Estimation of Indian Nuclear Arsenal.- Present and Future

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by Yusuf, Apr 23, 2012.

  1. Certified Gipsy

    Certified Gipsy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Scientists that develop technology and vehicles to deliver the technology are not brothered about the strategic policies of the day's govt. When they test and develop a technology, their motivation is to extract maximum possible positive output from the test and use it in all possible scenarios and intensities.

    When the scientists tested sub kilo ton devices, they did not expect that we would have a government that declares and adopts a no first use policy. Similarly when they developed a suitable vehicle to deliver such devices, they were just making the nation to be ready with all available means to protect , defend and if needed charge against our enemies. If we continue to have a favorable govt in the US after the next elections, I bet our govt would write off the no first use policy. Even with no first use policy, there are always ways to use these as a full scale retaliation, with localized serious damage to the stupidity of enemies.
     
    Indx TechStyle likes this.
  2. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,554
    Likes Received:
    2,936
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    I have just one question about Thermobaric bombs of tactical nuke scale, Can they be put atop missiles? MOAB and FOAB are very heavy and are air-dropped.
     
  3. Certified Gipsy

    Certified Gipsy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    ^^
    If thermobaric weapons carry 100% fuel, then they are dependent on outside oxygen for sustained combustion & I am afraid they will be a dud or ineffective in water and air based missiles. Their best application would be in tanks, artillery & Surface-Surface missiles.
     
    Immanuel and Indx TechStyle like this.
  4. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,293
    Likes Received:
    20,760
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Can't say, a stronger missile be there or an artillery system.
    Or keep destroying enemy assets mindlessly without watching their faces (Cold Start) with TBWs fired from artilleries, tanks and hand picked versions.
     
  5. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,554
    Likes Received:
    2,936
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Perhaps they would be good for anti-ship as well.
    Yet to hear about thermobaric artillery shells, but would be great if we have them.
     
    Indx TechStyle and aditya10r like this.
  6. IndianHawk

    IndianHawk Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Messages:
    3,548
    Likes Received:
    7,676
    The question is not about technological development, I already said I believe we have the know how . It's about deployment.
    Under present doctrine if we deploy such weapons we are effectively signaling to Pakistan that there exists a possibility of tactical nuclear warfare and Pakistan wants that possibility to exist.

    When and if we give up no first use will be a welcome decision but it might not happen in near future. Till then we need to reiterate that there is no such thing as a tactical nuke.
    A nuke is a nuke is a nuke
    should be our policy.
     
    raja696 likes this.
  7. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,691
    Likes Received:
    6,674
    This is the very reason I was asking for strategic bomber deployment in IAF. Heavy load like MOAB or FOAB can't be used as missile warhead. Although thermobaric could be used as artillery shell. But for any short of Nuclear drop bomb or conventional load a strategic bomber is much better then converted fighters IMO.

    As far as sub kt nuclear warhead is concerned, we have to remember that Brahmos too is nuclear capable and Nirbhay too. But 700kg warhead is too much for strategically. It proves that we have been unable to derive max yield and we need much more refinement. IMO something like 1kt/kg would be ideal for us and should be pursued.
     
    Indx TechStyle likes this.
  8. Certified Gipsy

    Certified Gipsy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    ^^
    The developed strategic missile carries 200 kg warhead and capable of producing sub kT yield. Based on the graph, upto 700 kgs can be used for producing a sub kT yield. This does not mean our sub kT war heads are 700 kgs.
     
  9. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,691
    Likes Received:
    6,674
    I got your point. But what I meant over here is, if our warheads would have to carry 200 kg for a yield of sub kiloton, then we have no where refined ourself to enhance the nuclear power of each warhead. Along with the graph you have provided, I am providing another chart herewith with all the nuclear weapons which US has refined and produced.
    yield-to-weight.png
    Now 6kt/kg is the magical figure which is achievable in theory. But in practice only about 5kt/kg has been achieved. But US does make use of device giving a yield of 2kt/kg in their latest Minuteman. By that way our 200 kg should give a yield of 400kt. But we are using 200kg for sub kiloton yield only.
    IMO and as far as I think, we might have achieved more then this and instead might be using warhead with 10-15kg as tactical warhead and 100+ in strategic warhead.
     
    Indx TechStyle likes this.
  10. indiazain

    indiazain Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    393
    Well that's a paki estimate without any real logic .Just as how they believe jf 17 is a game changer
     
  11. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,212
    Likes Received:
    7,121
    Location:
    Gujarat
    That is what exactly I want to say. People argue here that we need not make tactical nukes.
     
  12. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,212
    Likes Received:
    7,121
    Location:
    Gujarat
    Indx TechStyle likes this.
  13. republic_roi97

    republic_roi97 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,922
    Likes Received:
    2,440
    Location:
    Lucknow
    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...rgical-strikes-against-pakistan/1/783055.html
    WTF ????? They had thermobaric bombs too ?
     
  14. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,212
    Likes Received:
    7,121
    Location:
    Gujarat
  15. Akshay_Fenix

    Akshay_Fenix Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,080
    Likes Received:
    6,218
    Location:
    India
  16. Abhijat

    Abhijat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    573
    Location:
    Nothingness
    Sir , in my opinion 100% fuel here means that , fuel would be used to burn surrounding oxygen at target and thus creating pressure waves to destroy target.

    So delievery vehicle can be air dropped missile or underwater platform.

    Sent from my SM-A700FD using Tapatalk
     
  17. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,212
    Likes Received:
    7,121
    Location:
    Gujarat
    yes, They can not work in space and under water or at any place where oxygen is not there.
     
  18. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,293
    Likes Received:
    20,760
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Please note that it is a 14 years old article. So, many viewpoints and situations may not match modern scenario where India has got edge.
    For Cold Testing, USA, Russian Federation and PRC frequently conduct sub.critical/Cold nuclear tests to.sharpen the edge of weapons. These are only nuclear tests allowed under NPT and CTBT.:)
    The Nonproliferation Review/Fall-Winter 2003 105
    Sub-Critical Nuclear Tests:
    An Option for India?[PDF File]
    I'm not posting the content as it's too long to properly align and arrange with bolds.:p
     
  19. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,293
    Likes Received:
    20,760
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Experts worry that India is creating new fuel for an arsenal of H-bombs
    Tribal lands are taken for a top-secret atomic city, known as Challakere, where centrifuges will spin uranium capable of being used in powerful bombs
    Key findings:

    • The Indian government is building a large new factory for highly enriched uranium (HEU), which could be used to fuel a sizable new arsenal of thermonuclear weapons, or H-bombs.
    • If the factory operates as expected and some of the fuel is used in submarines, experts say, India could still have enough extra HEU to make 22 new H-bombs a year, a circumstance that will worry India’s neighbors, including China.
    • Residents of the area around the factory, located in the southern Indian village of Challakere, have had their land seized and been kept in the dark about its scope and purpose.
    • Planning for the project got underway at roughly the same time that Washington and Delhi reached an accord that Bush administration officials claimed would block any expansion of the Indian military’s nuclear arsenal.
    Challakere, India When laborers began excavating protected pastureland in India’s southern Karanataka state in 2012, members of the nomadic Lambani tribe were startled. For centuries, the scarlet-robed herbalists and herders had freely crisscrossed the undulating meadow there, known as kavals, and this uprooting of their rich landscape came without warning or explanation.

    By autumn, Puttaranga Setty, a wiry groundnut farmer from Kallalli, encountered a barbed wire fence blocking off a well-used trail. His neighbor, a herder, discovered that the road from this city to a nearby village had been diverted elsewhere. They rang Doddaullarti Karianna, a weaver who sits on one of the village councils that funnel India’s sprawling democracy down to the grass roots.
    Karianna recalls being baffled and frightened by the news. He said the 365,000 residents of the farming and tribal communities that live in over sixty villages alongside the kavals believe they are protected by a female deity that rises from the pasture, and so the “thought of not having [access to] the kavals was terrifying; like saying there will be no Gods.”
    Officials with India’s state and central governments refused to answer his questions. So Karianna sought legal help from a combative ecological-advocacy group in Bangalore that specializes in fighting illegal encroachment on greenbelt land. But the group’s lawyers were also stymied. Officials warned its lawyers that the prime minister’s office was running the project from New Delhi.

    “There is no point fighting this, we were told,” Leo Saldanha, a founding member of the advocacy group recalled. “You cannot win.” Indeed, an unprecedented election boycott and protests by thousands of local residents, some violent, have had no effect.

    Only after construction on the site began that year did it finally become clear that two secretive agencies were behind a project that experts say will be the subcontinent’s largest military-run complex of nuclear centrifuges, atomic research laboratories and weapons and aircraft testing facilities. Among the project's aims: to expand the government’s nuclear research, to produce fuel for India’s nuclear reactors, and to help power the country’s fleet of new submarines, one of which underwent sea trials in 2014.

    But another, more controversial ambition, according to retired Indian government officials and independent experts in London and Washington, is to give India an extra stockpile of enriched uranium fuel that could — if India so decides — be used in new hydrogen bombs (also known as thermonuclear weapons), substantially increasing the explosive force of those in its existing nuclear arsenal.

    Such a move would be regarded uneasily by India’s close neighbors, China and Pakistan, which experts say might respond by ratcheting up their own nuclear firepower. Pakistan in particular considers itself a fierce military rival, having been entangled in four major conflicts with India, as well as frequent border skirmishing.

    New Delhi has never published a detailed account of its nuclear arsenal, which it first developed in 1974. Until now, there has been little public notice, outside India, about the construction at Challakere and its strategic implications. The government has said little about it, and made no public promises about how the highly enriched uranium to be produced there will be used. As a military facility, it is not open to international inspection.

    But a lengthy investigation by the Center for Public Integrity, including interviews with local residents, senior and retired Indian scientists and military officers connected to the nuclear program, and foreign experts and intelligence analysts, has pierced some of the secrecy surrounding the new facility, parts of which are set to open next year. It makes clear that it will give India a nuclear capability – the ability to make many large-yield nuclear arms – that most experts say it presently lacks.

    And if these tasks require the trampling of the kavals, so be it.

    The independent Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates that India already has between 90 and 110 relatively low-yield nuclear weapons, as compared to Pakistan’s estimated stockpile of up to 120. And China, to India’s north, is estimated to have more than 260 warheads.

    China successfully tested a thermonuclear weapon — involving a two-stage explosion, typically producing a much larger force and far greater destruction than single-stage atomic bombs — as long ago as 1967, while India’s scientists claimed to have detonated a thermonuclear weapon in 1998. But test site preparations director K. Santhanam said in 2009 it had “fizzled,” rendering the number and type of such weapons in India’s arsenal uncertain to outsiders.

    India, according to a recent report by former Australian nonproliferation chief John Carlson, is one of just three countries that continue to produce fissile materials for nuclear weapons (the others are Pakistan and North Korea). The enlargement of India’s thermonuclear program would more clearly position the country alongside Britain, the United States, Russia, Israel, France, and China, which already have significant stocks of such weapons.

    Don't miss another investigation
    Sign up for the Center for Public Integrity's Watchdog email and get the news you want from the Center when you want it.

    Email address
    [​IMG]
    Eleanor Bell/Center for Public Integrity

    ranked India’s nuclear security practices 23rd, only above Iran and North Korea. An NTI analyst told the Center India’s score stemmed in part from the country’s opacity and “obfuscation on nuclear regulation and security issues.” But the group also noted the prevalence of corruption in India and the insecurity of the region: the rise of Islamist jihad fronts inside India and in nearby Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as home-grown leftist insurgencies.

    “Many other countries, including China, have worked with us to understand the ratings system and better their positions,” but India did not, the analyst said.

    Spokesmen for the two organizations involved in the Challakere construction, the Defense Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), and the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), which has played a leading role in nuclear weapons design, declined comment about the government’s ambitions for the new park.

    Like the villagers nearby, key members of the Indian Parliament say they know little about the project. One veteran lawmaker, who has twice been a cabinet minister, said his colleagues are rarely briefed about nuclear weapons-related issues. “Frankly, we in Parliament discover little,” he said, “and what we do find out is normally from Western newspapers.” In an interview with Indian reporters in 2003, Jayanthi Natarajan, a former minister for environment and forests and past member of a parliamentary committee on defense and atomic energy matters, said that she and other members of Parliament had “tried time and again to raise [nuclear-related] issues … and have achieved precious little.”

    a copy of personal correspondence between the two, seen by the Center.

    This was the very moment India was also negotiating a deal with the United States to expand nuclear cooperation. That deal ended nearly three decades of nuclear-related isolation for India, imposed as punishment for its first atom bomb test in 1974. U.S. military assistance to India was barred for a portion of this period, and Washington also withheld its support for loans by international financial institutions.

    The agreement was highly controversial in Washington. While critics warned it would reward India for its secret pursuit of the bomb and allow it to expand its nuclear weapons work, supporters emphasized language in which India agreed to identify its civilian nuclear sites and open them to inspection by the IAEA.

    India also said at the time that it would refrain from conducting new atomic weapons tests. And in return for the waiving of restrictions on India’s civil nuclear program, the President was required to determine that India was “working actively with the United States for the early conclusion of a multilateral treaty on the cessation of the production of fissile materials for use in nuclear weapons.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April 2006 that the deal would not trigger an arms race in the region or “enhance [India’s] military capacity or add to its military stockpile.” Rice added: “Moreover, the nuclear balance in the region is a function of the political and military situation in the region. We are far more likely to be able to influence those regional dynamics from a position of strong relations with India and indeed with Pakistan.”

    Opponents of the deal complained, however, that it did not compel India to allow inspections of nine reactor sites known to be associated with the country’s military, including several producing plutonium for nuclear arms. The deal also allowed 10 other reactor sites subject to IAEA inspection to use imported uranium fuel, freeing up an indigenously-mined supply of uranium that was not tracked by the international community and could now be redirected to the country’s bomb program.

    Given India’s “need to build up [its] nuclear deterrent arsenal as fast as possible,” it should “categorize as many power reactors as possible as civilian ones, to be refueled by imported uranium, and conserve our native uranium fuel for weapons grade plutonium production,” strategist Krishnaswamy Subrahmanyam, a longtime adviser to the Indian government, notoriously wrote in December 12, 2005, in The Times of India.

    By May 2009, seven months after the US-India nuclear cooperation deal was ratified by Congress, the Karnataka state government had secretly leased 4,290 acres adjacent to Varavu Kaval and Khudapura villages in the district of Chitradurga to the defense research group and another 1,500 acres to the Indian Institute of Science, a research center that has frequently worked with the DRDO and India’s nuclear industry, the documents obtained by lawyers showed.

    In December 2010, a further 573 acres were leased to the Indian Space Research Organisation and 1,810 acres were bought by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. Councilor Karianna said the villagers were not told at the time about any of these transactions, and that the documents, which they saw two years later, “were stunning. We were being fenced in — behind our backs.”

    Srikumar Banerjee, the chairman of India’s Atomic Energy Commission, first offered an official glimpse of the project’s ambitions in 2011, when he toldCNN’s Indian news channel that the enrichment plant could be used to produce nuclear fuel, or slightly enriched uranium, to power India’s heavy and light water reactors. However, Banerjee added that the site would also have a strategic use, a designation that would keep international inspectors away.

    Erecting barricades and draining the local water supply

    The sensitivity of the Challakere project became clearer after the legal team filed a lawsuit in 2012 at the High Court of Karnataka demanding a complete accounting of pasture land being seized by the authorities, only to learn from the state land registry that the Indian army was to be granted 10,000 acres too, as the future home for a brigade of 2,500 soldiers. The State Reserve Police, an armed force, would receive 350 acres, and 500 acres more was being set aside for a Commando Training Centre. The nuclear city close to Challakere would, in short, be ringed by a security perimeter of thousands of military and paramilitary guards.

    In July 2013, six years after the plans were green-lit by Delhi, the National Green Tribunal — India’s environmental agency — finally took up the villager’s complaints. It dispatched investigators to the scene and demanded that each government agency disclose its ambitions in detail. The DRDO responded that national security trumped the tribunal and provided no more information.

    While the IAEA would be kept out, villagers were being hemmed in. By 2013, a public notice was plastered onto an important shrine known as Boredevaragudi warning worshippers it would soon be inaccessible. A popular altar for a local animist ceremony was already out of bounds. The route for a festival of Hiriyara Habba at Khudapura, which celebrated the community’s ancestors, was also blocked.

    [​IMG]
    By the spring of 2014, more than 17 miles of 15-foot-high walls had been built throughout the kavals, catching out villagers who had not been consulted. They were now prevented from grazing their cattle or, in some cases, from reaching holy sites. A few broke through the walls, like here in Voru Kaval. Most were rebuilt immediately and security patrols by a private company now guard them.

    Adrian Levy

    “Then the groundwater began to vanish,” councilor Karianna said. The district is a semi-arid zone, and local records, still written in ink, show that between 2003 and 2007, droughts had caused the suicides of 101 farmers whose crops failed. Now, due to the construction, a critical man-made reservoir adjacent to Ullarthi was suddenly fenced off. Bore wells dug by the nuclear and military contractors as the construction accelerated siphoned off other water supplies from surrounding villages.

    Seventeen miles of 15-foot-high walls began to snake around the villagers’ meadows, blocking grazing routes, preventing them from gathering firewood or herbs for medicine. Hundreds rallied to knock holes into the new ramparts. “They were rebuilt in days,” Karianna said, “so we tried again, but this time teams of private security guards had been hired by someone, and they viciously beat my neighbors and friends.”

    BARC and the DRDO still provided no detailed explanations to anyone on the ground about the scope and purpose of their work, Karianna added. “Our repeated requests, pleadings, representations to all elected members at every level have yielded no hard facts. It feels as if India has rejected us.” Highlighting local discontent, almost all of the villagers ringing the kavals boycotted the impending general election, a rare action since India’s birth as an independent democracy.

    The growing local discontent, and the absence of public comment by the U.S. or European governments about the massive project, eventually drew the attention of independent nuclear analysts.

    Don't miss another investigation
    Sign up for the Center for Public Integrity's Watchdog email and get the news you want from the Center when you want it.

    Email address
    zeroed in on the construction site in the kavals. The journal IHS Jane’s Intelligence Review was separately doing the same in London, commissioning Kelley, formerly of the IAEA, to analyze images from the Mysore plant.

    What struck both of them was the enormous scale and ambition of the projects as well as the secrecy surrounding them. The military-nuclear park in the kavals, at nearly 20 square miles, has a footprint comparable to the New York state capital, Albany. After analyzing the images and conducting interviews with atomic officials in India, Kelleher-Vergantini concluded that the footprint for enrichment facilities planned in the new complex would enable scientists to produce industrial quantities of uranium, although the institute would only know how much when construction had progressed further. As Kelley examined photos of the second site, he was astonished by the presence of two recently expanded buildings that had been made lofty enough to accommodate a new generation of tall, carbon-fiber centrifuges, capable of working far faster to enrich uranium than any existing versions.

    Nuclear experts express the productiveness of these machines in Separative Work Units, abbreviated to SWUs (pronounced swooz). Kelley concluded that at the second site, the government could install up to 1,050 of these new hyper-efficient machines, which together with about 700 older centrifuges could complete 42,000 SWUs a year — or enough, he said, to make roughly 183 kilograms (403 pounds) of weapons-grade uranium. A new H-bomb, with an explosive force exceeding 100,000 tons of TNT, would require just 4 to 7 kilograms of enriched uranium, according to the International Panel on Fissile Materials, a group of nuclear experts from 16 countries that seek to reduce and secure uranium stocks.

    Retired Indian nuclear scientists and military officers said in interviews that India’s growing nuclear submarine fleet would be the first beneficiary of the newly-produced enriched uranium.

    India presently has one indigenous vessel, the INS Arihant, constructed in a program supervised by the prime minister’s office. Powered by an 80-megawatt uranium reactor developed by BARC that went critical in August 2013, it will formally enter military service in 2016, having undergone sea trials in 2014. A second, INS Aridaman, is already under construction, with at least two more slated to be built, a senior military officer said in an interview. Each would be loaded with up to 12 nuclear-tipped missiles. The officer, who was not authorized to be named, said the fleet’s expansion gained a new sense of urgency after Chinese submarines sailed across the Bay of Bengal to Sri Lanka in October 2014, docking in a port facility in Colombo that had been built by Chinese engineers.

    Asked what else the additional uranium would be used for, a senior scientist at the DRDO, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said it would mostly be used to fuel civilian nuclear power reactors and contribute to what he called “benign medical and scientific programs.” The government has not made such a promise publicly, however, or provided details. India does not have to report what it does with its indigenous uranium, "especially if it is not in the civilian domain,” said Sunil Chirayath, a research assistant professor at Texas A&M University who is an expert on India’s civilian nuclear program.

    A senior Obama administration official in Washington, who was not authorized to be quoted by name, expressed skepticism about the government scientist's private claim. The official said that India’s civilian nuclear programs, including power stations and research establishments, were benefiting from new access to imported nuclear fuel (after the embargo’s removal) and now require almost “no homemade enriched uranium.”

    India has already received 4,914 tons of uranium from France, Russia, and Kazakhstan, for example, and it has agreements with Canada, Mongolia, Argentina and Namibia for additional shipments. In September 2014, Prime Minister Tony Abbott of Australia signed an agreement to make Australia a “long-term, reliable supplier of uranium to India,” a deal that has sparked considerable controversy among Australians.

    The International Panel on Fissile Materials estimates that the Arihant class submarine core requires only 65kg of uranium, enriched to 30 per cent. Using this figure and the estimated capacity of the centrifuges India is installing in Mysore alone — not even including Challakere — Kelley concluded that even after fueling its entire submarine fleet there would be 160kg of weapons-grade uranium left over, every year, or enough to fuel at least 22 H-bombs.

    His calculation presumes that the plant is run efficiently, and that its excess capacity is purposeful and not driven by bureaucratic inertia – two large uncertainties in India, a senior U.S. official noted. But having a “rainy day” stockpile to deter the Chinese might be the aim, the official added.

    a new Indian doctrine adopted in 2003 — in response to Pakistan’s increasingly aggressive nuclear posture — altered this notion: “Nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage.”

    The official said: “China has long had a thermonuclear capability, and if India is to have a strategic defense worth its salt, and become a credible power in the region, we need to develop a similar weapon and in deployable numbers.” U.S. and British officials affirmed that they have been aware of this discussion among Indian scientists and soldiers for years.

    Asked for comment, Vikas Swarup, India’s official spokesman for the Ministry of External Affairs in New Delhi did not respond to email or calls.

    In an interview, General Balraj Singh Nagal, who from 2008 to 2010 ran India’s Strategic Forces Command within its Nuclear Command Authority, declined to discuss specific aspects of the nuclear city in Challakere or the transformation of the Rare Materials Plant close to Mysore. But he said that keeping pace with China and developing a meaningful counter to its arsenal was “the most pressing issue” facing India.

    “It’s not Pakistan we are looking at most of the time, like most in the West presume,” General Nagal said. “Beijing has long managed a thermonuclear program, and so this is one of many options India should push forwards with, as well as reconsidering our nuclear defense posture, which is outdated and ineffective. We have to follow the technological curve. And where China took it, several decades before us, with the hydrogen bomb, India has to follow.”

    The impact of the U.S.-India deal and India’s fissile production surge on the country’s neighbors can already be seen. “Pakistan recently stepped up a gear,” the recently retired British Foreign Office official said. He pointed to an increase in Pakistan’s plutonium production at four new military reactors in Khushab, a reprocessing plant known as Pinstech, near Islamabad, and a refurbished civilian plutonium reprocessing plant converted to military use in Chashma, as well as “the ramping up of uranium production at a site in Dera Ghazi Khan.”

    The retired foreign office official added: “India needs to constantly rethink what deterrence means, as it is not a static notion, and everyone understands that. But the balance of power in the region is so easily upset.” The official said that in choosing to remain publicly silent, the United States was taking a risk, evidently to try and reap financial and strategic rewards.

    Officials at the Pentagon argued before Washington reached its 2008 nuclear deal with India that lifting sanctions would lead to billions of dollars worth of sales in conventional weapons, according to a U.S. official privy to the discussions.That prediction was accurate, with U.S. exports of major weapons to India reaching $5 billion from 2011 to 2014, and edging out Russian sales for the first time.

    “But the U.S. is also looking for something intangible: to create a new strategic partner capable of facing down China,” and so India has taken advantage of the situation to overhaul its military nuclear capability, the British official noted. Pushing back China, said the official, who has worked for 30 years in counter terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and nonproliferation, especially in Southern Asia, is regarded as being “in everyone’s interest.”

    White House officials declined to comment on this claim on the record. But Robert Einhorn, the State Department’s former top nonproliferation official, told the Carnegie conference in March that some officials in the Bush administration had the ambition, in making a nuclear deal with India, to “work together to counter China, to be a counterweight to an emerging China.” He added that in his view, that ambition has not been realized, due to India’s historic insistence on pursuing an independent foreign policy. He also said the nuclear deal had unfortunate repercussions, because other nations concluded that Washington was playing favorites with India.

    [​IMG]
    Amrit Mahal cattle graze here, a breed brought to the district by the kings of Mysore, and deployed by them against the forces of he British empire in the 18th century, when they were used to tow cannons and chariots. Today, their descendants require the grasslands, herders say. They worry their cattle will starve, herding families becoming destitute, after the grazing areas were walled in by builders working on the new nuclear city.


    Adrian Levy

    In Challakere, construction continues despite a ruling by the National Green Tribunal on August 27, 2014, that called for a stay on all “excavation, construction and operation of projects” until environmental clearances had been secured. Blocked roads were to be re-opened with access given to all religious sites, said Justice M. Chockalingham and Dr. R. Nagendran of the tribunal. But when villagers have attempted to pass over or through the fences and walls, they are met by police officers who hand out photocopied notes in English: “Environmental clearances has (sic) been awarded [to BARC] dated 24 July 2014, which is a secret document and cannot be disclosed.”

    Councilor Karianna said: “Still, to this day, no one has come to talk to me, to explain to us, what they are doing to our land,” which he depicted as being at the “epicenter of historic India.”

    The kings of Mysore once used the kavals as a crucible for experimental breeding of the muscular cows, known as Amrit Mahal, recognizable by their ebony hump and ape-hanger horns, which hauled chariots and six-ton cannons into four, bone-crushing campaigns against the British Empire fought in the last three decades of the 18th century. The cattle remain, picking their way between towering rough stone walls and barbed wire fences patrolled by private security guards, while weavers like those in Karianna’s village continue to manufacture thick, black kambli or goat-wool blankets that are bought in bulk by the Indian army for its troops facing down Pakistan and China, and stationed in the thin air of the Himalayas to the north.

    “Is this what ‘national interest’ means?” Karianna asked, looking out over the rolling pasture, enveloped in the red dust kicked up by diggers. “We sit beneath out ancient trees and watch them tear up the land, wondering what’s in store.”

    National security managing editor R. Jeffrey Smith contributed to this article from Washington, D.C.

    Adrian Levy is an investigative reporter and filmmaker whose work has appeared in the Guardian, The Observer, The Sunday Times, and other publications. His most recent books are: The Meadow, about a 1995 terrorist kidnapping of Westerners in Kashmir, and The Siege: The Attack on the Taj, about the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai.
    Copyright: PublicIntegrity.org
     
  20. airtel

    airtel Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,997
    Likes Received:
    6,211


    they are not glorifying our capabilities .................but they are doing Typical commie Anti -India propaganda .
     
    Indx TechStyle likes this.

Share This Page