapon, News on Nuclear Weapon, stories on Nuclear Weapon, articles on Nuclear Weapon, Nuclear Weapon stories at Wion, Nuclear Weapon news, Nuclear Weapon latest news