The Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Islamabad in collaboration with the Liberal Forum Pakistan organised a Roundtable political consultation on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) on Monday, March 13, 2000 at a local hotel in Islamabad. The objective of this consultation was to solicit and bring forward the views of major political parties on the issue of signing CTBT. 

Shahrukh Rafi Khan from SDPI initiated the proceeding.

Dr. Shireen Mazari, a nuclear and security expert introduced the CTBT. She said the CTBT is a follow-up of the Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) of 1963 that Pakistan has signed and ratified. The CTBT does not distinguish or discriminate between nuclear and non-nuclear weapon states. It does not deal with nuclear weapons only with explosive nuclear testing. It allows cold testing and nuclear simulation for all states able to do so. The CTBT will enter into force only after ratification by 44 designated states. Out of these 44 states, 41 have signed the CTBT only Pakistan, India and 

North Korea have not. Its verification regime is designed to monitor only the occurrence of nuclear explosions and that too is a lengthy procedure.

Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, eminent physicist and peace activist argued for as to ‘Why Pakistan should sign the CTBT now'. The CTBT does not prohibit from possessing nuclear weapons and it does not need to test because it possesses only simple fission uranium weapons. He referred to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, which belonged to this category, was never tested. Pakistan can test again – though it should not and should not have done so in the first place–  if India tests; there exists a clear escape clause in the text of the CTBT that allows withdrawal in the event of ‘extraordinary events’ that might jeopardise a country's ‘supreme interests’. Pakistan will not be subjected to any intrusive verification procedure of its nuclear weapons facilities. And it can hope to gain a modest economic and political dividend by signing the CTBT. India loses more by not testing. It has a much more ambitious programme than Pakistan's – that includes boosted fission and thermonuclear weapons. In contrast to India, apart from a few dissenting individuals, the Pakistani nuclear establishment is generally equivocal, and even supportive, of the CTBT. If India signs before Pakistan, all advantages will be lost. Disregard the uninformed, war-mongering right-wing opposition that does not know or represent the interests of the Pakistani people. Therefore, Pakistan should sign the CTBT now.

Imtiaz Alam, Editor Current Affairs, daily The News said that CTBT is not an issue as far as peace lobby is concerned. It is the agenda of hawks, which is being politicised in religio-sovereignty jargon by lobbies who want Pakistan to be isolated from the world. He said the present government does not seem serious in signing the CTBT, otherwise why would it announce that it wants to achieve a national consensus? Pakistan did not seek a national consensus for putting its signature on the Chemicals Weapons Convention that is far more intrusive treaty. How would this government assess that now it has attained the national consensus? Pakistan does not have teeth to match India in the arms race. Its survival lies in economic progress and social reconstruction.

Mr. Akram Zaki who belongs to PML-N, but who chose to speak as a professional here, said that Pakistan should take its time to decide about the CTBT because it is linked to the over-all non proliferation regime. In case, Pakistan wants to build tactical nuclear weapons, it may not be easy for Pakistan to get out of the CTBT. His presentation got flak from discussants that regarded his ideas of a tactical nuclear threat irrelevant in the case of

Mr. Farhatullah Babar represented the PPP and emphasised that we should take into account other kind of securities other than the military security.

He said national security depends on the rule of law, fairness and national cohesion. Mushroom growth of 'Jehadi' groups and dictatorship is a much bigger threat to national security than signing the CTBT, which is not a discriminatory treaty.

Director disarmament, Mr. Abdul Bsit represented the Foreign Office of He said the present government would take a decision in the best interests of the country and agreed with earlier speakers that CTBT is not a discriminatory treaty.
A heated discussion round the table followed the presentations.

The author is an advocacy officer with the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI), Islamabad.