WI the U.S. only sanctioned India for going nuclear, not Pakistan

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The sanctions were quite, quite limited, nothing like the Iraq embargo/blockade.

In OTL, the US sanctioned both, for consecutively testing nuclear weapons.

What if the U.S. only sanctioned India, because India went first?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
There were some prior existing sanctions or limitations on aid to Pakistan even before the tests, what if the US some weeks or months before the Indian test said, "you guys do a test and rock the boat, we'll turn the taps on for Pakistan".
 
Bhutto wanted the US to put sanctions on India for making a nuke, but Kissinger said that it was a fait accompli and Pakistan would learn to live with it, yet admitted it disturbed Pakistanis. If Kissinger listens to Bhutto maybe the US would put sanctions on India.

I am guessing India would turn to the Soviet camp while Pakistan remains firmly in the American camp.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I'm referring to the 1990s openly proclaimed Indian test, not whatever the Indians did in 1974 when Kissinger was still in government.
 
That requires Larry Pressler not being voted into office in 1978 (Thank God). If Pressler does not get into office you might get what you are looking for, where the US sanctions India but not Pakistan. Maybe Bush is re-elected in 1992. US-India relations would also be worse.

I do, however, believe that Pakistan will eventually be sanctioned for testing a nuke in 1998, unless you can get an earlier War on Terror happening where the US needs Pakistan to be friendly with it.
 

Ak-84

Banned
In OTL, there were some quarters in the Pentagon who said the US should let Pakistan test in May '98 and then not inflict sanctions, in return for Pakistan joining the CTBT, since it would send a displeasure signal to India for starting it. POD, they rather than the State Dept people (led by Bruce Riedel, a noted Pakistan and Islamophone) triumph.
 
Top