Pope Francis, speaking in one of only two cities hit by atomic bombs in history, appealed on Sunday for the abolition of nuclear weapons, saying their mere possession was perverse and indefensible.

He restated his support for a 2017 treaty to ban nuclear weapons agreed by nearly two-thirds of U.N. members, but opposed by big nuclear powers who say it could undermine nuclear deterrence, which they credit with averting conventional war.

"The possession of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction is not the answer (to longings for peace)," Francis said, after having closed his eyes in prayer and lighting a candle in memory of the victims.

"Our world is marked by a perverse dichotomy that tries to defend and ensure stability and peace through a false sense of security sustained by a mentality of fear and mistrust," he said in a somber voice, amid driving rain and strong wind.

"Peace and international stability are incompatible with attempts to build upon the fear of mutual destruction or the threat of total annihilation."

Francis, who was speaking at Nagasaki's Atomic Bomb Hypocenter Park, ground zero of the bomb the United States dropped on Aug. 9, 1945, instantly killing 27,000 people, also decried what he called a dismantling of non-proliferation pacts.

Nagasaki was the second city hit by an atomic bomb during World War Two. Later on Sunday, the pope was due to visit Hiroshima, site of the first blast, which instantly killed about 78,000 people.

About 400,000 more eventually died of radiation illness and injuries caused by the bombs dropped by the United States in an effort to end the war.

"Here, in this city, which witnessed the catastrophic humanitarian and environmental consequences of a nuclear attack, our attempts to speak out against the arms race will never be enough," Francis said in his emotional appeal.

Resources spent on the "arms race" should be used for development and protection of the environment, instead.

"In a world where millions of children and families live in inhumane conditions, the money squandered and the fortunes made through the manufacture, upgrading, maintenance and sale of ever more destructive weapons, are an affront crying out to heaven," he said.

Last August, the United States pulled out of one landmark strategic arms accord, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), citing violations by Russia that Moscow denies.

Nuclear experts said it also appeared doubtful that agreement on a full-fledged replacement for the New START nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the United States will be in place before it expires in February 2021.

Collective memory

The bombing is seared in the collective memory of the people of the green and hilly harbour city of Nagasaki and has been passed on through the generations.

"We can't have any more atomic bombings. It'd be great if that message would get across to the world. I'd like it if nuclear weapons were eliminated and there wasn't any more war," said Chizuko Hisamatsu, 66, a housewife. "I think I may cry."

The pope delivered his appeal standing near a large print of a famous photograph taken by an American soldier shortly after the blast, showing a Japanese boy taking his dead younger brother to be cremated.

After his address, Francis spoke at a monument to faithful martyred during the 250 years in which Christianity was banned in Japan, forcing believers to go underground or face death.

"Hidden Christians" blended Christianity with Buddhism and native Shinto beliefs to survive, and Francis may meet several members of the ageing, dwindling population later on.

Jesuits brought Christianity to Japan in 1549, but it was banned in 1614. Missionaries were expelled and the faithful were forced to choose between martyrdom or hiding their religion. The ban was lifted in 1873.

Pope Francis, speaking in one of only two cities hit by atomic bombs in history, appealed on Sunday for the abolition of nuclear weapons, saying their mere possession was perverse and indefensible.

Pope Francis, speaking in one of only two cities hit by atomic bombs in history, appealed on Sunday for the abolition of nuclear weapons, saying their mere possession was perverse and indefensible. He restated his support for a 2017 treaty to ban nuclear weapons agreed by nearly two-thirds of U.N. members, but opposed by big nuclear powers who say it could undermine nuclear deterrence, which they credit with averting conventional war. "The possession of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction is not the answer (to longings for peace)," Francis said, after having closed his eyes in prayer and lighting a candle in memory of the victims. "Our world is marked by a perverse dichotomy that tries to defend and ensure stability and peace through a false sense of security sustained by a mentality of fear and mistrust," he said in a somber voice, amid driving rain and strong wind. "Peace and international stability are incompatible with attempts to build upon the fear of mutual destruction or the threat of total annihilation." Francis, who was speaking at Nagasaki's Atomic Bomb Hypocenter Park, ground zero of the bomb the United States dropped on Aug. 9, 1945, instantly killing 27,000 people, also decried what he called a dismantling of non-proliferation pacts. Nagasaki was the second city hit by an atomic bomb during World War Two. Later on Sunday, the pope was due to visit Hiroshima, site of the first blast, which instantly killed about 78,000 people. About 400,000 more eventually died of radiation illness and injuries caused by the bombs dropped by the United States in an effort to end the war. "Here, in this city, which witnessed the catastrophic humanitarian and environmental consequences of a nuclear attack, our attempts to speak out against the arms race will never be enough," Francis said in his emotional appeal. Resources spent on the "arms race" should be used for development and protection of the environment, instead. "In a world where millions of children and families live in inhumane conditions, the money squandered and the fortunes made through the manufacture, upgrading, maintenance and sale of ever more destructive weapons, are an affront crying out to heaven," he said. Last August, the United States pulled out of one landmark strategic arms accord, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), citing violations by Russia that Moscow denies. Nuclear experts said it also appeared doubtful that agreement on a full-fledged replacement for the New START nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the United States will be in place before it expires in February 2021. Collective memory The bombing is seared in the collective memory of the people of the green and hilly harbour city of Nagasaki and has been passed on through the generations. "We can't have any more atomic bombings. It'd be great if that message would get across to the world. I'd like it if nuclear weapons were eliminated and there wasn't any more war," said Chizuko Hisamatsu, 66, a housewife. "I think I may cry." The pope delivered his appeal standing near a large print of a famous photograph taken by an American soldier shortly after the blast, showing a Japanese boy taking his dead younger brother to be cremated. After his address, Francis spoke at a monument to faithful martyred during the 250 years in which Christianity was banned in Japan, forcing believers to go underground or face death. "Hidden Christians" blended Christianity with Buddhism and native Shinto beliefs to survive, and Francis may meet several members of the ageing, dwindling population later on. Jesuits brought Christianity to Japan in 1549, but it was banned in 1614. Missionaries were expelled and the faithful were forced to choose between martyrdom or hiding their religion. The ban was lifted in 1873.

Pope urges abolition of nuclear weapons at Nagasaki ground zero

Pope Francis, who years ago hoped to be a missionary in Japan, travels to the sites of the world's only atomic attacks this week seeking a ban on nuclear weapons.

The Argentine pontiff, 82, flies to Asia on Tuesday, where he will first visit Thailand and then Japan, including the two cities destroyed by devastating US nuclear attacks during the Second World War.

Despite both countries having less than 0.6 per cent Catholic populations, Francis is thirsty for interreligious dialogue with them.

He will arrive in Thailand on Wednesday before flying on to Japan on Saturday, where he will stay until November 26.

Sunday is set to be a marathon day with visits to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, where at least 74,000 people and 140,000 people respectively were killed by the atomic bombs attacks.&nbsp;

The August 6, 1945 bombing of Hiroshima and of Nagasaki three days later contributed to Japan's surrender and the end of the Second World War on August 15, months after Nazi Germany capitulated.

Father Yoshio Kajiyama, director of the Jesuit social centre in Tokyo, was born in Hiroshima shortly after the war and is eagerly awaiting the pope's anti-nuclear speech.

"My grandfather died the day of the bomb in Hiroshima, I never knew him. Four days later my aunt died when she was 15 years old," said the 64-year-old.

"If you grow up in Hiroshima, you can't forget the bomb."

No nukes message

The pope will make "as vigorous an appeal as possible in favour of concerted measures to completely eliminate nuclear weapons," the Vatican number two Cardinal Pietro Parolin told the United Nations in September.

"Using atomic energy to wage war is immoral," the head of the world's 1.3 billion Catholics told Japanese television in September.

A previous member of Japan's diplomatic mission to the Vatican, Shigeru Tokuyasu, said he hopes the visit will pull the world back from "the globalisation of indifference" over nuclear weapons.

But, said Tokuyasu, the pope should avoid discussing the politically sensitive issue of nuclear energy.

Francis is also set to meet victims of the devastating 2011 earthquake that struck northeastern Japan and the subsequent tsunami that between them killed 18,500 people and sparked the nuclear power catastrophe at Fukushima.

Fear of nuclear war

Francis is used to railing against countries that make money from weapons and has already voiced his fear of a nuclear war.

In January last year, he printed cards with a photo of a Nagasaki bomb victim, inscribing the words "the fruit of war" above his signature.

The 1945 photo, captured by American photographer Joe O'Donnell, showed a small boy standing ramrod straight carrying his dead younger brother on his back while waiting for his turn at a cremation site.

The late pope John Paul II visited Japan in 1981, where at Hiroshima's peace monument he pointed to war as "the work of man".

In August, the city of Hiroshima called on Japan to sign the U.N. treaty calling for a ban on nuclear weapons, something that all the world's nuclear powers have refused to do.

Japan, with its pacifist post-war constitution, adhered in 1967 to the principle of "not producing, possessing or allowing nuclear weapons on its territory," despite counting on the US nuclear umbrella for protection.

Multiethnic Thailand

Before arriving in Thailand on Wednesday, the pope praised the "multiethnic nation" which "has worked to promote harmony and peaceful coexistence, not only among its habitants but throughout Southeast Asia."

In a video message to the Thai people, the pope said he hoped to "strengthen ties of friendship" with Buddhists.

Since&nbsp;Francis' election six years ago, he has made two trips to Asia, visiting the Philippines and Sri Lanka in 2014, followed by Myanmar and Bangladesh in 2017.

On Thursday in Bangkok, the pontiff is to pay a visit to supreme patriarch Somdej Phra Maha Muneewong at a Buddhist temple.

Pope Francis, who years ago hoped to be a missionary in Japan, travels to the sites of the world's only atomic attacks this week seeking a ban on nuclear weapons.

Pope Francis, who years ago hoped to be a missionary in Japan, travels to the sites of the world's only atomic attacks this week seeking a ban on nuclear weapons. The Argentine pontiff, 82, flies to Asia on Tuesday, where he will first visit Thailand and then Japan, including the two cities destroyed by devastating US nuclear attacks during the Second World War. Despite both countries having less than 0.6 per cent Catholic populations, Francis is thirsty for interreligious dialogue with them. He will arrive in Thailand on Wednesday before flying on to Japan on Saturday, where he will stay until November 26. Sunday is set to be a marathon day with visits to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, where at least 74,000 people and 140,000 people respectively were killed by the atomic bombs attacks. The August 6, 1945 bombing of Hiroshima and of Nagasaki three days later contributed to Japan's surrender and the end of the Second World War on August 15, months after Nazi Germany capitulated. Father Yoshio Kajiyama, director of the Jesuit social centre in Tokyo, was born in Hiroshima shortly after the war and is eagerly awaiting the pope's anti-nuclear speech. "My grandfather died the day of the bomb in Hiroshima, I never knew him. Four days later my aunt died when she was 15 years old," said the 64-year-old. "If you grow up in Hiroshima, you can't forget the bomb." No nukes message The pope will make "as vigorous an appeal as possible in favour of concerted measures to completely eliminate nuclear weapons," the Vatican number two Cardinal Pietro Parolin told the United Nations in September. "Using atomic energy to wage war is immoral," the head of the world's 1.3 billion Catholics told Japanese television in September. A previous member of Japan's diplomatic mission to the Vatican, Shigeru Tokuyasu, said he hopes the visit will pull the world back from "the globalisation of indifference" over nuclear weapons. But, said Tokuyasu, the pope should avoid discussing the politically sensitive issue of nuclear energy. Francis is also set to meet victims of the devastating 2011 earthquake that struck northeastern Japan and the subsequent tsunami that between them killed 18,500 people and sparked the nuclear power catastrophe at Fukushima. Fear of nuclear war Francis is used to railing against countries that make money from weapons and has already voiced his fear of a nuclear war. In January last year, he printed cards with a photo of a Nagasaki bomb victim, inscribing the words "the fruit of war" above his signature. The 1945 photo, captured by American photographer Joe O'Donnell, showed a small boy standing ramrod straight carrying his dead younger brother on his back while waiting for his turn at a cremation site. The late pope John Paul II visited Japan in 1981, where at Hiroshima's peace monument he pointed to war as "the work of man". In August, the city of Hiroshima called on Japan to sign the U.N. treaty calling for a ban on nuclear weapons, something that all the world's nuclear powers have refused to do. Japan, with its pacifist post-war constitution, adhered in 1967 to the principle of "not producing, possessing or allowing nuclear weapons on its territory," despite counting on the US nuclear umbrella for protection. Multiethnic Thailand Before arriving in Thailand on Wednesday, the pope praised the "multiethnic nation" which "has worked to promote harmony and peaceful coexistence, not only among its habitants but throughout Southeast Asia." In a video message to the Thai people, the pope said he hoped to "strengthen ties of friendship" with Buddhists. Since Francis' election six years ago, he has made two trips to Asia, visiting the Philippines and Sri Lanka in 2014, followed by Myanmar and Bangladesh in 2017. On Thursday in Bangkok, the pontiff is to pay a visit to supreme patriarch Somdej Phra Maha Muneewong at a Buddhist temple.

Pope Francis to visit Hiroshima, Nagasaki on anti-nuclear weapon mission

By Miles A Pomper

As the Syrian crisis pits Turkish troops against former US-allied Kurdish forces, Pentagon officials have been reviewing plans to remove 50 nuclear bombs stored at a US airbase in Turkey.

A congressional directive to the Pentagon to quickly assess alternative homes for the US. “Personnel and assets” currently stationed at Incirlik Air Base is part of a broader bipartisan bill, still being debated, that proposes sanctions against Turkey. President Donald Trump has been forced to issue public reassurances that the weapons are secure.

During the Cold War, the US stationed B-61 nuclear bombs in Turkey, among other NATO countries. Formally, the US-controlled the weapons during peacetime, but the host countries’ forces trained and equipped planes so they could drop the bombs with US support in the case of war. The idea was to deter Soviet ground forces and reassure US allies by making clear that the US would be willing to risk nuclear war to block a Soviet invasion of a country hosting the bombs.

In addition, in the years before the US developed intercontinental ballistic missiles, they presented a way for NATO to demonstrate it could act quickly to respond to a Soviet attack.

The 50 bombs still at Incirlik Air Base, in southern Turkey – and others in Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands – are the last nuclear remnants of that Cold War strategy. The US began pulling nuclear bombs out of NATO countries after the Cold War ended, and since 2000 has removed 40 bombs from Turkey.

Two decades ago, the Turkish Air Force stopped equipping its planes to drop B-61s. Now the bombs at Incirlik could only be used if US pilots first flew nuclear-weapon-capable planes there to load them up. The bombs were left in Turkey even after a 2016 coup attempt raised serious concerns about their safety. After that event, the US Defense and Energy departments began planning how to remove them – but didn’t actually bring them back to the US.

How secure are they?

US nuclear weapons are stored in hardened bunkers, protected by electronic systems and heavily armed US troops. The Pentagon has recently reinforced both of those methods of defence.

The bombs themselves also require 12-digit codes to activate them, However, those protections are only strong enough to delay unauthorised use, rather than actually prevent it. If those barriers were overcome, US forces could disable the weapons by destroying electrical components or detonating their chemical high explosive without causing a nuclear release. In the worst case, they could blow up the weapons or the facilities at Incirlik.

Still the US procedures are not designed to prevent skilled attacks or sabotage, especially from an ally. With enough time, Turkey could make use of the nuclear material – if not to detonate in an actual nuclear explosion, then to “release disastrous and deadly radiation.”

What’s wrong with removing them?

Taking the weapons out of Turkey carries some physical risks. The bombs aren’t terribly heavy – roughly 700 pounds each – but moving nuclear material requires significant security. In addition, the Turkish government would have to help – or at least not stand in the way – of landing transport planes or sending cargo convoys by land or sea.

The greater risks are likely to be political. Those concerns have discouraged previous US administrations from removing the bombs, even though Turkey’s defence community isn’t particularly interested in using them.

One US concern is that Turkey could perceive the move as a push away from NATO. That could lead to Turkey seeking closer ties with Russia.

In addition, pulling the nuclear weapons out of Turkey could prompt requests to remove other bombs from Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany, where they are publicly unpopular.

A new worry just arose, when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently mused whether perhaps Turkey should leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and develop its own nuclear arsenal US officials have long feared that pulling the American nuclear bombs out could encourage Ergodan to try to turn that bluster into reality.

Unintentionally, Trump’s efforts to provide reassurance may have made this challenge more difficult. The presence of B-61s in the five countries is an open secret, confirmed by independent observers. But it has nonetheless been NATO policy not to acknowledge the deployments, giving local politicians and the US&nbsp;a shield from parliamentary and public oversight.

By publicly confirming that the weapons were in Turkey, Trump has raised the political stakes should he try to remove them, and made it more difficult for the United States and Turkey to strike a quiet deal to that effect.&nbsp; 
 
(Miles A Pomper is Senior Fellow, James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Middlebury)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-us-has-nuclear-weapons-in-turkey-and-may-try-to-put-the-bombs-away-125477">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) &nbsp;

By Miles A Pomper As the Syrian crisis pits Turkish troops against former US-allied Kurdish forces, Pentagon officials have been reviewing plans to remove 50 nuclear bombs stored at a US airbase in Turkey.

By Miles A Pomper As the Syrian crisis pits Turkish troops against former US-allied Kurdish forces, Pentagon officials have been reviewing plans to remove 50 nuclear bombs stored at a US airbase in Turkey. A congressional directive to the Pentagon to quickly assess alternative homes for the US. “Personnel and assets” currently stationed at Incirlik Air Base is part of a broader bipartisan bill, still being debated, that proposes sanctions against Turkey. President Donald Trump has been forced to issue public reassurances that the weapons are secure. During the Cold War, the US stationed B-61 nuclear bombs in Turkey, among other NATO countries. Formally, the US-controlled the weapons during peacetime, but the host countries’ forces trained and equipped planes so they could drop the bombs with US support in the case of war. The idea was to deter Soviet ground forces and reassure US allies by making clear that the US would be willing to risk nuclear war to block a Soviet invasion of a country hosting the bombs. In addition, in the years before the US developed intercontinental ballistic missiles, they presented a way for NATO to demonstrate it could act quickly to respond to a Soviet attack. The 50 bombs still at Incirlik Air Base, in southern Turkey – and others in Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands – are the last nuclear remnants of that Cold War strategy. The US began pulling nuclear bombs out of NATO countries after the Cold War ended, and since 2000 has removed 40 bombs from Turkey. Two decades ago, the Turkish Air Force stopped equipping its planes to drop B-61s. Now the bombs at Incirlik could only be used if US pilots first flew nuclear-weapon-capable planes there to load them up. The bombs were left in Turkey even after a 2016 coup attempt raised serious concerns about their safety. After that event, the US Defense and Energy departments began planning how to remove them – but didn’t actually bring them back to the US. How secure are they? US nuclear weapons are stored in hardened bunkers, protected by electronic systems and heavily armed US troops. The Pentagon has recently reinforced both of those methods of defence. The bombs themselves also require 12-digit codes to activate them, However, those protections are only strong enough to delay unauthorised use, rather than actually prevent it. If those barriers were overcome, US forces could disable the weapons by destroying electrical components or detonating their chemical high explosive without causing a nuclear release. In the worst case, they could blow up the weapons or the facilities at Incirlik. Still the US procedures are not designed to prevent skilled attacks or sabotage, especially from an ally. With enough time, Turkey could make use of the nuclear material – if not to detonate in an actual nuclear explosion, then to “release disastrous and deadly radiation.” What’s wrong with removing them? Taking the weapons out of Turkey carries some physical risks. The bombs aren’t terribly heavy – roughly 700 pounds each – but moving nuclear material requires significant security. In addition, the Turkish government would have to help – or at least not stand in the way – of landing transport planes or sending cargo convoys by land or sea. The greater risks are likely to be political. Those concerns have discouraged previous US administrations from removing the bombs, even though Turkey’s defence community isn’t particularly interested in using them. One US concern is that Turkey could perceive the move as a push away from NATO. That could lead to Turkey seeking closer ties with Russia. In addition, pulling the nuclear weapons out of Turkey could prompt requests to remove other bombs from Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany, where they are publicly unpopular. A new worry just arose, when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently mused whether perhaps Turkey should leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and develop its own nuclear arsenal US officials have long feared that pulling the American nuclear bombs out could encourage Ergodan to try to turn that bluster into reality. Unintentionally, Trump’s efforts to provide reassurance may have made this challenge more difficult. The presence of B-61s in the five countries is an open secret, confirmed by independent observers. But it has nonetheless been NATO policy not to acknowledge the deployments, giving local politicians and the US a shield from parliamentary and public oversight. By publicly confirming that the weapons were in Turkey, Trump has raised the political stakes should he try to remove them, and made it more difficult for the United States and Turkey to strike a quiet deal to that effect. (Miles A Pomper is Senior Fellow, James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Middlebury) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Why US has nuclear weapons in Turkey – and may try to put the bombs away

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on Friday said that India follows "no first use" policy regarding nuclear weapons but said what would happen in future will depend on "circumstances".

"On the question of nuclear policy, till today, we have a policy of no-first-use. What happens in future, will depend on circumstances," he said after paying homage to late prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee at Pokhran in Rajasthan where the country conducted its second nuclear tests during the regime of the NDA government in 1998.

"In Pokhran, India emerged as a nuclear power. Despite all restraints, Atalji gave permission for the nuclear test. India was listed among those countries which have nuclear power. I paid homage to Atalji on his first death anniversary here," Singh said.

He also posted a tweet reiterating his statement.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Pokhran is the area which witnessed Atal Ji’s firm resolve to make India a nuclear power and yet remain firmly committed to the doctrine of ‘No First Use’. India has strictly adhered to this doctrine. What happens in future depends on the circumstances.
— Rajnath Singh (@rajnathsingh) <a href="https://twitter.com/rajnathsingh/status/1162276901055893504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The nuclear test was conducted in May, 1998, in Pokhran during the Vajpayee government and the "no first use" policy was enunicated by him. The policy in India's nuclear doctrine meant the country will not to use its nuclear weapon as a means of warfare unless attacked by an adversary using nuclear weapons.

Singh's statement comes in the wake of abrogation of Article 370. Pakistan has shown its hostility towards India's action, raising it with the United Nations (UN) on the international level. It has, however, dealt a diplomatic setback with the UN Security Council declining to hold a formal session on Kashmir with its participation.

The UNSC has, instead, scheduled a closed-door consultation at China's insistence. The consultation will take place on Friday evening.

Pakistan does not have a "no first use" policy. The country also went nuclear immediately after India conducted its tests. Pakistan in fact has used its nuclear assets as a blackmail tool that any aggression on part of India would lead to full scale war.

India, on past two occasions, has been able to call off its neighbour's nuclear bluff by organising two surgical strikes inside Pakistan. The Balakot involved use of Air Force which was first by India after 1971 war. The only time India used Air Force was during the Kargil War, but that too, in a limited capacity. Singh's statement is full of significance and any move of India in the context is akin to completely re-calibrating the nuclear doctrine.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on Friday said that India follows "no first use" policy regarding nuclear weapons but said what would happen in future will depend on "circumstances".

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on Friday said that India follows "no first use" policy regarding nuclear weapons but said what would happen in future will depend on "circumstances". "On the question of nuclear policy, till today, we have a policy of no-first-use. What happens in future, will depend on circumstances," he said after paying homage to late prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee at Pokhran in Rajasthan where the country conducted its second nuclear tests during the regime of the NDA government in 1998. "In Pokhran, India emerged as a nuclear power. Despite all restraints, Atalji gave permission for the nuclear test. India was listed among those countries which have nuclear power. I paid homage to Atalji on his first death anniversary here," Singh said. He also posted a tweet reiterating his statement. Pokhran is the area which witnessed Atal Ji’s firm resolve to make India a nuclear power and yet remain firmly committed to the doctrine of ‘No First Use’. India has strictly adhered to this doctrine. What happens in future depends on the circumstances. — Rajnath Singh (@rajnathsingh) August 16, 2019 × The nuclear test was conducted in May, 1998, in Pokhran during the Vajpayee government and the "no first use" policy was enunicated by him. The policy in India's nuclear doctrine meant the country will not to use its nuclear weapon as a means of warfare unless attacked by an adversary using nuclear weapons. Singh's statement comes in the wake of abrogation of Article 370. Pakistan has shown its hostility towards India's action, raising it with the United Nations (UN) on the international level. It has, however, dealt a diplomatic setback with the UN Security Council declining to hold a formal session on Kashmir with its participation. The UNSC has, instead, scheduled a closed-door consultation at China's insistence. The consultation will take place on Friday evening. Pakistan does not have a "no first use" policy. The country also went nuclear immediately after India conducted its tests. Pakistan in fact has used its nuclear assets as a blackmail tool that any aggression on part of India would lead to full scale war. India, on past two occasions, has been able to call off its neighbour's nuclear bluff by organising two surgical strikes inside Pakistan. The Balakot involved use of Air Force which was first by India after 1971 war. The only time India used Air Force was during the Kargil War, but that too, in a limited capacity. Singh's statement is full of significance and any move of India in the context is akin to completely re-calibrating the nuclear doctrine.

India's 'no first use' nuclear policy in future will depend on circumstances: Rajnath Singh

Does The U.S. Have Any Locus Standi To Lecture Other Countries On Nuclear Weapons

Gravitas: Can the US lecture the world on nukes?

Nuclear Weapons & Defence Budgets: A Brief Summary.

Gravitas: The State of Nuclear weapons in 2019

US President Donald Trump sermonising to Russia on the latter’s nuclear armoury would be laughable were it not for the seriousness of the situation. Between them, these two powers hold over 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons in the world.

In the wake of the US pulling out of the decades-old Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia, the world is once again confronted with a nuclear arms race which has revived even more intensively.

When it comes to nuclear weapons, the US is the world’s first and leading offender. It was the first to develop, test and use a nuclear weapon. &nbsp;It is also the only country to use the threat of nuclear weapons against others. After all, one use is enough to convince the world that a second use would be disastrous for the planet. Thus, the mere threat of using nuclear force or missiles is sufficient to subdue any other country.

Besides the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council(UNSC), the other nuclear-weapon states are India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. There are other states on the threshold, capable of developing nuclear weapons at short notice. Then there are forces, including terrorist groups, which would not find it very difficult to get their hands on nuclear weapons of weak states.

The US is the prime culprit in making nuclear weapons aspirational for developing countries. So much so that possession of nuclear weapons is flaunted as a mark of "development". The other eight nuclear-weapon states are equally responsible for making the cult of nuclear weapons a matter of national pride.

It is high time that a global movement for the elimination of nuclear weapons was launched. The new initiative should come from a new quarter, such as BRICS, for example, which has successfully set up a bank in the teeth of opposition from the international community.

Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world

US President Donald Trump sermonising to Russia on the latter’s nuclear armoury would be laughable were it not for the seriousness of the situation. Between them, these two powers hold over 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons in the world.

US President Donald Trump sermonising to Russia on the latter’s nuclear armoury would be laughable were it not for the seriousness of the situation. Between them, these two powers hold over 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons in the world. In the wake of the US pulling out of the decades-old Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia, the world is once again confronted with a nuclear arms race which has revived even more intensively. When it comes to nuclear weapons, the US is the world’s first and leading offender. It was the first to develop, test and use a nuclear weapon. It is also the only country to use the threat of nuclear weapons against others. After all, one use is enough to convince the world that a second use would be disastrous for the planet. Thus, the mere threat of using nuclear force or missiles is sufficient to subdue any other country. Besides the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council(UNSC), the other nuclear-weapon states are India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. There are other states on the threshold, capable of developing nuclear weapons at short notice. Then there are forces, including terrorist groups, which would not find it very difficult to get their hands on nuclear weapons of weak states. The US is the prime culprit in making nuclear weapons aspirational for developing countries. So much so that possession of nuclear weapons is flaunted as a mark of "development". The other eight nuclear-weapon states are equally responsible for making the cult of nuclear weapons a matter of national pride. It is high time that a global movement for the elimination of nuclear weapons was launched. The new initiative should come from a new quarter, such as BRICS, for example, which has successfully set up a bank in the teeth of opposition from the international community. Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world

WION Edit: Eliminate nuclear weapons

Hiroshima marks 74th anniversary of bloody atomic bombing

U.S calls for meet after Tehran breaches N-Deal. IAEA board of governers represent 35 nations. Experts said ''We have no idea that what this meeting will achieve''. Parties to the N-Deal already have a separate forum. Watch this video to know more.

U.S calls for IAEA emergency meet

U.S. calls for IAEA emergency meet

Iran hit out at the United States on Monday for "causing tensions" after President Donald Trump said his <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-not-looking-for-regime-change-in-iran-trump-221945">government was not seeking regime change</a> and that he would welcome talks with Tehran.

The Trump administration was "hurting the Iranian people and causing tension in the region," Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on his Twitter account.

"Actions -- not words -- will show whether or not that's @realDonaldTrump's intent," Zarif added, referencing the US president's Twitter handle.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Ayatollah <a href="https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@khamenei_ir</a> long ago said we're not seeking nuclear weapons—by issuing a fatwa (edict) banning them.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/B_Team?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#B_Team</a>'s <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/EconomicTerrorism?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#EconomicTerrorism</a> is hurting the Iranian people &amp; causing tension in the region. Actions—not words—will show whether or not that's <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>'s intent
— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) <a href="https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1133080561235484672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Zarif also denied Iran was seeking nuclear weapons, after Trump said during a visit to Japan that "we're not looking for regime change (in Iran)... we're looking for no nuclear weapons".

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "long ago said we're not seeking nuclear weapons -- by issuing a fatwa (edict) banning them," the foreign minister tweeted.

Khamenei is said to have issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons in 2003 and has reiterated it several times since.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/qatar-invited-by-saudi-arabia-to-talks-over-iran-tensions-221847">Iran is locked in a tense standoff with the United States</a> which has beefed up its military presence in the Middle East in response to alleged threats from the Islamic republic.

On Saturday, Zarif called a deployment of extra US troops to the region "very dangerous and a threat to international peace and security."

It follows a US decision earlier this month to send an aircraft carrier strike force and B-52 bombers in a show of force against what Washington's leaders said they believed was an imminent Iranian plan to attack US assets.

Washington says the latest reinforcements are in response to a "campaign" of recent attacks including a rocket launched into the Green Zone in Baghdad, explosive devices that damaged four tankers near the entrance to the Gulf, and drone strikes by Yemeni rebels on a key Saudi oil pipeline.

Iran has denied any involvement in the attacks.

Watch: Saudi Arabia calls for emergency meeting over US-Iran conflicts

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/saudi-arabia-calls-for-emergency-meeting-over-us-iran-conflicts-221957/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Iran hit out at the United States on Monday for "causing tensions" after President Donald Trump said his government was not seeking regime change and that he would welcome talks with Tehran.

Iran hit out at the United States on Monday for "causing tensions" after President Donald Trump said his government was not seeking regime change and that he would welcome talks with Tehran. The Trump administration was "hurting the Iranian people and causing tension in the region," Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on his Twitter account. "Actions -- not words -- will show whether or not that's @realDonaldTrump's intent," Zarif added, referencing the US president's Twitter handle. Ayatollah @khamenei_ir long ago said we're not seeking nuclear weapons—by issuing a fatwa (edict) banning them.#B_Team's #EconomicTerrorism is hurting the Iranian people & causing tension in the region. Actions—not words—will show whether or not that's @realDonaldTrump's intent — Javad Zarif (@JZarif) May 27, 2019 × Zarif also denied Iran was seeking nuclear weapons, after Trump said during a visit to Japan that "we're not looking for regime change (in Iran)... we're looking for no nuclear weapons". Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "long ago said we're not seeking nuclear weapons -- by issuing a fatwa (edict) banning them," the foreign minister tweeted. Khamenei is said to have issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons in 2003 and has reiterated it several times since. Iran is locked in a tense standoff with the United States which has beefed up its military presence in the Middle East in response to alleged threats from the Islamic republic. On Saturday, Zarif called a deployment of extra US troops to the region "very dangerous and a threat to international peace and security." It follows a US decision earlier this month to send an aircraft carrier strike force and B-52 bombers in a show of force against what Washington's leaders said they believed was an imminent Iranian plan to attack US assets. Washington says the latest reinforcements are in response to a "campaign" of recent attacks including a rocket launched into the Green Zone in Baghdad, explosive devices that damaged four tankers near the entrance to the Gulf, and drone strikes by Yemeni rebels on a key Saudi oil pipeline. Iran has denied any involvement in the attacks. Watch: Saudi Arabia calls for emergency meeting over US-Iran conflicts ×

After Trump nuclear weapons comment, Iran says US 'causing tensions'

Seventy countries urged North Korea on Friday to scrap its nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and related programs, decrying the "undiminished threat" posed to world peace.

Signatories included the United States and South Korea, as well as nations in Asia, Latin America, Africa and Europe.

Russia and China, supporters of Pyongyang, did not sign the document drafted by France.

With two missile launches in a week, Pyongyang is walking a fine line between increasing pressure on the US and not derailing nuclear negotiations -- all while giving itself room to escalate, analysts say.

According to a diplomatic source, about 15 countries asked to sign on to the request for North Korean disarmament after the new missile firings.

The signatories "strongly deplore the grave and undiminished threat to regional and international peace and security posed by the ongoing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles programmes that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has developed," the text said.

"We encourage the DPRK to avoid any provocation," it added. "We also call for the DPRK to continue discussions with the United States on denuclearization."

Pyongyang fired two short-range missiles Thursday following an earlier drill on Saturday. The North had not launched any since November 2017, shortly before leader Kim Jong Un embarked on diplomatic overtures.

Kim declared an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles during rapid rapprochement last year.

Seventy countries urged North Korea on Friday to scrap its nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and related programs, decrying the "undiminished threat" posed to world peace.

Seventy countries urged North Korea on Friday to scrap its nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and related programs, decrying the "undiminished threat" posed to world peace. Signatories included the United States and South Korea, as well as nations in Asia, Latin America, Africa and Europe. Russia and China, supporters of Pyongyang, did not sign the document drafted by France. With two missile launches in a week, Pyongyang is walking a fine line between increasing pressure on the US and not derailing nuclear negotiations -- all while giving itself room to escalate, analysts say. According to a diplomatic source, about 15 countries asked to sign on to the request for North Korean disarmament after the new missile firings. The signatories "strongly deplore the grave and undiminished threat to regional and international peace and security posed by the ongoing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles programmes that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has developed," the text said. "We encourage the DPRK to avoid any provocation," it added. "We also call for the DPRK to continue discussions with the United States on denuclearization." Pyongyang fired two short-range missiles Thursday following an earlier drill on Saturday. The North had not launched any since November 2017, shortly before leader Kim Jong Un embarked on diplomatic overtures. Kim declared an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles during rapid rapprochement last year.

70 countries urge North Korea to scrap nuclear, ballistic weapons

The new tactical guided weapon that <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/world/north-korea-demands-pompeos-removal-from-us-nuclear-talks-211470&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwj1xYHh99vhAhU87HMBHYs0BFQQFggIMAE&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw2GUMAvAam9AfcUwmmyRvyM">North Korea</a> claimed it had tested earlier this week is a ground combat missile system, a spokesperson for the South Korean Defense Ministry said on Friday.

The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Thursday that North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, had overseen a trial of a new tactical short-range weapon designed to be used in combat scenarios.

The move appeared to be a message to both the North Korean public and Washington after a summit with United States President Donald Trump in Hanoi ended without a deal on Pyongyang's nuclear disarmament.&nbsp;

The South Korean armed forces have determined that it is a "ground combat propulsed projectile system," the spokesperson told EFE.

The acting secretary of US Defence, Patrick Shanahan, had said on Thursday that the new weapon was not a "ballistic missile".

Analysts believe that the projectile flew over a short distance at low altitude, likely meaning it is a short-range guided missile similar to the Israeli Spike, which has a range of around 20 kilometres.

The use of such short-range missiles does not violate UN resolutions which have been placed on North Korea following repeated tests in 2017 of nuclear weapons, including intermediate-range or intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Wednesday’s test was the first time Kim had publicly supervised an arms trial since Nov. 2018, when state media reported that he attended evaluations of another tactical weapon (presumed to be an artillery system), for which no further details were provided.

The summit in Hanoi, which was the second meeting between the two leaders following the first one in Singapore in June 2018, failed to kickstart the talks after Trump and Kim could not reach a consensus on Pyongyang's <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/world/us-envoy-to-north-korea-to-visit-moscow-discuss-denuclearisation-211296&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwj1xYHh99vhAhU87HMBHYs0BFQQFggLMAI&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3hRM7TDti79BheE2YGxcsz">denuclearisation</a>.

The US president said he chose to "walk away" from a deal with Kim because the North Koreans "wanted sanctions lifted in their entirety," which Trump refused.

North Korea has said it wants guarantees of its security from Washington before committing to fully dismantling its nuclear program.

Since Hanoi, Pyongyang has mulled re-starting its missile and nuclear tests, although last week Kim suggested in a speech to parliament that he was willing to meet with Trump again.

The new tactical guided weapon that North Korea claimed it had tested earlier this week is a ground combat missile system, a spokesperson for the South Korean Defense Ministry said on Friday.

The new tactical guided weapon that North Korea claimed it had tested earlier this week is a ground combat missile system, a spokesperson for the South Korean Defense Ministry said on Friday. The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Thursday that North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, had overseen a trial of a new tactical short-range weapon designed to be used in combat scenarios. The move appeared to be a message to both the North Korean public and Washington after a summit with United States President Donald Trump in Hanoi ended without a deal on Pyongyang's nuclear disarmament. The South Korean armed forces have determined that it is a "ground combat propulsed projectile system," the spokesperson told EFE. The acting secretary of US Defence, Patrick Shanahan, had said on Thursday that the new weapon was not a "ballistic missile". Analysts believe that the projectile flew over a short distance at low altitude, likely meaning it is a short-range guided missile similar to the Israeli Spike, which has a range of around 20 kilometres. The use of such short-range missiles does not violate UN resolutions which have been placed on North Korea following repeated tests in 2017 of nuclear weapons, including intermediate-range or intercontinental ballistic missiles. Wednesday’s test was the first time Kim had publicly supervised an arms trial since Nov. 2018, when state media reported that he attended evaluations of another tactical weapon (presumed to be an artillery system), for which no further details were provided. The summit in Hanoi, which was the second meeting between the two leaders following the first one in Singapore in June 2018, failed to kickstart the talks after Trump and Kim could not reach a consensus on Pyongyang's denuclearisation. The US president said he chose to "walk away" from a deal with Kim because the North Koreans "wanted sanctions lifted in their entirety," which Trump refused. North Korea has said it wants guarantees of its security from Washington before committing to fully dismantling its nuclear program. Since Hanoi, Pyongyang has mulled re-starting its missile and nuclear tests, although last week Kim suggested in a speech to parliament that he was willing to meet with Trump again.

New weapon tested by North Korea is for ground combat: South Korea

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday that North Korea does not have any economic future with nuclear weapons as the Pentagon confirmed the United States and South Korea had agreed to end joint large scale spring military exercises.

"North Korea has an incredible, brilliant economic future if they make a deal, but they don't have any economic future if they have nuclear weapons," Trump said at a Conservative Political Action Conference.

He added that the relationship with North Korea seemed to be "very, very strong."

According to a statement, acting Pentagon Chief Patrick Shanahan spoke with his South Korea counterpart on Saturday and they agreed to adapt their training programs.

The two "made clear that the Alliance decision to adapt our training program reflected our desire to reduce tension and support our diplomatic efforts to achieve complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula in a final, fully verified manner," the Pentagon said.

South Korea's military issued a similar statement also confirming plans to end the spring joint military exercises. Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Lee Do-hoon is planning on visiting the United States in the coming week to meet with US officials to discuss the second US-North Korea summit as well as the future agenda, according to a South Korean official.

The Pentagon said the US and South Korea had agreed to "newly designed Command Post exercises and revised field training programs." US officials have long said the scope of the spring exercises, known as Foal Eagle and Key Resolve, would be reduced.

Reuters and others reported on Friday that such an announcement would take place. To encourage talks, the United States and South Korea have suspended a number of military exercises since the first summit last year between Kim and Trump.

In Vietnam this week, the second meeting between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ended without a deal on sanctions relief North Korea would get in exchange for steps to give up its nuclear program.

Trump on Saturday addressed criticism from the parents of Otto Warmbier, an American student who died after 17 months in a North Korean prison. They had complained when Trump said at a Hanoi news conference that he believed Kim had nothing to do with Warmbier's death.

Trump said he was trying to maintain "a delicate balance" to coax the North Koreans into giving up their nuclear program.

The United States and North Korea have said they intend to continue talks, but have not specified when.

Some observers credited Trump for refusing to be drawn into a bad deal. Others criticised him for praising Kim's leadership and accepting his assertion that he had been unaware of Warmbier's treatment.

Analysts believe North Korea has 20 to 60 nuclear warheads which could threaten the US mainland if fitted to its intercontinental ballistic missiles. The United Nations and the United States ratcheted up sanctions when North Korea conducted nuclear and ballistic missile tests in 2017. Washington has demanded complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation before sanctions can be lifted, a position Pyongyang has denounced as "gangster-like."

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday that North Korea does not have any economic future with nuclear weapons as the Pentagon confirmed the United States and South Korea had agreed to end joint large scale spring military exercises.

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday that North Korea does not have any economic future with nuclear weapons as the Pentagon confirmed the United States and South Korea had agreed to end joint large scale spring military exercises. "North Korea has an incredible, brilliant economic future if they make a deal, but they don't have any economic future if they have nuclear weapons," Trump said at a Conservative Political Action Conference. He added that the relationship with North Korea seemed to be "very, very strong." According to a statement, acting Pentagon Chief Patrick Shanahan spoke with his South Korea counterpart on Saturday and they agreed to adapt their training programs. The two "made clear that the Alliance decision to adapt our training program reflected our desire to reduce tension and support our diplomatic efforts to achieve complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula in a final, fully verified manner," the Pentagon said. South Korea's military issued a similar statement also confirming plans to end the spring joint military exercises. Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Lee Do-hoon is planning on visiting the United States in the coming week to meet with US officials to discuss the second US-North Korea summit as well as the future agenda, according to a South Korean official. The Pentagon said the US and South Korea had agreed to "newly designed Command Post exercises and revised field training programs." US officials have long said the scope of the spring exercises, known as Foal Eagle and Key Resolve, would be reduced. Reuters and others reported on Friday that such an announcement would take place. To encourage talks, the United States and South Korea have suspended a number of military exercises since the first summit last year between Kim and Trump. In Vietnam this week, the second meeting between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ended without a deal on sanctions relief North Korea would get in exchange for steps to give up its nuclear program. Trump on Saturday addressed criticism from the parents of Otto Warmbier, an American student who died after 17 months in a North Korean prison. They had complained when Trump said at a Hanoi news conference that he believed Kim had nothing to do with Warmbier's death. Trump said he was trying to maintain "a delicate balance" to coax the North Koreans into giving up their nuclear program. The United States and North Korea have said they intend to continue talks, but have not specified when. Some observers credited Trump for refusing to be drawn into a bad deal. Others criticised him for praising Kim's leadership and accepting his assertion that he had been unaware of Warmbier's treatment. Analysts believe North Korea has 20 to 60 nuclear warheads which could threaten the US mainland if fitted to its intercontinental ballistic missiles. The United Nations and the United States ratcheted up sanctions when North Korea conducted nuclear and ballistic missile tests in 2017. Washington has demanded complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation before sanctions can be lifted, a position Pyongyang has denounced as "gangster-like."

North Korea has no economic future if it has nuclear weapons: Donald Trump

North Korea warned President Donald Trump on Sunday not to listen to US critics who were disrupting efforts to improve ties, as its leader, Kim Jong Un, made his way across China by train to a second summit with Trump in Vietnam.

The two leaders will meet in Hanoi on Wednesday and Thursday, eight months after their historic summit in Singapore, the first between a sitting US president and a North Korean leader, where they pledged to work toward the complete denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula.

But their vaguely worded agreement has produced few results and US Democratic senators and US security officials have warned Trump against cutting a deal that would do little to curb North Korea's nuclear ambitions.

The North's KCNA state news agency said such opposition was aimed at derailing the talks.

"If the present US administration reads others' faces, lending an ear to others, it may face the shattered dream of the improvement of the relations with the DPRK and world peace and miss the rare historic opportunity," the news agency said in a commentary, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

The Trump administration has pressed the North to give up its nuclear weapons programme, which, combined with its missile capabilities, pose a threat to the United States, before it can expect any concessions.

But a week before his second summit with Kim, Trump signalled a possible softening of that stance, saying he would love to be able to remove sanctions if there was meaningful progress on denuclearisation.

Trump also said he was in no rush and had no pressing schedule for North Korea's denuclearisation, hinting at a more gradual, reciprocal approach, long favoured by Pyongyang.

The North also wants security guarantees and a formal end of the 1950-1953 Korean War, which ended in a truce, not a treaty.

In a letter to Trump last week, three Democratic chairmen of key House committees accused the administration of withholding information on the negotiations with North Korea.

"There are ample reasons to be sceptical that Chairman Kim is committed to a nuclear-free North Korea," the lawmakers wrote.

US intelligence officials recently testified to Congress that North Korea was unlikely to ever give up its entire nuclear arsenal.

KCNA, referring to US fears of the North's weapons, said if this week's talks ended without results, "the US people will never be cleared of the security threats that threw them into panic".

Red carpet send-off

Few details of Kim's trip to Vietnam had been announced until early on Sunday, when North Korean state media confirmed he had left Pyongyang by train, accompanied by senior officials as well as his influential sister, Kim Yo Jong.

In rare, revealing coverage of Kim's travel, the North's Rodong Sinmun newspaper featured photographs of him getting a red-carpet send-off on Saturday afternoon and waving from a train door while holding a cigarette.

He was joined by top officials also involved in the Singapore summit, including Kim Yong Chol, former spy chief and Kim's top envoy in negotiations with the United States, as well as senior party aide Ri Su Yong, Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho and defence chief No Kwang Chol.

Other senior officials, such as his de facto chief of staff, Kim Chang Son, and Kim Hyok Chol, negotiations counterpart to US envoy Stephen Biegun, were already in Hanoi to prepare for the summit.

Both sides are under pressure to forge more specific agreements than were reached in Singapore.

The two leaders are likely to try to build on their personal connection to push things forward in Hanoi, even if only incrementally, analysts said.

"They will not make an agreement which breaks up the current flow of diplomacy. (President Trump) has mentioned that they'll meet again; even if there is a low-level agreement, they will seek to keep things moving," said Shin Beom-chul, a senior fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies.

Train spotting

Few details of summit arrangements have been released.

Some lamp posts on Hanoi's tree-lined streets are decked with North Korean, US&nbsp;and Vietnamese flags fluttering above a handshake design, and security has been stepped up at locations that could be the summit venue, or where the leaders might stay.

It could take Kim at least 2-1/2 days to travel to Vietnam by train.

Some carriages of a green train were spotted at Beijing's station on Sunday, but it was not confirmed it was Kim's.

South Korea's Yonhap news agency said Kim's train had passed through a station in China's port city of Tianjin, southeast of Beijing, at around 1 pm (0500 GMT).

China has given no details of his trip. Its foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

North Korea warned President Donald Trump on Sunday not to listen to US critics who were disrupting efforts to improve ties, as its leader, Kim Jong Un, made his way across China by train to a second summit with Trump in Vietnam.

North Korea warned President Donald Trump on Sunday not to listen to US critics who were disrupting efforts to improve ties, as its leader, Kim Jong Un, made his way across China by train to a second summit with Trump in Vietnam. The two leaders will meet in Hanoi on Wednesday and Thursday, eight months after their historic summit in Singapore, the first between a sitting US president and a North Korean leader, where they pledged to work toward the complete denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula. But their vaguely worded agreement has produced few results and US Democratic senators and US security officials have warned Trump against cutting a deal that would do little to curb North Korea's nuclear ambitions. The North's KCNA state news agency said such opposition was aimed at derailing the talks. "If the present US administration reads others' faces, lending an ear to others, it may face the shattered dream of the improvement of the relations with the DPRK and world peace and miss the rare historic opportunity," the news agency said in a commentary, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The Trump administration has pressed the North to give up its nuclear weapons programme, which, combined with its missile capabilities, pose a threat to the United States, before it can expect any concessions. But a week before his second summit with Kim, Trump signalled a possible softening of that stance, saying he would love to be able to remove sanctions if there was meaningful progress on denuclearisation. Trump also said he was in no rush and had no pressing schedule for North Korea's denuclearisation, hinting at a more gradual, reciprocal approach, long favoured by Pyongyang. The North also wants security guarantees and a formal end of the 1950-1953 Korean War, which ended in a truce, not a treaty. In a letter to Trump last week, three Democratic chairmen of key House committees accused the administration of withholding information on the negotiations with North Korea. "There are ample reasons to be sceptical that Chairman Kim is committed to a nuclear-free North Korea," the lawmakers wrote. US intelligence officials recently testified to Congress that North Korea was unlikely to ever give up its entire nuclear arsenal. KCNA, referring to US fears of the North's weapons, said if this week's talks ended without results, "the US people will never be cleared of the security threats that threw them into panic". Red carpet send-off Few details of Kim's trip to Vietnam had been announced until early on Sunday, when North Korean state media confirmed he had left Pyongyang by train, accompanied by senior officials as well as his influential sister, Kim Yo Jong. In rare, revealing coverage of Kim's travel, the North's Rodong Sinmun newspaper featured photographs of him getting a red-carpet send-off on Saturday afternoon and waving from a train door while holding a cigarette. He was joined by top officials also involved in the Singapore summit, including Kim Yong Chol, former spy chief and Kim's top envoy in negotiations with the United States, as well as senior party aide Ri Su Yong, Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho and defence chief No Kwang Chol. Other senior officials, such as his de facto chief of staff, Kim Chang Son, and Kim Hyok Chol, negotiations counterpart to US envoy Stephen Biegun, were already in Hanoi to prepare for the summit. Both sides are under pressure to forge more specific agreements than were reached in Singapore. The two leaders are likely to try to build on their personal connection to push things forward in Hanoi, even if only incrementally, analysts said. "They will not make an agreement which breaks up the current flow of diplomacy. (President Trump) has mentioned that they'll meet again; even if there is a low-level agreement, they will seek to keep things moving," said Shin Beom-chul, a senior fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Train spotting Few details of summit arrangements have been released. Some lamp posts on Hanoi's tree-lined streets are decked with North Korean, US and Vietnamese flags fluttering above a handshake design, and security has been stepped up at locations that could be the summit venue, or where the leaders might stay. It could take Kim at least 2-1/2 days to travel to Vietnam by train. Some carriages of a green train were spotted at Beijing's station on Sunday, but it was not confirmed it was Kim's. South Korea's Yonhap news agency said Kim's train had passed through a station in China's port city of Tianjin, southeast of Beijing, at around 1 pm (0500 GMT). China has given no details of his trip. Its foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

North Korea warns US sceptics as Kim heads for Vietnam for summit with Trump

The Red Cross called Friday for a total ban on nuclear weapons, warning of the growing risk that such arms could again be used with devastating effect.&nbsp;

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) launched a global campaign to raise awareness about the rising nuclear threat facing the world.

In a joint statement, they said some nuclear-armed states were straying from their "long-standing nuclear disarmament obligations" and were "upgrading their arsenals, developing new kinds of nuclear weapons and making them easier to use."

The notonukes.org campaign comes after the United States and Russia ripped up a key arms control treaty, with US President Donald Trump announcing last week that Washington was beginning a process to withdraw from the Cold War-era agreement in six months.&nbsp;

Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly followed suit, saying Moscow was leaving the treaty and would begin work on new types of weapons not permitted under the 1987 deal.

"Seventy-four years after nuclear weapons obliterated the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the risk that nuclear weapons will again be used is growing," the Red Cross organisations warned.

The notonukes campaign was launched with a video depicting two friends on a beach discussing whether they would want to live of die if a nuclear bomb were to explode.

One said he would want to live, because life is full of so many beautiful things, like spending time with his family, feeling the sun on his face and falling in love. The other said he would prefer to die, because after the bomb, none of those things would be possible.

The video ends with a call to action: "Let's decide the future of nuclear weapons before they decide ours".&nbsp;

The Red Cross said the campaign aimed to shine a light on the "catastrophic humanitarian consequences of a nuclear war".

It also aims to encourage people to lobby their governments to sign and ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which has so far been signed by 70 nations and ratified by 21.

"Any risk of nuclear weapons use is unacceptable," ICRC President Peter Maurer said in the statement, stressing that the TPNW "represents a beacon of hope and an essential measure to reduce the risk of a nuclear catastrophe."

"At this moment of growing international tension, I call on everyone to act with urgency and determination to bring the era of nuclear weapons to an end," he said.

The Red Cross called Friday for a total ban on nuclear weapons, warning of the growing risk that such arms could again be used with devastating effect. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) launched a global campaign to raise awareness about the rising nuclear threat facing the world.

The Red Cross called Friday for a total ban on nuclear weapons, warning of the growing risk that such arms could again be used with devastating effect. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) launched a global campaign to raise awareness about the rising nuclear threat facing the world. In a joint statement, they said some nuclear-armed states were straying from their "long-standing nuclear disarmament obligations" and were "upgrading their arsenals, developing new kinds of nuclear weapons and making them easier to use." The notonukes.org campaign comes after the United States and Russia ripped up a key arms control treaty, with US President Donald Trump announcing last week that Washington was beginning a process to withdraw from the Cold War-era agreement in six months. Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly followed suit, saying Moscow was leaving the treaty and would begin work on new types of weapons not permitted under the 1987 deal. "Seventy-four years after nuclear weapons obliterated the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the risk that nuclear weapons will again be used is growing," the Red Cross organisations warned. The notonukes campaign was launched with a video depicting two friends on a beach discussing whether they would want to live of die if a nuclear bomb were to explode. One said he would want to live, because life is full of so many beautiful things, like spending time with his family, feeling the sun on his face and falling in love. The other said he would prefer to die, because after the bomb, none of those things would be possible. The video ends with a call to action: "Let's decide the future of nuclear weapons before they decide ours". The Red Cross said the campaign aimed to shine a light on the "catastrophic humanitarian consequences of a nuclear war". It also aims to encourage people to lobby their governments to sign and ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which has so far been signed by 70 nations and ratified by 21. "Any risk of nuclear weapons use is unacceptable," ICRC President Peter Maurer said in the statement, stressing that the TPNW "represents a beacon of hope and an essential measure to reduce the risk of a nuclear catastrophe." "At this moment of growing international tension, I call on everyone to act with urgency and determination to bring the era of nuclear weapons to an end," he said.

Red Cross warns of 'growing' risk of nuclear weapons, urges ban

US withdraws from Cold War-era nuclear weapons treaty with Russia

20 years ago, India conducted a set of five nuclear tests. With Pokhran II, India became a nuclear power. It forced the world take note of India. Two decades later, India has entered an exclusive club. India is now a nuclear triad, it means that the country has the capability of launching Nuclear weapons from land, air and sea. It is a major milestone, not just because it gives India a place in an elite club, but also because it provides India with a significant deterrence capability.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
The completion of the nuclear-triad is critical for a country like India which has a clear policy of 'no first use of nuclear weapons'. The Nuclear arsenal is only to be used if India is attacked. That is called the second-strike capability. It is a country's ability to respond to a nuclear attack in equal measure. Completion of the nuclear triad is crucial for an effective second-strike capability.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
India is now capable of delivering nuclear weapons by aircraft, ballistic missiles and via a submarine. Nuclear prowess on different platforms is important for India as two of its neighbours are nuclear powers.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
The ability to fire nuclear missiles from under the sea is particularly important. Submarines, unlike fighter aircraft and land-based missile systems, are harder to track and destroy. Launching a nuclear weapon through land-based systems is the most common method, but it carries the risk of being detected and attacked. Hence, launching from underwater can prove to be the biggest threat in case of war.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
INS Arihant is a Strategic Strike Nuclear Submarine, which allows it to remain underwater longer than diesel-electric ones. INS Arihant can stay underwater indefinitely and avoid detection, making it the most dependable platform for a second strike.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Has India entered the big boys club? 
&nbsp; 
Yes, it has but the country still has a long way to go. It is a feat in itself that India can now place itself on the same list as the five members of the UN Security Council. The big five are the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, which includes China, Russia, United States, United Kingdom and France. India is only the sixth nation to complete the triad. But while that calls for a celebration, India is still far behind compared to those 5 nations. For example, China has 14 nuclear-powered submarines, whereas India has only 2 nuclear submarines. India is in the process of building 6 nuclear-powered submarines.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
What's next for India? 
&nbsp; 
INS Aridhaman is the second Arihant-class submarine. It is the second ingeniously built nuclear-powered submarine and is reportedly more powerful than INS Arihant. The submarine was originally reported to be named INS Aridhaman, but was called INS Arighat when it was launched last year. Aridhaman is reported to have the capacity of carrying twice as many missiles as INS Arihant. It can also travel faster than Arihant under water.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Is the long-awaited indigenisation here? 
&nbsp; 
INS Arihant is the country's first indigeniously built nuclear-powered submarine, but it would have not have been possible without assistance from Russia. The process of developing Arihant began in the 1980s with help from the Soviet Union. Russian experts worked with scientists at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre to develop INS Arihant. Having said that, you cannot take away the fact that it is indeed Made in India.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Will it reduce dependence on imports? 
&nbsp; 
No. India is far away from reaching that stage. While we should be proud of the first Made in India nuclear-powered submarine, we cannot forget the fact that India is the world's largest importer of major arms. A recent report suggested that India has spent close to $100 billion in the last one decade on military imports. In the last four years, India's imports are said to be far greater than that of China or Pakistan. India still imports some of the most basic weapons like revolvers and automatic rifles like the Kalashnikov.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

20 years ago, India conducted a set of five nuclear tests. With Pokhran II, India became a nuclear power. It forced the world take note of India. Two decades later, India has entered an exclusive club.

20 years ago, India conducted a set of five nuclear tests. With Pokhran II, India became a nuclear power. It forced the world take note of India. Two decades later, India has entered an exclusive club. India is now a nuclear triad, it means that the country has the capability of launching Nuclear weapons from land, air and sea. It is a major milestone, not just because it gives India a place in an elite club, but also because it provides India with a significant deterrence capability. The completion of the nuclear-triad is critical for a country like India which has a clear policy of 'no first use of nuclear weapons'. The Nuclear arsenal is only to be used if India is attacked. That is called the second-strike capability. It is a country's ability to respond to a nuclear attack in equal measure. Completion of the nuclear triad is crucial for an effective second-strike capability. India is now capable of delivering nuclear weapons by aircraft, ballistic missiles and via a submarine. Nuclear prowess on different platforms is important for India as two of its neighbours are nuclear powers. The ability to fire nuclear missiles from under the sea is particularly important. Submarines, unlike fighter aircraft and land-based missile systems, are harder to track and destroy. Launching a nuclear weapon through land-based systems is the most common method, but it carries the risk of being detected and attacked. Hence, launching from underwater can prove to be the biggest threat in case of war. INS Arihant is a Strategic Strike Nuclear Submarine, which allows it to remain underwater longer than diesel-electric ones. INS Arihant can stay underwater indefinitely and avoid detection, making it the most dependable platform for a second strike. Has India entered the big boys club? Yes, it has but the country still has a long way to go. It is a feat in itself that India can now place itself on the same list as the five members of the UN Security Council. The big five are the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, which includes China, Russia, United States, United Kingdom and France. India is only the sixth nation to complete the triad. But while that calls for a celebration, India is still far behind compared to those 5 nations. For example, China has 14 nuclear-powered submarines, whereas India has only 2 nuclear submarines. India is in the process of building 6 nuclear-powered submarines. What's next for India? INS Aridhaman is the second Arihant-class submarine. It is the second ingeniously built nuclear-powered submarine and is reportedly more powerful than INS Arihant. The submarine was originally reported to be named INS Aridhaman, but was called INS Arighat when it was launched last year. Aridhaman is reported to have the capacity of carrying twice as many missiles as INS Arihant. It can also travel faster than Arihant under water. Is the long-awaited indigenisation here? INS Arihant is the country's first indigeniously built nuclear-powered submarine, but it would have not have been possible without assistance from Russia. The process of developing Arihant began in the 1980s with help from the Soviet Union. Russian experts worked with scientists at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre to develop INS Arihant. Having said that, you cannot take away the fact that it is indeed Made in India. Will it reduce dependence on imports? No. India is far away from reaching that stage. While we should be proud of the first Made in India nuclear-powered submarine, we cannot forget the fact that India is the world's largest importer of major arms. A recent report suggested that India has spent close to $100 billion in the last one decade on military imports. In the last four years, India's imports are said to be far greater than that of China or Pakistan. India still imports some of the most basic weapons like revolvers and automatic rifles like the Kalashnikov. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Nuclear triad and why it's significant for India

Donald Trump accepted an invitation from Kim Jong Un to visit North Korea during their historic summit, Pyongyang state media reported Wednesday, as the US president said the world had jumped back from the brink of "nuclear catastrophe".&nbsp;

Tuesday's unprecedented encounter in Singapore saw the leader of the world's most powerful democracy shake hands with Kim, the third generation scion of a dynastic dictatorship, as they stood as equals in front of their nations' flags.

In a characteristically bullish tweet, Trump said the first-ever summit between sitting leaders of the two Cold War foes meant "the World has taken a big step back from potential Nuclear catastrophe!"

"No more rocket launches, nuclear testing or research! The hostages are back home with their families. Thank you to Chairman Kim, our day together was historic!"

In a joint statement following the talks, Kim agreed to the "complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula" -- a stock phrase favoured by Pyongyang that stopped short of long-standing US demands for North Korea to give up its atomic arsenal in a "verifiable" and "irreversible" way.

In its first report on the landmark summit, the official KCNA news agency ran a glowing dispatch on the talks, describing them as an "epoch-making meeting" that would help foster "a radical switchover in the most hostile (North Korea)-US relations".

The report said the two men each asked the other to visit their country.

"The two top leaders gladly accepted each other's invitation," KCNA said.

It asserted that Trump had "expressed his intention" to lift sanctions against the North -- something the US president had told a blockbuster press conference would happen "when we are sure that the nukes are no longer a factor".

"The sanctions right now remain," he added.&nbsp;

With the headline: "Meeting of the century opens new history in DPRK-US relations", the North's ruling Workers Party official daily Rodong Sinmun splashed no fewer than 33 pictures across four of its usual six pages.

One of the pictures showed a smiling Kim shaking hands with Trump's hawkish National Security Advisor John Bolton, who has previously advocated military action against the North, which in turn has referred to him as "human scum."

'War games' 
Pyongyang has reason to feel confident after the meeting, a major coup for an isolated and heavily sanctioned regime that has long craved international legitimacy.

"Kim Jong Un got what he wanted at the Singapore Summit: the international prestige and respect of a one-on-one meeting with the American president, the legitimacy of North Korean flags hanging next to American flags in the background," said Paul Haenle, director of the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center.

In his post-summit press conference, Trump made the surprise announcement that the US would halt joint military exercises with its security ally Seoul -- something long sought by Pyongyang, which claims the drills are a rehearsal for invasion.

The US stations around 30,000 troops in security ally South Korea to protect it from its neighbour, which invaded in 1950 in an attempt to reunify the peninsula by force.

"We will be stopping the war games which will save us a tremendous amount of money," Trump told reporters, adding that "at some point" he wanted to withdraw US troops from the South.

Both Seoul and US military commanders in the South indicated they had no idea the announcement was coming, and in an editorial Wednesday the Korea Herald said it was "worrisome".

Smiles and handshakes 
The Singapore summit was a potentially legacy-defining meeting for both men -- comparable to president Richard Nixon's 1972 visit to China, or Ronald Reagan's 1986 summit with Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik.

Only a few months ago, the pair were swapping personal insults such as "dotard" and "little rocket man" and the North conducted its six and most powerful nuclear test, as well as firing missiles over Japan.

Trump vowed to rain down "fire and fury" on Pyongyang if it threatened the US but instead in Singapore it was compliments that flowed, as the president described Kim as "talented" and said they had forged a "special bond."

After a day filled with smiles and handshakes watched around the world, the US "committed to provide security guarantees" to North Korea.

But critics charged that the summit legitimised Kim, whose regime has been accused of multiple human rights abuses, and said the summit was more about headlines than substantive progress.

Trump said the US would be checking Kim's progress towards denuclearisation "very strongly" but many agreements made in the past with North Korea have later fallen apart.

World powers from China to Japan, the European Union and Russia welcomed its outcome -- while cautioning it was only the first step towards resolving the nuclear stand-off with Pyongyang.

But some media in Japan, which North Korea has in the past threatened to "sink into the sea", were cautious.

"The real bargaining has now started between the US and North Korea. Problems that cannot be solved through a bling-bling political show remain on both sides," said the liberal Mainichi Shimbun.

Kim says denuclearisation dependent on ceasing antagonism: KCNA

Kim Jong-Un meanwhile said ridding the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons is dependent on Washington and Pyongyang ceasing moves that antagonise each other, the North's state media said Wednesday.

"Kim Jong Un said in order to achieve peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula and realise its denuclearisation, the two countries should commit themselves to refraining from antagonising... each other out of mutual understanding," the state-run KCNA news agency said.

Kim meanwhile said ridding the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons is dependent on Washington and Pyongyang ceasing moves that antagonise each other

Donald Trump accepted an invitation from Kim Jong Un to visit North Korea during their historic summit, Pyongyang state media reported Wednesday, as the US president said the world had jumped back from the brink of "nuclear catastrophe". Tuesday's unprecedented encounter in Singapore saw the leader of the world's most powerful democracy shake hands with Kim, the third generation scion of a dynastic dictatorship, as they stood as equals in front of their nations' flags. In a characteristically bullish tweet, Trump said the first-ever summit between sitting leaders of the two Cold War foes meant "the World has taken a big step back from potential Nuclear catastrophe!" "No more rocket launches, nuclear testing or research! The hostages are back home with their families. Thank you to Chairman Kim, our day together was historic!" In a joint statement following the talks, Kim agreed to the "complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula" -- a stock phrase favoured by Pyongyang that stopped short of long-standing US demands for North Korea to give up its atomic arsenal in a "verifiable" and "irreversible" way. In its first report on the landmark summit, the official KCNA news agency ran a glowing dispatch on the talks, describing them as an "epoch-making meeting" that would help foster "a radical switchover in the most hostile (North Korea)-US relations". The report said the two men each asked the other to visit their country. "The two top leaders gladly accepted each other's invitation," KCNA said. It asserted that Trump had "expressed his intention" to lift sanctions against the North -- something the US president had told a blockbuster press conference would happen "when we are sure that the nukes are no longer a factor". "The sanctions right now remain," he added. With the headline: "Meeting of the century opens new history in DPRK-US relations", the North's ruling Workers Party official daily Rodong Sinmun splashed no fewer than 33 pictures across four of its usual six pages. One of the pictures showed a smiling Kim shaking hands with Trump's hawkish National Security Advisor John Bolton, who has previously advocated military action against the North, which in turn has referred to him as "human scum." 'War games' Pyongyang has reason to feel confident after the meeting, a major coup for an isolated and heavily sanctioned regime that has long craved international legitimacy. "Kim Jong Un got what he wanted at the Singapore Summit: the international prestige and respect of a one-on-one meeting with the American president, the legitimacy of North Korean flags hanging next to American flags in the background," said Paul Haenle, director of the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center. In his post-summit press conference, Trump made the surprise announcement that the US would halt joint military exercises with its security ally Seoul -- something long sought by Pyongyang, which claims the drills are a rehearsal for invasion. The US stations around 30,000 troops in security ally South Korea to protect it from its neighbour, which invaded in 1950 in an attempt to reunify the peninsula by force. "We will be stopping the war games which will save us a tremendous amount of money," Trump told reporters, adding that "at some point" he wanted to withdraw US troops from the South. Both Seoul and US military commanders in the South indicated they had no idea the announcement was coming, and in an editorial Wednesday the Korea Herald said it was "worrisome". Smiles and handshakes The Singapore summit was a potentially legacy-defining meeting for both men -- comparable to president Richard Nixon's 1972 visit to China, or Ronald Reagan's 1986 summit with Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik. Only a few months ago, the pair were swapping personal insults such as "dotard" and "little rocket man" and the North conducted its six and most powerful nuclear test, as well as firing missiles over Japan. Trump vowed to rain down "fire and fury" on Pyongyang if it threatened the US but instead in Singapore it was compliments that flowed, as the president described Kim as "talented" and said they had forged a "special bond." After a day filled with smiles and handshakes watched around the world, the US "committed to provide security guarantees" to North Korea. But critics charged that the summit legitimised Kim, whose regime has been accused of multiple human rights abuses, and said the summit was more about headlines than substantive progress. Trump said the US would be checking Kim's progress towards denuclearisation "very strongly" but many agreements made in the past with North Korea have later fallen apart. World powers from China to Japan, the European Union and Russia welcomed its outcome -- while cautioning it was only the first step towards resolving the nuclear stand-off with Pyongyang. But some media in Japan, which North Korea has in the past threatened to "sink into the sea", were cautious. "The real bargaining has now started between the US and North Korea. Problems that cannot be solved through a bling-bling political show remain on both sides," said the liberal Mainichi Shimbun. Kim says denuclearisation dependent on ceasing antagonism: KCNA Kim Jong-Un meanwhile said ridding the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons is dependent on Washington and Pyongyang ceasing moves that antagonise each other, the North's state media said Wednesday. "Kim Jong Un said in order to achieve peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula and realise its denuclearisation, the two countries should commit themselves to refraining from antagonising... each other out of mutual understanding," the state-run KCNA news agency said.

Summit with Kim helped avoid 'nuclear catastrophe', says Trump

North Korea has confirmed to the US its willingness to denuclearise, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said today, asserting that President Donald Trump will not stand by a "bad deal" in his summit with Kim Jong-un in Singapore next week.

Any deal reached as a result of the meeting between Trump and the North Korean leader Kim would be brought before the Congress for its stamp of approval so that it cannot be reversed by any future administration, said Pompeo, who is spearheading the American efforts for talks with Pyongyang.

"The United States and North Korea have been holding direct talks in preparation for a summit, and North Korea has confirmed to us its willingness to denuclearise," he told reporters at a White House news conference.

Noting that a comprehensive whole-of-government effort in support of Trump's upcoming summit was underway, Pompeo said a White House and State Department-led advance teams were finalising logistical preparations and will remain in place in Singapore until the summit begins.

Trump continues to follow every development closely and is getting daily briefings from his national security team, he said.

The fact that the two leaders are coming to the table shows that they are very serious, Pompeo said, noting that the diplomatic model that they have used to date is different from past efforts.

The efforts gives them hope that they can find real success where past efforts have fallen short, he added.

Pompeo said Trump was hopeful, but he is also going into the summit with his eyes wide open. "We've seen how many inadequate agreements have been struck in the past. You can be sure that President Trump will not stand for a bad deal," he said.?&nbsp;

"The US has been clear, time and time again, that complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is the only outcome that we will find acceptable," Pompeo said.

Trump, he said, recognises that North Korea has great potential, and he looks forward to a day when sanctions on it can begin to be removed.

However, that cannot happen until the Pyongyang completely and verifiably eliminates its weapons of mass destruction programs, he reiterated.

Pompeo said Trump and Kim will certainly also discuss security assurances for North Korea, establishing a peace regime and improving relations between the two countries.&nbsp;

"Until we achieve our goals, the measures that the world, alongside the US, has put on the regime will remain. In the event diplomacy does not move in the right direction, these measures will increase. Throughout the entire process, the United States has been unified with Japan and South Korea in response to the threats from North Korea," he said.

Trump has been, and continues to be, committed to ridding the US and the world of threats posed by North Korea's weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes, he said.&nbsp;

"These programmes threaten our homeland, our allies and partners, and the broader non-proliferation regime. North Korea's past activities also make clear that it is proliferation to other actors that creates a risk, in addition to the primary risks. It has supporting infrastructure that is also of concern," he said.

Pompeo, who has met Kim twice in the recent past, said the North Korean leader was very capable of articulating the things that he was prepared to do, presents clearly the challenges that they all have to overcome.?&nbsp;

"It's why the two leaders are meeting. It's the opportunity to lay those out clearly between the two leaders so that we can see if we can find a path forward together that achieves the outcomes that both countries want," he said.

"He (Kim) has indicated to me, personally, that he is prepared to denuclearise that he understands that the current model doesn't work, that he's prepared to denuclearise.&nbsp;He understands that we can't do it the way we've done it before -- that this has to be big and bold, and we have to agree to making major changes," he said.

"We can't step through this over years, but rather need to acknowledge it will take some amount of time, that this doesn't happen instantaneously. But that the model for succeeding -- security assurance and political normalization and denuclearisation completely, verifiably, and irreversibly -- for that to take place, we've got to make bold decisions," Pompeo said.

Leading the American efforts in negotiating with the North Koreans, he said the US is making progress, inch by inch.&nbsp;

"We are going to travel there," the US Secretary of State said.

Asserting that the approach that Trump was taking is fundamentally different, the top American diplomat said in the past, there have been months and months of detailed negotiations, and it "got nowhere".&nbsp;"This has already driven us to a place we've not been able to achieve before," he said.&nbsp;

Pompeo said the Trump administration is hoping to submit a document that Congress would give currency and strength and elongation to the process so that when administrations do change, as they inevitably do, Chairman Kim will have comfort that American policy will continue down the same path.&nbsp;

The United States and North Korea have been holding direct talks in preparation for a summit, and North Korea has confirmed to us its willingness to denuclearise

North Korea has confirmed to the US its willingness to denuclearise, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said today, asserting that President Donald Trump will not stand by a "bad deal" in his summit with Kim Jong-un in Singapore next week. Any deal reached as a result of the meeting between Trump and the North Korean leader Kim would be brought before the Congress for its stamp of approval so that it cannot be reversed by any future administration, said Pompeo, who is spearheading the American efforts for talks with Pyongyang. "The United States and North Korea have been holding direct talks in preparation for a summit, and North Korea has confirmed to us its willingness to denuclearise," he told reporters at a White House news conference. Noting that a comprehensive whole-of-government effort in support of Trump's upcoming summit was underway, Pompeo said a White House and State Department-led advance teams were finalising logistical preparations and will remain in place in Singapore until the summit begins. Trump continues to follow every development closely and is getting daily briefings from his national security team, he said. The fact that the two leaders are coming to the table shows that they are very serious, Pompeo said, noting that the diplomatic model that they have used to date is different from past efforts. The efforts gives them hope that they can find real success where past efforts have fallen short, he added. Pompeo said Trump was hopeful, but he is also going into the summit with his eyes wide open. "We've seen how many inadequate agreements have been struck in the past. You can be sure that President Trump will not stand for a bad deal," he said.? "The US has been clear, time and time again, that complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is the only outcome that we will find acceptable," Pompeo said. Trump, he said, recognises that North Korea has great potential, and he looks forward to a day when sanctions on it can begin to be removed. However, that cannot happen until the Pyongyang completely and verifiably eliminates its weapons of mass destruction programs, he reiterated. Pompeo said Trump and Kim will certainly also discuss security assurances for North Korea, establishing a peace regime and improving relations between the two countries. "Until we achieve our goals, the measures that the world, alongside the US, has put on the regime will remain. In the event diplomacy does not move in the right direction, these measures will increase. Throughout the entire process, the United States has been unified with Japan and South Korea in response to the threats from North Korea," he said. Trump has been, and continues to be, committed to ridding the US and the world of threats posed by North Korea's weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes, he said. "These programmes threaten our homeland, our allies and partners, and the broader non-proliferation regime. North Korea's past activities also make clear that it is proliferation to other actors that creates a risk, in addition to the primary risks. It has supporting infrastructure that is also of concern," he said. Pompeo, who has met Kim twice in the recent past, said the North Korean leader was very capable of articulating the things that he was prepared to do, presents clearly the challenges that they all have to overcome.? "It's why the two leaders are meeting. It's the opportunity to lay those out clearly between the two leaders so that we can see if we can find a path forward together that achieves the outcomes that both countries want," he said. "He (Kim) has indicated to me, personally, that he is prepared to denuclearise that he understands that the current model doesn't work, that he's prepared to denuclearise. He understands that we can't do it the way we've done it before -- that this has to be big and bold, and we have to agree to making major changes," he said. "We can't step through this over years, but rather need to acknowledge it will take some amount of time, that this doesn't happen instantaneously. But that the model for succeeding -- security assurance and political normalization and denuclearisation completely, verifiably, and irreversibly -- for that to take place, we've got to make bold decisions," Pompeo said. Leading the American efforts in negotiating with the North Koreans, he said the US is making progress, inch by inch. "We are going to travel there," the US Secretary of State said. Asserting that the approach that Trump was taking is fundamentally different, the top American diplomat said in the past, there have been months and months of detailed negotiations, and it "got nowhere". "This has already driven us to a place we've not been able to achieve before," he said. Pompeo said the Trump administration is hoping to submit a document that Congress would give currency and strength and elongation to the process so that when administrations do change, as they inevitably do, Chairman Kim will have comfort that American policy will continue down the same path.

North Korea has confirmed to US willingness to denuclearise: Pompeo

State media calls North Korea's nuclear weapons a "treasured sword of justice".

Pyongyang has released commemorative stamps and built monuments in honour of its ballistic missile tests, while nuclear and rocket scientists have been named national heroes.&nbsp

For Kim Jong Un, fully giving up nuclear weapons would mean a dramatic reversal for an authoritarian leader who has not only staked his security on his nuclear arsenal, but also spent years publicly celebrating such weapons as an integral part of his regime's legitimacy and power.

South Korean envoys who met Kim in Pyongyang early this month quoted Kim as saying he was "committed to denuclearization", and that he "expressed his eagerness to meet US&nbspPresident Donald Trump as soon as possible".

Chinese officials who met with Kim in Beijing this week also said he committed to denuclearisation, but initial North Korean state media reports on the visit did not mention the nuclear issue.

Absent any public confirmation from Pyongyang, analysts are sceptical Kim will suddenly give up the nuclear arsenal he and his family have spent decades developing.&nbsp

Instead, Kim is likely to seek a more nuanced and long-term approach that could allow him to emerge looking victorious in the minds of his people and domestic elites, they say.

"Kim Jong Un does not need to sell anything to the North Korean population, particularly because denuclearisation is a process that will take at least 10 years to realistically achieve," said Michael Madden, an expert on North Korea leadership at Johns Hopkins University's 38 North website.

"Pyongyang most likely envisions ... a series of incremental agreements around this, rather than one or two large grand bargains."

Concessions needed

Former South Korean officials who have negotiated with the North in the past say such a pivot could be difficult, but not impossible - if the United States makes major concessions Kim Jong Un can take back and parade to his people.

"Kim Jong Un would seek to propagate the idea that he induced the US&nbspand international community’s ‘surrender’ by having mastered nuclear weapons," said Kim Hyung-suk, who served as the South's vice unification minister between 2016 and 2017.

"If talks go well, sanctions are eased and the economy grows. Then the people would understand Kim’s denuclearisation decision and become strongly supportive of it."

That may not be the kind of deal Trump envisions as he plans to sit down with Kim sometime in May for a historic first summit between sitting leaders of the two countries.

Trump's new national security adviser, John Bolton, recently said Trump should insist any meeting he holds with Kim be focussed squarely on how to eliminate that country's nuclear weapons programme as quickly as possible.&nbsp

Silence in Pyongyang&nbsp

The lack of comment from North Korean state media on the proposed talks between Kim and Trump was not unexpected, analysts said.

"It might reflect an ongoing internal discussion about how to deal with public opinion, certainly, although I would characterise that as a broader discussion of how to proceed overall," said Christopher Green, a senior adviser with the International Crisis Group, which researches conflict.

Given the importance he has attached to the weapons, and the money poured into their development, Kim will have to tread carefully to ensure any talk of abandoning the nuclear programme started by his grandfather and continued by his father wouldn't undermine his legitimacy at home, experts say.

To try to balance factions in his government, Kim Jong Un embraced a policy of "byungjin," or simultaneous military and economic development, after he came to power in 2011.&nbsp

Since 2013, the pro-military factions have been ascendant, but a Trump summit could lend heft to arguments by officials who prefer to prioritise economic development, Green said.

A number of military authorities and other senior elites might be less receptive to denuclearization.

"For them, it’s unthinkable to ensure regime security with conventional forces alone, so they could object to Kim’s decision and continue to argue for keeping the bombs," said Kim Hyung-suk.

Forebearers teaching

According to South Korean and Chinese officials, Kim Jong Un told them denuclearising the Korean peninsula was forebearers'&nbspteaching - a potential talking point if he does try to justify curtailing his much-vaunted nuclear programme.

"It is our consistent stand to be committed to denuclearization on the peninsula, in accordance with the will of late President Kim Il Sung and late General Secretary Kim Jong Il," Kim told Chinese President Xi Jinping during a visit this week, according to Chinese state media.

Kim Jong Un's father and grandfather both publicly promised not to pursue nuclear weapons, but secretly continued to develop the programmes, culminating in the country's first nuclear test in 2006 under Kim Jong Il.

Even after that test, Kim Jong Il insisted in a 2007 summit with his South Korean counterpart that he didn't "have the intention to own nuclear weapons".

The history of failed negotiations with Pyongyang makes many observers, including former senior US&nbspdiplomat Evans Revere, sceptical the latest negotiations will be any different.&nbsp

In past talks, North Korea had said it could consider giving up its arsenal if the United States removes its troops from South Korea and withdraws its so-called "nuclear umbrella" of deterrence from South Korea and Japan, a stance Washington has found unacceptable.

"Those of us who have negotiated with the North Koreans know what they mean (by denuclearisation)," Revere said.&nbsp

"About the only thing that the North Korean leader might need to 'sell'&nbspto his people - and particularly to the military - is the idea of a 'freeze'&nbspon some elements of his programme."

For Kim Jong Un, fully giving up nuclear weapons would mean a dramatic reversal for an authoritarian leader

State media calls North Korea's nuclear weapons a "treasured sword of justice". Pyongyang has released commemorative stamps and built monuments in honour of its ballistic missile tests, while nuclear and rocket scientists have been named national heroes. For Kim Jong Un, fully giving up nuclear weapons would mean a dramatic reversal for an authoritarian leader who has not only staked his security on his nuclear arsenal, but also spent years publicly celebrating such weapons as an integral part of his regime's legitimacy and power. South Korean envoys who met Kim in Pyongyang early this month quoted Kim as saying he was "committed to denuclearization", and that he "expressed his eagerness to meet US&nbspPresident Donald Trump as soon as possible". Chinese officials who met with Kim in Beijing this week also said he committed to denuclearisation, but initial North Korean state media reports on the visit did not mention the nuclear issue. Absent any public confirmation from Pyongyang, analysts are sceptical Kim will suddenly give up the nuclear arsenal he and his family have spent decades developing. Instead, Kim is likely to seek a more nuanced and long-term approach that could allow him to emerge looking victorious in the minds of his people and domestic elites, they say. "Kim Jong Un does not need to sell anything to the North Korean population, particularly because denuclearisation is a process that will take at least 10 years to realistically achieve," said Michael Madden, an expert on North Korea leadership at Johns Hopkins University's 38 North website. "Pyongyang most likely envisions ... a series of incremental agreements around this, rather than one or two large grand bargains." Concessions needed Former South Korean officials who have negotiated with the North in the past say such a pivot could be difficult, but not impossible - if the United States makes major concessions Kim Jong Un can take back and parade to his people. "Kim Jong Un would seek to propagate the idea that he induced the US&nbspand international community’s ‘surrender’ by having mastered nuclear weapons," said Kim Hyung-suk, who served as the South's vice unification minister between 2016 and 2017. "If talks go well, sanctions are eased and the economy grows. Then the people would understand Kim’s denuclearisation decision and become strongly supportive of it." That may not be the kind of deal Trump envisions as he plans to sit down with Kim sometime in May for a historic first summit between sitting leaders of the two countries. Trump's new national security adviser, John Bolton, recently said Trump should insist any meeting he holds with Kim be focussed squarely on how to eliminate that country's nuclear weapons programme as quickly as possible. Silence in Pyongyang The lack of comment from North Korean state media on the proposed talks between Kim and Trump was not unexpected, analysts said. "It might reflect an ongoing internal discussion about how to deal with public opinion, certainly, although I would characterise that as a broader discussion of how to proceed overall," said Christopher Green, a senior adviser with the International Crisis Group, which researches conflict. Given the importance he has attached to the weapons, and the money poured into their development, Kim will have to tread carefully to ensure any talk of abandoning the nuclear programme started by his grandfather and continued by his father wouldn't undermine his legitimacy at home, experts say. To try to balance factions in his government, Kim Jong Un embraced a policy of "byungjin," or simultaneous military and economic development, after he came to power in 2011. Since 2013, the pro-military factions have been ascendant, but a Trump summit could lend heft to arguments by officials who prefer to prioritise economic development, Green said. A number of military authorities and other senior elites might be less receptive to denuclearization. "For them, it’s unthinkable to ensure regime security with conventional forces alone, so they could object to Kim’s decision and continue to argue for keeping the bombs," said Kim Hyung-suk. Forebearers teaching According to South Korean and Chinese officials, Kim Jong Un told them denuclearising the Korean peninsula was forebearers'&nbspteaching - a potential talking point if he does try to justify curtailing his much-vaunted nuclear programme. "It is our consistent stand to be committed to denuclearization on the peninsula, in accordance with the will of late President Kim Il Sung and late General Secretary Kim Jong Il," Kim told Chinese President Xi Jinping during a visit this week, according to Chinese state media. Kim Jong Un's father and grandfather both publicly promised not to pursue nuclear weapons, but secretly continued to develop the programmes, culminating in the country's first nuclear test in 2006 under Kim Jong Il. Even after that test, Kim Jong Il insisted in a 2007 summit with his South Korean counterpart that he didn't "have the intention to own nuclear weapons". The history of failed negotiations with Pyongyang makes many observers, including former senior US&nbspdiplomat Evans Revere, sceptical the latest negotiations will be any different. In past talks, North Korea had said it could consider giving up its arsenal if the United States removes its troops from South Korea and withdraws its so-called "nuclear umbrella" of deterrence from South Korea and Japan, a stance Washington has found unacceptable. "Those of us who have negotiated with the North Koreans know what they mean (by denuclearisation)," Revere said. "About the only thing that the North Korean leader might need to 'sell'&nbspto his people - and particularly to the military - is the idea of a 'freeze'&nbspon some elements of his programme."

Analysis: How does Kim tell North Korea he's giving up nuclear weapons?

&nbsp;The newly appointed United States National Security Advisor (NSA), John Bolton, who had been a US ambassador to the United Nations, has had grave concerns about Pakistan&#39;s nuclear arsenal.

Last year, he said if Pakistan&#39;s nuclear arms fall into the hands of terrorists, it would be like NorthKorea or Iran on steroids.

&quot;Pakistan is a nuclear power and if it were to tip into terrorist control it would be like #NorthKorea or #Iran on steroids,&quot; Bolton tweeted last year.

Bolton, who was also an analyst on the Fox News Channel, is also of the opinion that more pressure should be exerted on Pakistan government to compel it to take action against terrorist groups operating from their territory.

&quot;Look, I think Afghanistan will be won or lost in Pakistan. And I certainly think that more pressure on the government there because of its support for terrorist groups, giving them safe haven in Pakistan is welcome,&quot; he said on the channel last year.

Yesterday, President Trump appointed Bolton as the NSA, replacing HR McMaster.

Bolton served as the ambassador to the United Nations under former US President George W Bush during parts of 2005 and 2006.&nbsp;

"Pakistan is a nuclear power and if it were to tip into terrorist control it would be like #NorthKorea or #Iran on steroids," Bolton tweeted last year

The newly appointed United States National Security Advisor (NSA), John Bolton, who had been a US ambassador to the United Nations, has had grave concerns about Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Last year, he said if Pakistan's nuclear arms fall into the hands of terrorists, it would be like NorthKorea or Iran on steroids. "Pakistan is a nuclear power and if it were to tip into terrorist control it would be like #NorthKorea or #Iran on steroids," Bolton tweeted last year. Bolton, who was also an analyst on the Fox News Channel, is also of the opinion that more pressure should be exerted on Pakistan government to compel it to take action against terrorist groups operating from their territory. "Look, I think Afghanistan will be won or lost in Pakistan. And I certainly think that more pressure on the government there because of its support for terrorist groups, giving them safe haven in Pakistan is welcome," he said on the channel last year. Yesterday, President Trump appointed Bolton as the NSA, replacing HR McMaster. Bolton served as the ambassador to the United Nations under former US President George W Bush during parts of 2005 and 2006.

New US  National Security Advisor once compared Pak's nukes to 'North Korea on steroids'

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/inx-media-case-karti-chidambarams-cbi-custody-extended-by-3-days-34895" target="_blank">INX Media case: CBI custody of Karti Chidambaram extended by 3 days</a>

A special CBI Court on Tuesday extended the agency&#39;s custody of Karti Chidambaram by three more days in the infamous INX Media case, after his previous five-day custody expired today.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/no-need-for-nuclear-weapons-if-we-have-security-guarantee-north-korea-34896" target="_blank">No need for nuclear weapons if we have security guarantee: North Korea</a>

North Korea is open to denuclearisation if the safety of Kim Jong Un&rsquo;s regime is guaranteed, a South Korean official said Tuesday.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lanka-imposes-10-day-emergency-in-kandy-due-to-communal-tension-34868" target="_blank">Sri Lanka declares </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lanka-imposes-10-day-emergency-in-kandy-due-to-communal-tension-34868" target="_blank">emergency</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/sri-lanka-imposes-10-day-emergency-in-kandy-due-to-communal-tension-34868" target="_blank"> to quell Buddhist-Muslim riots, curfew imposed in Kandy</a>

Sri Lanka declared a nationwide state of emergency for 10 days on Tuesday to stop the spread of communal violence, a government spokesman said, after clashes erupted between majority Buddhists and members of the minority Muslim community.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/neiphiu-rio-appointed-nagaland-chief-minister-by-governor-pb-acharya-34900" target="_blank">Neiphiu Rio appointed </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/neiphiu-rio-appointed-nagaland-chief-minister-by-governor-pb-acharya-34900" target="_blank">c</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/neiphiu-rio-appointed-nagaland-chief-minister-by-governor-pb-acharya-34900" target="_blank">hief</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/neiphiu-rio-appointed-nagaland-chief-minister-by-governor-pb-acharya-34900" target="_blank"> minister of Nagaland</a>

Nagaland Governor PB Acharya has appointed Neiphiu Rio as chief minister under clause (1) of Article 164 of the Constitution.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/pnb-scam-icicis-chanda-kochhar-axis-banks-shikha-sharma-summoned-by-sfio-34893" target="_blank">PNB scam: ICICI&#39;s Chanda Kochhar, Axis Bank&#39;s Shikha Sharma summoned by Serious Fraud Investigation Office</a>

ICICI Bank chief Chanda Kochhar and Axis Bank chief Shikha Sharma have been summoned by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) in connection with the over Rs 13,000-crore PNB scam.&nbsp;

INX Media case: CBI custody of Karti Chidambaram extended by 3 days A special CBI Court on Tuesday extended the agency's custody of Karti Chidambaram by three more days in the infamous INX Media case, after his previous five-day custody expired today. No need for nuclear weapons if we have security guarantee: North Korea North Korea is open to denuclearisation if the safety of Kim Jong Un’s regime is guaranteed, a South Korean official said Tuesday. Sri Lanka declares emergency to quell Buddhist-Muslim riots, curfew imposed in Kandy Sri Lanka declared a nationwide state of emergency for 10 days on Tuesday to stop the spread of communal violence, a government spokesman said, after clashes erupted between majority Buddhists and members of the minority Muslim community. Neiphiu Rio appointed chief minister of Nagaland Nagaland Governor PB Acharya has appointed Neiphiu Rio as chief minister under clause (1) of Article 164 of the Constitution. PNB scam: ICICI's Chanda Kochhar, Axis Bank's Shikha Sharma summoned by Serious Fraud Investigation Office ICICI Bank chief Chanda Kochhar and Axis Bank chief Shikha Sharma have been summoned by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) in connection with the over Rs 13,000-crore PNB scam.

WION Evening News Brief, March 6, 2018

South Korean President Moon Jae-in will send a team of special envoys -- including Seoul&#39;s spy chief -- to the North on Monday to push for talks between Washington and Pyongyang on nuclear weapons.

The delegation, announced by Moon&#39;s office on Sunday, is the latest chapter in a remarkable Olympics-driven detente between the two Koreas.&nbsp;

An intense rapprochement saw the two foes march together at the South&#39;s Pyeongchang Winter Olympics that ended February 25, with the North&#39;s leader Kim Jong Un sending his sister as a special envoy to the event.

Kim Yo Jong&#39;s appearance at the Games&#39; opening ceremony made global headlines, marking the first visit to the South by a member of the Kim family since the end of the Korean War.

Moon has sought to use the Pyeongchang Games to open dialogue between the US and the North in the hopes of easing a nuclear standoff that has heightened fears over global security.

He chose five top officials -- including top national security advisor Chung Eui-Yong and spy chief Suh Hoon -- to visit Pyongyang on Monday, Moon&#39;s spokesman said.&nbsp;

&quot;The special delegates will have extensive discussions over issues including creating conditions for North-US talks to denuclearise the Korean peninsula and improving inter-Korea ties,&quot; Yoon Young-chan told reporters.&nbsp;

The 10-member group -- five top delegates and five supporting officials -- would fly to the North&#39;s capital Pyongyang on Monday afternoon before returning on Tuesday, Yoon said.&nbsp;

The delegation will then fly to the US to explain the result of the talks to officials in Washington, he added.&nbsp;

Suh is a veteran in dealings with the North. He is known to have been deeply involved in negotiations to arrange two previous inter-Korea summits in 2000 and 2007.

The isolated, impoverished North staged its most powerful nuclear test and test-fired multiple missiles last year, including some capable of hitting the US mainland, in defiance of UN sanctions.&nbsp;

The North&#39;s leader Kim and US President Donald Trump have also traded threats of war and personal insults, sending tensions soaring.

Moon, who advocates dialogue with the nuclear-armed regime, said last week that Washington needs to &quot;lower the threshold for talks&quot; with Pyongyang.&nbsp;

But the US has ruled out any possibility of talks before the North takes steps towards denuclearisation, and imposed what Trump hailed as the &quot;toughest ever&quot; sanctions on Kim&#39;s regime late last month.&nbsp;

On Saturday, a foreign ministry spokesman in Pyongyang called on the US drop any preconditions for talks.

&quot;The US is taking preposterous action by continuing to trumpet an insistence that it will not have dialogue unless a right condition is met,&quot; the unnamed spokesman was quoted as saying by the state-run KCNA news agency.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in will send a team of special envoys -- including Seoul's spy chief -- to the North on Monday to push for talks between Washington and Pyongyang on nuclear weapons

South Korean President Moon Jae-in will send a team of special envoys -- including Seoul's spy chief -- to the North on Monday to push for talks between Washington and Pyongyang on nuclear weapons. The delegation, announced by Moon's office on Sunday, is the latest chapter in a remarkable Olympics-driven detente between the two Koreas. An intense rapprochement saw the two foes march together at the South's Pyeongchang Winter Olympics that ended February 25, with the North's leader Kim Jong Un sending his sister as a special envoy to the event. Kim Yo Jong's appearance at the Games' opening ceremony made global headlines, marking the first visit to the South by a member of the Kim family since the end of the Korean War. Moon has sought to use the Pyeongchang Games to open dialogue between the US and the North in the hopes of easing a nuclear standoff that has heightened fears over global security. He chose five top officials -- including top national security advisor Chung Eui-Yong and spy chief Suh Hoon -- to visit Pyongyang on Monday, Moon's spokesman said. "The special delegates will have extensive discussions over issues including creating conditions for North-US talks to denuclearise the Korean peninsula and improving inter-Korea ties," Yoon Young-chan told reporters. The 10-member group -- five top delegates and five supporting officials -- would fly to the North's capital Pyongyang on Monday afternoon before returning on Tuesday, Yoon said. The delegation will then fly to the US to explain the result of the talks to officials in Washington, he added. Suh is a veteran in dealings with the North. He is known to have been deeply involved in negotiations to arrange two previous inter-Korea summits in 2000 and 2007. The isolated, impoverished North staged its most powerful nuclear test and test-fired multiple missiles last year, including some capable of hitting the US mainland, in defiance of UN sanctions. The North's leader Kim and US President Donald Trump have also traded threats of war and personal insults, sending tensions soaring. Moon, who advocates dialogue with the nuclear-armed regime, said last week that Washington needs to "lower the threshold for talks" with Pyongyang. But the US has ruled out any possibility of talks before the North takes steps towards denuclearisation, and imposed what Trump hailed as the "toughest ever" sanctions on Kim's regime late last month. On Saturday, a foreign ministry spokesman in Pyongyang called on the US drop any preconditions for talks. "The US is taking preposterous action by continuing to trumpet an insistence that it will not have dialogue unless a right condition is met," the unnamed spokesman was quoted as saying by the state-run KCNA news agency.

South Korea to send envoys to North on Monday

President Vladimir Putin announced an array of new nuclear weapons on Thursday, in one of his most bellicose speeches in years, saying they could hit almost any point in the world and evade a U.S.-built missile shield.

Putin was speaking ahead of an election on March 18 that polls indicate he should win easily. He said a nuclear attack on any of Moscow&#39;s allies would be regarded as an attack on Russia itself and draw an immediate response.

It was unclear if he had a particular Russian ally, such as Syria, in mind, but his comments looked like a warning to Washington not to use tactical battlefield nuclear weapons.

His remarks were greeted with scepticism in Washington, where officials cast doubt on whether Russia has added any new capabilities to its nuclear arsenal beyond those already known to the U.S. military and intelligence agencies.

The Pentagon, which recently announced a nuclear policy revamp based partly on the bellicose posture from Moscow, said it was not surprised by Putin&#39;s presentation.

&quot;We&#39;ve been watching Russia for a long time. We&#39;re not surprised,&quot; Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said.

&quot;These weapons that are discussed have been in development a very long time,&quot; she told a news briefing, without addressing any of Putin&#39;s specific claims of new capabilities.

John Rood, U.S. under secretary of defense for policy, declined to comment on U.S. intelligence on Russian capabilities.

But, addressing a forum in Washington, Rood generally played down Putin&#39;s presentation, saying: &quot;I think it&#39;s broadly consistent with things that have been stated before (by) Russian officials.&quot;

The Trump administration accused Moscow anew of violating a Cold War-era treaty which banned nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles).

&quot;President Putin has confirmed what the United States government has known all along, which Russia has denied: Russia has been developing destabilizing weapons systems for over a decade in direct violations of its treaty obligations,&quot; White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said.

Putin has often used militaristic rhetoric to mobilise support and buttress his narrative that Russia is under siege from the West. His 2014 annexation of Ukraine&#39;s Crimea boosted his ratings to a record high and he has cast his military intervention in Syria as a proud moment for Moscow.

On Thursday, he sought to back his rhetoric with video clips of what he said were some of the new missiles. The images were projected onto a giant screen behind him at a conference hall in central Moscow where he was addressing Russia&#39;s political elite.

&quot;They have not succeeded in holding Russia back,&quot; said Putin, referring to the West, which he said had ignored Moscow in the past, but would now have to sit up and listen.

&quot;Now they need to take account of a new reality and understand that everything I have said today is not a bluff.&quot;

Among weapons that Putin said were either in development or ready was a new intercontinental ballistic missile &quot;with a practically unlimited range&quot; able to attack via the North and South Poles and bypass any missile defence systems.

Putin also spoke of a small nuclear-powered engine that could be fitted to what he said were low-flying, highly manoeuvrable cruise missiles, giving them a practically unlimited range.

The new engine meant Russia was able to make a new type of weapon - nuclear missiles powered by nuclear rather than conventional fuel.

&quot;Nothing like it in the world exists,&quot; Putin told the audience. &quot;At some point it will probably appear (elsewhere) but by that time our guys will have devised something else.&quot;

Other new super weapons he listed included underwater nuclear drones, a supersonic weapon and a laser weapon.

In one of his video clip demos, a weapon appeared to be hovering over what looked like a map of the state of Florida.

&quot;It was certainly unfortunate to have watched the video animation that depicted a nuclear attack on the United States,&quot; State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told a news briefing. &quot;We don&#39;t regard that as the behavior of a responsible international player.&quot;

Putin&#39;s audience, made up of Russian lawmakers and other leading figures, frequently stood up and applauded his presentation, which culminated with the Russian national anthem being played.

Earlier in the speech, he had struck a very different tone, ordering officials to halve the number of Russians living in poverty by sharply boosting social and infrastructure spending in an obvious pre-election pitch to voters.

NATO measures &#39;&#39;useless&quot;

Putin, who has dominated his country&#39;s political landscape for the last 18 years, said the technological advances meant that NATO&#39;s build-up on Russia&#39;s borders and the roll-out of a U.S. anti-missile system would be rendered useless.

&quot;I hope that everything that was said today will sober up any potential aggressor,&quot; said Putin.

&quot;Unfriendly steps towards Russia such as the deployment of the (U.S.) anti-missile system and of NATO infrastructure nearer our borders and such like, from a military point of view, will become ineffective.&quot;

Steps to contain Russia would also become unjustifiably expensive and pointless, he forecast.

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said in a statement after the speech that the new weapons Putin had unveiled meant that NATO&#39;s missile defence shield, in Poland, Romania and Alaska and planned elements in South Korea and Japan was like an umbrella that was full of holes.

&quot;I don&#39;t know why they would now buy such an &#39;umbrella&#39;,&quot; Shoigu said, referring to Seoul and Tokyo.

NATO declined immediate comment.

The United States has long asserted that U.S. missile defenses are incapable of halting a large-scale attack by a major nuclear power, like Russia or China, due in part to the limited number of U.S. missile interceptors.

Instead, the technology is aimed at what the United States views as &quot;rogue&quot; states, such as Iran or North Korea.

&quot;They know very well that it&#39;s not about them. Our missile defense has never been about them,&quot; White said.

She added that the U.S. focus in addressing Russia&#39;s nuclear modernization was strengthening America&#39;s own nuclear forces to serve as a deterrent.

Lisbeth Gronlund, senior scientist and co-director of the Global Security Program of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said Putin&#39;s announcement of a missile with a nuclear-powered engine, even if true, would change little when it came to the Russian threat since Russia already has large numbers of ICBMs.

Putin also voiced concerns about a new U.S. nuclear doctrine, saying Russia&#39;s own doctrine was defensive and only envisaged the use of nuclear weapons in response to an attack.

Russia has repeatedly said it is keen to hold talks with the United States about the balance of strategic nuclear power and Putin put Washington and other nuclear powers on notice.

&quot;We will view any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, be it of small, medium or any force, as a nuclear attack on our country,&quot; he said.

&quot;Our response will be immediate. Nobody should have any doubts about that.&quot;

Putin said that Russia did not plan to attack anyone, however. Russia&#39;s growing military might was a guarantee of world peace, he said, designed to preserve a strategic balance of power on the planet.

Putin was speaking ahead of an election on March 18 that polls indicate he should win easily.

President Vladimir Putin announced an array of new nuclear weapons on Thursday, in one of his most bellicose speeches in years, saying they could hit almost any point in the world and evade a U.S.-built missile shield. Putin was speaking ahead of an election on March 18 that polls indicate he should win easily. He said a nuclear attack on any of Moscow's allies would be regarded as an attack on Russia itself and draw an immediate response. It was unclear if he had a particular Russian ally, such as Syria, in mind, but his comments looked like a warning to Washington not to use tactical battlefield nuclear weapons. His remarks were greeted with scepticism in Washington, where officials cast doubt on whether Russia has added any new capabilities to its nuclear arsenal beyond those already known to the U.S. military and intelligence agencies. The Pentagon, which recently announced a nuclear policy revamp based partly on the bellicose posture from Moscow, said it was not surprised by Putin's presentation. "We've been watching Russia for a long time. We're not surprised," Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said. "These weapons that are discussed have been in development a very long time," she told a news briefing, without addressing any of Putin's specific claims of new capabilities. John Rood, U.S. under secretary of defense for policy, declined to comment on U.S. intelligence on Russian capabilities. But, addressing a forum in Washington, Rood generally played down Putin's presentation, saying: "I think it's broadly consistent with things that have been stated before (by) Russian officials." The Trump administration accused Moscow anew of violating a Cold War-era treaty which banned nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles). "President Putin has confirmed what the United States government has known all along, which Russia has denied: Russia has been developing destabilizing weapons systems for over a decade in direct violations of its treaty obligations," White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said. Putin has often used militaristic rhetoric to mobilise support and buttress his narrative that Russia is under siege from the West. His 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea boosted his ratings to a record high and he has cast his military intervention in Syria as a proud moment for Moscow. On Thursday, he sought to back his rhetoric with video clips of what he said were some of the new missiles. The images were projected onto a giant screen behind him at a conference hall in central Moscow where he was addressing Russia's political elite. "They have not succeeded in holding Russia back," said Putin, referring to the West, which he said had ignored Moscow in the past, but would now have to sit up and listen. "Now they need to take account of a new reality and understand that everything I have said today is not a bluff." Among weapons that Putin said were either in development or ready was a new intercontinental ballistic missile "with a practically unlimited range" able to attack via the North and South Poles and bypass any missile defence systems. Putin also spoke of a small nuclear-powered engine that could be fitted to what he said were low-flying, highly manoeuvrable cruise missiles, giving them a practically unlimited range. The new engine meant Russia was able to make a new type of weapon - nuclear missiles powered by nuclear rather than conventional fuel. "Nothing like it in the world exists," Putin told the audience. "At some point it will probably appear (elsewhere) but by that time our guys will have devised something else." Other new super weapons he listed included underwater nuclear drones, a supersonic weapon and a laser weapon. In one of his video clip demos, a weapon appeared to be hovering over what looked like a map of the state of Florida. "It was certainly unfortunate to have watched the video animation that depicted a nuclear attack on the United States," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told a news briefing. "We don't regard that as the behavior of a responsible international player." Putin's audience, made up of Russian lawmakers and other leading figures, frequently stood up and applauded his presentation, which culminated with the Russian national anthem being played. Earlier in the speech, he had struck a very different tone, ordering officials to halve the number of Russians living in poverty by sharply boosting social and infrastructure spending in an obvious pre-election pitch to voters. NATO measures ''useless" Putin, who has dominated his country's political landscape for the last 18 years, said the technological advances meant that NATO's build-up on Russia's borders and the roll-out of a U.S. anti-missile system would be rendered useless. "I hope that everything that was said today will sober up any potential aggressor," said Putin. "Unfriendly steps towards Russia such as the deployment of the (U.S.) anti-missile system and of NATO infrastructure nearer our borders and such like, from a military point of view, will become ineffective." Steps to contain Russia would also become unjustifiably expensive and pointless, he forecast. Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said in a statement after the speech that the new weapons Putin had unveiled meant that NATO's missile defence shield, in Poland, Romania and Alaska and planned elements in South Korea and Japan was like an umbrella that was full of holes. "I don't know why they would now buy such an 'umbrella'," Shoigu said, referring to Seoul and Tokyo. NATO declined immediate comment. The United States has long asserted that U.S. missile defenses are incapable of halting a large-scale attack by a major nuclear power, like Russia or China, due in part to the limited number of U.S. missile interceptors. Instead, the technology is aimed at what the United States views as "rogue" states, such as Iran or North Korea. "They know very well that it's not about them. Our missile defense has never been about them," White said. She added that the U.S. focus in addressing Russia's nuclear modernization was strengthening America's own nuclear forces to serve as a deterrent. Lisbeth Gronlund, senior scientist and co-director of the Global Security Program of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said Putin's announcement of a missile with a nuclear-powered engine, even if true, would change little when it came to the Russian threat since Russia already has large numbers of ICBMs. Putin also voiced concerns about a new U.S. nuclear doctrine, saying Russia's own doctrine was defensive and only envisaged the use of nuclear weapons in response to an attack. Russia has repeatedly said it is keen to hold talks with the United States about the balance of strategic nuclear power and Putin put Washington and other nuclear powers on notice. "We will view any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, be it of small, medium or any force, as a nuclear attack on our country," he said. "Our response will be immediate. Nobody should have any doubts about that." Putin said that Russia did not plan to attack anyone, however. Russia's growing military might was a guarantee of world peace, he said, designed to preserve a strategic balance of power on the planet.

Putin, before vote, unveils 'invincible' nuclear weapons to counter West

North Korea and the United States clashed at a UN forum on Tuesday over their military intentions towards one another, with Pyongyang&rsquo;s envoy declaring it would &ldquo;never&rdquo; put its nuclear deterrent on the negotiating table.

Japan, well within reach of North Korea&rsquo;s missiles, said the world must maintain pressure on the reclusive country to rein in its nuclear and missile programs and now was not the time for a resumption of multi-party talks.

North Korea has pursued its weapons programs in defiance of UN Security Council sanctions and ignored all calls, including from major ally China, to stop, prompting a bellicose exchange of rhetoric between the North and the United States.

North Korea justifies its weapons programs, including its recent threat to fire missiles towards the US Pacific territory of Guam, by pointing to perceived US hostility, such as military exercises with South Korea this week.

US disarmament ambassador Robert Wood told a UN-sponsored Conference on Disarmament in Geneva US President Donald Trump&rsquo;s top priority was to protect the United States and its allies against the &ldquo;growing threat&rdquo; from North Korea and America was ready to use &ldquo;the full range of capabilities&rdquo; at its disposal.

The &ldquo;path to dialogue still remained an option&rdquo; for Pyongyang and it had the choice between poverty and belligerence on the one hand and prosperity and acceptance.

North Korea&rsquo;s envoy told the same forum the North&rsquo;s nuclear deterrent would never be up for negotiation, echoing Pyongyang&rsquo;s regular denunciation of US &ldquo;aggression&rdquo;.

&ldquo;The measures taken by the DPRK to strengthen its nuclear deterrence and develop inter-continental rockets is justifiable and a legitimate option for self-defense in the face of such apparent and real threats,&rdquo; diplomat Ju Yong Chol told the forum, referring to &ldquo;constant nuclear threats&rdquo; by the United States.

DPRK stands for the North&rsquo;s official name, the Democratic People&rsquo;s Republic of Korea.

Regarding joint US-South Korean military exercises that began on Monday, he warned: &ldquo;The ongoing military adventure would certainly add gasoline to the fire, driving the current tense situation to further deterioration.&rdquo;

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said pressure must be maintained until the North demonstrated it would give up its nuclear program.

&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not the time to discuss (the resumption of) six-party talks,&rdquo; Kono said, referring to stalled negotiations involving both Koreas, the United States, Russia, China and Japan.

&ldquo;It&rsquo;s time to exert pressure,&rdquo; he told reporters.

&#39;Crazy&#39; to share timeline

The head of the US military&rsquo;s Pacific Command said diplomacy was key.

Admiral Harry Harris was in South Korea to observe annual joint military drills with the South Korean military, which the North called a step towards nuclear conflict masterminded by &ldquo;war maniacs&rdquo;.

&ldquo;So we hope and we work for diplomatic solutions to the challenge presented by Kim Jong Un,&rdquo; Harris told reporters at a US air base in Osan, about an hour from Seoul, referring to the North Korean leader.

He said diplomacy was &ldquo;the most important starting point&rdquo; in response to the North&rsquo;s threat, when asked what actions by North Korea might trigger a preemptive US strike against it.

&ldquo;As far as a timeline, it would be crazy for me to share with you those tripwires in advance. If we did that, it would hardly be a military strategy,&rdquo; he said.

The United States and South Korea began the long-planned exercises on Monday, called the Ulchi Freedom Guardian, which the allies have said are purely defensive.

The drills involve tens of thousands of troops as well as computer simulations designed to prepare for war with a nuclear-capable North Korea.

The United States and South Korea are technically still at war with the North because their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty.

Delegations from about 20 countries spoke at the four-hour UN session, including Britain, France, Australia and South Korea, all of which criticized North Korea.

&ldquo;I would like to repeat the appeal to the DPRK to listen to the fact that there is no alternative to stopping the different provocations and to return to dialogue,&rdquo; South Korean ambassador Kim Inchul said.

&ldquo;We have never threatened the DPRK with any attacks and we have never promoted the use of force.&rdquo;

North Korea has pursued its weapons programs in defiance of UN Security Council sanctions and ignored all calls

North Korea and the United States clashed at a UN forum on Tuesday over their military intentions towards one another, with Pyongyang’s envoy declaring it would “never” put its nuclear deterrent on the negotiating table. Japan, well within reach of North Korea’s missiles, said the world must maintain pressure on the reclusive country to rein in its nuclear and missile programs and now was not the time for a resumption of multi-party talks. North Korea has pursued its weapons programs in defiance of UN Security Council sanctions and ignored all calls, including from major ally China, to stop, prompting a bellicose exchange of rhetoric between the North and the United States. North Korea justifies its weapons programs, including its recent threat to fire missiles towards the US Pacific territory of Guam, by pointing to perceived US hostility, such as military exercises with South Korea this week. US disarmament ambassador Robert Wood told a UN-sponsored Conference on Disarmament in Geneva US President Donald Trump’s top priority was to protect the United States and its allies against the “growing threat” from North Korea and America was ready to use “the full range of capabilities” at its disposal. The “path to dialogue still remained an option” for Pyongyang and it had the choice between poverty and belligerence on the one hand and prosperity and acceptance. North Korea’s envoy told the same forum the North’s nuclear deterrent would never be up for negotiation, echoing Pyongyang’s regular denunciation of US “aggression”. “The measures taken by the DPRK to strengthen its nuclear deterrence and develop inter-continental rockets is justifiable and a legitimate option for self-defense in the face of such apparent and real threats,” diplomat Ju Yong Chol told the forum, referring to “constant nuclear threats” by the United States. DPRK stands for the North’s official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Regarding joint US-South Korean military exercises that began on Monday, he warned: “The ongoing military adventure would certainly add gasoline to the fire, driving the current tense situation to further deterioration.” Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said pressure must be maintained until the North demonstrated it would give up its nuclear program. “It’s not the time to discuss (the resumption of) six-party talks,” Kono said, referring to stalled negotiations involving both Koreas, the United States, Russia, China and Japan. “It’s time to exert pressure,” he told reporters. 'Crazy' to share timeline The head of the US military’s Pacific Command said diplomacy was key. Admiral Harry Harris was in South Korea to observe annual joint military drills with the South Korean military, which the North called a step towards nuclear conflict masterminded by “war maniacs”. “So we hope and we work for diplomatic solutions to the challenge presented by Kim Jong Un,” Harris told reporters at a US air base in Osan, about an hour from Seoul, referring to the North Korean leader. He said diplomacy was “the most important starting point” in response to the North’s threat, when asked what actions by North Korea might trigger a preemptive US strike against it. “As far as a timeline, it would be crazy for me to share with you those tripwires in advance. If we did that, it would hardly be a military strategy,” he said. The United States and South Korea began the long-planned exercises on Monday, called the Ulchi Freedom Guardian, which the allies have said are purely defensive. The drills involve tens of thousands of troops as well as computer simulations designed to prepare for war with a nuclear-capable North Korea. The United States and South Korea are technically still at war with the North because their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. Delegations from about 20 countries spoke at the four-hour UN session, including Britain, France, Australia and South Korea, all of which criticized North Korea. “I would like to repeat the appeal to the DPRK to listen to the fact that there is no alternative to stopping the different provocations and to return to dialogue,” South Korean ambassador Kim Inchul said. “We have never threatened the DPRK with any attacks and we have never promoted the use of force.”

US, North Korea clash at UN forum over nuclear weapons

Pope Francis, in his annual &quot;state of the world&quot; address called on Monday for all nations to support dialogue to ease tensions on the Korean peninsula and to work for a legally binding ban on nuclear weapons.&nbsp;

In the speech, Francis also repeated his call for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians and respect for the &quot;status quo&quot; of Jerusalem following US.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump`s decision to recognize the city as Israel`s capital.&nbsp;

&quot;It is of paramount importance to support every effort at the dialogue on the Korean peninsula, in order to find new ways of overcoming the current disputes, increasing mutual trust and ensuring a peaceful future for the Korean people and the entire world,&quot; Francis said.&nbsp;

The pope addressed envoys from more than 180 countries a day before North Korea and South Korea are due to hold talks expected to address North Korea&#39;s participation in the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, which some diplomats see as a possible opening for discussions on other topics such as humanitarian issues and divided families.&nbsp;

Earlier this month, after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, asserted that he had a nuclear button at the ready, Trump tweeted that the US button was bigger and more powerful.&nbsp;

&quot;Nuclear weapons must be banned,&quot; Francis said, quoting a document issued by Pope John XXIII at the height of the Cold War and adding that there is &quot;no denying that the conflagration could be started by some chance and unforeseen circumstance&quot;.&nbsp;

Noting that the Holy See was among 122 states that last year agreed a United Nations treaty to ban nuclear weapons, he called for a &quot;serene and wide-ranging debate&quot; on disarmament.&nbsp;

The United States, Britain, France and others boycotted the talks that led to the treaty, instead pledging commitment to a decades-old Non-Proliferation Treaty.&nbsp;

At the individual greetings after the speech, Francis spent more time chatting with South Korea`s envoy, Jonghyun Jeong, than with most other diplomats.&nbsp;

Washington&#39;s new ambassador to the Vatican, Callista Gingrich, attended along with her husband, former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich.&nbsp;

Addressing climate change, Francis called for a &quot;united effort&quot; to remain committed to the 2015 Paris accord on reducing carbon emissions. French President Emmanuel Macron is trying to breathe new life into the agreement after Trump announced that the United States would withdraw.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

Francis, who has made the defence of migrants and refugees a major plank of his pontificate, warned against &quot;stirring up primal fears&quot; of newcomers.&nbsp;

&quot;There is a need, then, to abandon the familiar rhetoric and start from the essential consideration that we are dealing, above all, with persons,&quot; he said.&nbsp;

Migration has become a top political issue in countries including the United States, Italy and Germany.

At the individual greetings after the speech, Francis spent more time chatting with South Korea`s envoy, Jonghyun Jeong, than with most other diplomats.

Pope Francis, in his annual "state of the world" address called on Monday for all nations to support dialogue to ease tensions on the Korean peninsula and to work for a legally binding ban on nuclear weapons. In the speech, Francis also repeated his call for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians and respect for the "status quo" of Jerusalem following US. President Donald Trump`s decision to recognize the city as Israel`s capital. "It is of paramount importance to support every effort at the dialogue on the Korean peninsula, in order to find new ways of overcoming the current disputes, increasing mutual trust and ensuring a peaceful future for the Korean people and the entire world," Francis said. The pope addressed envoys from more than 180 countries a day before North Korea and South Korea are due to hold talks expected to address North Korea's participation in the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics, which some diplomats see as a possible opening for discussions on other topics such as humanitarian issues and divided families. Earlier this month, after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, asserted that he had a nuclear button at the ready, Trump tweeted that the US button was bigger and more powerful. "Nuclear weapons must be banned," Francis said, quoting a document issued by Pope John XXIII at the height of the Cold War and adding that there is "no denying that the conflagration could be started by some chance and unforeseen circumstance". Noting that the Holy See was among 122 states that last year agreed a United Nations treaty to ban nuclear weapons, he called for a "serene and wide-ranging debate" on disarmament. The United States, Britain, France and others boycotted the talks that led to the treaty, instead pledging commitment to a decades-old Non-Proliferation Treaty. At the individual greetings after the speech, Francis spent more time chatting with South Korea`s envoy, Jonghyun Jeong, than with most other diplomats. Washington's new ambassador to the Vatican, Callista Gingrich, attended along with her husband, former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. Addressing climate change, Francis called for a "united effort" to remain committed to the 2015 Paris accord on reducing carbon emissions. French President Emmanuel Macron is trying to breathe new life into the agreement after Trump announced that the United States would withdraw. Francis, who has made the defence of migrants and refugees a major plank of his pontificate, warned against "stirring up primal fears" of newcomers. "There is a need, then, to abandon the familiar rhetoric and start from the essential consideration that we are dealing, above all, with persons," he said. Migration has become a top political issue in countries including the United States, Italy and Germany.

In 'State of World' speech, Pope urges dialogue in Korea, nuclear ban

North Korea denounced on Wednesday US&nbsp;President Donald Trump&#39;s decision to relist it as a state sponsor of terrorism, calling it a &quot;serious provocation and violent infringement&quot;, North Korean state media reported.

Trump put North Korea back on a list of state sponsors of terrorism on Monday, a designation that allows the United States to impose more sanctions and risks inflaming tension over North Korea&#39;s nuclear weapons and missile programmes.

In North Korea&#39;s first reaction to the designation, a spokesman for the foreign ministry denied in an interview with the state media outlet KCNA, that his government engaged in any terrorism.

He called the state sponsor of terrorism label &quot;just a tool for American style authoritarianism that can be attached or removed at any time in accordance with its interests&quot;.

The US&nbsp;designation only made North Korea more committed to retaining its nuclear arsenal, the official said.

&quot;As long as the US&nbsp;continues with its anti-DPRK hostile policy, our deterrence will be further strengthened,&quot; he said, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name, the Democratic People&#39;s Republic of Korea.

&quot;The US&nbsp;will be held entirely accountable for all the consequences to be entailed by its impudent provocation to the DPRK.&quot;

The designation came a week after Trump returned from a 12-day, five-nation trip to Asia in which he made containing North Korea&rsquo;s nuclear ambitions a centerpiece of his discussions.

Announcing the designation, Trump told reporters at the White House: &quot;In addition to threatening the world by nuclear devastation, North Korea has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism, including assassinations on foreign soil.&quot;

Trump put North Korea back on a list of state sponsors of terrorism on Monday, a designation that allows the US to impose more sanctions and risks inflaming tension over North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programmes

North Korea denounced on Wednesday US President Donald Trump's decision to relist it as a state sponsor of terrorism, calling it a "serious provocation and violent infringement", North Korean state media reported. Trump put North Korea back on a list of state sponsors of terrorism on Monday, a designation that allows the United States to impose more sanctions and risks inflaming tension over North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programmes. In North Korea's first reaction to the designation, a spokesman for the foreign ministry denied in an interview with the state media outlet KCNA, that his government engaged in any terrorism. He called the state sponsor of terrorism label "just a tool for American style authoritarianism that can be attached or removed at any time in accordance with its interests". The US designation only made North Korea more committed to retaining its nuclear arsenal, the official said. "As long as the US continues with its anti-DPRK hostile policy, our deterrence will be further strengthened," he said, referring to North Korea by the initials of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. "The US will be held entirely accountable for all the consequences to be entailed by its impudent provocation to the DPRK." The designation came a week after Trump returned from a 12-day, five-nation trip to Asia in which he made containing North Korea’s nuclear ambitions a centerpiece of his discussions. Announcing the designation, Trump told reporters at the White House: "In addition to threatening the world by nuclear devastation, North Korea has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism, including assassinations on foreign soil."

North Korea calls terror relisting 'serious provocation' by Trump

Pakistan is more dangerous than North Korea as it does not have a centralised control on its nuclear weapons, making them vulnerable to theft and sale, a former top American Senator warned, describing both the nations as rogue states.

Larry Pressler, who served as chairman of the US Senate&#39;s Arms Control Subcommittee, feared that Pakistan&#39;s nuclear weapons might be used against the US, warning of the possibility of someone buying these nuclear weapons from generals or colonels.

As chairman of Senate Arms Control Subcommittee, Pressler advocated the now-famous Pressler Amendment, enforced in 1990.

<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>When a Pakistani embassy official asked Pressler if it is appropriate to categorise Pakistan and North Korea on the same page, the former Senator said &#39;Yes&#39;</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=When a Pakistani embassy official asked Pressler if it is appropriate to categorise Pakistan and North Korea on the same page, the former Senator said 'Yes'" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Aid and military sales to Pakistan were blocked, including a consignment of F-16 fighter aircraft, changing forever the tenor of the US relationships with Pakistan and India. &quot;Their weapons could be transported to the US fairly simply. Just as 9/11 was a very simple operation run by 20 or 30 people,&quot; he said.

&quot;The Pakistani nuclear bombs are not controlled. They are subject to sale or stealing and they could be easily gotten out of Pakistan to just about anywhere in the world,&quot; he said speaking at an event organised by The Hudson Institute, a top American think-tank.

&quot;I consider Pakistan more dangerous than North Korea in the sense that Pakistan doesn&#39;t have a centralised control of their nuclear weapons,&quot; Pressler said while discussing his latest book &#39;Neighbours in Arms: An American Senator&#39;s Quest for Disarmament in a Nuclear Subcontinent&#39;.

The former top American Senator, however, said he does not think that Pakistan&#39;s nuclear weapons are going to be used against India.

&quot;I think what North Korea needs is just a lot of attention and hand-holding. Pakistan is a different thing because you don&#39;t really have one person in charge. I think Pakistan is more dangerous to the US,&quot; he reiterated in response to a question.

With Secretary of State Rex Tillerson having just concluded his India trip wherein he sought to elevate India-US relationship, Pressler said the US should declare Pakistan a terrorist state.

&quot;We should declare Pakistan a terrorist state. We should put certain sanctions on Pakistan,&quot;&nbsp;he said.

Pressler said in his book he has made recommendations for some reforms to treat India at a higher level.

When a Pakistani embassy official asked Pressler, if it is appropriate to categorise Pakistan and North Korea on the same page, the former Senator said &quot;Yes&quot;.

&quot;From a nuclear dangerous point of view, I think they are both the rogue states in my opinion. They both do not have the interests of the US in mind. Pakistan has and is harbouring terrorists. And North Korea is a threat to the US,&quot; he said.

He said President Donald Trump may be one of the best presidents of US&nbsp;for India in terms of Indo-US relationship.

Trump, Tillerson and the secretary of defense are advocating closer relationships with India, he said.

&quot;They are coming close to declaring Pakistan a terrorist state or at least in effect. And they are very interested in moving toward more free trade with India of course,&quot; the former Senator from South Dakota said.

Moderating the session, former Pakistan&#39;s ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani said American officials have acknowledged that Pakistan has a stable command and control system over its nuclear programme. 
Haqqani, however, said, &quot;Pakistanis are living in a narrative that is purely Pakistani.&quot;

&quot;One should pay attention to what Pressler said that while he started out by being critical of the nuclear programme of everybody it was Pakistan&#39;s repeated inability to keep the promises that made him particularly critical,&quot; he said.

&quot;I&#39;m a Pakistani too and I would say that there is some merit to that argument where the Pakistanis want to recognise it or not. We have a tendency to over promise and then later on give excuses for why we couldn&#39;t keep our promise that&#39;s not just in relation to the nuclear issue, we have seen that over Afghanistan in the last two decades, he said.&nbsp;

Pakistan is more dangerous than North Korea becuase it does not have centralised control over its nuclear weapons, making them vulnerable to theft and sale, said Larry Pressler

Pakistan is more dangerous than North Korea as it does not have a centralised control on its nuclear weapons, making them vulnerable to theft and sale, a former top American Senator warned, describing both the nations as rogue states. Larry Pressler, who served as chairman of the US Senate's Arms Control Subcommittee, feared that Pakistan's nuclear weapons might be used against the US, warning of the possibility of someone buying these nuclear weapons from generals or colonels. As chairman of Senate Arms Control Subcommittee, Pressler advocated the now-famous Pressler Amendment, enforced in 1990. When a Pakistani embassy official asked Pressler if it is appropriate to categorise Pakistan and North Korea on the same page, the former Senator said 'Yes' × Aid and military sales to Pakistan were blocked, including a consignment of F-16 fighter aircraft, changing forever the tenor of the US relationships with Pakistan and India. "Their weapons could be transported to the US fairly simply. Just as 9/11 was a very simple operation run by 20 or 30 people," he said. "The Pakistani nuclear bombs are not controlled. They are subject to sale or stealing and they could be easily gotten out of Pakistan to just about anywhere in the world," he said speaking at an event organised by The Hudson Institute, a top American think-tank. "I consider Pakistan more dangerous than North Korea in the sense that Pakistan doesn't have a centralised control of their nuclear weapons," Pressler said while discussing his latest book 'Neighbours in Arms: An American Senator's Quest for Disarmament in a Nuclear Subcontinent'. The former top American Senator, however, said he does not think that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are going to be used against India. "I think what North Korea needs is just a lot of attention and hand-holding. Pakistan is a different thing because you don't really have one person in charge. I think Pakistan is more dangerous to the US," he reiterated in response to a question. With Secretary of State Rex Tillerson having just concluded his India trip wherein he sought to elevate India-US relationship, Pressler said the US should declare Pakistan a terrorist state. "We should declare Pakistan a terrorist state. We should put certain sanctions on Pakistan," he said. Pressler said in his book he has made recommendations for some reforms to treat India at a higher level. When a Pakistani embassy official asked Pressler, if it is appropriate to categorise Pakistan and North Korea on the same page, the former Senator said "Yes". "From a nuclear dangerous point of view, I think they are both the rogue states in my opinion. They both do not have the interests of the US in mind. Pakistan has and is harbouring terrorists. And North Korea is a threat to the US," he said. He said President Donald Trump may be one of the best presidents of US for India in terms of Indo-US relationship. Trump, Tillerson and the secretary of defense are advocating closer relationships with India, he said. "They are coming close to declaring Pakistan a terrorist state or at least in effect. And they are very interested in moving toward more free trade with India of course," the former Senator from South Dakota said. Moderating the session, former Pakistan's ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani said American officials have acknowledged that Pakistan has a stable command and control system over its nuclear programme. Haqqani, however, said, "Pakistanis are living in a narrative that is purely Pakistani." "One should pay attention to what Pressler said that while he started out by being critical of the nuclear programme of everybody it was Pakistan's repeated inability to keep the promises that made him particularly critical," he said. "I'm a Pakistani too and I would say that there is some merit to that argument where the Pakistanis want to recognise it or not. We have a tendency to over promise and then later on give excuses for why we couldn't keep our promise that's not just in relation to the nuclear issue, we have seen that over Afghanistan in the last two decades, he said.

Pak more dangerous than North Korea: Ex-US Senator

Top UN court today rejected an epic case brought by the tiny Marshall Islands against India for allegedly failing to halt the nuclear arms race.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its ruling in the country&#39;s case against India, the first to be decided, said it had accepted Indian arguments that ICJ&nbsp;should not have jurisdiction in the case, international news agency Reuters reported.

&nbsp;

The 16-judge bench was quoted as saying by Reuters&nbsp;that while the Marshall Islands may not be satisfied with progress on nuclear disarmament, it had failed to show that it has any ongoing legal dispute with India fit for the court&nbsp;to adjudicate.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

It later rejected the Marshall Islands&#39; suit against Pakistan on the same grounds. The third suit, against Britain, was still to be decided.

&nbsp;

The Pacific archipelago, whose territory was used for dozens of atomic-bomb tests by the United States after World War Two, had argued that nuclear powers weren&#39;t doing enough to adhere to the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

In a majority verdict by nine votes to seven, &quot;the court upholds the objection to jurisdiction raised by India,&quot; presiding judge Ronny Abraham was quoted as saying by AFP, and therefore the tribunal &quot;cannot proceed to the merits of the case.&quot;

&nbsp;

The tribunal found it lacked the jurisdiction in the case as there had been no prior recorded dispute or negotiations over the nuclear issue between the Marshall Islands and India.

&nbsp;

Majuro in 2014 accused nine countries of failing to comply with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

However, ICJ failed to take up cases against other countries --China, France, Israel, North Korea, Russia and the United States -- as they have not recognised the court&#39;s jurisdiction.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

It&#39;s also pertinent to mention that India and Pakistan have not signed the NPT, that &nbsp;commits all nuclear weapon states &quot;to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.&quot;

&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from AFP, Reuters)&nbsp;

The top UN court said it had accepted the Indian arguments that ICJ should not have jurisdiction in the case

Top UN court today rejected an epic case brought by the tiny Marshall Islands against India for allegedly failing to halt the nuclear arms race. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its ruling in the country's case against India, the first to be decided, said it had accepted Indian arguments that ICJ should not have jurisdiction in the case, international news agency Reuters reported. The 16-judge bench was quoted as saying by Reuters that while the Marshall Islands may not be satisfied with progress on nuclear disarmament, it had failed to show that it has any ongoing legal dispute with India fit for the court to adjudicate. It later rejected the Marshall Islands' suit against Pakistan on the same grounds. The third suit, against Britain, was still to be decided. The Pacific archipelago, whose territory was used for dozens of atomic-bomb tests by the United States after World War Two, had argued that nuclear powers weren't doing enough to adhere to the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In a majority verdict by nine votes to seven, "the court upholds the objection to jurisdiction raised by India," presiding judge Ronny Abraham was quoted as saying by AFP, and therefore the tribunal "cannot proceed to the merits of the case." The tribunal found it lacked the jurisdiction in the case as there had been no prior recorded dispute or negotiations over the nuclear issue between the Marshall Islands and India. Majuro in 2014 accused nine countries of failing to comply with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However, ICJ failed to take up cases against other countries --China, France, Israel, North Korea, Russia and the United States -- as they have not recognised the court's jurisdiction. It's also pertinent to mention that India and Pakistan have not signed the NPT, that commits all nuclear weapon states "to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament." (WION with inputs from AFP, Reuters)

International Court of Justice rejects Marshall Islands suit against India, Pakistan

Pakistan could be building a new uranium enrichment complex, an analysis conducted by IHS Jane&#39;s Intelligence, a British publishing company specialising in military, aerospace and transportation topics, has said.&nbsp; 
 
The analysis was conducted by Jane&#39;s Intelligence review using satellite images taken by Airbus Defence and Space on 28 September, 2015. The review was done again on 18 April, 2016, Indian news agency PTI reported today. &nbsp; 
 
&quot;The construction of a new site, based in the town of Kahuta some thirty kilometres east of Islamabad, provides fresh evidence of how Pakistan is seeking to boost its atomic arsenal,&quot; &nbsp;th PTI report says.&nbsp; 
 
The goal, however, is inconsistent with the principles of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) the country is seeking to join, said the analysis.&nbsp;The country is believed to have 120 nuclear weapons, more than India, Israel and North Korea. 
 
&quot;The area of interest is approximately 1.2 hectares and is located within the secure area of the Khan Research Laboratories (KRL), in the southwestern part of the complex,&quot; &nbsp;the report says.&nbsp; 
 
A 2015 report written by scholars at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Stimson Center also noted that Pakistan could increase its stockpile by 20 warheads a year and have the world&#39;s third largest in a decade. 
 
Karl Dewey, a proliferation analyst at IHS Jane&#39;s added: &quot;It is sited within an established centrifuge facility, has strong security and shows some of the structural features of a possible new uranium enrichment facility. This makes it a strong candidate for a new centrifuge facility.&quot;&nbsp; 
 
The structure of the site is along the lines of facilities built by URENCO, a nuclear fuel company operating several uranium enrichment plants in Europe, the analysis said. 
 
&quot;This may be more than coincidence as AQ Khan, considered by many to be the founder of Pakistan&#39;s nuclear programme, worked at URENCO before stealing centrifuge designs and returning to Pakistan,&quot; said Charlie Cartwright, an imagery analyst for IHS Jane&#39;s. 
 
 
(WION with inputs from PTI)

The country is believed to have 120 nuclear weapons, more than India, Israel and North Korea

Pakistan could be building a new uranium enrichment complex, an analysis conducted by IHS Jane's Intelligence, a British publishing company specialising in military, aerospace and transportation topics, has said. The analysis was conducted by Jane's Intelligence review using satellite images taken by Airbus Defence and Space on 28 September, 2015. The review was done again on 18 April, 2016, Indian news agency PTI reported today. "The construction of a new site, based in the town of Kahuta some thirty kilometres east of Islamabad, provides fresh evidence of how Pakistan is seeking to boost its atomic arsenal," th PTI report says. The goal, however, is inconsistent with the principles of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) the country is seeking to join, said the analysis. The country is believed to have 120 nuclear weapons, more than India, Israel and North Korea. "The area of interest is approximately 1.2 hectares and is located within the secure area of the Khan Research Laboratories (KRL), in the southwestern part of the complex," the report says. A 2015 report written by scholars at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Stimson Center also noted that Pakistan could increase its stockpile by 20 warheads a year and have the world's third largest in a decade. Karl Dewey, a proliferation analyst at IHS Jane's added: "It is sited within an established centrifuge facility, has strong security and shows some of the structural features of a possible new uranium enrichment facility. This makes it a strong candidate for a new centrifuge facility." The structure of the site is along the lines of facilities built by URENCO, a nuclear fuel company operating several uranium enrichment plants in Europe, the analysis said. "This may be more than coincidence as AQ Khan, considered by many to be the founder of Pakistan's nuclear programme, worked at URENCO before stealing centrifuge designs and returning to Pakistan," said Charlie Cartwright, an imagery analyst for IHS Jane's. (WION with inputs from PTI)

Pakistan could be constructing new nuclear site, say analysts

nuclear-weapons

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