6 minutes now past 12 and good afternoon and welcome back to mid-day on Minnesota Public Radio. I'm Gary Yankton. Well as you heard Pakistan drop the other shoe today Pakistan today announced it has conducted to underground nuclear test. Just two weeks after its neighbor and bitter rival India conducted 5 nuclear tests last night President Clinton tried to convince Pakistani leaders not to carry out these tests. He failed us sanctions will not automatically be imposed on Pakistan just as they've already been imposed on India joining us this hour to discuss the situation in South Asia is retired Admiral Eugene Carroll who is deputy director of the center for defense information in Washington, and we also invite you to join our conversation this our give us a call. If you have a question for Admiral Carol are Twin Cities number is 227-6002 276 thousand if you're calling from outside the Twin Cities, you can reach us toll-free at 1 800 to +422-828-227-6102 for 22828. First of all, the report on today's top. Sears national public radio's Mike Sullivan for more than 2 weeks the United States and other Western Nations have been trying to persuade Pakistan not to conduct its own tests in response to the five conducted by India earlier. This month was President Clinton and Britain's Prime Minister. Tony Blair had made repeated telephone calls to Pakistan's prime minister Nawaz Sharif urging restraint. But Sharif has been under growing political pressure at home to respond to what Pakistani see is India's nuclear provocation a poll taken earlier this week in Pakistan showed that 50% of those responding insisting on an immediate response with over 70% favoring response sometime soon earlier today and what may have been a pretext for carrying out its test Pakistan accused India of planning an attack on Pakistan's nuclear installations. The statement issued by the foreign office said that Pakistan has received credible information last night that an attack Mounted Before Dawn the Indian foreign Ministry today dismissed the report as malicious and completely baseless tensions between the two countries have been rising steadily in recent months in April Pakistan test the new long-range missile called the gauri which has an estimated range of 900 miles and they belong at 3 to almost every major city and neighboring India and his response to that test was muted but just over a month later detonated. It's 5 nuclear devices in the desert of Rajasthan less than 100 miles from border with Pakistan immediately following today's the last Pakistan's foreign Ministry issued a statement that said the gauri was already being kept with nuclear weapons to get what the statement called of benefiting reply to any misadventure by the enemy analysts are skeptical the Pakistan's new missile is ready for deployment with or without nuclear warheads in New Delhi word of Pakistan's pets pop pandemonium in the Indian Parliament opposition leaders accused prime minister vajpayee of starting a nuclear arms race in the region and demanded to know why Play the Indian intelligence establishment hadn't warned the government of the test for his part of fudge pie told lawmakers, but the tests have created a new situation in the region. We may have our differences. He said but if the challenges from abroad that challenge must be met by United government and a United Nation Michael Sullivan. NPR news, New Delhi following Pakistan's announcement this morning that it had conducted those nuclear test President Clinton issued the following statement in Washington first. I deplore the decision. By failing to exercise restraint and responding to the Indian test of Pakistan lost truly Priceless opportunity. To strengthen its own security to improve its political standing and in the eyes of the world. And although Pakistan was not the first to test two wrongs. Don't make a right. I have made it clear to the leaders of Pakistan that we have no choice, but to impose sanctions pursuant to the Glenn Amendment as is required by law. and up Thank you. Now I want to say again. It is now more urgent than it was yesterday. That both Pakistan and India renounce further test sign the comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and take decisive steps to reduce tensions in South Asia in reverse the dangerous arms race. I cannot believe that we are about to start the 21st century by having the Indian subcontinent repeat the worst mistakes of the 20th century when we know it is not necessary to peace to security to prosperity to National greatness or personal fulfillment, and I hope that the the determined efforts of the United States and our allies will be successful in helping the parties who must themselves decide how to define their future to diffuse tensions and avoid further errors President Bill Clinton speaking in Washington this morning. Once again retired Admiral Eugene Carroll joins us now from Washington. He's the deputy director of the center for defense information in Washington. We also invite you to join our conversation. Give us to call 227-6000 or 1-800. 242-282-8227 6001 800-242-2828 discussing the Pakistan nuclear. Test today in what that all means Admiral. Thanks so much for joining us this afternoon. Good to be aboard does do these tests actually increase the threat of nuclear war in South Asia, I believe so each Nation there has signal to the other that they are going to armed with nuclear capabilities and they have ongoing disputes primarily over Kashmir, but other issues, so when you have two contesting Nations that have fought three wars in the last 50 years arming themselves a nuclear weapons. You are not in a safe condition. Would they actually use these nuclear weapons? You think not if they are saying but we know that nations are not always logical or saying in their actions when passions flare and lives are being lost. You simply can't count on them not being used if they've invested the time and money and creating the capability. How big are the weapons if they were used what kind of scale of damage we talkin about here the largest test of the five by the Indians this month was around 43 kilotons, which would be just about three times the size of the Hiroshima bomb or twice the size of the Nagasaki bomb and each of those killed around a hundred thousand people when we used against us an urban area. They also tested some very small devices which may be related to a triggers for other devices for for thermonuclear devices. All you can say is there are no really small nuclear explosions in the Indian certainly demonstrated the capability to inflict a tragic blow against cities in in Pakistan. I have heard no estimate yet of the size of the explosions of the Pakistani test, but they're certainly large enough. They would easily destroy whole cities is going to kill a lot of people if it goes off in an urban area and it isn't just where it goes off as we know the contamination which they produce the pollution The Fallout can produce casualties miles and hundreds of miles away depending on the on the weather patterns. Did either of these nations need these weapons for their defense? Not in my estimation of they cannot create Arsenal's. Capable of dealing with China or Russia or the United States. They're creating Arsenal's which are primarily targeted or or structured to deal with each other. And that is I say simply increases the risk that one party or the other may feel their National survival is threatened in the NL resort to these weapons if they have them. Is there any danger that China will now involve itself more directly in the Indian Pakistan situation? Yes, there is a danger certainly China has leaned toward Pakistan for a good many years. And that's one of the strange thing. I'm glad you asked a question up until a month ago. There was a definite Trend toward the improved Chinese Indian relations. Both parties were seeking more constructive relationships and then suddenly Shores Fernanda is the minister of defense for India started screaming about China moving its nuclear forces closer to India moving its aircraft closer to India. Well as it turns out of course that was a cover or up. Justification in part for the Indian test. He was just getting the the story in place that we're threatened by China. That's why we have to test and yet. In so doing and of course, they did create a concern in China that our relationships are not going to improve. I don't think China will take any additional nuclear steps. They lived right next door and still do to Soviet Union Russia who possesses thousands of nuclear weapons and they have a relatively small Arsenal measured in the hundreds. They will certainly won't feel threatened by the size of the Indian nuclear program. Finally Admiral before we get to some callers here one last question for you. Is there any chance that both India and Pakistan have now proven to the world that they have nuclear capability will stop here not deploy nuclear weapons and potentially back off. Yes, there is a chance and it certainly should the item high on you. Coliseum bag policy of the the world Community to find ways in which to dissuade them from making weapons out of these devices. They've tested from putting them on thistles first and foremost. All of these are practical means of preventing the nuclear capability from becoming an active nuclear threat and what I regret of course is this probably involves incentives probably involves helping them in one way or another as a quid pro quo for their not pursuing further nuclear weapons capability. I'm not sure it will succeed. The two nations are are inflamed at this moment and then. They'll be a lot of pressure on to get nuclear weapons. If you heard Pakistan announced they'd already capped their Gowdy missiles with nuclear weapons. Will that is a complete this statement? They don't have that capability now and then it'll be awhile before they they could develop it but keeping them from proceeding to develop but it's an important thing. You know, I'd like to offer one more thought before we moved to this callers and their ideas. I heard President Clinton just a few moments ago on your broadcast say he deplored the Pakistani decision to test. Well, I deplore President Clinton's announcement in November last year that the United States would continue to make nuclear weapons the Cornerstone of our security indefinitely and that we reserve the right to make first use of nuclear weapons. Against Any Nation including non-nuclear States. I deplore that he is dedicated to maintaining the nuclear Triad of US forces the bombers the land-based missiles the sea base missiles that can bring nuclear weapons power against Any Nation on the face of the globe. We promised faithfully and legally in 1968 as one of the nuclear states to work for complete nuclear disarmament. We haven't done that. We are still depending upon our nuclear war fighting capability to exercise us hegemony around the world. And that is one of the real reasons that India and Pakistan are testing we have said are the United States nuclear weapons are important for National purposes for power for influence and and if you want to Be considered a major Nation. If you want to be considered a first-line nation, you'd better get your own nuclear weapons. And that's what they're proceeding to do in in part not because of each other but because of the the status of the nuclear arsenals in the world Eugene, Carol is with us. He is the deputy director of the center for defense information at base in Washington DC were talking this hour about the implications of the Pakistani announcement today that it too has now conducted nuclear tests this 2 weeks after its rival India are conducted its nuclear test. If you'd like to join our conversation this our give us a call 227-6020 area number to 276 Thousand Oaks had the Twin Cities. The number would be one 800-242-2828 David go ahead place and it's an honor to have a I don't care on board again. It is disingenuous for the United States the most heavily armed nation in the world and nation which has from its Inception from from from from the end of World War II depended upon nuclear weapons as its trump card it it's as it's a primary mode of deterrence against at that time Soviet aggression up until 1991 or so to dictate to the Indian government or the Pakistani government that somehow this should not assume reply to them. I think that there's a real problem here because our policy towards Pakistan certainly has been somewhat schizophrenic on one hand. We slapping was sanctioned. Can we find them trying to get a hold of these krytron for today triggering switches for nuclear weapon? Yeah. We are working to process of selling them a high-performance fighter aircraft. We employ them in trying to get weapons to the anti-soviet forces in Afghanistan. I think that in the absence of some kind of genuine security guarantee rendered by someone the United States perhaps in this case the Pakistani government was faced with no other real political choice, but to actually go ahead and test I say this because I would imagine that the plans to test these weapons did not start when India tested for love of the five nuclear test two weeks ago. I believe that their test the decision to actually make ready for testing was made shortly before Indian election or perhaps shortly after when the present government was making all these noises at how India was going to be a nuclear arms nation and envy this did this capability could really be ain't no one else but Pakistan, I think it's I think that's very important to understand. I think it's very difficult for us actually point a finger. All in that respect because of luxury we've had with our our nuclear capability and our geopolitical on geographical of status and role of is it there safe to assume that that Pakistan has been planning to do this for some while solutely just as India and then planning to do it, you know, the Indian made a major part of the preparations for these tests 3 years ago, but Workforce waited and not to proceed with a test see the political situation in India was very fluid. And so they didn't go ahead but when they decided is the caller said in connection with the election that they were going to declare their nuclear state is they really had everything in position in position to pop that test series and when they did that it was almost certain Pakistan was going to go ahead with a response not only two signal militarily that they were prepared. But to placate the Pakistani public who strongly wanted to signal to any of that. We're not defenseless short of total nuclear disarmament and you suggested earlier that the US should be moving toward that has promised to many many years ago. What what is a reasonable position for the United States to take Visa V these tests? I think we should try to cut our losses two ways one, of course by providing the Diplomatic and economic concessions in in the Incentives for both India and Pakistan to say that's as far as we need to go. Now we've we've signaled what we can do. We're willing to stop here provided that certain things are done and Endo. We should be willing to consider doing them. The other part of the US response clearly should be to lead the way on the part of the five nuclear states of the United States China Russia, France and Great Britain to live up to their commitment to work for nuclear disarmament. I just wrote these words about a week ago. I'd like to read them. I think they're Very pretty to do it your call or just said if the four most nuclear power in the world stands clear signals that nuclear weapons constitute the key elements of its military strength Security in political influence. How can non nuclear states such as India not seek similar capabilities. It is unrealistic and a illogical to believe that the nuclear states can hope to deny to all other nations forever the right to possess such power while we proclaim the right and intention to exercise it indefinitely and there is where the real hang-up is and India recognizes it they have not signed the non-proliferation treaty. They have not signed the non-com the comprehensive Test Ban Treaty because they say the five nuclear States cannot have special status when you agree in and disarm we will agree and disarm. That's so bring Minnesota senator Rod grams into the conversation center grams. Of course a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the chair of the Foreign Relations subcommittee on International operations. You have been Senator Gary. How are you doing? Just fine. I hope you were able to hear Admiral Carol's comments. Do you think a sir that the US finds itself and kind of a tenuous position here proclaiming that other states should stay away from nuclear weapons while we continue to rely so heavily on them disarmed ourselves with all the these weapons hoping the others would do the same. I think there was an old saying somebody said that there's going to be a time when the lion lays down with the lamb if that happens. You better be pretty sure that you're the lion but I do agree out of the United States is in a position now where we got to show some real leadership and how we're going to deal with this and I agree with the five nations in the nuclear. National Community right now. How are we going to address this? How are we going to bring these nations now into that Community what is going to be our overall foreign policy and not only with with these five countries, but what are we going to do with other countries that might have changed this type of technology in the future and maybe in the very near future understand the hasn't approved the comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has it we're hoping to bring it up. But I think the terminal with German helmets is not decided on when he's going to do it but he has mentioned something to the effect the president can pick and choose and there's got to be theirs numbers of other trees out there. That should also be coming before our committee that are being held up. So what he is saying is we need to see all of these and then we'll schedule him. I don't know exactly when that will happen. No, but I doubt there's going to be times within this Congress to take a look at it. But I hope we can consider, you know early in the next. Would you like to see it approved may be moved up to the front burner and I'll give him the concern over India and Pakistan when I think just the fact that India set off a number of devices that we were not aware of and could not detect does that mean that the train does the treaty itself would be ineffective if we can't detect all of those type of tests that are going on in the only reason we knew about them. It was because India told us that they did them. So does that make the Test Ban Treaty ineffective? So I think those are the questions we have to bring up, you know, the old saying trust but verify if we have this treaty we have to make sure that it is verifiable and I think those are some of the questions that'll you know, really hinge on the debate longer-term senator in an effort to I suppose prevent the deployment of weapons in South Asia, perhaps to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries. There is one theory of what that says. We should perhaps extend our our cooperation are nuclear umbrella. If you will. Other nations, they don't feel the need to develop their own. Would you favor that approach the hearing right after the India tests were completed and I will talk to the senator Biden of Delaware. Of course in these are some of the things we talked about after having this panel of experts talking to us on the expansion of this. And again, it's like I say, you're letting smoke out of the bottle. This technology is moving forward that these countries have today others are going to have it the question is how do we treat them? And do we quit the baby in the current box that we're in and look for new approaches and does that mean opening up, you know this nuclear Community inviting others in but at the same time while acknowledging they have this technology that we put the same owners and responsibility on them and how these are handled and I think that's very important. So we can't really anymore deny that this is happening that other countries are not going to have The capability of producing nuclear weapons, but are I think real debate has got to be how are we going to address this new reality? Thank you Senator. Appreciate you joining us. Thanks very much grams, who is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? We're talking this hour with the retired Admiral Eugene Carroll deputy director of the center for defense information and Washington discussing Pakistani nuclear tests that were conducted earlier. Today is two weeks after India conducted its nuclear tests and back to the phones Now Dave has a question for the Admiral go ahead Place Graham Center grams is left. Studying here in Minneapolis and them at all happy with unlike India, which has had some history of stability of Pakistan. I can't really hasn't had we have had a whole cities of nutrient eventions and Antica was and enjoying the fact that Atomic program is under the under the military establishment little lies with a swollen golf tournament very concerned about you know, these two countries Not really be hitting the way this shirt with these weapons in their hands and also the fact that the bike is on has a much closer relationships with countries like Libya and the key lock that has India in Atlanta. So this particular relationships and very close relationships. In fact that China has with Pakistan and I'll different state that the relationship that likes pain has been in China is just not leaning over towards Pakistan but so very close relationship and that really gives me a lot of cause for concern control over these weapons in Pakistan. Is that something that more than Dave should be concerned about one of the great principles of US security is that we always have civilian control over the US military. Why is that important? Institutional government for 220 years or whatever we're up to. Now. You cannot allow the military to become a Force unto themselves and and create the means of threatening the Liberty within their own country or threatening neighbors without concern for the policy of the government military must be subject to civilian and hopefully elected Democratic civilian control. I'd like to go back to Senator Graham's comments. I think it's only fair to say that when the persons who don't agree with you want to take a position. They they change what you said. No one no one has advocated bilateral or unilateral nuclear disarmament. This nuclear disarmament process must be a very orderly and well. Ordered process in which everybody takes responsibilities and actions in in concert. So we're not going to be lying down with the lion and trusting his good nature and that leads me to his comments about the verifiability of the comprehensive Test Ban. It has immensely the Talos verification provisions and end signing the Treaty of ratifying the treaty and bringing it into effect will do a great deal to create the confidence that we're not going to have Nations sneaking off and trying to conduct their own nuclear developments Admiral. How much can I get for a litter to the fact that it's kind of tough for us to be preaching to the rest of the world about nuclear weapons wooden tool in there such a key element of our defense strategy. Do you think they'll to some extent other nations use that as an excuse to do something they do otherwise do anyway? I'm not sure about that. I think India where this thing started earlier this month is very sincere that they do not recognize the right of five nations to maintain a nuclear Monopoly in a a status which gives them potential hegemony over the rest of the world and that they will join the process and adhere to it when and if it applies to all nations, I sincerely believe they mean that and I believe the Pakistan would not have conducted these tests or brought down on its head some of the sanctions that are going to be imposed if India hadn't tested so we have to start at the beginning and create a world community in which we all work toward the same goal and in my estimation the only way to be safe from Dangers of nuclear weapons is to get rid of the horrible things. I'm one of the 60 to Admirals and Generals around the world who signed the call for nuclear abolition in December of 1996 while we recognize that is a very complexion and the Detailed process it was going to take a good deal of time. We urged starting right now to work for the day when the world could enjoy a non-nuclear. Environment Tom your question for Admiral Carol, please. Should have a chance to address the questions to rephrase that. I have all that. Well if India and Pakistan are not major players and you know what? You killer of geopolitical dynamic. Do you think that looking back at history prior place a 19-14 the yard time triple long time. This case of Southeast Asia. Do you feel that that's going to have a how could you say it? Dangerous are approaching lakeeron. That's still a great. Organized Sovereign governments that would like to create the instability there anywhere. I can watch Brianna at there could be a situation of the cookie War over there. Any major war I agree that Iraq is a very uncomfortable neighbor. Iran has not moved very far from it's very strong and I Western policies, but I asked you what does nuclear do nuclear weapons have to do with dealing with those situations. We're not going to use nuclear weapons against Iraq or Iran. We took a terrible defeat in Vietnam the worst defeat in the history of the United States of America economic political and Military and we didn't find a means or a justification to use a single nuclear weapon. We aren't going to use nuclear weapons against those States. And so let's let's separate the two issues. How does the world Community deal with radical Nations such as a rag and and recognize that nuclear weapons have no utility at all in that process. Is it reasonable for us or is this just pure chauvinism on our part? Is it reasonable for us to assume that? We are more responsible in dealing with nuclear weapons and forgoing their use then I'm saying India or Pakistan would be I think there is an element of Truth in that and as an American and proud of our system institutions and having been a member of the group for 37 years that control these weapons. Yes, we were and are responsible and then maybe more so than others but now turn yourself around and put yourself in their shoes and recognize that we say nuclear weapons are the Cornerstone of our security and and we are going to use them indefinitely to protect our interests. How can they be sure that this will always be the case that they will not be at the mercy of the United States and in the other nuclear States at any time or policies change Bob your question, please I just want to point out that according to your Center for defense information that we're spending 27 billion dollars annually to maintain a nuclear arsenal of roughly 12400 nuclear warheads, 7150 our long-range nuclear weapons 950 are short-range nuclear weapons, and we have another 4300 in storage. And so my question is what steps you think the United States should take in terms of reducing of your weapons interesting way. And ironically you send her grams call for strong leadership on this issue, but then didn't provide any didn't suggest Cuts in a nuclear Arsenal. He didn't suggest ratifying the comprehensive nuclear-test-ban. So again, the question Admiral is what specific steps could you recommend on the way down to 80 small nuclear Arsenal? Thanks for reading the Monitor and if any of the other listeners would like to get the defense monitor from the center for defense information. I'll be happy to give you the particulars. I agree with you entirely that you have to start with very practical steps to change the whole climate of the nuclear posture. The United States should make an absolute and unequivocal declaration that we will never make first use of nuclear weapons. We always say that we have them for deterrence but we don't say we won't use them if we see a need so declare no first use with that is the reason we don't do that is is because for example if we were attacked with biological weapons and we signed an agreement like that that would take away our most effective response. Is that why we we don't sign a nuclear weapons are not our most appropriate response to chemical or biological weapons. We have conventional means to deal with such Prince that are far more useful in and rational than simply going in and dumping a nuclear weapon on on Bagdad that for example nuclear weapons have no military utility and we really got to quit thinking of them is as part of our security. They are part of our insecurities and identity with us the Practical steps. We should certainly start lowering the tension between the United States and Russia. We're the only two nations in the world that can destroy each other and most of the world and we ought to be taking immediate steps to dealer tar nuclear missiles get them off of the hair-trigger. Let's take the weapons off of the missiles instead of having them percs. They're ready for use in one minute. Let's d-mate the WarHeads. Let's then get serious about reducing the numbers of those. Weapons dismantling them under International supervision and in the United States and Russia lead the way down the nuclear ladder until finally we can engage all the other nations of the world with clear evidence that we intend to participate in a non-nuclear world when when the conditions permit should we also build an anti-missile defense system to protect ourselves as that process is working itself through body in a matter of 30 minutes to to devastate the United States. We don't have the means to create a defense against such an attack. The only hope for Security is to get rid of the weapons that constitutes a threat by the way, the Rogue nations are not a threat in this since they don't have the money. They don't have the technology. they don't have Foolishness to build a nuclear system which would threaten the United States? Because if they used it, it carries a return address so nuclear threat from Rogue States is clandestine action smuggling a nuclear weapon into the United States in the Hall of a tramp steamer or in a bale of marijuana. They would come out us if they ever got a nuclear capability not through the air but very quietly and covertly. Naruto your question, please. Call me. My second, is second person who called himself a Pakistani student. I don't think he's in his room because he bring in the TV on channel Pakistan Pakistan. I think that kind of picking up dirty, Thanks for your call Admiral for those of us who haven't been following this all very closely or as closely as we should could you give us a thumbnail sketch in a minute or two why it is at Indian Pakistan or is it the bitter Rivals? What what happened that made them so louder than that created the site are enmity between the two division of the subcontinent very arbitrarily by the British as they prepared to withdraw was done without consultation in without carefully working out the modus vivendi for the existence of two states on the subcontinent when the Raj was there the Muslims and Hindus got along because the Raj said they would and when Great Britain divided the subcontinent, he left many unresolved issues along the Border Lines not And most specifically the Kashmir question. It should have been dealt with much more objectively and and fundamentally so that when they left the continent the subcontinent to the Indigenous people they were in agreement that they had a fair Division and workable Arrangement. It's been the tensions along the border and particularly over Kashmir which produce the three Wars since Division and keeps tension. So high terms of conventional military balance are the two Nations pretty equal is infinitely Superior in conventional terms after all you have a billion people there and a fairly Advanced economy and Technology a technological base. Pakistan simply doesn't have the resources on the conventional level to deal with India. I am the one I want to congratulate and I'm so I can see how happy I am at the Admiral's comments because all along we've been hearing only raving and ranting at the India having detonated the done the best thing because you see a one-sided approach all the time when you leave the United States has the cement Arsenal in India is just is not saying that they going to have a blast of the nuclear explosion in the near future. Secondly. I want to bring out the point that citizen dependents. We've had four wars fought and not one of them has been started by India. And so I don't see any reason for us to panic so much that you know, goodness. These people have got the power now, what are they going to do? And are you at all concerned? clear capability to put things into people's mouth ahead. That is a possibility but I would only wish that good sense prevails. I'm not happy that any country has nuclear capabilities at all. I agree with the Admiral that the world should be nuclear-free and that's what we should work towards and that is Bored provocation that I think is being made public for even India have done what they are doing. Well given the fact that they first did this in 1974 to do something after 24 years. There has been some provocation which I think people are not looking at I have no comment with a call or a couple of relevant points. the India and Pakistan violated no convention no treaty. No rule of law in exploding those weapons underground. They were perfectly within the rights of a sovereign state to do so under the present state of the world Community when and if they join the non-proliferation treaty and the comprehensive Test Ban regime, then they would be in violation if they continue testing that's one reason. We should be trying very hard to bring them in second. Just a very interesting point India, which is blamed for starting. This process has now tested six nuclear device has the United States has tested 1072 of them. There seems to be a bit of a imbalance here to find India creating such a terrible threat to the world security. Jonathan your next go ahead place. I'd like to thank the Admiral for his comments. I think he's very intelligent. One thing of frustrates me is all these colors that are saying Iran and Libya and Iraq us not forget that till we should not be arrogant to think that we are more civilized than for example, Iran, Iraq, Iraq was our Ally for many years until they invaded a bigger but my main question is the Admiral is why do we asked Pakistan and India not to have nuclear weapons yet Israel, which of the countries that has very large conventional capabilities much better technology in Warfare and its surrounding states. They have nuclear weapons are CIA knows that our government knows it yet. We don't raise no alarm at what Israel have nuclear weapons and they may use it. If they feel that they are threatened to lose their country or their cities and I think that's a big danger also. Well, you put your finger on a very important point we have accepted Israel as a de facto nuclear State without protest or complain. It's obviously for domestic political reasons. There are very powerful influences within the United States it say we are committed to the existence of the state of Israel. We are the guarantors of its existence and we clearly would go to war if Israel were threatened with extermination. So we have simply look the other way knowing that the Israelis probably possess something in the order of two or three hundred fishing type nuclear weapons that they will not Give up and and I trust will not use short of a nuclear attack upon them build your question. Thank you Admiral, China now seems to have become an aggressive Nation. Do you do actually believe that they would abolish their nuclear weapons are Arsenal their warheads and the and disarmed, just trying to what actually disarm. Thank you. Thank you for the question because China is a dimension in this that we haven't noted. I think I disagree with your statement that China has become a very aggressive Nation China is by long history and tradition and internal looking Nation. It's looking at its own interests and its own people internally and there is no history of external aggression by the Chinese. We fought them in Korea. Because we got up to the Chinese border and they were not having any part of our military forces on their border, but I don't think the China at this time nor for the next 20 years presents a threat of external aggression against American interests the other part of your question, will they give up their nuclear weapons? They don't have that many and if Russia and the United States didn't have any and agreed that they wouldn't have any I'm certain China would enter into effective negotiations and arrangements to eliminate nuclear weapons. Finally there would be a great deal of internal or of the international Verification required we'd have to have a verification regime as the senator said that was very trustworthy, but that can be worked out in 10 or 15 years as we go down the path from the 30. 5000 weapons that exist today to 0 weapons that we'd like to have some time in the future. We are running out of time here. I wanted to ask you is there a danger by the US now of cording to US law will be imposing these tough sanctions against Pakistan they've been imposed on India. Is there any chance that the sanctions themselves will will lead to war causing such economic disruption in the area that the government leaders if for no other reason will decide to distract the population with a little military action then leadership and made it a matter of statutory process. And then some of the statutes are not well thought-through. I hate to see these automatic axes falling. Without fault to our longer-term interest. Yes, Pakistan particularly is going to be harm the setback economically by any extensive sanctions that we imposed and as a result there will be increased internal. Instability in Pakistan and certainly animosity at the United States and India for having brought it on them. I wish that we could be more four-sided and Constructive in our arrangements with other nations not just execute such and such a statute looking into your Nable crystal ball. Do you expect Pakistan and India to essentially fries and stop now for a while or are they going to go ahead and deploy these nuclear devices As Weapons United States that will play a leading role in what we offer them as reasons not to enter into this foolish process of competing in nuclear armaments. Thank you so much for joining us Admiral. Really? Appreciate it. Thank you for calling retired Admiral Eugene Carroll, who is the deputy director of the center for defense information in Washington, DC? Well, we have run out of time like to thank you for joining us on our midday program. Today. We're going to be rebroadcast in this conversation with the animal Carol at two 9 tonight. So I get a second chance to hear his views on the meaning of the implications long-term implications of today's announcement out of Pakistan that the pakistanis like the Indians before them have in fact touched off some nuclear tests that will be at 9 tonight. Now some of you were expecting to hear from Minnesota his story and high bourbon today. We've been promoting that program because of the developments on the nuclear front what we've done here is reschedule the Cybermen conversation until noon tomorrow. So you get a second chance to hear that tomorrow and I do hope you'll be able to find it pretty pretty interesting Cybermen over the noon hour tomorrow at 11 tomorrow and opportunity to talk with gubernatorial candidates. Skip Humphrey one week out from the Dfl State Convention programming on Minnesota Public Radio is supported by the Pillsbury company Foundation caring for the community by giving kids a loving lift. That does it for Midday Gary I can hear. Thanks so much for tuning in. Hope you can join us tomorrow. It's Lynne Rossetto Kasper this week on The Splendid Table. It's a look at the New Joy of Cooking with its editor Maria Guarnaschelli. Nothing's without controversy, you know join us Saturday at 2 and Sunday at 7 on Minnesota Public Radio know FM. 91.1, Minnesota Public Radio. We have a sunny Sky. It's 84 degrees at Contra W FM 91.1 Minneapolis. And st. Paul should be sunny all afternoon. And the Weather Service says he could get close to 90° yet this afternoon clear tonight with an overnight low in the upper 50s and then tomorrow partly cloudy sky is forecast with a high in the low 80s.