Deterrence

[ShauryaT]

Although, this issue of TSP TNW bogey has been around for a while and many Indian analysts have consistently said that we shall not distinguish between this tactical and strategic nonsense, I do have to ask. Will we really not distinguish? I mean a sub KT on an invading Indian column shall be responded to by "massive retaliation"? Fine to talk about this, but in reality, it could amount to millions for a few 1000's at most, in foreign territory? Think India will do it?

[Prem Kumar]

ShauryaT: the counter-question is - will Pakistan dare to find out the answer the hard way?

[ShauryaT]

ShauryaT: the counter-question is - will Pakistan dare to find out the answer the hard way?

True. But that is a different question.

[ramana]

After KS garu's demise SS has stepped up to the plate and justified KS's confidence in him.

No wonder BK does not see eye-eye with SS. They are friends though. Good to have these differing views to represent Indian interests.

A few years back one of our members went to see BK to talk about TSP. BK introduced SS and they all had a great review of the TSP slide deck.

ShauryaT, ACM Mehra was asked about a year after the tests about the strategic and tactical weapons. He said its all about targets. Some need high and others need low. So India doesn't see the difference in S and T.

Nuke War prevention is one of the goals of MND. And this clarification helps to clarify the matter and bolsters the goal.


And the low yield makes them more usable and thus adds credibility.
Prevailing winds and all that hogwash.

[Austin]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=20093
Even a midget nuke strike will lead to massive retaliation, India warns Pak

NEW DELHI: India will retaliate massively even if Pakistan uses tactical nuclear weapons against it. With Pakistan developing "tactical" nuclear warheads, that is, miniaturizing its weapons to be carried on short-range missiles, India will protect its security interests by retaliating to a "smaller" tactical attack in exactly the same manner as it would respond to a "big" strategic attack.

This is the kind of language I would like to see rather than the weak cowardly language that "India worries", "Army anxious", "China issues demarche", "Pakistan responds angrily" language that our press uses giving the exact impression needed for Pakistanis to describe Indians as "shivering in their dhotis" or "will run at the sound of gunfire"

All these Policy Research Talks are just "Feel Good Be Happy Stuff" for the intellectuals , the impact is similar to what a Common Man feel after watching Salman movie in a theater he feel good and great about himself.

Forget about getting close to Tactical Nuke Retaliation , We have gone to utmost length even to avoid a small scale conflict with Pakistan after Parliament strike and 26/11 ......all efforts on the contrary have gone to white wash it and start a new chapter , forgetting the old at the cost of common mans life. All the more encouraging Pakistan to increase the scale of attack and for us increasing the threshold to bear it.

Not to mention the thought of using nuclear weapon even on a small scale can have terrible consequences on the common people of this country who would mostly bear the brunt , in a country we cant manage to take care of people suffering from drought or flood , taking care of population or even a small section of it impacted by nuclear effect would be a terrible and unimaginable thing.

Such speech by Saran an all reminds me of an hindi proverb we most commonly use here "Kutte Jo Bhokte hai Woh Kaaate Nahi" i.e Dog which Barks Cannot Bite.

[ramana]

Austin, Please read the text again.
He is talking as the Chariman NSAB not member of CPR.

Before retaliating massively for a TNW attack, let us retaliate for the years of terrorism against us, beheading of our soldiers etc. Then we will take these words at their face value. Today, we suffer a huge credibility gap, even internally.

Err there is no gap in India's MND credibility.

It has weapons of different yields, it has two types of delivery systems (aircraft and missiles of various ranges on land, air force and sea based ships) with the third one (submarine based) underway, it has a doctrine, it has a command structure in place, and it has a dead man trigger in place prior to that. People can choose to ignore at their own risk.

[Austin]

Austin, Please read the text again.
He is talking as the Chariman NSAB not member of CPR.

Does it really matter ramana , there is Chidu as home minister who spoke after 26/11 that war with Pakistan is not an option and current NSA saying conflict with China is like a very remote thing.

All in All , these talks of we will use N Weapons and wont discriminate if its tactical or something is just posturing and talk for the sake of it ...more like an intellectual discourse since pakistani ex army guy mentioned that using tactical nuke was a option. Looks more like tit for tat.

In the end we should judge these people by what they do and not what they talk and in past 2 decades they did precious little to inspire confidence even on basic issues and neither any one was held accountable ...usual chalta hai stuff.

[Sanku]

After KS garu's demise SS has stepped up to the plate and justified KS's confidence in him.

If I am not wrong, this is the first time the institutional details of the Nuclear use mechanism (NCA etc) have been quoted in public domain?

But ramana garu, Austin/SShridhar saars do have a very important point. The GoI, including unfortunately Shri Shyam Saran by his association with Man mohan's govt, have their credibility really shaken.

How much can we trust ? Much as we like what we hear?

[Supratik]

Austin is partly correct. The ultimate posture will depend on the politicians in power. So it will be something if someone with guts like IG and ABV is in power and totally different with weak leaders like IKG and MMS. Nonetheless, it is good to have the opponent know the lakshman rekhas.

[ShauryaT]

If I am not wrong, this is the first time the institutional details of the Nuclear use mechanism (NCA etc) have been quoted in public domain?

These details of the NCA, including its critiques and compares with others have been out there for years now and much of it is posted in these threads too.

[ShauryaT]

In the end we should judge these people by what they do and not what they talk and in past 2 decades they did precious little to inspire confidence even on basic issues and neither any one was held accountable ...usual chalta hai stuff.

I think you are conflating initiation of war with nuclear deterrence issues, two separate things, even if interlinked.

[Sanku]

If I am not wrong, this is the first time the institutional details of the Nuclear use mechanism (NCA etc) have been quoted in public domain?

These details of the NCA, including its critiques and compares with others have been out there for years now and much of it is posted in these threads too.

From an official source? Or chai walla reports, if official I would appreciate if you can point to any previous one.

[ramana]

Sanku,
If so read Adm Sushil Kumar's view that the nukes were built up at cost of the conventional forces and that lead to the DBO standoff.

GOI is a big steel frame with redundant structures. One shouldnt think all of it is rusted.

SS could have relaxed after being bypassed for NSA.

He could have taken up advisor to some business house and made tons of money.

Instead he sat in same room as BK at CPR and planned and articulated the new vision.


Anyway one can believe in what they want but facts are what it should be based on.


NCA has been revealed on and off but in one speech that puts all the mosaic together.

[ShauryaT]

Sanku: There are a plethora of works on the matter, but the below started it all. As official as it gets.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2 ... 20033.html

[Austin]

ABV is in power and totally different with weak leaders like IKG and MMS.

ABV was the PM during Parliament strike what did he do ? IG perhaps yes but she screwed india in other ways.

I think you are conflating initiation of war with nuclear deterrence issues, two separate things, even if interlinked.

That is why said in my opening statements what SS said would be most liked by intellectual since it gives them something to chew on makes them feel good and happy. { not a personal statement on you but generally speaking }

Bottom line is GOI must be always be judged by why they do and not say ..... it wont be an understatement to say the past 2 decades as far as national security goes which by extension also means terrorist strike small and spectacular one has been a disaster mostly paid by blood of common citizen ... the only silver lining has been Nuke testing but thats little solace since if you end up using it you are pretty much sure you would be at the receiving end of it too or already had been.

[Prem Kumar]

Ramana: the Shyam Saran talk should be made sticky at the beginning of the thread. Very thoughtful & articulate

Austin: I share your pain as does everyone else. But people like Shyam Saran who put together the nuclear security architecture arent the ones to be blamed. They have done an admirable job. The house is in good shape, the tenants are rotten. The people of India elect the tenants. If our Cabinet Committee on Security has luminaries like Manmohan Singh, Sushil Kumar Shinde and Salman Khurshid, whose fault is it?

[ramana]

A few x-posts from Mil Forum...

From Hindustan Times Blog: India’s nuclear logic

The former Indian foreign secretary, Shyam Saran, gave a revealing speech on India’s nuclear deterrent on April 24th. The speech was titled, somewhat vaguely, “Is India’s Nuclear Deterrent Credible?”

But it more usefully updated India’s nuclear weapons status in a way that hasn’t happened since the release of the draft nuclear doctrine back in the early 2000s.

The most striking part of the speech doctrinally responded to Pakistan’s supposed move to develop tactical nuclear capability. Saran made it clear that India wouldn’t distinguish between a kiloton weapon aimed at tanks or a megatonner aimed at a city. “The label on a nuclear weapon used for attacking India, strategic or tactical, is irrelevant from the Indian perspective. A limited nuclear war is a contradiction in terms. Any nuclear exchange, once initiated, would swiftly and inexorably escalate to the strategic level. Pakistan would be prudent not to assume otherwise as it sometimes appears to do, most recently by developing and perhaps deploying theatre nuclear weapons.”

The speech also fitted in place missing bits of India’s nuclear puzzle.

He confirmed that two legs of India’s nuclear triad — airborne weapons and rail and mobile land-based nuclear warheads — have been completed. And he laid out a timetable for the completion of the third submarine-based leg.

He also confirmed that an official nuclear doctrine has been approved, and bemoaned the face it has not been made public.

“Since January 4, 2003, when India adopted its nuclear doctrine formally at a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), it has moved to put in place, at a measured pace, a triad of land-based, air-delivered and submarine-based nuclear forces and delivery assets to conform to its declared doctrine of no-first use and retaliation only. It has had to create a command and control infrastructure that can survive a first strike and a fully secure communication system that is reliable and hardened against radiation or electronic interference.” Saran argues that if the doctrine cannot be revealed, then India should at least release an annual Strategic Posture Review.

I feel Saran pulled his punches on arguing for the doctrine to be made public. Deterrent works only by being transparent about intent and capability. Otherwise, an opponent may conclude the deterrent is a bluff. At a time when Pakistan is slowly losing its political marbles, the logic of such transparency is stronger than ever.

The speech also lays out a potted history of India’s nuclear posture. One of the more forceful parts of the speech refutes the argument that India went nuclear largely for reasons of prestige. It was China, China and China, Saran makes clear.

“I find somewhat puzzling assertions by some respected security analysts, both Indian and foreign, that India’s nuclear weapons programme has been driven by notions of prestige or global standing rather than by considerations of national security.”

He also makes the argument that India’s nuclear environment with its three-nation minuet makes a lot of the strategy that evolved in the West irrelevant. “It is because of this complexity that notions of flexible response and counter-force targeting, which appeared to have a certain logic in a binary US-Soviet context, lose their relevance in the multi-dimensional threat scenario which prevails certainly in our region.” This is an interesting argument but needs a lot more explaining than this speech was able to.

-----------

From Hindustan Times Blog: India’s nuclear logic

A curious comment, the only one so far, from a Navtej Sarna:

Still fuzzy and mumbling so that his muttering can be taken as a personal viewpoint - the fact is that India does not have a nuclear doctrine just technology demonstrators and working missiles period

Is this Navtej Sarna, the ambassador to Israel? Funny though that someone with the same name as an Indian ambassador should be discrediting the Indian Foreign Secretary's assertions.

-----

Shri Shyam Saranjee is first among equals in race for filling the shoes of GoI's Bhisham Pitamah (vacant for some time) not to be taken lightly . He has the highest possible approval from all quarters . Its reassuring & timely message .

[chaanakya]

US asks India, Pakistan to restrain their nuclear, missile programmes

What unkil forgot to tell here is that it looked away and gave certificates to Pakis when it was stealing nuke technology and supported by Chinese and NoKo as conduit. It actively finances aids and provides military equipments which can only be used against India. Their advise deserves consideration but only as a non friendly advice.

It was RG idea for complete disarmament which has been hijacked by unkil to mean disarmament of Rest of the world. It has never accepted removal of its nuclear stockpile and stoppage of further development. To counter India it came up with idea of NPT, CTBT , FMCT and NSG , MTCR and what not.
Unkil also forgets that Indian weapons are not a counter to pakis only but China and host of other threats as well.

"The United States remains deeply concerned by the dangers posed by the continuing buildup of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems in South Asia," Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation Thomas Countryman said in his address to the 2015 Review Conference of the States Parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons in Geneva on Monday.

"Consistent with our shared vision of a world without nuclear weapons, the United States has repeatedly called on India and Pakistan to restrain their nuclear and missile programmes; end the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons; and support the commencement of negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament of a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty," he said.

"In that regard, it is with concern and deep disappointment that we note Pakistan's reluctance to support the start of such negotiations," the US official said.

"We would welcome meaningful trust and confidence-building between these nuclear-armed states; we must find ways to reduce regional tensions and diminish the risk that nuclear weapons could be used, either intentionally or accidentally, in a crisis," he said.

The United States, he said continues to encourage both India and Pakistan to play a positive role in the global non-proliferation community and take steps to prevent proliferation, including bringing their strategic trade controls in line with the guidelines of the multilateral supplier regimes.

"We support, in a phased manner, India's goal of joining the four multilateral export control regimes," he said, adding that the US remains cognizant of its non-proliferation commitments and objectives when considering how to conduct its bilateral relations with any country.

"Our activities with both India and Pakistan continue to be consistent with our NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty) obligations and with our commitment as members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group," Countryman said according to a copy of the speech provided here.

[Sanku]

Sanku: There are a plethora of works on the matter, but the below started it all. As official as it gets.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2 ... 20033.html

Thanks a lot ShauryaT; I was not aware that this information had been placed in public domain from official sources, I always thought the information available was through BK/BC and other such think tank types.

Much appreciated.

[Sanku]

SS could have relaxed after being bypassed for NSA.

He could have taken up advisor to some business house and made tons of money.

Instead he sat in same room as BK at CPR and planned and articulated the new vision.

Ramana garu, Shri Shyam Saran has no doubt continued to work in ways which add to his personal credibility and his words and thoughts enhance his own as well as India/GoIs prestige.

He is the sort of one individual which single handedly pulls the system along. All this I agree.

Yet there is a reason for the despondent mood after all -- this is not a knock on Shri Shyam Saran at all.

NCA has been revealed on and off but in one speech that puts all the mosaic together.

Thanks for this, yes I too think that this speech is as important as the first draft doctrine of nuclear strategy as placed before the nation by Shri ABV et al.

[ramana]

chaanakya, What is the Indian saying "Sau choohe kha ke Billi Haj nikili!"
Translation:"After eating hundred mice, the cat started on Haj pilgrimage"

[abhik]

Austin is partly correct. The ultimate posture will depend on the politicians in power. So it will be something if someone with guts like IG and ABV is in power and totally different with weak leaders like IKG and MMS. Nonetheless, it is good to have the opponent know the lakshman rekhas.

The ultimate goal is to maximize the enemies losses and minimize one's own losses. And to achieve this one must have the right tools lake a large and powerful nuclear force to completely destroy the enemy militarily and economically and also minimize the effect of their deterrent by destroying it on the ground and neutralizing the ones already launched at you using an effective missile defence system. With out these tools no leader in the right mind, be it ones with guts or ones without any will take the course of action being ascribed as our policy on limited nuclear strike. A Minimum Deterrent force will give us only Limited Deterrence. And as Austin-ji said all this only posturing, I don't think the paki's are buying this.

[Supratik]

ABV was the PM during Parliament strike what did he do ? IG perhaps yes but she screwed india in other ways.

ABV ordered nuke tests, open nuclearization and Op. Parakram which forced Pak to tone down terrorism in Kashmir via Khan. IG got Bd against US threats. We are talking about having guts and not having it.

[Supratik]

The ultimate goal is to maximize the enemies losses and minimize one's own losses. And to achieve this one must have the right tools lake a large and powerful nuclear force to completely destroy the enemy militarily and economically and also minimize the effect of their deterrent by destroying it on the ground and neutralizing the ones already launched at you using an effective missile defence system. With out these tools no leader in the right mind, be it ones with guts or ones without any will take the course of action being ascribed as our policy on limited nuclear strike. A Minimum Deterrent force will give us only Limited Deterrence. And as Austin-ji said all this only posturing, I don't think the paki's are buying this.

Who knows what is minimum - 10, 20, 200, 2000? It is a nice word that is abstract to have for global consumption. Successive Govts. have pushed things in the right direction without making India a NK. Even MMS who clearly needs **** has had Agni 5 and 6.

[ramana]

K Sundarji said "Minimum is that number that deters the challengers the maximum"

[abhik]

K Sundarji said "Minimum is that number that deters the challengers the maximum"

Who knows what is minimum - 10, 20, 200, 2000? It is a nice word that is abstract to have for global consumption.

How can the Deterrent have any Credibility if what "Minimum" is itself not defined (apart from cryptic clues). Can someone put a number to it? How do I know that the enemy is actually deterred? The very fact that the Pakis are preparing for limited tactical nuclear warfare suggests that they are not deterred.

[Supratik]

How can the Deterrent have any Credibility if what "Minimum" is itself not defined (apart from cryptic clues). Can someone put a number to it? How do I know that the enemy is actually deterred? The very fact that the Pakis are preparing for limited tactical nuclear warfare suggests that they are not deterred.

What is credible will be determined by the establishment and who runs it. It is flexible and would change with threat perception. Why put a number to it. Let the opponent keep guessing. Makes him unsure. Pakis are pursuing tactical nukes becoz they know they cannot hold off a conventional Indian attack. SS is reiterating that even tactical nukes are not going to help.

[Manish_Sharma]

While it is good to discuss 'deterrence', don't tie up the issue of nuclear warheads in 'just a deterrent' line of thought. Nuclear bombs are just like other bombs, to destroy and kill the enemy. It's a big trap nuke club countries have set for the rest of the world.

Just like no country in the world has 'Offence Ministry', every nation has a 'Defence Ministry', or armed forces for 'defence' not 'offence'. Strange ! if everyone has 'Defence Ministry' why have there been wars? Whoever started it was using it for offence.

US' or Russia's 10,000+ warheads were said to be deterrents, but they actually stockpiled them to obliterate each other OR to send each other back to 'stone age' instead of 'iron age etc.'

So while creating/stockpiling warheads our aim has to be the same like US or Russia. Deterrent will be a byproduct of it, not an aim.

I think around 400 warheads of 150 kt. each can obliterate porkistan. While we can't do the same to lizard, still around 600 warheads salted with Gold isotop 197 and cobalt 60 will do wonders for golden future of china.

To certain CCP leaders it might deter or in many situations it may deter, to many leaders it won't or in many situations it won't.

[ramana]

Very close to POKII anniversary on May 11th, VKS assures:

India's nuclear deterrence capacity is in place, the country can sleep well: Defence research chief
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/india ... ief-362765

New Delhi: In a big step towards securing India's capabilities for nuclear deterrence, the reactor on board India's indigenously made nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant will become operational in three weeks. After that, INS Arihant will be ready for sea-trials and will subsequently be commissioned to the Indian Navy. (Read)

Dr VK Saraswat, the chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation or DRDO, shared these exclusive details with NDTV's Science Editor Pallava Bagla and asserted that India's nuclear deterrence is robust. He also spoke about the Agni-V missile project, and made a pitch for a shift from global buying to indigenous technology development and procurement of defence equipment. Here is the full transcript of the exclusive interview:


NDTV: What is happening with the Agni series of missiles now? What is the next phase?

VK Saraswat: Agni Series of missiles are in an advanced stage of production. Today, as you remember, we have completed development of Agni I, Agni II, and Agni III. Agni IV and Agni V are in an advanced stage of development. And this year, you will see two more launches of Agni V, which will culminate its complete developmental activity and it will be led to production. Agni IV is already getting into production mode. So with this - Agni I, Agni II, Agni III, Agni IV, Agni V - getting into production mode, the next logical corollary as far as the long-range ballistic missile deterrents capability of this country is concerned, we will switch over to force multiplication. Force multiplication in the case of ballistic missiles will be by way of multiple independently manouevreable re-entry vehicles (MIRV).

NDTV: Meaning one missile which can carry many war-heads?

VK Saraswat: Carry multiple warheads. Our design activity on the development and production of MIRV is at an advanced stage today. We are designing the MIRVs, we are integrating it with Agni IV and Agni V missiles, and that would also give us the capability to cover a vast area plus deliver in the event any activity requires a number of payloads at a required place.

NDTV: So will the next test be with a multiple warheads system or...

VK Saraswat: No. The present task, as I was mentioning, will be only with the normal configuration of Agni V. But there will be an experimental test in which we will be testing the MIRV capability.

NDTV: So that would be what? Agni VI or...

VK Saraswat:No we are not naming it Agni VI... it will be Agni V missile with MIRVs.

NDTV: So Agni V plus?

VK Saraswat: You can name is Agni V plus or Agni VI, but certainly it is not Agni VI.

NDTV: It is not Agni VI but Agni V will have multiple warheads so we can have a single missile going and hitting several targets at the same time?

VK Saraswat:Yes it will be in that category.

NDTV: OK. Now, you also need a certain platform for your nuclear reactor. So what is happening on the Arihant project? How soon can we see criticality and commissioning?

VK Saraswat: Arihant development is at an advanced stage. Last year, we saw the culmination of the development trials of BO5, which was launched from the pontoon (landing stage) and it completed all its objectives. It is under production today. As far as the platform is concerned, it is also at an advanced stage today. I must say, in a couple of weeks, you will see that it will go into criticality and from there onwards the commission exercise will start.

NDTV: Criticality meaning, that the nuclear reactor which is on board INS Arihant will be started and the submarine itself will be powered by the Indian-made nuclear reactor. Is that what you are telling?

VK Saraswat: Yes, absolutely.

NDTV: How soon can we see that?

VK Saraswat: I think it should happen in the next 2-3 weeks.

NDTV: In the next 2-3 weeks, the nuclear reactor will be started and the nuclear chain reaction will start working in INS Arihant. So it will become like a self-propelled vehicle then?

VK Saraswat: See, criticality means the reactor gets into operation. And that is the most important for any nuclear system, whether it's a reactor or it's a power plant for a nuclear submarine. It's a very important event as far as the designers, the builders of these platforms are concerned.

NDTV: So what next? When can we see a full-fledged trial?

VK Saraswat: After that we get into the trial mode. We have an evolved programme in which many trials of this system will be done with the submarine moving into the right operational mode and then also trying out the weapons and equipment. There is a series of tasks that are required to be carried out.

NDTV: So you are happy with the INS Arihant as it stands?

VK Saraswat: We are extremely happy because it is a major technological breakthrough for the country. And as far as the indigenous capability is concerned I must say that India has reached one of the major milestones in the field of complex technology of nuclear powered submarines.

NDTV: There is a lot of indigenisation underway now. That everything should be made in India, that technology development should in India. Is the DRDO in a position to deliver without time delays and cost over-runs?

VK Saraswat: I think a shift in India's policy as far as acquisition of defence equipment is concerned -- from buy-global to buy-Indian as a preferential mode of procurement -- is very welcome and a good shift because it will give a major boost to the development and production of indigenous equipment and participation of the Indian industry in a big way. Obviously, as far as DRDO is concerned, it will have a major role to play.

DRDO, under this umbrella of buy-Indian will have tremendous opportunities for tying up with industries, tying up with academic institutions and with global players for delivering systems and products and equipment as desired by the armed forces. When we integrate with the industry, obviously it acts as force multiplication -- in terms of our capability and capacity. This will also reduce the time to develop things and also maybe control costs.

NDTV: So in effect you are saying that DRDO and India are ready for this huge push on indigenisation?

VK Saraswat: It's a beginning. I must say that it's a beginning because a shift from buy-global to buy-Indian requires the readiness of the industry to participate in this kind of venture. Obviously, there will be some time required for industries to gear up for these challenges. What is required is investment in the Indian industries, in the major areas of technologies, which would ensure that when DRDO goes to these industries, they are capable to absorb and produce in large numbers. Or tomorrow if they tie up with global players, because that is also a mode of operation, then they should be in a position to absorb that technology.

NDTV: But DRDO is known for delays...

VK Saraswat: No, DRDO will use this as an opportunity for cutting down delay. Also, by using the industry as our extended arm, we can control delays, can control the development of technologies, can control production and we will also be able to use our technology to augment the capability and capacity of the Indian industry.

NDTV: There is a lot of concern about incursions by the Chinese. We have certain technologies like Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Did we use them? Why did we not learn about these incursions? Is there something under DRDO, which can help India learn ahead of time or when an incursion is happening?

VK Saraswat: We have a number of technologies and we are using our UAVs, we are using our surveillance systems. In fact, we have kept a few UAVs in our labs in the Leh area and we are in a position to see what is happening in that system. In case of land incursions, we can use UAVs, we can use our radars, we can use our battlefield surveillance radars, and we can use our border security radars to find out what is happening. Incursions are not new, they have taken place earlier. But the way this incursion has taken place is certainly an alarm bell for us.

NDTV: You are deploying your technology for this current incursion also to learn more... to do surveillance on it?

VK Saraswat: Yes, we have our UAVs in that area.

NDTV: They are operational even as we speak?

VK Saraswat: We can utilise them today. We are not integrated with our armed forces today because they are experimental UAVs, which are for our application but, certainly, it can generate the required data for the purpose of surveillance activities.

NDTV: There is some concern that India's nuclear deterrence is more a political statement than actually a statement of fact. DRDO was involved in the Pokharan II blast in a very big way and you are developing many technologies. What do you have to say? Do we have the capability or is it all bluster?

VK Saraswat: I think all the statements are made out of ignorance. India has a very robust and a systematic deterrence capability, both in terms of weapon platforms as well as in terms of the required payloads. India has industry to support it, has the mechanism to control, mobilise and also use it whenever needed. Plus India has a very robust doctrine on these matters. It is a structured system, which controls the entire deterrence activity that starts from the highest body in the country to all the operational units, which are essential for exercising deterrence.

The notion that many analysts have are purely based upon their perception of things and comparison with other countries. I think every country has deterrence capability based upon its capacity, based upon evolving threats and also (takes into consideration) the ecosystem and the environment in which this deterrence has to work. So one need not compare whether country A has a better one (deterrence) or country B has a better one. It is what India needs. Do we have that? I can assure that India has the required deterrence capability in all forms. The triad is getting completed and I have no doubts that we will match with the best in the world.

NDTV: So DRDO, Department of Atomic Energy, Indian armed forces together can protect India if there is a nuclear threat to India?

VK Saraswat: I can assure you of that.

NDTV: A hundred percent?

VK Saraswat: One hundred percent!

NDTV: Average citizens need not worry? I can sleep well?

VK Saraswat: You can sleep well. The country can sleep well. Indian scientists, industries, armed forces and deterrence mechanisms are fully in place and we have nothing to fear.

[SaiK]

Noise from beating the chest by Saran saab is pretty much valid and needed. I think people are taking that into a non-nuclear context and questioning, what is this meek-weak point argument, when we can't prevent pakis and chipanda ramrodding into our borders and crossing all seas. These two strategies are entirely different.. the nuke strategy will be always test by our neighbor and the threshold points are verified and validated, against our civilian and non nuclear military capabilities are strengthened. It is important that we have better and less corrupted setup for better security.. we have problems in that sphere, and not in the DRDO or in the strategic defense area.

Our civilian setup is the weakest link.. and mass IQ is going down, lead by corrupt officials and not helping build a healthy deterrence against non-nuclear strikes. skirmishes and cross border activities have higher thresholds.. and if we can nuclearize that, then we could see some relief.

I'd say, go nukes on skirmishes.. not megaton or kilos.. go sub-critical and strategic weapons.. DUs, and what now. Go nuclear on area defense. This is vital.. I say, go for even nuclear tipped bullets on INSAS.. scary! heck ya!... that gives better deterrence in the minds of the enemies. scare value from radiations is the deterrence that we need for pakis and chippanda club.

Go for it! let us show the world of the capabilities to use nuclear weapons for area defensive purposes. It does not matter about efficiency or payload issues, as long as the radiation is engaged... and few skins are burned on the opposite side.

[Austin]

India's Nuclear Triad - A Net Assessment

[ShauryaT]

^^Ausitin, the paper already posted in the previous page, with my sob story.

[wig]

shyam saran has written a series of three parts in the tribune published from chandigarh
on 08 May 2013
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130508/edit.htm#6

Why India went down nuclear weapons path -India’s policy towards nuclear weapons evolved over a period of nearly three decades and this evolution was impacted by several significant developments in the country’s security environment

on 09 may 2013
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130509/edit.htm#6

India’s nuclear weapons not for national pride -Security analysts, both Indian and foreign, often make puzzling assertions that India’s nuclear weapons programme has been driven by notions of prestige or global standing rather than considerations of national security

on 10 may 2013
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130510/edit.htm#6

Pak policy smacks of nuclear blackmail -In dismissing India’s nuclear deterrent as driven by pride and prestige, Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent is sought to be projected as somehow more justified, as unlike India it is said to be driven by so-called real security threats.

Shyam Saran, former Foreign Secretary, studies Pakistan’s nuclear posturing and failure of India’s strategists to clear the air about its own nuclear programme.

the article published on 08 may 2013 appears to be the same that has been linked and reproduced at the top of this page by ramana ji
the other two articles are also lengthy ( moderators may decide if they should be reproduced in full) but illuminating and instructive

[JE Menon]

>>Security analysts, both Indian and foreign, often make puzzling assertions that India’s nuclear weapons programme has been driven by notions of prestige or global standing rather than considerations of national security

This type of reaction is probably the only disagreement I have with what Shyam Saran has spoken about and written. There is absolutely no need to deny, or validate such statements exclusively. You will note that the comment on this issue (maybe an afterthought, or late add-on), came after an article in some Western media about our reasons for acquiring nuclear capability. Not sure if it was NYT or Economist or something...

If at all we want to say something in response, it would be probably more appropriate to say (in different language): Yes we do it for national prestige and status, but when used in response to an attack our weapons will have the same impact as those acquired exclusively on security considerations. From a deterrence perspective general perceptions of our motivations are immaterial.

Wig, I wouldn't say our strategists have been pretty clear (Saran is one of them, so he is not blaming them for failure to clear the air). It is a very specific subset of the world, primarily some in the US-UK (and some block-headed apes amongst our own), who do not seem to understand or want to understand or deliberately give play to this "status, prestige" line.

I'm only disagreeing with the way we react to these claims. Suggests a desire on our part to want to change their minds on the issue. Frankly, I don't see why we should give a crap what they believe on the subject.

[ramana]

JEM
Perkovich in US and P.R.Chari are the two proponents of the prestige driven Indian quest for nukes. They have their fanboys in the chatterati.

[JE Menon]

Plus mv ramana I would think. Haven't seen much out of chari for a while. Wonder what he's upto...

[Rudradev]

The thing is: why must we be defensive even if it IS a prestige-driven quest? What was the "space race" between the US and Soviets after all? Were there urgent national interests driving the Apollo or Soyuz programs? Had the US/USSR solved ALL their domestic issues for their entire populations, and created infallible utopias on earth, before they headed to space? The space programs happened to spin off technologies that became useful in a thousand arenas, including national defense, but they show that prestige is as good a reason to pursue technological achievement as any (and better than some reasons, e.g. Paki style warmongering).

So let them say it is prestige-driven. Why get our undies in a knot at perceived condescension? If that is the best reason Perkovitch et al have for criticizing India's pursuit of nukes, tell them to give up their degrees, their academic/professional positions, their nice houses/cars/clothes and move into a trailer park. After all they have accumulated those things out of a need for "prestige" onlee, no?

[Christopher Sidor]

ABV is in power and totally different with weak leaders like IKG and MMS.

ABV was the PM during Parliament strike what did he do ? IG perhaps yes but she screwed india in other ways.

I think you are conflating initiation of war with nuclear deterrence issues, two separate things, even if interlinked.

Not only that consider the following
1) The kandhar hijack
2) Refusal to grant permission to cross the LoC and IB during Kargil conflict to both IAF and IA. Countless lives were lost due to that dastardly decision. One gets a distinct impression that ABV was scared to crossing the LoC and IB. Contrast this what the LB did in 1965.
3) His stationing of IA for more than one month in the blistering heat of Indian summer on the Radcliffe Line. Again the impression that ABV did not want to cross the IB. We see a distinct pattern emerging over here.
4) His going and paying obeisance to the place where the declaration to partition India on religious grounds was passed.
5) His going to PRC in 2003 and saying publicly that Tibet is a part of China.

That is why said in my opening statements what SS said would be most liked by intellectual since it gives them something to chew on makes them feel good and happy. { not a personal statement on you but generally speaking }

Bottom line is GOI must be always be judged by why they do and not say ..... it wont be an understatement to say the past 2 decades as far as national security goes which by extension also means terrorist strike small and spectacular one has been a disaster mostly paid by blood of common citizen ... the only silver lining has been Nuke testing but thats little solace since if you end up using it you are pretty much sure you would be at the receiving end of it too or already had been.

I do agree GoI whether ruled by UPA or NDA has seen a distinct lack of spine. And I beg to differ about the nuke testing. The nuke testing did not prevent Pakistan from carrying out the kargil. But the nukes did prevent us from crossing the Rubicon and the Radcliff line, not once but twice. On the contrary we went to the town claiming how we were a responsible nuclear weapons power and how we had a moratorium in effect and so on. Does anybody recall any Indian government prior to blasts in 1998 giving this concession?

[Austin]

India does not retaliate against Pakistan due to nuclear weapons: US expert

"All the terrorism that Pakistan has supported against India has been carried out, secure in the knowledge that India cannot retaliate," Stephen Blank, Research Professor of National Security Affairs at the Army War College, said.

"If Pakistan had no nukes, if there were no nukes on the South Indian peninsula, India could retaliate and probably would. But their hand is stayed by the threat of nuclear war," Blank told a meeting of National Defense Industrial Association in response to a question

[ShauryaT]

Chinese view of Indian Deterrence