What's new

Deception of nuclear ‘no first use’

Is nuclear no first use realistic ?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 42.4%
  • No

    Votes: 19 57.6%

  • Total voters
    33
That punching above the weight class is a legacy left oddly by our founding father or rather the mythology surrounding him. His brilliant lawyer-like political machinations and tactics turned the generally discounted Muslim league into the force that would lead to a division of India(with the British conniving at the end through Nehru). That concept of a massive free United India that the Congress held so dear was suddenly in tatters.
On the other hand, that myth of a divine struggle for Pakistan and its achievement against impossible odds(which while difficult were not really insurmountable due to the numbers game and people mobilization) drives that cockiness to punch above one's weight. It is both a massive plus for Pakistani psyche and a drawback as it tends to lead to a very volatile morale. One that oscillates between "Bring it on" and "We are doomed".

As for the ambiguous NFU; at the end it is just words and rhetoric for most since the decision to deploy has to do with strategic red lines and less to do with principles.

The founding father was an advocate, and in this case, an advocate for his closest friends, who by all means were the political and religious leaders of a big populace. His job was to get them the judgement delivered by then British Adjudicators, which he successfully did. Then the strange thing happened, he who was never interested in the leadership role, became the first Governor General because no one else could be up to the task.

It is like your lawyer winning you your divorce proceedings only to find out that you are too dumb to hold on to them so he becomes the new owner.
 
.
However, the Hawks cry of wolf has also led to situations where the Indian populous has started to question whether the Indian military is actually capable of anything or just hot air. Firing a few thousand rounds out of the mortar stocks may rattle the average Ranger but at the end has the rest of the force looking across thinking "Is that the best they can do", which makes them even bolder at poking a stick.

Dats amusing, dude.

Very very flawed article.

It is really stupid to take the words of an well known paid journalist book as a source. She was exposed by Radia Tapes controversy. There is no way an journo can access to sensitive policies of GoI.
Complete lies.

Secondly India and China have strictly NFU, not to please western countries. Cos that's fair. Or else it will be equal to bully nearby small countries with Nuke weapons.
Even if Pakistan invades Delhi, we wont be using Nukes.

Thirdly just cos an official recommended against NFU, there is no proof to indicate govt accepted his stand.

That story by those two journos is simply daft; they take a line from Barkha Dutt and counterpoise it with what Bruce Riedel has said and documented many times over. Now Barkha Bahar can consider herself fortunate if she gets entry to a Govt. Presser; while Bruce Riedel was a guy who advised the POTUS and wrote out the Briefing Notes that the President of USA read every morning in the Oval Office. That tells you where the OP is coming from!
 
Last edited:
.
Very very flawed article.

It is really stupid to take the words of an well known paid journalist book as a source. She was exposed by Radia Tapes controversy. There is no way an journo can access to sensitive policies of GoI.
Complete lies.

Secondly India and China have strictly NFU, not to please western countries. Cos that's fair. Or else it will be equal to bully nearby small countries with Nuke weapons.
Even if Pakistan invades Delhi, we wont be using Nukes.

Thirdly just cos an official recommended against NFU, there is no proof to indicate govt accepted his stand.

I don't think that is the case any longer.Both Shyam Saran - the Chairman of the then NSAB & Mr.Shivshankar Menon the NSA during the UPA -2 regime hinted a couple of years ago that in the light of Pakistan developing TNW and brandishing them at will , India may re think its position of NFU w.r.t Pak.

Please note that they also clarified unambiguously that henceforth NFU would be adhered to in case of NWF (Nuclear Weapon Free) States as a matter of policy.

If you notice , there's been no re iteration of NFU in our strategic doctrine since then nor any comment on it given Lt.Gen Kidwai's statement during NS's recent visit to Washington when the good general declared that Pak WMD programme particularly TNW were solely directed at India , given India's so called Cold Start doctrine.

The situation is far more ambiguous at our end w.r.t NFU in Pak's case .We'd be playing it by the ear & cross the bridge when we get to it.
 
Last edited:
.
So let me get this straight!

Pakistan's ambiguous First Use policy, with its TNW's (with a declared intention of targeting Indian troop formations) and with a matching bunch of motor-mouths threatening India with Nuclear annihilation at every opportunity (including on the floor of UN General Assembly), combined with its propensity to use 'non-state' actors to try and achieve its strategic goals (like in Kargil itself), is somehow an acceptable or even morally superior position than India's clearly stated No-First-Use policy?


The OP is contradicting himself big time first by stating that both India's and Pakistan's nuclear capabilities during Kargil were questionable. But immediately takes the words of Barkha Dutt as a gospel, who herself was simply "quoting" US's own assessment of the situation as to what India might do as a result of Pakistan's INVASION into Indian territory of Kargil!

Even if Barkha Dutt was quoting the US assessment correctly (a big 'if'!), there is nothing to suggest that US own assessment was accurate. And judging by how the US let puny Pakistan, lead them by the ears on the War On Terror and OBL episode (and the Afghan Taliban and the likes), I have ZERO confidence in US's ability to assess the situation even with the advantage of their very advanced Intel gathering capabilities! How else would you NOT ONLY let a country that harbored OBL off the hook so easily, but also end up paying tens of Billions of dollars in both cash and ammunition as a compensation for Pakistan's efforts in WOT even after they were clearly caught playing both the sides? But that is another discussion!

Also remember, neither Barkha nor US provides any concrete evidence to suggest that India (which chose NOT even to cross the LOC even after the gravest provocation by Pakistan in decades) would engage in Nuclear First Strike during Kargil misadventure!

And finally don't forget, we are not even counting the integrity of the said journalist and her tendency to blow her own trumpet in order to feel important and get a few more eyeballs for her books!
 
Last edited:
.
I don't think that is the case any longer.Both Shyam Saran - the Chairman of the then NSAB & Mr.Shivshankar Menon the NSA during the UPA -2 regime hinted a couple of years ago that in the light of Pakistan developing TNW and brandishing them at will , India may re think its position of NFU w.r.t Pak.

Please note that they also clarified unambiguously that henceforth NFU would be adhered to in case of NWF (Nuclear Weapon Free) States as a matter of policy.

If you notice , there's been no re iteration of NFU in our strategic doctrine since then nor any comment on it given Lt.Gen Kidwai's statement during NS's recent visit to Washington when the good general declared that Pak WMD programme particularly TNW were solely directed at India , given India's so called Cold Start doctrine.

The situation is far more ambiguous at our end w.r.t NFU in Pak's case .We'd be playing it by the ear & cross the bridge when we get to it.

Cos the govt has clarified. An nuclear attack on Indians anywhere on the planet will invite an response. So in the same case, Indians invade Pakistan and it resolts to Nuke or even Chemical attacks, we have to respond nuclear as we do not have chemical or biological weapons. Its fair trade.
 
.
NTI says Pakistan has 2.1 megatons.

Nuclear Disarmament Pakistan | Articles | NTI Analysis | NTI

bxJ2Zui.jpg

----------

NTI says India has one megaton.

Nuclear Disarmament India | Articles | NTI Analysis | NTI

qBNUFM7.jpg


A first strike policy is viable only if it can at least eliminate opponent's second strike capability, or assured destruction of all retaliative capabilities. So before choosing a game plan, can either Pakistan (2.1 megaton) or India (1 megaton) tactically achieve such objective? If yes then there is a possibility for NFU, otherwise the option could be doubtful.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom