Why is India so reluctant to sign NPT and CTBT?

为什么印度这么抵制《不扩散核武器条约》和《全面禁止核试验条约》?

 Quora读者的评论：

Balaji Viswanathan

Non Proliferation Treaty in its current form is not fair to India. The treaty essentially states that only 5 wng powers of World War II have the right to have nuclear weapons. There is no way for India to sign a treaty considered as suicide. India's traditional position has always been either those five too denuclearize or everyone has the same rights to have nuclear weapons.

India shares 7500 km of borders with Pakistan and . Both nations have nuclear weapons and have fought wars with India. It is silly to ignore India's security threats and persist with the fiction that India will someday give up its nuclear weapons.

With nuclear weapons in hand, India doesn't worry about other countries as much any more and is able to confidently deal with both the first world (US-Europe) as well as second world (-Russia). This confidence and security has led to better economic policies, greater trade links and further prosperity.

India would not give all this peace and prosperity up for some relic of post-WW2 that wants to permanently freeze the strong positions of the five allies wng that war. Also, India has a stellar record of not allowing nuclear weapons to proliferate.

One just hopes that eventually west will allow India, Pakistan and Israel as recognized nuclear powers into the fold. There is not point in kee up with the current farce of having only 5 recognized nuclear powers. Since these three counties have never signed the treaty before going nuclear, there is less risk of compromising the basic tenets of NPT.

当前形式的核不扩散条约对印度并不公平。该条约基本上规定，只有第二次世界大战中的5个战胜国有权拥有核武器。印度不可能签署自杀条约。印度的传统立场一直是，要么这五个国家也无核化，要么每个国家都有权拥有核武器。

印度与巴基斯坦和有着7500公里的边界线。两国都拥有核武器，并与印度打过仗。忽视印度的安全威胁，坚持认为印度终有一天会放弃核武器，这是非常愚蠢的。

有了核武器，印度不再那么担心其他国家，有能力自信地应对第一世界(美欧)和第二世界(中俄)。这种信心和安全带来了更好的经济政策、更紧密的贸易联系和进一步的繁荣。

印度不会为了二战后的遗留而放弃所有和平与繁荣。二战后的遗留希望永久锁定打赢那场战争的五个盟国的强大地位。此外，印度在不允许核武器扩散方面有着出色的记录。

人们希望，西方最终会允许印度、巴基斯坦和以色列成为公认的核大国加入核武器国阵营。目前只有5个被承认的核大国，参与这一闹剧没有任何意义。由于这三个国家在拥有核武器之前从未签署过该条约，因此对《不扩散核武器条约》的基本原则妥协的风险较低。

译文来源：三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/47217.html  译者：Joyceliu

Sangeeth Madhur, works at Tata Consultancy Services

The reasons for India not signing the Non-proliferation Treaty are realistic. To better understand why India did not sign the NPT , what actually is there in NPT can shed the light and this automatically explains India not signing NPT.

1. According to NPT , only the Horizontal Proliferation is prohibited and not the vertical proliferation i.e. no new country except the p-5 (US, UK, Russia, and France) can proliferate the nuclear weapons. And the most tricky part is that there is no limitation or clause to limit further proliferation by the p-5 nations. This means that p-5 can acquire as many weapons as they can but other nations shouldn't dare to procure any . This is a clear discrimination and a move to permanently geo-politicize nuclear weapons.
2. The NPT calls for nuclear disarmament but There is not time bound plan of action for a complete nuclear disarmament. Which means that in no near time frame the wish of nuclear weapon free world is going to be realized. More over the NPT has been extended indefinitely in 1995 which means neither the p-5 nations nor the signatories are realising the goal.
3. The membership from NPT can be withdrawn by any nation with a 3-month prior notice period. ==> A nation can avail all the benefits of the NPT like nuclear commerce , become itself self-sufficient in technology and withdraw from the NPT and continue with its nuclear programme. This is what exactly happened with North Korea in 2003. For a country like India which is committed to Complete Global Nuclear Disarmament this may be unpalatable and the very loophole of NPT .
4. According to NPT all the civilian nuclear establishments have to be brought under the surveillance of "International Atomic Energy Agency

" (IAEA). But the IAEA has been questioned of its relevance after Iran has been caught in 2002 with its highly enriched uranium heavy water reactor at Arak.

印度不签署核不扩散条约的原因是现实的。为了更好地理解为什么印度没有签署《不扩散核武器条约》，《不扩散核武器条约》的实际内容可以为我们提供一些线索，而这也自动解释了为什么印度没有签署《不扩散核武器条约》。

1. 根据《不扩散核武器条约》，只有水平扩散是被禁止的，垂直扩散没事，即除了5个国家(美国、英国、俄罗斯、和法国)，没有其他国家能指望从这5个国家获得核武器。最棘手的部分是没有限制或条款来限制这5国家核武器的进一步发展。这意味着这5个国家可以获得尽可能多的武器，但其他国家不应该胆敢获得任何武器。这是一种明显的歧视，是将核武器永久政治化的行动。
2. 《不扩散核武器条约》要求去核化，但没有一个全面去核化时限的行动计划。这意味着在未来很长时间内，无核武器世界的愿望都不会实现。1995年，《不扩散核武器条约》被无限期延长，这意味着这5个国家和附议国都没有实现这一目标。

3.任何国家都可以提前3个月通知别国，本国将退出《不扩散核武器条约》的事。一个国家可以利用《不扩散核武器条约》的所有好处，如核商业，在技术上自给自足，然后宣布退出《不扩散核武器条约》，继续发展核计划。这正是朝鲜在2003年做的事。对于印度这样一个致力于促成全球去核化的国家来说，这可能是令人不快的，也是《不扩散核武器条约》的一个漏洞。

4. 根据《不扩散核武器条约》，所有民用核设施都必须置于“国际原子能机构”的监督之下”(IAEA)。但是，自从2002年伊朗在阿拉克的高浓缩铀重水反应堆被发现后，国际原子能机构一直受到质疑。

Apart from the above reasons despite of NPT , and having the responsibility of protecting other nations from acquiring nuclear weapons , Some of the p-5 countries especially USA and have been soft towards certain states like Pakistan and even are accused of hel them procure the weapons. This is nothing but the fence feeding on the crop.

The above reasons beyond doubt explains the India's refusal to sign NPT.

除上述原因外，尽管有《不扩散核武器条约》，而且有责任保护其他国家不获取核武器外，一些P-5国家，特别是美国和，对巴基斯坦等某些国家较为温和，甚至被指控帮助他们获取核武器。

毫无疑问，上述原因解释了印度为什么拒绝签署《不扩散核武器条约》。

Vikram Yashashvi, Patriotic and nationalistic.

As far as CTBT is concerned, every PM of India starting from Nehru has done a lot of hard work , and even then PTBT (Partial Test Ban Treaty) was only complied with. India during Vajpayee government offered a moratorium on underground testing, thus ever since de facto India has been a CTBT nation, in concurrence with Indian stand on testing from decades. Vajpayee government India remained flexble on CTBT and willing to make ‘de jure’ its self imposed ban on testing, but as Brijesh Mishra said that time that India’s support to CTBT cannot be in a vacuum and depends on several reciprocal actions, particularly by Nuclear Weapon States. Thus India as a responsible state has always been on the fore front of Nuclear Test ban, and still remains so.

As far as NPT concerned, NSG as a matter of policy (Not Law) decided to prohibit all nuclear commerce with nations, that have not agreed for full scope safeguards, this precondition effectively required countries to join as NON WEAPON States.

I think fellow Quorans can see the absurdity of this precondition, especially since India is flanked on both sides of its borders by Nuclear weapon states.

So India is not reluctant to sign CTBT, in fact it is observing CTBT, and will sign when NWS also fulfil similar clauses.

Also India is not reluctant to sign NPT, it is determined not to sign it till the mentioned policy is treated as a law and precondition and I believe no Indian would ask our government to sign the NPT!

就《全面禁止核试验条约》而言，从尼赫鲁开始的印度每一位总理都做了很多艰苦的工作，即便如此，也只遵从了《部分禁止核试验条约》。在瓦杰帕伊政府期间，印度暂停了地下核试验，因此事实上，印度已经是一个禁核试条约国家，与印度几十年来对核试验的立场一致。瓦杰帕伊政府在《全面禁止核试验条约》上保持灵活性，并愿意在法律上禁止进行核试验，但正如布里杰什•米什拉所说，印度对《全面禁止核试验条约》的支持不可能处于真空中，取决于一些相互影响的做法，尤其是核武器国家。因此，作为一个负责任的国家，印度一直处于禁止核试验的前沿，现在仍然如此。

就《不扩散核武器条约》而言，核供应国集团作为一项政策(而非法律)决定禁止与尚未就全面保障达成一致意见的国家进行一切核贸易，这一前提条件实际上要求各国作为非武器国家加入。

我认为，Quorans同胞可以看出这一前提的荒谬性，尤其是印度边界两侧都存在核武器国家。

因此，印度并非不愿意签署《全面禁止核试验条约》，事实上，印度遵守着《全面禁止核试验条约》的规定，并将在其他新核武器国家也履行条约条款时签署。

此外，印度并不是不愿意签署《不扩散核武器条约》，它要等到上述政策成为法律和先决条件，我相信没有哪个印度人会要求印度政府签署《不扩散核武器条约》!

Nikhil John, Learning about India

India has not signed the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty), 1970 because:

1. India thinks NPT is discriminatory: There are two types of members in the NPT - Nuclear Weapons State and Non-Nuclear Weapons State. Only five countries (including ) who had fired a nuclear device before 1970 were given the status of Nuclear Weapons State. Any other nation who wished to sign the NPT, had to do so as a Non-Nuclear Weapons State. India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974 - this implies that the only option by which India could sign the NPT is being a Non-Nuclear Weapons State.
2. India needs a minimum nuclear deterrant: If India signs the NPT as a Non-Nuclear Weapons State, India cannot even keep a minimal nuclear deterrant. In the light of the wars waged with neighbours and Pakistan, this option seems suicidal, given and Pakistan themselves have nuclear weapons. Therefore even popular political support, across the political spectrum, has been towards nuclear weapons program, rather than signing the NPT.

印度没有签署1970年的《不扩散条约》，是因为:

1. 印度认为《不扩散核武器条约》是歧视性的：《不扩散核武器条约》有两类成员国- -核武器国家和无核武器国家。1970年以前，只有5个国家(包括)拥有核武器。任何其他希望签署《不扩散核武器条约》的国家都必须作为一个无核武器国家这样做。印度在1974年引爆了第一枚核装置，这意味着印度签署《不扩散核武器条约》的唯一选择是成为无核武器国家。
2. 印度需要拥有最低限度的核设施：如果印度作为一个无核武器国家签署《不扩散核武器条约》，印度连保有最低限度的核设施都不行。鉴于印度与邻国和巴基斯坦之间的战争，因为和巴基斯坦都拥有核武器，这种选择似乎是一种自杀行为。因此，各个政治派别普遍支持的都是支持核武器计划，而不是签署《不扩散核武器条约》。

William Petroff, Web Developer

What's the point? 

If it did, India would either have to get rid of its nuclear weapons or else run the serious risk of facing crippling sanctions. They're not about to give up their nuclear weapons (it would put them at a serious disadvantage with Pakistan and ) and, since they aren't paying much of a price for not being a member of the treaty because they are widely given access to nuclear technology, there's very little that incentivises them to join the treaty.[1] If they were to sign the treaty, though, it would not be inconceivable that they'd face some sort of sanctions because they'd be flagrantly violating a treaty that most countries like to invoke.

[1] One of the biggest incentives to get countries to sign the NPT was the agreement that the nuclear countries would share "peaceful nuclear technology" with the non-nuclear countries so that they could domestically have the capability to produce nuclear power and use nuclear material for other peaceful purposes. Over the years, that restriction kind of faded away as power politics and raw economic considerations have taken on a bigger role in how the transfer of technology happens

加入了有什么意义?

如果这样做，印度要么必须放弃核武器，要么面临严重的制裁风险。他们不会放弃核武器(这会使他们在面对巴基斯坦和时处于严重劣势)，而且，因为他们得到了很多核技术，所以他们并没有为不加入条约国付出过太多代价，没有什么好处来激励他们加入条约。如果他们加入条约，因为他们会因为公然违反条约面临不可想象的制裁。

Deep Shah, Hardcore Indian

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is a mere farce in my opinion. It is an 'ancient' and unjust contract not reflecting the present geopolitical structure. Drafted in 1968, it only gives the P-5 (Permanent 5: USA, UK, Russia, and France) to hold nuclear weapons. Although it calls for nuclear disarmament, no fixed targets had been mentioned. has (allegedly) violated the treaty by proliferating knowledge to Pakistan.

Although it permits all nations to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, the remaining countries are at a great risk. Their security is threatened until these five completely dismantle their nuclear arsenal. Indian Foreign Policy has therefore been against the NPT. India, Pakistan and Israel are the only non-signatories. North Korea pulled out so that it may beef up its security. So today, only 8 countries possess nuclear arsenal (P5, Indo-Pak, Israel). Iran and North Korea are suspected to possess them as well.

Although this lessens India's Soft Power, India's stance remains unchanged due to strategic planning. The same goes for Complete Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). However, in an attempt to make up for this, India adopted the 'No First Use Policy'.

Bottomline: Given the possession of nuclear arsenal by many nations (including Pakistan), and in order to not make any mistake in her defense strategy, India has not signed the NPT and the CTBT.

在我看来，《不扩散核武器条约》只不过是一个闹剧。这是一个“古老的”不公平的契约，不能反映当前的地缘政治结构。该条约起草于1968年，只允许P-5（5个常任理事国：美国、英国、俄罗斯、和法国）拥有核武器。虽然它呼吁去核化，但没有制定明确的目标。(据称)向巴基斯坦扩散核知识，违反了该条约。

尽管它允许所有国家将核能用于和平目的，但其余国家面临着巨大的风险。直到这五个国家完全拆除核武库，这些国家的安全将会一直受到威胁。因此，印度的外交政策一直反对《不扩散核武器条约》。印度、巴基斯坦和以色列是唯一的非签署国。朝鲜退出是为了加强其国家安全。所以今天，只有8个国家拥有核武库(P5，印巴，以色列)。伊朗和朝鲜也被怀疑拥有核武器。

尽管这削弱了印度的软实力，但由于战略规划，印度的立场没有改变。印度对《全面禁止核试验条约》(CTBT)也是如此。然而，为了弥补这一缺陷，印度提出了“不率先使用核武器”的政策。

分界线：考虑到许多国家(包括巴基斯坦)都拥有核武库，为了不在国防战略上出错，印度尚未签署《不扩散核武器条约》(NPT)和《全面禁止核试验条约》(CTBT)。

Manthan Vijay Shah, History and politics <3

For a moment, forget about India. Just have a look at Ukraine....Ukraine got separated from the USSR few decades back....and at that time it took a decision of having no nukes.....that is signing the NPT... recently we saw that a comparatively weaker Russia (than the USSR in its prime), a nuke enabled country overtook Crimea and is in the possibility of annexng Donetsk as well....would this have happened if Ukraine had been a nuke-powered country? Would Russia have still gone ahead in annexng Crimea? I think not.....

Let's come back to India.....the country which perennially lives in the backdrop of threats coming from Pakistan, infiltration in Jammu and Kashmir, Assam (from Bangladesh) and an over assertive which shall soon have the largest army in the world.....being a nuke powered country gives India security and discourages anti-indian elements....Think of Pakistan annexng J&K just like Russia did in Ukraine.....what will India be able to do? The whole of Europe and US could not help Ukraine....here the odds are even more skewed..... may support Pak to annex J&K.....India has signed a no first use policy but giving up nukes is not an option......for a moment you might even consider Israel without nukes surrounded by enemies on all sides.....Iran, Palestine, Jordan,Egypt......nukes are a must if u want to protect the country

暂时忘掉印度吧。看看乌克兰吧……乌克兰几十年前脱离了苏联…在那个时候，乌克兰决定不拥有核武器……即签署核不扩散条约…最近我们看到一个相对较弱的俄罗斯(比起鼎盛时期的苏联弱)，一个拥有核武器的国家攻占了克里米亚，并且有可能吞并顿涅茨克。如果乌克兰是一个核武器国家，这种情况会发生吗？俄罗斯还会继续吞并克里米亚吗？我并不这么认为.....

让我们回来看看印度…这个国家常年生活在来自巴基斯坦的威胁、渗透查谟和克什米尔、阿萨姆邦(来自孟加拉国)以及独断的背景下，不久后将拥有世界上最大的军队……作为一个有核国家，印度的安全能够得到保障，同时也能打击反印度分子。想像一下，巴基斯坦像俄罗斯吞并乌克兰一样，吞并查谟和克什米尔……印度能做什么？整个欧洲和美国都无法帮助乌克兰……可能支持巴基斯坦吞并查谟和克什米尔…印度签署了不率先使用核武器的政策，但放弃核武器不在印度的考虑之列，如果你想保护国家，核武器是必需品

Sanjeeva Shukla, Firewalled by Logic, fueled by thinking, I dive when they swim.

It sure takes some guts to keep rejecting the NPT such consistently - something that's been signed by almost everybody around - except for India, Pakistan, Israel and South Sudan. And we have to.give it to India, Pakistan and Israel, that they've kept the Uranium supplies uninterrupted despite the NPT ban on countries to sell stuff to the 'errant' nations!

India's argument has been consistent: ONE, in the presence of nuclear neighbors, and in the absence of any mechanism within the NPT to ensure deterrence, India cannot sacrifice it's security interests.

And TWO, which is very sharp, too - that the NWS - the five Nuclear Weapons States - US, UK, France, and Russia - don't show any proof or credible evidence that they are mounting down yet from their stockpiles, and are indeed de-nuclearizing themselves - a clause which too is an integral tenet of the NPT, and the NWS have to follow that.

That's why, India's stance looks fair enough: If NWS are not following a tenet after being a party to the NPT, what's India's crime in not signing the NPT. But yes, it can be certainly argued, that the NPT regime may have certainly succeeded in almost stop a rampant spread of nuclearization threat among other nations, as all NPT signatories are barred from trading in technologies, material, software and hardware meant for war games.

要一直拒绝《不扩散核武器条约》，当然需要一些勇气——这是除了印度、巴基斯坦、以色列和南苏丹以外，几乎所有国家都签署的条约。尽管《不扩散核武器条约》禁止各国向其他国家出售核武器，但他们对铀的供应仍然没有中断！

印度争论的点一直没变：一是，在邻国有核武器的情况下，在《不扩散核武器条约》没有任何确保威慑的机制的情况下，印度不能牺牲自己的安全利益。

第二，这也是非常尖锐的一点——美国、英国、法国、和俄罗斯这五个核武器国家——没有任何证据或可信的证据表明它们的核物料堆正在减少，确实正在去核化——这业是《不扩散核武器条约》的原则，核武器国家必须遵循这一原则。

这就是为什么，印度的立场看起来很公平：如果核武器国在加入《不扩散核武器条约》之后没有遵循一个原则，那么印度不签署《不扩散核武器条约》算什么罪过？但是，可以肯定的是，由于所有《不扩散核武器条约》签署国都不得进行用于战争用途的技术、材料、软件和硬件贸易，因此《不扩散核武器条约》制度可能已经成功地几乎阻断了核武器化威胁在其他国家间的猖獗蔓延。

Dan Kim, Worked in defense R&D, banking. Currently in Asset Mgmt

Because India believes NPT treaty is unfair because some states are allowed to have nukes. It also doesn't like the fact that some countries are required to do more to prove that they are not trying to go nuclear than others. For example, NPT would have required India to do more to prove that it's not researching nukes than say Sweden. But ultimately, because India believed that it should have the nuclear weapons.

 India's External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said during a visit to Tokyo in 2007: "If India did not sign the NPT, it is not because of its lack of commitment for non-proliferation, but because we consider NPT as a flawed treaty and it did not recognize the need for universal, non-discriminatory verification and treatment."

因为印度认为《不扩散核武器条约》允许一些国家拥有核武器，不公平。它也不喜欢一些国家被要求比其他国家做更多的事情来证明他们没有试图发展核武器。例如，《不扩散核武器条约》要求印度比瑞典做更多的工作来证明它没有研究核武器。但最终，印度认为自己应该拥有核武器。

印度外交部长普拉纳博·穆克吉在2007年访问东京期间表示:“如果印度没有签署《不扩散核武器条约》,并不是因为不愿对不扩散核武器作出承诺，而是因为我们认为《不扩散核武器条约》是一个有缺陷的条约，它不承认普遍、非歧视性的核查和处理的需要。”

Prasad Patil, works at Students

First we need to understand what is Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In 1958 Ireland proposed this system. It was opened to sign from 1968. Treaty states that whoever tested the nuclear weapon before 1964, can keep their weapons, but after 1964, no country is allowed to test nuclear weapon.

India tested its nuclear weapon in 1974. Thus if India sign up for NPT, India will have to destroy nuclear weapons Indians have. We are secured from and Pakistan just because of nuclear weapons. has large army compared with our army. So India will never sign this treaty.

首先，我们需要了解什么是核不扩散条约。

1958年，爱尔兰提出了这个想法。1968年开始对外开放签署。条约规定，1964年以前试验核武器的国家可以保留核武器，但1964年以后，任何国家都不得试验核武器。

印度在1974年进行了核武器试验。因此，如果印度签署《不扩散核武器条约》，印度将不得不销毁印度拥有的核武器。正是因为有了核武器，我们才免受和巴基斯坦的威胁。与我们的军队相比，有着庞大的军队。所以印度永远不会签署这个条约。

Anil Singh, Analyst

India argues that the NPT creates a club of "nuclear haves" and a larger group of "nuclear have-nots" by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967, but the treaty never explains on what ethical grounds such a distinction is valid. India's then External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said during a visit to Tokyo in 2007: "If India did not sign the NPT, it is not because of its lack of commitment for non-proliferation, but because we consider NPT as a flawed treaty and it did not recognize the need for universal, non-discriminatory verification and treatment."

印度辩称，《不扩散核武器条约》通过将合法拥有核武器的国家限制在1967年之前进行核试验的国家，从而建立了一个“有核国”俱乐部和一个规模更大的“无核国”组织，但该条约从未解释过这种区别在何种道德上是有效的。印度当时的外交部长慕克吉在2007年访问东京时说：“如果印度不签署《不扩散核武器条约》，并不是因为印度没有承诺不扩散核武器，而是因为我们认为《不扩散核武器条约》是一个有缺陷的条约，而且它不承认需要普遍、非歧视性的核查和待遇。”

Shijoe Joseph, Technical Support Consultant at Rogers Communications (2018-present)

Underdogs won’t always remain so, because every dog has its day.

Do we still say, women aren’t supposed to hold jobs? Nope! Similarly, the old relics, though to be respected for its pioneering quality, need to be tad adjusted because we have Pakistan and as our neighbours, and Lord knows when they are gonna get all cranky; so on and so forth.

Besides, what about equality for all, ey?! Everybody has the right to nuclear power (yes, even North Korea, as much as that scares the crap out of us), not just the elite 1st world Ladies.

The key is to follow NPT core guidelines and use said nuclear power to heal the planet (I know, that itself is ironic, but there is no going back now) and better all forms of life on her sublime bosom (yes, non-human beings are important, too).

弱者不会永远如此，因为每个人都有成功的一天。

我们现在还会说，女性不应该有工作吗?不!同样的，旧日的遗迹，尽管因为其开创性而受到尊重，但需要稍微调整，因为我们有巴基斯坦和这样的邻国，天知道他们什么时候就会发动骚乱。

此外，人人平等呢？每个人都有使用核能的权利(是的，即使是朝鲜)，而不仅仅是第一世界的名门淑女。

关键是要遵循《不扩散核武器条约》的核心指导方针，使用上述核能来拯救地球(我知道，这本身具有讽刺意味，但现在已经没有回路可走了)，以及她崇高的胸怀里所有形式的生命(是的，非人类也很重要)。

Amey Parulkar, Grad student in CS at TAMU.

NPT is a unfair treaty to the non-nuclear weapons states I.e states other than big five ( US, Russia, , UK, France), it says that those who have nuclear weapons have no obligation to give them up while others are not allowed to have them. India is committed to nuclear non-proliferation, but does not want to endorse such a biased treaty.

《不扩散核武器条约》是一项对无核武器国家而言不平等的条约。报告称，除了五大国家(美国、俄罗斯、、英国、法国)，其他国家都不允许拥有核武器，而拥有核武器的国家没有义务放弃核武器。印度致力于核不扩散，但不愿支持这样一项有失偏颇的条约。

Aliasger Fanaswalla, Ernst & Young

Because its essential for our survival . We are surrounded by two hostile countries and one of them already being a to be super power - .

Nuclear weapons gives us the right to self determination.

The peace of mind to focus on non military sectors without worrying about our nation getting conquered .

Nuclear weapons is to our survival as meat for the Lion. We can stay without it but not for long.

We can't fight endlessly and nuclear weapons has given us the right to assert ourselves and to have a say on foreign policies .

No matter what , we won't sign the NPT.

因为它对我们的生存至关重要。我们被两个敌对国包围，其中一个已经升级为超级大国——。

核武器赋予我们自决的权利。

安心专注于非军事领域而不用担心我们的国家被征服。

核武器对我们的生存就像肉之于狮子。我们可以暂时没有，但不能忍受太久。

我们不能无休止地战斗，核武器赋予了我们维护自己的权利，并在外交政策上拥有发言权。

无论如何，我们不会签署核不扩散条约。