Comments on: Nuclear Arms in the Indian Subcontinent

By: Matthew Perez

Matthew Perez — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:11:36 +0000

Even if Pakistan’s nuclear armaments are not as powerful as those of India, a nuclear weapon is still a nuclear weapon. In a large city like New Delhi, the destruction and death cause by such a device would be horrid. Although there is a deep resentment between the two countries, I doubt either truly wants to use their nuclear arsenal. They are essentially following the U.S. strategy during the Cold War; deterrence. It would take a drastic action by either country in order to trigger the usage of one of these weapons. For the betterment of people around the world, I am glad for that.

By: Chris Phippen

Chris Phippen — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:04:23 +0000

Again, I’m in agreement. I love that Mike likened the situation to the Prisoner’s Dilemma. I’d say the likelihood of nuclear war between these two is very low. As mentioned above, each knows that the other has the capability, and will use them in retaliation if the other side presses the button first. Pakistan is just trying to equalize the situation because they’re a smaller, underpowered country.

The fact that U.S Intelligence discredits Pakistan’s claims about the number and yield of their nukes makes me think they are bluffing, not just about the size of the arsenal, but that the refusal to sign a first-to-use agreement is also a bluff. Hopefully no one “calls” in this situation.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:06:33 +0000

I think I’d have to agree with Michael. I believe the risk is lower that nuclear weapons would be used between the two countries, than the risk that an extremist group would somehow get them for terrorist activities. This has always been the fear since the Soviet Union failed… Who will get the nukes? I think they’re being used mostly as a deterrent in the same way that the U.S. is using them.

By: Michael Minasian

Michael Minasian — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 00:11:25 +0000

This is an interesting question. Given that the world has never really seen a full fledged “nuclear war” (with attack and retaliation with nukes) it’s hard to estimate the level of involvement of other large nations. However, judging by the response of the worldwide community to the *potential* for countries like North Korea and Iran to having nukes, shows that the rest of the world cares very much about exactly who has these weapons, and their relative stability. Chase makes a great point about outside forces obtaining the weapons which would probably be the worst possible outcome. It seems to me, (perhaps from my jaded worldview) that nuclear war is unlikely from either side currently. Looking at it with game theory, they have a bit of a prisoner’s dilemma on their hands. It seems that both countries realize that they are both better off keeping their nukes at bay. Both countries need to be sure not to back the other into a corner where they use one out of desperation.

By: Frederick Peemoeller

Frederick Peemoeller — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:26:37 +0000

I don’t think these countries will go to a full fledged war anytime soon. The impact of 50-100 nuclear bombs detonating on a country is something that no country in the world is willing to risk. The destruction would be so devastating that a country could never recover, which is why in my opinion, they have so many. Its ironic, but I believe they use these weapons of mass destruction to keep peace between the countries rather than start a conflict.

By: Chase Janvrin

Chase Janvrin — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:45:51 +0000

Jay, I have to wonder, why do you feel it so understandable that Pakistan covets these weapons so dearly? In this day and age, possessing nuclear weapons is nothing more than an invitation to attack or espionage. Pakistan holds inferior nuclear weapons; low grade and of limited range that are capable of being fired by standard canon type guns (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/). Because of this, Pakistan’s arsenal is probably one of the most likely to slip into some terrorist organizations hands, and that is the real threat.

Jordan, I agree with you 100%. If India is to continue to prosper at such an astonishing clip, they must remain stable. A major war, especially a nuclear war, could potentially send them back decades in terms of infrastructure, and respect with in the global business community.

Let’s all hope neither of these scenarios occur, that India and Pakistan continue to work together towards mutual prosperity and sovereignty, and who knows, perhaps one day we’ll see a cricket team of consisting of Indians AND Pakistanis. Hopefully beating a Canadian team…

By: Tim Lynds

Tim Lynds — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:35:34 +0000

- Corrected version. Please use this one and delete the first response.

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would not just be a war between the two countries. Nuclear war can never be an isolated incident between two countries due to the extreme power of nuclear weapons and the negative consequences of using them. This type of war would affect the entire world and would likely draw in the superpowers and others. Both countries know this and hopefully will think of the consequences of starting a nuclear war before any action is taken.

I think it is very possible that this type of war will take place in the future, but tensions would have to escalate to a much higher degree. Let’s cross our fingers and hope they just all get along.

By: Jordan Wente

Jordan Wente — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:55:36 +0000

I think it would take a lot to escalate a full-fledged war between these two countries. A lot is to be said about their current relationship with each other. The longer and longer issues fester the more and more likely a war could arise from these conflicts. With the Indian public still outraged about the Mumbai attack formal diplomacy has become more complicated than ever. In order to keep the threat of war between the two countries at bay it seems diplomatic relations need to be reestablished. According to the New York Times on Thursday India made the offer to start talks with Pakistan in order to resume formal diplomacy. This could signal a step in the right direction that in essence could lessen the threat of war between the two countries.
Pakistan would likely be the first to use nuclear weapons on India but doing so would mean that India could strike back even harder. This seems like a possibility that I doubt Pakistan wants to encounter. Furthermore, the use of nuclear weapons would have severe consequences on either countries relationship with the international community. India is working to becoming an influential global player and future economic growth depends on the stability of the region. It seems to me that the price of using the nuclear weapons is far too high for either country. India is on a path to economic prosperity and with so much at stake can they really afford to go to war?