India's Nuclear Doctrine

[Sabir]

still it cant give 100% gurantee. May be in future something will be developped to protect a country totally from any hostile projectile. But with current technology risk will always be there.

reviewing no first use policy will be a stronger detterent than present one.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Nuking another country is no joke. Just because we "suspect" that the other side might nuke us, we can't justify emptying our arsenal to create a wasteland of the other country.

Intelligence about a probable nuclear attack on our country can never be fool-proof. Secondly, our first strike can't assure destruction of all launch pads of Nuclear missiles. If if we manage to, there's always an aerial route.
Our first strike will provide the perfect reason for the other side to put in everything that they've got.

Nobody wants a nuclear war. Nor us, nor the Pakistanis.

we have three avenues to choose from in a retaliatory strike so this policy is backed by power to implement it. This is a hypothetical scenario that should never happen we were all one people not too long ago though many have forgotten it.

 

[Soham]

If our major cities are the targets for pak nukes what are our targets???(other than their installations)

There's a difference between the Indian POV and the Pakistani POV, and that difference should, and will remain.
Our doctrines are based on annihilation of the Pakistani Army and not the civilians.


P.S. Read Yusuf's signature.

 

[Daredevil]

how would we be sure it is not a conventional strike? our intelligence would have to be 100% perfect.

Any ballistic missile firing will be construed as a nuclear attack as there is no way to verify if it is a conventional or nuclear attack. Because the mating of warheads to the missiles can be monitored by satellites/humint/elint etc, we will be in a position to know if they are going for a nuclear attack or not. Then we can take necessary decisions to handle the situation.

 

[Yusuf]

If our major cities are the targets for pak nukes what are our targets???(other than their installations)

It will be detected like i said. Their nukes are noton hair trigger alert. They have to assemble the nukes andvthen mate it with the missile and then fuel the bird. Long enough time for detection by intel.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

reviewing no first use policy will be a stronger detterent than present one.

interesting point Sabir just reviewing the no first use poliy has a psychological impact.

 

[Daredevil]

still it cant give 100% gurantee. May be in future something will be developped to protect a country totally from any hostile projectile. But with current technology risk will always be there.

So does the first strike by India. We have to take our chances and I believe we are on the right side.

 

[Sabir]

It will be detected like i said. Their nukes are noton hair trigger alert. They have to assemble the nukes andvthen mate it with the missile and then fuel the bird. Long enough time for detection by intel.

in that case we will have confirmed excuse to throw what we have.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

views very well expressed by all the participants.

 

[Daredevil]

reviewing no first use policy will be a stronger detterent than present one.

Reviewing NFU policy will be a big blunder if you ask me especially when India is not fit enough to carry out a crippling first strike. It will also lead to a lot of misinterpretation of our intentions and might lead to a chaotic situation especially with China.

 

[Yusuf]

Seriously we cannot even think of reviewing our NFU policy as our nukes are not just for pakistan. Any decision on our part will force china too to have a second look at it's own policy.

We cannot lose our nukes in a first strike on pakistan and have none remaining for china. Remember we have been discussing a two front war in this forum. If we finish our nukes in pakistan, we are naked against china.

 

[Soham]

in that case we will have confirmed excuse to throw what we have.

You aren't getting the point. A nuke strike is useless unless assured.
If the enemy manages to save any of the launch sites or systems, we are going to be the aggressors who initiated the second nuclear holocaust.

 

[Daredevil]

With respect to Pakistan, by declaring NFU policy, India has put the ball squarely in Pakistan's court, any nuclear attack will be the sole responsibility of Pakistan and that will create that much more pressure on Pakistan in preventing nuclear attack on India.

 

[Sabir]

So does the first strike by India. We have to take our chances and I believe we are on the right side.

Its about preventing the one that is bent to come and save lives. striking a larger area where you are anticipating the missile is going to be lunched from is more dependable than putting your bet on a ABM. What will happen next can be thought. But first you have to take on the first one.

 

[Yusuf]

in that case we will have confirmed excuse to throw what we have.

What will you target there if you know of an impending strike? Launch against their population? Doesnt serve any purpose does it? They will still have the missiles to launch against our population.

We don't need nukes to take out their nukes. Air strikes can take care of that.

 

[Yusuf]

Its about preventing the one that is bent to come and save lives. striking a larger area where you are anticipating the missile is going to be lunched from is more dependable than putting your bet on a ABM. What will happen next can be thought. But first you have to take on the first one.

You are wasting nukes on just probabilities.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

With respect to Pakistan, by declaring NFU policy, India has put the ball squarely in Pakistan's court, any nuclear attack will be the sole responsibility of Pakistan and that will create that much more pressure on Pakistan in preventing nuclear attack on India.

very true but any disagreement brings up this threat from the pakistani side, then play the victim and run to the international arena and try to make india look like the aggressor in the disagreement.

 

[Daredevil]

Its about preventing the one that is bent to come and save lives. striking a larger area where you are anticipating the missile is going to be lunched from is more dependable than putting your bet on a ABM. What will happen next can be thought. But first you have to take on the first one.

We can prevent most of them by ABM. Most of their missile launching sites will be secret and well protected from any attacks (may be in bunkers!!!). Even nuclear weapons may not take them out. There is no 100% guarantee this way either.

We have more plus points in NFU policy than in First strike policy.

 

[Sabir]

You are wasting nukes on just probabilities.

the way you said it...as if I am really throwing nukes like darts to pakistan.

 

[Daredevil]

very true but any disagreement brings up this threat from the pakistani side, then play the victim and run to the international arena and try to make india look like the aggressor in the disagreement.

Disagreement in what sense?. Now we have cold-start strategy, where we will have their lands even before they run to their masters and other international fora without crossing the nuclear threshold. Of course, I'm here assuming that Pakistan will be the offenders. India will not attack without a reason.