Monday, April 7, 2014

Nuclear madness

South Asia has always been identified as the most likely place where nuclear war-fare is likely to break out. we are now one step closer to that nightmare.

India has a no-first use nuclear policy while Pakistan does not. That may change with a new BJP govt at the helm. While this may appear only to be of symbolic importance nevertheless symbols are important. There should have been out of the box thinking (whereby NaMo would sit down with NaSha and discuss ways and means to strengthen regional security) instead what we have is more macho posturing.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), widely tipped to form the next government, pledged on Monday to revise India's nuclear doctrine, whose central principle is that New Delhi would not be first to use atomic weapons in a conflict.
Unveiling its election manifesto, the party gave no details, but sources involved in drafting the document said the "no-first-use" policy introduced after India conducted a series of nuclear tests in 1998 would be reconsidered.

Arch-rival Pakistan, which responded within weeks that year by conducting tests of its own, does not profess "no first use".

The BJP made no mention of reviewing nuclear policy in its manifesto for the previous elections in 2009.

India adopted a no-first-use policy at a time when it was under pressure from punitive embargoes by western nations for its nuclear tests, but since then it has been unofficially accepted as a nuclear power. The no-first-use policy was based on a premise that India would retaliate so massively against a nuclear strike that an enemy would not contemplate such a move in the first place.

However, a source who advises the BJP said there has been significant debate in recent years about being bound to the policy given the advances of Pakistan's nuclear capability.

He said Pakistan's nuclear inventory may have already overtaken that of its neighbour, and it has claimed progress in miniaturization of weapons for use on the battlefield. "Do we need tactical weapons? This issue was never raised and discussed because at the time it was not a concern." said another source involved in drawing up the manifesto.

There was no immediate reaction from the Pakistan government or its military, which controls foreign and defence policy. A former Pakistani national security adviser, retired Major General Mahmud Ali Durrani, said he would not be concerned if India revised the central tenet of its nuclear doctrine. "I don't think it will be of great consequence," he said. "The nuclear doctrine here is MAD (mutually assured destruction). If one side does it, the other side has enough to cause unacceptable damage in response."




  1. Stop this!

    The nuclear hysteria in India-Pakistan is overrated. India lacks proper methodology to deliver the weapons, and in any event, the wind and atmosphere will blow back significant radiation to India. Pakistan lacks a commitment as a country to do anything. Recently, the country took 1.5 billion not to interfere in Afghanistan for some time. Neither country has the financial capability, organization or technical skills to fight a war of any length or consequence. All the other countries have to do is to enforce an oil supply moratorium and the war will end in 10 days.

    I do understand that the two countries have bombs. But bombs in the hand of beggars is as meaningless. The budget deficits (current account and governmental) makes it impossible for them to mount an internal effort to contain terrorism (against TTP or Naxalites) leave alone a foreign effort.

  2. Khodambo, your analysis assumes that those who have control over the nukes will remain rational. I'm not so sure about that, especially when it comes to Pakistan.