Nasr missile is the result of the fetish our Generals have with that idiotic Cold Start doctrine of India.
Nuclear weapons are by definition strategic weapons; it makes no sense to marry them with a tactical delivery system.
-----------------------
A 70 km range missile just cannot be operated by a central command and control. In a war scenario, the missile has to handed over to field formation near the border e.g. IV Corps Lahore so that it could be used against the enemy.
Scenario 1: The Indian armor is concentrated near the border. A nuclear missile cannot be used preemptively before the armored formation starts its offensive. Nevertheless, to deter the Indian armor, Nasr has to handed over to the Corps deployed there. This would create a dangerous situation for a whole-scale nuclear war.
Scenario 2: The Indian armor has already jumped off from its assembly areas and has begun its offensive operation. Nasr could not be used again as it would be too close to our formations and cities.
--------------------------------
Why on earth would the Central Command deploy a delivery system that cannot be operated from deep within our borders. Why would someone risk a nuke to be placed along the border!!!!!!!
If a war breaks out, what would be the primary targets? Indian tanks or Indian Command and Control? Why would someone use nukes against tanks when he has the option to obliterate entire cities to deter the enemy.
-------------------
Would India be deterred with destruction of their armored divisions or their cities?