“There are two ways of lying. One, not telling the truth and the other, making up statistics.” The US state department followed precisely the other way in busting the myths concerning the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and regime in its recent fact sheet. This fact sheet is an effort to dilute the claims that the NPT is a regime used by the powerful — exclusively the US — to curb the weak. According to the fact sheet (which in my view is not so factual), the US has done enough in pursuit of nuclear disarmament. While giving data on how the US reduced its nuclear warheads by up to 80 percent, the department of state intermingled the concepts of arms control and disarmament. Perversely, a comprehensive analysis of US nuclear policies and strategic doctrines will evidently reveal an increasing dependence of the US on its nuclear weapons.The US has always followed the policy of ‘first use’ of nuclear weapons. Washington on numerous occasions has publicised its right of using nuclear weapons (as it did in 1945) if the US or its allies ever confronted the threat of biological or chemical weapons. On the contrary to nuclear disarmament the US is relying more and more on its nuclear inventory. Therefore, when Germany proposed that the US abandon its first use policy, Washington and NATO bluntly rejected the recommendation.The department of state is also of the view that Washington never endorses a double standard with respect to opposing nuclear proliferation and that the US has always promoted a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction. True! The US has never followed double standards but carries on exhibiting triple and quadruple standards in its policies towards nuclear proliferation and disarmament, especially in the Middle East. The foremost determinant that is hampering the progression on a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East is US policy of sheltering the Israeli nuclear programme.The Senate’s foreign relations committee published a report, called Chain reaction: avoiding a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, in 2008. The report comprised chapters on Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey but Israel was an exception. The main imperative of the US in accomplishing its own agendas of international non-proliferation is its adherence to the Israeli policy of nuclear opacity. The US’s bias on the Middle Eastern nuclear status quo is generating commotion in the Arab world. For instance, Egypt has already threatened a withdrawal from the NPT in the backdrop of insignificant progress in achieving a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East.The fact sheet is concluded with a caustic proclamation: “Nothing in the US-India civil nuclear agreement violates the NPT.” This is contrary to what the US’s foreign policy has been in the past as the 39th US president, Jimmy Carter, stated in 2006, “Knowing for more than three decades of Indian leaders’ nuclear ambitions, I and all other presidents included them in a consistent policy: no sales of civilian nuclear technology or uncontrolled fuel to any country that refused to sign the NPT.” Membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) could also entice India to sell reactors and enrichment/reprocessing technology to anyone because it is outside the NPT and has no obligations.The membership of the NSG, like the US-India nuclear deal, will dent global nuclear non-proliferation efforts and weaken the international safeguards system because it may lead to the diversion of India’s indigenously produced fissile materials to military programmes. India will become inebriated with its new power, contend destructively with western economies, bully its neighbours and possibly even launch a nuclear first strike against Pakistan. India could also play hardball and freeze consensus on the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). It is currently taking a comfortable cover behind Pakistan. Though the spotlight is on Pakistan’s nuclear programme, India will further enlarge strategic reserves of weapons stockpiles, and thus start challenging the major nuclear powers. Then, it would be too late to give precedence to economic imperatives over nonproliferation pipedreams and global stability.The US, as a major global power, should carry on its efforts for nuclear disarmament rather than explicating justifications on its erroneous policies towards nonproliferation by such fact sheets. There is a necessity to address the subject on why the NPT was powerless to thwart India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme and what the insurances are that the NPT will not fail again. The major problem for the NPT is the regions that are prone to conflicts i.e. South Asia and the Middle East, as the state will proliferate (horizontally/vertically) when their existence is threatened. Nowadays, the NPT is facing numerous challenges and the only option is to redesign it. The writer is a M Phil student at the Department of Strategic Studies, Quaid-e-Azam University