Our Nuclear Nightmare

[SQ8]

But isn't this a massive price to pay. The damage to India is nothing compared to the decades long consequences for Pakistan. Not to mention the Pak economy would perish and the casualties for Pak would be 20 times India (cause of huge civilian concentrations on Pak side).

Let's say there is a repeat of 26/11 and IA does enter Pak, I would find it strange if the above happens. And I really mean it. If Pakistani leadership is really ready to accept the above than I don't have anything to say. IA will have no problems in entering Pak. IA is not afraid of TNWs. Except for MAD nothing really makes IA think twice.

You are assuming too naively that the usage of a tac nuke will occur after the IA is say 100km inside the border. The threshold for using the tac nuke could be as little as 20km.. or it may not be used at all. Again, this is actual nuclear conflict we are talking about and not Command and Conquer red alert where we lob nukes at our wish.

 

[timetravel]

You are assuming too naively that the usage of a tac nuke will occur after the IA is say 100km inside the border. The threshold for using the tac nuke could be as little as 20km.. or it may not be used at all. Again, this is actual nuclear conflict we are talking about and not Command and Conquer red alert where we lob nukes at our wish.

My assertion is that TNWs have no deterrence capability. On the other hand if Pak says it will use TNWs and will NOT use strategic nukes if India does not use strategic nukes, is a bonus for IA.

Whether 20KMs or 100 KMs the nukes fall inside Pakistan. Also IA is very well capable to avoid these nukes fallout and continue its advance. Even if the advance is halted (which will require 100s of tactical nukes as their effect is limited in area). It is only Pak which suffers max damage.

TNWs will not stop IA from entering Pak in case they decide to. This is just hypothetical scenario, I am not asking or want IA to enter Pak. I don't want or promote war here. I want a prosperous, peaceful, friendly and open borders country in Pakistan.

In my opinion TNWs are a waste of money. And if used they have more horrible consequences for Pak then for India. Except for strategic nukes falling on Indian cities, nothing would stop IA from advancing inside Pak if required. TNWs are a failed ploy and unnecessary burden on Pakistan people. I won't say same about strategic nukes, which have definately prevented wars.

 

[SQ8]

My assertion is that TNWs have no deterrence capability. On the other hand if Pak says it will use TNWs and will NOT use strategic nukes if India does not use strategic nukes, is a bonus for IA.

Whether 20KMs or 100 KMs the nukes fall inside Pakistan. Also IA is very well capable to avoid these nukes fallout and continue its advance. Even if the advance is halted (which will require 100s of tactical nukes as their effect is limited in area). It is only Pak which suffers max damage.

TNWs will not stop IA from entering Pak in case they decide to. This is just hypothetical scenario, I am not asking or want IA to enter Pak. I don't want or promote war here. I want a prosperous, peaceful, friendly and open borders country in Pakistan.

In my opinion TNWs are a waste of money. And if used they have more horrible consequences for Pak then for India. Except for strategic nukes falling on Indian cities, nothing would stop IA from advancing inside Pak if required. TNWs are a failed ploy and unnecessary burden on Pakistan people. I won't say same about strategic nukes, which have definately prevented wars.

Your first sentence is the answer to your entire query.. there is no statement by Pakistan on what it will use or not. Whether its using TNWs or Strategic nukes or the like. If India ignores the TNW(to assume that it will have no or negligible disruptive effects is folly.. and that if a vehicle that moves at 70kph can avoid a missile that takes 2 minutes to get there at max.. is folly).. then Pakistan will escalate the usage to airbases.. what will happen then?
See, there is no conventional victory for Pakistan.. or victory in the actual sense of the word.
The minute a IA asset goes across the border with the intent to secure territory, the war is already in their favour..
It is in India's favour to keep it limited.. and in Pakistan's to escalate it beyond means. India may be looking for a scaled escalation, Pakistan is not.. it wants to have that idea in the Indian leadership mind that if India launches one nuclear weapon at a Pakistani airbase.. everything Pakistan has will be launched. I cannot explain that "deterrence" any simpler than that.

 

[SledgeHammer]

Not reacting to a nuclear strike is not an option thus is never even mentioned passingly. Indian Government will not have a choice except to respond after absorbing a nuclear strike on its forces. India will be perceived as weak and its nuclear deterrence will come into question. Not something India is trying to project these days. Escalation can get out of control quickly and this no game! Trust me, a sane mind would not take a slightest of chance when nuclear weapons are involved on both sides. People on both sides deserve better than this!

Something I am trying to convey for a long time to some Pakistani members here who believe that TNW will not trigger a nuclear retaliation, hope they will understand the logic behind it now since it is coming from a Pakistani.

 

[SledgeHammer]

The article skips one important narrative and hence ignores the very PURPOSE of the TNWs. The TNWs are NOT there to stop India's columns more than they are to provoke India into using its own weapons... weapons that escalate all the way into total conflict where nuclear weapons are dropped on Indian cities and here as well. Mutually Assured Destruction.

Besides, Pakistan now has the advantage of first strike, using TNW means handing over that advantage to India on a silver platter.

 

[SQ8]

Besides, Pakistan now has the advantage of first strike, using TNW means handing over that advantage to India on a silver platter.

Not exactly, the idea of the TNW is to essentially lower India's "first strike" threshold and hence the threshold for MAD.
As many dont seem to get, a TNW is not a statement to halt armoured columns flat as much as it is a statement of "I dare you to cross this line"... where the line is not even defined.

The "What if" of a TNW that is likely to be used within the Pakistani border area but on Indian troops leaves it in a quagmire(along with the international community).. if it ignores it then it is inviting many more such strikes and regardless of their less than advertised effectiveness.. the destructive power is still disruptive.

If it does not ignore it and goes all out, what guarantee is there that the Pakistani Strategic forces arent already at that level of preparedness to go all out at a few minutes notice?

And this is not a question of today as many naively assume. TNWs have been in Pakistan's arsenal since the 90s.. what has changed is the delivery mechanism.. previously it would be the Mirage or A-5s delivering th weapon.. now it is on a rapid response system . So where previously there were high chances of perhaps preventing the attack or avoiding it to a large extent.. that has disappeared.

If a TNW does fly, the first guarantee is that the rest of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is also ready to go within 5 minutes notice.The TNW will get to its target in less than 2 minutes and cause a measured level of devastation and disruption. That effect will be relayed to the Indian leadership.. who then have to decide

1. whether to cut their losses and withdraw.. leaving Pakistan having nuked its own territory but with considerable losses to their own side essentially in vain

2. retaliate with their own TNW.. thereby inviting a tit for tat TNW.. before international pressure and mounting losses without any actual results makes the Indian leadership cave in.

3. Launch a full spectrum strike, hoping that at least some of Pakistan's highly mobile nuclear launch systems are taken out.. whilst concurrently hoping to survive Pakistan's strike which will come with the same swiftness.

In all of this, India is looking to survive and continue.. Pakistan on the other hand may not be looking at that outcome at all.. its "prize" would be not letting India continue or at worst .. letting India continue in a rather miserable state.

 

[VCheng]

Your first sentence is the answer to your entire query.. there is no statement by Pakistan on what it will use or not. Whether its using TNWs or Strategic nukes or the like. If India ignores the TNW(to assume that it will have no or negligible disruptive effects is folly.. and that if a vehicle that moves at 70kph can avoid a missile that takes 2 minutes to get there at max.. is folly).. then Pakistan will escalate the usage to airbases.. what will happen then?
See, there is no conventional victory for Pakistan.. or victory in the actual sense of the word.
The minute a IA asset goes across the border with the intent to secure territory, the war is already in their favour..
It is in India's favour to keep it limited.. and in Pakistan's to escalate it beyond means. India may be looking for a scaled escalation, Pakistan is not.. it wants to have that idea in the Indian leadership mind that if India launches one nuclear weapon at a Pakistani airbase.. everything Pakistan has will be launched. I cannot explain that "deterrence" any simpler than that.

With such nuclear deterrence on both sides, the best way to wage war these days is economic.

 

[Paksanity]

I don't know when threshold for tactical nukes will be reached. Forget about major cities, while Pakistan never tells it's nuclear threshold it is widely believed that even threat to a major city is threshold for full nuclear strike. Think tanks believe Pakistan's threshold is very low. A major defeat to Pakistan military may be the threshold.

This leaves the Indian planner the option to make shallow incursions that may be in less significant areas like southern Punjab border or Sindh may be. That is Thar desert. Use of tactical nuke has minimal effect on very scarcely populated desert area except on advancing Indian army.

Now to hurting our own troops. Warfare in that area is more like maneuver war. It is not necessary that both armies are in contact all the time. PA is likely to do good job at stopping Indian formations when it can concentrate its forces at right place at right time (Pakistan's armor has very good ratio with IA) but there could be a possibility where an Indian formation may maneuver and PA does not have resources in place to counter it in time. Now if this poses significant threat in comes the TNW, on troops which are not in contact with PA. Military formations are large bodies and only front edge is engaged in active combat. Rear or middle can be taken out with Tactical without harming own troops. With no rear elements, front ones are as good as dead.

Now keep in mind that no one knows nuclear threshold of Pakistan so your guess is as good as mine. Pakistan maintains what is called ' Nuclear Ambiguity'. This makes it impossible to guess what will we do. With nuclear weapons, no one wants to play poker! Pakistanis are not known for their predictability, either.

There are some research papers on this topic available on internet. Interesting reads.

 

[Didact]

@Oscar, Those calculations work if India intends to go to war in retaliation for a Mumbai or Parliament attack, wherein the cost and rationale of such a campaign can and would be brought into question. We have already seen the effectiveness of the Pakistan's theory as far as such attacks are concerned. There is no way the political brass, no matter which party in power, will risk a nuclear war for such provocations, however much we Indians would like to deny it.

This is something the IA brass realizes as well, probably better than the civilian counterparts.And so do the groups/non-state actors that benefit from Indian retaliation: It would take an extra ordinary provocation to force the GOI's hand into war now. And by extra ordinary, I really do mean a dirty bomb, or a massive Bio-chemical attack or something beyond my level of imagination.

What happens if something that terrifying happens? Under normal situations, a limited conflict (of possibly questionable effectiveness) would have sufficed to cool national tempers and atleast gain a semblence of political space for the government in power. However, in this case, where Pakistan promises nothing short of total war, there is no space except IA going for total war preemptively.

This is the form of discussions gaining support within the power circles in Delhi now. Pakistan may have blundered into something else entirely, a world where India is not the level headed guy in the brawl.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar,
This is the form of discussions gaining support within the power circles in Delhi now. Pakistan may have blundered into something else entirely, a world where India is not the level headed guy in the brawl.

This I absolutely agree with. And is my fear as well, because previously it was always the Indian "think tank"/establishment that was the sane and pragmatic one. With the recent government and political shift that seems to have now gone into complete opposite spin. The massive rearmament is no longer motivated on a defensive basis but an offensive one.

 

[Gufi]

In my opinion, the idea of developing battlefield nuclear weapons seems an ‘overreaction’ to an impractical Cold Start strategy. The CSD is a non-starter as it assumes a capability for high-tech combined-arms warfare that India cannot acquire in the near future.

The whole point is to deter something that India is working on rather then start when India has the high tech combined warfare abilities

Such an attack would turn Pakistan’s densely populated agricultural heartland into a nuclear wasteland and also cause serious radiation damage to other parts of the country.

any nuclear attack on Indian troops will be met by a huge response is the position of your army

Only weapons that we have some concern is your Babur Cruise missile.It is the real problem.

you need to understand that ABMs will not work because there is never going to be one missile in a given direction and any missile blown in mid air will leave a radioactive fallout. Plus the bombs that do reach will be enough with the radiation to make India uninhabitable/

I am just mocking TNWs. See the theory is PA throws TNWs at IA when IA enters Pak. The idea is that this would kill the Indian advance.

using very quick accurate ballistic missiles is very different to throwing

My assertion is that TNWs have no deterrence capability. On the other hand if Pak says it will use TNWs and will NOT use strategic nukes if India does not use strategic nukes, is a bonus for IA.

how is it a bonus when tens of thousands of your troops die and remember the fall out from the radiation will carry to India also. Plus India is very clear about its nuclear policy on use of TNWs

in the end to everyone it is clear that Pakistan is using TNWs as a deterrent rather then working on longer range missile it is investing in quick mobile platform weapons to make sure that India does not attack.

 

[SledgeHammer]

1. whether to cut their losses and withdraw.. leaving Pakistan having nuked its own territory but with considerable losses to their own side essentially in vain

2. retaliate with their own TNW.. thereby inviting a tit for tat TNW.. before international pressure and mounting losses without any actual results makes the Indian leadership cave in.

3. Launch a full spectrum strike, hoping that at least some of Pakistan's highly mobile nuclear launch systems are taken out.. whilst concurrently hoping to survive Pakistan's strike which will come with the same swiftness.

First, India barely gains anything by invading Pakistan, in 1965 India went for Lahore as a strategic move to counter Pakistan's offensive in J&K. In a worst case scenario, after another 26/11 like attack India will launch some quick surgical strikes with missiles/air strikes on the terrorist camps near the border areas inside Pakistan.

However, since we are discussing the scenario of Pakistan using its TNWs on India;

Option 1 will leave India with the risk of further nuclear escalation by Pakistan, probably a massive one, as either PA would assume that India is incapable of responding, or India will respond anytime, so finish them off before they do!
Even if nothing happens, this will weaken India's position and make things worse for it going forward.

Option 2 will only increase India's losses with zero gain.

Option 3 makes more 'sense'! India in such a scenario should launch a full spectrum conventional & nuclear strike against Pakistan; hoping to cripple Pakistan's nuclear war capabilities to the maximum extent possible in the shortest possible time, and hoping to further minimize the risk with the ABM systems, and absorb what is still coming through for one last time. This actually maximizes India's chance of survival compared to Option 1.

 

[Didact]

This I absolutely agree with. And is my fear as well, because previously it was always the Indian "think tank"/establishment that was the sane and pragmatic one. With the recent government and political shift that seems to have now gone into complete opposite spin. The massive rearmament is no longer motivated on a defensive basis but an offensive one.

It shouldn't be that unexpected a development. After all, Pakistan imposed punitive costs for the "pragmatic and sane" behavior shown by successive governments in India. And as with humans (or animals), behavior with punitive costs are quickly rectified.

Pakistan may choose to deny the Indian version of the narrative, but the fact is that the nation has learnt lessons, or rather learnt of the consequences for appearing weak, meek. And those lessons aren't going away anytime soon.

 

[SrNair]

The whole point is to deter something that India is working on rather then start when India has the high tech combined warfare abilities

any nuclear attack on Indian troops will be met by a huge response is the position of your army

you need to understand that ABMs will not work because there is never going to be one missile in a given direction and any missile blown in mid air will leave a radioactive fallout. Plus the bombs that do reach will be enough with the radiation to make India uninhabitable/

using very quick accurate ballistic missiles is very different to throwing

how is it a bonus when tens of thousands of your troops die and remember the fall out from the radiation will carry to India also. Plus India is very clear about its nuclear policy on use of TNWs

in the end to everyone it is clear that Pakistan is using TNWs as a deterrent rather then working on longer range missile it is investing in quick mobile platform weapons to make sure that India does not attack.

Ever evolving ABM have missile systems that can target your missile in outer space.And we are now developing tech for destroy your missile at initial stage

 

[Gufi]

Option 3 makes more 'sense'! India in such a scenario should launch a full spectrum conventional & nuclear strike against Pakistan; hoping to cripple Pakistan's nuclear war capabilities to the maximum extent possible in the shortest possible time, and hoping to further minimize the risk with the ABM systems, and absorb what is still coming through for one last time. This actually maximizes India's chance of survival compared to Option 1.

India-Pakistan Nuclear War Would Kill 2 Billion People, End Civilization: Report
read this article and the study behind it carefully

Ever evolving ABM have missile systems that can target your missile in outer space.And we are now developing tech for destroy your missile at initial stage

why do you believe that while India works on ABMs etc Pakistan does nothing
you also read this
India-Pakistan Nuclear War Would Kill 2 Billion People, End Civilization: Report