What's new

India: The U.S. Nuclear Deal and Indian ICBMs

Adux

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
3,856
Reaction score
0
http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=290807
Quote:
India: The U.S. Nuclear Deal and Indian ICBMs
June 21, 2007 19 24 GMT

Summary

India reportedly halted development of intercontinental ballistic missiles as a good-faith gesture aimed at facilitating the troubled civilian nuclear deal with the United States, according to an unconfirmed (and as yet not denied) CNN-IBN report June 18. Though the gesture may have appeared magnanimous, intercontinental reach is far down New Delhi's list of priorities.

Analysis

New Delhi appears to have halted -- at least temporarily -- development of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), CNN-IBN reported June 18. The halt appears to be an effort to address Washington's discomfort with the proposed U.S.-Indian bilateral civilian nuclear deal. Though the report has not been confirmed, it also has not been denied.

U.S. concerns, however, have nothing at all to do with Indian ICBMs. India has only moderate interest in such a capability, since its most pressing international concerns are hardly at intercontinental distances. As such, India's need for ICBMs -- especially in the near term -- is quite limited.

Pakistan

Ultimately, India is fairly geographically secure. Oceans and mountains constitute the bulk of New Delhi's border. The Himalayas provide a nearly impenetrable barrier to meaningful military confrontation with China. Pakistan, which along with Afghanistan occupies the Hindu Kush to the northwest, is the only real power within India's immediate geographic zone.

The Indo-Pakistani rivalry has been well entrenched since 1948 -- but Indian strategic missiles are well-suited to deal with that threat. Moreover, the nuclear balance between the two has matured to the point that it now injects an element of stability and restraint into the rivalry. An ICBM has almost no relevance to a direct confrontation with Pakistan. The 3,000-kilometer (about 1,800 miles) distance from Bangalore in southern India to the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, in northern Pakistan is probably approaching the minimum range of a true ICBM.

Thus, unlike the intercontinental ranges of the U.S.-Russian Cold War rivalry, the Indo-Pakistani rivalry is not a long-distance rivalry. The medium-range Agni II, the longest-range ballistic missile yet deployed by the Indian military, already allows India to cover the entirety of Pakistan from nearly anywhere in India.

China

The Sino-Indian balance, however, is another story. With the Himalayas as a geographic buffer, neither country represents an imminent strategic threat to the other. And neither has much interest in any sort of arms race, since both have far better things to worry about.

This is where the Agni III intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) comes in. A successful test in April followed a serious stumble in 2006, when a failure with the first-stage exhaust nozzle destroyed the test mission in the first minute of flight. It took nearly a year to retool and test a second missile. The Agni III gives New Delhi the ability to target Beijing, though this is not something New Delhi is in any particular hurry to do given the two countries' distracted bilateral relationship.

Beijing, by contrast, already can target all of India with most of its strategic arsenal. With another major power so close by, New Delhi could only consider it prudent to establish a basic counterbalance. Given the state of the two countries' current relations, such a counterbalance could be more than sufficiently accomplished with a small force of Agni III missiles.
Other Motivators for India

This is not to say India does not want an ICBM capability; who would not? But just like anyone else, India has priorities -- with establishing the military capability to obliterate Pakistan ranking near the top. Achieving a basic parity with China also is important. But for the immediate future, the importance of the nuclear deal with Washington ranks far above its desire for intercontinental reach.

While an ICBM is indeed within India's grasp, the nation's missile programs reflect that this is not a top priority. Development of the Surya ICBM has been rumored for more than a decade without tangible results. This is despite continued progress with the indigenous geostationary and polar orbit satellite launch vehicles on which the Surya theoretically is based. (Ultimately, the distinction between a satellite launch vehicle and an ICBM comes down to payload.) What is more, India is poised to become only the sixth country in the world to field a cryogenic upper stage, a particularly complex technology. So if it were a real priority, the Surya would surely be further along.
On the other hand, few things are more important to India right now than maintaining control over its own nuclear fuel cycle (and thus retaining the ability to extract its own weapons-grade plutonium for military purposes). This has been a contentious issue in the nuclear negotiations with the United States. India's defense establishment is extremely wary of the conditions the United States wants to place on India before the civilian nuclear deal can pass, and New Delhi is offering very little leeway on any concessions that would set India back militarily. Before the announcement of the Indian ICBM halt, the Indian Cabinet ratified an amendment June 15 to the International Atomic Energy Agency convention providing for protection of nuclear material from acts of terror and sabotage. This was another key U.S. demand for India (a nonsignatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) to facilitate the ongoing negotiations.

In essence, the apparent sacrifice of the ICBM program is nothing more than a low-cost way for India to promote itself as a responsible nuclear player deserving of the civilian nuclear agreement with the United States. India can certainly stand to take a missile program essentially already on the back burner off the stove for a little while. But with the continued development of the Agni III IRBM and launches of its geostationary and polar satellite launch vehicles, India will continue to progress in this direction regardless.
 
.
bc9f0872f60704fadb63ccf374f6147f.jpg
 
. .
Thats good. I do really hope that India tests an ICBM so we can.
 
.
India is going to say China, or rather all of China, to have a 5000 or a little moreKilometers what is your point of building a ICBM.
Pakistan : A country which does have a bad history among world nations, will have trouble and will get into more economic isloation cuz of its desire for ICBM unlike India. Neither America, Russia or any other western power will stand by to see Pakistan make an ICBM.
India is goodie two shoes of the world.
 
.
Webmaster you have no clue what your talking about on ICBM, Honestly my personal opinion even if India can operationalize 1 regiment of Agni 3 within 2012 I'll be amazed, and your saying Pakistan making ICBM's? seriously...do you have a clue what it takes to form a total ballistic missile industry which can develope-produce-sustain?

During the cold war Russia/US spent billions of dollars and over decades and decades yet could came up with only a thousand missile warhead or so!! delivery systems were even lesser.

Think of it! We have ICBM ambition from 70's heard of project valiant and project Devil? yet we havent succeeed till!! just for sake to test the RV of this missile which is autonomous we took over 18 years!! the first RV was tested on SLV-3 then on Agni TD then on Agni 1 then Agni 2 then Agni 2 TD then this spanking new RV.

Then there are motor engine requirement, a ICBM like Surya would be absolutely useless, ICBM doesnt not only means Range, a nuke should be compact enough to deliver the payload, should be small enough to hide in silos and should be versatile enough for deployment to thousand of thing depends!
 
.
This is same as saying Pakistan made turbofan engines for Babur!! heck miniaturized turbofans are harder to make then a aero twin spool turbofans!!
 
. .
Pakistani development will be faster than most countries as along as they have china along with them which do not adhere to international laws of arms control. Most of Pakistani missile's are of chinese, north korean orgin. NoDong, M-11 and what not.

I am more interested in Pakistani justification of an ICBM program. As Bush said in Pakistan, both Pakistan and India have differnet history's and therefore the world will favour India. They see India as a responsible country with quite similar belief and system as the west. They will tolerate an Indian ICBM all the while, they will try to stifle any Pakistan objective to gain more the 2500Km- 3000Km of Missile Range.
The Question is about politics and Pakistani standing in the world, which in all honesty is quite poor. I am sure their scientist along with the generous Chinese help which never ceases and never has any boundries, they will able to achieve it. techincally. But politically can they go against the world.
The world even with current Pakistan capabilities of nuclear and missile's sees it as a threat to world peace as well as it has good chance of it falling into the hands of islamic fundamentalist.
 
.
I'm sure Pakistan can make a ICBM but there is a difference between making one, making it properly one, operationalizing it as per doctrines one, producing it mass scale wise one, that would take quite some time.

Atleast first manufacture RLG INS for your missiles yourselves, else they are all on US mercy.

Same with India, the precise reason we might not even operationalize Agni 3 and move onwards to Agni 3++, the thing we need a M51 class missile, we got the motor dia right, 2m , the RV right, payload is fine lets see how much time it takes for us.
 
.
Adux the world wont tolerate India having ICBM's , the atlantists and pacifists would hue and cry and the NPA's would go crazy over it.

Our requirements are quite defined a Agni 3++, We have got the most critical part i.e. rocket motor right, the RV right, Agni 3++ would have ICBM range.

even China is having problems with making-operationalizing ICBM's, its not called problem its something they are facing is fuine tuning which can take good 5 years bare minimum.

The world even with current Pakistan capabilities of nuclear and missile's sees it as a threat to world peace as well as it has good chance of it falling into the hands of islamic fundamentalist.
I dont think so, GOP knows well they cant afford to do that, lets not veer from the topic here....
 
.
I dont quite agree with you joe, The world does see India in a different light, yes there will be a hue and cry but that would be it. Let the China vs US-Japan hot-up. You can see the difference in Political play then.

Islamic fundamentalism in Pakistan is a definite problem, Musharraf is alone fighting it. The moment he goes; the nuke sector is an open space.

The whole point of ATV being away from Pakistani or Chinese Navy range and attacking their land mass; is a definite proposition.
 
.
Adux I'll again say your wrong, US wont let it happen even if there is a remote possibility, Can you back up your claims without just the claims?

LAst time I checked in a article even ATC of Pakistan is manned by US guys.

What your saying is just counterproductive with very little evidence, the same can be said for maoists. A jamia hafsa cannot get in nuke reactor dude! thats absurd, but definitely issue of dirty bomb is there and that si from any nuke mines.
 
.
I am talking about dirty bombs as well as hardliner islamic parties taking over the government of pakistan in an election, not a terrorist takeover of pakistani army.

I am talking about Indian ICBM, it will happen, and is a matter of time. My assertion is that world will see Indian ICBM in a different light to that of Pakistani ICBM.

As for my claims of Indian ICBM, isnt the article itself and our progress in Agni 3 evidence itself.
 
.
Why cant your govt test a missile first, why is it that you always want to give the Indian excuse?

Simple it would be easy to justify if India test fires one first. Plus if the world does nothing for India. Then they would find it harder to sanction Pak.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom