Nukes protect India from blackmail by other powers, NSA Shivshankar Menon says

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
NEW DELHI: In a delicate balancing act, India Tuesday renewed its pitch for universal nuclear disarmament, but underlined that until the world arrived at "this happy state" it will continue to maintain atomic weapons as they have helped deter others from attempting nuclear coercion or blackmail.

"On at least three occasions before 1998, other powers used the explicit or implicit threat of nuclear weapons to try and change India's behaviour," National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon said at a national outreach conference on global nuclear disarmament.

Menon disclosed that after India became a declared nuclear weapons state in 1998, it has not faced such threats.

"So the possession of nuclear weapons has, empirically speaking, deterred others from attempting nuclear coercion or blackmail against India," he added.

The day-long conference, organised by the Indian Council of World Affairs and supported by the external affairs ministry, saw the participation of nearly 1500 students from around 37 universities.

It was held to commemorate the 68th birth anniversary of former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, who presented a plan for a nuclear-weapons-free world order at the UN General Assembly June 9, 1988.

In an oblique reference to Pakistan, Menon stressed that India has consistently maintained that its nuclear weapons were weapons of deterrence and not war-fighting weapons. "These weapons are for use against an attack on India."

"Unlike certain other nuclear weapon states, India's weapons were not meant to redress a military imbalance, or to compensate for some perceived inferiority in conventional military terms, or to serve some tactical or operational military need on the battlefield," he added.

Menon underlined that said the acquisition of nuclear weapons has imparted an added authority to India's moral authority for universal disarmament on the global fora.

"We spent 24 years after our first peaceful nuclear explosion in 1974 urging and working for universal nuclear disarmament and a nuclear free world," he said.

India argued for a nuclear weapons free world out of conviction that such a scenario would enhance national security and that of the rest of the world, he said.

"But sadly this was a conviction and view that obtained much lip sympathy and verbal support but was actually flouted in practice with increasing impunity by others," Menon said.

"And when the division of the world into nuclear weapon haves and have-nots was sought to be made permanent in the nineties it became clear that possession of nuclear weapons was necessary if our attempts to promote a nuclear weapon free world were to be taken seriously and have some effect," he said.
Nukes protect India from blackmail by other powers, NSA Shivshankar Menon says - The Times of India
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
The only explicit threat came in 1971. It was not from Soviet Union off course.
 

KS

Bye bye DFI
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
8,005
Likes
5,758
More false than true.

Nukes have actually upset the mil-balance in sub continent in Pak's favor.
 

ani82v

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
1,006
Likes
707
Country flag
More false than true.

Nukes have actually upset the mil-balance in sub continent in Pak's favor.
It doesn't make a difference. Both the countries had Nuke technology well before they did the tests.
Otherwise, it would not have taken them just 18 days to respond with their tests in '98.

Suppose we had not done the tests, and went to war some years later and Pakistan felt pushed to a corner, they still would have used nukes on India (or had deterrence, though unproven).
Our decision of nuke test does not change that balance.
 

ant80

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
141
Likes
22
It doesn't make a difference. Both the countries had Nuke technology well before they did the tests.
Otherwise, it would not have taken them just 18 days to respond with their tests in '98.

Suppose we had not done the tests, and went to war some years later and Pakistan felt pushed to a corner, they still would have used nukes on India (or had deterrence, though unproven).
Our decision of nuke test does not change that balance.
I actually agree with Karthik Sri. It was only because of nukes that Pak started Kargil and the Parliment terrorist op. We mobilized and did nothing. If nuclear threat had not been involved, I doubt Pak would've done something like that in the first place.
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,615
Likes
5,772
My hypothesis is Pakis are nuke nude. All talk about nuclear weapons is more bluff and bluster than reality.
 

ant80

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
141
Likes
22
My hypothesis is Pakis are nuke nude. All talk about nuclear weapons is more bluff and bluster than reality.
Lets hope we never have to put that theory to test.

In a nuclear age, WAR is the enemy.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
48,599
Country flag
We are still not immune to blackmail no ICBM And no megatonnage.
Many will reply that we have a nuclear submarine but no operational SLBM
Always playing catch up.
 

A chauhan

"अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l"
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
9,513
Likes
22,526
Country flag
Having a credible BMD is more important than having nukes, if we cant threat our enemy because of our vulnerability to their nukes and cant intercept incoming nukes then our nukes are useless.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
48,599
Country flag
Having a credible BMD is more important than having nukes, if we cant threat our enemy because of our vulnerability to their nukes and cant intercept incoming nukes then our nukes are useless.
BMD we have is for 1 warhead IRBM's and not tested against ICBM's or MIRV's.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
:facepalm:

Back to the same topic.

Nukes are deterrents. In the hands of same actors.

Not want to be harsh on the Japanese, but I think the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved how destructive nuclear weapons were even if it was just 12KT. It was good that those bombings happened than have a full fledged nuke war without knowing what it could do.

Te superpowers spent 30 years built a huge arsenal first to win a war by finishing the adversary completely. Then the adversary built more. Then they realized they need defence shields. Then they realizes damn even if one gets through millions will die. Then they eateries SALT, START, ABM. They knew there was no way they could afford to loose even one city. Sane actors don't want to lose even a city block let alone a city. Megaton nukes are not required for that.

But nukes in the hands if terrorists who are ready to kill and get killed is a deadly weapon. Terrorists include terrorist states like Pak. Though I believe that at least for the moment, there are some sane actors in GHQ who would not like to die.
 

Known_Unknown

Devil's Advocate
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
2,626
Likes
1,670
Not want to be harsh on the Japanese, but I think the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved how destructive nuclear weapons were even if it was just 12KT. It was good that those bombings happened than have a full fledged nuke war without knowing what it could do.
Again we keep going back to the same argument. I believe I proved here with pictures once the reason for the destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.....most of their structures were made completely of wood. A 12 MT nuke in Delhi won't even do 1/10th the damage that it did in Japan. On the other hand, in North America, most of the houses are still constructed of wood.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Again we keep going back to the same argument. I believe I proved here with pictures once the reason for the destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.....most of their structures were made completely of wood. A 12 MT nuke in Delhi won't even do 1/10th the damage that it did in Japan. On the other hand, in North America, most of the houses are still constructed of wood.
Even if the structures stand, people won't. It's the lives of the citizens that is of concern.
 

A chauhan

"अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l"
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
9,513
Likes
22,526
Country flag
BMD we have is for 1 warhead IRBM's and not tested against ICBM's or MIRV's.
Yeah but Pakis doesn't have ICBMs and BMD against an MIRVed ICBM would be a tough job to be done.

So far as blackmail from developed countries is concerned yes! nukes+accurate delivery platforms like Agni series have protected us from being blackmailed.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top