That is not the dilemma he is talking about.There is no dilemma. Indian program is pretty clear now. Bigger ssbn are coming which will be full fledged deterrence vessel with displacements of 12-13k tons. K6 will come with mirv and 6000km+ ranges . India will match Chinese nuke posture even if it can't match conventional military race. Pakistan can chose to field full fleged deterrence itself and in the process can bankrupt itself .
These factors create a “Goldilocks dilemma” for India: Its attempts to boost deterrence stability with China endanger crisis stability with Pakistan. China’s and Pakistan’s reactions to Arihant’s first deterrent patrol were illustrative of this dynamic. China hardly raised an eyebrow because unless India fields a credible SSBN force capable of launching ICBMs that can strike deep inside Chinese territory, it has nothing to fear. Pakistan, on the other hand, was quick to suggest that Arihant dilutes its nuclear deterrent and that it will opt for “cost-effective options” to maintain strategic stability. As Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry claimed, “no one should be in doubt about Pakistan’s resolve and capabilities to meet the challenges posed by the latest developments both in the nuclear and conventional realms in South Asia.” Recent statements by high-level Indian officials calling for elimination of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons through preemptive use of nuclear and conventional forces have only worsened Islamabad’s nuclear nightmares.
How can India achieve a balance between these two strategic imperatives? Regarding China, India should set some limits on what it considers a credible nuclear deterrent, rather than pursuing open-ended nuclear force development. As Rajesh Basrur has argued, India’s deterrent should not be based solely on establishing a credible response; it should also take into account an adversary’s appetite for risk. A limited capability should be sufficient to deter Beijing. India has exhibited such restraint in the past: After China tested nuclear weapons in 1964, Indian decision-makers were convinced that any Chinese nuclear threat or use against India would risk nuclear retaliation from the great powers and that this “minimal risk” was sufficient to deter Chinese decision-makers. Today, Beijing could facilitate a similar rethinking by accepting India as a nuclear power (the current policy of non-acknowledgment may spur India to continue its buildup in order to be taken more seriously) and initiating nuclear confidence-building measures.
That is not the dilemma he is talking about.
China is not Pakistan and the cost of deterrence is not linear.He is talking about how Indian match up to china raises existential crisis for Pakistan and Pakistan seeking to balance Indian advances.
I'm saying Pakistan is welcome to such an costly strategic race.
The same thing applies to china as it races to catch up to USA with new missile and nuke subs It raises issues for India and India builds up its own deterrence further. Yet is china stopping? No.
China is not Pakistan and the cost of deterrence is not linear.
China can match up to the US without going bankrupt. But for pakistan to match India they don't have to spend half as much.
Wrt to china, their nuclear posture is not at all directed at us. As the article says they do not even acknowledge our nuclear capabilities relevance. Honestly, it is a 'minimal risk' and we have achieved enough to counterweight it.
- When you develop sophisticated BMD systems they just increase number of missiles with longer range.
- When you invest billions to develop SSBN they just modify a diesel sub to make it SSB.
When you develop sophisticated BMD systems they just increase number of missiles with longer range.
When you invest billions to develop SSBN they just modify a diesel sub to make it SSB.
Article didnt say china is not bothered with indian nukes or missiles but he was referring to SSBN. NSG brings zero value to indian nuclear capability other than prestige factor.That is why I called the article bullshit. Why won't Chinese consider India nuclear posture when there is unresolved boundary dispute?
Chinese have been complaining about Agni v range they even tried to raise UN resolutions against India on the matter ! They are still resisting Indian entry into nuclear supplier group ! Why do all that if they are truly not bothered about India nukes.
It is the definition.diesel sub doesn't make an ssb
Article didn't mention SSB but I did. You are replying incoherently. The point was how cost of deterrence is not linear and pakistan will not go bankrupt countering us.diesel sub doesn't make an ssb . It's endurance is very limited and so it will be detected and destroyed. It's buying into Pakistani propaganda.
See the irony of it the author says Indian ssbn is not proper deterrence against china but Pakistani diesel ssb is adequate? What kind of logic is that.
Second strike isn't just some shoehorn . You need assurance of survivable of ssb. That's why it has to be nuclear and there have to multiple such subs so that
They can survive in far away seas and that's why they need full icbm so that they can hit the enemy from almost anywhere. Unless Pakistan builds all of that it has no credible second strike all that diesel sub will do is buy some more time .
IFIf the BMD works, then increasing the number of missiles is pointless since SAMs can easily outnumber ballistic missiles.
If the BMD works very well against SRBMs and MRBMs, then the enemy has to build IRBMs even for short range. So one can imagine how much money is required to actually defeat this type of BMD with numbers alone.
Reports say PN is getting Type 039B which has 3,500 ton+ displacement.An SSB is possible only if you have the research and engineering capability to build something bigger than the SMX Ocean, which Pakistan obviously lacks.
Anything less than that is simply meant to be used for propaganda.
The Pakistanis plan to equip SSKs with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles as a counter to India's SSBNs.
Reports say PN is getting Type 039B which has 3,500 ton+ displacement.
Yeah, they build all these missiles and stuff because of their 'research and engineering' !
Whats up with your newfound love with SMX Ocean?
It doesn't work today.We won't go for it if it didn't work. So time will tell. Although work on it has already begun.
I dont think they are going for BM but Babur sub-launched version.It's too small for BMs.
Its just a concept. You have a habit of getting excited about things far too into the future which may or may not happen.It's an amazing sub, with no equivalent among SSKs. Very suitable for operations within the SCS. Too bad we are not getting it.
It doesn't work today.
Its just a concept. You have a habit of getting excited about things far too into the future which may or may not happen.
Article didnt say china is not bothered with indian nukes or missiles but he was referring to SSBN. NSG brings zero value to indian nuclear capability other than prestige factor.
It is the definition.
Article didn't mention SSB but I did. You are replying incoherently. The point was how cost of deterrence is not linear and pakistan will not go bankrupt countering us.
It doesn't matter how survivable it is.
It's an amazing sub, with no equivalent among SSKs. Very suitable for operations within the SCS. Too bad we are not getting it.
My point was that it doesn't work because Pakistan can simply overwhelm it.Well, you were the one who brought it in
Correct, so they have keep the balance with whatever they can.That's because they neither have the capability nor finances to do it.
My point was that it doesn't work because Pakistan can simply overwhelm it.
Correct, so they have keep the balance with whatever they can.
Thus the same ending cycle which the author was referring to.
Perhaps because it's too bloody costly. To Australia it is costing 3 billion usd per sub. We can build actual nuke sub for less.