What is Pakistan's Full Spectrum Deterrence doctrine?

[jaunty]

I wonder who has the final authority in Pakistan to launch nukes. Is it the COAS or President/PM like other countries? If I have to take a bet, I'd bet on the COAS having the launch codes.

 

[shahriyar haq]

No FIRST USE POLICY for what ... ??? NUCLEAR ....

its like children attitude 'apna brabar wala se laar na .... baroo ki dhamki q deyta' .... same here lets fight conventional war .... Nuclear nooo nooo.... why not 'NO' for 'WAR' ... ??

Keep in mind in INDIA-PAKISTAN scenario there will no LIMITED or COLD WAR, one can only plan to initiate it but could not predict its end .... WAR WILL TAKE IT COURSE BY ITS OWN .... so do not make childish claims .... my keyboard warrior ....

Indian No First Use (NFU) is no more than a cost free propaganda in self righteousness, which may perhaps impress the credulous friends of India, but we have a true measure of Indian sincerity and magnanimity and can not be duped in.In any case doctrines evolved are a reflection of various geo strategic realities,which explains your fallacy of thought.Shahriyar haq

 

[ito]

Why is there no news on this on Indian media?

 

[Ind4Ever]

Full Spectrum Deterrence: An unequivocal message delivered to Indian hawks

Pakistan’s National Command Authority (NCA), the apex forum on nuclear matters, has delivered an unequivocal message to India; Pakistan will maintain the capability for a Full Spectrum Deterrence at all costs in order to meet the eventuality of any aggression from India’s hawkish posture it has developed in the recent past.

What is full spectrum deterrence (FSD) and why Pakistan was forced to travel from minimum credible deterrence, its initial nuclear doctrine, to FSD?

Pakistan had to become a nuclear state not by choice but by compulsion of circumstances due to growing conventional asymmetry and its threat perception vis-à-vis India who, by its own admission, fueled, manned, funded and actively supported an engineered insurgency for country’s break up in 1971. A country many times bigger in size and conventional military might which spends ten times more on its Pakistan-specific military initiatives persistently gives threatening messages and works closely with its internal and external enemies for destabilization, if not another break up.

When Pakistan detonated its nuclear device in 1998 in response to India’s nuclear tests, it like a responsible member of international community chose nuclear restraint as a part of nuclear policy and vowed to maintain its capability as a minimum credible deterrence to ward off security threats from India. This effectively meant that Pakistan would not use its nuclear devices unless provoked to do so. The provocation means that Pakistan would use its nuclear capability only when the enemy goes beyond Pakistan Nuclear Threshold.

There have been a number of developments since 1998 which has forced Pakistan to make adjustments in its nuclear doctrine and take a posture deemed more effective to maintain deterrence. There have been talks about India’s Cold Start doctrine which aims at rapid but limited retaliatory incursions into Pakistan by the Indian army to seize and hold narrow slices of territory in response to a terrorism event in India involving Pakistanis. In India’s calculations, Pakistan would not resort to the use of nuclear weapons in response to a limited Indian incursion, thereby offering space for conventional conflict even in a nuclearized environment.

Pointing to this Indian war doctrine, Pakistani decision-makers now argue that the deterrent value of their current arsenal operates only at the strategic level. According to this line of reasoning, the gap at the tactical level gives India the freedom to successfully engage in limited Cold Start-style military operations if kept below the Nuclear Threshold, without fear of nuclear escalation.

With these developments, it was becoming increasingly impossible for Pakistan to maintain its original doctrine without making adjustments. Pakistan, therefore, developed low-yield, short-range, tactical battlefield nuclear weapon, the Nasr missile which provides “flexible deterrence options” for an appropriate response to Cold Start, rather than massive nuclear retaliation against India. Nasr is a war horse in the eventualities like Cold Start and will deter India from carrying out its plan.

Pakistan’s Full Spectrum Deterrence thus gives it a flexibility to deal with conventional threats through tactical nuclear weapons like Nasr. It is a ‘qualitative’ response to new war fighting concepts of ‘Cold Start’ and Pro Active Operations (PAO), introduced by India. Full spectrum offers a range of options to the decision-makers. According to Pakistan’s narrative, tactical nuclear weapons are to balance the conventional advantage of India. On the other hand India perceives it differently. India perceives it to be a destabilizing factor in the region. In response India has announced its policy of massive retaliation according to which no matter what the nature of nuclear threat is (tactical or strategic) it would come under strategic realm and would be countered by massive retaliation.

Full Spectrum Doctrine effectively changes Pakistan’s Nuclear Policy; it no longer waits for nuclear attack to counter with nuclear weapons; it will deter conventional force by employing nuclear deterrence. The greater the conventional threat, lower would be the threshold to employ nuclear deterrence. Development of tactical nuclear weapons gives more flexibility to Pakistani strategists as it would not be forced to use strategic nuclear weapon as a first response to India’s overwhelming conventional force in the eventuality of a major aggression against it.

When Pakistan’s apex nuclear body decides to maintain Full Spectrum Deterrence at all costs, it has given a loud message to the world, in general and the adversary in particular, that Pakistan will use whatever it takes to defend its territorial integrity.

Full Spectrum Deterrence: An unequivocal message delivered to Indian hawks | The Passive Voices

Thanks for the post . Am puzzled with this question for many years ...We all know what is the yield of Pakistan nukes . If am not wrong its around 35 kt maximum tested yield . But what could be the yield of 1 ton warhead . Any idea ?

 

[shahriyar haq]

I wonder who has the final authority in Pakistan to launch nukes. Is it the COAS or President/PM like other countries? If I have to take a bet, I'd bet on the COAS having the launch codes.

In my considered opinion,it will always a joint decision headed by Prime Minister who is the Chairman of NCA.In matters as critical as this, consensus is what guides decisions.and it would be presumptuous to believe that the Chief alone would have the codes.

 

[Fireurimagination]

who knows? The full spectrum is probably already under control of uncle Sam

 

[The Deterrent]

I wonder who has the final authority in Pakistan to launch nukes. Is it the COAS or President/PM like other countries? If I have to take a bet, I'd bet on the COAS having the launch codes.

The National Command Authority. The codes are probably with the military, but the authorization has to be given by the NCA. Of course the civilians (PM/President) would have a lesser say in that matter (in present times).

 

[Levina]

no longer waits for nuclear attack to counter with nuclear weapons; it will deter conventional force by employing nuclear deterrence.

Old wine in a new bottle!!!
Pakistan in its quest for parity always wanted to have a policy which makes it appear more powerful than India. Full spectrum deterrence gives Pakistan the choice of beginning a nuclear war with India. In short, at the end of a nuclear war Pakistan would be held responsible(if it takes place).
But frankly speaking, I don't think there will be any nuclear war between the 2 countries.
IMO, the policy of full spectrum deterrence doesn't make any sense as long as India has a massive retaliation policy. Any nuclear attack from the other side of border would be like shooting oneself in the foot. Slightest of nuclear provocation will lead to complete annihilation (on both sides).
I do not think leaders and commanders on both sides are galoot-ish enough to step on this "nuclear mine".

I see massive retaliation policy as more a smarter policy to defend oneself and the one which gives India the moral edge over Pakistan.

Why is there no news on this on Indian media?

There was....
I read about it sometime back when during an ntermational conference one of the generals of Pakistan declared their new full spectrum deterrence nuclear policy.

 

[Zarvan]

Full Spectrum Deterrence: An unequivocal message delivered to Indian hawks

Pakistan’s National Command Authority (NCA), the apex forum on nuclear matters, has delivered an unequivocal message to India; Pakistan will maintain the capability for a Full Spectrum Deterrence at all costs in order to meet the eventuality of any aggression from India’s hawkish posture it has developed in the recent past.

What is full spectrum deterrence (FSD) and why Pakistan was forced to travel from minimum credible deterrence, its initial nuclear doctrine, to FSD?

Pakistan had to become a nuclear state not by choice but by compulsion of circumstances due to growing conventional asymmetry and its threat perception vis-à-vis India who, by its own admission, fueled, manned, funded and actively supported an engineered insurgency for country’s break up in 1971. A country many times bigger in size and conventional military might which spends ten times more on its Pakistan-specific military initiatives persistently gives threatening messages and works closely with its internal and external enemies for destabilization, if not another break up.

When Pakistan detonated its nuclear device in 1998 in response to India’s nuclear tests, it like a responsible member of international community chose nuclear restraint as a part of nuclear policy and vowed to maintain its capability as a minimum credible deterrence to ward off security threats from India. This effectively meant that Pakistan would not use its nuclear devices unless provoked to do so. The provocation means that Pakistan would use its nuclear capability only when the enemy goes beyond Pakistan Nuclear Threshold.

There have been a number of developments since 1998 which has forced Pakistan to make adjustments in its nuclear doctrine and take a posture deemed more effective to maintain deterrence. There have been talks about India’s Cold Start doctrine which aims at rapid but limited retaliatory incursions into Pakistan by the Indian army to seize and hold narrow slices of territory in response to a terrorism event in India involving Pakistanis. In India’s calculations, Pakistan would not resort to the use of nuclear weapons in response to a limited Indian incursion, thereby offering space for conventional conflict even in a nuclearized environment.

Pointing to this Indian war doctrine, Pakistani decision-makers now argue that the deterrent value of their current arsenal operates only at the strategic level. According to this line of reasoning, the gap at the tactical level gives India the freedom to successfully engage in limited Cold Start-style military operations if kept below the Nuclear Threshold, without fear of nuclear escalation.

With these developments, it was becoming increasingly impossible for Pakistan to maintain its original doctrine without making adjustments. Pakistan, therefore, developed low-yield, short-range, tactical battlefield nuclear weapon, the Nasr missile which provides “flexible deterrence options” for an appropriate response to Cold Start, rather than massive nuclear retaliation against India. Nasr is a war horse in the eventualities like Cold Start and will deter India from carrying out its plan.

Pakistan’s Full Spectrum Deterrence thus gives it a flexibility to deal with conventional threats through tactical nuclear weapons like Nasr. It is a ‘qualitative’ response to new war fighting concepts of ‘Cold Start’ and Pro Active Operations (PAO), introduced by India. Full spectrum offers a range of options to the decision-makers. According to Pakistan’s narrative, tactical nuclear weapons are to balance the conventional advantage of India. On the other hand India perceives it differently. India perceives it to be a destabilizing factor in the region. In response India has announced its policy of massive retaliation according to which no matter what the nature of nuclear threat is (tactical or strategic) it would come under strategic realm and would be countered by massive retaliation.

Full Spectrum Doctrine effectively changes Pakistan’s Nuclear Policy; it no longer waits for nuclear attack to counter with nuclear weapons; it will deter conventional force by employing nuclear deterrence. The greater the conventional threat, lower would be the threshold to employ nuclear deterrence. Development of tactical nuclear weapons gives more flexibility to Pakistani strategists as it would not be forced to use strategic nuclear weapon as a first response to India’s overwhelming conventional force in the eventuality of a major aggression against it.

When Pakistan’s apex nuclear body decides to maintain Full Spectrum Deterrence at all costs, it has given a loud message to the world, in general and the adversary in particular, that Pakistan will use whatever it takes to defend its territorial integrity.

Full Spectrum Deterrence: An unequivocal message delivered to Indian hawks | The Passive Voices

Well it is pretty simple we want Nukes which can be fired from Ships and Submarines and lands and Air simple as that for that we are buying Ships and Subs and developing Missiles

 

[volatile]

I wonder who has the final authority in Pakistan to launch nukes. Is it the COAS or President/PM like other countries? If I have to take a bet, I'd bet on the COAS having the launch codes.

Secret thing is some one will push it .

Old wine in a new bottle!!!
Pakistan in its quest for parity always wanted to have a policy which makes it appear more powerful than India. Full spectrum deterrence gives Pakistan the choice of beginning a nuclear war with India. In short, at the end of a nuclear war Pakistan would be held responsible(if it takes place).
But frankly speaking, I don't think there will be any nuclear war between the 2 countries.
IMO, the policy of full spectrum deterrence doesn't make any sense as long as India has a massive retaliation policy. Any nuclear attack from the other side of border would be like shooting oneself in the foot. Slightest of nuclear provocation will lead to complete annihilation (on both sides).
I do not think leaders and commanders on both sides are galoot-ish enough to step on this "nuclear mine".

I see massive retaliation policy as more a smarter policy to defend oneself and the one which gives India the moral edge over Pakistan.

I can almost tears in your eyes .Blame Pakistan we dont care as there wont be any one nation left those who will be left are more miserable .Pakistan is and will always be stronger than India simple fact we dont afraid to meet our creator .Yes i do agree about no war as Your leaders are more than coward hiding behind weapon procured from all over the world even though 500 Mil Indians dont have access to food ..

 

[SipahSalar]

Nothing changes on the ground .

India has announced its policy of massive retaliation according to which no matter what the nature of nuclear threat is (tactical or strategic) it would come under strategic realm and would be countered by massive retaliation.

It's not that we don't know about "massive retaliation". It's that we just don't care.

 

[Levina]

.Blame Pakistan we dont care as there wont be any one nation left those who will be left are more miserable .Pakistan is and will always be stronger than India simple fact we dont afraid to meet our creator .Yes i do agree about no war as Your leaders are more than coward hiding behind weapon procured from all over the world even though 500 Mil Indians dont have access to food ..

Warmongering won't help.
I'm glad that your army and govt doesn't take this sentiment of some section seriously, for they know the perils of starting a nuclear war.
I don't think you understand the fact that Pakistan has a full spectrum deterrence policy, so it reserves the right to begin a nuclear war, in other words history would put the blame of sparking a nuclear on Pakistan if there's a nuclear war.
It is definitely not India's cowardness which lead it opt for a massive retaliation. If so, China would also be bracketed with India for coming up with No First use policy.
It's for the fledgling civilisations to opt for preposterous and aggressive nuclear policies. Not ours! Our's (China's and India's) history goes back to 10000 years and more.

 

[jaunty]

The National Command Authority. The codes are probably with the military, but the authorization has to be given by the NCA. Of course the civilians (PM/President) would have a lesser say in that matter (in present times).

In my considered opinion,it will always a joint decision headed by Prime Minister who is the Chairman of NCA.In matters as critical as this, consensus is what guides decisions.and it would be presumptuous to believe that the Chief alone would have the codes.

I fully understand that it is not an individual decision and there is an NCA in Pakistan just like the US or India. I was wondering who has the final say in such matters. There is always an individual who has the final authority. In the US it is the president and in India it is the PM. Where does the buck stop in Pakistan?

 

[shahriyar haq]

I fully understand that it is not an individual decision and there is an NCA in Pakistan just like the US or India. I was wondering who has the final say in such matters. There is always an individual who has the final authority. In the US it is the president and in India it is the PM. Where does the buck stop in Pakistan?

In my opinion the final decision rests with the PM.

who knows? The full spectrum is probably already under control of uncle Sam

So you have all reasons to sit smug and enjoy!

 

[Alpha BeeTee]

What is the guarantee that Pakistan will actually do what it says it will do i.e FSD ?
What is the guarantee that Pakistan will actually do what FSD implies :
"If Indian forces make it into our territory,then they have successfully initiated the end of the subcontinent".
Just wondering..