After Iran, Pakistan?

[halupridol]

How old is this author?
Pls dont misunderstand me, I believe ppl get wiser with age but this former ambassador to UN makes me doubt if he really got any wise as his hair strands turned grey. I seriously doubt his capability to cogitate if he thinks that this is not true

Or may be he has put on blinders.
Some capsules of @halupridol should be enough to make him understand that it is Pak which has an ambiguous nuclear policy, and which refuses to pledge a no-first use like other regional nuclear powers (China and India). It is Pakistan which has tac-nukes, which brings down the threshold of a nuclear war. Even a grade 8 student can list these points but Mr. Ambassador is blinded by his nationalism and ignores the threat his country poses to its neighbors.

well,,,the last para effectively reveals the motive,,

The central question which Pakistan must pose to the world is: if the aim is to prevent a South Asian catastrophe, is it not better for the world powers to promote an equitable solution to the Kashmir dispute and an agreement on mutual military restraint between Pakistan and India?

baki sab wahi roz ka

 

[haman10]

Like i said Iran had a different agenda. I did not mean any disrespect.
.

None taken, mate.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

How old is this author?
Pls dont misunderstand me, I believe ppl get wiser with age but this former ambassador to UN makes me doubt if he really got any wise as his hair strands turned grey. I seriously doubt his capability to cogitate if he thinks that this is not true

Or may be he has put on blinders.
Some capsules of @halupridol should be enough to make him understand that it is Pak which has an ambiguous nuclear policy, and which refuses to pledge a no-first use like other regional nuclear powers (China and India). It is Pakistan which posses tac-nukes, which brings down the threshold of a nuclear war. Even a grade 8 student can list these points but Mr. Ambassador is blinded by his nationalism and ignores the threat his country poses to its neighbors.


Oh!!
So is it your hobby to make predictions??

After reading that erstwhile paksitani ambassador's rant, are there many questions remaining about why paksitani diplomacy sucks....

 

[Pulsar]

ALTHOUGH most Iranians are celebrating their nuclear deal with the P5+1, the framework ‘understanding’, once implemented, will effectively block Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapons capability for the foreseeable future.

Hardly a week after the Iran deal was announced, the New York Times — which often reflects official US policy — editorially propagated that attention be turned to constraining Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic capabilities. The issue was also covered by other US media.

The NYT arguments, taken from the Indian hymnbook, were not surprising; the timing of the proposal to target Pakistan is significant. If the editorial indeed reflects official US thinking, it would confirm the view of many in Pakistan and the Muslim world that America’s aim is to denuclearise all Islamic countries. With Iran neutralised, Pakistan remains the only nuclear-capable Islamic nation.

The world should be made to understand why Pakistan remains ‘obsessed’ with India.
Pakistan has fought off numerous US attempts, initially to prevent and, after 1998, to retard Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic programmes. Pakistan’s ‘establishment’ is confident that future attempts will fail also. But, it would be a mistake to become complacent.

The US is engaged in a strategic contest with China. It sees India as a ‘strategic partner’ in this Asian power game. India can challenge China effectively only once it has neutralised Pakistan. The Indian lobby in the US is now second in influence only to the Israeli lobby. Thus, unless persuaded otherwise, Washington can be expected to do all that is possible to assist India in neutralising Pakistan’s power.

The following stratagem, used against Iran and others, may be used to restrict Pakistan:

First, concerns about Pakistan’s programmes will be spread through the media and diplomatic channels. Then, Islamabad would be pressed to give assurances and accept constraints ostensibly to assuage these ‘concerns’.

Next, an effort would be made to translate these restraints and restrictions into binding commitments, including through the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, the IAEA and the UN Security Council.

If Pakistan then ‘violates’ such restrictions, it would be subjected to multilateral or unilateral sanctions.

Numerous grounds will be cited to restrain Pakistan. Previously, it was argued that Pakistan was a nuclear proliferator; that its nuclear weapons could be captured by ‘Islamist terrorists’; that the Pakistan Army could turn ‘Islamist’. The new tack, reflected in the editorial, is that:

— Pakistan should no longer be “obsessed” with India, which is now preoccupied with becoming “a regional economic and political power”;

— Pakistan’s nuclear and military deployments against India are destabilising; and;

— Pakistan is descending into chaos.

These motivated assertions need to be refuted effectively. Pakistan’s diplomacy should be actively mobilised for the purpose.

First, the world should be made to understand why Pakistan remains “obsessed” with India. As the editorial itself observes (almost approvingly), Prime Minister Modi has threatened “retaliation” against Pakistan “if Islamic militants carry out a terror attack in India” — irrespective of whether or not the Pakistan government is responsible for this. Given Modi’s aggressive policies in Kashmir and the BJP’s persecution of Indian Muslims, such a “terrorist” attack appears almost inevitable, sooner or later. If Modi’s doctrine is applied, an India-Pakistan conflict also becomes inevitable.

The Indian threat is real “on the ground”. Over 70pc of India’s land, air and sea forces are deployed against Pakistan. India’s capability for aggression against Pakistan is being rapidly enlarged by the $100 billion in advanced weaponry being sold to it including by the US, Europe and Israel. Indian generals have not disavowed their ‘Cold Start’ doctrine envisaging a sudden and massive attack against Pakistan.

Pakistan’s is not the “fastest growing nuclear arsenal”. In fact, with the revival of their Cold War post the Ukraine crisis, the US and Russia have deployed the largest number of additional nuclear weapons last year. Pakistan’s warheads are estimated in the Western media by assuming that all of its fissile material production capacity is being transformed into nuclear warheads. On the same assumption, India’s arsenal would be much larger than projected, since foreign nuclear fuel supplies, authorised by the Suppliers’ Group, enable India to use all of its indigenous uranium for weapons purposes.

The size of nuclear arsenals is relevant for mutual deterrence. During the Cold War, the US and the Soviet Union built over 20,000 warheads. Several US ‘experts’ have asserted that with its capacity to build a larger arsenal, and deployment of anti-ballistic missiles, and a ‘second strike’ capability, India would be able to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic capabilities in a pre-emptive nuclear strike. Pakistan can best preserve nuclear deterrence by developing larger and survivable numbers of nuclear warheads.

Likewise, Pakistan’s recently tested long-range missiles are defensive; designed to ensure that India cannot threaten Pakistan with impunity from the Nicobar and Andaman Islands or its long-range nuclear submarines.

Similarly, the deployment of nuclear-capable tactical missiles was in direct response to India’s growing and advanced military deployments and repeated threats to attack Pakistan. (It is similar to Nato’s deployment of battlefield nuclear weapons during the Cold War against the larger conventional forces of the Soviet Union.)

The assertion that Pakistan is “descending into chaos” is palpably false. Today, the politics of the street is over; the economy has stabilised, and a concerted civil-military campaign is under way to combat TTP terrorism and the Baloch insurgents, with the cooperation of the new Afghan government. (Meanwhile, 17 insurgencies simmer within India, unremarked by the Western media.)

The potentially disastrous consequences of the India-Pakistan nuclear and military stand-off cannot be left to be debated in the news media. But India refuses to discuss this seriously.

Under the circumstances, it would be wise for Pakistan to ask the US: if India indeed threatens to launch an attack against Pakistan after a ‘terrorist’ incident, will the US intervene to prevent the conflict, or to prevent Pakistan from resorting to nuclear deterrence?

The central question which Pakistan must pose to the world is: if the aim is to prevent a South Asian catastrophe, is it not better for the world powers to promote an equitable solution to the Kashmir dispute and an agreement on mutual military restraint between Pakistan and India?

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

Published in Dawn, April 12th, 2015

After Iran, Pakistan? - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

One of the most silly articles I've read in a long long time! The author doesn't seem to know WTF he's talking about. I can shred his nonsensical arguments point by point but I don't have the time. His facts are all over the place and his grand delusions are breathtaking in their idiocy!

And he was Pakistan's UN ambassador to the UN? Oh wow!

 

[SipahSalar]

One of the most silly articles I've read in a long long time! The author doesn't seem to know WTF he's talking about. I can shred his nonsensical arguments point by point but I don't have the time. His facts are all over the place and his grand delusions are breathtaking in their idiocy!

You do have the time to make a useless comment.

 

[Winchester]

One of the most silly articles I've read in a long long time! The author doesn't seem to know WTF he's talking about. I can shred his nonsensical arguments point by point but I don't have the time. His facts are all over the place and his grand delusions are breathtaking in their idiocy!

And he was Pakistan's UN ambassador to the UN? Oh wow!

The basic premise of the article is that there are elements in the U.S who along with the increasingly strong Indian lobby who will try to curtail Pakistan's nuclear program.
If i am a policy maker in Delhi why wouldn't i use my increased influence in Washington to spread fear about my rival's strategic program ?
This is just a heads up to Pakistan to prepare itself for any such eventuality !

What I find wrong with this analysis is it talks about only India and Pakistan, as though their nuclear war will be in isolation and will not affect other powers in the region America's interest in India is not out of love for curry masala, or against Pakistan, they want India to become a pain in china's behind, and to keep a check on India itself they do need Pakistan.

One way to prevent a nuclear war is to denuclearize the conventionally weaker side....no???
Plzzz don't compare India to China
India will never be able to compete with the U.S like China is doing

India will try its best of course, but with recent developments like the AH-1Z sale of $1 billion, it seems Washington is not ready to play ball.

That sale still requires congressional approval if i am not wrong
Anyways Indian influence in Washington will continue to grow and the Hindu nationalist govt. will try to use that to hurt Pakistan in whatever way possible

 

[LeGenD]

This man is a fool. US has no policy to neutralize Pakistan's nuclear assets, as US understands it is impossible to do that at this point. Pakistan has too many nukes, too many facilities, and too many nuclear weapons engineers.

Read this: The Pentagon's Secret Plans to Secure Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal | Global Security Newswire | NTI

A military operation of this magnitude is likely to involve some serious US firepower, the real Shock and Awe. While homework for a military operation have been done, their is no political incentive for it in current times since Pakistan does not poses a threat to US interests thus far.

I am, however, worried about Pakistan's plans for China concerning Gwadar port; Pakistan should not transform this port into a Chinese Naval base and rather use it for revenue generation purposes because USA is keeping an eye on Gwadar-related-developments due to its China-containment policy.

Also, you need to learn about the concept of US strategic primacy. Those hundreds of billions of dollars are being invested somewhere, don't you think?

Read following articles:-

U.S. Moves Toward Nuclear First Strike Capability

Action/Reaction: U.S. Space Weaponization and China | Arms Control Association

U.S. military will need to look into ways to 'neutralize' China's underground storage facilities that could contain as many as 3,000 nuclear weapons | Daily Mail Online

 

[Pulsar]

India will never be able to compete with the U.S like China is doing

Huh? China competing with the US?

China has a stockpile of 240 nukes (usable or not) whereas the US has a current stockpile of 5000 nukes! And you contend that China is competing with America?

 

[Winchester]

Huh? China competing with the US?

China has a stockpile of 240 nukes (usable or not) whereas the US has a current stockpile of 5000 nukes! And you contend that China is competing with America?

Wow so going by your logic since by most accounts Pakistan has more nuclear weapons than India thus.......
Compete as in sphere of influence
Compete as in size of economy

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar; having an attack of paranoia? Thought that you had some immunities in your physiology.

Not really, just letting my paranoia loose...sometimes crying wolf has its benefits.

I dont see why you compare with ISIS

Plain level of comparative hatred for their enemies.

 

[rockstar08]

Yeah we 're planning to show the complete picture soon.

we were in weak position in 90's you could have done that if your army got something they lack from the beginning ..hint 2002 Parliament attacks , 2008 Mumbai Attacks ....

hum dhamkiyun se daara nai kerte ,
Kaghaz ke sher yun dhaara nai kerte

 

[doppelganger]

Pakistan is the only Muslim country which has developed capability to wage nuclear war.

No country except the USA and Russia have nuclear warfighting capability.

What Pakistan has is credible deterrence against India. Period.

A 100 nuke arsenal, in disassembled component form, is not a nuclear warfighting arsenal.

 

[Bornubus]

we were in weak position in 90's you could have done that if your army got something they lack from the beginning ..hint 2002 Parliament attacks , 2008 Mumbai Attacks ....

hum dhamkiyun se daara nai kerte ,
Kaghaz ke sher yun dhaara nai kerte

No major terrorist incident happened in India since 2008 ,ever wonder why ?

There are several

HINTS

 

[Levina]

we were in weak position in 90's you could have done that if your army got something they lack from the beginning ..hint 2002 Parliament attacks , 2008 Mumbai Attacks ....

hum dhamkiyun se daara nai kerte ,
Kaghaz ke sher yun dhaara nai kerte

Bwahaha
What could our army do when our leaders were dithery??
But times have changed...

After reading that erstwhile paksitani ambassador's rant, are there many questions remaining about why paksitani diplomacy sucks....

May be I had high hopes...lol

 

[rockstar08]

Bwahaha
What could our army do when our leaders were dithery??
But times have changed...


May be I had high hopes...lol

well trust me, dont expect much from your current leadership ... because things have changed beyond the expectations