Pakistan’s nukes: How many are enough?

[Imran Khan]

Anybody who is coming up with numbers please minus (-1) from the list and avoid bombing my city... i want to live more.

and tell to india dont damn fire on this location

29°14'1.16"N 71° 4'3.59"E



i will warranty you abut your city if you give for mine.

 

[T-Faz]

What aspects should be put on hold?

Can't we save many magnitudes more money through some of the reforms on the civilian side I outlined in my previous posts?

Not to mention make the lives of millions of Pakistanis, that depend on products and services from those PSE's, less miserable?

It appears to me that the optimal solution is right there, but people are tip toeing around it and just bashing the military and strategic programs.

i agree.

But lowering the defence budget vis-a-vis putting on hold certain projects would not bring the economy back on track, because the economy is not suffering at the hands of the defence budget but as Agno have correctly pointed that the reason behind it is corruption, poor management, $3 billion annually on Railways, Pak Steel, PIA the high cost required to maintain a huge Cabinet etc.

We cut the above issues loose and we may come back on track.

The army was in power for an extended period of time in the last decade. Gen. Musharraf had ample time to deal with the corruption and poor management that is rampant throughout the mentioned Public Sector Enterprises (PSE's) and more. He was not able to clamp down on this apparent corruption and the situation has continually worsened over time.

Whatever did take place was inadequate and only superficial. The incompetence of the current government is well known and we cannot expect much from it, so it should be entirely down to the single entity that can deal with all this and that is the army. It had its chance earlier, to restructure the civilian element of the state but whatever that did take place was unsuccessful.

I am all for reforms in the civil service but that is not the point of discussion. Its about Pakistan Nukes and in my opinion, the only amount that is adequate is the one that is affordable at this current stage.

Once the state is in a position to fund further development of our nuclear program, we can continue to expand as required.

 

[TOPGUN]

Enough to keep our enemies at there nest simple as that ....does any country need enough dumb comment.

 

[Xeric]

The army was in power for an extended period of time in the last decade. Gen. Musharraf had ample time to deal with the corruption and poor management that is rampant throughout the mentioned Public Sector Enterprises (PSE's) of GoP and more. He was not able to clamp down on this apparent corruption and the situation has continually worsened over time.

Whatever did take place was inadequate and only superficial. The incompetence of the current government is well known and we cannot expect much from it, so it should be entirely down to the single entity that can deal with all this and that is the army. It had its chance earlier, to restructure the civilian element of the state but whatever that did take place was unsuccessful.

I am all for reforms in the civil service but that is not the point of discussion. Its about Pakistan Nukes and in my opinion, the only amount that is adequate is the one that is affordable at this current stage.

Once the state is in a position to fund further development of our nuclear program, we can continue to expand as required.

A martial law can never be successful.

Not in our case because they had been lacking legitimacy, not total legitimacy though but then it had been seeking assistance from political parties, bureaucrats and black-mailers. So theoretically a dictator might have been in total control but infact as he had to please many others to maintain his rule we might see him end up like any other politician.

The failure to construct Kalabagh Dam is a classical example to support this.

But then there's no denying the fact that had Gen Musharraf wanted he could have done it. Infact the resistance that we see on the issue of Kalabagh Dam i dont think there would be anyone else other than a dictator who would be the one giving the executive order for its construction in future. The kind of 'coalition' govts we are going to see in future would never be able to get a consensus over the it, never!

Anywaz, back to topic. Army got it chances and it did deliver while keeping its limitations in view. i dont have the list but then we all know that any major improvement, may it be in terms of development, healthy economy, construction, the field of education etc has been done during Army's rule. Now i dont say that i support military rules, but then the facts are available for us to see.

i wish our govts can be more powerful and if we keep the 'american-influence' factor aside the only other thing that weakens the govt is provincial nationalism. i am not against it, but i do am against the false sense of pride these politicians show by politicizing national issues of utmost importance.

 

[desiman]

No matter how many nukes Pakistan has, it will make no difference to the strategic equation. India already has enough to destroy what it wants to so while Pakistan goes on this wild goose chase to increase its nuclear stockpile, we will work on something else like our economy. I am starting to feel this scenario will be very much like the cold war where Russia just like Pakistan in its eternal quest for more nukes will one day crumble under their very strain.

 

[TOPGUN]

No matter how many nukes Pakistan has, it will make no difference to the strategic equation. India already has enough to destroy what it wants to so while Pakistan goes on this wild goose chase to increase its nuclear stockpile, we will work on something else like our economy. I am starting to feel this scenario will be very much like the cold war where Russia just like Pakistan in its eternal quest for more nukes will one day crumble under their very strain.

It makes all the difference in the world.... thats why these nukes are being made not just by us by your country as well and other super powers of the world ...genius.Second Pakistan also has enough to destroy what it wants as well not just india a understatmnent by you it only takes a few nukes to do the job both nations have enough and both will loose alot .Third of all it is none of anyones business what we do & how many we make just like we have no business on how many your country makes these deadly wepons are made to finish of one & the other . I can not stress enough how you people seem to think all you think about is war talk about friendship & peace for once if our gov's are making nukes why should it make a difference in how we can approach each other with name of peace hands & in hands you people need some serious help in the way you guys think of each other with hate

 

[Manas]

More nukes, More power...soon with an arsenal of 1000 nukes we will be able to solve all our problems from corruption to terrorism, poverty, minority rights, etc etc..yeah right! lets spends the money wisely as we are on the verge of default.

Only post that some sense.

 

[Areesh]

No matter how many nukes Pakistan has, it will make no difference to the strategic equation. India already has enough to destroy what it wants to so while Pakistan goes on this wild goose chase to increase its nuclear stockpile, we will work on something else like our economy.

Now that's some genius post..

And Pakistan also has enough to destroy it's enemies and if you think that it hasn't then it is exactly what Pakistan is working on. To produce enough to destroy it's enemies.

I am starting to feel this scenario will be very much like the cold war where Russia just like Pakistan in its eternal quest for more nukes will one day crumble under their very strain.

Isn't this feeling too old. Like you guys have been feeling this since 1947. Don't you get exhausted of such feelings.

 

[Xeric]

No matter how many nukes Pakistan has, it will make no difference to the strategic equation. India already has enough to destroy what it wants to

If that's the case, then...

so while Pakistan goes on this wild goose chase to increase its nuclear stockpile,

..how does it counts as a wild goose chase?

we will work on something else like our economy.

i am sorry to disappoint you that if there's indeed an increase in our nuclear stock pile it was done from the same % defence budget without burdening the national exchequer.

I am starting to feel this scenario will be very much like the cold war where Russia just like Pakistan in its eternal quest for more nukes will one day crumble under their very strain.

Well, we might be comparable with Russia because of our crude behavior, but then equating india with the US, no my friend, no.

Ok, on a serious note. It has been 6 decades since the quest started, and it still carry on. During this Pakistan have seen very very hard times indeed. Collapsing economy, a failed state, with no support from the outside etc, but we stood up. May be we already have learnt enough so that another Russia might not repeat itself? No?

BTW, on a more serious note, there's a term known as 'fail-deadly' in nuclear strategy, may be, if know about it, you'd know that if Pakistan goes down, it will take you along!

 

[T-Faz]

A martial law can never be successful.

Not in our case because they had been lacking legitimacy, not total legitimacy though but then it had been seeking assistance from political parties, bureaucrats and black-mailers. So theoretically a dictator might have been in total control but infact as he had to please many others to maintain his rule we might see him end up like any other politician.

The failure to construct Kalabagh Dam is a classical example to support this.

But then there's no denying the fact that had Gen Musharraf wanted he could have done it. Infact the resistance that we see on the issue of Kalabagh Dam i dont think there would be anyone else other than a dictator who would be the one giving the executive order for its construction in future. The kind of 'coalition' govts we are going to see in future would never be able to get a consensus over the it, never!

This is one reason why I admire Gen. Ayub Khan. He successfully dealt with mush of the ill's that plagued Pakistan, in his early years, the General was able to successfully angle Pakistan into the right path but alas his own fate was sealed because of the men he chose to advise and assist him.

Anywaz, back to topic. Army got it chances and it did deliver while keeping its limitations in view. i dont have the list but then we all know that any major improvement, may it be in terms of development, healthy economy, construction, the field of education etc has been done during Army's rule. Now i dont say that i support military rules, but then the facts are available for us to see.

That is correct, the Army rules except for Zia ones were greatly admired and popular for a significant part of their entire life but the entire work becomes useless when succeeding civilian governments choose a different path reversing all the progress.

i wish our govts can be more powerful and if we keep the 'american-influence' factor aside the only other thing that weakens the govt is provincial nationalism. i am not against it, but i do am against the false sense of pride these politicians show by politicizing national issues of utmost importance.

I too wish that we are able to get a strong government which can tackle all the issues because that is the only way forward. The armed forces can take over but in doing so, they only negatively effect themselves in the long run.

Similarly provincialism is another one of those things that is a bane because its only used for public support and not to gain anything substantive.

Lets hope that one day soon, we have a government strong enough to tackle the issues that we face.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The army was in power for an extended period of time in the last decade. Gen. Musharraf had ample time to deal with the corruption and poor management that is rampant throughout the mentioned Public Sector Enterprises (PSE's) and more. He was not able to clamp down on this apparent corruption and the situation has continually worsened over time.

'Clamping down on corruption' in the PSE's is too challenging an endeavor. Depending on the government, PSE's may or may not get stuffed with political cronies and supporters, and any 'claming down' done earlier goes to waste. The only avenues to fix the situation is to enter into public-private partnerships or privatize them completely, with management in the hand of the private sector in the former case, so that profit and growth drives PSE decision making, not 'how many votes can be bought by appealing to the unions and stuffing party workers in'.

Whatever did take place was inadequate and only superficial. The incompetence of the current government is well known and we cannot expect much from it, so it should be entirely down to the single entity that can deal with all this and that is the army. It had its chance earlier, to restructure the civilian element of the state but whatever that did take place was unsuccessful.

I am all for reforms in the civil service but that is not the point of discussion. Its about Pakistan Nukes and in my opinion, the only amount that is adequate is the one that is affordable at this current stage.

Once the state is in a position to fund further development of our nuclear program, we can continue to expand as required.

Musharraf did in fact privatize several PSE's during his time in office. Pakistan steel was in the works had the SC not stepped in, so I disagree that he did not do much. Such is however the state of our politicians and government, that the GoP forced the privatized KESC to reverse its decision to lay off 4000 workers, and allegedly allowed hooliganism and rioting to take place in order to force the management to reverse.

Now I agree with you that these reforms are tough to implement, but the problem with your suggestion, of only addressing the military side, is that it does nothing to address the actual deep rooted issues that are the major drain on the country. All your proposal does is create a small bit of room for a year or so, and then we'll be back to where we are now.

Temporary 'easy fixes' may seem attractive, but they will get us nowhere, and merely distract.

 

[Xeric]

@ Agno.

Once during some discussion with a (retd) General who had to do something with privatization thingy i was told that (i dont remember) how many billions of rupees are given to PIA annually alone by the govt so that it can recover from the deficit and pay its employees. i remember him being vigorously supportive of privatizing PIA. i was kinda against it, i was like hey, why would you privatize your national airline, and his reply was, if it had been in my hand i would even give PIA for FREE!! Atleast, in this way we would be able to save those those 2/3 whatever billion rupees that we hand over like a charity to PIA, annually!!

Guess, he was right!

And yes, this was post Musharraf.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

@ Agno.

Once during some discussion with a (retd) General who had to do something with privatization thingy i was told that (i dont remember) how many billions of rupees are given to PIA annually alone by the govt so that it can recover from the deficit and pay its employees. i remember him being vigorously supportive of privatizing PIA. i was kinda against it, i was like hey, why would you privatize your national airline, and his reply was, if it had been in my hand i would even give PIA for FREE!! Atleast, in this way we would be able to save those those 2/3 whatever billion rupees that we hand over like a charity to PIA, annually!!

Guess, he was right!

And yes, this was post Musharraf.

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) has declared losses of Rs41 billion in the last two years whereas total net worth of the organisation is not more than Rs16 billion.

Senator Tariq Azeem presided over a meeting on Monday of the subordinate committee of the Senate standing committee on defence and reviewed the five-year revival plan of the PIA.

PIA managing director Ijaz Haroon informed the committee that PIA had a deficit of Rs41.7 billion in the last two years. In 2008 alone, the company incurred a loss of Rs35.88 billion.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/80280/pia-suffers-rs41b-losses-in-two-years/

41 billion = approximately $500 million

Pakistan Steel losses last two years:
Pakistan Steel explains but admits huge loss

38 billion = approximately $450 million

There is no way this kind of revenue can be raised through cuts in the defence budget and nuclear program, not to mention the increase in tax revenues if these entities actually become profitable, and maybe even expand.

 

[SekrutYakhni]

AM: What about that Russian/Chinese bid?

 

[rubyjackass]

If Pakistani leaders played their part well, they could have been Islamic Israel for USA even without nukes. USA would have chosen Pakistan for its unconditional support to show the Muslim world they are not enemies. This applies even for Kashmir dispute. Remember all the decades when Pakistan was a clear favourite of USA and how it used to detest India and its aid requests.
Even if such a perfect manoeuvre was not possible, they could have gained support diplomatically or in the worst case played a victim for the support. But apparently Pakistan would put pride before purpose. May be this was unavoidable given the insecurity Pakistan faced as the weaker rival.
But it is an undeniable fact that nukes did save Pak from punitive strikes. But IMO India wouldn't have invaded Pakistan at all with or without nukes. It was busy impressing the west till 1999 after the opening of economy. Then there was the pressure of embargoes. Attacking Pakistan would have made it worse even drawing the ire of gulf oil producers who are babysitters of many a leader of Pakistan and Pakistan itself. From then on India was busy trying to stay on track with its new found economic growth. Where was the time? Anyhow no one in Pakistan then could have predicted this at that time. And they were with hurt pride especially after Bangladesh. So credit for going on with the programme. The only Pakistani blunders have been messing up in Kargil and often showing up in news as the source of terror acts in India. Even with that, they could have kept the world on their side(by world I mean USA and other powers that would matter). The telling blows to the country's image and the reason for others' siding with India are the pictures showing Pakistan's map with a star in FATA alongside the mugshots of the terrorists who attacked or tried to attack civilians in USA.
USA in it's 'interest' would have put up with a dozen Mumbais(I mean even the 26/11 version, not just the earlier black and blacker fridays). But this ones, 9/11 and Pearl killing and the like, these made the difference. And these are the real failures of Pakistan in maintaining its position against India.