CTBT: A case of arm-twisting?

If the objective of the comprehensive test ban treaty (CTBT) over nuclear weapons is to free the world of the nuclear menace, I would remain grateful to know why the governments of all the five members of the nuclear "haves" club (i.e. the countries having a confirmed arsenal) do not agree to India's suggestion (or demand) that all of them declare their timetable to get rid of their own nuclear arsenal instead of trying to twist India's arm to pressurize her into signing the CTBT.

Or is the real objective to separate the "haves" from the "have-nots?" It would be worthwhile to remember that India has stuck to her declared policy of garnering/harnessing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes by refraining from testing any further nuclear devices since her first successful test in the 1970s. On the other hand, Red China (I mean the People's Republic of China) conducted its recent tests with total disregard for world opinion and protests.

The Chinese, at least, conducted their tests on their own soil. The French went one step further and did all their dirty work in Asia. The New Zealanders and Australians protested, but the French showed remarkable immunity to all the protests and criticism!

And why did Australia try to bring (futile) pressure to bear on India in UN's General Assembly, instead of taking the members of the "haves" club to task for their refusal to accept and stick to some schedule of destroying their nuclear stockpiles? With such a volte-face, all their previous vociferous protests against China and France seem pretentious, dishonest and hypocritical. Were they just "playing to the gallery" by doing such an "in" thing so that they are labeled as a "liberal" country. It would be interesting to read comments from the representatives of the governments of the "nuclear haves club" and Australia about the above in The Jakarta Post columns.

K.B. KALE

Jakarta