Hari Sud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,701
- Likes
- 8,331
Would like to clear few things reg our nuke doctrine and deterence. Deterence works till the time nuke is not used. The moment nuke is used tactical or otherwise, its breakdown of deterence. Then its all about response.
Tactical nukes are destabilising in nature. If India also decides to field tactical nukes it will be lowering the nuclear threshold in case of a conflict. Our nuclear doctrine covers all aspects of nuke attack. It includes the use of nukes on Indian forces on Indian or enemy territory. In case the deterrent breaks why should India match with what the adversary did to us. Our response mentions massive response(MR). Paki using a tactical nuke is an enough reason to send them to stone age. And we do not blow up the world, we only blow up Pakis. Also our doctrine follows counter value response which means we will prefer to nuke Paki millitary installations rather than cities thus limiting casualties and decapitating it for further attack and bring it to negotitiation on knees. Coming to MAD it is for super powers who can survive multiple nuke hits. It was created for USA vs USsR equation. Pak cannot survive a second nuclear attack. It will be finished by the first retaliation itself. IMO our doctrine is fine against Pak. The only improvement required was removal of NFU which probably has been done (as Parrikar hinted). So now India should not wait to be nuked in order to retaliate but should act preemptively. That is how a nation should secure its safety.
Yes, the first nuclear weapon means a massive response. No other advice taken.