Deterrence

[shiv]

Samuel you have asked a question whose answer has been lost in the text

Sankuji, please say more. what's reality then?

The answer was

So not only do we have no deterrence our low low capability creates a situation where we are forced to resort to desperate tactics since that is the only avenue available to us.

But let me respond with my views on the post below particularly the highlighted text.

How about something simpler. We have no intention of using nuclear weapons, and if hit, we will respond in a way that suits us. We have approx. 250-300 250-300KT weapons, with an unknown un-assembled war-heads, which can be delivered by cruise missiles, missiles, air and sea. We are resolved to keep our arsenal ready and updated so that the cost of this war, if it ever arises, is prosecuted in the most economical, efficient and least uncertain way. What prevents us from doing this and, if we are only learning to be free like this, why reshackle, running to one or the other for materiel and protection, when we should be working away at calling and having our own (my opinion)?

S

India's fizzile bombs are India's way of prosecuting a war "in the most economical, efficient and least uncertain way.". Perhaps this may change at some uncertain time in the future, I don't know.

Please excuse my French, but the difference between Pakistan, China and the US on the one hand and India on the other hand is not that the former are good at doing g**nd masti while India does not do it. In my view India does only half hearted g**nd masti while pretending to be holy. Why India behaves in this manner I don't know - or at least people will accuse me of piskology if I try to explain that. But to India's credit I suspect that Indians have tried to keep India's core interests at heart. Let me try to stick to what I think are technical issues. In the absence of a net search I may get some things wrong.

India's first nuclear reactors came with Western collaboration. Particularly it was CANDU that had imported (Canadian?) Uranium. Unless i am mistaken it was that spent fuel that was reprocessed to extract the Plutonium for India' 1974 test. By 1974 the "high table" - the P5 had already been formed and India's test instantly created a caste system with the P5 on the one hand and the India on the other.

I am sure most older members of BRF will remember the India of the 1960s and 70s. After the humiliation of 1962 - we had the whammy of a powerfully armed Pakistan attacking in 1965. 1965 was a drought year and people might also recall that a ballpoint pen was a luxury in 1965 and those lucky elites who managed to go to the US would flaunt them. Indian banks were nationalised in 1969 to regulate banking in a socialist move that curtailed the power of the private elite. The Indian economy barely recovered from 1965 when we had our long lost brothers - the Porkistanis fighting again in 1971. 1971 was also the year that the powers of the wealthy ball point pen elite - the Princes and Maharajas was curtailed by stopping payments of the privy purse a princely sum of money they were receiving from the Indian government.

The years 1972-1974 were also the years in which the feudal land ownership system of India was broken up in the land reforms acts where the wealthy feudal landowning elite were further deprived of their vulgar privileges in a country full of desperately poor people. This was a time when I relinquished my right on ancestral agricultural land owned by my family - obtained as a gift from the Maharaja of Mysore.

The point I am making is that India's economy was weighted in favor of an extremely wealthy elite (maybe 5%) and a desperately poor population. The GoI had little money and the moneyed elite were not making nukes. It was in this period that Indira Gandhi understood the need to project some power on an international stage and conducted Pokhran I using Pu sourced from Canadian Plutonium - inviting the wrath of the high caste P5.

India's atomic energy sector since then has shown only a Hindu rate of growth

If you look at the 24 years between 1974 and 1998 - you need to ask how much Plutonium India has access to given that it was under sanctions regarding Uranium import. How many fission bombs could be made from that Plutonium? This is classified info but there are publicly available estimates from foreign peers.

Even if Indians desired to make thermonuclear weapons and made prototypes - India was never brazen enough to attempt to test them until 1998.

Given India's overt behavior which was IMO one of "abiding by international rules" except for one or two brief paroxysms of rule breaking in 1974 and 1998 - India has not displayed what it takes to persist with international level g**nd masti to develop a huge arsenal. The "economy" and "democracy" excuse is always there for India to explain this away. We did not follow the China route and India is still not showing any national consensus of following a route that adopts brazen re-arming in order to militarily intimidate or militarily reoccupy lands. In that sense rajeshks is right in saying that India is not taking the Nazi Germany route to nationalism.

We have

• Limited stocks of Plutonium (probably - there is a catch here)
  Limited testing experience
  Virtually no experience in proving huge thermonuclear weapons
  Virtually no information about India's arsenal

What sort of arsenal can India be judged to have?
How many bombs and of what yields can India reasonably be expected to have
If you were tasked with attempting to achieve deterrence with what we have (as opposed to what you want) what would you do?

I have stated my take on these questions time and time again. People have disagreed and it is their prerogative to do so. But let me hear alternative views.

[Airavat]

Indian banks were nationalised in 1969 to regulate banking in a socialist move that curtailed the power of the private elite.

1971 was also the year that the powers of the wealthy ball point pen elite - the Princes and Maharajas was curtailed by stopping payments of the privy purse a princely sum of money they were receiving from the Indian government.

These measures were used by Indira Gandhi against her political opponents, like the Swatantra Party, to deprive them of electoral funding. The elite within the Congress Party fold flourished under the licence-permit Raj; call them crony capitalists or crony socialists.

The Swatantra Party, a right-of-centre formation, advocated free enterprise, inviting foreign capital, opening relations with Israel, and they opposed the Congress party's weak-kneed policy on Tibet.

Formed in 1959 this party also had a flexible nuclear policy. M.R. Masani, General Secretary of the Swatantra Party, initially advocated that India seek protection of a US nuclear umbrella instead of pursuing indigenous nuclear weapons development. He said, "A nuclear force, in order to act as a deterrent, must be vastly superior to that of the enemy. It is highly problematic whether India would ever be capable of achieving such superiority over Communist China."

But he also acknowledged that if this protection is not sought or is not available, the Indian government should encourage the development of a domestic nuclear weapons capability.

[samuel]

Could the dhimmi rate of growth that India showed be instructive of the kind of technical and political ambiguity surrounding 98. Where we have such strong beliefs in the "hindu rate of growth" by AEC etc., why is the fizzle that far off the mark?

A nuclear force, in order to act as a deterrent, must be vastly superior to that of the enemy. It is highly problematic whether India would ever be capable of achieving such superiority over Communist China."

This statement is true today just as it was back then. So there was awareness, there was thinking, there was no momentum. In fact, it appears that present day policy is not much different:

1. First see if US will give us chatri.
2. If not, do it on our own.

You expect us to go anywhere like this, really?

Let's get it out of the way first that we do need a deterrent. What we have is piddle and inadequate, we can't keep fudging, bluffing and confusing ourselves that is, and we need to put effort in there as the first goal not the last resort.

Let's get that far here on this forum perhaps, let alone all of India, if we are to believe the "elite" are here. Then, with that reality sinking in, we might be able to say what we need to do and simply go about doing it.

I hoped and believed that India payed intense attention to its nuclear deterrent. Now it looks like yet another class experiment where negative results are just as good.

S

[shiv]

These measures were used by Indira Gandhi against her political opponents, like the Swatantra Party, to deprive them of electoral funding. The elite within the Congress Party fold flourished under the licence-permit Raj; call them crony capitalists or crony socialists.

I am sure you are right - but the extreme corruption and self serving actions of the Indian elite have been a constant factor from those days right up to this day. Nevertheless - at least for vote bank politics a small amount of money has gone into development and an even smaller amount has gone into nuclear weapon development - or even defence for that matter.

Any deficiencies in our nuclear arsenal today are hardly the result of one scientist lying to the nation. The alleged lies told by one man can possibly be remedied by the actions of the many honest people around him. But the entire nation is actually fairly screwed up - a point that blind faith in ancient history and intense neo-nationalism cannot remedy. Especially if people are in deep denial.

There are fundamental defects in the way our entire nuclear tech set up has been funded and fostered right from the outset that have a bearing on the deterrence of today. Imagining that the story will end "happily ever after" if the "Deceitful Lying Ogre" is defeated is living in cloud cuckoo land. This is not a fairy tale where one scapegoat can be removed to solve the problem.

[shiv]

Could the dhimmi rate of growth that India showed be instructive of the kind of technical and political ambiguity surrounding 98. Where we have such strong beliefs in the "hindu rate of growth" by AEC etc., why is the fizzle that far off the mark?

S

It is not at all far off the mark. Even a "sizzle" of a frightening 45 kt means exactly the same thing. Not exactly a gigaboom is it? And making one man a scapegoat and declaring "Hurrah! problem solved" and feeling happy about it is right on the dot for the standard dhimmi behavior. It all fits in.

[samuel]

I don't know to what lengths scaling laws are valid and therefore I can't say if 45KT for S1+S2+S3 or S1 or some other combination thereof is significant. Does not seem to me that it is.

From the deterrence point of view, we got nothing over 100KT (as per current wisdom), we have no TN, we have no MIRV ready, we have a modest arsenal, and one threat of massive escalation to do to China that we can't follow through on. We've had a lot of time to work on this and we cannot blame anyone else. The mindset that was articulated :
1. First seek shelter with the big wigs.
2. if they say no, DIY.

That mindset truly shackles us. But we can chart a better destiny than the dhimmi inheritance we are cursed with. We can negotiate a space that is secure and well connected without giving up the option to stand on our own two feet if only we deem it to be our character to do that.

What does that mean. CTBT is out of the window. Bow out, politely, whatever that translates to. Screw NPT. No discussions on our nuclear status, do tests when we need to and we need to. Remain open for business, cut rate prices, free markets and all that jazz...where's the conflict unless we are scared we've been bluffing and were hoping all along someone else will take care of us for being nice and good? And when Condi showed up, the flood gates flew open because she was the farishta we were waiting for?

S

[ss_roy]

shiv,

The problems of India can be traced to the behavior and attitudes of it's rulers after independence. India's deficiencies were self-induced.

Whether it was infrastructure, education, coherent foreign policy, funding science etc- every action of the Indian 'rulers' was designed to ensure that it would not succeed.

Note- I used the word 'rulers' not 'government'.

[shiv]

shiv,

The problems of India can be traced to the behavior and attitudes of it's rulers after independence. India's deficiencies were self-induced.

Whether it was infrastructure, education, coherent foreign policy, funding science etc- every action of the Indian 'rulers' was designed to ensure that it would not succeed.

Note- I used the word 'rulers' not 'government'.

But Roy "rulers" or "government" India has gradually changed all its human condition parameters in such a way that the graph goes in the direction that pleases the people who use the word "development". The "human condition" parameters that are measured in India are not spirituality or nationalism. They are birth rate, literacy, infant mortality, maternal mortality, healthcare etc. All these parameters are accepted in the West as needing to reach a particular value for a country to be declared as being "developed".

So no matter what parameter you look at (among these Western defined parameters) the "human condition" of India has "improved". It is another matter that the words "Hindu rate of growth" was used to describe a situation in which the population growth would always outstrip the rate at which human condition could be improved.

E-khanomists say that India needs to achieve 7%(?) or higher growth to break the vicious cycle of population growth rate always being ahead of the rate at which human condition improvement (human development) can progress.

So while India can be described as "slow and lethargic" - zero improvement or negative growth is not an accusation that can easily be placed against India no matter who the rulers were/are. Maybe India could have done better but India needs to sprint in order to stay in one position. It irritates jingos to hear lousy stats about India, but those lousy stats refer to a huge mass of people who create and elect rulers.

Sanjay Gandhi tried the China model by forced sterilizations. But the strong arm tactics of Indira and her son were rejected by the very patriots who later formed the NDA government and called a moratorium after an alleged fizzle. To me the consistent wimp like actions of both the NDA and the UPA indicate that their priorities do not coincide with the priorities of a lot of jingos on here.

I believe India is really at a cusp and cannot improve and may even fail unless we start looking at more difficult human development parameters like governance. Testing huge gigabooms is not going to get priority (fortunately IMO). It is mischievous and motivated to claim that since India has not tested and demonstrated gigaboom the responsible people - scientific and government are traitors and/or liars and India's security is compromised. India's security is already compromised by 300 million unhappy, underfed people whose presence is denied.

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out. India has problems that are in no way going to be helped by gigaboom and there are enough cards in the hands of developed nations to slow us down and screw us further should we insist on testing gigaboom because we believe somebody is a liar. What a pathetic state of self delusion.

[vera_k]

^^^

But Shiv, the Gigabooms are hardly holding back progress on the human development indicators. For example, BARC's 2007 budget was about 1300 CR. And extending health insurance under the Chiranjeevi scheme that promises to improve maternal care to BPL families all across India was estimated to cost 1200 CR.

Note that neither sum is particularly unaffordable for India today. IMO, the suspect Gigaboom and the poor HDI stats are both an indicator that the Indian state is not particularly competent. Significant parts of it need to be dismantled and exposed to competition in right earnest, yet this is unlikely to come about until there is a change in the leadership. Which, of course is orthogonal to the desire and effort to build Gigaboom devices.

[shiv]

Note that neither sum is particularly unaffordable for India today. IMO, the suspect Gigaboom and the poor HDI stats are both an indicator that the Indian state is not particularly competent.

This I agree with

Significant parts of it need to be dismantled and exposed to competition in right earnest, yet this is unlikely to come about until there is a change in the leadership. Which, of course is orthogonal to the desire and effort to build Gigaboom devices.

I have no specific comment on this except to say that "competition" is a deadly word in the Indian context. To be very honest, when the first Ghazis came India they were "competing" with resident Indians for resources. When the Brits came - again there was "competition"

India has a history of capitulating when we compete on others terms. Again the nuclear deal throws some things open to competition. So let's see. I think the only "fair" competition is when India wins. As far as my mind goes competition must never be fair if someone else has a chance of winning. Indians take words like "fair competition" and "International treaty" too seriously and act as if others really want fair competition or really want to uphold treaties. With fellow Indians we behave like others treat us. With firangis we are oh so fair.

So India is "up a gum tree" as RayC says. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

We compete best against other Indians. BARC's budget is for all its activities - not Gigabooms and may I respectfully point out that "budgets" in India mean very little in that a Gigabooom budget would not be publicised even if 2000 crores were spent on it. The Indian way is to hide and obfuscate. Openness and accountability are an American disease that is sought to be superimposed on Indians.

[shiv]

Chiranjeevi scheme that promises to improve maternal care to BPL families all across India was estimated to cost 1200 CR.

Vera. this is a scam. Having said that BARC too is a scam as per some people, so their almost equal budgets make almost equal scams.

[Sanku]

The India way is to hide and obfuscate. Openness and accountability are an American disease that is sought to be superimposed on Indians.

I dont know why you slip in those value based statements amongst other data based statements.

Often your posts would have data point which there would be agreement with "India has not done a good job as a nation" with statements like "Indian way is to hide", often the switch is made without any credible logic being provided in that post to go from one to another.

I do know that this is a common debating tactic (that we learn as children in BRF to look for in psec writings) but I think we need to not use that device ourselves, even if we are trying to score a piskological point (all towards India's betterment of course)

Our efforts will all be better and more effective if they are more closely aligned with Satyamev Jayate actually (IMVHO and other standard disclaimers apply)

[abhiti]

But Roy "rulers" or "government" India has gradually changed all its human condition parameters in such a way that the graph goes in the direction that pleases the people who use the word "development".

So just direction is enough? Well even 10% Zardari will change the direction. Where do you factor in the true contribution of the rulers i.e. hundreds of millions of people in abject poverty, hundreds of millions of people uneducated, zero rule of law, massive corruption, teetering infrastructure, and total denial of justice which was so loftly promised in constitution.

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out.

Says who? People like you were also saying that India will become a shit pit after first nuke blasts. Did it? Also who talked about gigaboom? I only heard most people talk about less than a megaton weapon which btw was a target set by members of the ruler party who you so worship. You seem to totally ignore need for testing every weapon multiple times to ensure reliability and focussed on just gigaboom to forward your flawed argument.

BARC's budget is for all its activities - not Gigabooms and may I respectfully point out that "budgets" in India mean very little in that a Gigabooom budget would not be publicised even if 2000 crores were spent on it.

Do you have any reason to believe that a 200KT weapon will cost 2000 crore more than your promised 20KT weapon? Please share you insight. Or are you gonna base your argument on speculation.

Funny that you bring up cost because a really argument for substantial nuclear deterrence is COST! The argument goes that you can never match Chinese and Pakistan together in any conventional war e.g. 126 jet figters alone cost 50,000 crores (so much about 2000 crores ). Therefore it is cheaper to get say 500 MIRV AGNI 3 SLBM each hosting 200KT weapon (a super power size arsenal) that keep expanding air force and military.

[shiv]

Good one!

I look forward to your next angry post next month.

[abhiti]

I look forward to your next angry post next month.

This is in line with what I have seen you do on this thread and other i.e. never engage in serious debate, whenever you cannot answer a question just ignore it, wait a couple of days, then post the same argument.

[samuel]

Abhiti,
I think shiv really only means about a milli-gigaboom or 100 micro-gigaboom, because as far as I know it is a really huge stretch and a joke to go from ~10s of Kilotons to ~million kilotons. Gigaboom is just some arbitrary unit, I don't know the origins, but sounds nice. Like a gigabyte, I tend to think of it as somewhat cheap, getting even cheaper to do. So every time someone says gigaboom, just multiply 0.00001 in front of it for every gigaboom.

One of the issues being pointed out is the cost of milligigaboom device or less. i think we should investigate that here more fully because it seems to me that the deterrence is working on us. We have two examples in front of us 74 and 98 and can we see how things were affected as a result. 74 much more ambiguous due to cold war affiliations having an equally large impact, but 98 is instructive. Without those sanctions, how much further along would we have gone?

S

[disha]

Sanjay Gandhi tried the China model by forced sterilizations. But the strong arm tactics of Indira and her son were rejected by the very patriots who later formed the NDA government and called a moratorium after an alleged fizzle. To me the consistent wimp like actions of both the NDA and the UPA indicate that their priorities do not coincide with the priorities of a lot of jingos on here.


I believe India is really at a cusp and cannot improve and may even fail unless we start looking at more difficult human development parameters like governance. Testing huge gigabooms is not going to get priority (fortunately IMO). It is mischievous and motivated to claim that since India has not tested and demonstrated gigaboom the responsible people - scientific and government are traitors and/or liars and India's security is compromised. India's security is already compromised by 300 million unhappy, underfed people whose presence is denied.

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out. India has problems that are in no way going to be helped by gigaboom and there are enough cards in the hands of developed nations to slow us down and screw us further should we insist on testing gigaboom because we believe somebody is a liar. What a pathetic state of self delusion.

Spot on. Also highlighting the bare truths. Also the other truth is that there is no point in security unless there is an economic security. They both go hand in hand. India has worked hard and sacrificed a lot to be just stable and come to a point where it can set itself up for a higher growth trajectory among the cesspool of nations it is surrounded with. The higher growth here is not necessary just economic growth, but growth in say security or governance or human life indicators (take your favourite pick).

Put it this way, if you are fighting for your daily life, a mega boom going off on your head is a blessing!

[abhiti]

One of the issues being pointed out is the cost of milligigaboom device or less. i think we should investigate that here more fully because it seems to me that the deterrence is working on us. We have two examples in front of us 74 and 98 and can we see how things were affected as a result. 74 much more ambiguous due to cold war affiliations having an equally large impact, but 98 is instructive. Without those sanctions, how much further along would we have gone?

It will always cost something. But asking that question in just a small context of nukes is incorrect. Nukes are meant for something, it is for defence. So you need to ask a much broader question as to how much you want to spend on defence, not just nuke defence. If 2000 crores is too much what you do say about 1 lakh crore defence budget every year. The entire reason super powers become so concerned about nukes is because it is a lot cheaper to compete in terms of nukes than in terms of fighters and ships.

[abhiti]

Put it this way, if you are fighting for your daily life, a mega boom going off on your head is a blessing!

Disha poverty argument is a powerful one. But why use it just for nuke deterrance which even Shiv talks about 2000 crores but then forget to use it for MRCA which will induct 126 fighters for 50,000 crores? It should also be used for defence budget which btw is 1 lakh crores. How about if we slash it by one tenth. 10,000 crore defence budget and not a penny more...anyone?

[disha]

I think we should investigate that here more fully because it seems to me that the deterrence is working on us. We have two examples in front of us 74 and 98 and can we see how things were affected as a result. 74 much more ambiguous due to cold war affiliations having an equally large impact, but 98 is instructive. Without those sanctions, how much further along would we have gone?

S

1974 affected is in other ways. Agreed that the world was perfidious and all that, but we were still economically isolated. Our trade with the soviet bloc was more of a barter trade and we could not plug in to the wider economic world and improve our lot then. The next chance was when soviet bloc collapsed and we had to mortgage our gold. That was just 2 decades back.

[RamaY]

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out.

Shiv-ji: Are you sure that you made this decision just for patriotic reasons? You have been thumping your chest for a long time based on this criteria. Does it add any value to this discussion or this forum?

[RamaY]

I believe India is really at a cusp and cannot improve and may even fail unless we start looking at more difficult human development parameters like governance. Testing huge gigabooms is not going to get priority (fortunately IMO). It is mischievous and motivated to claim that since India has not tested and demonstrated gigaboom the responsible people - scientific and government are traitors and/or liars and India's security is compromised. India's security is already compromised by 300 million unhappy, underfed people whose presence is denied.

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out. India has problems that are in no way going to be helped by gigaboom and there are enough cards in the hands of developed nations to slow us down and screw us further should we insist on testing gigaboom because we believe somebody is a liar. What a pathetic state of self delusion.

-deleted lungi dance comment-

The facts present a different story. India’s Average GDP Growth was 3.22% between 1947-1973. It increased to 5.12% between 1974-1998. It again increased to ~9% after 1998.

A factual analysis proves that every time India asserted its national security prerogatives; it lead to a comprehensive growth in human, economic, infrastructural, military, and strategic arenas.

[samuel]

There is no argument that our economy was in socialist tatters for a long time. Ascribing that to 74 probably has some value but there was a huge context by then. 71 had just happened, then there was 65, 62 and "Nehru." That was a long time coming.

We did "step out" by 98 and that is why I wonder if we can look at it in terms of how much the economy slowed as a result or what it would've gained in defense without the test. I think we should go about it as objectively as we can, though there will be controversy for sure. It should help us get a better understanding of how we truly are deterred by the "what will the world do to us and our economy" argument.

S

[samuel]

For a long time my argument for a more robust defense posture always hit a hesitation when I was confronted with the argument: what about our poor and disadvantaged, should we not be focusing on that.

This happened during the nuclear deal too, but I am increasingly confident that the numbers don't really add up or relate that way. With increasing financial muscle, we are only spending more on buying other stuff, which has also increased the degree by which we are manipulated although one could argue that it increases our leverage too. As an aside, we should track and measure if our foreign policy objectives are better met or if we have changed them more as a result of this route.

On the other hand, attainment of a new level on our own seems to open opportunities that appear to me to take a rather long time the other route, or none at all. And the "svraj model" also increases our leverage.

But the thing is, neither of these routes are getting to the people who we argue to be the cause for making the guns-butter dichotomy. That theory has its own problems, for another thread. I contend that there is no dichotomy between asserting swraj and having a robust nationalist approach, and a vigorous well-integrated economy and both these can be done while indeed delivering the fruits of that to our most needy. Putting them in conflict is a false choice in my view. What we need are leaders who can take a holistic view of these issues and that leadership can be nurtured by what we do here and spread out later. But that would be the correct debate for us to have in another thread.

S

[dinesha]

China – US scenario for comparative analysis.. lot of analysis can be drawn on simily basis.. Link

U.S.-China nuclear strikes would spell doomsday
By Mitsuo Takai
Guest CommentaryPublished: October 07, 2009TOOLBAR

Tokyo, Japan — Those who advocate nuclear armaments, and are now raising their voices in Japan and elsewhere, should take a look at an objective analysis by U.S. scientists who have disclosed the results of several studies on strategic nuclear missile strikes.
What would happen if China launched its 20 Dongfeng-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles, each with a 5-megaton warhead, at 20 major U.S. cities?

Prevailing opinion in Washington D.C. until not so long ago was that the raids would cause over 40 million casualties, annihilating much of the United States. In order to avoid such a doomsday scenario, consensus was that the United States would have to eliminate this potential threat at its source with preemptive strikes on China.

But cool heads at institutions such as the Federation of American Scientists and the National Resource Defense Council examined the facts and produced their own analyses in 2006, which differed from the hard-line views of their contemporaries.

The FAS and NRDC developed several scenarios involving nuclear strikes over ICBM sites deep in the Luoning Mountains in China’s western province of Henan, and analyzed their implications.

One of the scenarios involved direct strikes on 60 locations – including 20 main missile silos and decoy silos – hitting each with one W76-class, 100-kiloton multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle carried on a submarine-launched ballistic missile. In order to destroy the hardened silos, the strikes would aim for maximum impact by causing ground bursts near the silos' entrances.

Using air bursts similar to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not be as effective, as the blasts and the heat would dissipate extensively.

In this scenario, the 6 megatons of ground burst caused by the 60 attacks would create enormous mushroom clouds over 12 kilometers high, composed of radioactive dirt and debris.

Within 24 hours following the explosions, deadly fallout would spread from the mushroom clouds, driven by westerly winds toward Nanjing and Shanghai. They would contaminate the cities' residents, water, foodstuff and crops, causing irreversible damage.

The impact of a 6-megaton nuclear explosion would be 360 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb, killing not less than 4 million people.

Such massive casualties among non-combatants would far exceed the military purpose of destroying the enemy's military power. This would cause political harm and damage the United States’ ability to achieve its war aims, as it would lose international support.

On the other hand, China could retaliate against U.S. troops in East Asia, employing intermediate-range ballistic missiles including its DF-3, DF-4 and DF-21 missiles, based in Liaoning and Shandong provinces, which would still be intact.

If the United States wanted to destroy China's entire nuclear retaliatory capability, U.S. forces would have to employ almost all their nuclear weapons, causing catastrophic environmental hazards that could lead to the annihilation of mankind.

Accordingly, the FAS and NRDC conclusively advised U.S. leaders to get out of the vicious cycle of nuclear competition, which costs staggering sums, and to promote nuclear disarmament talks with China. Such advice is worth heeding by nuclear hard-liners.

From the same site:
China in search of an enemy “Suddenly, the Chinese found themselves with a 3 million-strong military and no enemy in sight. Now it is looking to create one, preferably in its neighborhood – and India fits the bill.”
Read on.. http://www.upiasia.com/Security/2009/10 ... nemy/1337/

New paradigms of deterrence in Asia
http://www.upiasia.com/Security/2009/10 ... asia/1912/

[samuel]

Suppose we went to China to initiate nuclear disarmament talks for Asia. What do you think the outcome of that will be?

S

[svinayak]

The facts present a different story. India’s Average GDP Growth was 3.22% between 1947-1973. It increased to 5.12% between 1974-1998. It again increased to ~9% after 1998.

A factual analysis proves that every time India asserted its national security prerogatives; it lead to a comprehensive growth in human, economic, infrastructural, military, and strategic arenas.

Finally some real arguments.

[negi]

Appah this is heights ; bringing in economy angle to pass on the blame to the issues like poverty ,low GDP yada yada from the actual culprit i.e. lack of political will and defunct foreign policy based on phony ideals.

Infact even the reason for slow economic growth imo can be attributed to flawed policy making at the center ; the major economic players today made the most of the cold war paranoia by siding with either US or RU and here we had bunch of day dreamers chugging along with NAM.

Since people are talking in terms of 'IFs' and 'BUTs' I guess I am allowed to indulge in some myself. How about IF India had sided with either of the two blocks what would have been its impact on economic and strategic progress (And no please do not come up with an excuse that we prevented the WW-III sorry it won't sell ) ?

[svinayak]

Appah this is heights ; bringing in economy angle to pass on the blame to the issues like poverty

Thank god your location is still in kindergarden

[negi]

Ofcourse I am in a KG for where else do you see people highlighting a random line from a post and go off in a tangent.

[shiv]

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out.

Shiv-ji: Are you sure that you made this decision just for patriotic reasons? You have been thumping your chest for a long time based on this criteria. Does it add any value to this discussion or this forum?

I believe it does.

Since you ask let me state what I recall saying earlier somewhere. I have repeated so many things that this may be yet another one.

Everyone who goes abroad and returns to India thinks that he has learned something and will "give back" to India all the things that he dreamed of giving back when he lived abroad. But India is big and the individual is small. India bends the life of every individual the way India is going to bend it. The individual will not make much of a difference. At the end of decades, India teaches the individual why it is the way it is and why all the starry eyed solutions the individual had are not going to make a dent to India.

The only dents that affect India are the dents that affect a large number of people. Gandhi, the murders of partition, famines, deaths from childbirth and hunger, television, cellphones, motor scooters, electricity are things that touch so many people in India that they can relate to the need to have more (or less) of each of these things. India is so big in people that anything that is done by very few people which affects very few people does not register. India's voting system allows people to choose what they think they need. Even if false promises are made - the vote will go to the false promise maker who makes a false promise of what the maximum number of Indians want.

Imagine two grass roots politicians (or even PM candidates) making two different promises at election time

Politician A promises food for all or electricity for all
Politician B promises bombs enough to destroy China and Pakistan

In India A gets voted in even if he never does his job. B will not get voted in even if he is honest and will keep his promise.

The point I am trying to make is that the people of India are such a strong force acting on life and governance that unless you live in India you can imagine that all sort of things are "good" for India. But the people making the choices know what is good for them. And unless the vast majority of people in India believe that your choice of what is "good for India" matches their own choice of what is "god for me" what will prevail is the latter, the "people's choice" and not your choice.

You have to live in India to see what people are choosing. If you want to change their choices (good or bad) you have to come here and change it and fight against ten million other people who are trying to convince Indians that something else is the best choice just as you might want to tell them that 500 x 750 megaton bombs are good for them and for India. The experience is humbling - but it also makes one amused at people who say completely naive and ignorant things to an India that does not give a damn about certain choices that are foisted as "good" for India but make no difference to the majority of people. Those who are unable to experience being humbled by India will always be prescriptive for India without insight about India. Those who are humbled by India will also be prescriptive - but about totally different things based on what people around them in India are demanding.

You may know what is really good for India. But one billion Indians know what's good for them as individuals. If your idea coincides with theirs. You win.

That is all I am trying to say.

PS - I am an extremely fortunate person in that my lifestyle choices fit in with the patriotism angle. Call that an unfair advantage - but like i said - it is fortune, not design. If my luck had been different (worse?) I would not have been living in India. My patriotism had to come secondary to my stomach. Once the stomach is full. patriotism blooms. That is true for most people

[shiv]

Suppose we went to China to initiate nuclear disarmament talks for Asia. What do you think the outcome of that will be?

S

I think the Chinese will think we are weak.

[svinayak]

Ofcourse I am in a KG for where else do you see people highlighting a random line from a post and go off in a tangent.

Not only that but lousy stats are being touted as virtues and KG people and jingo people are reminded that they dont come from the poor mass and they dont look after the future of this poor mass.

[svinayak]

Suppose we went to China to initiate nuclear disarmament talks for Asia. What do you think the outcome of that will be?

S

There will be only talk

[rajeshks]

It will be like talking to pakistan about stopping terrorism.

[NRao]

I believe India is really at a cusp and cannot improve and may even fail unless we start looking at more difficult human development parameters like governance. Testing huge gigabooms is not going to get priority (fortunately IMO). It is mischievous and motivated to claim that since India has not tested and demonstrated gigaboom the responsible people - scientific and government are traitors and/or liars and India's security is compromised. India's security is already compromised by 300 million unhappy, underfed people whose presence is denied.

By testing gigaboom India is going to remain the shit pit that it is and I say that as a wholly patriotic Indian living in India having made the choice to live here despite multiple options to shift out. India has problems that are in no way going to be helped by gigaboom and there are enough cards in the hands of developed nations to slow us down and screw us further should we insist on testing gigaboom because we believe somebody is a liar. What a pathetic state of self delusion.

-deleted lungi dance comment-

The facts present a different story. India’s Average GDP Growth was 3.22% between 1947-1973. It increased to 5.12% between 1974-1998. It again increased to ~9% after 1998.

A factual analysis proves that every time India asserted its national security prerogatives; it lead to a comprehensive growth in human, economic, infrastructural, military, and strategic arenas.

what is the lie? Trying to understand the comment.

[shiv]

For a long time my argument for a more robust defense posture always hit a hesitation when I was confronted with the argument: what about our poor and disadvantaged, should we not be focusing on that.

S

I had related thoughts. it can never really be "either guns or butter". It has to be both with resources being allocated as dictated by the relative priority of the threat posed by lack of guns or butter.

If I push the semi-competent India argument further we can reach some conclusions.

At this point in time (62 years post independence) India has done many things in part and nothing in full

Development - partial
Literacy - partial
health sector- partial development
Economy- not fully developed
Industry - still developing - yet to reach 21st century state of the art
Nuclear bombs - partially developed.

Despite all these partials - partially literate, partially healthy, partially employed etc - Indian people have to be fully alive and the state has to work fully and include a fully effective defence, industry and agriculture. The effectiveness of anything in India is built up from the partially developed components. Our workforce consists of partially educated people who are paid a part of what others are paid elsewhere. Our deterrence too echoes that. Its components are less than we might desire, but that is what we have and we must make the best use of it until everything in India moves forward by another millimeter.

[NRao]

For a long time my argument for a more robust defense posture always hit a hesitation when I was confronted with the argument: what about our poor and disadvantaged, should we not be focusing on that.

IF India had the growth shown on paper, it should have shown up on the ground too?

The fact seems to be that India did have the growth shown on paper, but it reached only a small %age of the people who were already rich. (There was a report just a few months back by the Asian Development Bank just on this topic. Some 80% of Indian wealth is in the hands of some 5% of the population. Which explains the "butter" aspect.)

And, that is where the problem lies.

The other two issues are: an underground economy and wealth stashed in Swiss banks (perhaps other banks too).

India is not a poor country, just that wealth is not distributed.

Back to deterrence.

[shiv]

The facts present a different story. India’s Average GDP Growth was 3.22% between 1947-1973. It increased to 5.12% between 1974-1998. It again increased to ~9% after 1998.

A factual analysis proves that every time India asserted its national security prerogatives; it lead to a comprehensive growth in human, economic, infrastructural, military, and strategic arenas.

India does not give a damn about choices that are foisted as "good" for India but make no difference to the majority of people.

Just guess what type of people are in the majority in India? Examples are the fellows who are desperate to pick up your luggage and offer to carry it for you outside an Indian airport when you have just travelled the world and lugged your bags yourself in every other country.

That is not the greatness of India. It shows how screwed up the "average Indian" actually is. If he and his kind want gigaboom - India would have more nukes than anyone else. just like Indians own the most privately held gold in the world.

[RamaY]

Shiv-ji

Completely agree with your post (about Indianness) for what it truly states. Nothing beyond that.

However we are talking about the strategic posture of India. Here the individual goes into background and India comes in to focus as a single-entity. At this level Shivs and RamaYs are not visible and their differences do not matter. What matters is what India represents as a single entity. Indian system presents the Prime Minister (or President) as the personification of Indian stature, values, beliefs, and aspirations. And they are expected to demonstrate that. At this level, all the individual issues and choices must go back. Especially when they are unrelated. Let me explain:

The opponents of big bums give various reasons to not to pursue them:

1. Nuke-wars are meaningless as there is no winner – But all my mortal enemies have one. And this is the criteria (perceived) for big power status.
2. Fission weapons will do the job – Goes against above reason.
3. No amount of bums can destroy the enemy completely – Goes against the above two points. If one cannot destroy the enemy completely, why having small bums or why stopping at small bums?
4. India can use this money for better use; poverty and toilets – The annual budget of BARC+DRDO <$3B out of ~$150B annual budget – This is the insurance premium the nationalists are asking for. The annual budget of all the development projects is >$50B and we are yet to see the statistics on how many people are pushed above poverty line every year. With this kind of money, even if we give a cash subsidy of Rs 60,000 per family per year, we should be able to pull nearly 30 million families from poverty.
5. India must focus on economy first – Goes against points 1,2, &3. That means these people are ok with having big bums and killing millions of people, but not now. After 10 years it is ok to possess TN-weapons that kill billions.