(Indian) Defense Secretary warns of nuke retaliation

The Times of India ^ | 6.2.02 | Reuters Wires

[mhking]

Defence Secretary warns of nuke retaliation

REUTERS [ SUNDAY, JUNE 02, 2002  11:55:50 AM ]

NEW DELHI: India would retaliate in the event of a nuclear strike by Pakistan, and must be prepared for mutual destruction on both sides, Defence Secretary was quoted as saying.

In an interview with the weekly magazine Outlook, which hit news stands on Sunday, Yogendra Narain said India was prepared for conventional war turning nuclear.

"But Pakistan is not a democratic country and we don't know their nuclear threshold," he said. "We will retaliate and must be prepared for mutual destruction on both sides."

On Saturday, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf sought to calm international fears that a military stand-off with India could escalate into nuclear conflict, saying it would be unthinkable.

With a million soldiers massed along the border, there are fears that war could be triggered by another attack against India by Pakistan-based militants.

In response to such an attack, Narain said surgical strikes by India would be the "realistic option", not all-out war. And they could come at three hours' notice.

Such strikes would target militant bases in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

"Surgical strikes are the realistic option," Narain said.

"But we also know that there will be retaliation on other parts of the border from Pakistan. It'll escalate and will not be confined to one region."

New Delhi accuses Islamabad of fomenting violence in Kashmir by arming and training militants.

It says there are dozens of militant camps sheltering the rebels across the border in PoK.

Pakistan denies Indian charges and says it only provides moral, political and diplomatic support to the legitimate Kashmiri freedom struggle.

India has ruled out first use of nuclear weapons, while Pakistan has not.

Tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals were triggered in December after an attack on Parliament which New Delhi blamed on Pakistan-based militants.

They flared again last month after a raid on an army camp in Jammu, which killed 34 people including the three attackers.

[Lessismore]

Pakistan has a large, devoutly Islamic military. Its military has on several occasions taken over the country. It is armed with the "Islamic bomb". It has a radical Islamic clergy, with a significant fraction being of the Wahhabi-Deobandist Taliban variety.

It is by far the most dangerous country in the world -- the very hub of the Axis of Evil.

Having India defeat Pakistan, occupy it, and liquidate its officer corp and clergy would be a very positive development.

[VA Advogado]

This is rather scary. Anyone think about moving their stock investments into something a little more stable? You can bet the market is going to drop like a lead balloon if this place lights up.

[VA Advogado]

This is more frightening than anything that has occured in many months, and the blame for a lot of this can be laid right at the door of the Clinton administration.

How in the world can you blame Clinton? No one is to the right of me in blaming that dunce for the things that he's done, but I dont see how this one gets stuck on Clinton. We're dealing with Muslims for God sake. They're completely wacked out.

[Arleigh]

You are both assuming that India & Pakistan are 100% in control of their nukes. But it is my understanding that the intelligence capabililties and command and control infrastructure of both countries are rather rudimentary. Pakistan, as I understand it, has purposefully created a "Doomsday Device" by parcelling out control of its nukes to generals in the field so that there is no incentive for an Indian decapitation strike. There is some debate as to whether there is even a working "hotline" between the leadership of the two countries.

So, the situation may not be like the carefully crafted Cold War realpolitik between US and USSR, but more like a game of chicken between two teenagers who don't know how to drive. Even if one "backs down," there still might be a horrible crash.

[Lessismore]

I used to read Pournelle's column in Byte, but I haven't read his science fiction.

[VA Advogado]

Now conventional warfare could very likely break out, but escalation to suicide is very unlikely now. Musharif's statement yesterday was basically a backing down, so the direction has been changed.

The problem is the Pak's will get crushed in a conventional warfare exchange. Their only option to save face would be to nuke the indians. If the Pak general/president doesn't nuke them, he'll be killed and the military will install someone that will. This shows why our civian control over the military is another wise break set up by our Founding Fathers.

[Arleigh]

A world government will be established by the great powers shortly thereafter to ensure against a repeat.

Yes, I've thought about this, too. A very real, very scary possibility. With 20+ million dead & dying on the sub continent, NOTHING will seem too radical. (Just like Australia basically disarmed its entire population after just one madman went on a shooting spree.)Anyone who disagrees with the need for a world government will be painted as an idiot or a monster.

[VA Advogado]

The danger is that India, in responding to terrorism, might actually assist terrorists and actually make the situation worse in the long run.

India is in a very similar situation as Israel. Hope they have the same self control.

[VA Advogado]

A world government will be established by the great powers shortly thereafter to ensure against a repeat.

Lets kick the UN out of New York and give them a good deal on this soon to be vacant real estate.

[backhoe]

FYI--

[TongRat]

Thanx for the info..sorry it took me so long to reply.

Part of my concern -is that I'm worried that Tanzania would be exposed to significant fallout levels..because my little sister is scheduled to go there as a Christian missionary very soon...given everything that has happened..I can't but help fear for her safety..and since I can't talk her out of going..I'm trying to arm her with as much info about threats in the region-as possible..once again..thanx..and have a good one....

[backhoe]

The "one book" to give your sister is "Nuclear War Survival Skills" by Kearney- it's been updated ( 1999 ) & has info on expedient shelters, and much more. Good luck- the proliferation that happened on the clintons' watch may be coming home to roost...