'A responsible nuclear weapons power' : Nuclear Weapons and Indian Foreign Policy

This thesis examines the interrelationship and dynamics between the Indian United Progressive Alliance government’s foreign policy and its nuclear weapons policy. The purpose of the study is to situate nuclear policy within a foreign policy framework, and the fundamental research problem is thus how does the Indian nuclear policy reflect and respond to the Indian foreign policy? The study examines the intentions in the Indian foreign and nuclear policies, and asks whether these intentions are commensurable or incommensurable. Moreover, the thesis asks whether the UPA government differs from its predecessors, most notably the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government in its foreign and nuclear policies. Answers to these questions are based on the interpretation of political texts and speeches as suggested by Quentin Skinner’s notion of meaning3, what does a writer or speaker mean by what he or she says in a given text, and by J.L. Austin’s speech act theory. This linguistic perspective and the approach of intertextualizing, place the political acts within their contingent intellectual and political contexts. The notion of strategic culture is therefore introduced to provide context for these juxtapositions. The thesis firstly analyses the societal, historical and intellectual context of India’s foreign and nuclear policy. Following from this analysis the thesis then examines the foreign and nuclear policies of Prime Minister Manmo-han Singh’s UPA government. This analysis focuses on the texts, speeches and statements of Indian authorities between 2004 and 2008. This study forwards the following claims: firstly, the UPA Government conducts a foreign policy that is mainly and explicitly inclusive, open and enhancing, and it conducts a nuclear policy that is mainly and implicitly excluding, closed and protective. Secondly, despite the fact that the notion of military security is widely appreciated and does not, as such, necessarily collide with foreign policy, the UPA Government conducts a nuclear policy that is incommensurable with its foreign policy. Thirdly, the UPA Gov-ernment foreign and nuclear policies are, nevertheless, commensurable re-garding their internal intentions. Finally, the UPA Government is conduct-ing a nuclear policy that is gradually leading India towards having a triad of nuclear weapons with various platforms and device designs and a function-ing and robust command and control system encompassing political and military planning, decision-making and execution. Regarding the question of the possible differences between the UPA and NDA governments this thesis claims that, despite their different ideological roots and orientations in domestic affairs, the Indian National Congress Party conducts, perhaps surprisingly, quite a similar foreign and nuclear policy to the Bharatiya Janata Party.

The paribhasas arthavadgrahane nanarthakasya, laksanapratipadoktayoh pratipadoktasyaiva grahanam and ekadesavikrtam ananyavat : Studies on some Metarules in Paninian system

In his grammatical treatise, the Astadhyayi, Panini includes sutras that state guiding rules for the right interpretation and application of his other directly grammatical sutras. These sutras are called paribhasas. In addition to these paribhasas, the various commentaries on Panini frequently invoke supplementary paribhasas which are not stated explicitly in his Astadhyayi. These paribhasas have been a subject of study since early times after Panini and have also occupied modern scholars on Panini s grammar. In regard to most of them, it remains unsettled even today whether they are used in the Astadhyayi, where they apply, what is their role, and whether they are necessary in arriving at the desired grammatical form. Some scholars go even further and argue that none of such paribhasas were intended by Panini. This study aims to settle this question by dealing with three such of these paribhasas individually considering all the information available in the commentaries in their regard and examining the cases in which, according to commentaries, the paribhasas apply. I select the paribhasas arthavadgrahane nanarthakasya, laksanapratipadoktayoh pratipadoktasyaiva grahanam and ekadesavikrtam ananyavat, which are all considered nyayasiddha or lokanyayasiddha; they express logical and obvious principles which are found in daily life. On this basis, Paniniyas explain why Panini did not mention them in the Astadhyayi. I discuss each paribhasa separately and all the issues it involves. I present and explain the cases where the specified paribhasas are invoked in the major commentaries, the Mahabhasya, the Kasika and the Siddhantakaumudi and the arguments found in the commentaries concerning these cases. If available, I supply other solutions to the difficulties for which these paribhasas are invoked. The study aims to make the issue of these paribhasas clearer, which will help us to reach a solution to the key question, that is, whether Panini has presupposed them in his Astadhyayi. My study shows that Panini has presupposed the paribhasa ekadesavikrtam ananyavat (or a similar principle). He also may have used the paribhasa arthavadgrahane nanarthakasya (or a similar principle) as this paribhasa does not lead to undesired results. As for the paribhasa laksanapratipadoktayoh pratipadoktasyaiva grahanam (or a similar principle), the original scope of this paribhasa was clearly extended by later Paniniyas. Moreover, their interpretation of this paribhasa conflicts with Panini s procedure. If Panini has used this paribhasa, he has used it in a very limited way.