India, Pakistan Remain Lacking in Nuclear Security

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
As the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit gets underway in The Hague, Netherlands, world leaders and nuclear security experts will ponder the future of nuclear security in the Indian subcontinent. Nuclear-armed neighbors India and Pakistan both score poorly on several important indicators for the security of nuclear materials and their ability (or inability) to regulate their supply of both fissile material and weaponized nuclear systems is a continued cause of concern for nuclear security advocates.
India, Pakistan Remain Lacking in Nuclear Security | The Diplomat
 

prohumanity

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,290
Likes
1,362
Country flag
Who is talking...the G-7 racist country club members..thru the diplomat..the paid tabloid.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Who is talking...the G-7 racist country club members..thru the diplomat..the paid tabloid.
India's failure due to European racism. Yup, that'll play well here.

India's low score on the NTI Security Index is mostly due to a series of bureaucratic failures and delays. India remains a relative newcomer to the community of normal nuclear weapon states. Despite the fact that India never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, its landmark 2006 civil nuclear cooperation deal with the United States and its eventual receipt of a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group in 2008 made it the first nuclear weapon state outside of the NPT framework to engage in civil nuclear commerce.

India's nuclear security problems are myriad. Despite having excellent multilateral compliance, including fully implementing UN Security Council resolution 1540, poor regulations and laws that merely suggest but do not require oversight keep India's nuclear security provisions below optimal levels. Two years ago, at the last Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, India pledged to establish an independent regulatory agency for nuclear material security but has failed to do so. Other major shortcomings for India include a failure to hedge against insider threats to nuclear materials and protect materials during transport. While India's threat environment is far less dangerous than Pakistan's, terrorist groups have plotted to acquire nuclear materials in India.
 

angeldude13

Lestat De Lioncourt
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
2,499
Likes
3,999
Country flag
India's failure due to European racism. Yup, that'll play well here.
This report sound BS to me.
Who the hell is Netherlands???
They don't have nukes and they don't have the hostile neighborhood that India is in.
So they should shut up.
No terrorista ever will lay his hands on Indian nuke.
Don't know and don't care about amreeki and nether nukes.
 

Jagdish58

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
796
Likes
644
Is US Nuclear Security 100%??:thumb: wish they have not passed any weapon technology to jihadis in 80's agaisn the Soviet:lol::scared2:
 

thethinker

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
2,808
Likes
6,489
Country flag
Interesting article. Will you please share how the nuclear security trustworthiness factor is decided?

Speaking of nuclear security, wasn't the 2nd in command of US nuclear arsenal suspended for gambling?

Certainly makes one wonder that how come some countries get away with lapses and be not featured in such criticism yet others are being targeted over and over when it comes to nuclear security?

Like US for instance :

Air Force general in charge of nuclear weapons removed for lack of trust: defense officials - NBC News

Air Force general in charge of nuclear weapons removed for lack of trust: defense officials

A top general in charge of the U.S. Air Force's arsenal of nuclear ballistic missiles has been relieved of his command due to loss of trust, defense officials told NBC News.

Air Force officials said Maj. Gen. Michael Carey was fired for "personal misbehavior" while on temporary duty at an unspecified location outside his usual command. The officials would not describe the behavior, other than to say that it did not involve any sexual improprieties, drug use, gambling, or criminal conduct.


Another one :

Second-in-command of the country's nuclear arsenal is suspended as he is investigated for GAMBLING | Mail Online


Second-in-command of the country's nuclear arsenal is suspended as he is investigated for GAMBLING

The No. 2 officer at the military command in charge of all U.S. nuclear war-fighting forces has been suspended and is under investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigation Command for issues related to gambling, officials said Saturday.

The highly unusual action against a high-ranking officer at U.S. Strategic Command was made more than three weeks ago but not publicly announced.

Air Force Gen. Robert Kehler, the commander of Strategic Command, suspended the deputy commander, Navy Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, from his duties on Sept. 3.

He is still assigned to the command but is prohibited from performing duties related to nuclear weapons and other issues requiring a security clearance, she said
.
 

praneet.bajpaie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
597
Likes
367
Why does it matter what the US, EU, Aliens think about the safety of our nukes? What matters is whether we are satisfied? What do you expect from these racist pigs??
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
This report sound BS to me.
Who the hell is Netherlands???
They don't have nukes and they don't have the hostile neighborhood that India is in.
So they should shut up.
No terrorists ever will lay his hands on Indian nuke.
Don't know and don't care about amreeki and nether nukes.
The 2014 Nuclear Security Summit is being held in the Hague, which is in the Netherlands.

Why do you want to be so profoundly ignorant?

No, the real question is, why is the profound ignorance displayed by you and a few others tolerated by DFI?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Why does it matter what the US, EU, Aliens think about the safety of our nukes? What matters is whether we are satisfied? What do you expect from these racist pigs??
You should share your opinion with the government of India. I am sure they would like to hear from such a concerned citizen as you.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Interesting article. Will you please share how the nuclear security trustworthiness factor is decided?
From the article:
The Nuclear Threat Initiative's 2014 Security Index, "a unique public assessment of nuclear materials security conditions in 176 countries, developed with the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)," scored both India and Pakistan rather poorly for nuclear material security. The NTI's ranking examines nuclear material security indicators among the 25 countries known to possess weapons-usable nuclear material and this year's ranking put India in 23rd place and Pakistan in the 22nd place. Only Iran and North Korea — two nations largely ostracized by the international community for their nuclear programs — scored lower. Despite its higher internal instability, Pakistan came out ahead of India on the NTI 2014 Security Index.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Air Force general in charge of nuclear weapons removed for lack of trust: defense officials
The fact that he was removed is an indication of concern about security. That would be a good thing.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
The report is not BS and cannot be dismissed summarily as western crap.

I read their 150 page report an now they arrive at the score.

I put up the question on the low score to Indian MEA who released India's statement at the summit and he didn't reply.

Only Iran and North Korea are worse than us.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
In fact I've been discussing why India is not more transparent and very secretive about our nuclear program. As we aspire to be a "great nation" we will have to act like one. We need to have process in place where we declare our stockpile (civil), our locations (civil) etc and I also say that we should come to a conclusion of what minimum credible deterrence means and put a number to it under the current threat perception and not give a vague we will respond with unacceptable damage thing. This threat perception should be reviewed say every two years as we build our stockpile. If we declare the number of warheads, the type and their yields, the enemy will also feel "assured" and "confident" of our program and we can build confidence building measures to reduce chance of nuclear conflict.
 

thethinker

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
2,808
Likes
6,489
Country flag
From the article:
And about the nuclear trust related incidents of US military? One key figure in charge of nuclear facilities is relieved of command due to "trust and safety" issues and other suspended for gambling certainly puts nuclear security at risk.

Where is the criticism over that since it relates to key areas of the report?

More specifically, this key area from the "report" :

ADDRESSING A SHARED GLOBAL THREAT
Because any catastrophe involving a nuclear weapon
would be global in scope, countries with weapons-usable
nuclear materials have a responsibility to secure all those
materials and to provide assurances to others that build
confidence in the effectiveness of their security
 

thethinker

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
2,808
Likes
6,489
Country flag
In fact I've been discussing why India is not more transparent and very secretive about our nuclear program. As we aspire to be a "great nation" we will have to act like one. We need to have process in place where we declare our stockpile (civil), our locations (civil) etc and I also say that we should come to a conclusion of what minimum credible deterrence means and put a number to it under the current threat perception and not give a vague we will respond with unacceptable damage thing. This threat perception should be reviewed say every two years as we build our stockpile. If we declare the number of warheads, the type and their yields, the enemy will also feel "assured" and "confident" of our program and we can build confidence building measures to reduce chance of nuclear conflict.
Even better would be to keep a nuclear launch code as "00000000" which the US did for so many years. :)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2515598/Launch-code-US-nuclear-weapons-easy-00000000.html

Dial 00000000 for Armageddon. US's top secret launch nuclear launch code was frighteningly simple

For nearly 20 years, the secret code to authorize launching U.S. nuclear missiles, and starting World War III, was terrifyingly simple and even noted down on a checklist.

From 1962, when John F Kennedy instituted PAL encoding on nuclear weapons, until 1977, the combination to fire the devastating missiles at the height of the Cold War was just 00000000.

This was chosen by Strategic Air Command in an effort to make the weapons as quick and as easy to launch as possible, as reported by Today I Found Out.

This claimed that it would take just four people working together to launch nuclear missiles from the silos he had worked in.
 

praneet.bajpaie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
597
Likes
367
You should share your opinion with the government of India. I am sure they would like to hear from such a concerned citizen as you.
Mr Ewald, I am really trying to be a nice guy here, lest I am banned again. Please refrain from provoking me, I request you sincerely.
 

thethinker

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
2,808
Likes
6,489
Country flag



This is the breakdown for US nuclear security scorecard, an area of interest being considered here is "Insider Threat Prevention".

Considering the recent personnel infractions who were in charge of US nuclear arsenal, what seems interesting is that all of areas related to that in the scorecard is 3 (which I assume is highest trustworthiness factor for vetting personnel).

If someone can explain how this is calculated and clarify the whole scoring process, it would be great.

While accountability and detailed analysis may be useful to examine pain points due to such reports, to think that such reports are the gospel of nuclear security is incorrect.

Many nations who supposedly are superior in "nuclear practices" did invade countries where no WMDs were found, tried to block nuclear programs of developing nations (CTBT anyone?) and so on.

So to assume that certain countries when score poorly means they really suck is plain wrong considering the credibility of nations who back such reports .
 
Last edited:

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
And about the nuclear trust related incidents of US military? One key figure in charge of nuclear facilities is relieved of command due to "trust and safety" issues and other suspended for gambling certainly puts nuclear security at risk.

Where is the criticism over that since it relates to key areas of the report?
What I am suggesting is that the actions you mention (the relief from command and suspension) are indicators that nuclear security is taken seriously by those responsible for the oversight of US nuclear facilities.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top