{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034829202947086406, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010716677829872739, 'mean_word_length': 4.881889763779528, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
U.S. Domestic Structure and Non-Proliferation Policy Objectives 1990–2000

This article is about U.S. non-proliferation objectives towards South Asia in the period 1990-2000. The article begins with an inquiry into the reasons for the transition of South Asia in the U.S. security debate from a “basket case” or an irrelevancy to “the greatest flashpoint” on earth.’ Not only has there been an increase in the political salience and visibility of South Asia in American internal analysis and comment, but South Asia is the most commonly quoted example ofproliferation concern. Secondly, the article draws up a balance sheet of U.S. perceptions of threat vis-a-vis South Asia. This understanding is vital because a nation’s security policy has to be predicated on its threat perceptions, whether perceived or real. Thirdly, it categorizes U.S. non-proliferation objectives towards South Asia in three ways, as they emerge from its domestic structure.? These are, first, prevention or renunciation of nuclearization. This is the NPT centered approach, aiming for the prevention of a nuclear breakout between India and P‘akistan and is chiefly advocated within the Congress, the orthodox non-proliferation community and some think tanks. Second, there is the objective of cap, roll back and eliminate nuclear weapons advocated primarily by the U.S. administration. Third, there are some who advocate a limited overt capability for South Asia, among the defence and politico-militay organizations.