Nasr is a boon for India, while we will lose many thousand troops, we will have a right justification to wipe out pakistan.
Super powers will not be able to stand against India, since we will be doing a "second strike"....... but it will actually be a "first total destruction".
Pakistan does not have a second strike policy, so the reaction time will be extended, and atleast 90% of its warheads would have been already destroyed.
The rest will be taken care by PAD and IAF.
Bro, sorry. Indian NFU policy has a grey area which allows us to launch pre-emptive nuke/neutron strikes if we have credible information that enemy has activated its nuke command to launch strikes on India. Pakistan has only made their survival more difficult by claiming that NASR is nuke delivery platform bcoz the moment we detect its TEL coming out of the storage positions, we will launch nukes to wipe out Pakistan. A nation with NFU must always maintain its nuke forces in complete readiness.
I post here some of my views which are also the policy of GOI.
The first element is to have a clear doctrine stating the conditions under which the Indian State would resort to nuclear weapons. It has to keep in mind the commitment to No First Use and the negative assurances to non-weapon states. This doctrine has to address all threats — state and non-state actors. There is no real basis for distinguishing between tactical and strategic weapons. All nuclear weapons are strategic and the decision to use them is a political step on the escalation ladder. The real distinction is between low and high yield devices.
The declared position of the GOI on NFU etc., takes care of state players. However, as regular warfare is a deterred, there is a possibility of proxy wars through non-state actors both within and without India. Due to ideological ties and possible command of such movements by surrogates or regulars on leave, the state players might not feel they are violating their sovereign commitments of non-transfer of WMD. Under such conditions the doctrine has to treat the sponsors as proxy aggressors and deal accordingly.
In addition it has to take into account the fact that the Revolution in Military affairs (RMA) makes it possible to subject the state to severe degradation with conventional attacks. The NFU pledge could lull an attacker to resort to massive conventional attack without fear of retaliation. Thus the NFU clause has to have a rider that it would not apply when facing a severe defeat. An alternate clause would be that use of force not in accordance with international law or the UN charter would negate the NFU. These take care of aggressions and unlawful use of force. The possibility exists of some powers using fourth generation nuclear weapons, which are not accompanied by nuclear chain reactions. These could be what are termed as micro-nukes and could be used against high value targets. To counter such use, the use of weapons based on fission or fusion or using nuclear materials or by products should be considered as First Use and invite retaliation.
Pakistani nuclear weapons and posture is a proxy extension of China. India-Pakistan nuclear scenario is not a two-sum game, meaning that in case of Pakistani first-strike the nuclear exchange will not be limited between India and Pakistan. A first-strike by Pakistan can only happen at China's behest. The object is to raise the cost of first strike for all aggressors. By having all combat aircraft trained for this mission, but assigned only as needed it would require the aggressor to dedicate a large amount of his assets to first strike. If one takes into account the various military formation facilities, command and control centers, and commercial centers it would require a large number of incoming pay loads which would rule out everyone except the most determined challenger. In other words, in order to maximize the survivability have a large number of facilities where the credible deterrent could be located. When the submarine platform is inducted, the emphasis will shift accordingly. There is a false debate about the 'need to deploy the deterrent' in a de-alerted status — separate the payload from launch vehicles. This is possible only when all NWS (Nuclear Weapon States) go to such a status. As India has threats from a neighbour, which cannot give a NFU pledge, it is not possible to take this step. It would be de-stabilizing and invites an aggressor to launch a first strike hoping for international intervention to prevent retaliation. Some weapons have to be assembled and be in a state of readiness. Not only that, way back in 1993-94, I also underwent training to launch nukes from my aircraft. All fighter sqn of IN are multirole sqns and only IAF has role specific sqns. Even all pilots of IAF flying multirole and strike aircraft are trained to deliver nukes by air for this very reason. Soon we will have ready to launch nukes onboard our subs which will further add to our strong nuke posture and deter anyone from using nukes against us.
