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

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by Yusuf, Aug 21, 2012.

  1. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    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
     
  2.  
  3. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    The only explicit threat came in 1971. It was not from Soviet Union off course.
     
    Aayush likes this.
  4. sesha_maruthi27

    sesha_maruthi27 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,884
    Likes Received:
    1,568
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh(INDIA)
    Why did USSR threaten INDIA?
     
  5. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    fantastic.
    they throw 5 MT nuke on us taking whole of delhi and NCR.
    we respond by throwing 20 KT bomb taking away their slum
     
    Aayush, Known_Unknown and Dovah like this.
  6. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    Who said USSR threatened India
     
  7. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    It takes a lot more than that to dent delhi
     
  8. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    More false than true.

    Nukes have actually upset the mil-balance in sub continent in Pak's favor.
     
    ant80 likes this.
  9. ani82v

    ani82v Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    706
    Location:
    Bangalore
    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.
     
  10. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    I wonder who threatened us(a) ?

    :hmm:
     
    Known_Unknown and Spindrift like this.
  11. ant80

    ant80 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    22
    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.
     
    ani82v likes this.
  12. Spindrift

    Spindrift Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    177
    3.3 MT should be more that sufficient to cause a significant dent...

    NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein
     
  13. Daredevil

    Daredevil On Vacation! Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    11,613
    Likes Received:
    5,670
    My hypothesis is Pakis are nuke nude. All talk about nuclear weapons is more bluff and bluster than reality.
     
  14. ant80

    ant80 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    22
    Lets hope we never have to put that theory to test.

    In a nuclear age, WAR is the enemy.
     
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    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.
     
  16. A chauhan

    A chauhan "अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l" Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,928
    Likes Received:
    4,563
    Location:
    Raipur
    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.
     
    LETHALFORCE likes this.
  17. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,561
    BMD we have is for 1 warhead IRBM's and not tested against ICBM's or MIRV's.
     
  18. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    :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.
     
    roma likes this.
  19. Known_Unknown

    Known_Unknown Devil's Advocate Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,632
    Likes Received:
    1,664
    Location:
    Earth
    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.
     
  20. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Even if the structures stand, people won't. It's the lives of the citizens that is of concern.
     
  21. A chauhan

    A chauhan "अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l" Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,928
    Likes Received:
    4,563
    Location:
    Raipur
    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.
     

Share This Page