Indian Nuclear Testing

[commander]

This brings up an important question:

Why didn't, at that time, General Sundarji call for an Israeli like first strike operation against Pakistan nuclear facilities in order to avoid being in this bind in the first place?

Maybe because Pakistan was pampered with US Dollars ? I mean until very recently when they conducted a raid for OBL they were very much pro Pakistan isn't it ?

[Officer of Engineers]

Why didn't, at that time, General Sundarji call for an Israeli like first strike operation against Pakistan nuclear facilities in order to avoid being in this bind in the first place?

I thought that was planned but got the no-go from the PMO.

[Blademaster]

I thought that was planned but got the no-go from the PMO.

The consensus was that US got wind of that and behind the scenes, played hardball with India to avoid a strike by giving satellite coverage and feeding live info as to India's force status alert and whereabouts of Indian forces.

[Oracle]

The consensus was that US got wind of that and behind the scenes, played hardball with India to avoid a strike by giving satellite coverage and feeding live info as to India's force status alert and whereabouts of Indian forces.

Consensus amongst whom? Could you please be brief? Live info to who?

[Blademaster]

Consensus amongst whom? Could you please be brief? Live info to who?

I thought you didn't give a jack shit about my posts. Only that you care about OOE, DCL, or Capt. LT's posts?

[ace16807]

That was 2009, you knumb skull. Before I started understanding FM Nie and General Sundarji. We were working on the principle of si vis pacem, para bellum before understanding Deterrence is not warfighting.

The history and actions of the 2nd Artillery Force proves you wrong. As of right now, 21 B2 bombers armed with GBU-28s can take out the entire Chinese ICBM arsenal, be it 20 or 80, before the the Chinese knew they were hit ... and they're doing NOTHING about it. The silos have been located. They're targetted.

Warheads continued to be stored outside their delivery vehicles. Not one. Not a single one. ZERO PERCENT of Chinese nuclear forces are on standby readiness. ZERO. That means the Americans have hours to keep killing them and given the Chinese exercises we have seen, they still need days to prepare a retallitory strike. Meaning the Americans have days to keep degrading the Chinese nuclear arsenal.

So yes, 100% the Chinese ARE FULLY PREPARED to lose their nuclear arsenal.

Oh, the SSBNs. Yeah, right. Tell me the Americans won't part a LA outside the subpen when they're loading their nukes.

And AGAIN, YOU ARE NOT A DECISION MAKER. WHAT YOU WANT YOU CAN WRITE COMIC BOOKS WITH. YOU HAVE NO SAY IN HOW INDIA WILL ACQUIRE HER NUCLEAR ARSENAL. NONE. NADDA. ZERO. ZILCH. SO STOP PRETENDING YOU SPEAK FOR THE INDIAN NUCLEAR WEAPONSNEER. BECAUSE YOU DON'T!

I keep pointing you to Indian strategic thinkers, the father of your nuclear doctrine ... and you didn't even bother to find out. What's more, you have the gall to pretend you know more than Gen Sundarji.

....source on SAF vulnerability and readiness?

[Officer of Engineers]

http://project2049.net/documents/chi...ing_system.pdf

Jeffrey Lewis • China and "No First Use"

[Deltacamelately]

My goodness! Still on after so many years?

Btw Hitesh .... Did I spoil your tranquility?:confu:

[Blademaster]

My goodness! Still on after so many years?

Btw Hitesh .... Did I spoil your tranquility?:confu:

No, it is all quiet on the western front. ;)

[ace16807]

http://project2049.net/documents/chi...ing_system.pdf

Jeffrey Lewis • China and "No First Use"

Getting a bit off topic but the claims made indicate that one NDU faculty claims that China sees its nuclear arsenal as "unusable" (not prepared to lose it) and that warhead/missile mating only occurs during elevated readiness conditions (which as far as we know could occur weeks before any shooting occurs). I don't doubt that SAF could be relatively vulnerable but I think dismissing the viability of a 2nd strike would require taking on some rather ambitious assumptions.

[Officer of Engineers]

Getting a bit off topic but the claims made indicate that one NDU faculty claims that China sees its nuclear arsenal as "unusable" (not prepared to lose it) and that warhead/missile mating only occurs during elevated readiness conditions (which as far as we know could occur weeks before any shooting occurs). I don't doubt that SAF could be relatively vulnerable but I think dismissing the viability of a 2nd strike would require taking on some rather ambitious assumptions.

The numbers speak for itself. At no time did China ever mated nukes to rockets, not even during the height of the Soviet threat and Nie disobeyed a direct order from Lin Bao to mate nukes to rockets.

Since then, the 2AF has all but abanondoned nukes and gone the way of conventional warhead strike package and the exercises all assumed a nuclear first strike.

As indicated, the USAF B2 strike force can now take out all of China's ICBM silos with conventional munitions. And since it takes hours to mate a warhead onto a rocket, the B2s got more than a few chances at killing those silos. With the ICBMs gone, and a LA class park outside Chinese sub pens, you tell me how the Chinese are going for a viable retalitory strike?

They didn't even try during the height of the Soviet threat.

[Double Edge]

Here's an example of how a deterrent worked.

After the US took out Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi voluntarily turned over his WMD program to the UN. He opened his books and gave up all hardware. His only goal was to keep the Americans out. His deterrent worked. Americans did not invade. He remained in power until the fiasco that was "Arab Spring."

Then what purpose does nukes serve for so called 'deterrent powers' ?

WHO and WHAT are they deterring. Why spend all those bucks to keep them. What is their value ?

Who is Pakistan, India & China deterring. If all three are at a conventional disadvantage with a superior opponent.

They deter the US or Russia, here keep them, don't nuke us now piss off. And that gets you one more life. But it requires a massive conventional superiority to pull off. Without which it can still protect a regime as China can't do it to India nor can India do it to Pakistan. Neither of these three can really have much of a real war with each other.


Arab spring will start again when the conditions are right. They've done it once already. Unseated a dictator. When the choice is either SISI or ISIS, there has to be an alternative for moderate politics. Tunisia is the only survivor.


Want to address a couple of your other points which seems to have fallen through.

Unfortunately you are up against people with automatic weapons and there's a new ban coming up. All those with automatic weapons already, get to keep them. There will be no more sale of guns and ammo is restricted as well. One may replace old ammo, but not add to the collection. There's even a ban on testing of ammo. One won't know what works and what doesn't.

This is exactly the kind of talk that precipitated the '98 tests. In '95, the NPT was extended into perpetuity and it said China got to keep its nukes whereas everybody else could not. India decided that would not be the case. India is a nuke power by sole virtue of being able to detonate a device. No need for permission or recognition from anyone. Its a fact.

Now there are other competing reasons. Does the deterrent work or not. A test would confirm old stock. These two are i would think the major reasons.

You would sign a treaty and then disregard it? You are losing credibility on the international stage.

What was the cause for India to test in '74 ? Some say it was China in '64 that got things going. Others will say it was Nixon's nuke threat in '71.

There is something more, its the perception of a dalliance between the US & China in the 70s that did it. Both had aggressive intentions towards India within a decade and then decide to get into bed with each other.

As to when India will test again.

If the US is perceived as unreliable in Asia or some sort of deal is made to carve up Asia, basically Pax China in Asia. That would be one compelling reason.

Testing to check old nukes. I'm not sure that would be the only one, there has to be extenuating circumstances that make it a national imperative. At which point we take what comes as far as the treaty goes.

We've withstood sanctions twice, the second were in name only. The '98 tests paved the way for the nuke deal in 2005. Clinton visits India in March 2000, 22 years after Carter or the last US president to visit India. Less than two years after a nuke test ? why.

the nuke deal is akin to P5+1 or group of 6 with NK. It's an attempt by the nuclear order to in an ad-hoc way deal with powers that disrupt that order. India is taken care of to a certain extent. Iran & NK are outstanding.

[Double Edge]

Now here is the thing. Even though it started off as a Mexican 3 pointed standoff, it is increasingly off late turning out to be a situation where in all likelihoood it will be two parties (Russia and China) turning against you. Either in concert, or opportunistically.

You have already said that you can take on one. But not both.

Now a fourth party enters the picture.

Would you (specifically the US today) want to be a friend or would you now want to turn another one away from you and now have 3 potentially against you where there were originally two (from one in the begining)?

Let me also tell you that today India regionally is in a similar position. No longer can we trust the Russians to have our back. And in alll likelihood were we to go to war with China, Russia would probably side with the Chinese.

This is not my civilian opinion incidentally.

We are therefore as things have ironically developed in the post Cold War world, more "natural allies" than the empty words doing the rounds of the political circles.

That underlined bit is why the Ukranian thing has given me headaches.

Forces India to choose between two friends, Ukraine & Russia. We did not.

Then things develop further and India has to choose between another set of friends, Russia & the US. TBD.

Russia goes closer to China which means pressure on India again when it comes to regional disputes. TBD.

There's two winners here, US & China if things go the wrong way.

In a reversal of history, China gets Russia and the US gets India. In this case no need for an Indian test.

'natural allies' is a term Vajpayee used, it kept the doors open.

We started off with non-alignment which morphed into 'strategic autonomy' during the cold war. This meant we kept everybody equidistant. Today, i don't think its possible to do the equidistant game any longer, some are going to be closer than others.

In such a scenario, were India to go the ICBM route ( which we will - again, not my civilian view), what will you do?

In effect, would you push India into becoming another China or would you accept India as the Asian France.

That is what the US needs to decide. Because I do not think India will change its mind.

This depends on technical competence. We'd have to do really well to go Gaullist. If the US & India were unable to ally then that would be the only option left. Last resort.

[Double Edge]

You mentioned England and France, and why the USSR didn't see them as a threat/target them. They are the third person in the fight but they are US allies. Russia knows that to jump on one of them means that the other country and the US is also getting in the fight.

Why did both of them develop nukes by 1960 then ?

It was Nikita's thinly vieled statements about the range of his missiles after the Suez crisis that did it.

[Double Edge]

This one is speculative. And since its an election year people come up with all sorts of ideas. This latest by Bharat Karnad is India retests at the end of the year to improve Modi's flagging popularity

Slumping Modi needs thermonuclear tests | Security wise | Jun 03 2018

So what can Modi do to revive his prospects in the short time available to him? New and catchy, alliterative, slogan-promises — yawn! — of radical big bang reforms won’t cut the mustard. Political leaders who have found themselves in Modi’s dilemma have done the obvious thing — started a small war — not rinky-dink “surgical strikes”. A war with China is not practicable. A small war with Pakistan — six months before election date — is an attractive proposition to restore his reputation and get the people behind him. Except the Indian Army and the other two armed services are in no fit state — given the “voids” — to prosecute one that can last more than a week or two. In a conflict of one week or two week duration — which is the most the country can afford and the Indian military can manage, zilch will be achieved against the ready Pakistani forces. In other words, no meaningful objectives can be attained by this option.

There’s another more doable option that will fetch Modi the political results he wants. He can order a genuine big bang — the Big Bang that comes from a resumption of underground testing of big yield thermonuclear weapons that, besides obtaining a proven, reliable, and respect-inducing hydrogen weapons inventory for the country, will mobilize the people (voters) behind him in the face of the expected adverse reaction by the US and the West. If this includes economic sanctions so much the better because then Modi can reasonably make the case for the country coming together to thwart foreign adversaries of India. The more Washington and Western governments threaten and act up the more Modi can stoke the fear of the country under siege, and to paint the opposition parties into a corner as providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

The resumption of thermonuclear testing as a means of strengthening his chances of regaining power in 2019 cannot, however, be too much on the eve of the elections, because then not enough time will be available for the popular feelings to stand by the government in a crisis to naturally congeal into mass support for Modi in elections, because the N-tests will be seen as too obvious an electoral ploy to win votes. So if the elections are called on due date in May 2019, the tests will have to be conducted by December 2018-January 2019 at the latest, with instructions issued immediately to BARC and DRDO to begin preparations. There is, moreover, no dearth of reasons for the tests — China’s assistance to North Korea to secure proven thermonuclear prowess and to Pakistan to build a formidable arsenal of short range tactical nukes, and China’s own nuclear build-up.

And this time the thermonuclear tests have to be full bore, full yield, to leave no doubt in anyone’s mind as to their attributes. DRDO head Christopher Raj has said that tests can be undertaken at a short notice, implying there are spare L-shaped tunnels in Pokhran to set off these test explosions.

The question as always is can Modi, will Modi, do the right thing by the country and reassert India’s stature as an independent would-be great power and risk upsetting the US and the West — relations with whom he puts much store by — by taking such a course of action, and one which guarantees him an extended stay in office?

I am sceptical of this idea. We test if the need arises, as in we are in a near war situation and need a demonstration of ability. What is the need to do it now, why go back to
1998 otherwise and undo all the progress made since