India Urges IAEA Oversight of Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal Amid Escalating Tensions

New Delhi: In a bold and unprecedented move, India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has called for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to take charge of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, labeling the neighboring country an “irresponsible and rogue nation.” This statement, made on May 15, 2025, in Srinagar, comes in the wake of the most severe military conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations in nearly three decades. The remarks have sparked condemnation from Pakistan, diplomatic responses from global powers, and renewed focus on the volatile nuclear dynamics in South Asia.

Background: A Region on Edge

India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers since their tit-for-tat tests in 1998, have long been locked in a tense rivalry, primarily over the disputed region of Kashmir. The latest escalation began with a terrorist attack on April 22, 2025, in Pahalgam, Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians, including 24 Hindu tourists. India attributed the attack to Pakistan-backed militants, prompting a swift and aggressive military response codenamed Operation Sindoor. On May 7, Indian forces launched pre-dawn airstrikes, targeting nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). According to Indian political leaders briefed by Singh, the strikes killed at least 100 terrorists.

The conflict rapidly escalated as Pakistan retaliated, with both nations deploying fighter jets, missiles, armed drones, and artillery in a series of attacks and counterattacks. On the night of May 9-10, the Indian Air Force struck 13 Pakistani air bases and military installations. After four days of intense fighting, a ceasefire was reached on May 10, facilitated by direct talks between New Delhi and Islamabad, with diplomatic pressure from the United States. The truce, extended until Sunday, May 18, has been held, though Pakistan has been accused of violating it with drone incursions over Indian cities on May 10 and May 12.

Rajnath Singh’s Call for IAEA Oversight

Speaking to soldiers at the Chinar Corps headquarters in Srinagar’s Badami Bagh Cantt, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh questioned the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. “Are nuclear weapons safe in the hands of such an irresponsible and rogue nation?” he asked, urging the IAEA to supervise Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. Singh’s remarks were part of a broader critique of Pakistan’s alleged support for terrorism, particularly in the context of the Pahalgam attack. He emphasized that Operation Sindoor was a direct response to Pakistan’s “nuclear blackmail” and a demonstration of India’s resolve to combat terrorism.

Singh’s demand for IAEA oversight is significant, given the agency’s role as the global watchdog for nuclear programs. Headquartered in Vienna, Austria, the IAEA was established in 1957 as an autonomous organization within the United Nations, with a motto of “Atoms for Peace and Development.” With 180 member states, including India, the IAEA promotes peaceful nuclear use, develops safety standards, and verifies compliance with non-proliferation commitments. Notably, the IAEA is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but plays a critical role in verifying safeguards agreements under the treaty.

India, Pakistan, and Israel are not signatories to the NPT, which came into force in 1970 and was extended indefinitely in 1995. The treaty, joined by 191 countries, including the five recognized nuclear-weapon states (China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US), aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Pakistan’s nuclear program, like India’s, operates outside the NPT framework, though the IAEA has conducted inspections of Pakistan’s civilian nuclear facilities through its Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS). India, under a 2009 agreement, allows IAEA monitoring of its civilian nuclear facilities.

Pakistan’s Response and Global Reactions

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry swiftly condemned Singh’s remarks, labeling them a reflection of India’s “insecurity and frustration” over Pakistan’s “effective defence and deterrence against Indian aggression through conventional means.” In a post on X, the ministry rejected India’s allegations of supporting terrorism and defended its nuclear program as a cornerstone of its national security.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, addressing cadets and pilots at an air base in Kamra, called for peace talks with India. “Now let us talk about peace,” he said, urging both nations to address the issue of terrorism collaboratively. Sharif denied any Pakistani involvement in the Pahalgam attack and emphasized Islamabad’s willingness to engage in dialogue, provided the focus remains on countering terrorism and resolving disputes, including Kashmir.

U.S. President Donald Trump, who announced the ceasefire on May 10, claimed the India-Pakistan dispute was “settled” and urged both nations to prioritize trade over war. Speaking to U.S. troops in Qatar, Trump highlighted Washington’s diplomatic role in de-escalating the conflict. However, India’s Foreign Ministry clarified that trade was not discussed during talks with the U.S., and the ceasefire was negotiated directly with Pakistan. Pakistan thanked Washington for its involvement but did not comment on Trump’s latest statement.

The IAEA, responding to the escalating rhetoric, issued a statement on May 16, confirming that there had been “no radiation leak or release from any nuclear facility in Pakistan.” This was in response to unverified reports, refuted by India, that Indian airstrikes had targeted Pakistan’s Kirana Hills, allegedly home to a nuclear facility.

The Broader Context: Nuclear Proliferation and Regional Stability

The India-Pakistan conflict underscores the precarious nuclear dynamics in South Asia, a region often described as one of the world’s most dangerous nuclear flashpoints. Both nations’ nuclear arsenals, developed outside the NPT, are not subject to comprehensive international oversight, raising concerns about safety and stability. Singh’s call for IAEA supervision of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons reflects India’s strategic aim to isolate Pakistan diplomatically while highlighting its alleged irresponsibility.

Other treaties aimed at curbing nuclear proliferation include the Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963), which India has signed and ratified, banning nuclear tests in the atmosphere, outer space, and underwater. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) of 1996, which bans all nuclear explosions, has not been signed by India, Pakistan, or China. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) of 2017, which prohibits all nuclear weapon activities, has also been rejected by both India and Pakistan.

Pakistan’s economic struggles add another layer of complexity. Singh mocked Pakistan’s reliance on a $1 billion IMF bailout approved in May 2025, noting that India contributes to the IMF’s funds. “Wherever Pakistan stands, the line of beggars starts from that point,” he quipped, highlighting Pakistan’s financial vulnerability amid its military posturing.

India’s New Doctrine and Operation Sindoor

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has articulated a new doctrine in response to the Pahalgam attack, declaring that any attack on Indian soil will be treated as an act of war. This marks a shift from India’s historically restrained approach to Pakistan’s alleged support for terrorism. Modi described the May 7 strikes on “universities of terror” in Pakistan as a “new normal,” signaling India’s willingness to take preemptive military action.

Operation Sindoor, launched in response to the Pahalgam attack, was India’s most muscular action against terrorism to date. Singh described it as a testament to India’s resolve to end the scourge of terrorism, emphasizing that the strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure, not civilian or nuclear facilities. The operation, which involved bombing nine terror camps and subsequent strikes on Pakistani military bases, was a direct challenge to Pakistan’s nuclear threats, which Singh dismissed as “blackmail.”

Modi, addressing the nation on May 12, clarified that India had only “paused” its retaliatory actions and would closely monitor Pakistan’s future moves. “Any terror attack will get a befitting response, on our terms, in our way,” he warned, signaling that India’s military posture remains vigilant.

Ceasefire and the Path Forward

The ceasefire, upheld through direct communication between the Indian Army’s Director General of Military Operations, Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai, and his Pakistani counterpart, has restored an uneasy calm along the border. No shots have been fired since May 10, though Pakistan’s drone incursions have raised concerns about its commitment to the truce.

Singh reiterated India’s stance that “terror and talks can’t go together,” insisting that any dialogue with Pakistan must focus on countering terrorism and addressing the status of PoK. This position aligns with Modi’s broader vision of prioritizing India’s sovereignty and security over diplomatic niceties.

Implications for Global Nuclear Security

Singh’s call for IAEA oversight of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is unlikely to materialize, given the agency’s limited mandate and Pakistan’s sovereignty over its nuclear program. However, the demand has succeeded in drawing global attention to the risks posed by nuclear weapons in a volatile region. The IAEA’s role as a neutral verifier of peaceful nuclear use makes it a logical focal point for such discussions, but any move to impose oversight on Pakistan would require unprecedented international consensus.

For now, the ceasefire holds, but the underlying tensions between India and Pakistan remain unresolved. The international community, led by the U.S., continues to urge de-escalation, while the IAEA monitors the situation to ensure nuclear safety. As South Asia navigates this precarious moment, the world watches closely, aware that the stakes—both regional and global—could not be higher.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)