The Stability of Nuclear Deterrence in South Asia: The Clash between State and Antistate Actors
T he September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mainland have transformed calculations about the threats posed by nonstate actors, especially those who largely are inspired by a global, antistate ideology such as al-Qaeda's panIslamist vision. Since 11 September 2001 the old threat of nuclear holocaust has acquired a new dimension-the possible possession and use of nuclear weapons by terrorists and extremist movements. Structural designs for nuclear weapons and other such materials were confiscated from underground hideouts of the alQaeda terrorist group in Afghanistan. The stability and instability of nuclear deterrence between India and Pakistan also has been a major issue of concern since the late 1980s. Proponents of nuclear deterrence in South Asia who argue that the introduction of nuclear weapons has prevented the outbreak of a largescale conflict between India and Pakistan, generally belong to the "State-as-arational-actor" school of thought. Others worry about the new threat against the stability of nuclear deterrence in South Asia posed by the intrusion of nonstate actors, or perhaps, more accurately, "antistate actors." Many perceive their agendas as "irrational" in their ideological orientation (Wahabism today as was Maoism in the 1960s).' Because their ultimate stated objective is to destroy the modern international system--a system based on nation-states-they should, therefore, be described as antistate actors in nature and purpose. Why should we pay greater attention to the role and perspective of antistate actors in our discussion of the stability of nuclear deterrence in South Asia?
Nuclear Ethics? Why Pakistan Has Not Used Nuclear Weapons … Yet
Why has Pakistan not used nuclear weapons since Islamabad first tested the bomb in 1998? Despite the outbreak of the Kargil War in 1999, the recurrence of military crises, and repeated threats of nuclear first use by the Pakistani Army, nuclear restraint has reigned. Nuclear restraint in South Asia is both a development to celebrate and a puzzle to explain. Conventional wisdom in both Pakistan and the United States credits the power of mutual nuclear deterrence for the nonuse of nuclear weapons in the past India-Pakistan military crises and the 1999 Kargil War. For instance, according to Naeem Salik, “nuclear deterrence in Kargil was important since the conflict remained very confined to a portion of a LoC and did not even expand horizontally.” Shireen Mazari, director general of an Islamabad-based think tank, argues that “nuclear deterrence is making an all-out war between India and Pakistan a receding reality.” American scholar and former government official Ashley J. Tellis contends that “a reasonably high degree of deterrence stability currently exists within the greater South Asia region... .It is not unreasonable to expect that the acknowledged presence of nuclear weapons on all sides would inhibit any interactive sequences that could lead to serious forms of deterrence breakdown in the future.”
Police and Political Violence in the 1960s and 1970s: Germany and Italy in a Comparative Perspective
Notwithstanding the significant differences between the German and Italian police models (federal and civil vs. centralised and militarised), in both countries the confrontation with the protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s had a profound impact on police conceptions and public order strategies. Police forces in some German federal states (West Berlin) followed a hard line until the late 1960s, while in others (Munich, Hamburg) reforms to the Weimar-centred police intervention tactics took place beginning in the early to mid-1960s. In Italy, traditional police conceptions and strategies remained largely unchanged and re-emerged in 1968. Here, a movement from within the police led to the demilitarisation and unionisation of the state police in 1981. In both countries, fighting left-wing terrorism in the 1970s stimulated technical modernisation and enhanced the centralisation of the police. In critical response to police tactics, in the late 1970s Germany police matters were increasingly perceived as a concern not only of the state but of civil society—even if policing remained a highly contested terrain. In Italy, such matters largely remained state concerns in which only politicians and internal security specialists were entitled to intervene.