Cold start or cold feet?

Discussion in 'Pakistan' started by farhan_9909, Jan 11, 2013.

  1. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    Cold start or cold feet?

    The Frontier Post
    Cold start or cold feet? | Missile ThreatMissile Threat
    Posted on November 12, 2012 by editor
    [​IMG]

    Pakistan’s development of Hatf-IX (Nasr) short-range ballistic missile is giving Indian myth-makers cold feet. New Delhi began the nuclear weapons game in South Asia, continues developing its nuclear and conventional forces but demurs from facing the consequences.

    India destabilized the region by not settling the territorial disputes and disregarded calls by the UN to address the Jammu and Kashmir issue. It developed the provocative doctrine of fighting war with limited territorial aims – called the Cold Start Doctrine (CSD) – and now appears to be appealing to the international community that it must “come together to stop Pakistan’s quest to acquire [short-range] destabilizing weapons.”

    It is widely believed that Pakistan has developed Nasr to deter India from operationalizing the CSD. The provocative doctrine would ostensibly telescope India’s military mobilization time to launch shallow and swift attacks in Pakistan’s territory and punish it before the nuclear weapons come into play.

    With its short-range and nuclear capability, Nasr signals that every inch of Pakistan’s territory is sacrosanct and its people would not stand even a minor Indian ingress. Nasr has shifted onus of maintaining stability in India’s court. Interestingly, India has started distancing itself from the CSD saying it is just a concept and is rather Pakistan’s favorite bogeyman. New Delhi has now re-styled it to a more benign title Proactive Defense Strategy.

    Seven major misperceptions have appeared in the recent commentary on Nasr that call for dispassionate analysis. First, holds that Nasr is a Pakistan Army project whereas the National Engineering and Scientific Commission developed it. Second, related-misperception is that the command and control of the so-called Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNWs) would have to decentralize at some stage of war to enable their timely employment. Actually, the National Command Authority (NCA) exercises assertive control over the development, deployment and use of all nuclear weapons.

    The video footages of the recent tests of the short-range missiles show NCA’s capability to directly control these weapons. All nuclear-armed states have to make the tightrope walk to balance that nuclear weapons are always available but there is no misuse or accidental launch. The challenge lies in balancing this infamous “always-never dilemma.”

    Third, Indian Prahaar missile is not nuclear-capable and India has opted not to go down the so-called TNWs route. Three arguments belie the claim that Prahaar has a conventional delivery capability only. One, although the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) wisely avoided using the N-word for Prahaar, there is no mechanism to verify if a nuclear warhead would not be used.

    The DRDO statement only said “carries different types of warheads…” and has been misinterpreted. Two, it is quite unlikely that DRDO would develop a 150-kilometer range Prahaar that could fire a salvo of six missiles in different directions.
    This advanced capability would preferably be developed for a nuclear delivery system. Three, Prahaar was tested in July 2011 after two years of work. India was developing the so-called TNWs independent of Pakistan’s decision to develop Nasr. Fourth, the moniker TNW—the term was literally imposed on South Asia, neither Pakistan nor India used it for Nasr and Prahaar. The U.S. and erstwhile Soviet Union could afford to use ‘tactical’ and ‘battlefield’ for their SRBMs because these would land on ‘their European battleground.’ Anything falling on their mainland would be strategic.

    Likewise, it would be incorrect to use TNW for Prahaar or Nasr as their use will have strategic results. Pak-India border is populated and would become the battlefields at the outset. Hence, the Western counter-force and counter-value targeting terms do not hold in the Subcontinent’s scenario because even low yields like 0.05 to 0.5 kilotons would affect the forces, civilian population and industries close to borders. Fifth, the NATO has eschewed the so-called TNWs and Subcontinent, especially Pakistan is treading the perilous nuclear war-fighting route. The fact is that the U.S. and Russia possess sizeable arsenal of the so-called TNWs. Russia uses its SRBM arsenal as a lever against the U.S. to compromise its European ballistic missile defense shield.

    Sixth, the so-called TNWs lower the nuclear-use threshold. If this argument were accepted, then it would be easy to conclude that a rational state would eschew any doctrine that provokes its adversary to deploy and use the SRBMs. If both adversaries possess the short-range delivery means, they would be deterred from escalating a crisis to even contemplate a limited war. Stability in Europe despite the TNWs is an example. If the deterrence fails then bets on all genres of nuclear weapons would be off. Seventh, SRBMs are difficult and expensive to manufacture.

    Many wonder about Pakistan’s capability to miniaturize warheads that could fit Nasr’s thin 300 mm diameter. Recalling the yield data about Pakistani tests on May 28 and 30, 1998 it would be easy to infer that a couple of designs were low-yield weapons. Likewise, in thirteen years Pakistan must have made at least ‘some’ progress in smaller warhead designs that could fit Nasr.

    Miniaturization is step one to a multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRVs), submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) capability and artillery delivered weapons. The MIRVs help defeat anti-ballistic missiles, while SLBMs and cruise missiles give assured second strike capability of absorbing a nuclear attack and still retaliate with submarine-based weapons. This technological spinoff from developing Nasr would save Pakistan from nuclear blackmailing. Naturally, Pakistan’s adversary would portray such technological leap as a gaffe.

    India initiated the nuclear game in the South Asia, shunned Pakistan’s repeated proposals of no war pact, nuclear weapons free zone and strategic restraint regime in the South Asia, but it seems to be developing cold feet from Pakistan’s responses.

    Although Pakistani initiatives have been overtaken by time, there is always hope. If India quits intransigence to genuine peace efforts, offers credible evidence of revoking dangerous doctrines, resolves the thorny issues, ends unabated militarization, Pakistan should be willing to respond.
    Until then, who knows if more may come from Pakistan in terms of variety of delivery means at the pace the Pakistani strategic planners are moving! The choice of making peace rests with India; Pakistan was only a reluctant entrant in the nuclear club. In the meanwhile, it seems to have been a short distance from Cold Start to Cold Feet.
     
  2.  
  3. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    Miniaturization Point

    *The Miniaturization of warhead will indeed help us in long run for Shaheen III(MIRV)

    Each Warhead for Shaheen III(200kt)

    6x(200kt equivalent of tnt) on each Shaheen III(gross weight of shaheen III=47tonnes)
     
  4. The Fox

    The Fox Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2012
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    267
    Location:
    Bangalore
    Have you read the Indian SFC they have the control of indian Nuclear Arsenal and in case there is a attack on india or on indian troops on foreign land they will launch all their Nukes so be careful with NASR
     
  5. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    pak does have 200 kt warhead transporting and delivering capability but the question is where is that 200 kt bomb?

    the agency which says indian explosion was dud ALSO says that pak's explosion was even more smaller in intensity with only few KT yielding out. in all what ever may be the tech held by both the countries a bomb from india may wipe out karachi's slum but pakistan's nuke will do no better and might score even lesser.

    though coming to smaller nuclear warheads. a nuclear strike is a nuclear strike. with india's NBC centric modernization in place these warheads might not be that effective IF the soldiers get their due gears which would be NBC protected.

    with prahar in place both sides stands equal chance of scoring on head count.

    related to CSD- its a phenomenon involving both chinese and pakistani attack on India. that is India planned to strike on western border to get a bargain chip in the initial days- if that happens then pakistan with present mentality will launch a nasr with nuke on the indian forces- which means on pakistani soil itself.

    the question is how desperate pakistani army can become to avert advancing indian army that they nuke their own country?
     
  6. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    One does not go to war on a pique.

    It is done at the time and place of one's choosing.

    And any mature country attempts all options before embarking on war.

    But Pakistanis won't understand that since they are neither mature nor a country comprehension of statecraft
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2013
  7. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    first of all you should the difference between dud(india) and low yeild(pakistan)

    on the other hand the dud claim of indian nuclear test by western were confirmed by indian scientist later..so it is confirmed that india at the moment don't have nukes or dud design's.courtesy is your dear nuclear scientist.

    And No pakistani scientist has claimed so.so our first test had a yield of 35-41kt in 1998..when our development were not open
    Mind it pakistan first warhead was developed in early 80's.

    its been 14-15 years since than and deep investment into the field is made..the reason in the other threads i have already said that we are onto several megatons warhead capability(not 1megaton only)
     
  8. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Same old, same old. All this Nasr talk is debunked.

    Simple point is, if Pakistan has 'Nasr' then what is the need of Pakistan to have conventional army and weapons. All it needs is 'Nasr' and 'nukes', no need for Army., Navy, JF-17s, AWACs, Tanks, Submarines etc etc.
     
  9. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    The dangers of India – Pakistan war | 1913 Intel


    Pakistan and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  10. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    we have a defence budget.hence to be spent on something

    though nuclear war is the last option in a full out war(not in CSD).
     
  11. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    See, you don't know the answer. Just because you have a defence budget doesn't mean you have to spend. You will spend on defence only if you need conventional fighting strength otherwise you just need - Nasr missiles and tactical nukes.
     
  12. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    no nasr has its own purpose.being battle field ballistic missile

    aircraft,awacs,tanks etc has there own
     
  13. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Again, you don't know why you need conventional army. You say, any CSD will invite Nasr nuke attack. I say using Nasr nukes on India will initiate a nuclear war. And then I ask, then why does Pakistan need conventional army when it wants to stop a war by using nukes. But then you don't have answer for it. :crazy:
     
  14. farhan_9909

    farhan_9909 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,895
    Likes Received:
    496
    Location:
    Abbottabad,Bannu
    CSD will invite nasr no doubt
    after that
    if india wants a nuclear war than we will go nuclear.if india want to limit it to conventional than the armed forces with their equipments will carry out

    we are open on all front.
     
  15. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    then why are you scared of cold start ????
     
  16. blank_quest

    blank_quest Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2012
    Messages:
    2,128
    Likes Received:
    927
    Ghazis pe shak :nono: :taunt:
     
  17. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    they have not clarified bold part. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Once you go nuclear, NASR or no NASR, it will be a nuclear retaliation from India and India has already made it clear.

    So, basically NASR is useless or your conventional army is useless. It cannot be both.
     
    sayareakd likes this.
  19. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    they dont get it we have said it in very clear terms. Any attack on our forces any where (even in Pak) would mean wiping out entire Pakistan. I hope they will use NASR and we will end this nonsense with Pakistan for ever.
     
  20. gokussj9

    gokussj9 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    1,137
    Location:
    USA
    He will not understand no matter how much you explain him. :laugh:

    MOD EDIT: Don't use expletives against other members.
     
    prakashbioc and sayareakd like this.
  21. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    I think they have wish to be wiped out from the world map. We should also grant them their wish.
     
    gokussj9 likes this.

Share This Page