A Normal Nuclear Pakistan

[VCheng]

Who the F is atanz

He is a fellow of yours in the exalted TT-C ranks, Sir.

Funny isn't it you live in the only country that has used nuclear weapons

There is nothing funny about that, Sir. If you can help me understand how is that relevant to the present thread, may be I can formulate a response?

 

[SipahSalar]

Sure, Pakistan is ready to fall back from Full-Spectrum Deterrence if our conventional forces receive very significant armaments and technology. Otherwise, no thank you.

 

[VCheng]

Sure, Pakistan is ready to fall back from Full-Spectrum Deterrence if our conventional forces receive very significant armaments and technology. Otherwise, no thank you.

Of course, both sides have to give and take, and it has to be worth it for both sides too, if there is to be a deal.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Who the F is atanz

Who the F is atman?

@Syed.Ali.Haider

(i) I never have said or subscribe to sub continent being superior. Within it there is such diversity that one statement is like trying to configure a statement on the passing block of traffic.

(ii) I think you might be referring to my referance Indus basin-Pakistan being cradle of human civilization. That would be true but note Indus basin is NOT the subcontinent - merely a small but historically significant portion.

(iii) As regards nuclear weapons nothwithstanding the shenanigans of AQK Pakistan has as much right as USA or any other nuclear capable nation that includes Isreal.

If I went to the local shop to buy a can of coke and in front were French, American, Chinese and Russian all lined up to buy coke on account of being blistering hot day ( I know in UK that is rare to never but hey this is only a analogy ) and the French guy paid his change walked out. Ditto American. Ditto Chinese. Ditto Russian.

However as I am about to walk away with my can I am given a list of do's and don'ts. Don't shake the can. Don't throw into the air like a missile. Don't microwave it. All this I get as free "safety advice".

Well you know what I would do? Shake the friggin thing and open it in the sales assistant's face.

I hope that explains my "nuclear doctrine"

 

[VCheng]

Well you know what I would do? Shake the friggin thing and open it in the sales assistant's face.

Sure, go ahead Sir, I have no problem with that.

(But, to take your analogy further, as long as you are prepared for the consequences of said actions, it is okay.)

 

[third eye]

If you guys are done with your who the F is ....

Can we get on with an Indo Pak nuclear exchange ?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Sure, go ahead Sir, I have no problem with that.

(But, to take your analogy further, as long as you are prepared for the consequences of said actions, it is okay.)

Well when you get girlfriend you get her for a reason. When you buy a gun you get that for a reason. When you make nuclear weapons you make them for a reason.

You don't think "she gonna get pregnant". You do it. You don't think you might disturb the neighbours sleep - if you need to you shoot the gun.

The American's, British, French, Isreali's, Chinese, Russian's, Indian's and the Pakistani's know why the got the nukes for. Push to shove. Use 'em.

And here is a bizzare fact about humans. If they know you will use them nobody will dare you to use them. Which in a circular way leads to safety and security.

You know the M - A - D

 

[VCheng]

Well when you get girlfriend you get her for a reason. When you buy a gun you get that for a reason. When you make nuclear weapons you make them for a reason.

You don't think "she gonna get pregnant". You do it. You don't think you might disturb the neighbours sleep - if you need to you shoot.

The American's, British, French, Isreali's, Chinese, Russian's, Indian's and the Pakistani's know why the got the nukes for. Push to shove. Use 'em.

And here is a bizzare fact about humans. If they know you will use them nobody will dare you to use them. Which in a circular way leads to safety and security.

You the M - A - D

You are absolutely correct about the MAD Doctrine, which is also why when opposing sides have nuclear weapons, other means are used to further national interests, mainly economic. That is the next step when a country crosses the nuclear threshold, it gets to play in the big leagues where such things are played by the rules of a post-nuclear world as I have described them.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Whatever the article says is perhaps true. There is however another asymmetry which is the real reason behind the asymmetry under discussions. The real asymmetry is in the size of the Indian economy which enables India to finance third largest military machine in the world.

Indian Army has 1. 13 million active personnel with another 1-million reservists consisting of 34 Divisions & 15 independent brigades. Indian Navy is about 60,000 strong with 2 aircraft carriers, 16 submarines including 1 nuclear, 10 destroyers, 15 frigates & 25 corvettes. IAF strength stands at about 130,000 with 42 combat squadrons planned. Annual defence purchases have reached a staggering $24-billion and her annual defence expenditure is more than entire annual budget of Pakistan.

Pakistan’s army & Airforce are less than half both in manpower & material assets. Pak Navy strength is less than one third, putting Pakistan at a great disadvantage in any conventional conflict.

Pakistan’s economy being about 1/10 of Indian economy; whichever way one looks at; it is more than likely that Pakistan would lose out in any long drawn out war. Primarily because equipment losses due to attrition would be near impossible to replace.

I was in agreement with you until this point:

Therefore, unless we accept to become a client state of India; Pakistan has no option but to build up her nuclear arsenal to the level where “Mutually Assured Destruction” would result if the nuclear threshold is crossed.

Why is the nuclear option the one thing Pakistanis cling to above all else? As if the only logical conclusion is to possess nuclear weapons. What good has it done you thus far?

Whether anyone likes or not; it is matter of life & death for Pakistan.

Only if Pakistan chooses to frame the issues through this frame. Why does it have to be life or death? Is any other ,non-nuclear, state in S.Asia "dead" because they do not possess "the bomb"? Has India absorbed any of them into its territory?

I am stating that even if fighting quality of Pakistan military turns out to be superior to the Indian military (as PAF proved in 1965);

Can we park national pride to one side and stop perpetuating this myth of inherent Pakistani superiority? You have to go back 50 years to find anything to support such an absurd claim but since then you have fought 2 further wars with India and lost them decisively. The Pakistani martial theory is nonsense.

 

[niaz]

Can we park national pride to one side and stop perpetuating this myth of inherent Pakistani superiority? You have to go back 50 years to find anything to support such an absurd claim but since then you have fought 2 further wars with India and lost them decisively. The Pakistani martial theory is nonsense.

Hon sir,

You may be surprised to know that I don't believe in Pakistani Martial theory either. History is witness to the fact that Rajputs, Marathas & Sikhs have proven themselves to be as good as any when it comes to fighting.

I wrote "I am stating that even if fighting quality of Pakistan military turns out to be superior to the Indian military (as PAF proved in 1965);"

The stress is on "Even". I was merely pointing out that superior fighting ability would not be much help against the Indian overwhelming quantitative edge.

The wording was for the sake of argument only and never meant as a slur on the Indian Armed Forces competence.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

What good has it done you thus far?

What ever good they have done to India.

Can we park national pride to one side and stop perpetuating this myth of inherent Pakistani superiority

It is not about inherent superiority. It is about inherent numercial inferiority. The population inbalance is almost 1:7. So that feeds into everything. Assuming if both countries were matched and mirrored each others actions Indian would have 7 times bigger economy, 7 times bigger military, 7 times more aircracft, 7 times more manpower. This is just simple numbers.

Can you imagine if Utter Pradesh alone was pitted against Pakistan? That is 1:1 as UP has about same population. Now don't give me gibberish about numbers can be undone. I know they can like Isreal or Germany but those are very advanced societies.

In our case we are both about ( cut here and cut there ) the league. Thus the 7 times greater advantage plays the dominant factor. If you don't believe that why not chop your country 7 times and then see what you will have left to face Pakistan.

Another way of presenting this is if you had war with

China
China
China
China
China
China
China

Yes, that is 7 Chinas. You think you would have problems? The only equalizer is nuclear weapons because it is not such a big deal how big you are.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

Or how small you are for that matter! Good analysis Atnaz!

I am really at a loss as to why Indians on this forum and on many others don't or just don't want to grasp the concept of deterrence for a smaller neighbor against a bigger one!

Ok if one wants to really ease off things in our neck of the woods then why not give lectures on solving our one and only issue of biblical proportions with India! Solve that and we don't have a problem!!

Giving us lectures on what to do and what not to do --- is now counter productive because it is after all falling on deaf ears in Islamabad!

In essence Pakistan has moved --- it is no longer in a conventional race but has taken the "Equalizer" route and went "Full Spectrum."

It is time for India to think out of the box and remove the so called irritant between the two nations ( and I don't mean giving away Kashmir -- but finding a face saving solution for both sides).

And btw harping on Mumbai is counter productive too. After all we fought three wars, lost hundreds and thousands of souls, we lost half of our country to no small measure by active interference of India, but we together still came and sat on the table, Tashkent, Shimla, etc. Compared to that Mumbai should have been an impetuous for a more determined effort to seek peace.

If India perceives China to be a bigger threat, and they do harp on this theory when explaining their Nuclear ambitions, then they need to see possibilities of how to ramp down tensions between India and Pakistan. And one sure way to do this is to drop Mumbai and move on to a solution of Kashmir!

My 2c

 

[jaunty]

And btw harping on Mumbai is counter productive too. After all we fought three wars, lost hundreds and thousands of souls, we lost half of our country to no small measure by active interference of India, but we together still came and sat on the table, Tashkent, Shimla, etc. Compared to that Mumbai should have been an impetuous for a more determined effort to seek peace.

Mumbai has changed the thought process of ordinary Indians, the way no war has till date. It may seem illogical but that is the truth. Mumbai has done irreparable damage to the Indo-Pak relationship. It will always linger around.

 

[araz]

There is a far greater danger building up here for Pakistan, and I am surprised that the intelligent section of PDF hasn't spotted it yet.



Let us start with this, without quibbling over figures. There is no need to check every point for accuracy because @niaz Sahib's point is quite simple.

What is not so simple is the effect on the morale and the effect on the fighting efficiency of the Pakistani armed forces. As we hear constantly on every occasion that the Pakistani Army cannot hope to cope with the Indian Army, that the Pakistani Air Force cannot overcome or cannot defend itself from the Indian Air Force, that the Navy cannot do much about the Indian Navy, any member of the Pakistan Army, or the Pakistan Air Force, or the Pakistan Navy must sooner or later begin to get the impression that his service is inferior and that his country can hold out, not because of his patriotism, valour and willingness to fight for his country against all odds, but because there is a rich and varied nuclear inventory to back them up when they inevitably lose in battle.

Give enough years for this to sink in, and there will be nothing left of the three Pakistani services except frustrated and secretly internally frightened soldiers, sailors and airmen. They will expect to lose, as everyone expects it of them, and they will expect not to have to fight too hard, as the 'bum' is ready at hand precisely in those occasions when it loses. Which practically interpreting the various formulae used by the administration means every occasion.

It means that progressively, the threshold will have to be lowered. At this level, it is a situation where the three armed forces acknowledge that as a united entity, they will lose. The next stage will be when the individual armed forces acknowledge that they will lose. The longest hold-out will be wondering if he is to be the last casualty in a comical non-war, and, if so, why he should be the chosen one.

Finally the day will come when after losing a company strength encounter, the brigade, division or corps commander will ask for a single nuclear warhead to be detonated on the ground that his troops have surrendered, as there is no other course.

I think as Niaz has pointed out and you have omitted to see this is not a case of defeatist mentality of the armed forces but a stark reality that in the long run ,if a war gets drawn out Pakistan will loose. It is a pity that we did not resolve the festering sore of Kashmir(irrespective of the solution) as it would have allowed the two nations to reevaluate their relationship. The Palkistani soldier did not loose faith or hope in 2002 and again in 2008, and the Air force and Navy will also fight to the last ship. It is in my view a cewrtainty rahter than a wish.
I look at another aspect of this conundrum. What in Pakistan's view is enough? When will Pakistani high command start saying guys we have enough of a stock pile lets do something else. My fear is that the Pakistani thought process is that sooner or later the world powers will lean on it and get it to limit the fissile material in its possession. Before this happens Pakistan wants to accumulate enough Plutonium for its needs for the foreseeable future. But what is the limit and what is the time scale for this?
Another aspect for me to worry about is the vested interests in the region which can instigate a high profile event in either country and use it to whip up war frenzy. If the initial event is nuclear in nature then it will be kit gloves off and all hands on deck for a no holds barred between the two countries which would be disastrous for the countries and the region and perhaps the world. I am hoping that instead of imposing on just one country the USA ,China and Russia should get the two countries together and knock some sense into both and get an agreement in place which will settle all outstanding issues between them and get them on ther road to recovery from what is in my view at least a path leading to eventual destruction.
A

 

[VCheng]

I am hoping that instead of imposing on just one country the USA ,China and Russia should get the two countries together and knock some sense into both and get an agreement in place which will settle all outstanding issues between them and get them on ther road to recovery from what is in my view at least a path leading to eventual destruction.

So what you are hoping for, in essence, that the world pay attention to Pakistan's stockpile to force India to a solution. Do you think that such blackmail can really work?