Nuclear Detente in South Asia?

When I was in college at Lawrence U. in Appleton, Wisconsin, we had this political science professor from Mumbai (Bombay) who spoke just like John Hausman from the Paper Chase. His voice was slightly English in accent but mostly it just oozed centuries of family membership in the elite of India that might even have pre-dated the British "Raj". As Freshmen, we were scared to death of him. One day he asked us, "Does anyone know what is important about today?" Nervously a hand went up....."Its the 25 anniversary of the assasination of JFK?" (which it was by the way, pretty sharp for a frosh). "No..." said the professor, "Although I suppose that's improtant tooo. There was an election in PakiSTAN today. What do you dooo here in the Midwest just sit around and watch the corn grow?" (I thought that was unfair since most students at LU were from Chicago, Minneapolis and Milwaukee and this guy had lived for over 30 years in Appleton, Wisconsin and he was calling us hicks?) In his defense the new Prime Minister of Pakistan was Benizir Bhuto, the first woman head of government in any Muslim country and only the second woman head of government in the world.

So, does anyone know what is important about today?

India and Pakistan are holding a summit in New York City (note: not Washington, D.C.). You can read the BBC.com story about it here. This peace process has survived a leadership turnover in India and several minor border clashes in Kashmir. This is a HUGE development in the world. The nuclear standoff between these two countries is dangerous beyond measure. That they are talking and saying nice things about each other is fantastic! I only hope Musharraf can avoid being killed for his trouble.

I'm very interested to read what von Brawn thinks of it. My take is that India and Pakistan have looked into the abyss and decided they like living more than they hate each other. In other words this could another case where we have to chalk one up for Mutually Assured Destruction.

While I'm waxing speculative about South Asia, I'll suggest that India should get a permanent seat on the Security Council. After all China has one and India and China have serious strategic differences in South Asia and South East Asia. According to the original logic of the Security Council, both should be represented. By the way, I think putting Japan on the Security Council wouldn't be a bad idea either. Germany, I'm not so sure. The EU/Western Europe already has two votes on the S.C. Would adding Germany really incorporate new strategic interests? Anyway, India is clearly a responsible nuclear nation that also has a powerful conventional army, navy and airforce capable to projecting power throughout the Indian Ocean (India has aircraft carriers which China does not). India has its own strategic agenda independent of the US and in potential conflict with China. So they should be on the S.C.

Comments? Discussion?