Scilla Elworthy, Director of the Oxford Research Group, argues that British Prime Minister Tony Blair could play a key role in diffusing the world's most pressing nuclear weapons issue.

Reactions to India and Pakistan testing nuclear weapons were almost universally of horror and disgust. With a little time for reflection, however, a more constructive response may be possible. 

We need to recognize that we are at a turning point in history. The choice is no longer how many nuclear weapons we in the nuclear club can have. The choice is, quite starkly, between arranging for the elimination of nuclear weapons, or anticipating their proliferation to many other countries and sub state groups. In spite of strenuous and laudable efforts by the western powers, especially the United States, it is no longer very difficult to obtain the materials and know how to make a nuclear bomb. Potential proliferators may well take their lead from India and use the very arguments which Britain and other nations have used, to justify their own development and possession of nuclear weapons. 

The nuclear states could not have been surprised by the tests. For years the Indian Ambassador in Geneva made herself unpopular by saying plainly and repeatedly to the UN Conference on Disarmament that the five nuclear weapons states must abide by their undertakings, made nearly thirty years ago, to make serious moves toward nuclear disarmament. She warned that if they did not do so, other nations could no longer be expected to continue to uphold their undertakings not to develop nuclear weapons. India had in fact made no such undertaking.

In early December last year, and again in March this year, Oxford Research Group organized in-depth, off-the-record discussions between senior policy-makers of all the nuclear nations with Indian and Pakistani officials, on precisely these issues, and the signals from India were very clear. At the meeting in March, which took place in India, they had five days of talks with the Ambassador and with very senior Indian military and nuclear physicists, as well as an address from Jaswant Singh, defense spokesman for the party which has now taken the decision to test.

Nevertheless, now that the tests have happened, and before other countries follow suit, we have an opportunity. There is even a powerful role opening up for the British Government. Britain could take the lead in involving other nuclear nations in negotiations towards a multi-lateral agreement on the global elimination of nuclear weapons. This is entirely in line with Labor Party policy. To start on pragmatic footing, there are three preliminary areas where possibilities of agreement could be explored with no risk to our security whatsoever, and a great deal of potential benefit. 

The first of these concerns taking nuclear weapons off full alert. While much progress has already been made in terms of de-targeting US and Russian weapons and de-alerting US bombers, many hundreds of nuclear warheads remain on launch-on warning alert, ready to be re-targeted and launched within minutes. The 'hair-trigger' situation could be made less dangerous and prone to accidental nuclear launch by taking a large part of the nuclear forces off alert. The UK Government could, for example, consider putting on the table a proposal that British, French and Chinese nuclear weapons at sea be removed from full alert. This could be done by having the guidance systems removed from the missiles. Such a measure would constitute a security and safety measure, as well as a confidence building measure, since no immediate enemies are targeted by these countries. The advantage of de-alerting is that it offers a risk-free advance in security for the nuclear powers, by reducing to zero the possibility that a missile could be launched in error, provoking a nuclear exchange. Such a move would be welcomed by the public as a definite, measurable and verifiable step towards a safer world.

The second issue is the hoped-for negotiation of a Fissile Materials Convention, banning the production of uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons. Talks in Geneva may now be able to re-start in a more constructive manner, given willingness by India, Pakistan and Israel to enter negotiations.

The third issue concerns an agreement on No-First-Use of nuclear weapons, which has long been a priority for China, but has met with various degrees of resistance from other nuclear weapons states. The Chinese wish for an agreement on No-First-Use could conceivably be discussed alongside de-alerting and a fissile materials convention, because it can be interpreted as making weapons less usable, and this is exactly what de-alerting does.

These are preliminary steps, which would simply make the world a great deal safer, at no cost to anyone's security. They would build the necessary confidence and political will to begin negotiations of a multi-lateral convention on the global elimination of nuclear weapons. A draft of such a treaty has in fact been tabled in the United Nations, but the official reaction of the nuclear states has so far been negative. It is worth noting that in the press statement announcing the tests, India specifically stated her commitment 'to a speedy process of nuclear disarmament leading to total and global elimination of nuclear weapons'.

The world needs not just leadership but statesmanship to move away from the unthinkable consequences of a new global nuclear arms race. Imposing economic sanctions on India and Pakistan for carrying out tests is not leadership; it is like a man with a lighted cigarette telling another not to smoke. Moreover, as we know from Iraq, economic sanctions and the withdrawal of aid hurt women, children and the poor, and have very little effect of decision-makers: both governments calculated very precisely what the effects of sanctions and loans withdrawal would be, before they went ahead.

So now is the time to consider how to transform this dangerous situation into one where greater safety can be achieved. To act wisely, rather than to react, and to prepare for the future is what we need statesmen and stateswomen for. It will be a great contribution to the world if Britain has such a statesman in Tony Blair.