Casting doubt on Indian nuclear weapon designs and yields

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 May 2008 19:38

John Snow wrote:We know how to make a bomb work,

but

Can we say for sure every bomb we make works?

(with no more than 6 tests on record)

If the answer is yes then no testing only fielding!


My thought-chain came from the article I linked above. The article supports an arsenal of 200 weapons to take out 8 cities. I am going hyper over that figure and saying 500 warheads for 8 cities. Every weapon does not have to work when you are allowing for a 90 plus percent failure rate (from every cause)

I am allowing for a 95% plus failure rate in my hypothetical scenario. Surely if we cannot get 5% of our arsenal to work we don't need nukes. Consider that as far back as in 1974 - we had a 100% success rate in our tests.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35889
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 24 May 2008 19:57

does it take years and years of analysis and discussions to come to the conclusion we still need testing!..

its been a decade after voluntary moratorium.. and it appears to be that we were very tolerant for non-testing, all these while.

is it not politically impossible to test now?

btw, can we build facilities to test mega tons that would not throw out signals to the NPA world out there?

are we taking realistic approaches here? what are trying to infer here, let say the test needs to be done.. and that is largely welcomed by the technical requirement.

what about politics? timing? etc. I have heard that India's soverign decision to do this and we shall do anything and everything want BS. We just can't ignore the fact about our surroundings.

achy
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 26 Jan 2008 00:36

Postby achy » 24 May 2008 20:18

shiv wrote:My question is, what if India were able to stockpile 500 warheads, and not worry about testing in the near to medium term future. In what way would this affect deterrence or any other geopolitical goal? Why would yields or scalability matter at all? For a goal of 8 citiies - 500 warheads - even of 15 kilotons, with a 90% failure rate will ensure that 6 Hiroshima size bombs will hit each targeted city.

Where is the need to test any further if this goal is acheivable?


Shiv,

Your post can be broken down in two assertions:

1. India has a credible deterrence.
Assumptions here are that,

1.1 India has stockpile of abt 200 warheads of 15KT boosted fission design.
1.2 India has a reliable second strike capacity to take out 8 cities of the adversary. Not a MAD type deterrence but scaled down UD kind of deterrence.

2. As deterrence is credible, why worry about testing in near term (I hope you have not discounted the need of testing altogether). Basically, 2 follows from 1.

Assertion 1.1 is on higher side of probability.All independent estimates seem to establish India's arsenal at abt 80-100. Isn't this is the reason that we want to have FBF which will optimize our stockpile of WGPu.

Assertion 1.2 assumes reliable second strike capability. How can we have that until we have the triad delivery system. Current capability of land and air based delivery will be nuetered in case the enemy goes whole hog. Enemy certainly has that capacity.

Even assuming that we have second strike capability to take out 8 cities, in the eventuality that nuclear deterrence fails, we have assured our full destruction while enemy has only sufferred UD but not complete annihilation.Is this acceptable ? There is every likelihood that a slightly irrational enemy perhaps will take this chance. Consider this, Pukes have assumed the PRC like capability either by collusion or whatever. Does'nt a slightly irrational adversary starts making lot of sense. At the end of day there is no substitue to MAD capability for real deterrence to prevail. India's nuclear doctrine must ensure that a first strike by who so ever will mean annihilation of PAK and PRC both.

Third, if we freeze our capability at boosted fission, how will you plan for changing strategic security paradigm. Surely you will agree that security paradigm will evolve and we need to retain the flexibiliy to change accordingly.

In short, I dont think that current capability is credible deterrence in changed security paradigm even in medium term (7-10 years). This puts premium on developing two things. 200 KT TN and Triad delivery system.

Without retaining option of testing, we can have neither.

Added later:
It is not prudent to play chess with Grand Masters until we even have semblance of Grand master like capability.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 May 2008 20:48

SaiK wrote:does it take years and years of analysis and discussions to come to the conclusion we still need testing!..

its been a decade after voluntary moratorium.. and it appears to be that we were very tolerant for non-testing, all these while.

is it not politically impossible to test now?

btw, can we build facilities to test mega tons that would not throw out signals to the NPA world out there?

are we taking realistic approaches here? what are trying to infer here, let say the test needs to be done.. and that is largely welcomed by the technical requirement.

what about politics? timing? etc. I have heard that India's soverign decision to do this and we shall do anything and everything want BS. We just can't ignore the fact about our surroundings.


SaiK - you make an interesting point.

Suppose India is actually doing subcrititcal testing what could it be up to?

Perhaps smallish bombs are being tested in large cavities to avoid detection?

Perhaps fissile material is being subjected to high temp laser to figure out equations of state?

Perhaps something else that I cannot guess.

But no matter what we do, there will be a percentage of people who will not be convinced that bombs can work unless they have seen and heard huge bombs going off and experience the satisfaction of india conducting at least 25 tests. Take the example of missiles in which the few tests that are done are consistently questioned by many on here and that infrequent testing has also been noted by Gen Malik

I don't think another two or three tests will suffice. For "piskological satisfaction" of Indians my guess is 25 tests more. Let me throw another googly. Supposing some top experts in the world and every Indian source suddenly turns around and say "Yes. India's 6 test are fine. There is no doubt that things are proven" then Indian self doubt may decrease to the extent that we will be happy with 10 tests more.

But we want to see and feel those tests and will not accept anything less. But those 10 to 25 tests are not going to occur. And we are not going to get any more information than we already have. And if we even do 3 tests more we will be singled out for a denial regime that will never push us down, but will cause us pain that the Indian polity is not willing to bear - faced with a population that is actually 50% poor. And if we do 25 tests more - we will merely be using up our own fissile material in a virtual act of "measuring and remeasuring our own p*nis" to reassure ourselves that it is as long as that of all adversarial and non adversarial states.

We are already facing a state of international blackmail. What exactly would be the purpose of bravado and bluster under the circumstances? By doubting our own yields we are reducing our own credibility in our own eyes at a time when no political party will ever test. This is a completely worthless game to play and any doubts that we have about yields might as well get bottled up for all they are worth.

If our yields are not credible in the eyes of potential adversaries our doubts will only give them some fun and laughter. They know that we will not test, and they know that they will not test. If they have doubts about their arsenals - they are not letting anyone know in public. Note that Chins and Pakistan have expressed no public doubts whatsoever about their own arsenal and any Indian will be able to explain why the Chinese and Pakistan bombs will work and Indian ones won't work. It can easily be concluded that every Indian commentator has as deep a knowledge of the Chinese arsenal as that of India.

Whether our bombs are a fizzle or not is a dead end discussion. If you assume that every P5 member has a "mature and well tested arsenal" - you can then count the number of tests each has done and safely claim that we have to do at least as many tests as the P5 country that has done the fewest test in order for our bombs to be effective and mature. After all we will always feel inferior to any nation that has don more tests and we will always say that if every other country has more tests how can Indians manage with less. India is less than each and every p5 nation in technology, so it will be impossible for Indians to believe that India can have something equally good with fewer tests. Using this logic - India will at least have to equal China - with 45 tests.

How long will it take us to do that? After all there is no use doing a simultaneous 45 hole test. We will have to make new designs and then repeat tests. This means continuous testing for at least 10 years from now. I see the possibility of this as being less than that of a fart in a hurricane.

So where is the sense in asking for more testing - who is going to be satisfied with another one or two. If the next test is 200 kt or even 2 Mt we will say '"Hey - how do we know it is reliable?", "hey but we don't need 200 kt" - is it scalable to 50 kt?" See what I mean.

This is a dead end discussion. We are not going to do the number of tests we want to see and we are only gnashing our teeth and tearing our hair needlessly by doubting the announced yields - no matter what the degree of credibility of those announcements was.

JMT

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 May 2008 21:15

achy wrote:Without retaining option of testing, we can have neither.

Added later:
It is not prudent to play chess with Grand Masters until we even have semblance of Grand master like capability.


India has never given up the option of testing - never mind the clever political rhetoric. I am just saying that India does not have that option any more. India will never be an openly declared Grand Master in this game.

The words "Vinasha kaale vipareetha buddhi" seems appropriate here.

India should have started testing regularly after 1974. India waited till everyone had finished testing and tested after that. Now a proportion of Indians are unhappy with that and want more testing because teh originals are dubbed failures. Even more peopel are calling for more tests to mature and maintain the arsenal.

Asking for more testing is easy. I have myself seen extremely good reasons being given here for more testing. I don't doubt the need for more testing. But if I may use an analogy - I am convinced of the need for a flight that takes me from here to New York in 3 hours. I am sure people will agree with me. But that option is not available to me.

The option of testing is only theoretically available to India. In reality we are out of the testing game unless we get lucky and one of the P 5 tests.

If Syria or Iran test - india will get all cocky and start behaving like the p5 and say with a self satisfied smirk that "testing must not be done". This has nothing to do with any desire not to test. But the behavior required from us is exactly that. And I am willling to bet my left testimonial that every P5 member wants to test and wants to test badly. But they to are holding each other back. - because if any one of them does that - all sorts of other states will test.

So we are caught in a web that we should have foreseen in 1974, but did not.

Under the circumstances all that we can do is to act uppity like all other NWS and say "We will not test. We have a credible arsenal" and we need to build up our arsenal with what we have to make it credible at least to ourselves.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 24 May 2008 21:22

"Like beauty detrrent is in the eye of the beholder" Spinster 1998.


If by doing POK II we (feel) have achived deterrence then no more testing.

Like honesty deterrence is abstract in notion and existence of which can be proven when it (deterence) fails.

****
with due apologies to Adi Sankara



I am not fussion, nor fission, nor boosted,
nor the reflections of inner equations of state.
I am not the five senses.
I am beyond that.
I am not the power, nor the energy,
nor the fire, nor the wind (the five elements).
I am indeed,
That eternal knowing and bliss, Deterrence,
love and pure consciousness.

Neither can I be termed as energy (prana),
nor five types of breath (vayus),
nor the seven material essences,
nor the five coverings (pancha-kosha).
Neither am I the five instruments of elimination,
procreation, motion, grasping, or speaking.

I am indeed,
That eternal knowing and bliss, Deterence,
love and pure consciousness.
I have no hatred or dislike,
nor affiliation or liking,
nor greed,
nor delusion,
nor pride or haughtiness,
nor feelings of envy or jealousy.
I have no duty (dharma),
nor any money,
nor any desire (kama),
nor even liberation (moksha).

I am indeed,
That eternal knowing and bliss, Deterence,
love and pure consciousness.

......

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Postby Raja Ram » 24 May 2008 21:25

There are far more valid reasons to test than techincal reasons. So far I still do not see any technical reason made for calling the S1 a failure, other than I dont believe RC and gang argument.

It does not mean that there are no technical reasons, only means that whatever is available open source and referencable is not enough to term the S1 as a failure or partial success or fizzle or whatever. It could well be the case that there could be other valid technical reasons to test.

There are other non technical reasons to test as well. A lot of posts allude to deterence strategy and war gaming. Frankly, beyond a point, it is also a psychological warfare. From what is evident so far, in quarters that count and matter in our adversaries and other world powers there is nothing to suggest that Indian capability is doubted.

All actions by both regional and global players clearly indicate otherwise. If you look at the last 18 months or so time period, we can see that intervening period since Pokharan II is all about delivery systems and ABM, it is all about operationalising. It does not mean that the nuclear arsenal development has stopped, it has reached a critical mass and while there is clear programme to develop the designs and weapons efficiency, the emphasis has been in operationalising the DND. Significant breakthroughs have been achieved in this front.

Still I would like to see if there are any convincing technical arguments that can question the S1 result.

For the record I am for keeping the option to test open, I am for carrying out tests before we sign any deal, but I dont think there is a need to test because the S1 capability that was demonstrated in POK II is deemed a failure because we do not trust the guys in charge.

That argument is not good enough for me. There is no other convincing technical argument being made by the experts here.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6467
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Postby disha » 24 May 2008 22:48

Sanku wrote:What if the enemy launched ASAT satellites purely as a defensive measure and does not intend to launch nukes -


You mean an ASAT weapon to take *your* sat out. Not its sat. Assuming your sat goes out due to ASAT, isn't that itself a launch of nuclear war, particularly your "infrastructure" sat?

As a aside---
The fact that we are discussing what if of deterrence based on lack of ability means that the casting doubt part is no longer discussed but proven.


No, it has not proved anything. Drawing red lines for retaliatory strikes does not prove lack of ability or deterrence.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6467
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Postby disha » 24 May 2008 22:58

John Snow wrote:We know how to make a bomb work,

but

Can we say for sure every bomb we make works?

(with no more than 6 tests on record)

If the answer is yes then no testing only fielding!


The answer is yes.

The fatboy on Nagasaki, eventhough big was "tested" only once. They worked on the bomb design only for a year! The biggest obstacle they faced was the neutron source [which was the same obstacle for POK I circa 1974]. Read up on the trinity test and you will hopefully get the idea.

Within few years, the size was reduced to 1/10th of the original size and a better yield, the same happened for POK-I.

BTW, the littleman on Hiroshima, that utilized only 1% of the total fissile material, very dirty. It was more a dirty bomb than a nuclear weapon.

Chandi Prasaad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 11:50
Location: Triveni

Postby Chandi Prasaad » 25 May 2008 00:12

shiv wrote:I was not entirely joking with my previous post about testing.
All the pre-1998 nuclear power are holding off from overt testing. Only France and China tested in 1992 - so their last chance to validate their arsenal and data was 15 years ago.

Everyone's arsenal is getting older and while the US clearly publishes efforts to keep their arsenal in working order, no such information is forthcoming with regard to Russia or China. But no doubt they are concerned too.

Clearly you did not follow the earlier discussion. It is because they have the doctors prescription. All of them have more than 1 LIF dedicated for nuclear weapons (or have access to LIF) and a a fully funded and qualified physicists and mathematicians (NOT Engineers) scientific staff in 2 or more independent teams to sanitize each other.

Why are they not testing? Could is be because the time for nuclear tests is really being brought to a close. I do not disagree with people who say that the existing nuke states are out to stop India from developing its weapons. But I would qualify that by saying that existing nuclear weapons states do not want any new state, includin India, Pakistan, Korea, Iran etc to develop weapons and they are, in effect telling India "Hey OK - you are big boy now. You are nuclear weapon state - so you stop testing, just like us"
IOW Pander to physcological needs to confuse the niave. One has to use HIS own EYES, HIS own Senses, and HIS own Intellignece to decide the burden on your head is a goat or donkey (from Panchtantra: the stroy of a Brahmin carrying a goat on his head is waylaid on the way home by 3 tricksters who convince him that he is carrying home a donkey or worse a morphing demon, forcing the Brahmin to dump the aminal in fear, while later the tricksters enjoy goat meat). Trick India into beliving that its a Big Boy carrying that gun and is welcome to the Big Boy gun club, making it forget that what India has is Qty-200 of Enfield .303 while the rest of the Big Boys have not just an array of ballistic weapons but also the data & knowhow to continue to make more types of barreled weapons, PLUS a factory too.

Welcome indeed to the Big Boy club to suck up to their sadestic desires or be slaughtered, for the 303 is of no consequence in what the other Big Boys want or do. Great con job; keep it up India you are doing just great.

And yes the club of "new state, including India, Pakistan, Korea, Iran etc" there is only one that is/will be major world player and competitor to regain its historical 40% of the world GDP role. So who is it that the Big Boys really fear? Korea and Iran of course! India has to be stupid to believe that.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35889
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 25 May 2008 00:37

If we are driving at an event, then we can't be the trigger but only the catalyst for that trigger to happen. Meaning, we can't test until some one else does it, cause, the moment you talk about testing in public, will immediately put that John Snow theory of Deterrence into trash can.

So, from deterrence maintenance, its better to keep at that i200KT weapon in the running equations. Hell, RC is more than perfect from that perspective.

I agree, we need to invest a lot into testing facilities, and there is a concern after MaMoSe govt, reduced the budget. Why did he do that? Scuttling out independent path is one thing, and entirely projecting a notion that our techniques can only get there that much onleee, is entirely another psy ops, that is triggered via govts like k-angrez who are now in a swing of seeing everything rose from NPA authorities viz civilian nukes.

A hidden budget is the answer.. silently build those facilities, and do the dos. we may test it 100 mtrs under sea somewhere half way thru to deigo garcia or send it space, or do it in some big city in the neighborhood, by planting the testing device under 100 mtrs at car achi or i slam bad. What is needed is the nooj that we are in the game, to keep that NFU floating with highest deterrence value that we have maintained thus far..

until, this thread broke out.

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Postby rocky » 25 May 2008 00:45

Comparing the Nagasaki air drop to a realistic feasible scenario is not appropriate.

Nagasaki was done when Japan was already at it's knees; Hiroshima had already been flattened. And moreover, nobody in the world could retaliate to American actions by the time either Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened.

Chandi Prasaad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 11:50
Location: Triveni

Postby Chandi Prasaad » 25 May 2008 01:50

shiv wrote:Consider that as far back as in 1974 - we had a 100% success rate in our tests.

Pls revisit and recall the fundamentals of statistics requires a certain minimum sample size that is much greater then 1, before talking of success rate.

shiv wrote:SaiK - you make an interesting point.

Suppose India is actually doing subcrititcal testing what could it be up to?

Perhaps smallish bombs are being tested in large cavities to avoid detection?

Perhaps fissile material is being subjected to high temp laser to figure out equations of state?

Suppose that big CAT facilities was dismantled, miniatured, reassembled somewhere else too. With that fantastic supposed capability who need H bomb or N bomb? Perhaps Jinn power to generate the laser is in reach too.

If subcritical testing is enough for determining equation of state, you mind also telling why India had to do the S3, S4 and S5 experiment? Much less EOS for a cauldron of chemistries in the experiment called S1. And with competence running so high did not have the EOS for all critical metal that went into S1? Worth pondering.


I don't think another two or three tests will suffice. For "piskological satisfaction" of Indians my guess is 25 tests more. Let me throw another googly. Supposing some top experts in the world and every Indian source suddenly turns around and say "Yes. India's 6 test are fine. There is no doubt that things are proven" then Indian self doubt may decrease to the extent that we will be happy with 10 tests more.

But we want to see and feel those tests and will not accept anything less. But those 10 to 25 tests are not going to occur. And we are not going to get any more information than we already have. And if we even do 3 tests more we will be singled out for a denial regime that will never push us down, but will cause us pain that the Indian polity is not willing to bear - faced with a population that is actually 50% poor. And if we do 25 tests more - we will merely be using up our own fissile material in a virtual act of "measuring and remeasuring our own p*nis" to reassure ourselves that it is as long as that of all adversarial and non adversarial states.

Similar Piskological resaons have been given on this forum on conserving precious Pu was the reason S6 test was not conducted in the second campaign. Let me suggest this way: Power to be decided S6 will be a waste, because they knew beforehand all data that could be collected from S6 is already collected.

The more serious question is indeed credible Indian deterrence. It is about "Effects of Effect" not just the "Effect". "The Effects" requirements is I am VERY sure told to DAE/DRDO before. The concern for Khatoli villagers play NO role in that. For "Effects of Effect" required for the nation and there is bleeding hearts concern of villagers so dear. The concern for the villagers go in relocating the people. Specially considering that people of Katholi are till date not compensated for broken houses?

The "Effects" however of Indian "X" yield is very clear today. The country to the west with 0.4X is deterred and behaving. The country to North-East with "10X" does not have the desired "Effects". It is not mounting deterrence petrols, instead is in land grabbing mode in Sikkim/Arunachal. Same "X" yield has different "Effects" depending on their Y is <X or >> X.

Bottom line is, "Effects" is broken. Unfortunately there is no easy way out, but to repeat the "Effects of Effect" exercise. And prove beyond shadow of doubt. That is the bottom line, & not the Jingo's who frequent this forum.

We are already facing a state of international blackmail. What exactly would be the purpose of bravado and bluster under the circumstances? By doubting our own yields we are reducing our own credibility in our own eyes at a time when no political party will ever test. This is a completely worthless game to play and any doubts that we have about yields might as well get bottled up for all they are worth.

If our yields are not credible in the eyes of potential adversaries our doubts will only give them some fun and laughter. They know that we will not test, and they know that they will not test. If they have doubts about their arsenals - they are not letting anyone know in public. Note that Chins and Pakistan have expressed no public doubts whatsoever about their own arsenal and any Indian will be able to explain why the Chinese and Pakistan bombs will work and Indian ones won't work. It can easily be concluded that every Indian commentator has as deep a knowledge of the Chinese arsenal as that of India.

Whether our bombs are a fizzle or not is a dead end discussion. If you assume that every P5 member has a "mature and well tested arsenal" - you can then count the number of tests each has done and safely claim that we have to do at least as many tests as the P5 country that has done the fewest test in order for our bombs to be effective and mature. After all we will always feel inferior to any nation that has don more tests and we will always say that if every other country has more tests how can Indians manage with less. India is less than each and every p5 nation in technology, so it will be impossible for Indians to believe that India can have something equally good with fewer tests. Using this logic - India will at least have to equal China - with 45 tests.

How long will it take us to do that? After all there is no use doing a simultaneous 45 hole test. We will have to make new designs and then repeat tests. This means continuous testing for at least 10 years from now. I see the possibility of this as being less than that of a fart in a hurricane.

So where is the sense in asking for more testing - who is going to be satisfied with another one or two. If the next test is 200 kt or even 2 Mt we will say '"Hey - how do we know it is reliable?", "hey but we don't need 200 kt" - is it scalable to 50 kt?" See what I mean.

This is a dead end discussion. We are not going to do the number of tests we want to see and we are only gnashing our teeth and tearing our hair needlessly by doubting the announced yields - no matter what the degree of credibility of those announcements was.


You forget that overt "Capability" demonstration and sustained institution of LIF and Stewardship Program (with 2 or more independent teams of physicists and mathematicians) is the other option. But for that the Nation needs enactment of Laws that ensure this Stewardship Program is never dismantled and stays effective.

So Zimple onlee. Why the pussy footing?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 05:55

Chandi Prasaad wrote:
You forget that overt "Capability" demonstration and sustained institution of LIF and Stewardship Program (with 2 or more independent teams of physicists and mathematicians) is the other option. But for that the Nation needs enactment of Laws that ensure this Stewardship Program is never dismantled and stays effective.

So Zimple onlee. Why the pussy footing?


There are two separate issues here.

One is of yields and the other of stewardship.

The time for this overt capability demonstration was from 1974 to 1998. A full 24 years. We did not do it and the time is over. And 10 years after that time got over we are crying over spilt milk and talking overt capability demonstration that should have started 30 years ago. Forget about it. Its not going to happen. Time to face up to the caste system in which P5 have all it takes to remain happy forever (as you have cryptically pointed out) while Hindoostan is in the crap-heap along with Somaila and Pakistan.

You are now saying something cryptic about stewardship, Is it possible for you to be more clear?

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Postby rocky » 25 May 2008 06:36

shiv wrote:We did not do it and the time is over.
Why is the time over?

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 25 May 2008 06:42

rocky wrote:
shiv wrote:We did not do it and the time is over.
Why is the time over?


Good question.

If the P5 are worried about breakout testing breaking out all over the world by unwashed countries following a floodgate-opening POK III, then am sure some deal can be worked out whereby the P5+India can maintain a conspiracy of silence following the POK III.

Else, well, the floodgates open.

/Seems plausible to me. After all didn't PRC inveigle bum designs (even warhead designs like the W88 if some farout reports are to believed) from the P2 using just this tack of negotiations? Just wondering only. Readily admit to my lack of gyan on this subject.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 07:08

rocky wrote:
shiv wrote:We did not do it and the time is over.
Why is the time over?


Sorry - you will have to go through my posts above - but let me repeat my views on this.

There seems to be a general agreement between crooks (who have nuclear bombs) that they must not test again. That agreement was reached by 1992. India - which was theoretically in a position to test from 1974 to 1992 failed to test based on some geopolitical excuse or the other. Even the 1998 tests came after some postponements.

The minute India tested - it served as a licence for Pakistan to test (or for China to test in Pakistan).

While we basked in our tests and ducked the relatively mild sanctions, the world has become that much more hardened against the idea of testing. That means that an upstart nation that tests now either has to be totally not bothered about economic or other consequences, or it has to say that we are willing to face whatever sanctions are put in our way.

India does not have the political will to test. India is on a spree to try and get as much investment as possible - and India's main quest is to try and make rural Indian lifestyle quality similar to urban middle class lifestyles. Everybody knows this and everybody knows that this quest can be delayed or thwarted by slowing down investment in all sorts of areas - especially infrastructure, education, tourism and industry. No Indian is in a mood to pay that price. We want that investment and involvement with the global economy. We do not want the sacrifices that were forced on us through the 1960s.

If investor nations tell us not to test, we will not test. All talk of independence is hot air. Oh yes - we are "free to test," but other countries are equally free to twist the rod they have already place in our behinds.

If things get desperate, a nuclear exchange occurs somewhere or if China tests, we are likely to test again - especially if China is let off lightly. But aside from chance events like this the doors for India to test are closed by a combination of multiple circumstances.

I believe that for the foreseeable future - we will have to make do with whatever fission capability we have. If by chance the people who say that fusion did not wok are wrong - so much the better for us. But none of us on here are in a position to decide that one way or the other.

The idea that we are free to test in theory but not free to test in practice is a hard one to swallow if you are otherwise living a great life. But the fact is 50 plus percent of Indian voters are looking for clean water supply, education, jobs and material things and Indian politics is divisive in such a way that any event that slows down the provision of these things will be picked up by any opposition party to pull an existing party down. So the polity itself is afraid to rock the boat. Unless people are continuously fed with propaganda to make them feel that testing and the inevitable sacrifices that go with it are essential, the government that oversees testing will be pulled down by the other crabs and governmental instability is worse for the economy than sanctions.

This is my reading of the socio-political environment of India. I do not foresee any overt testing anytime unless something drastic happens.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 25 May 2008 07:26

Fair enough Dr Shiv.

At least I know we're not totally nuke nude and will take out at least one enemy city in the event of armageddon against our metros, N-sites, satellites etc.

China pulling a kargil redux could be an opportunity to test, perhaps.
But again, as you pojt out, the consequences of testing maybe too severe to risk for a 'mere' tawang or North Sikkim, perhaps. I hope it never comes to pass, but at least our polity seems clear on where our priorities lie. Economics trumps security. Doesn't matter whether one agrees with it or asked for it or not. Nobody asks to have cancer either. That is a fait accompli. One simply lives with it, I guess.

Am ducking out. Back to lurk n learn mode.
Tks!

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 25 May 2008 07:27

OK guys, Why need of this thread. Time to go home and have chai. No more test. Kapisch!

Chandi Prasaad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 11:50
Location: Triveni

Postby Chandi Prasaad » 25 May 2008 07:48

shiv wrote:
Chandi Prasaad wrote:
You forget that overt "Capability" demonstration and sustained institution of LIF and Stewardship Program (with 2 or more independent teams of physicists and mathematicians) is the other option. But for that the Nation needs enactment of Laws that ensure this Stewardship Program is never dismantled and stays effective.

So Zimple onlee. Why the pussy footing?


There are two separate issues here.

That was a hurrid post without a chance to read it once. What I meant was:
"You forget that overt "Capability" demonstration with sustained institution of LIF and Stewardship Program (with 2 or more independent teams of physicists and mathematicians) is the other option. "

I.e. Overt & unambigious "CAPABELITY" of LIF+ Setwardship Program.

I did not mean that India could or should forget overt "Capability" via full yield over test. On the contratry that is the First option, Preferred option and a Viable one. That window is open from now till ATV become operational I.e. next few years.

Sorry about writing imperfect foriegn launguage that English is, to my Dehatee true self.

One is of yields and the other of stewardship.

The time for this overt capability demonstration was from 1974 to 1998. A full 24 years. We did not do it and the time is over. And 10 years after that time got over we are crying over spilt milk and talking overt capability demonstration that should have started 30 years ago. Forget about it. Its not going to happen. Time to face up to the caste system in which P5 have all it takes to remain happy forever (as you have cryptically pointed out) while Hindoostan is in the crap-heap along with Somaila and Pakistan.


NO WAY. Please see my clairification and response above. India still has another 3 years for next round of nuclear test.

Sorry again for my imperfect foriegn launguage skill. My true self onlee Banarasi Dehati who talk Hindi & walk Hindi all life.

Chandi Prasaad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 11:50
Location: Triveni

Postby Chandi Prasaad » 25 May 2008 08:05

shiv wrote:While we basked in our tests and ducked the relatively mild sanctions, the world has become that much more hardened against the idea of testing. That means that an upstart nation that tests now either has to be totally not bothered about economic or other consequences, or it has to say that we are willing to face whatever sanctions are put in our way.

India does not have the political will to test. India is on a spree to try and get as much investment as possible .... . . .


It is delicate balance, but that is also a great negotiation position. And that negotiation CAN NOT be wasted away tis time. Overt LIF + Stewardship is a 90% as good "CAPABELITY" compared to nuke tests, and that must be cast in stone and be real. And its financial investment cost is 1/20th of the nuclear energy investment cost. That cant be fritted away and pressure built on GOI to make that happen, and happen overtly.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 08:46

Acharya wrote:OK guys, Why need of this thread. Time to go home and have chai. No more test. Kapisch!


Bingo!

And along with this thread we need to put to rest bickering over yields that we got in those tests -which is what started this thread in the first place.

QED

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 25 May 2008 09:22

The baby boomer was supposed to pack a "megaton punch". Can't see it being deployed without some form of testing.
A few points I make, feel free to roast me on burning coal it need be, but please verify / rebutt.

1. Reducing budgets for the civilian nuclear programme does not mean that secret budgeting for the strategic programme has been reduced. The analogy is that we have had a nuclear submarine programme on for 25 years without there being any declared budget for it, and we have spent close to half a billion dollars on it.
2. There are "rumours" of peer review of POK 2 by ... What role has this played?

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 25 May 2008 09:29

Noooo :)

We whipped ourselves into a frenzy (myself included - just in case it comes out as mockery) when the talk was about mega bums and mega testing and super size mushrooms. Many threads and hundreds of posts went by in a breeze following a lot of breeze.

Then a few really simple questions on the whys with some probing thoughts on what India is all about and things suddenly turn drab?

===

Spinster's post is piognant and I do believe more damage was caused by the constant questioning of the yields and the put down of the key people. Not that there cant be merit in the questions themselves. But not in a public forum. Possible saving grace is a sad hope of the insignificance of the forum in strategic circles.

JMTP and IMVHO.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 25 May 2008 10:27

With much water down the bridge my considered position and advise is to oppose the Nuclear deal tooth and nail. A firm NO. We will get a far better deal later; India is not hungry for it, but the USA for sure is hungry for the Nuclear deal like hell.

Walking with eyes open on the "teer" in our "tashkar" and "dushman', is better then day dreaming or ostrich head in the sand. Be wise and not befooled.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Postby merlin » 25 May 2008 10:30

India does not have the political will to test. India is on a spree to try and get as much investment as possible - and India's main quest is to try and make rural Indian lifestyle quality similar to urban middle class lifestyles. Everybody knows this and everybody knows that this quest can be delayed or thwarted by slowing down investment in all sorts of areas - especially infrastructure, education, tourism and industry. No Indian is in a mood to pay that price. We want that investment and involvement with the global economy. We do not want the sacrifices that were forced on us through the 1960s.


True India does not seem to have the political will to test.

However, India did grow quite nicely in the early period of liberalization and also when the investment in India from external sources was quite small. External investment is not the be all and end all. We can still grow without external investment. And how the heck is everyone so sure that there will be all kinds of sanctions in case we test. What if everyone just tut-tuts and goes on doing whatever they were doing before we tested?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 10:44

merlin wrote:. What if everyone just tut-tuts and goes on doing whatever they were doing before we tested?


There is no problem if everyone does that. It would be remiss not to think about the consequences if everyone does not do that.

I can think of many analogies, but will post only one. A naked electric wire is hanging from a pole. Touching that wire on a dare mat be fun. If it is dead there is no problem. The problem is if it is live and it is incumbent upon the person wanting to touch that wire to see if he has the means to cope with the effects of touching that wire.

The wire analogy is inadequate in many ways because only one person dies with a live wire. In the case of nuke tests the economy of millions could be affected and requires special care. The tut tutting cannot be assumed to occur.

Chandi Prasaad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 11:50
Location: Triveni

Postby Chandi Prasaad » 25 May 2008 10:47

merlin wrote:
India does not have the political will to test. India is on a spree to try and get as much investment as possible - and India's main quest is to try and make rural Indian lifestyle quality similar to urban middle class lifestyles. Everybody knows this and everybody knows that this quest can be delayed or thwarted by slowing down investment in all sorts of areas - especially infrastructure, education, tourism and industry. No Indian is in a mood to pay that price. We want that investment and involvement with the global economy. We do not want the sacrifices that were forced on us through the 1960s.


True India does not seem to have the political will to test.?


"Gayee Bhains Paani Main". This chapter is not closed.

The correct assessment is:
"With the current ManMohan Singh government in power for the next 12 months India does not seem to have the political will to test?

After next year's Lok Sabha election all bets are off. This chapter is not closed yet. The fire on the tail of USA gets hotter and hotter as the MMS Govt counts its last few months in power."

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 11:16

Why does any nation test nuclear bombs?

1) The very first test ALWAYS serves to demonstrate capability.

2) From the second test onwards it becomes an issue of validation of design, testing of new designs, collection of data and stewardship.

From 1945 up to 1992 the countries of the world had almost no time pressure, They could do one test at a time, they did not have to keep preparations secret; they could take their time to analyse data; and they could retest at will as and when they were ready.

Apart from China and France in 1992 - no nation was in a race against time.

Rewind to India in 1998. The goals that India was expected to achieve in 1998 were as follows:

1) To demonstrate capability. The 1974 test did not count because it was never a weapons and was not even declared a weapon. So India had to demonstrate capability like point 1 above.

2) To validate design - because India had already weaponized

3) To test and collect data from new designs

India had one constraint that no other nation had - i.e time. India did not have the luxury of keeping on testing for an indefinite time. It was one chance and that one chance came up in 1998 when an just-voted-in government took its chances with sanctions - and even recalled the LCA folks in the US expecting sanctions before testing.

And because of the time constraint India was forced to try and achieve 4 objectives in the span of 48 hours and the plans had to be made in total secrecy, keeping most people out of the loop.

Only 2 of those objectives was technical. Two objectives were geopolitical.

In May 1998 the people in Pokhran were expected to:

1) Demonstrate capability (geopolitical objective)
2) Validate existing design (technical objective
3) Test new designs and collect data (technical objective)
4) To declare itself a nuclear weapons state that could then bargain as an "equal" with the other nuclear weapons states (geopolitical objective)

Supposing all the tests in May 1998 had zero yield - i.e they were a complete failure, then we would have seen and felt nothing.

But once the tests produced demonstrable yield India had to declare all objective as having been met. The declaration that all objectives were met was almost pre-decided - as long as there was demonstrable yield.

Let me explain why.

Recall that India's goals in May 1998 were more than technical. They were geopolitical for reasons (1) and (4) listed above. If the tests were deemed a failure or even a partial failure, neither of those geopolitical goals could be achieved. Therefore those two geopolitical goals were always going to be declared as having been achieved no matter what the technical results of the tests may have been.

That is why India had to conduct 5 test in 48 hours - an act that has not been attempted by anyone else.

Once the geopolitical objectives were declared as having been met, India started posturing and acting like a nuclear power, formulated a nuclear doctrine and started developing a nuclear triad.

Very little is known of the exact technical objectives and results other than what was declared by a small core group of people. The only hint that I have of the question of subcritical testing again comes from Chidambaram's IISc talk:


< snip >
RC dwelt at some length on what he called the "chotus" - the "little ones" among the tests. Why 0.2 kT? He went into some technical detail here (see footnote 4) and said that after the CTBT came into effect France and China were not confident of computer simulation of devices less than 0.2 kT, (unlike the US), so they called for a modification in the CTBT requirements so that tests uoto 0.2 kT could be done, For that technical reason it was thought necessary to test a 0.2 kiloton device in Pokhran.
< snip

Footnote 4)In fissile material k=population of neutrons in present generation/population of neutrons in the previous generation. In a runaway chain reaction - eg a nuclear bomb k>1. In a steady state nuclear reaction k=1, and in storage k<1.

CTBT allowed for tests as long as k<1. That was fine for the US as it was actually able to do undetectable subkiloton tests or simulate on computer. France and China objected and wanted the limit raised to 0.2 kT below which they had not developed the ability to validate at the time of signing.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11843
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Postby Suraj » 25 May 2008 14:50

merlin wrote:However, India did grow quite nicely in the early period of liberalization and also when the investment in India from external sources was quite small. External investment is not the be all and end all. We can still grow without external investment.

That is the wrong perspective. The early period of liberalization was on a very small base - our GDP is ~450% what is was then, from under $250 billion in 1991-92 to $1170 billion last fiscal year (07/08 ). Gross trade volume is over 20x higher at nearly $500 billion, total capital flows into and out of the country have grown the same extent, to over $1000 billion last year.

It is extraordinarily off base to claim that 'external investment is not the be all and end all'. India is massively engaged with the world economy today, on a scale that bears no relation to even the early 2000s, much less the early 1990s. Folks sometimes grossly underestimate how much India has changed in its economic engagement with the world.

However, none of this is to be construed as a suggestion not to test. I'm merely quoting economic facts to underline a more nuanced argument. My suggestion as to what to do is straightforward - act on any matter when we are in a position to control the consequences. If we want to test, understand specifically how our external engagement looks like. Work ahead of time to more closely economically embrace those entities whose negative actions will hurt us most. Why ? Because their actions will hurt *them* as well. That's precisely the basis of the Sino-US equilibrium...

Such an understanding of our economic position, our engagement with the world in general, and critical parties in particular is absolutely required. Sorry, but simplistic statements like 'we can grow without external investment' just does not cut it.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 25 May 2008 16:09

shiv wrote:India had one constraint that no other nation had - i.e time. India did not have the luxury of keeping on testing for an indefinite time. It was one chance and that one chance came up in 1998 when an just-voted-in government took its chances with sanctions - and even recalled the LCA folks in the US expecting sanctions before testing.

And because of the time constraint India was forced to try and achieve 4 objectives in the span of 48 hours and the plans had to be made in total secrecy, keeping most people out of the loop.

Only 2 of those objectives was technical. Two objectives were geopolitical.

In May 1998 the people in Pokhran were expected to:

1) Demonstrate capability (geopolitical objective)
2) Validate existing design (technical objective
3) Test new designs and collect data (technical objective)
4) To declare itself a nuclear weapons state that could then bargain as an "equal" with the other nuclear weapons states (geopolitical objective)

Shiv sahib, I am sure you know that RC and DAE was not given just 48Hr to deliver the objectives. DAE was directly under PMO since Mrs Indira Gandhi, and got all the necessary support from the highest office of the country. Indira Gandhi, Rajiv and most importantly PVN Rao gave them mandate to be ready to deliver when the time comes, at the expense of funds and labor and limbs of defense forces. DAE got ample heads up and dry run of how they will be asked to deliver during the first short lived govt of ABV too. You give DAE very generous rope when you say they got 48 hrs to deliver, when in reality they got many years, with the caveat that it will be a rare and possibly one time opportunity for DAE and India to test to their hearts content and DELIVER.

When the time came DAE did deliver something:
1. A successful S2 pure fission test (~12 Kt yield) from the inventory from the 1974 vintage version.
2. Demonstrated capability of mastery of fission weapons with the 3 sub critical tests.
3. Demonstrated competence of boosted fission weapons with the primary of S1 weapon.

But did they deliver all MUST HAVE goods that PMO required?
Let me list what they did not deliver in spite of all the funds and also adequate support/cautions:
1. Fusion was identified within DAE as the next stop after 1974 test. Fusion was explicit deliverable that DAE asked for and PVN Rao granted all necessary things during his tenure. That was a commitment not a commitment to try Fusion.

2. DAE put all eggs in one basket for Fusion weapon design. Review and lab facilities available to experimentally validate aspects of weapon design were not used (CAT/Indore was available but not used, so supremely confident the design team was, but eventually it turned out to be empty boast).

3. When the once in a lifetime orders (& opportunity) came to test to their hearts content, DAE was totally unprepared to deliver Fusion weapon. When the S1 seriously underperformed on Day-1 DAE had no fall back plan to test any other/second Fusion weapon design. Any reasonable program plan would have called for a fusion weapon design that will meet the PMO's BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS for this type of weapon which is as someone said "Effects of Effect". Viz an unambiguous big Fusion weapon test of many hundred KT yield to confidently declare to the world that India has arrived and "India had Big Hydrogen Bomb" something that PM ABV blurted out first only to recount and modify it to something irrelevant and not meeting BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS that were SPECIFIED to DAE.

That alternative fusion weapon design (however sub-optimal it might have been) should have gone in a test shaft for the second round. But no, RC was forced (and by implication India was forced) to eat humble pie by ordering S6 to to be pulled out of the shaft because he forgot to make the correct stuff (plan B stuff) that will work no matter what, for that S6 shaft.

That is the biggest "Night soil" on DAE's face, because the price India has/had to pay for that mistake & many future generations of Indians will have to pay in one way or another. And yes let us not forget to thank DAE and RC for all the gut wrenching, sick feeling, hair pulling, teeth gwaning frustrating discussion on BRF related to Indian strategic deterrence, options, testing, Hyde and Jackyll etc etc.. No BRF fun without that gift from DAE.

Fusion was the major deliverable for Pok-II and it seriously compromised the deliverable required off DAE in exercising that "Silver bullet" of an opportunity with all the grave risks it entailed to India.

4. The 3 sub-kt experiments had many objectives. Unfortunately apart from proving Indian mastery in fission design. Those experiments it turned out were not that well designed. But Indian had lucky providence of getting good data that will prove invaluable in fixing the TN weapon, not to mention there are other things that need to be fixed in that design.

5. When finally RC/DAE leadership did use the lab facility in Indore, the lab experiments quickly gave the exact result of what would happen if S1 design weapons is fired. It matched result of S1 debris. Yet another incriminating criminal act of powers to be in DAE weapon design team lead by R Chidambram. If only DAE leadership used all the money and facilities created at huge deprivation of other military programs. Most mediocre program managers in India in similar situation would have done far better. One does not have to compare DAE program management to program mgmt in multi-national corporations, much less foreign military PM or Military Nuclear Program Mgmt.

The above reveals no proliferation sensitive information, but exposes serious organizational weakness of DAE and its leadership.

Very little is known of the exact technical objectives and results other than what was declared by a small core group of people. The only hint that I have of the question of subcritical testing again comes from Chidambaram's IISc talk:

< snip >
RC dwelt at some length on what he called the "chotus" - the "little ones" among the tests. Why 0.2 kT? He went into some technical detail here (see footnote 4) and said that after the CTBT came into effect France and China were not confident of computer simulation of devices less than 0.2 kT, (unlike the US), so they called for a modification in the CTBT requirements so that tests uoto 0.2 kT could be done, For that technical reason it was thought necessary to test a 0.2 kiloton device in Pokhran.
< snip

Footnote 4)In fissile material k=population of neutrons in present generation/population of neutrons in the previous generation. In a runaway chain reaction - eg a nuclear bomb k>1. In a steady state nuclear reaction k=1, and in storage k<1.

CTBT allowed for tests as long as k<1. That was fine for the US as it was actually able to do undetectable subkiloton tests or simulate on computer. France and China objected and wanted the limit raised to 0.2 kT below which they had not developed the ability to validate at the time of signing.

For completeness I restate point#4 above:
4. The 3 sub-kt experiments had many objectives. Unfortunately apart from proving Indian mastery in fission design. Those experiments it turned out were not that well designed. But Indian had lucky providence of getting good data that will prove invaluable in fixing the TN weapon, not to mention there are other things that need to be fixed in that design.
Last edited by Arun_S on 25 May 2008 16:42, edited 1 time in total.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 25 May 2008 16:32

:!:

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Postby Raja Ram » 25 May 2008 16:35

The following is not strictly related to the subject of the thread, so please bear with me.

While I still do not see any technical arguments to doubt what is being claimed as S I result, it does not mean that we should not test. There are other valid reasons to test, especially in the context of the proposed separation of the strategic programme from the civilian deal.

What I fail to understand is why should India be constrained from testing. Is there any international agreement that we have signed up against testing? We have not signed that CTBT stuff. We have not been party to the NPT. We owe no explanation. The only constraint is the potential sanctions and their effect.

India was relatively more susceptible in 1998 when the test was made. The effect of sanctions were broken. The GOI then was able to raise billions from two Bonds, the resurgent india bond and millenium bond.

Is it that all we need is a modern day Jamabavan to tell Hanuman how strong he really is?

Just a thought, What is wrong if GOI makes a statement that in order for building a consensus and buy in across political and scientific communities in India, that it is suspending the unilateral moratorium, even assure potential adversaries that this is just part of setting up a nuclear stewardship programme and ......

Then announce publicly a series of tests and conduct it.

Post which re announce the resumption of vountary moratorium.

At least that should be offered as our variation from agreed sequence of steps with the GOTUS if we have to look at the issue from the prism of the deal. They had no business to introduce Hyde Act, and they also changed the sequence of events that was agreed. Why cant we propose this as a way out to save the deal if they want?

It is another matter that, according to me, due to the Hyde act even then it is not worth signing, but we can at least demonstrate that we retain the soverignity and maybe even pass our own Sanjivni Act that will come into play in case they bring in their Hyde Act.

The GOI can build genuine consensus across the spectrum by doins something like that. Even today the congress is thinking of only talking to the Left as part of the consensus process. This way tests can be done, and we can assure the capability to some doubting thomases around as well AND build a genuine consensus on a national issue.

I know it seems like wishful thinking. But it is not really. India pre 1998 did exactly that did it not? Shivji says that the window for testing is closed. I cannot understand this. Is it really so? or is it only our own log kya kahenge syndrome.

Just a ramble as usual. Take it for what it is worth.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 25 May 2008 16:47

Suraj wrote:
merlin wrote:However, India did grow quite nicely in the early period of liberalization and also when the investment in India from external sources was quite small. External investment is not the be all and end all. We can still grow without external investment.

That is the wrong perspective. The early period of liberalization was on a very small base - our GDP is ~450% what is was then, from under $250 billion in 1991-92 to $1170 billion last fiscal year (07/08 ). Gross trade volume is over 20x higher at nearly $500 billion, total capital flows into and out of the country have grown the same extent, to over $1000 billion last year.

It is extraordinarily off base to claim that 'external investment is not the be all and end all'. India is massively engaged with the world economy today, on a scale that bears no relation to even the early 2000s, much less the early 1990s. Folks sometimes grossly underestimate how much India has changed in its economic engagement with the world.

However, none of this is to be construed as a suggestion not to test. I'm merely quoting economic facts to underline a more nuanced argument. My suggestion as to what to do is straightforward - act on any matter when we are in a position to control the consequences. If we want to test, understand specifically how our external engagement looks like. Work ahead of time to more closely economically embrace those entities whose negative actions will hurt us most. Why ? Because their actions will hurt *them* as well. That's precisely the basis of the Sino-US equilibrium...

Such an understanding of our economic position, our engagement with the world in general, and critical parties in particular is absolutely required. Sorry, but simplistic statements like 'we can grow without external investment' just does not cut it.

Thanks Suraj for that observation and advise.

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Postby Raja Ram » 25 May 2008 16:47

Saw the latest missive from the missile guru. I still see a lot of allegations made and sweeping statement not backed by any technical arguments, so we are still where we were at the begining of this thread.

I also do not seem to recollect ABV making anykind of retraction, modification, alterations or whatever to his original statements. They were cryptic and they were not ambigous.

Anyway, it is not worth belabouring the point. Those who believe that S1 did not deliver will believe that. No one can change that. It is more important that disbelief on Indian capability is not shared by people who matter - our adversaries. So far i see no evidence that there is any doubt about Indian capability or intent. I dont make this statement on what many of them say or the psy ops that they take out. But base it on the actions they have been taking in relation to India since then. Actions are more eloquent than words. And actions by adversaries and global powers indicate that there is no doubt in their minds of Indian capbility or intent to use that.

All we have is circular arguments now. I have great regard to some of those who are convinced that the S1 failed. I have learnt a lot from them on other matters, but I do not see that value here on this matter. I hope it does not come in between us as mature individuals, we are all convinced on maintaining the strategic independence of India. On that there is no difference or two opinions. That is what I take out of this thread.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 25 May 2008 17:00

Raja Ram wrote:Saw the latest missive from the missile guru. I still see a lot of allegations made and sweeping statement not backed by any technical arguments, so we are still where we were at the begining of this thread.

I addressed that in the first post on this thread.

I also do not seem to recollect ABV making anykind of retraction, modification, alterations or whatever to his original statements. They were cryptic and they were not ambigous.

Search/Google and you will find.

Anyway, it is not worth belabouring the point. Those who believe that S1 did not deliver will believe that. No one can change that. It is more important that disbelief on Indian capability is not shared by people who matter - our adversaries.

I believe there is nothing that I say that is not already known to analysts in concerned countries.


So far i see no evidence that there is any doubt about Indian capability or intent. I dont make this statement on what many of them say or the psy ops that they take out. But base it on the actions they have been taking in relation to India since then. Actions are more eloquent than words. And actions by adversaries and global powers indicate that there is no doubt in their minds of Indian capability or intent to use that.

So true of purpose but I am afraid proven wrong by action data. What more action based based evidence one needs when China does land grabbing of country that declares itself to be NWS/Country with Nuclear Weapons? Pls give one example when this has happened fro any other state with Nuclear Weapons?

Doubt about Indian capability or intent: With the Indian fatakas, Pakistan is deterred, China is not.

One could argue that Pakistan tried to nibble Kargil as the window of reality was closing fast. There is no argument w.r.t China thought. Pure and simple Chinese action to the effect of: "Tu Kya Ukhaad Laygaa?"

Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 586
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Postby Raja Ram » 25 May 2008 17:10

Saw the first post and the last, did the search on google, no such retractions as claimed.

With regard to chinese land grab not happening with any other nuclear armed country wrong again. chinese land grabbed from Soviets and the soviets land grabbed chinese land as well. Both proven beyond doubt TN powers. so much for that evidence.

As far as Chinese not being deterred, think again, just as you believe that every foriegn analyst believes what you believe about indian test, I too can claim the same that chinese analysts do believe that India has assured means of nuclear retaliation.

Read up on recent PLA sponsored papers, read up on chinese think tank papers especially chinese language ones and see what they are planning to counter Indian "hegemonistic designs"

As I said earlier, i do really respect your immense contributions in this forum. I am no where close to what you have contributed, but in this case and this particular point alone, i do not see that value. Rest assured, I have not slightest doubt that you are taking this position on this matter with the intention of seeing that India never compromises its soverignity. I respect that and I also share the same intention. It is just that we do not agree on this, let us agree to disagree.

I also admit freely that your arguments may have swayed the majority of posters here to your POV, but I choose to remain in the minority of one if need be on this.

I certainly do not wish to argue further on this with you, and if I have offended you in anyway my apologies. It was never my intention.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 May 2008 17:16

Arun_S wrote:Shiv sahib, I am sure you know that RC and DAE was not given just 48Hr to deliver the objectives. DAE was directly under PMO since Mrs Indira Gandhi, and got all the necessary support from the highest office of the country. Indira Gandhi, Rajiv and most importantly PVN Rao gave them mandate to be ready to deliver when the time comes, at the expense of funds and labor and limbs of defense forces. DAE got ample heads up and dry run of how they will be asked to deliver during the first short lived govt of ABV too. You give DAE very generous rope when you say they got 48 hrs to deliver, when in reality they got many years, with the caveat that it will be a rare and possibly one time opportunity for DAE and India to test to their hearts content and DELIVER.
.


I believe that you have misunderstood my post.

In fact using your interpretation - DAE did not have several years - it had several decades - from 1974 to 1998.

But that is not what I implied or said. When the time came to do the tests the DAE was tasked with demonstrating a credible deterrent and was given only one chance. That chance was between May 11 to May 13th. In two days they had to do all the tests and then be in a position to say that everything was working.Everyone else in the world has been allowed to test and experiment over many years and were not asked to meet all their country's expectations by testing once and for all time within a two day period.

Note that no scientists from any other country in the world have been forced to do this. No scientist from any country has been told that he has only one 48 hour window to complete all his tests and declare that all is well technically so that a geopolitical statement can be made to the world.

If you forget the technical flaws that you believe are true for a minute and look at the geopolitical statements that were made after May 13th 1998 they were:

1) India has atomic bomb (demonstration of capability)
2) India is a nuclear weapons state - we are in the nuclear club.

Both these are not technical statements.

The only technical statements that were made were that India had tested a thermonuclear bomb, a fission bomb and subkiloton bombs.

The 1998 tests met India's immediate geopolitical objectives and very little information was given out about the technical capability. In fact you have made a lot of statements that you did not make in 1998.
Since then, you may have met or spoken to someone who is your source of information regarding the technical failure of the tests. But nobody else seems to have met and spoken to those people - which is why there is some skepticism for your comments.

if we uphold the normal standards that we ask for on BRF then one must ask for the source of your information regarding the technical failure of the tests and, if possible, your seeming inside information about structural changes that DAE requires, and more surprising suggestion that the DAE does not have any form of stewardship for its weapons.
Last edited by shiv on 25 May 2008 18:48, edited 1 time in total.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 25 May 2008 17:48

I have one question for Arun-S:

if you believe S1 failed why do you accept AGNI configuration with MIRVs of 150 Kg weight?

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Postby rocky » 25 May 2008 22:17

One needs to understand the real purpose of why all the 1998 tests were conducted so quickly, and in such secrecy.

- Were we going to conduct tests and pretend that we never did - doubt it.

- Were we testing to ensure that if things don't go as planned, we can claim we never did? doubt it.

- Were we testing to ensure that sanctions didn't apply during the testing, but only after the testing? doubt it.

- Were we testing to ensure that sanctions didn't apply, period? doubt it.

Which leaves us with the only one reason - we tested in quick succession and secrecy in order to avoid sabotage of the tests, either over through pressure, or covert, through well, covert activities.


Shiv, your lengthy post on why the time to test is over - comes across to me as the behaviour of a person pretending to be fast asleep - it's impossible to wake such a person up.

We can even test before the 123 act is formally signed - test and declare weapons refinement as an excuse like France did.

Let's get perform an exercise. If we test, say tomorrow, what will the world do. Please don't get off into tangents and post wailing posts. Be very specific, post a thorough analysis backed with logic.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests