'Pakistan's Nasr missile is the most dangerous development in South Asia'

Discussion in 'Pakistan' started by Zarvan, Aug 12, 2015.

  1. Zarvan

    Zarvan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    468
    Likes Received:
    205
    Location:
    Lahore
    http://**********/attachments/11873620_1034087306610121_7670695080404972277_n-jpg.246112/

    Pakistan's Nasr missile

    'If ever India loses its patience after repeated terror attacks and decides to retaliate against the terrorist camps, Pakistan may term that a conventional military attack and invoke the nuclear option.'

    'This is a way to continue with terrorism without retaliation.'

    Top nuclear scientist Dr R Rajaraman, emeritus professor of theoretical physics at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, believes Pakistan's growing nuclear arsenal is a matter of great concern to India with the Nasr missile being of special concern.

    The co-chair of the International Panel on Fissile Materials and a member of the world scientists permanent panel on Mitigation of Terrorists Acts, Dr Rajaraman, below, left, tells Rediff.com contributor Rashme Sehgal why an alarming nuclear story is unfolding in the sub-continent.

    Pakistan has the fastest growing nuclear programme in the world. By 2020, it is expected to get 200 nuclear devices most of which are targeted at India.

    While countries around the globe are talking about diminishing their nuclear stockpiles, the opposite seems to be happening in the case of Pakistan.

    It is true that Pakistan is producing more weapon-usable fissile material each passing year. So, for that matter, is India!

    Estimates of Pakistan's rate of growth of nuclear warheads are often exaggerated in the West and blindly quoted by some by Indian analysts as well.

    The main thing to understand about estimates of the number of nuclear bombs is that no one outside the respective governments will really know how many weapons have been assembled. And the government people are not likely to talk.

    Most estimates by non-governmental think-tanks and analysts are just unverifiable hearsay. The only responsible outside estimates are based on nuclear fissile materials production and stocks.

    So I will go by the estimates made by our International Panel on Fissile Materials which has been tracking fissile material production of all countries year after year.

    It is true that the Pakistanis have set up 3 plutonium (Pu) producing reactors at Khushab and a fourth is in the making. But these are believed to be heavy water reactors of about 50 MWth (Megawatt thermal) capacity.

    Such reactors typically produce, at 65 per cent efficiency, about 7 kg of Pu each per year. At best the three reactors can together produce only 105 kg in five years, which can fuel about 21 warheads.

    Moreover, once the Pu is produced in the reactors it is not immediately available for making bombs. The fuel rods have to be cooled for a couple of years and then reprocessed to have the weapon-usable Pu extracted. So the actual production of assembled weapons will be much less.

    The current arsenal, frequently quoted in think-tank reports, is supposed to be about 110 weapons. So even if that is correct and they add 21 more in the next five years, Pakistan cannot reach 200 warheads by 2020.

    You must remember that the earlier Pakistani weapons used highly enriched uranium produced by A Q Khan's centrifuges. But as Zia Mian, M H Nayyar and I have shown in an audit we did of Pakistani uranium availability, their domestic supply of raw uranium is limited and can barely feed the four Khushabh reactors.

    So there is unlikely to be much left for enrichment by centrifuges. Therefore I would keep the estimate of Pakistan's arsenal at 130 warheads or less by 2020.

    Both Pakistan and India have doubled their nuclear stockpiles since 2007 with their weapons increasing at the rate of ten a year.

    India's rate of warhead production is not 10 warheads a year. Its only functioning Pu production reactor is the Dhruva at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre which annually produces about 18 kg of Pu which can fuel about 3, 4 bombs per year, not 10 as is stated.

    The CIRUS reactor that used to produce weapons-grade Pu at BARC was closed down as part of the India-US nuclear deal.

    Yes, this should be a matter of great concern to the people of both countries. Unfortunately, it is not.

    Dr R RajaramanIn response to India stating it would not hesitate to go beyond its border to eliminate terrorists, former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf responded to say nuclear stockpiles were not being collected to be used at the time of a festival.


    Stylish And Durable Helmet With Blue Graphics Buy 1 Get 1 Free
    Rs. 2,199 Rs. 699
    Add to cart

    Vox 3G 7inch V102 Dual Sim Calling Tablet
    Rs. 3,999 Rs. 3,299
    Add to cart

    Air Sofa Cum Bed 5 In 1
    Rs. 6,500 Rs. 2,469
    Add to cart
    Pakistan has always maintained that its nuclear force was intended to deter a conventional attack by India. But it has also been using their nuclear umbrella for a more insidious purpose -- as a cover even for the terrorist attacks it sponsors in India such as the infamous Mumbai attack.

    The idea is that if ever India loses its patience after such repeated terror attacks and decides to retaliate against the terrorist camps, hideouts or headquarters, Pakistan may term that a conventional military attack and invoke the nuclear option.

    This is a way to continue with terrorism without retaliation.

    China has confirmed that it is involved in at least six of Pakistan's nuclear projects even though it is well known that Pakistan has not fully adopted the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.

    So far, in building two civilian reactors in Pakistan, China has not strictly speaking violated the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines. It has used the so-called grandfather clause (that the agreement with Pakistan was signed before the NSG sanctions came into being).

    We must not forget that Russia had to invoke the same argument when starting to build our Kudangulam reactors. Furthermore, the two new civilian reactors China is building in Pakistan will be under strict IAEA safeguards. Pakistan cannot avoid these safeguards.

    Nuclear experts repeatedly warn of the danger of some of these weapons falling into the hands of terrorists.

    I don't think terror groups like the Taliban can get their hands on a Pakistani bomb. They may have launched some attacks at the gates of some military bases. But that is a far cry from penetrating the rings of security that Pakistan must undoubtedly have to guard its weapons.

    Remember that these weapons, like our own in India, are considered the crown jewels of their arsenal.

    Pakistan has deployed or is developing delivery systems for its nuclear warheads including aircraft, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. They have also developed the battlefield Nasr missile to be used against India.

    But there is no clarity on the chain of command on who will authorise the use of these weapons in case war breaks out between these two countries.

    The Nasr is, in my opinion, the most dangerous development in South Asia.

    It is not clear what the command and control status of such battlefield nuclear missiles will be.

    For them to be effective they have to be used in battle in response to battlefield developments. In such situations it may be impractical for the ground commanders to seek and await a go-signal from the apex political leadership.

    Pakistan Air Commodore Tariq Ashraf's book Evolving Dynamics of a Nuclear South Asia highlights the absence of civilian and bureaucratic involvement in the Pakistan Nuclear Control Authority. How far is this correct? Who controls the nuclear button in Pakistan?

    Although the military has a strong involvement in Pakistan's nuclear control, I believe that the top political authority is also very much a part of it. The 'button' is controlled by a collection of people from the apex political and military sector.

    How much highly enriched uranium has Pakistan acquired as opposed to India?

    According to the annual Global Fissile Material Report 2010 of IPFM, Pakistan's stock of weapon grade HEU was about 2.5 ± 1 ton.

    This might have increased somewhat by now, but as I have said there is not much uranium left in Pakistan to enrich, after feeding the three Khushab reactors.

    Is there any likelihood of the nuclear race between the two countries ending in the near future?

    The nuclear race may stop in a few years if neither side develops newer types of technology, such as ballistic missile defence or more nuclear-capable battlefield weapons. But by saying that the race will stop I don't mean that the weapons will be disarmed and thrown away. But only that further growth in the arsenals may stop.

    Actually getting rid of these very dangerous weapons may not happen for a long time, if at all. That is a scary prospect!

    http://www.rediff.com/news/intervie...gerous-development-in-south-asia/20150727.htm
     
    Neo likes this.
  2.  
  3. Rowdy

    Rowdy Co ja kurwa czytam! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Location:
    Milky Bar
    Congratulations Pakistan.................. Now use that Nasr missile against TTP :lol:
     
    Alien likes this.
  4. Blackwater

    Blackwater Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    20,997
    Likes Received:
    11,830
    Location:
    Akhand Bharat

    No it will only work on Hindu kufurs
     
  5. Hari Sud

    Hari Sud Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2012
    Messages:
    1,054
    Likes Received:
    855
    Location:
    Ontario
    Need additional view point, other than the Rediff reporter.

    Is Nasr missile that dangerous then why rest of the world not taken notice of it. Jane's mentioned its development in a passing reference about four years back. Others have paid limited attention to it. If the missile is that effective, I am sure Saudi Arabia must have sent delegations to Pakistan to buy it by now.

    Is Rediff joining the ranks of people who spread scare tactics. Nuclear weapons as Indian government had said repeatedly that if used will invite a massive retaliation, effectively anhiliation.
     
    Alien likes this.
  6. jackprince

    jackprince Turning into a frog Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    2,675
    Location:
    Seema Andhra
    So, essentially the article states that Nasr being a fucked up weapon (tactical nuke missile, who with right mind uses them?) in the hand of a fucked up nation that have a fucked up army which is commanded at every level fucked up officers, poses a great threat. Hell, of course it does! The very fact is that Pakis have nukes is a threat to humanity, as a good many of their so called experts' opinion always seem to swerve towards using nukes! What do they think, that if Pakis use nukes India will be too scared to retaliate? If Pakis ever use a nuke, it will definitely hurt India and generations of Indians will be affected, not to mention millions that will die. Of course, Pakistan won't have to think of repercussion of that, since it will cease to exist.
     
    aditya bhatia and Alien like this.
  7. hit&run

    hit&run Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,498
    Likes Received:
    4,676
    o_O..........................................................
     
  8. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,317
    Likes Received:
    3,890
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    Clickbait garbage. Next time there's a 26/11-styled attack, Modi's reputation will be on the line. He will attack, and then Pakistan's nuclear escalation bogey will be put to rest once and for all.

    People didn't elect Modi to be a "statesman" who rules by the book. People elected him to be an authoritarian.

    Pakistan will be making a big mistake trying to call out his response to a major terrorist attack.
     
  9. SREEKAR

    SREEKAR Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    585
    Location:
    visakhapatnam
    35 minutes ago#129
    http://**********/data/avatars/m/138/138817.jpg?1438581994
    al_asad_al_mulkFULL MEMBER
    http://**********/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/2ndLieutenant.jpg
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    444
    Ratings:
    +2 / 186 / -2
    http://**********/styles/default/xenforo/flags2/pk.GIF
    http://**********/styles/default/xenforo/flags2/ae.GIF

    NIA said: Nuclear attack on Indian troops....Your single attack can decide existence of pakistan on world map.

    Paki's reply:That you are saying what is our stance if your dirty force land one inch inside Pakistan we will start annihilating your cities, your forces will met Nasr and your big cities will be see our Shaheen and your military targets will be ruined by Babur, your airfield will be nuked by Ra'ad we will not spare a single missile in our inventory. And after that India might do what they can do.:biggrin2::pound::rofl::daru:
    @Blackwater
    What do u say about him!!:biggrin2:
     
  10. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,317
    Likes Received:
    3,890
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    Tell him that of all the warheads we unload on his country, the last one will head to for Mecca.
     
    Alien and Sylex21 like this.
  11. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    21 warheads from 3 reactors in 5 years is a big threat? If the fast breeders are on schedule I have heard numbers of upto 700 warheads possible annually. For India But let Pakistan enjoy their missile .which by it's size would be about 10 kiloton yield IMO.(from a 4 missile salvo) Pakistan does not have more than a 20 kiloton capability presently and I highly doubt Pakistan has enough fissile material for 110 warheads even after years of yellow cake method using new centrifuges.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2015
  12. bose

    bose Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    3,956
    Likes Received:
    2,637
    Location:
    Kolkata, India.
    Any Nuclear attack on India will lead to nuke attack not only on Pakistan but also on all the Islamic religious places in Saudi Arabia ... It will be full blown religious war...

    Mecca & Medina will become legitimate targets... Make no mistake ...
     
  13. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,688
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    The problem with the Nasr is that it's a tactical battlefield missile. In essence that means that it will have to be deployed with forward echelons, most notably it shall have to get within 60km of a forward deployed Indian formation to damage it. The Pakistanis will use it as a suicide weapon and it will be deployed with nuclear warheads only.
    However it's not a silver bullet. It can easily be taken out before it gets into launch range by airpower or even a well timed smerch barrage.
    As far as warheads are concerned the Pakistanis have a 45kt nuke as the largest weapon , we have a 60kt warhead as our largest tested yet. The nuclearweaponsarchive suggests that we have already built nukes of 300kt capacity.Some paanwala gossip suggests that our first megaton weapon will be SLBM only.There is too much obsfucation to be sure.
    As for Indian plutonium stocks, David Albright estimated in 1999 that India had approximately 4200kg of unsafeguarded plutonium.That's enough for 1000 bombs.
     
    Alien and LETHALFORCE like this.
  14. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    @bengalraider

    I doubt we will go for mega tonnage we are more focused on MIRV 's. One large splat or many precise deadly strikes?
     
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    With a 60km range and official .5-5 kiloton yield this missile is more or less useless. This a Chinese Smerch copy claimed to be mated with a nuclear warhead ? Does Pakistan have miniaturization capability?
     
    Blackwater likes this.
  16. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    I loved your suggestion that India emulate Israel's official stance that any attack on it soil would invite nuclear retaliation on all of the Muslim world.

    After all , if barbarabians wanted the Islamic bomb and bankrolled the pakis , its only right that they be made to pay the price of that endeavor. Every mistake should have its price.

    But the question is, will the daughter selling dogs in india allow the usage of nukes against mecca? We do have nearly 15% muslims in India. It might cause super duper debates on why India was wrong in nuking mecca.

    Buy if the war was used as an excuse for emergency and the commies and anti national filth are cleaned up , then it would be even better.
     
    raja696 and Alien like this.
  17. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,688
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    Both, a few big ones to scare the Chinese and many slightly smaller ones to get maximum bang for the buck .
     
    LETHALFORCE likes this.
  18. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,317
    Likes Received:
    3,890
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    That's why war-doctrines are neither up for public debates, nor are they accessible by RTI. I've always endorsed a nuclear second strike doctrine that's based on these:
    • Pakistan believes that in a nuclear war with India, India has more to lose than Pakistan (more cities, more population, bigger economy), and so India would exercise a crippling amount of self-restraint.
    • Pursuant to that, Pakistan has less to lose. The Pakistani state (Pak Army) is loyal to itself more than its people, as proven by countless futile misadventures, a lion's share of financial resources, and the desire to keep its eastern border hot (and create an existential problem that only it can "solve" or appear to be solving). So to the Pak Army, the loss of life, economy, and infrastructure in a nuclear war is a lesser restraining factor than it is to the Indian state.
    • Pakistan has always tried to project that it's wielding nuclear weapons for not just itself but the entire Islamic world. The Islamic world (particularly KSA), though bound by an understanding with the Americans to stay away from nukes, has midwifed the Pakistani nuclear weapons programme, various other Sunni states bankrolled them.
    • Therefore, India must create an atmosphere of ambiguity where, in the event of a nuclear exchange with Pakistan, India also takes unprovoked first-strikes against key targets in the Sunni-Islamic world, including Mecca-Medina. This doctrine should be whispered just enough that it's rumored in security establishments around the world, while we deny it (owing to our oh-so-secular population, and our demographics).
    • This will most definitely cause a change in Pakistan's nuclear doctrine, since it raises their stakes. Paki warlords will have to live with the burden of having initiated a nuclear exchange that could potentially turn Mecca into an irradiated crater. If they have half a brain, and the half of their genome inherited from their goat parents are recessive, this will definitely weigh in on them.
    But if shit hits the fan, and there is a nuclear exchange, we must make good on our threats.
     
    Bornubus, I_PLAY_BAD, Sameet2 and 7 others like this.
  19. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,427
    10 kiloton, you are giving them morons way too much credit. It is a sub kiloton weapon.

    http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/faculty-staff/zia-mian/Limited-Military-Utility-of-Pakistans.pdf

    Even if Pak uses its strategic warheads (not those puny sub-kiloton Nasr ones) on Indian armour, it will not stop the invasion but in turn will get buggered by Indian nuclear retaliation. It is a lose-lose scenario for Porkis either way.
     
  20. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    6,554
    This would be from a four missile salvo nasr missile is .5-5 kilotons from neutral source. So I will say 2.5 kiloton and four missiles so I got 10 kilotons which still maybe generous? Strategically speaking no compotent general or military planner would use this pos missile.
     
  21. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,427
    Well, Pakis were/are desperately showing off their sub kiloton warheads and the "fact" that their scientists have achieved something Indians "couldn't" do, warhead miniaturization.

    IMO, a single nasr launcher will not carry more than 2 genuine warheads for reasons below;

    • Small payload means no anti-ABM measures or penetration aids.
    • Pakistan don't have that many warheads.Arming every single missile is putting a whole lot of eggs in a very unsurvivable basket.
    • At 60km range, it is well within range for any number of attack scenarios. Be it counter battery fire, UAVs, attack choppers, SOF or the good old ground attack aircraft.
    • At >3 mach reentry speed (being generous here) is not that difficult a task for existing ABM systems but early warning might.
    • If you read the above pdf you will see how useless these warheads are against armour. I doubt that both PA and IA didn't do such calculations.
     

Share This Page