'Pak Assesses India Has Material for Over 2,000 Nuclear Warheads'

[Alien]

'Pak Assesses India Has Material for Over 2,000 Nuclear Warheads'

Pakistan has assessed that India has enough fissile material to build more than 2,000 nuclear warheads, a media report said today.

The apex policy-making body for Pakistan's strategic programme, the National Command Authority (NCA), noted that India's rapidly growing nuclear programme and absence of a conflict resolution mechanism were upsetting strategic stability in the region.

The situation was forcing Pakistan to maintain 'full- spectrum deterrence capability', the Dawn reported.

"Contrary to international estimates which give a watered down view, Pakistani assessment is that India has enough fissile material, both reactor and weapon-grade plutonium, for more than 2,000 warheads," the report said.

It cited a paper published by the International Institute of Strategic Studies this year that noted: "New Delhi's plutonium stocks also continue to pile up; according to one Pakistani assessment, by the end of 2013 India had produced enough weapons- and reactor-grade plutonium (0.8-1tn and 15tn respectively) for 2,000 warheads."

The NCA meeting, held yesterday, was presided over by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and attended by Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, and Advisor on National Security and Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz among others.

The meeting reviewed the regional security environment and was briefed on fast-paced strategic and conventional capability developments taking place in the neighbourhood., the report said.

Pakistan's reference to the speed with which India is developing its nuclear programme follows reports by US think- tanks Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Stimson Centre which said Pakistan had the fastest growing nuclear programme and could have the third largest nuclear stockpile within five to 10 years.

The meeting agreed that Pakistan should maintain full- spectrum deterrence capability in line with the dictates of credible minimum deterrence against all forms of aggression.

http://www.outlookindia.com/news/ar...aterial-for-over-2000-nuclear-warheads/912464

 

[Blackwater]

Just a excuse and fooling world to increase their Nuke arsenal

 

[Mikesingh]

Ok, but we don't need more than 50 nukes of nominal yield to destroy the whole of Pakistan. These are enough to send Pakistan back to the stone age. The only survivors would be Pakistani cockroaches!

 

[Sylex21]

Pakistan producing more nukes is probably very good for India strategically. Nukes are very expensive to produce, protect and maintain, siphoning badly needed funds from Pakistani conventional forces.

Right now the west is obsessed with Muslim terrorism and nothing stresses them out more than Pakistani nukes falling into terrorist hands. India being perceived as the "peaceful nuclear power" and Pakistan being precieved as aggressively producing more and more nukes is very good for India's image and very bad for Pakistan's internationally.

 

[A chauhan]

One, only one Nuke slips from the hands of Pakistan to the terrorists, and Pakistan is doomed !!

It'll be stripped off from it's nuclear power status by the rest of the world.

 

[Indian Devil]

Khwaja Asif must have read,,,, "101 ways to raise funds for NCA by giving false threat of India to Pakistan "... and Voila, Funds tripled..,..

 

[warrior monk]

More BS from Pakistan
Pu-240 contributes 360 neutrons per second per g of Reactor grade plutonium compared to about about 66 neutrons per second per g of Weapons grade Pu which makes it a significant risk of pre detonation plus weapons grade plutonium are tough to machine it into a pit due to high neutron content , these fools don't even understand how an implosion device operates.

 

[Hari Sud]

Pakis are you not afraid that India has so much nuclear material that Pakistan could be a heap of burnt out heap.

If not then your research is incorrect.

 

[warrior monk]

Pakis are you not afraid that India has so much nuclear material that Pakistan could be a heap of burnt out heap.

If not then your research is incorrect.

Pakistanis know how much fissile material we have and what is our inherent potential for generation of fissile material they are just suicidal , their calculation of our WG Pu to Reactor grade plutonium potential is wrong and misleading at best , they think India is converting RG Pu to warheads is simply an asinine idea to say the least.

 

[Yusuf]

Yawn. We always have had good amount of fissile material. We choose not to weaponize them. What's new in India having enough for 2000 warheads? Western analysts have said this long back.

We are not going to waste money on 2000 warheads.

More is not required when less is enough-Gen Sundarji

 

[Bheeshma]

That stockpile has to power 12-15 Nuke subs and 3-4 nuke powered carriers in future.

 

[Anikastha]

Pakistan producing more nukes is probably very good for India strategically. Nukes are very expensive to produce, protect and maintain, siphoning badly needed funds from Pakistani conventional forces.

Right now the west is obsessed with Muslim terrorism and nothing stresses them out more than Pakistani nukes falling into terrorist hands. India being perceived as the "peaceful nuclear power" and Pakistan being precieved as aggressively producing more and more nukes is very good for India's image and very bad for Pakistan's internationally.

But the point u forgot to mention is some super powers are providing soft loans to pakistan...so that they may able to reduce burden

 

[Illusive]

Yet its pakistan that has the fastest growing nuclear arsenal. If they think that we need 2000 nukes to destroy them, then are fools, if they think their scaremongering is to direct attention of world towards India in a negative way, then they still haven't learnt their lesson.

 

[Yumdoot]

Yawn. We always have had good amount of fissile material. We choose not to weaponize them. What's new in India having enough for 2000 warheads? Western analysts have said this long back.

We are not going to waste money on 2000 warheads.

More is not required when less is enough-Gen Sundarji

Actually it was an American political pundit, who said that and Sundarji repeated that.

Sundarji was also the person who understood that India should either kill all chances of Pakis going nuclear at birth or India should learn to live with it the way India has learnt to live with nukes in the hands of other countries.

Sundarji also believed that having nukes in Paki hands, perhaps would give them some spine and they would stop being so fcuking fearful of India.

Apparently Sundarji was, wrong and right, just like the rest of us. Pakis still remain fearful of our theoretical 2000 bombs.

Only real solution is that the Pakis learn to wake up in the morning and solemnly declare to themselves : "the real strategic problem for pakistan is the small size and nothing can remedy that and further that pakistan accepts the situation as such, in the interest of being a responsible country in this world."

Obviously that would require a cultural change and is somewhat unlikely to happen in a jiffy.

Yo Paki - Yes we can make 2000 actually it could theoretically go upto 16000+ and 16000+ can actually be delivered too with existing delivery assets and design capabilities and you pakis have no way of tracking much of those, should we choose to.

But unlike you we chose and are happy with what we have. First you guys got to learn to be happy with less then perhaps you may even be granted more by allah or be kept stuck at that lesser position, again by allah . But whatever it is, first learn to negotiate with your allah, not with us.

 

[Sylex21]

But the point u forgot to mention is some super powers are providing soft loans to pakistan...so that they may able to reduce burden

Soft loans still need to be paid back eventually. Pakistan is barely able to not default on its debt with the loans it receives. They aren't getting enough to really sustain a ramp up of their nuclear program and prevent their economy from collapsing.

 

[Yusuf]

That stockpile has to power 12-15 Nuke subs and 3-4 nuke powered carriers in future.

No we have more and making more as well after considering those requirements [emoji12][emoji41]

If we choose to weaponize maximum nukes today, we can make 2000 warheads

In Pokhran, one of the devices used reactor grade Plutonium as an experiment

 

[LETHALFORCE]

By 2020 when india utilizes the fast breeder reactors. India could have one of the highest fissile material reserves in the world. Some estimates as high as 700 warheads annually?

 

[warrior monk]

That stockpile has to power 12-15 Nuke subs and 3-4 nuke powered carriers in future.

We have more than that though this is not the issue the goal is to have HEU reactors in our Subs unlike LEU reactors in Russian and Chinese subs which makes it inefficient as low power is transferred to the shafts and has higer SL . Arihant has 44% LEU reactor compared to less than 10% LEU reactor for Chinese subs . US uses 95% HEU reactor in its Virginia class giving it a lifespan of 33 yrs .

 

[warrior monk]

By 2020 when india utilizes the fast breeder reactors. India could have one of the highest fissile material reserves in the world. Some estimates as high as 700 warheads annually?

700 warheads is not possible as it would require nearly 3.5 tonnes of WG plutonium per year which will require 3000 MT Uranium which would be tough , plus we are going slow on our breeder reactors as liquid metal cooled reactors are tough to make only two countries have success in this reactor one is Russia and another India .Continuously chopping the radial and axial blankets would would have to be topped off by MOX fuel to not to hamper the reactor working which will consume our reactor grade plutonium , doing that with one to two reactors is possible but anymore than that will not be possible so there will be inherent trade off between military and civilian usage.
Running partial core plutonium breeding cycle will give us 100 to 190 warheads annually which will be better and less taxing than processing the radial and axial blankets and than topping them off .