Indian Nuclear Testing

[Officer of Engineers]

Why would this be a surprise...this is an expected reaction.

Mainly because I found Hans Christensen's reasoning to be dubious. The exact same data produced two different estimates from one year to the next. In 2008, Pakistan was estimated at 40-60. Now, it's 70-90 with the exact same data set as 2008.

The only actual close source revelation was USN Admiral Mullen's one word reply to the question, is Pakistan expanding her arsenal. Adm Mullen responded yes. That was spring of this year. Hans took his cue from that and did his mumble jumble and came up with 30 more warheads than last year.

Had it not been for Adm Mullen's testimony, I would have dismissed this year's report.

For decades the Pakistanis kept a balance with the Indians in terms of conventional forces.At various points due to American aid,they have also had superior equipment though not in the numbers India managed to field. This balance has changed completely today.India is modernizing the military rapidly due to a growing economy,the Pakistanis know they cannot match either quality or quantity with the Indian conventional forces from now on especially with the changed US-India relationship.So what do they do...start producing the one thing they can do without spending a lot of money...the nukes.

A google on Pakistani nuclear doctrine came up with these two very revealling documents.

Pakistan’s Nuclear Doctrine
‘Understanding Pakistan's Nuclear Doctrine’

Both points to a role, nuclear warfighting, that I can quite understand but also know that the Pak arsenal is not upto task. What is revealling is that a Pakistani LGen trying to explain Pak nuke doctrine might as well be in la-la land. The author of the 1st article, LGen (Ret'd) Sardar FS Lodi is no K. Sundarji.

From Pakistan’s Nuclear Doctrine

Pakistan's Nuclear Doctrine would therefore essentially revolve around the first-strike option. In other words we will use nuclear weapons if attacked by India even if the attack is with conventional weapons. With his American experience of a graduated nuclear response Professor Stephen P. Cohen feels that Pakistan would use what he calls an 'option-enhancing policy' for a possible use of nuclear weapons. This would entail a stage-by-stage approach in which the nuclear threat is increased at each step to deter India from attack. The first step could be a public or private warning, the second a demonstration explosion of a small nuclear weapon on its own soil, the third step would be the use of a few nuclear weapons on its own soil against Indian attacking forces. The fourth stage would be used against critical but purely military targets in India across the border from Pakistan. Probably in thinly populated areas in the desert or semi-desert, causing least collateral damage. this may prevent Indian retaliation against cities in Pakistan. Some weapon systems would be in reserve for the counter-value role. These weapons would be safe from Indian attack as some would be airborne while the ground based ones are mobile and could be moved around the country.

So, Pakistan would be 1st strike ... as a demonstration. In other words, Pakistan would give the Indians the right to strike after they wasted a nuke on a dog-and-pony show. And even after total escalation, Pakistan would not inflict unacceptable damage on India but to blunt her armies.

I don't know if this guy is in la-la land or need a serious course in military axioms of killing the enemy.

The 2nd article, however, is a wealth of information, in Pakistani nuclear diplomatic history with India, attempts at arms control, and lack thereof, the final response to a 1st strike doctrine.

However, both articles made it clear that within the historic context, Pakistan prefers the minimum reprisal. LGen Lodi suggested Pakistan 50 to India's 150. India is nowhere near 150.

So, the question is what changed to prompt this new estimate? Adm Mullen isn't talking.

OOE I think the Indians are the ones being reactive here on the nuclear field,the Pakistanis are ones being active as this is the only military field they can be active today.

India has the lead as far as nuclear weapons technology is concerned. At least with open source reporting, she is confident that she can deploy a 30kt thermonuke (designed to fit within a SLBM), recent revellations not withstanding.

[calass]

However, both articles made it clear that within the historic context, Pakistan prefers the minimum reprisal. LGen Lodi suggested Pakistan 50 to India's 150. India is nowhere near 150.

So, the question is what changed to prompt this new estimate? Adm Mullen isn't talking.





India has the lead as far as nuclear weapons technology is concerned. At least with open source reporting, she is confident that she can deploy a 30kt thermonuke (designed to fit within a SLBM), recent revellations not withstanding.

Perhaps the fact that India is now developing a missile defense system which seems to be at a more advanced level than previously thought..also maybe as posted before Pakistan is not certain anymore whether she can hold the previous red lines due to the conventional gap opening up.


I don't think India wants to go for a rapid weaponization of her arsenal.She is reacting to what Pakistan is doing.Wonder what China thinks of this.

[Officer of Engineers]

Perhaps the fact that India is now developing a missile defense system which seems to be at a more advanced level than previously thought..also maybe as posted before Pakistan is not certain anymore whether she can hold the previous red lines due to the conventional gap opening up.

You don't come up with an extra 30 warheads in one year.

I don't think India wants to go for a rapid weaponization of her arsenal.She is reacting to what Pakistan is doing.

If we go by announced programs, then India has yet to need more warheads. Her SSBN/SLBM programs won't be ready to accept nukes for at least 4 more years, more likely 6. So, from this perspective, the Pak increased arsenal is clearly designed to trump India's nuclear weapons program.

Wonder what China thinks of this.

Well, I have not touched on this. Hans listed China at 235 warheads when China announced she is the smallest of the N5. Jeffery Lewis listed China at 120 warheads. So, depending on who do you believe or track, then the reaction would be different.

[tinymarae]

That is just it. The Kargil War proved the Pakistnis are rational, if risk-preferred, thinkers.

I was reading about Kargil war after going through this thread and came across this.

Pakistan 'prepared nuclear strike'

How reliable is Bruce Reidel's account? Has this been rubbished on WAB before?

[Deltacamelately]

Major DCL, I have to disagree here. Under current and foreseeable situation the Chinese are still rational players who will not escalate to the nuclear threshold and risk Shanghai and Beijing going up in flames just to make a point on a border or a trade dispute. They have very real, very earthly interests to look after. So deterrence works vis a vis China, Taiwan or no Taiwan.

Cactus,

I puposefully stressed on the lack of deterance IF China removes its nuclear focus from the mainland war. There is a reason for that. You have to have an arsenal that can deter both Pakistan and China simultaneously. China with a bigger and more proven arsenal and till yesterday, Pakistan with a smaller one. However, with the recent news reports of (Pakistan) moving from 70 to 90 atomic bombs to more, India's min credible doctrine stands to become null and void. There is a difference between having a degree deterrence, which is required for protection, and having a recessed deterance, i.e.going beyond that. If the news are correct, then they are going well beyond the requirement of deterrence. This obviously is a dangerous scenario. Your deterance is in question so what do you do?

You analyse the current Chinese and Pakistani nuclear posture and make contingencies. The Chinese current posture with necessary modifications (since India's requirements are of a significantly different and lower order) becomes a relevant example. But for us, the more reasonable and optimum posture would be based on recessed deterrence. Though this posture would not require weaponisation as such, however, all elements of the deterrent (warheads, delivery systems and infrastructure) kept at a level of preparedness, which allows for their rapid shift to a deployed status, immediately needs to be trebled to the "assessed" Pak arsenal. This is not a doctrine of ambiguity, but one that seeks to define capabilities that can be rapidly transformed from its current mini level into an operational arsenal of a certain "magnified" level. The current level is simply not enough to deter the enemy in a real future war.

[Deltacamelately]

You don't come up with an extra 30 warheads in one year.

If we go by announced programs, then India has yet to need more warheads. Her SSBN/SLBM programs won't be ready to accept nukes for at least 4 more years, more likely 6. So, from this perspective, the Pak increased arsenal is clearly designed to trump India's nuclear weapons program.

Well, I have not touched on this. Hans listed China at 235 warheads when China announced she is the smallest of the N5. Jeffery Lewis listed China at 120 warheads. So, depending on who do you believe or track, then the reaction would be different.

Sir,

There are many strategic uncertainties that India will have to contend with in the coming years and decades. But it is clear that while preoccupied with Taiwan and the US, China does not pose a threat in a way that India cannot adequately deal with. The issue thus is not a question of a threat from China or Pakistan or BOTH, but the fact that if India has to maintain its independence of policy and action, it must have adequate means of self-defence, whether conventional or nuclear. The challenge is in ensuring the autonomy and strength to deal with future coercion or military pressure. It is in this context that India will require a nuclear amplification and need it soon.

[diplomaticview]

Fair comments needs no particular flag

I think you need to change your county's flag diplomat.
And this is not a Kashmir thread.

My diplomat flag will be remains same but this was my neutral analysis on indo-pak relations and misbehaves of world community with Pakistan.

Yes this is not Kashmir thread but this is a root of all crimes.

[Luke Gu]

I don't think India wants to go for a rapid weaponization of her arsenal.She is reacting to what Pakistan is doing.Wonder what China thinks of this.

The arsenal can also be used to deal with China，so I think you can image what China thinks of this。

[Officer of Engineers]

I was reading about Kargil war after going through this thread and came across this.

Pakistan 'prepared nuclear strike'

How reliable is Bruce Reidel's account? Has this been rubbished on WAB before?

Musharraf in his book during the Kargil War, wrote Pak nukes were not ready to be deployed.

[Officer of Engineers]

The arsenal can also be used to deal with China，so I think you can image what China thinks of this。

Pretty well nothing. The Chinese are perfectly comfortable that their arsenal can deter India since it deters both Russia and the US.

[Luke Gu]

Pretty well nothing. The Chinese are perfectly comfortable that their arsenal can deter India since it deters both Russia and the US.

I don't mean we will increase our arsenal，it's enough to deter any nations。But I don't think we will feel nothing about our two neighbor increase their arsenal。

[Officer of Engineers]

Major,

I don't know what the Indian response is. It is clear that Gen Kapoor believes in the Pak expansion though I hope to hell he has better intel than using Hans Christensen.

However, there is something seriously wrong with Pak nuke doctrine. They don't believe they can win.

[pChan]

However, there is something seriously wrong with Pak nuke doctrine. They don't believe they can win.

Sir,

Can you please elaborate on that statement?

[Deltacamelately]

Major,

I don't know what the Indian response is. It is clear that Gen Kapoor believes in the Pak expansion though I hope to hell he has better intel than using Hans Christensen.

However, there is something seriously wrong with Pak nuke doctrine. They don't believe they can win.

Sir,

I won't concede to conspiracy theories of Pak nukes on Saudi fighters, though their might be some salt to that. However, the Pak nuclear trend is indeed disturbing. They had attained sufficient degree deterance way back in 1999-2000 with 35-50 nukes and had near parity with any Indian arsenal to speak of. Even at 10-15 kts, the numbers were sufficient to deter any near parity stockpile. You also have to consider that they have not been able to amplify the delivery platforms the way they have amplified the number of nukes. So what's the deal? Is it to provoke India to either slutter up its own arsenal or is it to provoke India for doing a harakiri...detonating another TN or two and subsequently hear the international rebuke music and face crippling economical-technological embargoes and a fullstop to its hitech shopping?

[Luke Gu]

However, there is something seriously wrong with Pak nuke doctrine. They don't believe they can win.

If it's true，does it mean her nuclear policy is defensive ？