Bharat Rakshak

ramdas

This long gap between tests, introducing new systems in each test etc makes it look like a perennial research/tech. demo project rather than a system that is to be deployed. In the second case, one freezes design after three or so succesful tests and makes a couple of more tests to certify the fixed...

ramdas

Indeed missile testing has slowed to pre-2012 levels since the Avinash Chander fiasco. Also, the current GoI seems to be reluctant to give a full speed ahead to the missile program just like their predecessors. It was a wrong decision to put DRDO in charge of someone from outside the missile cluster...

ramdas

@Karan M: also, after the new GoI came to power, we are seeing an inexplicable slowdown in ballistic missile testing. No Agni V test for the last year when media reports were claiming that 3 would be done over the next year. No K4 test since the new GoI came. No missile (not dummy) firing from the A...

ramdas

Not on Arihant. For one, Arihant is just a training vessel until it gets the K-4. Even with the K-15, actual missile firing (not ejection tests) seems to have been postponed repeatedly since end November. The only explanation other than GUBO to the west is that personnel and other resources have bee...

ramdas

I think other nations, especially in the West, have formed their stands based on the assumption that India will not test again (as promised - no one asked India for that) and the Indian doctrine. Changing the doctrine *will absolutely mean* that these nations will reevaluate their stand - cannot sa...

ramdas

What about further Agni V test? IIRC, after the last canister launch a year ago there were supposed to be 2 more trials 'within a year' for rapid induction. The Babus announce everything (to get increased fund allocations every year) but deliver a lot less. I do not think the issue here is a lack o...

ramdas

And who told you that we don't have a deployed 1 tonne thermonuke warhead? Gen. Nagal's statement that we should go thermonuclear indicates this. Unless you claim to know more than someone who has had his responsibilities in this matter. Look at it this way. Suppose Pakis have 100 X 500 kt nukes (t...

ramdas

OK. consider a scenario where we have only 100 or so 20 kt fission weapons. TSP obtains 100+ 500t TNs. A nuke war will then kill 20 million TSPians and 200 million+ Indians. Who would have won the nuke war ? Clearly, TSP and its sponsors. That nuclear war could be winnable will make TSP push for it ...

ramdas

Maybe we ought to answer all the ramifications of the question "How will India's resumption of testing" affect deterrence. I acknowledge the argument that testing and refinement of our designs can aid nuclear warfighting by enabling more MIRVs and smaller and more efficient warheads. But ...

ramdas

@NRao: who according to you should determine deterrence requirements ? Civilian baboo(n)s /politicians/economists/human rights activists ? You are picking up a fragment of what I said about Gen. Nagal's work profile. That he was SFC head and involved with the operational aspects does not mean that h...

ramdas

@ldev: by the time a border war starts, it would be way too late to test. It takes a couple of years to operationalize a newly tested design. Moreover, time is required to correct the design in case BARC has botched it up. As for the west, they have never been understanding of our strategic compulsi...

ramdas

Gen. Nagal's job was getting the codes, etc when he was SFC chief. He later headed the nuclear cell within the PMO. Then his job was to determine our strategic requirements for the coming decade. Having headed this planning activity (post his retirement as SFC chief), his opinion is perhaps the most...

ramdas

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/12/16/18874/experts-worry-india-creating-new-fuel-arsenal-h-bombs Read the last section of the above article to learn what authorities who managed our nuclear forces from the relevant cell in the PMO think about this matter. That they are retired indicates that th...

ramdas

@Shiv: Bharat Karnad has himself mentioned warheads around 125-175 kt that are MIRVable and has mentioned a 1MT warhead in his 2008 book. They may well exist. Whether they will give their designed yield or anything close to that is a different question. Maybe for starters GoI should up the intensity...

ramdas

@NRao: Gen. Nagal did not refer to requirement vis a vis this or that country. He looked at our overall requirement for a credible deterrent. Certainly Gen. Nagal pointed out to our requirement for MIRVs and MaRVs. It is my presumption that MIRVs etc will be needed against PRC in the next few years ...

ramdas

Going by what Dr. Santhanam has said, we indeed have designs ready for test: Dr. Santhanam has claimed that no more than 2-3 tests are required for perfecting the TN sought in S-1. Bharat Karnad too alludes to a TN warhead in our arsenal based on S-1 after making the necessary fixes. The issue is th...

ramdas

It is not the consequences that we face that i am interested in. it is the effect that our testing has on other powers - particularly Pakistan - which I have already spoken about. On balance it is my belief that testing sends all the wrong signals and allows Pakistan a free hand. I do not believe P...

ramdas

Our not testing is a symptom of the larger disease of our being strategically retarded (or "wimp power" if you put it that way). There is no point in restraining our strategic power just to defer to US or any other power's wishes. There have been instances of our doing the right thing in s...

ramdas

As I see it, China is making its 1990s moves all over again in the nuclear field: it has always tried to box us under the nuclear hegemony of a rabid Pakistan. In 1990's it was about crossing the threshold from conventional to nuclear weapons Pak has proven PRC fission weapons, while we had unproven...

ramdas

So while we can rest easy by claiming that we have better and bigger nukes after a series of tests, I am unable to see what advantage over Pakistan will accrue from such tests, given that they too will gain the same advantages as we do. Pakistan will get the advantages of bigger and better nukes vi...

ramdas

Ramanaji: the 6 kt estimate might also be to obfuscate reality. Look at the yield equation given here: mb = 1.0125 log (Yield in kt) − 0.7875 log (overburden in m) + 5.887 (see http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1200732/north-korea-tested-an-h-bomb/, who have given a link to a relevant seismolog...

ramdas

where is the permanent damage to us if we resume testing ? The same argument was made by those who did not want the 1998 tests to happen. What happened after the 1998 tests ? Tests are to ensure that we do not fall behind in arsenal quality. Right now, we are on par if not ahead. Whether we test or ...

ramdas

ShauryaT: assuming the pessimistic scenario regarding impact, it is still worth pushing for new tests. Nothing outlined there would even bring our growth down by 2% p.a. Any sanctions that result will wither away in a few years. The LCA Tejas would probably face a setback. But proven TNs are worth m...

ramdas

Pakistan is keeping the provocations below a certain level now: when their nuclear deterrent is yet to have an edge over ours. How they would behave when they achieve strategic superiority is anybody's guess. That is not a place we would want to go. If ``economy" etc is an argument used to prev...

ramdas

The only consequence of testing again would be some sanctions and the consequent fall in the stock market. Some initial panic will be there. Slow growth at 4-5%p.a for a few years instead of 7-9%p.a. Freeze on Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train project for a few years at least. Nothing beyond that. Assor...

ramdas

This constant clinging to minimality of the deterrent is dangerous. Credibility of the deterrent is far more important than minimality.

ramdas

Indeed, given TSP's rogue behavior, a prudent planner would assume that the ability to obliterate TSP in a second strike is essential. Which is probably why our planners required thermonuclear weapons in the first place. Even Gen. Padmanabhan in one of his writings has pointed out this requirement o...

ramdas

any national security conscious planner plans for the worst case situation in the abscence of full technical information. What else should be expected ? "Assuming the worst" is therefore, not a rhetorical argument.

ramdas

@Shiv: We cannot destroy Pak. as of now. 100 or so 20 kt fission weapons (that is what we have in the worst case) would kill roughly 8% of Pak's population or 1-1.5% of our population. 100 5 kt nukes will eliminate less than 1% of our population. 100 500 kt nukes would kill 8-10% of our population. ...

ramdas

The only reason the Indian test is in doubt is Dr. K. Santhanam's statements. Correct or not, they have cast a doubt given his role in the 1998 tests. The Korean test should be viewed as a success from our point of view mainly because we ought to assume the worst about our adversaries' capability un...

ramdas

@shiv: Teller-Ulam is not only for bang/kg of fissile material. It is also for yield/weight ratio: necessary if we wish to develop MIRVed missiles. Given the PRC investment in missile defences, MIRV's will become necessary for us. Whichever way you look at it, Teller-Ulam ensures a massive increase ...

ramdas

@Shiv: Bharat Karnad is indeed often clumsy with details. But he has access to sections of the security establishment and might be conveying their assessment. What I would gather from BK is as follows: The current NoKo test (given the 5.1 Mb) could be anything upto 30kt. This could well be a two sta...

ramdas

Ramanji, Depends at what level: at one level, the logic of strategy suggests that for setting up a credible strategic defense/deterrent, we would require continuous qualitative and quantitative expansion. at a higher level, we can focus primarily on military/deterrent power or economic power. Mainta...

ramdas

Ramanaji, I see the review of the Luttwak book you posted in the China thread. All that might be fine. But without a credible nuclear deterrent, the India-Japan-Vietnam axis looks like the proverbial "Hijron ki fauj". Plus for India the near term threat of a vastly enhanced TSP arsenal. As...

ramdas

Ramanaji, Did read the Luttwak article. Shows that India is in their crosshairs. No direct link yet to the question of whether we will test again. Hope GoI does not let us down for the sake of a "strategic alliance" with the U.S. As Saurav Jha says, this "strategic alliance" is f...

ramdas

Ramanaji,

Looks like events are going to force the decision. Hope there is minimal resistence to making the decision. The more we allow resistance to the decision, the worse it becomes for us vis a vis TSP.

ramdas

royG, How can you be so sure that Buddha will smile again ? Modi seems more interested in ``development", getting bullet trains etc. I doubt if he will reallize that open ended thermonuclear testing should be national priority no: 1 even if the price we pay is -10 % GDP growth for a few years d...

ramdas

No point postponing. Enemies will try to pull down the Modi govt. before that through internal dissent/manufacturing chaos etc. Also gives too much time for TSP to consolidate nuclear superiority. The situation is desperate. India needs proven thermonuclear weapons ASAP at all cost. The sooner we em...

ramdas

I think it is time for us to get out of the moratorium. Hope the PM ignores R Chidambaram in this: the latter has a vested interest in keeping the moratorium- which will lead to TSP nuclear superiority over us. Open ended testing till we get thermonuclear weapons of sufficient yield is a must. Sanct...

ramdas

schinnas: Better to assume the worst: which is that TSP is soon going to have a credible thermonuclear capability and that not testing on our part will ensure nuclear inferiority. Anything else amounts to burying one's head in the sand (which is what R Chidambaram, [who is clinging onto his post of ...

Search found 584 matches