In the short term we need multirole fighters in numbers. We need to develop BMs in the long term to ensure credible deterrence.
Due to our geography, we are extremely vulnerable to enemy artillery. Only BMs can ensure our neighbours avoid war at all costs.
The aim of any weapon be offensive or defensive is to build a credible deterrence.... Now as most bd members suggest that BM alone will achieve it .... the idea in itself is highly flawed .... A ballistic missile is strategic weapon in nature (not considering tactical/battlefield BMs) .... Its main purpose is to achieve the destruction of enemy population centers/Targets of strategic value... which aren't reachable through conventional means..... however alone no matter how frighting and deadly the word Ballistic Missile sounds cannot achieve the purpose of building deterrence .... the reason being.... some inherent flaws to this thinking... how and where does it fail to to build and provide deterrence?
As mentioned earlier, being a strategic weapon it surely can be used for striking at long distances deep in enemy's heart ..... as some here suggested 2500 or 3000 km..... but what good would that be ? how much fear it can instill in enemy's heart? how much of a destruction value it can achieve ? Not much if you ask me honestly..... with a conventional payload ...it would not achieve more then a long range artillery..... except for the fact that its not long range artillery and cannot be used in that capacity .... without a nuclear payload .... A ballistic missile does not help to provide you the deterrence you are desperately seeking to make your adversary back off...
Now another misconception which is commonly placed amongst folks is the question of ...why not ?? why cant we have em' and deter the enemy with thousands and thousands of it raining upon the enemy ....hitting every nook and corner of its territory ...would force it to back off.... the answer .... no, you simply cannot .....these systems are highly complex and expensive to build, operationalize and maintain..... how many units of such systems do you think declared nuclear powers like India or Pakistan maintain ? definitely not by thousands or even hundreds ...the very nature of such systems prevent them to be build in such numbers....
Do members here remember the night after 27th of Feb 2019 when India threatened Pakistan with missile attack but had to back off because of the consequences ....though it was totally humiliated in the air warfare.....was it because of us having missiles of our own both ballistic and cruise ....or was it the fear of a nuclear war? with the use of theses weapons you jump the escalation ladder to uncharted waters ....the thoughts of which cannot only make both the countries shiver but the entire world...
why do the west in general do no develop and employ such weapons(except for the nuclear powers).... being part of the developed world how hard is for them to build one.... realistically speaking how hard would it be say for a country like Sweden to build an IRBM or even ICBM?
And the idea of developing a BM .... how realistic is it for Bangladesh? the amount of complexity involved ...do you have the scientific and industrial base for it....do you have enough connections in the international market to provide you with the key technologies and parts?? How about the time frame involved...even if you ignore the core philosophy of its use and start building one now? how many years it would take you guys to develop a meaningful intermediate range or even a medium range BM ? what about the world reaction? how would they respond to such a news? with obvious next step to develop a nuclear program....without which BMs are meaningless? how about your threat perception... would India allow it for you to have one? would it not sabotage it or destroy such a program at its very inception ...when it can..then to allow for you to develop such a program(Hell arent they trying to impose a defense deal on you guys at this very moment? figure it out)? and for a moment even if we imagine ...you get some miraculously from outside... how would you protect them? given the current levels of your conventional forces ...Air force in particular, air defense another one Viz-a-Viz India...which are almost insignificant if not none... how would you ensure the safety(from with-in) and protection of these strategic assets? then comes the other factors like ABM defense and multi-layer shields that India is in the process of developing/procuring and deploying? how do you plan to counter them? its and un-ending cycle....which would literally break your bank.....even if we ignore the other factors..... these are some serious questions that needs to be answered.... but nowadays one hears this statement from our bangladeshi friends quite often..."We have the money now" ...that might be true....so use it wisely rather... build your defenses ....Invest in areas which are long ignored and are required to develop deterrence w.r.t your threat perceptions....
Rather then planing to invest in BMs .... would it not be be better to invest in the right kind of Anti Ballistic Missile defense? How about building up your long neglected navy? other then surface vessels how about building of a fleet of say Six A-class submarines which would ensure AA/AD? how about updating your badly needed Airforce? buying a few 4+ or even 4.5+ generation squadrons would certainly not hurt the cause....what about building the non-existing early warning system?...how about updating your army with not only equipment but training too? how about investing in interoperability and net-centric warfare capabilities? how about finding and investing in areas asymmetry to your advantage? get the qualitative edge where ever possible.... you name it and you need to build it from scratch or rebuild it entirely....thats the amount of work and investment you need to build your conventional deterrence.... and it does not mean the deterrence is solely based on defensive posturing but also adding the right kind of teeth for offensive purpose...
Then comes the idea of building alliances....with the right kind of friends that have your back at the hour of your need.... those who can help you build capabilities and capacities ..... what has Bangladesh done in this regard? have you ever considered the case of Europe? Individually many of the counties in E.U...wont be able to survive on their own ....its their pact which bind them in a strong alliance....which make them work in a pack rather alone....hence makes them strong even against the strongest of countries like USSR.... alone most of them wouldn't stand a chance.....Bangladesh is lucky in this regard ....where India takes Pakistan as its main enemy as it challenges its regional hegemony ...focusing and deploying the bulk of its resources against it.....then comes china.... which it does not want to confront as an enemy ...for obvious reasons ....but is forced to do so.... for natural reasons.... India focuses on Bangladesh to the extent that it remains under its umbrella of influence perpetually like other smaller countries of the region ....which is suffocating for the people of Bangladesh.... Unfortunately your PM has been stuck in the bitter past and her shortsightedness are going to have repercussions for the security of her country.....she hard swam in the opposite direction....while it might have worked for her in the short term ...but in the long run she might have put your country's sovereignty at stake... anyways you guys are wise enough to choose for yourself... and only time will tell which decision was right and which one wrong...
Lastly, the idea of building BM is no different to the case of some naive Pakistanis asking for Aircraft carrier .... without realizing the ground realities....and its implications on our defense... at this point of time.
Sorry for posting off-topic....but I felt to highlight this issue raised by Bangladeshi members from time to time.... confusing range with the choice of weapons....and its implications for their country.
Adios!
