Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Three Million Would Die In "Limited" Nuclear War Over Kashmir
New Scientist ^ | 5-24-2002

Posted on 05/24/2002 7:49:59 AM PDT by blam

Three million would die in "limited" nuclear war over Kashmir

15:05 24 May 02

NewScientist.com news service

A minimum of three million people would be killed and 1.5 million seriously injured if even a "limited" nuclear war broke out between India and Pakistan, warns a new study discovered by New Scientist.

The estimates are comprised of the immediate casualty list from blast, fire and radiation if only a tenth of both countries' nuclear weapons were exploded above 10 of their largest cities. It does not take account of the inevitable suffering that would result from the loss of homes, hospitals, water and energy supplies, or the cancers that could develop in future years.

Tension between India and Pakistan over the disputed territory of Kashmir has escalated, following an attack earlier in May on an Indian army camp that left 30 dead. Troops are reported to be moving into the area, with up to a million soldiers facing each other across the border. The dispute has seen two full-scale wars and numerous lesser conflicts over the last 55 years.

Fears have centred on a scenario in which an attempt for what India's Prime Minister has called a "decisive victory" could prompt Pakistan, which has far fewer conventional military forces, to launch a nuclear attack. Suggestions that India will allow Pakistan two months to stop cross border attacks by militants have alternatively been interpreted as allowing preparation time for an Indian attack.

Credible and devastating

The US and Asian nuclear researchers investigated the impact of 10 explosions similar to that detonated by the US over the Japanese city of Hiroshima in 1945. They assume that five 15-kilotonne bombs explode 600 metres above Bangalore, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and New Delhi in India, while another five explode above Faisalabad, Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore and Rawalpindi in Pakistan.

They conclude that hundreds of thousands of people would be killed or badly injured in every city, amounting to 2.6 million in India and 1.8 million in Pakistan. The prospect is credible and devastating, warns M V Ramana one of the researchers from Princeton University, New Jersey and an expert on nuclear policy in India.

"It is imperative that the two countries not go to war - however limited in scale. Even the most local conflicts have the potential to escalate into a full-scale war, possibly nuclear," Ramana told New Scientist.

Nuclear arsenals

Estimates of the size of India and Pakistan's nuclear arsenals vary widely, though the most reliable are those that are founded on their stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium and uranium.

The Institute for Science and International Security in Washington DC suggests that India has about 65 warheads made from 310 kilograms of plutonium, while Pakistan has around 40 made from 690 kilograms of uranium.

Most of the weapons are likely to be around the 15-kilotonne range and some of them may not work, says the institute's David Albright. But it is possible to conceive of circumstances in which they could all be fired, particularly if decisions have to be left to individual commanders after a breakdown in communications.

If bombs explode on the ground instead of in the air, the resulting radioactive dust could kill people across hundreds of square kilometres, Albright points out. And because the prevailing winds are from the west, India is more likely to become the victim of its own fall-out than Pakistan.

Rob Edwards


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: die; kashmir; million; nuclear; southasialist; three; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

1 posted on 05/24/2002 7:49:59 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam
Wow - and how long would China sit by in such a circumstance?
2 posted on 05/24/2002 7:58:12 AM PDT by Notforprophet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Scientists are not military analysts.....logic would dictate that nukes would be used against enemy troop concentrations, and NOT over cities...
3 posted on 05/24/2002 7:59:07 AM PDT by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notforprophet
China would probably start shipping both sides more nuc's.

If there ended up being a few hundred million less people to the south of China, it would be much easier for them to culturally colonize just like they did in Tibet.

4 posted on 05/24/2002 8:01:07 AM PDT by eFudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blam
All Muslim warriors need to go to Pakistan to help fight the Indians. Hope Osama is already there.
5 posted on 05/24/2002 8:02:33 AM PDT by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
For Reference:

Hiroshima 12 kiloton
Nagasaki 10 kiloton
India 40-60 kilotons each
Pakistan 15-25 kilotons each

6 posted on 05/24/2002 8:07:25 AM PDT by My Identity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Powder..Patch..Ball FIRE!

7 posted on 05/24/2002 8:07:51 AM PDT by BallandPowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: Notforprophet
Some idle speculation on problems for the US:

- US Troops caught in the cross-fire
- US Troops targeted for revenge by Pakis (logic not required here)
- US blamed (logic not required here)
- US reps (embassy, etc.) caught in the cross-fire (UK ordered evacs yesterday)
- Pakistan's 'humiliation' causes it to lob everything it has at anybody it can find
- US "allies" hurt badly, US aid required
- US staging for Afghanistan from Pakistan becomes more difficult
- Region destabilized (opening for China)
- Another player (China) sneaks suitcase nukes into India
- Global fallout causes (probably unnecessary) panic
- Ripple effect in financial markets causes recession (perhaps depression)
9 posted on 05/24/2002 8:16:12 AM PDT by My Identity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mortin Sult
Allowing yourself to be conquered by your enemies, without dfending yourself, now that's illogical...
10 posted on 05/24/2002 8:23:04 AM PDT by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: ken5050
From my understanding of the conflict the troops are already massed in close proximity. Surely dropping a nuke where it would do most "good" (killing as many enemies as possible) would be counterproductive and kill many of their own troops.

I would imagine that dropping 2 or 3 nukes where the troops are heavily massed in Kashimir, would also, in effect, destroy Kashimir, the region being disputed. The advantage is that Kashimir would be destroyed enought that they wouldn't have to fight over it again.

12 posted on 05/24/2002 8:35:28 AM PDT by frmrda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: *southasia_list
Check the Bump List folders for articles related to and descriptions of the above topic(s) or for other topics of interest.
13 posted on 05/24/2002 9:11:21 AM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mortin Sult
And what does logic have to do with war?

Quite a lot, actually. Assuming that it is Pakistan which has to resort to first use because their lines are overrun by several dozen Indian divisions, the logical targets would be the rear echelons of those troop and armoured concentrations. Suicide is not a logical option for anyone and for them to vaporize Indian cities would insure the incineration of their own population as well.

14 posted on 05/24/2002 9:26:31 AM PDT by katana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: frmrda
a dmz, with a hotzone for a halflife of what, say 500 years or so? That ought to cool em down.
15 posted on 05/24/2002 9:31:04 AM PDT by Robert_Paulson2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: astounded
IMHO it's 3 million fewer Muslims...

Except that's 3 million in both Pakistan and India--in fact, mostly India. So we're talking mostly Hindu and (particularly with Jammu and Kashmir involved) some Buddhist.

17 posted on 05/24/2002 10:53:00 AM PDT by Peter Porcupine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: blam
that's not counting the fallout that would blow all over the world
18 posted on 05/24/2002 1:30:29 PM PDT by alithia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
we are talking about Pakistanis.They wouldn't blink at killing civilians
19 posted on 05/24/2002 1:32:10 PM PDT by alithia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson