TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | Time CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Advertisement

India, Pak uphold pact on not hitting each other’s nuclear installations

Signed in 1988 and in force since January 1991, the Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack against Nuclear Installations and Facilities commits both nuclear-armed neighbours to refrain from targeting each other’s civilian nuclear infrastructure
Photo for representation only.
Advertisement

For over four decades, India and Pakistan have upheld an agreement not to attack each other’s civilian nuclear facilities — an arrangement that has endured periods of armed hostilities, including the recent skirmishes between May 7 and 10.

Advertisement

Signed in 1988 and in force since January 1991, the Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack against Nuclear Installations and Facilities commits both nuclear-armed neighbours to refrain from targeting each other’s civilian nuclear infrastructure. As part of the agreement, the two countries exchange lists of their nuclear installations every year on January 1.

Advertisement

However, the terror attack in Pahalgam on April 22 has led both countries to re-evaluate their existing bilateral agreements. India has put the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. Pakistan, in response, said it “shall exercise the right to hold all bilateral agreements with India, including but not limited to the Simla Agreement, in abeyance”.

On Monday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a televised address, warned that “India will not tolerate any nuclear blackmail” — a reference to Pakistan’s repeated nuclear threats.

India’s draft nuclear doctrine underscores deterrence based on the threat of inflicting “unacceptable damage”, while maintaining a “No-First Use” policy.

Advertisement

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement