What's new

Cold War lessons for India and Pakistan

kurup

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
10,563
Reaction score
-2
Country
India
Location
India
Russia’s missiles may still be trained on the United States but it is the nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan that worries Russian experts more than American nukes.

Scholars gathered at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (Imemo), a top-rated Russian think-tank advising the Kremlin, rang alarm bells about the threat of nuclear war in South Asia, which today is greater than anywhere else in the world.

It was pointed out that India and Pakistan are the only two nuclear weapon states locked in a permanent conflict that occasionally escalates to armed confrontation, making the nuclear standoff particularly dangerous. Pakistan’s refusal to make a no-first-use pledge, its development of tactical nuclear weapons, India’s missile defence programme were all seen as factors driving the nuclear arms race in the region and heightening the risk of nuclear conflict.

Well-positioned

At the same time, it was felt that India and Pakistan are well positioned to embark on bilateral arms control because, much like the United States and the erstwhile Soviet Union, they have comparable nuclear forces meant to contain each other.

A senior Indian expert on nuclear disarmament who took part in the discussion (the event was conducted under the Chatham House rule, not disclosing the participants) said the road of talks was strewn with obstacles such as lack of trust between India and Pakistan, different roles the two countries assign to nuclear weapons and the China factor. While Pakistan’s nuclear arms serve to contain India, India’s nuclear programme is directed at China. India is also concerned over the absence of any transparency about China’s nuclear arms.

Notwithstanding these difficulties, Russian experts believe that India and Pakistan could do more to enhance transparency ontheir nuclear arsenals and set up a verification mechanism, at least for confidence-building measures already agreed upon, such as the commitment not to attack each other’s civil nuclear installations and exchange secret lists of such sites.

The Indian participant argued that the dearth of trust between India and Pakistan was so gaping that it was impossible for India to reveal how many nuclear weapons it has, where they are sited or to accept what Pakistan tells it about its nuclear weapons.

The scholar was clearly irked by demands for India to agree to greater transparency. He said it was “puzzling” that such proposals should come from Moscow and urged Russian experts to have “a reality check”.

Strong precedent

Russian experts, however, insisted that the trust divide should not stop India from engaging Pakistan in nuclear arms control. They recalled that there was no trust between the Soviet Union and the U.S. when they began nuclear arms talks in the early 1970s and it was the talks that helped the two superpowers to partially bridge the confidence gap. It was further argued that despite the centrality of China to India’s nuclear strategy it is unrealistic to expect Beijing to negotiate with New Delhi, because China’s nuclear forces are primarily aimed at countering the threat from the U.S.

A leading Russian strategic analyst called on India and Pakistan to negotiate a treaty to slash their arsenals of short and medium-range missiles. Such a treaty could be modelled on the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States, which led to the elimination of all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 km.

In the case of India and Pakistan, an INF pact could cap the number of missiles at 100 to 150, according to the Russian expert. The proposed cuts would not affect India’s deterrent against China — air and sea-based nuclear arms, as well as long-range missiles.

The organisers regretted the fact that Pakistan’s stand was not adequately articulated at the conference (a senior Pakistani diplomat had been invited but failed to turn up), but the debate was still interesting, especially in the light of the ongoing reassessment in Russia of its relations with India and Pakistan.

The Hindu : Opinion / Op-Ed : Cold War lessons for India and Pakistan
 
.
So it was one sided.. but the experts have assumed wrong that the capability bridge at a 150 warheads will ever be accepted.
 
.
A leading Russian strategic analyst called on India and Pakistan to negotiate a treaty to slash their arsenals of short and medium-range missiles. Such a treaty could be modelled on the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States, which led to the elimination of all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 km.

Now this is interesting, Pakistan in no way will agree to this since India do have missiles with more than 5500 kms or is in process to test them (Agni-5, A-6, maybe surya) whose ranges can be reduced to hit Pakistan, but Pakistan has only intermediate range missiles in Gauri & Shaheen for striking India, so why will Pakistan agree to dismantle the only nuclear warhead delivery missiles vis-a-vis India??
 
.
Russia’s missiles may still be trained on the United States but it is the nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan that worries Russian experts more than American nukes.

Scholars gathered at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (Imemo), a top-rated Russian think-tank advising the Kremlin, rang alarm bells about the threat of nuclear war in South Asia, which today is greater than anywhere else in the world.

It was pointed out that India and Pakistan are the only two nuclear weapon states locked in a permanent conflict that occasionally escalates to armed confrontation, making the nuclear standoff particularly dangerous. Pakistan’s refusal to make a no-first-use pledge, its development of tactical nuclear weapons, India’s missile defence programme were all seen as factors driving the nuclear arms race in the region and heightening the risk of nuclear conflict.

Well-positioned

At the same time, it was felt that India and Pakistan are well positioned to embark on bilateral arms control because, much like the United States and the erstwhile Soviet Union, they have comparable nuclear forces meant to contain each other.

A senior Indian expert on nuclear disarmament who took part in the discussion (the event was conducted under the Chatham House rule, not disclosing the participants) said the road of talks was strewn with obstacles such as lack of trust between India and Pakistan, different roles the two countries assign to nuclear weapons and the China factor. While Pakistan’s nuclear arms serve to contain India, India’s nuclear programme is directed at China. India is also concerned over the absence of any transparency about China’s nuclear arms.

Notwithstanding these difficulties, Russian experts believe that India and Pakistan could do more to enhance transparency ontheir nuclear arsenals and set up a verification mechanism, at least for confidence-building measures already agreed upon, such as the commitment not to attack each other’s civil nuclear installations and exchange secret lists of such sites.

The Indian participant argued that the dearth of trust between India and Pakistan was so gaping that it was impossible for India to reveal how many nuclear weapons it has, where they are sited or to accept what Pakistan tells it about its nuclear weapons.

The scholar was clearly irked by demands for India to agree to greater transparency. He said it was “puzzling” that such proposals should come from Moscow and urged Russian experts to have “a reality check”.

Strong precedent

Russian experts, however, insisted that the trust divide should not stop India from engaging Pakistan in nuclear arms control. They recalled that there was no trust between the Soviet Union and the U.S. when they began nuclear arms talks in the early 1970s and it was the talks that helped the two superpowers to partially bridge the confidence gap. It was further argued that despite the centrality of China to India’s nuclear strategy it is unrealistic to expect Beijing to negotiate with New Delhi, because China’s nuclear forces are primarily aimed at countering the threat from the U.S.

A leading Russian strategic analyst called on India and Pakistan to negotiate a treaty to slash their arsenals of short and medium-range missiles. Such a treaty could be modelled on the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States, which led to the elimination of all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 km.

In the case of India and Pakistan, an INF pact could cap the number of missiles at 100 to 150, according to the Russian expert. The proposed cuts would not affect India’s deterrent against China — air and sea-based nuclear arms, as well as long-range missiles.

The organisers regretted the fact that Pakistan’s stand was not adequately articulated at the conference (a senior Pakistani diplomat had been invited but failed to turn up), but the debate was still interesting, especially in the light of the ongoing reassessment in Russia of its relations with India and Pakistan.

The Hindu : Opinion / Op-Ed : Cold War lessons for India and Pakistan

Why Dont they Talk of Russia Vs China in Nukes Race. In 60-90s Russians had hundreds of Nukes Targeted at Beijing. China on the Contrary after loss of 1969 Border War and had its Nukes aimed at Kremlin.*

However, here the case was Both the Countries has debatable stance on Nukes use. Ruskies had second stike Vs Chincoms First Strike.

Please be informed Chinese SOP for NDS has never been credible till 1990s so point of accident fire still remains.....Open.

In India/Pakistan case - Pakistan states First use but will Arrow, S300 U, S 500/PAD allow this to Happen when my Neighbour is used North Korean Antiquated Delivery System - NO.*

Entire West is covered by Green Pine. Do note these systems when assisted by Aerostats (mounted 24hrs) do monitor Cruise Missiles and can launch faggots to destroy.*

Raising a Issue on Pakistan to push it to corner to rub it more, appears to be Russian/American stance . But Sunny Jims No one would like to annihilate themselves. Civilians Glorify death and distruction.......who have never even fired a Damm 0.22 Rifle !! Its not that I am saying Pakistanis have been moral examples nor have we.....

Also, knowing Pak Military they might have loop holes but there Nukes are well under control delivery codes and mating of Projectiles are under diff commands. My Only Reason to worry would be in case there is a Bersek General Like Zia coming to Power.

Under water SSBN - Change the entire Ball Game!! No Wonder Iranis are scared of Dolphins, Arihant Class for my region

There is a famous saying - When I fight I want to go home to see peace. But if there is no Home to go to will I fight....
 
.
Now this is interesting, Pakistan in no way will agree to this since India do have missiles with more than 5500 kms or is in process to test them (Agni-5, A-6, maybe surya) whose ranges can be reduced to hit Pakistan, but Pakistan has only intermediate range missiles in Gauri & Shaheen for striking India, so why will Pakistan agree to dismantle the only nuclear warhead delivery missiles vis-a-vis India??

Pakistan is already working on ICBM but due to economic situation we are not even testing IRBMs. We will surpise you soon as we have always surprised you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missiles_of_Pakistan
 
.
Pakistan is already working on ICBM but due to economic situation we are not even testing IRBMs. We will surpise you soon as we have always surprised you.

List of missiles of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You should have said we are assembling Chinese IRBMs and giving them the desired shade of green.
And if what you say is correct then do spare some of yr missile scientist for yr railways so that they have look upto India or buy substandard railway engines from the Chinese.
 
.
You should have said we are assembling Chinese IRBMs and giving them the desired shade of green.
And if what you say is correct then do spare some of yr missile scientist for yr railways so that they have look upto India or buy substandard railway engines from the Chinese.

Is that why India bought Chinese trains in 2010? :lol:

Mumbai metro to use Chinese trains - Hindustan Times
 
. . . .
We always like to keep things secret. You will find it soon.

Looks like u know more secrets of Pakistan than the GOP or ISI or PA itself, will have to send RAW to trace ur location ;)
 
.
Pakistan is already working on ICBM but due to economic situation we are not even testing IRBMs. We will surpise you soon as we have always surprised you.

List of missiles of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seems like a script of science fiction movie of LOLlywood :hitwall::rofl:

Ghauri-V ICBM (Range 4,000-6,500 km)
Taimur-I ICBM (Range 7,000-9,000 km range)
Taimur-II ICBM (Range 8,200-11,000 km, Three stage)
Saladin-I range between 10,000-13,500 km
Saladin-II Nuclear ICBM (Range 11,500-16,800 km, Three stage)
 
. .
You should have said we are assembling Chinese IRBMs and giving them the desired shade of green.
And if what you say is correct then do spare some of yr missile scientist for yr railways so that they have look upto India or buy substandard railway engines from the Chinese.

U could do better then this TRY TRY AGAIN finally u will be able to get some THANKS.
 
.
U could do better then this TRY TRY AGAIN finally u will be able to get some THANKS.

Truth is always bitter. A nation which claims that they got babur by reverse engineering Tomhawks but is in capable of reverse engineering Chinese rail engine. Stuff like this makes me laugh and this is what i pointed to that fanboy.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom