Connect with us

News

India’s no first use nuclear theology rooted in wars country might fight, touted to be a tactic to discourage enemy strikes

Published

on

Defense Minister Rajnath Singh said that India’s position on the first use (NFU) of nuclear weapons could change in the future, even though it remains committed to the doctrine now, causing controversy with global consequences. It is probably not wise to read too much in the statement, one that simply reflects a long-standing and unfinished debate inside and outside the government. But the debate is not about to disappear.

Why does India have NFU?

NFU was a tough military decision. Despite what the official spokesmen can say, it is not about India being a Gandhian nation.

India’s NFU declaration, made in 2003, has its roots in the type of wars that the country believes it might have to fight. For more than a generation, Indian war-fighting plans have involved exploiting the asymmetry of conventional forces between the two countries and pushing armored formations deep into Pakistan. Faced with such an offensive, the nation led by Imran Khan has made public that it would use nuclear weapons, probably small sub-kiloton devices known as Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNW).

For obvious reasons, India wants to make it as difficult as possible for Pakistan to unleash its nuclear arsenal. Of course, India could retaliate for the use of nuclear weapons by Pakistan, but then Pakistan would retaliate for India’s second attack and both sides will end up without most of their cities. Therefore, India says it will not be the first to use nuclear weapons, which, at least in theory, increases the pressure on the other side so that it does not go first.

What is the case against NFU?

Many Indian experts, including Lieutenant General Balraj Nagal, former head of the Strategic Forces Command, argue that NFU unnecessarily ties India’s hands. Nagal has asked for a new doctrine that is ambiguous or declares a policy of first use. NFU risks India having to absorb unacceptable costs and encourages Pakistan to attack first, knowing that it will receive a free hit, he says. In addition, Nagal argued that India would not need to invest in expensive ballistic missile defense systems to protect itself from a first attack if it abandoned its commitment to the NFU.

In 2016, the then Defense Minister, Manohar Parrikar, supported these arguments and said he did not see the need for India to commit to an NFU commitment. In the 2014 Lok Sabha election manifesto, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had said it would “review and update” India’s nuclear doctrine, although there was no explicit commitment to the NFU.

What’s the case for sticking with NFU?

Those who support the position of the NFU of India argue that even extremely sophisticated surveillance systems cannot be sure that an adversary is about to launch a first attack with nuclear weapons. In addition, it is almost impossible to destroy the strategic arsenal of an adversary, hidden inside hardened facilities, with a first attack. Therefore, the first attacks achieve nothing but precipitate the certainty of a retaliatory attack. In addition, experts such as Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal have argued that some of the arguments in favor of abandoning NFU make no sense. The first use will only expose people and troops to attack, instead of protecting them, he says.

Then, there are the collateral gains of NFU. In 1998, after the Pokhran II tests, the country was placed in the equivalent of the international dog house for criminals. NFU was part of a series of measures that allowed India to gain unprecedented access to technology and participate in the international nuclear regulation system. Losing this would cost much more, say NFU advocates, than the uncertain gains from eliminating the compromise.

How does NFU play on the world stage?

Each state of nuclear weapons has a policy appropriate to its particular circumstances, which means that none, except China and India, have committed to a NFU commitment. France and the United States of America are clear that they are willing to make a first attack, while the United Kingdom has an ambiguous position. In 1964, Beijing joined NFU. In 1993, Russia abandoned the 1982 promise of its predecessor, the Soviet Union, not to be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over the issue. North Korea has not ruled out the first use of nuclear weapons. Israel does not officially admit that it has nuclear weapons, so the question of a doctrine does not arise.

It is worth mentioning that an NFU is something like a check with a later date. Pakistan does not believe that the NFU Indian commitment has real value, just as India would not believe in a Pakistani NFU. Neither China nor India make military plans based on each other’s NFU either.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Priyanka Gandhi reminded of the London Smog

Published

on

Priyanka Gandhi reminded of the London Smog

Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi has suggested to make a law, amidst the furore over pollution situation in Delhi. Reminding him of the London Smog, he said that there was a terrible smog in 1952 in which 12 thousand people lost their lives. Millions of people fell ill. After such a huge tragedy, legislation for clean air passed in London. His gesture was to take similar stringent measures to clear the air from the government. Let us know that Delhi Government has implemented Odd-Even from today, which has got some effect.

 

Priyanka Gandhi told the need to work unitedly for this, avoiding politics completely. A major hearing took place in the Supreme Court on Monday about the rising air pollution in the country’s capital. In this, the Supreme Court made strict remarks that all the concerned state governments have failed to fulfill their responsibilities and action should be taken against the people concerned on negligence.

 

Meanwhile, the National Green Tribuna, taking cognizance of air pollution in Delhi-NCR, has been appointed as the Chief Secretary of Delhi, Chairman of Delhi Pollution Control Control Board (Chairman, Delhi Pollution Control Committee). , Has summoned the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change along with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB).

 

 

Let us know that the situation in Delhi-NCR is getting worse due to air pollution. On Monday also the air quality level in Delhi was around 700, while in Noida, Greater Noida, Gurugram, Faridabad, it was also around 500. Although it remained between 300-400 by evening, doctors are advising people to stay away from Delhi-NCR. Doctors say that people from other states should stay away from Delhi right now, because the current situation here is very bad.

Continue Reading

News

India FTA will not be included in RCEP, decision taken on domestic industries

Published

on

India FTA will not be included in RCEP, decision taken on domestic industries

India has decided not to participate in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement. This information has been received from sources. The agreement did not include the prime concerns of PM Modi, so it was said that India would not compromise its core interests. The RCEP agreement does not reflect its original intent. Result is not fair or balanced. India’s major concerns include inadequate protection against import growth, inadequate interoperability with China, potential loopholes of rules of origin, keeping base year as 2014 and no reliable assurance on market access and non-tariff barriers Not given

 

Sources in the government said that the days are gone when Indian negotiators hollowed out the country under pressure from global powers on trade issues. This time India played on the front foot during the pact. In the meantime, it emphasized the need to address India’s concerns over trade deficit and the need for countries to open markets for Indian services and investment.

 

Sources in the government say that India’s stance is a mixture of pragmatism. It calls for an effort to protect the interests of the poor and benefit India’s service sector. While opening various sectors to global competition has not deterred. It is said that India also did not accept the obligations of Most Favorite Nation (MFN), where India was obliged to give equal benefits to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) countries which it has given to other countries. Where India was obliged to give equal benefits to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) countries which it has given to other countries.

 

PM Modi said, India will not compromise its interests

During the summit, PM Narendra Modi clarified that India will not compromise on its interests in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). He said that India would see if its concerns over trade, services and investment in the RSEP agreement were being fully accommodated. PM Modi said that India clearly believes that the Mutually Beneficial Resep (RCEP), from which all parties derive reasonable benefits, is in the interests of other countries involved in the negotiations, including India.

 

16 countries were to be included in the agreement

The agreement was to be between 10 ASEAN countries (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and six trade countries – India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. ASEAN countries include Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand, Philippines, Laos and Vietnam. In 2012, India had agreed to join it, but due to the increasing cheap imports from China, India’s position has changed now.

Continue Reading

News

Within 6 hours of the Odd Even Scheme being implemented, the SC asked – what is the logic behind it?

Published

on

Within 6 hours of the Odd Even Scheme being implemented, the SC asked - what is the logic behind it?

To control the rising air pollution, the Delhi government has implemented Odd Even Scheme till 15 November, but within hours of its implementation, the Supreme Court questioned it. During the hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court said- ‘You would have understood even if you banned diesel vehicles, but what is the meaning of this odd-even?’

 

What is the logic behind Odd Even Scheme?

During the hearing on the issue of pollution in Delhi on Monday, the Supreme Court said that what is being gained from aud-even and what is the logic behind the implementation of this scheme?

 

With this, the Supreme Court said that till Friday, submit data and records related to Odd-Even to prove that this Odd Even Scheme has reduced pollution in Delhi. The next hearing in this case will now be held on 6 November.

 

Court fired questions

In a hearing on Monday on the Odd Even Scheme, the Supreme Court asked the lawyer of the Delhi government in question that if you stop diesel vehicles to stop pollution in Delhi, then it would be understandable, but behind the implementation of Odd Even Scheme What is logic Along with this, the court also said that on one hand you are prohibiting the running of trains on the road and on the other hand there are running trains. With this, the court said that there is less pollution from the car and what is being achieved by keeping the car at home, because people are traveling by auto or taxi and they also cause pollution.

 

Significantly, the Delhi government implemented Odd Even Scheme from Monday under a seven-point program to fight the poisonous air. Under this, trains of even number ran from 8 am to 8 pm on Monday. The scheme will remain in force till November 15 and a penalty of 4000 will be imposed for violation. Many people and classes have also been exempted under this. For example, women, two-wheeler drivers, ministers, PM-President judges are also exempt. At the same time, Delhi has been exempted from Odd Even Scheme on Sunday.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019-NewsZone. All Rights Reserved.