Arrange in chronological order:
1) The 1971 war between India and Pakistan led to the creation of an independent country called Bangladesh.
2) The regions of Goa, Diu and Daman were freed from Portuguese rule and became parts of the Indian federations.
3) The Congress Party led by Indira Gandhi was roundly defeated by the newly formed ‘Janat Party.’
4) Lal Bahadur Shastri gave the slogan ‘Jai Jawan Jai Kisan’ with which he highlighted the importance of Indian soldiers and Indian farmers.
5) India successfully carried out an underground test of an atomic device at Pokharan in Rajasthan.
Answers
Answer: The primary purpose of this game was to explore international approaches for dealing with crises involving the threat and use of nuclear weapons. To do so, the game engaged mid- to high-level participants from fifteen countries in a United Nations Security Council setting. The scenario examined tensions between India and Pakistan. The following observations emerged from game play:
International organizations are likely to be ineffective in addressing a nuclear crisis in South Asia, primarily because their deliberations take too long. However, a forum like the United Nations will still be required for the conduct of critical multilateral negotiations, whether or not the organization itself gets involved in intervention.
For the foreseeable future, "managed tension" will remain the norm between India and Pakistan.
Historic ties shape the perceptions and actions of belligerents as well as those responding to a crisis. Although this may sound like a blinding flash of the obvious, the extent to which historic ties impacted the game was revealing.
Conventional force confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan need to be complemented by nuclear CBMs.
Nuclear weapons provide states with enhanced negotiating leverage. Nuclear weapons provide countries with a wild card that they would not otherwise possess.
Conflicting views concerning the importance of nuclear weapons will continue. India, in particular, sees possession of nuclear weapons as the key to great power status.
Post-nuclear exchange options are extremely limited.
Game play also revealed a number of policy implications that should be considered by U.S. decision-makers. They include:
The U.S. must pursue more sources of leverage that could be used to prevent a crisis from escalating and understand how to employ them aggressively.
Pre-crisis sanctions and embargoes generally weaken, rather than strengthen, the international community's bargaining position.
Policymakers must recognize that leverage weakens as a crisis escalates.
Terrorism can precipitate interstate conflict.
The international community needs to be more proactive in dealing with festering tensions among nuclear powers. The challenge in South Asia remains Kashmir.
Unilateral options are unlikely to work. U.S. actions were accepted only as long as they were developed in partnership with others.
Non-proliferation and comprehensive test ban treaties are more likely to delay than to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. Countries currently pursuing nuclear programs are not likely to renounce them.
Participants agreed that accident and miscalculation are the most likely triggers that could result in a nuclear exchange on the sub-continent. Resort to tactical nuclear weapons is especially likely if a country perceives that its sovereignty is seriously threatened. Participants also asserted that if the international community fails to resolve serious cross-border tensions, and only attempts, on the brink of conflict, to search for solutions, it must bear some responsibility for the suffering that results.
Some players expressed a preference for handling such matters bilaterally, others indicated a preference for a regional resolution; but, for the most part, participants understood that a crisis involving the potential use of nuclear weapons is an international problem. Moralist, pragmatist, and fatalist positions were all represented in the game. Few players believed, however, that the world would be denuclearized in the near term, if ever. Nuclear weapons are like smoke in a bottle; once released, it is impossible to put it back in.