ISLAMABAD, June 19: Disparities in the international strategic nuclear order were up for discussion at a seminar organised by the Centre for International Strategic Studies (CISS) at a local hotel.

International and local nuclear strategists were in a consensus that international nuclear regime promotes access to nuclear energy to certain states, while restricting it to select other states.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has traditionally been considered a guard against nuclear proliferation and towards nuclear disarmament; however, the international order has dramatically changed since 1968.

“The international non-proliferation regime is highly discriminatory and based on double standards. Efforts must be made to strengthen the NPT regime but somehow the original five (the US, UK, Russia, France and China), who are the core of NPT, do no want to recognise new realities,” former ambassador to the US, Riaz Khokhar, noted.

The philosophy propagated by the dominant strategic international order is that nuclear weapons are dangerous, and a hypothetical attack will lead to disaster causing the international economy to sink, if not a complete annihilation of the states that decide to use this as a last measure.

"The use of nuclear capability is an extreme measure, there is no victory in a nuclear war," added professor Zafar Iqbal Cheema.

Yet, certain powerful states have acquired them to fend of threats from unfriendly states, while discouraging what are perceived to be rouge states, such as Iran and North Korea, through economic and political sanctions.

“The notion that deterrence with nuclear weapons was legitimate in some regions and not in others and that there was an inherent difference in the security of the developed world and security of developing states, undermined and continues to undermine the legitimacy of the non-proliferation regime,” argued Shireen Mazari, PTI leader and MNA.

A crisis prone environment forces states to act in an aggressive manner. For Pakistan, the driver of nuclear escalation has been largely the Indian hostility.

From the stand-off at Kargil to Mumbai attack in 2008, the two nations build up their arsenal to deal with threat perceptions.

“It is well known that Pakistan has been against the status-quo in regard to the existing nuclear order. Whatever flexibility or change takes place in the present unfair and rigid international nuclear regime, Pakistan stands to benefit and even be vindicated,” stated Ali Sarwar Naqvi, Executive Director of CISS.

Since many securities remain unaddressed between the South Asian neighbours, chances of tension and conflict remain.

Furthermore, a potential build-up of nuclear fissile material by Iran and Israel, and in the Korean peninsula, will require the global nuclear order to ensure an effective guarantee that in no circumstances weapons are deployed and that the deterrence regime evolves to take into account the anxieties of the less powerful.

The conference was attended by members of academia, nuclear policy making establishments, diplomats and students from prominent universities in Islamabad.