India's Nuclear Doctrine

Should India have tested a Megaton warhead during Pokran?


  • Total voters
    159

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,061
Likes
7,706
Country flag
The new document also doesn't explain what is the thresh hold either, whether India would take a hit and then retaliate or just deploying the N tip till launch would be considered as strike.

There is no formal definition to it. It's for various reasons under speculation. Even Menon had once made wrong declaration due to typographical error but the formal definition is still unclear. Which gives India a benefit of doubt to retaliate when the adversary has begin the process for nuclear strike.
Actually it does. Let me point you towards them in the very document.

5
3.2
India’s nuclear doctrine derives from the Constitution of India. The
executive powers of the Indian Union are vested in the Prime Minister, who
is the designated launch authority.
3.3
The Prime Minister (and his designated successors) shall exercise command
and control over India’s nuclear forces.
4.
THE DETERRENT
4.1
India shall maintain a credible minimal deterrent, where credibility
comprises three specific components
-
leadership credibility, force
credibility, and technological credibility.
4.2
The Strategic Forces Command (SFC) shall advise the Prime Minister on the
qualitative and quantitative aspects of credible minimal deterrence, which
shall have to be determined by him/her from time to time.
4.3
In adherence to a policy of no first use, India will not initiate a nuclear strike.
NO FIRST USE
Art 4.3: In adherence to its policy of no first use, India will not initiate a nuclear strike.
‘Initiation’ covers the process leading up to the actual use of a nuclear weapon by an adversary.
This would include mating component systems and deploying warheads with the intet This will
enable the Prime Minister to gain the flexibility to decide upon an appropriate response.
This formulation also avoids the constraints placed on the NFU policy in regard to using the nu-
clear deterrent against WMDs adopted in the 2003 CCS decision
.
Now look at the underlined part. It clearly states that this formulation has been prepared and suggested to overcome the constraints which are there in NFU policy.

Moreover it has been discussed in some strategic talk shows too in LSTV.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,108
Likes
818
Country flag
What I wrote was, in the documents India says, ''India will not be first one to initiate a nuclear strike.'' @Chinmoy


Initiation of nuclear strike means making a decision to press the button. But no where says that India will wait until it gets hit. So If Pakistan launches a BM and India tracks it then India will not wait until it falls. Immediately India will retaliate.


Now since even Cruise missiles and ASM can be fitted with N tip. It is possible that if China launches any CM towards any big cities in India, India may regard it as initiation of nuclear strike by China and as a benefit of doubt may retaliate with nuclear strike, vice versa. In military there cannot be any loop holes that, oh we can't expect Chinese to make a CM N tip missile. Analysis has to be professional.


So use of missiles in this scenario may immediately escalate to nuclear flash point.

Deterrence is not a strategy pursuing victory in a potential nuclear war but avoiding nuclear war at any cost: the number of nuclear weapon possessed by deterrence countries is simply not enough to bring any meaningful victory.

In the case of China nuclear striking India, China has two types of targets: India nuclear weapon nor India city. If Chinese choose to wipe out India nuclear weapon, then 250 Chinese warheads is nowhere close to destroy all of India nuclear weapon (2 to 1). The best result for Chinese is India will still got 20 to 30 warheads left, these warheads can destroy at least 5 Chinese cities with total minimum casualty of 2 million people. So, eventually, Chinese lose all their nuclear weapons, 5 cities and 2 million people, while India lose all her nuclear weapons and couple of thousands of military men. So, CHINESE LOSE.


What if Chinese choose Indian cities as target? Then you will find there is no difference between shoot nuclear missile before or after Chinese warhead explosion because there is no damage to India nuclear force at all. Again, 250 warheads is nowhere close to force India to surrender. If India nuclear weapons can kill 30 millions Chinese before this nuclear strike, now India nuclear weapon still can kill 30 millions of Chinese. And more importantly, after this strike, Chinese is threatened not only by 120 Indian warheads, but also 1000 US and Russian warheads (they will come to disarm Chinese once for all). So, Chinese lose AGAIN.


So, we can draw the conclusion from the above: for deterrence countries, as long as the nuclear war starts, you lose the war already. Who initiates it, who lose more.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,108
Likes
818
Country flag
Cant the same rule be applied to India vs China. Lets say Chinese decide to send their armour and artillery towards India, can India use tactical nukes in Tibet under such a situation to save herself.
Tactical nukes are the waste in this scenario. Himalaya will cause more trouble to Chinese armor column than any tactical nuclear weapon. Indian bombers and artillery can bring more damage to Chinese armors at cheaper costs.
 

kalakaar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
109
Likes
144
Actually it does. Let me point you towards them in the very document.





Now look at the underlined part. It clearly states that this formulation has been prepared and suggested to overcome the constraints which are there in NFU policy.

Moreover it has been discussed in some strategic talk shows too in LSTV.
As per the document, Fall of deterrence happens
When the adversary deploys the N tip then India's deterrence is fallen. And India deploys the N tip too. When adversary presses the button then Indian deterrence is fallen and wouldn't wait till it comes overhead, and India would press the button too. It's simple. I LSTV also they mentioned that India wouldn't wait until it's overhead.

My point is, as India is restricted to NFU, it is adversary who has to understand that they are the first ones who need to fall back and deescalate. Because you can't differentiate between a Ntip and Non Ntip missile. India may press the button before taking the hit to equate the deterrence.
 

kalakaar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
109
Likes
144
Deterrence is not a strategy pursuing victory in a potential nuclear war but avoiding nuclear war at any cost: the number of nuclear weapon possessed by deterrence countries is simply not enough to bring any meaningful victory.

In the case of China nuclear striking India, China has two types of targets: India nuclear weapon nor India city. If Chinese choose to wipe out India nuclear weapon, then 250 Chinese warheads is nowhere close to destroy all of India nuclear weapon (2 to 1). The best result for Chinese is India will still got 20 to 30 warheads left, these warheads can destroy at least 5 Chinese cities with total minimum casualty of 2 million people. So, eventually, Chinese lose all their nuclear weapons, 5 cities and 2 million people, while India lose all her nuclear weapons and couple of thousands of military men. So, CHINESE LOSE.


What if Chinese choose Indian cities as target? Then you will find there is no difference between shoot nuclear missile before or after Chinese warhead explosion because there is no damage to India nuclear force at all. Again, 250 warheads is nowhere close to force India to surrender. If India nuclear weapons can kill 30 millions Chinese before this nuclear strike, now India nuclear weapon still can kill 30 millions of Chinese. And more importantly, after this strike, Chinese is threatened not only by 120 Indian warheads, but also 1000 US and Russian warheads (they will come to disarm Chinese once for all). So, Chinese lose AGAIN.


So, we can draw the conclusion from the above: for deterrence countries, as long as the nuclear war starts, you lose the war already. Who initiates it, who lose more.
You are correct, but my point is different. My point is, two countries have deployed the weapons and since most of the new missiles having range 500km to 1000km can be N tipped. India may press the button as a benefit of doubt on false alert. And same with the Chinese.

So false alert may trigger a nuclear war. This was the most horrific scenario during cold war between US and Soviets.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,108
Likes
818
Country flag
You are correct, but my point is different. My point is, two countries have deployed the weapons and since most of the new missiles having range 500km to 1000km can be N tipped. India may press the button as a benefit of doubt on false alert. And same with the Chinese.
No.
1. As I have proved, deterrence countries will be better off pressing the button after the incoming warhead exploding, there is no benefit of doubt here;
2. The number of nuclear weapons they possess decides that they have no luxury to desclate the situation once they shoot out;
3. Unlike US/Russia, once the nuclear war starts, deterrence countries are the losing side already.

So false alert may trigger a nuclear war. This was the most horrific scenario during cold war between US and Soviets.
No, India and China were not US and Soviet. Both countries never built up their nuclear forces the way US/Soviet did:
1. The nuclear weapons are always controlled by civilian governments of India and China, while US/Soviet army groups commanders partially controlled these tactic nuclear weapons. In other words, these commanders can initiate the tactic nuclear attack in certain situation while Indian and Chinese commanders can't.
2. India and China has no missile mate with nuclear warhead in peace time.
3. There are too many false alert to both US/Soviet early warning system, so even these 2 countries have given up this kind of shooting first, asking question later policy.
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,061
Likes
7,706
Country flag
As per the document, Fall of deterrence happens
When the adversary deploys the N tip then India's deterrence is fallen. And India deploys the N tip too. When adversary presses the button then Indian deterrence is fallen and wouldn't wait till it comes overhead, and India would press the button too. It's simple. I LSTV also they mentioned that India wouldn't wait until it's overhead.

My point is, as India is restricted to NFU, it is adversary who has to understand that they are the first ones who need to fall back and deescalate. Because you can't differentiate between a Ntip and Non Ntip missile. India may press the button before taking the hit to equate the deterrence.
It does happen, but the document has only suggested what should be the steps if it happens. It doesn't imply that it has happen or the suggestions has been implemented. As of now, India's NFU policy clearly mentions that we would be absorbing the first strike.

But it doesn't imply that we have to keep our warhead and launch system in unmated form.
 

kalakaar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
109
Likes
144
It does happen, but the document has only suggested what should be the steps if it happens. It doesn't imply that it has happen or the suggestions has been implemented. As of now, India's NFU policy clearly mentions that we would be absorbing the first strike.

But it doesn't imply that we have to keep our warhead and launch system in unmated form.
Bro how much times does it take for a missile to reach its destination, hardly 15 mins and if there is an alert then in those 15 minutes in the terminal stage it will be met with BMD and if that is missed then India will surely press the button. Whether after absorbing or before the total time would be just 15 minutes. Preparation for launch would start in those 15 minutes.

I agree with you last point.

@no smoking
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,061
Likes
7,706
Country flag
Bro how much times does it take for a missile to reach it destination, hardly 15 mins and if there an alert in those 15 minutes in the terminal stage it will be met with BMD and if that is missed then India will surely press the button. Whether after absorbing or before the total time would be just 15 minutes. Preparation for launch would start in those 15 minutes.

I agree with you last point.

@no smoking
Its not about preparation time or launch time. NFU is all about using. It doesn't mean that India would not be Nuclear ready in case of eventuality. But the thing is when would India press the button.
 
Last edited:

kalakaar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
109
Likes
144
Its not about preparation time or launch time. NFU is all about using. IT doesn't mean that India would not be Nuclear ready in case of eventuality. But the thing is when would India press the button.
And there is also no hard and fast rule in any book in case of confirmed BM launch India may launch it simultaneously. As rule one says, when deterrent falls, India's deterrent would fall immediately when adversary launches a BM. Can you disagree with that? It is upto to the adversary that don't even bring their BM close to launch sequence.
 

indus

Living in Post Truth
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
2,462
Likes
7,793
Country flag
What can be the number of nukes required to bring India China equation to MAD....
 

Flame Thrower

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,677
Likes
2,700
What can be the number of nukes required to bring India China equation to MAD....
Because it is a waste of money.

Please do go through the America's pain for building(and maintaining) thousands of Nukes.

100 nukes are more than enough (as of today) to make credible minimum deterrence.

When China gets a capable BMD, then we can think of increasing numbers...

Thus I rest my case.
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,061
Likes
7,706
Country flag
And there is also no hard and fast rule in any book in case of confirmed BM launch India may launch it simultaneously. As rule one says, when deterrent falls, India's deterrent would fall immediately when adversary launches a BM. Can you disagree with that? It is upto to the adversary that don't even bring their BM close to launch sequence.
If you are talking about Nuke BM, for India, there is hard and fast rule as of now. The whole hullaboo about revisiting NFU is only because of this hard and fast rule.


Have a look at this. Here is a small snippet of India's NFU.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,108
Likes
818
Country flag
What can be the number of nukes required to bring India China equation to MAD....
Well, in order to reach threshold of MAD, each country need at least over 1000 nukes.
However, when you get there, you will find yourselves getting into a new league - US & Russia league. They will add you into their major targets list since you now have minimum scale to their destruction as well. So, instead of improving your security environment, it is getting worse. In this case, you have to continue to expand your nuclear weapon stock to achieve equation to US/Russia. Finally, you get into an arm race that you can't win since you don't have the necessary uranium resource to build up such a scale of nuclear force.
 

Arihant

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Messages
280
Likes
1,347
Country flag
Well, in order to reach threshold of MAD, each country need at least over 1000 nukes.
However, when you get there, you will find yourselves getting into a new league - US & Russia league. They will add you into their major targets list since you now have minimum scale to their destruction as well. So, instead of improving your security environment, it is getting worse. In this case, you have to continue to expand your nuclear weapon stock to achieve equation to US/Russia. Finally, you get into an arm race that you can't win since you don't have the necessary uranium resource to build up such a scale of nuclear force.
https://www.firstpost.com/india/rep...seless-smack-of-false-propaganda-2577150.html


in response to a question in Parliament, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) informed the house on December 23, 2015 that “as of November, 2015, AMD has established 2,29,936 tonnes in-situ U3O8 (1,94,985 tonnes of uranium) reserves.”


No need to have thousands of nuclear weapons because after using 100 nukes life on the earth will be like hell and most probably half or more population will die within few months because of this. And in sane world No one is going to use nuclear weapon because a single weapon fired on some country will lead to immediate response from the world to stop retaliation if not everyone will be killed on the earth because of world war. No one will be alive. No winner, only looser, and they too not alive.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,108
Likes
818
Country flag
https://www.firstpost.com/india/rep...seless-smack-of-false-propaganda-2577150.html


in response to a question in Parliament, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) informed the house on December 23, 2015 that “as of November, 2015, AMD has established 2,29,936 tonnes in-situ U3O8 (1,94,985 tonnes of uranium) reserves.”
This figure means nothing as it is built based on importation source which has been always monitored by IAEA.


No need to have thousands of nuclear weapons because after using 100 nukes life on the earth will be like hell and most probably half or more population will die within few months because of this.
Well, Soviet planned to use 200 nuclear warheads to disarm China in 1969, they were not stopped by the prospect of nuclear winter but the interference of another nuclear superpower.

And in sane world No one is going to use nuclear weapon because a single weapon fired on some country will lead to immediate response from the world to stop retaliation if not everyone will be killed on the earth because of world war. No one will be alive. No winner, only looser, and they too not alive.
During cold, who do you think can stop US or Soviet to shoot out their nuclear missile? Certainly not the world, but the threat of ten thousands of nuclear weapons from another superpower.
 

Indx TechStyle

War Mongerer
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
13,373
Likes
26,055
Country flag
DRDO develops quick response mobile facility for nuclear incidents
With threat perception of terrorists using weapons of mass destruction increasing, DRDO has developed a mobile facility to help provide immediate

India Science Wire
With threat perception of terrorists using weapons of mass destruction increasing, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed a mobile facility to help provide immediate relief in case of any attack involving radioactive material.
The key equipment in the facility include a whole body radiation counter, storage system for containment of radioactive waste and provision for preliminary decontamination of the affected areas.
Whole body radiation counters are generally large and expensive devices consisting of massive high density radiation shields and sophisticated instrumentation. The new facility helps to avoid the handicap and at the same time provide a quick assessment of the nature of the radiation contamination and its extent. The facility offers the possibility of containerised transportation by any mode, while providing high resolution analysis of the contaminants.

A truck-mounted prototype was on display at the 'Pride of India' expo set up as part of the 106th session of the Indian Science Congress, which is underway here at Lovely Professional University. It was one of the major attractions at the expo, with children and adults, who are attending the conference, making a beeline and clambering up a steel ladder put up at the rear of the truck to have a glimpse of the facility.
Speaking to India Science Wire, Director General (Life Sciences), DRDO, Dr. A.K.Singh,said it takes just about 15 minutes to measure the radioactivity concentration per person and is a field-compatible standalone system.
The DRDO, he said, was also working, among other things, on developing low-cost polyhouses to help improve crop quality and productivity in border and other remote areas as part of an exercise to provide better supply of fresh vegetables, fruits and other food articles for army and paramilitary forces deployed in those areas, besides improving the socio-economic condition of the local population,
"Polyhouses cost about Rs 2-3 lakhs and are based on aluminium and other materials. Our aim is to use bamboo and other locally available material and bring down the costs to Rs 25,000-30,000. We are working to develop polyhouses of different sizes to cater to needs at individual, family and community levels," he added.
Noting that the main agenda of the life sciences division of DRDO was to develop life support technologies to improve combat efficiency, he said DRDO scientists have designed a state of the art backpack with a capacity of 90 kg with a facility to even stow away a rifle. “Indo-Tibetan Border Force has tried it out and they were happy with it”.
Among other things, special types of gauzes and gels have been developed to handle bleeding injuries better and have been tested out by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences “Our goal is to enhance health and well-being of the soldiers even in extremes of environmental and operational conditions, strengthen man-machine interface through human factors engineering, and boost the moral and motivation of troops”.
Asked about the problems that have been found with regards to the biodigesters that were developed by DRDO and were used by railways and other agencies, he said that corrective measures are being taken. "The problem was not with the technology. It had to do with their implementation. For instance, the working of the biodigesters depended upon the kind of bacterial cultures that were used and their quantity. The norms were not been followed properly. In many cases, there was overloading of the system. We are in touch with user agencies to ensure that correct procedures are followed," he said. (India Science Wire)
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top