Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: If India doesn’t comply, U.S. must flex its muscle

Thursday, May 14, 1998 | 10:53 a.m.

"INDIA REMAINS committed to a speedy process of nuclear disarmament leading to a total and global elimination of nuclear weapons." So sayeth the federal Cabinet in New Delhi, India.

Who are they kidding?

For the past couple of years the world has experienced one less phenomenon of the Cold War designed to not only shake us in fear but, actually, shake us where we live. Especially when we live in Las Vegas or some other locale adjacent to a nuclear testing facility. That relative respite ended Monday when India, one of the most populous countries in the world with hunger as its calling card and intelligence as its saving grace, decided to set off three underground nuclear devices.

And with those blasts it awoke a world which, justifiably or not, believed that the worst of the nuclear age might have passed. It also awakened its neighbor and ever-ready enemy, Pakistan, which has already vowed to step up the arms race in that part of the world by blasting a few nuclear caps of its own. After all, the thinking goes, if India thinks it can get away with ruining the world's reverie, well, think again, because it has another think coming.

No one should be surprised in the least that India has exposed its nuclear capability because the world has forever known or, at least, taken for granted that a country the caliber of India certainly had the brainpower and technological capability to build and explode its own atom bombs. What has caught most people by surprise, though, is that it demonstrated its willingness to test them and, by doing so, incurred the wrath of the rest of the world. That is not like the India the world has known.

So what has changed? The most obvious difference is the new government in India, which has an extremely nationalistic approach to life in that part of the world. If it were making a new flag, it would read "Don't Tread on Me" or some other such saying to ward off any would-be attackers or defilers of her way of life. The trouble is, though, there hasn't been any saber- rattling over there for some time. There will be now.

Other than some very nationalistic Indian responses, most of the reaction to the explosions has been -- what shall we say? -- less than enthusiastic. In fact, there hasn't been one country that has spouted off the usual Cold War verbiage about a country's right to pursue its own territorial needs, including defensive activities such as blowing up three nuclear bombs. To a person, the people looked to for reaction gave damning comments concerning the stupidity of such actions and the threat to world peace that they represented. More than one threatened to re-start their own nuclear testing programs. Even Russia, one of India's biggest benefactors in the arms-supply business, expressed disappointment in its client state, claiming that India had "let us down."

So, what do we do about all this? Back up --- should we, the United States, do anything about India's entrance into the nuclear testing club? There are many in this country who think that, one, we don't have a role to play in this drama and, two, even if we did, it is none of our business. I am proud to disagree with that fuzzy-headed thinking.

In fact, I don't believe President Bill Clinton went far enough Tuesday in his reaction which, I understand, to official and unofficial (meaning CIA) Washington was based on complete surprise. Recalling the U.S. ambassador was a no-brainer. And calling on India to "announce that it will conduct no further tests and that it will sign a comprehensive test ban treaty now and without conditions" was the least he should demand. Of course, the veiled threat sent to Pakistan was not lost on those who heard the president say, " I also urge India's neighbors not to follow suit, not to follow down the path of a dangerous arms race."

Good words and good warning. But we should do more. Of course, if India succumbs to the logic of the United States' position, then there is no need for further action. If it ignores President Clinton and the wishes of every thinking American who yearns to avoid another arms race and global nuclearization, then we must be prepared to take the next step.

The United States is the only superpower on Earth. While some may be ashamed of that supreme position of authority -- military and moral -- I take a different view. We have an obligation and responsibility to generations of Americans and other freedom-loving people who will inherit this Earth to do what we can to ensure that the world they come into is safe. That means no nuclear weapons.

If our status as sole superpower is good for anything, it is good for making sure the lesser countries on this planet pay heed, either to our reasonable requests or our more than reasonable military threats.

Saddam Hussein has called our bluff a couple of times and backed down when he realized that we were fully prepared to back up our diplomacy with shots that could be heard and watched around the world. That argument was over the potential proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. In India's case, the nuclear bombs are here and now, and so is the time to put a stop to any further actions that could grow them into world-menacing weapons.

India and any other country that thinks about disturbing the peace of a more tranquil world must know that there are consequences and that the United States is willing to mete them out.

But let's not rush in just yet. Give the president and the rest of the world the time needed to talk some sense into a country that has never displayed a lack of good sense before. Only if and when reason fails to persuade should we go to plan B.

And we must never be afraid to use that plan when it is in our national interests to do so.