India’s nuclear logic

[Capt.Popeye]

Your analogy is flawed

If Pakistan does choose to exercise a tactical nuke on the battlefield, expect the order to go out to start assembling the strategic nukes. If Pakistan does detect the launch of Indian Strategic Nukes, expect Pakistan to unleash all its nuclear arsenal on India which is already cocked up after the firing of the tactical nuke. Instead of calling this a singular suicide, you should use the term 'mutual suicide'.

Both the narrative of your post and the conclusion do not make sense. In the course of a Conventional War; Pakistan chooses to fire a Tactical Nuke (sub-kiloton). India will retaliate with Strategic Nukes. How do you even assume first that single TacNuke will leave India already "cocked-up". Will the loss of one Armored Regmt do that?

Then look at Pakistan's Geography and Location, disposition and density of Targets. After that consider the Indian Geography and Location, disposition and density of targets. Which has greater chances of survivability? In Nuke Wars even Geography matters as does even a piffling matter as Meteorology.

One more thing; the relative sizes and strengths of the Nuclear Stockpiles on either side. Most people here have got bamboozled by the reports of the NUMBER OF WARHEADS being speculated. Few of the reports are able to determine the POWER OF THOSE WARHEADS and the break-up thereof. Do some study on that aspect before drawing the conclusions that you seek to.

 

[N3oN]

You may have heard of Guerilla war . A strategy used when your enemy is strong economically,militarily and resourcefully.
But Guerilla war do damage and win against the so called "Mighty Power".Afghan war history is an example for you.
The point is India is ahead of Pakistan in both resources and economy. And we know we can never match India's conventional strength in NUMBER and we dont have to. That is why we are building these nukes and they are called "Our Deterrent Capability against India". And one thing you said correct being a Pakistani I dont know Pakistan's capability as much as Indians do. That's why Indians have concerns and are afraid of our capabilities. If you still think that Pakistan does not has the capability to Nuke India. Then keep living in fool's paradise.
And the other point is not that if Pakistan fire a nuke then Pak cant get away. The point is IF India attacks Pak then India CANT get away.

what do you think only Pakistan have capability to nuke India.. As compared to Pakistan India have some degree of ballistic missile defense.. I think you are living in fools paradise and showing your so called nuclear capacity.. Guerilla warfare and nuclear war are far sides of earth.. Nuclear war is self destruction if you are offending any nuclear country and don't give such Kiddish logic..
India knows Pakistan better than you hence we are preparing for ballistic missile defense.
And at last .. You are convinced that Pakistan lags behind India in conventional war.. Its hard to find such members on PDF.

 

[N3oN]

Why Pakistan thinks that we are going to attack them? Just stop terrorism, live peaceful life.. And why so afraid that every now and then everybody comes and says we will nuke you.. Lolz
Where are your hypothesis like when you say 1 Pakistani vs 10 Indians..
Why so afraid boys..? Chill
We R not going to attack you.

 

[Bang Galore]

Your analogy is flawed

If Pakistan does choose to exercise a tactical nuke on the battlefield, expect the order to go out to start assembling the strategic nukes. If Pakistan does detect the launch of Indian Strategic Nukes, expect Pakistan to unleash all its nuclear arsenal on India which is already cocked up after the firing of the tactical nuke. Instead of calling this a singular suicide, you should use the term 'mutual suicide'.

Nope yours is. Pakistan is the smaller country(geographically), there is always a risk that Pakistan may detect an Indian strike late & might find its nuclear option diminished as a result of an Indian nuke strike. The larger country could possible take such a risk, Pakistan cannot. It is reasonable to assume that Pakistan's detection abilities would already have been considerably diminished by the time it feels the necessity to use a nuke, tactical or otherwise.


As for the suicide bit, Pakistan can only decide for itself & if Pakistani actions are responsible for such an outcome, it can only be called suicide regardless of any attempt at murder.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Nope yours is. Pakistan is the smaller country(geographically), there is always a risk that Pakistan may detect an Indian strike late & might find its nuclear option diminished as a result of an Indian nuke strike. The larger country could possible take such a risk, Pakistan cannot. It is reasonable to assume that Pakistan's detection abilities would already have been considerably diminished by the time it feels the necessity to use a nuke, tactical or otherwise.

This is the biggest flaw in your narrative, your basing your entire premise on assumptions. Strategic nukes are big, like Pakistan, India keeps them in semi-component form. If India starts putting together its strategic nuke, this is something you cannot hide under the rug. That news gets out, especially since the Big 3 will be watching from the 'Eye in the Sky'. Both sides are extremely vigilant when it comes to monitoring each other's strategic nuclear weapons, if India starts putting its missiles together, Pakistan will not sit by idle. But as i said before, Pakistan will likely start mating its strategic nuke immediately as soon as the order goes out to use a tactical nuke.

As for the suicide bit, Pakistan can only decide for itself & if Pakistani actions are responsible for such an outcome, it can only be called suicide regardless of any attempt at murder.

It is a bit amusing to see that you actually believe that India will come out unscathed. Accept the reality my friend, there won't be a Subcontinent left and whatever unfortunate souls that will be left alive will probably kill themselves due to radiation. It is for India to decide whether she wants to risk frying up the entire Subcontinent.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Both the narrative of your post and the conclusion do not make sense. In the course of a Conventional War; Pakistan chooses to fire a Tactical Nuke (sub-kiloton). India will retaliate with Strategic Nukes. How do you even assume first that single TacNuke will leave India already "cocked-up". Will the loss of one Armored Regmt do that?

It is upto India whether she wants to escalate the conflict or not. But one thing is forsure, Pakistan will immediately '**** up' its nukes as soon as a tactical nuke is fired. Pakistan will only fire a tactical nuke if its existence is threatened and a 'Red Line' has been crossed.

Then look at Pakistan's Geography and Location, disposition and density of Targets. After that consider the Indian Geography and Location, disposition and density of targets. Which has greater chances of survivability? In Nuke Wars even Geography matters as does even a piffling matter as Meteorology.

No one wins in a nuclear war. If it comes down to a nuclear showdown, be assured that all of the subcontinent will be fried up and the unlucky ones who will survive, they will likely kill

One more thing; the relative sizes and strengths of the Nuclear Stockpiles on either side. Most people here have got bamboozled by the reports of the NUMBER OF WARHEADS being speculated. Few of the reports are able to determine the POWER OF THOSE WARHEADS and the break-up thereof. Do some study on that aspect before drawing the conclusions that you seek to.

I already have, and my conclusion is that nobody wins. Nuclear weapons are a curse on Mankind, if i had the power i would eliminate them all.
@deckingraj

Hope i answered your queries

 

[arbit]

This is the biggest flaw in your narrative, your basing your entire premise on assumptions. Strategic nukes are big, like Pakistan, India keeps them in semi-component form. If India starts putting together its strategic nuke, this is something you cannot hide under the rug. That news gets out, especially since the Big 3 will be watching from the 'Eye in the Sky'. Both sides are extremely vigilant when it comes to monitoring each other's strategic nuclear weapons, if India starts putting its missiles together, Pakistan will not sit by idle. But as i said before, Pakistan will likely start mating its strategic nuke immediately as soon as the order goes out to use a tactical nuke.

What you say makes sense provided your own assumptions are true. For example, you presume that as and when hostilities break out, govt. of India will wait till Pakistan launches tactical nuke attack, to assemble its own arsenal.
Taking into account your first attack policy, rest assured the missiles will start moving at the first sign of trouble at the border.

This ostrich like tendency to seek selective logic has been your undoing so far. So my friend, the scenario you paint lose credibility here.

It is a bit amusing to see that you actually believe that India will come out unscathed. Accept the reality my friend, there won't be a Subcontinent left and whatever unfortunate souls that will be left alive will probably kill themselves due to radiation. It is for India to decide whether she wants to risk frying up the entire Subcontinent.

Secondly I don't get this kind of lame argument. There might be a little possibility that we might come out unscathed or might not. But for you, your fate is etched in stone. And if you don't want entire subcontinent to be fried, don't even think of using Nasr, fight as long as possible conventionally and then call USA. That will be a better option. You will survive atleast.

 

[deckingraj]

Buddy few flaws(as per my thoughts) in there....

It is upto India whether she wants to escalate the conflict or not. But one thing is forsure, Pakistan will immediately '**** up' its nukes as soon as a tactical nuke is fired. Pakistan will only fire a tactical nuke if its existence is threatened and a 'Red Line' has been crossed.

This line of thought is exactly what I am challenging...NASR has nothing to do with Pakistan existential threat...If Pakistan existence is under threat then there is no point using NASR....it is time to go all guns, no??...NASR is something that will be used much earlier which is more of at a localized level...this is what we are challenging...that use of such tactical weapons doesn't make sense because they lower the nuclear threshold and irrespective of the logic...Indian position is ...you use nuke i will unleash whatever i have...and if i combine both the concept than my hypothesis tells me why give India a chance??...let me unleash whatever i have and then pray that i have decimated some/most of their retaliation capability...

No one wins in a nuclear war. If it comes down to a nuclear showdown, be assured that all of the subcontinent will be fried up and the unlucky ones who will survive, they will likely kill

That is true,....however that doesn't mean we let our adversary have full go at us and once he is done we retaliate with the theory that irrespective of whenever i retaliate they will be fried...Meaning i will still try to inflict more damage and that too before you...


Personally i feel NASR was conceptualized to add yet another deterrent for India so that they can't do a Kargil to Pakistan...However it is good as long as India do not call the bluff...I once again re-iterate if Pakistan decides to use Nasr then she is better going all guns blazing...

 

[Bang Galore]

This is the biggest flaw in your narrative, your basing your entire premise on assumptions. Strategic nukes are big, like Pakistan, India keeps them in semi-component form. If India starts putting together its strategic nuke, this is something you cannot hide under the rug. That news gets out, especially since the Big 3 will be watching from the 'Eye in the Sky'. Both sides are extremely vigilant when it comes to monitoring each other's strategic nuclear weapons, if India starts putting its missiles together, Pakistan will not sit by idle. But as i said before, Pakistan will likely start mating its strategic nuke immediately as soon as the order goes out to use a tactical nuke.

Err....assumptions? None bigger than what you made right here.

It is a bit amusing to see that you actually believe that India will come out unscathed. Accept the reality my friend, there won't be a Subcontinent left and whatever unfortunate souls that will be left alive will probably kill themselves due to radiation. It is for India to decide whether she wants to risk frying up the entire Subcontinent.

Nothing amusing at all. Pakistan decides to go nuclear & India is responsible to decide whether wants to work its stated doctrine? How does it matter whether India decides to go for complete annihilation or match Pakistan nuke for nuke? There is no way you chaps will come out on top. What then would be a Pakistani rationale to see what India would do? Wouldn't Pakistan be deterred from using a battlefield nuke using the very same logic that India will be deterred from seeking an all out victory? The same logic applies. Unless of course, you think Pakistan is immune to logic in the first place.

 

[shivgan3]

MOSSAD offered re-habitation of Kahsmiri pundits RAW refused...
solution to kahsmiri problem is changing demography by rehabitating more pundits than muslims in the valley on lines of Zionist settlements...

RAW is wearing bagles, hindus are leaving assam kashmir bihar begal where muslims are going majority.. raw is sleeping..
With CIA MOSSAD on its side, still RAW cannot disintegrate Pak or destroy Nuk capbility..

Last year 100s of hindus were killed in assam and thousands leaved assam when they foudn that muslims have ak47 supplied to them by isi in assam and begal..

Very good a big part of india will get dis-integrted..

Hell RAW didnt do anything when a muslim was appointed IB head last year..

This all proves that RAW is the msot useless intellgence service modern times..

Umair be proud of your culuture. Your jamat damaged india more than the powerful islamic rulers could do in 700 years, Pak is created on lines of Allahs wish to conquer the world and convert everyone into islam.. This dangerous ideology is carried only by pak today in an agressive way..

Pak is standing when RAW CIA MOSSAD workgin against it...

Well you dont know the success of your nation kiddo

Wake up kiddo

It seems u have no idea abt RAW n her ''success''

 

[genmirajborgza786]

yeah even I think, that its better to go for a "Massive first strike" then to go for tactical nukes I mean the whole point is mutual annihilation of both Pakistan & India, (if Pakistan goes down it will take India along with it) if using tactical nukes risks that, then it is better that Pakistan should concentrate on building a Massive Strikes capability to make sure
"Mutual Assured Destruction" of both Pakistan & India

@AhaseebA your thoughts on this

 

[The Deterrent]

yeah even I think, that its better to go for a "Massive first strike" then to go for tactical nukes I mean the whole point is mutual annihilation of both Pakistan & India, (if Pakistan goes down it will take India along with it) if using tactical nukes risks that, then it is better that Pakistan should concentrate on building a Massive Strikes capability to make sure
"Mutual Assured Destruction" of both Pakistan & India

@AhaseebA your thoughts on this

As an Indian member said here, that all-out first strikes have a too high threshold...perhaps so high that by the time it is crossed, there won't be much resources left to initiate it. Both India and Pakistan do not maintain a credible enough nuclear arsenal. Neither both have hundreds of nuclear weapons ready to fire at short notices.
So claiming to break all hell loose just because India occupied a few hundred sq. km of Pakistan or Pakistan nukes the same territory in response, is simply insane.

Now people can claim and boast all about the "massive retaliation against any sort of nuclear strike", but the thing is it is not that simple, specially when you know that all out nuclear strikes don't guarantee destruction of entire nuclear arsenal of a country. Most importantly, you have to practically demonstrate that you have the resources and balls to take it to the next level.

Pakistan's military is working towards a graduated nuclear escalation scenario, from tactical (counter force) to strategic (counter value). So that the enemy is aware of the certain response, at every step. This allows saner minds to prevail, and gain control of matters before losing it.
That is something our military planners are gambling on. They think, that strategic nukes have a too high threshold, and the international community will jump in before it is crossed. So in the mean time during a conflict, the only solution to counter India's conventional might are tactical nuclear weapons.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

As an Indian member said here, that all-out first strikes have a too high threshold...perhaps so high that by the time it is crossed, there won't be much resources left to initiate it. Both India and Pakistan do not maintain a credible enough nuclear arsenal. Neither both have hundreds of nuclear weapons ready to fire at short notices.
So claiming to break all hell loose just because India occupied a few hundred sq. km of Pakistan or Pakistan nukes the same territory in response, is simply insane.

Now people can claim and boast all about the "massive retaliation against any sort of nuclear strike", but the thing is it is not that simple, specially when you know that all out nuclear strikes don't guarantee destruction of entire nuclear arsenal of a country. Most importantly, you have to practically demonstrate that you have the resources and balls to take it to the next level.

Pakistan's military is working towards a graduated nuclear escalation scenario, from tactical (counter force) to strategic (counter value). So that the enemy is aware of the certain response, at every step. This allows saner minds to prevail, and gain control of matters before losing it.
That is something our military planners are gambling on. They think, that strategic nukes have a too high threshold, and the international community will jump in before it is crossed. So in the mean time during a conflict, the only solution to counter India's conventional might are tactical nuclear weapons.

@AhaseebA; Great post.
There are innumerable fallacies built into the existing Nuclear Doctrines as much of them that can be discerned. While the common understanding that seems to have percolated into us "common-folk" are even much more fallacy ridden than we can imagine.

The Nuke Factor is a HUMONGOUS GAMBLE; the word "Gamble" that you have used is perfectly appropriate in this context. So it is finally boiling down to a "Game of Poker" where the players will be faced with the nearly impossibly difficult decision of 'when to hold or to fold'. Then the idea of TacNukes has inroduced more Jokers than may be manageable in this game. And I mean for the holders of those Jokers; not the one that they may get dealt to.

Just think about one thing; the TacNuke Jokers even seem to have messed up clarity of thinking on Doctrines of Conventional Warfare. AhassebA, give that a thought too. Too much dependence on them will be an error.

But finally; as I firmly and clearly believe- Nukes are just weapons of dubious utility. So should one bank too much on them?

 

[The Deterrent]

@AhaseebA; Great post.
There are innumerable fallacies built into the existing Nuclear Doctrines as much of them that can be discerned. While the common understanding that seems to have percolated into us "common-folk" are even much more fallacy ridden than we can imagine.

The Nuke Factor is a HUMONGOUS GAMBLE; the word "Gamble" that you have used is perfectly appropriate in this context. So it is finally boiling down to a "Game of Poker" where the players will be faced with the nearly impossibly difficult decision of 'when to hold or to fold'. Then the idea of TacNukes has inroduced more Jokers than may be manageable in this game. And I mean for the holders of those Jokers; not the one that they may get dealt to.

Thanks...agreed.

Just think about one thing; the TacNuke Jokers even seem to have messed up clarity of thinking on Doctrines of Conventional Warfare. AhassebA, give that a thought too. Too much dependence on them will be an error.

But finally; as I firmly and clearly believe- Nukes are just weapons of dubious utility. So should one bank too much on them?

Nobody is depending too much on them. Neither Pakistan is spending too much on them (as hyped by international media), nor they are the only line of defense. They are there to plug-in the loop holes created by bigger and less rapidly mobilize-able nuclear weapons.

Of course, nuclear weapons nullify their purpose as soon as they are used (by both sides). But you have to agree, they have prevented what could've been the bloodiest of world and regional wars.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Sir

This line of thought is exactly what I am challenging...NASR has nothing to do with Pakistan existential threat...If Pakistan existence is under threat then there is no point using NASR....it is time to go all guns, no??...NASR is something that will be used much earlier which is more of at a localized level...this is what we are challenging...that use of such tactical weapons doesn't make sense because they lower the nuclear threshold and irrespective of the logic...Indian position is ...you use nuke i will unleash whatever i have...and if i combine both the concept than my hypothesis tells me why give India a chance??...let me unleash whatever i have and then pray that i have decimated some/most of their retaliation capability...

First of all, there is no White Paper released by the Indian Government outlining its stance regarding a tactical nuke strike. This article represents the opinion of an Ex Foreign Secretary, so far the Indian Government has officially been ambiguous regarding this scenario.

Lets brainstorm and try to find out under what scenarios NASR will be used. I reckon it will be used as a warning shot if the IA manages to destroy a huge chunk of PA's Armour, breaks through the N5 highway effectively cutting off Karachi-Islamabad Axis, and is advancing towards Islamabad. PA fires a tactical nuke while giving out the orders to start assembling a strategic nuke. Once PA fires that nuke, it would be up to India whether she chooses to exercise the option of MAD or chooses to withdraw her forces from Pakistan. Thus, Pakistan leaves the ball in India's court on which course of action she want

That is true,....however that doesn't mean we let our adversary have full go at us and once he is done we retaliate with the theory that irrespective of whenever i retaliate they will be fried...Meaning i will still try to inflict more damage and that too before you...

This is a never ending argument, both sides have enough munitions to cause colossal damage to each other. When both sides are done causing damage to each other, there are not going to be any winners in the end.

Personally i feel NASR was conceptualized to add yet another deterrent for India so that they can't do a Kargil to Pakistan...However it is good as long as India do not call the bluff...I once again re-iterate if Pakistan decides to use Nasr then she is better going all guns blazing...

Not at all, the use of NASR ensures that there might be hope that India might not choose to exercise MAD. I have a hard time believing that India will risk frying up its entire country for the sake of an Armoured Column, i just cannot get my head around this.

But please look at @AhaseebA response, i couldn't have said it better myself.