Editorial: Nuclear war not an option

Friday, May 31, 2002 | 5 a.m.

The last time people the world over became truly frightened about nuclear war was in 1983, but the basis for the fright was fiction -- a made-for-TV movie titled "The Day After." Today the fear is back and this time it's for real as India and Pakistan brace for war once again over the disputed state of Kashmir. Unlike the wars of 1947-1949, 1965 and 1971, the countries now are alarming the world with threats of using nuclear weapons. The threats are not idle, as each successfully tested nuclear bombs in 1998 and each have demonstrated ballistic missile capability.

President Bush is right to be sending Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Pakistan and India this week. The trip will be preceded by a visit from Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Last week British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was in the region. Diplomacy at this level must continue. Additionally, the U.N. Security Council should assume a far greater role.

Enmity between Pakistan and India has been nonstop since 1947, when they became independent of British rule. Kashmir, north of India and sharing its western border with Pakistan, had been virtually autonomous under British rule. After independence, the state's Hindu ruler chose to align with predominantly Hindu India, even though most citizens of Kashmir were Muslim.

With talk of the long-bloody dispute turning nuclear, it's time for unceasing diplomacy. Immediately, Gen. Pervez Musharraf should be persuaded to adopt a "no first use" doctrine, as has India. And while India should defend itself against terrorist attacks, it should not use them as justification to risk nuclear war. Terrorists would see this as an opportunity to bring it on, particularly if it's true, as India maintains, that al-Qaida is active in Kashmir.

Ideally, diplomacy would lead to an agreement that at some date in the future, the people of Kashmir, in a free election, could decide whether to align with Pakistan or India, or whether to become independent. The U.N. Security Council has called for such elections three times. Firm agreements set for the future have proven successful in the past, such as the treaties regarding Hong Kong's alignment with China and the Panama Canal being turned over to the Panamanians. It's time for the bloody dispute to end and the best chance is for the United Nations and diplomats from its individual member countries to work round-the-clock in moderating a lasting agreement.