This is really cool, a lot more people posting.
vaman wrote:I don't see any politics in the issue
While that is true, the issue can be politicized?
I think "politics" is a very valid component of strategic deterrence, but a) the current discussion does go beyond that - at least for the time being, and b) at some point in time, when push really comes to shove, they all have to unite behind some common policy WRT "deterrence". Even the lost and tired CPI.
Raj Malhotra wrote:This whole thing is orchesterated by MMS + NSA to rip off BJP chaddi and tell USA to get off!
Understand the BJP part, what is tell USA to get off"?
I add - S1 was meant to 1000kt and was a fizzile.
Such a large test device would have produced a much, much larger crater than the one Santhanam claimed @ 72 meter (and latest 70 meters - close enough).
Gagan wrote:If India has mastered the TN, with computer simulations shouldn't it be possible to extrapolate and scale?
Needs proofing - a test - is the counter argument.
Dipak wrote:S1 - (TN) successful -- Not weaponized -- Why continue story, just weaponize and be done with it!
But just harping on 'capability' for 11 years but not weaponizing and inducting formally, is itself proof enough that TN test was not successful. Repeated claims of success and capability do not cut it.
weaponization should be under the deterrence doctrine team, nothing to do with RC/BARC/DRDO.
Based on what B Karnad has published/email, it seems that RC has assured them that India can weaponize a TN. Which means that the team that is busy with deterrence has accepted his assurances (not asked for tests) or asked for tests and teh political wing has either declined the offer or postponed it.
RC cannot force the issue of deploying a TN.
What Santhanam is saying is that NEEDS a TN - as a weapon - to deter China (in specific). Santhanam is playing the cheif os scicom and the chief of deterrence team (which he may be qualified to do - as he seems to be both a scicom + RAW). And since his contention is TN does not exist, he wants to start from there. IF S1 had succeeded he would have forced the issue of making it a weapon and at some time mating it with a viable missile (not that in his last article he brings this (TN + missile) point up too).
If the reason given is TN not needed for deterrent, well what was the need in the first place to conduct a TN test then?
To build a capability.
ShauryaT wrote:His take on how an entire organization with men who have sacrificed other lucrative careers for the nation, could be lying for all these years?
That is not the end of that story. RC seems to managed to fool pretty much everyone else too!!! The US, all members of the NSG.
THAT is true minimum credible deterrence
. ROI is really high!!
Besides that all these man-hours for fibbing? Wow. Some BUNCH of people in the GoI had to be in on this too. Possible.
IMHO, the S1 was not a "dud". At worst it provided some data, at best it provided enough data to correct the design, better still it achieved what it was set to do.
kit wrote:India needs thermonuclear weapons because of its smaller stockpile and lesser number of delivery systems vs its principal potential aggressor(s)
May be. I happen to think otherwise. Pakistan is a international problem with deep roots in India. IMHO, the more Pakistan claims and wiggles to the high table, the more other nations have to take notice of it. I believe that Pakistan will kill itself - slowly. On China, I am not worried because China - as she gets bigger in every way - will stand to lose so much that India's smaller nukes will be enough of a threat to her. So, if India calculated in 1990 that dropping a 20 Kt on X city would cause X unit of pain, in another 10 years the same 20 Kt should (IMHO) cause 5X units of pain. (I am not sure if anyone has read some articles in FT on China. One of the things China is very carefully re-cultivating is her "culture" - yes, they have placed value on that too, outside of economic, military, etc. IF that is true, then India can be a greater threat even with her much, much smaller arsenal.)
India is scared of testing again due to reasons imagined or otherwise.
I would think she is less concerned today than 10 years ago, and, India will be even further less concerned IF the country grows (not JUST the economy). But, perhaps the need to test may also die slowly IF others see nukes as a problem?