Re: Deterrence
Posted: 19 Apr 2019 12:39
for comparison sake, the largest American deployed nuke is the B83, with a maximum yield of 1.2 megatons
300 Kilotons.dinesh_kimar wrote:
H bomb posession is already known, with some experts saying possible yield up to 250 kt....
It's nothing new.
When he spoke the above words, I think he means a class of 4 MT H-bombs, known in the trade as a "City buster".
Anything bigger won't be deployable by present inventory.
In other words Balakot restored deterrence to core deterrence only.SSridhar wrote:IMO, the above, Deterrence did'nt fail during stand-off with India: officials, is a new concession by SPD that there indeed is a sub-nuclear war possibility, something which remained vague before (to the strategic advantage of Terroristan) and that India would do so and we can't do anything about it (He said deterrence was largely a misunderstood concept and “some have come to believe that even a stone cannot be hurled at us”). The Balakot attack has put that into a concrete shape, as we have said here before. Terroristan used to claim that "No one can even cast an evil eye on us".
Absolutely.ramana wrote:In other words Balakot restored deterrence to core deterrence only.
A pebble aimed correctly will shatter a false image.pankajs wrote:All it took was one air-strike for all ambiguity about ambiguity to vanish like misty after sunrise.
In its latest annual report, the MoD says Pak army has further “consolidated” its position as the “institution driving Pakistan’s foreign security and defence policies” after the Imran Khan government came to office in August last year.
The MoD’s assertion about Pakistan’s rapidly-growing nuclear and missile arsenals is in tune with international assessments that the country now has 140-150 nuclear warheads as compared to 130-140 of India.
With its expanding uranium enrichment and plutonium production facilities, Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile could realistically grow to 220-250 warheads by 2025 if the current trend continues, as per the Bulletin of The Atomic Scientists. Pakistan, of course, owes much of its progress in the nuclear and missile arenas to clandestine help from China and North Korea over the years.
Noting that there were global concerns regarding proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, which pose a “serious” danger to international security, the MoD said, “WMD terrorism will remain a potent threat as long as there are terrorists seeking to gain access to relevant materials and technologies for malicious purposes.”
The MoD report, turning to Pakistan army’s active support to anti-India terror outfits, said, “It has avoided taking action against jihadi and internationally proscribed terror outfits that target its neighbours.”
the article carries some nuggets on the discussions of US representatives with PakOver the space of months during 1979-80, the US went from intense efforts to slow down or reverse Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme to turning a blind eye to it in order to get Islamabad’s support following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, according to newly declassified cables and documents
In a memorandum to president Carter dated September 29, 1980, defense secretary Brown talks about providing military aid to Pakistan and renewing “our earlier decision to turn a blind eye to their nuclear weapons program”.
Perhaps more telling is a record of a conversation between Carter and visiting foreign minister Agha Shahi in Washington on January 12, 1980, with the then president saying: “Our position on nuclear explosives is clear and I hope you will relay our concern to President Zia. Movement on this is not a prerequisite for cooperation, but our long-term relations will be substantially affected by the question of nuclear explosives...The nuclear question, then, is no longer an insurmountable obstacle, but it remains important.”
I dont think it is taking eye off but a question of favoring the Pakis, nobody in the world recognizes restraint except us. When we failed to do more detonations after 1974 it was assumed that we did not have Nuke capability. Thats why Pakis were confident of going to war in 1989, the also threatened Gujral as Foreign Minister, a Paki F-16 even had a Nuke for Hiroshima/ Nagasaki type strike, it was only when they learnt about us also having some Nukes that Pakis left it just supporting the insurgency, US admin 90's was absolutely pro paki, the only thing they were worried was Qadir Khan supply of information to Libya and Iran. Foreign Secretary Madeline Albright actually claims that Hindu militants did Chittisinghpura, I dont how people sleep at night with these kind of lieswig wrote:https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... tZRPM.html
US cables show how it took eye off Pakistan nukes amid Soviet warthe article carries some nuggets on the discussions of US representatives with PakOver the space of months during 1979-80, the US went from intense efforts to slow down or reverse Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme to turning a blind eye to it in order to get Islamabad’s support following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, according to newly declassified cables and documents
In a memorandum to president Carter dated September 29, 1980, defense secretary Brown talks about providing military aid to Pakistan and renewing “our earlier decision to turn a blind eye to their nuclear weapons program”.
Perhaps more telling is a record of a conversation between Carter and visiting foreign minister Agha Shahi in Washington on January 12, 1980, with the then president saying: “Our position on nuclear explosives is clear and I hope you will relay our concern to President Zia. Movement on this is not a prerequisite for cooperation, but our long-term relations will be substantially affected by the question of nuclear explosives...The nuclear question, then, is no longer an insurmountable obstacle, but it remains important.”
vinod wrote:Not sure talking up the nuclear bit is wise when Pak is going around frantically shouting about nuclear war. This just adds a bit of legitimacy to their claims..
We will have to wait and see what direction they take after this statement - whether they gnarl and show teeth, or tuck their tails in and stay low!
Did ninda Turtle coordinate with the Thee CONomist?The Economist @TheEconomist
Committing America to a “No First Use” nuclear-weapons policy could actually make the world less stable
wig wrote:https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... tZRPM.html
US cables show how it took eye off Pakistan nukes amid Soviet warthe article carries some nuggets on the discussions of US representatives with PakOver the space of months during 1979-80, the US went from intense efforts to slow down or reverse Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme to turning a blind eye to it in order to get Islamabad’s support following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, according to newly declassified cables and documents
In a memorandum to President Carter dated September 29, 1980, defense secretary Brown talks about providing military aid to Pakistan and renewing “our earlier decision to turn a blind eye to their nuclear weapons program”.
Perhaps more telling is a record of a conversation between Carter and visiting foreign minister Agha Shahi in Washington on January 12, 1980, with the then president saying: “Our position on nuclear explosives is clear and I hope you will relay our concern to President Zia. Movement on this is not a prerequisite for cooperation, but our long-term relations will be substantially affected by the question of nuclear explosives...The nuclear question, then, is no longer an insurmountable obstacle, but it remains important.”
“I am not sure there will be changes, but big changes are being discussed more openly now than in a long time.”
The report, authored by Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris, estimates that Pakistan has stored its nuclear arsenal in the following nine locations:
1. Akro Garrison, Sindh (Possible underground weapons storage site)
2. Gujranwala Garrison, Punjab (Possible weapons storage with components in remote depot)
3. Khuzdar Garrison, Balochistan (Possible underground weapons storage site)
4. Masroor Depot (Karachi), Sindh (Potential storage of bombs for Mirage Vs at Masroor AB)
5. National Development Complex (Fatehjang), Punjab (SSM launcher assembly and potential warhead component storage)
6. Pano Akil Garrison, Sindh (Possible weapons storage with components in remote depot)
7. Sargodha Depot, Punjab (Possible storage site of bombs for F-16s at nearby Sargodha AB and warheads for SSMs)
8. Tarbala Underground Depot, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Potential warhead storage)
9. Wah Ordnance Facility, Punjab (Possible warhead production, disassembly, and dismantlement facility)
The scientists used commercial satellite images, expert studies, and local news reports and articles to derive the locations.
"Pakistan has as small as 125-250-gram atom bombs also, which may hit (and destroy) a targeted area," The News newspaper quoted the minister as saying after he inspected an under-construction railway station building.
His comments came as Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has been harping on the possibility of a military confrontation between the two nuclear armed countries over the Kashmir issue.
He said India should avoid a war with Pakistan, lest it proves the last one between the two nuclear armed countries.
ISLAMABAD: A day after Prime Minister Imran Khan unexpectedly announced that Pakistan will not use nuclear weapons or initiate military action against India first, Islamabad on Tuesday in a U-Turn said that there was no such change in its nuclear policy.
Addressing an event of Sikh community in Lahore on Monday, Khan had said that both Pakistan and India were nuclear-armed countries and if tension escalated between them, the whole world could be in danger. “But there will be no first from our side ever,” Khan reportedly said.
However, Dr Muhammad Faisal, spokesperson of the foreign affairs ministry, in a tweet said, “Prime Minister’s comments on Pakistan’s approach towards conflict between two nuclear armed states are being taken out of context.” “While conflict should not take place between two nuclear states, there’s no change in Pakistan’s nuclear policy,” he added.
Since New Delhi nullified the special status of Jammu and Kashmir on August 5, Imran Khan has been appealing to the world leaders asking them to play their part in resolving the Kashmir issue to prevent a fatal war, a reference to the use of nuclear weapons between Pakistan and India. Khan has repeatedly warning the international community that Pakistan-India conflict will not be limited to South Asia but will have global consequences.
Last month, India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh had said that his country’s commitment to ‘No First Use’ (NFU) policy for nuclear weapons may see a shift in future. “It is for now, but what happens in future depends on the circumstances,” Singh had said.
The Army chief said India has noted the emerging threats from Pakistan and is more-than-prepared to meet any challenge. On nuclear threats by Islamabad, General Rawat said that this was a sign of a loss of confidence in conventional forces in Pakistan.
“When you don’t have confidence in the abilities of your conventional forces to deter the adversary, you start using the nuclear bogey," the Army chief said
Now, Khalid Kidwai, the ex-Chief of SPD of Pakistan had enunciated the four Pakistani redlines openly at least on two occasions, once in c. 2002 and another in c. 2015 at Carnegie. Pakistan would use n-weapons if anyone of the following conditions happens:Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan raised the spectre of a nuclear war with India once again over the Kashmir issue while elaborating that this could be a “consequence” in the event of Islamabad losing a conventional war with New Delhi.
In an interview to Al Jazeera that was telecast on Saturday, Khan reiterated that nuclear war between the two neighbours could be a possibility. “When two nuclear-armed countries fight, if they fight a conventional war, there is every possibility that it is going to end up into nuclear war. The unthinkable.”
While emphasizing that he was clear that Pakistan would never start a war, Khan said: “I am a pacifist, I am anti-war. If say Pakistan, God forbid, we are fighting a conventional war, (which) we are losing, and if a country is stuck between the choice: either you surrender or you fight till death for your freedom, I know Pakistanis will fight to death for their freedom. So when a nuclear-armed country fights to the end, to the death, it has consequences.”
“We discovered that while we were trying to have dialogue, they were trying to push us in the blacklist in FATF (global terror financing watchdog Financial Action Task Force) ... If Pakistan is pushed into the blacklist of FATF, that means there will be sanctions on Pakistan. So they were trying to bankrupt us economically, so that’s when we pulled back. And that’s when we realised that this (Indian government) is on an agenda ... to push Pakistan to disaster,” he said.
Now I haven't seen video of this part, but These VIP security gaurds often carry a portable bullet proof shield which folds into a shape of briefcase.ramana wrote:#HowdyModi stadium walk was interesting for the briefcase carried by NaMo guard.