Interestingly, the first news that I got of India’s successful launch of the long-range Agni V missile on April 19, came in a phone call from a journalist in faraway Warsaw, who wanted a Pakistani perspective on it. Apparently, the 5000 kilometre range was creating ripples within a radius that would take in Eastern Europe, Russia and much of China. Launched from Nicobar Island, Agni V could knock at Australia’s door.
Reactions from Washington and Beijing were notable for pragmatism. America set aside its usual rhetoric about proliferation—used aggressively only few days earlier when Pyongyang carried out a failed test of a long-range delivery vehicle; it virtually welcomed another big step taken by India towards balancing China’s strategic power. On its part, the Chinese decided not to be alarmed by the Indian capability to attack even the great economic hub, Shanghai, and declared that as two large developing nations, India and China “are not competitors, but partners”.
In the absence of any formal reaction from Pakistan I told the Polish journalist that Agni V made no material difference to the existing India-Pakistan balance of power or terror. Its expected operational deployment by 2014 would certainly peg India’s power projection several notches higher. As a technology demonstrator, it showed that India could build inter-continental ballistic missiles with a range of up to 10,000 kilometres. The test also augured well for India’s ambitious Space programme. India would expect its western supporters, including the United States, to consider it as a further attribute of power entitling it to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
It did not seem appropriate to me to add caveats to Pakistani sang-froid about Agni V; a cool and serene April morning in Islamabad is no time for apocalyptic images. A quick recourse to Indian sources, however, provided a glimpse into the ecstasy that accompanied India’s latest chariot of fire. This celebration of the culture of power seemed more important than the physical parameters of the test — the range, payload, accuracy, use of solid fuel. In the final analysis, peace is threatened more by the increasing militarisation of imagination in the region than by the tools of war. In Asia, by now, China, India, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea have well developed missile programmes while Japan has high capability without any overt military purpose. Much depends on how these states translate their advances into strategic ambitions.
India’s rise to the status of a major power is assured. What is still not clear is how it would conduct itself in international affairs. Since strategic planners in both, India and Pakistan belong to the realistic school, Pakistan has already built up a formidable deterrent capacity. A sizeable nuclear arsenal is backed by a wide range of missiles. Apart from a further extension of Agni’s outreach, the next frontier for India is the development of anti ballistic missile systems, an enterprise in which it could expect support from Israel and the United States. Pakistan’s cruise missile provides an answer for now. India’s defence budget has major annual leaps. According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, India’s aggregate defence procurement spending between 2011 and 2015 would exceed $100 billion. Pakistan cannot afford this arms race and would probably respond by improving its current delivery systems and by enlarging its tactical weapons programme. Its posture on Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) may further harden.
There are good reasons for Pakistan not to be alarmed by Agni V. As the strategic calculus pioneered by the Cold War goes, it is reasonably secure. Pakistan’s test of Hatf IV Shaheen 1A — a missile with an undisclosed extension of range and greater accuracy than an earlier version of it — on April 25 testifies to the robust programme in hand; the test did not seem to belong to the category of tit-for-tat tests. What should be of concern is that strategic advances may make resolution of outstanding issues more difficult.
India is in a transition from a soft state to a hard state. It may increasingly interpret conflict resolution as an exercise to be undertaken only on its terms. Locked in action and reaction, South Asia can drift away from what it needs most — a culture of peace that demands that regional states abandon the use of force, overt or covert, or the threat to use force in solving problems left behind by history. Neither side can constrain military acquisitions of the other but both of them can jointly accelerate the processes by which their respective power, conventional or nuclear, is not considered a menace. Given the geography, new feats in nuclear weapons and missile technology should be a reason to deepen and expand the recently held conversation between President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 30th, 2012.
COMMENTS (44)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Lala Gee:
"insist on maintaining “status quo”
So, we should capitulate what any Country's outlandish claims. Status quo means not wanting anything from the other side. To be content. Is that so wrong? Will Pakistan hand over the waters of its rivers if India asks so? No, because it is not in its interest. Same reason India will want to maintain status quo.
And, I don't understand your 2nd point. China appreciates it, so does the World India's non-confrontationist approach, especially its no-first-use of nukes, which declared right after testing its weapons in 1998. Pakistan should follow suit, but that means it has to accept the status quo, revision is not possible.
@Lala Gee: "You must come out the wonderland and stop day dreaming because it will hurt none but yourself. Indian is not Mars or on another continent, but at a distance of a stone’s throw. You are and you will always be within the reach of Pakistani missiles and nothing can stop them to reach Indian territory."
You never heard of missile defense systems which can intercept incoming missiles way before they reach their target?!!! India is in the process of setting up one which will be fully operational by 2014. In fact, a few of them have already been sucessfully tested. Google to know more!!!!
@Lala jee what world u talking about the same world who cant see deaths of kashmiris and palestineans and what world u talking about who screams about human and women chidren rights but cant see what happening by the hands of indians and israelis soldies and what world man they see and crys about east temour or south sudans or 9/11 but cant see how many civilions gonna die in iraq or afghan war come on man pakistan is small country but know how to deal with its so called harm less enemies.
@BruteForce:
"Pakistan is well known to want a revision of status quo and has nukes and missiles. Combine this with the mess that Pakistan has been in and will be, you get a very dangerous and potent cocktail of mayhem."
Indians' sense of fairness is so much so marred by their greed, arrogance, and obstinacy that they prefer mayhem over a just solution of disputes and insist on maintaining "status quo"
. *"The reason the World chose to applaud Agni 5 is because of the non-threatening nature of Indian weapon systems. India has a no-first-use policy in place ....""
Even China chose to applaud against whom you developed this missile. Any thoughts why? And, by the way, policies are not a divine scripture which cannot be changed later when the time comes. My suggestion to Pakistan is to follow the same policy of no-first-use.
@Rafi Ka Deewana:
"Besides, Indian forces went into East Pakistan only after India was attacked on the western front by general Yahya Khan."
It is OK to be a "Rafi ka Deewana" but certainly not being an "intellectually Deewana".
@Lala Gee: "So Pakistan has the right to invade India – or any other country for that matter – on the pretext of plight of Kashmiri Muslims, or Muslims of India, or the “Untouchables”, or Sikhs, or Christians? Right? This is exactly what you meant?"
If Pakistani army has to save the Muslims and minorities, it should "invade" Pakistan itself as those Muslims and others need more help than Indian Muslims.
Besides, Indian forces went into East Pakistan only after India was attacked on the western front by general Yahya Khan.
@How?: @Riaz Haq: "Is this a comment or to promote your website."
@Riaz Haq: Sir, my deepest appreciations and thanks for exposing the India's duplicity, hypocrisy, and reality of their propaganda of self proclaimed righteousness by providing undeniable facts, proofs, sound references.
@How?: This is not a website promotion rather an eye opener for some naive Pakistanis who have become victim of the Indian trolls' concerted propaganda assault.
@Riaz Haq: Please do not blame the Indian government for the state of Muslims in India. Stop using selective statistics to fool yourself.
If most Muslims do make the cut in the competition race, they have to introspect and see the reasons. How is it that minority communities like Sikhs, Parsis and Jains are well off. How is it that Sikhs who do not constitute even 3% of India's population constitute 20% of Indian army officers.
@Ajit Sharma:
Please don't blame Muslim victims or Islam in India. Drop your prejudice and deal with facts.
Understand that 22% of women in Pakistan work and vast majority of them are Muslim. Women now make up 4.6% of board members of Pakistani companies, a tad lower than the 4.7% average in emerging Asia, but higher than 1% in South Korea, 4.1% in India and Indonesia, and 4.2% in Malaysia, according to a February 2011 report on women in the boardrooms.
http://www.riazhaq.com/2011/09/working-women-seeding-silent-social.html
I think partition was a great mistake and when i see our peoples working and some dies in the extreme weather of gulf arab riegen i have witniced by my self one pathan was working in saudia arabia digging the earth for water pipe line and died of dehidration shame on india and pakistani leader and makers of two nation theory they cant see our missery and they have kashmir problem left or there bank balances they care about.
@Tanvir Ahmad Khan:
although i agree with ur second part....i strongly suggest u read more about ballistic missiles...they DO NOT depend on terrain
@Riaz Haq: Sir, with due respects to your "in-depth knowledge" about everything Indian, I just want to satisfy my curiosity..have you earned ur Doctorate in Indian Studies ? If yes, then your thesis are just hypothesis, not theories:)regards Joy
Tanvir Khan # Roperia# It is extremely doubtful if the anti-missile defences being built by India would provide fool-proof security. Pakistan already has missiles that are very difficult to track down and neutralise. Our geography would defeat any anti ballistic missile system; the balance of terror would still prevail. The only credible defence for both sides is to build enduring architecture of peace. It takes time to do so. Meanwhile the two close neighbours with very large populations inhabiting provinces close to the border should negotiate confidence building measures and achieve mutual nuclear- missile restraint. I consider the future outlook fair. Tanvir Ahmad Khan
@ Riaz Haq. As Raj and Arijit said, your comments are irresponsible. You quote statistics and dont discuss the reason. You quote Shahsi Tharoor and dont discuss his whole context or article.
This selective journalism will not lead you anywhere. If you want people to go to your website which you are so madly advertising, you need to have courage to be neutral and say the full story. I understand facts, figures and real history is something, Pakistanis are not very good at. But there is internet and other sources available you can may do a bit more research. May be listen to or read what your 'liberal fascists' have to say about India and the history of region. Generally what they say is accepted worldwide and correct.
For example, I will never go to your website now because I know it will be no good but just a biased propaganda.
@Riaz Haq:
pakistan invaded kargil for no reason....infiltrated thousands of soldiers in 1965....forcefully tried to capture kashmir....regular terrorism....threats and rallies against india openly on streets without any intervention from any govt authorities....
understood why india maintains such a large formation on pakistani border??
@Riaz Haq: " ... Among Muslim women, 91% are unemployed, compared with 77% of Dalit women. ... "
Muslims must do two things immediately: (1) first decide which century they want to live in and (2) define in unambiguous terms what is meant by "Islam gives equal rights to women."
Things will automatically fall into place.
@Tanvir Ahmad Khan - There are good reasons for Pakistan not to be alarmed by Agni V.
Absolutely. India never attacked Pakistan. Wehave no use for your country.
@Riaz Haq - You had given statistics on the sad state of Indian Muslims but did not have the courage to analyze the cause and try to explain it to the readers. It's misleading and dangerous.
And by the way that Bangladesh is a different country is not fault of India or Bangladeshis but it's fault of Pakistani administration and military. It's very convenient for Pakistani commentators to point at Indian aggression to cover up their follies and inhuman treatment of Bangladeshis which turned them into so called traitors.
@ Shahid: Who are you kidding?
The sad state of India's Muslims was well documented by Sachar Commission which said that Muslims are now worse off than the Dalits in India. Some 52% of Muslim men are unemployed, compared with 47% of Dalit men. Among Muslim women, 91% are unemployed, compared with 77% of Dalit women. Almost half of Muslims over the age of 46 ca not read or write. While making up 11% of the population, Muslims account for 40% of India’s prison population. Meanwhile, they hold less than 5% of government jobs.
http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/12/muslims-indias-new-untouchables.html
Please . . . let us keep Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh as separate countries. We don't want any part - whether it be east or west - of any country. Just accept the LOC the way it is and we are set for years to come. Peacefully.
India’s hostility toward Pakistan? How many times India has attacked Pakistan compared to the number of times Pakistan has attacked India?
@Riaz Haq: Even if india occupies Pakistan hpotheticaly which it would never do as Pakistan could never have come into being without congress's approval. It would still be a win win situation for people of Pakistan. If 200 million muslims can leave under secular India why not another 180 million.After all we were one nation and country untill 1947.As Iqbal; said Srea jhan se acha hindustan hamara. India would never dream of adding so many muslims to its population so don't worry about that
@ How?: No, it's to set the record straight about India's hostility toward Pakistan.
It's based on the fact that India tried to stifle Pakistan by blocking its share of Rs. 55 crores from sterling reserves due in 1947, and released it in 1948 only when India's ploy didn't work.
India invaded and divided Pakistan in 1971. There would have been no Bangladesh without Indian intelligence infiltration in East Pakistan followed by outright military invasion.
India's support of anti-Pakistan Northern Alliance is aimed at hurting Pakistan.
Given the terrain between India & China, the thousands of Indian tanks and artillery pieces India is gathering would be absolutely useless for mountain warfare. These are part of war prep against Pakistan in the plains of Punjab and deserts of Sind.
Of India's 33 infantry divisions, twenty-four are on Pakistan borders. Of India's three armored divisions, all three are arrayed against Pakistan borders. Of India's three mechanized divisions, all three against Pakistan borders.
So Pakistan's threat perception from India is real, not imagined.
Pakistan has to move very cautiously as it rightly tries to pursue detente with India.
http://www.riazhaq.com/2009/05/musharraf-on-cnn-gps-with-fareed.html
Frankly, Sir, I don't give a fig for hard or soft and sound-bites like that. I only want to ask one question as a boring old economist: how much is this costing us? Never mind India. I am not interested in India, I AM interested in Pakistan and what the poor of this country have to forego (the opportunity cost if you will) of this stupidity and madness. .
@Roperia: Once these Ballistic Missile Defense are deployed in every major city, Pak nukes will become useless and so will your $2.5 billion maintaining them. They all will be blown in the sky without reaching India.
In India 626 million and in Pakistan 40 million people defecate in the open. But the middle class of both countries feels no shame when it cheers at the testing of missiles. Instead of wasting billions on these useless projects, toilets should have been provided to millions of people so they could defecate respectfully and hygienically.
@Riaz Haq: Is this a comment or to promote your website.
While it is obvious for India's neighbors to analyze India's intentions and motivations for the future, it is a bit ridiculous for Pakistan to continually question India's commitment to peace when it has been Pakistan that has repeatedly provoked and waged covert and over wars against India for most of its existence.
India is a responsible state where the leadership, the military and indeed all government functionaries are held accountable to the people of India for their actions. Rogue operations, personal crusades and campaigns of hubris are not tolerated in India. Intelligent agents, past or present cannot run secret wars, carry out personal agendas or harbor terrorist leaders and mafia dons.
Unlike Pakistan that saw General Pervez Musharaff launch a campaign to capture Kargil and provoke nuclear war with India for his personal glory and without the permission of the Pakistani President or any elected representatives, India's military or even the Indian Prime Minister can engage in such adventurism without a clear and urgent necessity to do so that can be supported by the public. Even after 26/11 attacks which killed hundreds of Indians by Pakistani handlers, India acts with more restraint and wisdom than any Pakistani leader could ever manage. Today, there are rallies in Pakistan by radicals that attracts hundreds of thousands of illiterate and semi-educated Pakistanis indoctrinated on the Islamic propaganda of hatred and narrow minded ideologies of "Islamic nationalism" that call for the destruction of India, etc. Yet there are hundreds of articles that question if India is committed to peace ?? THAT is hypocrisy!
@Arijit Sharma: Imprisoning people for changing lanes without a signal would bankrupt India.
@shahid: "India has no intentions to violate pakistan’s geographical boundries"
The history and the current posture and concentration of Indian forces along Pakistani border says otherwise. http://www.riazhaq.com/2009/04/indias-hostility-toward-pakistan.html
Pakistan needs to completly review its policy towards India with the following considerations. #1. India has no intentions to violate pakistan's geographical boundries. #2. India is ten times bigger than Pakistan and Pakistan does not always have to compete with India to prove that it has equal status. #3. Pakistan cannot exists if it does not changes it's status from Islamic republic to a secular democracy. #4. India's help is vital to eliminate Islamic extremism from Pakistan the more closer we become to India the more middleeastern influence can be eliminated from Pakistan. #5.Pakistan can eliminate it's defence expenses drasticaly if India is no more considered a threat.
@Riaz Haq: Since you quoted Shashi Tharoor, you should have provided context.The tile " India is super poor not super power" was used by newspapers and is not attributable to Tharoor himself. He also said "he would rather describe the two countries (India and CHina) as being on the way of becoming significant powers." http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/nation/south/india-super-poor-not-superpower-says-shashi-tharoor-244.
I don't think anyone in India would have a problem with his statement. No-one thinks India is a superpower today but we DO believe that India is on its way to become a significant power. While many social metrics need improvement, some metrics that are on way to significant improvement are school enrollment, infant mortality rate, access to good drinking water.
Nice paper to read here. It surely promote India in Pakistan whenever it get a chance. At the same time it makes sure to break-a-leg or two of Local Pak Life Realities while skipping any bad news from India. So much concern for the correction of Pak System sometimes with a "giggle & a wink" by E.T. make a citizen realize true meaning of "freedom of press".I ask God! Why only in Pakistan_ anything that bring good news in other countries only bring misery, pain & resentments for it's inhabitants? Did we call it upon our self by our self, when, how? Why our garden grows thorns & poison berries from the same plant it produces fruits for others.
I'm surprised to read a fairly balanced article where the writer acknowledges that Pakistan had nothing to do with this missile.
I'd like to know the author's perspective on the Ballistic Missile Defence technology India has developed and is deploying in its major cities. The first one is bound to operational by end of 2013 around New Delhi.
The reason the World chose to applaud Agni 5 is because of the non-threatening nature of Indian weapon systems. India has a no-first-use policy in place, essentially meaning that it has no intention of attacking any power with its nukes and missiles and use it for strictly defence purposes.
Thats simply not that case with China and Pakistan. China seems like a revisionist state but its actions, at least on the Indian border, do not suggest this. Pakistan is well known to want a revision of status quo and has nukes and missiles. Combine this with the mess that Pakistan has been in and will be, you get a very dangerous and potent cocktail of mayhem.
A nice thought provoking article. Peace in South Asia remains a fairy tale at least in the near future.
It will be interesting to see, though, how the South Asian demographics turn out to be when US leaves from Afghanistan and Pakistan turns to damage control mode yet another time as we saw in 1990's.. Hopefully we will get more rational ally in Kabul, not just Anti-Taliban or Taliban, but perhaps a mix of both.
Pakistan & India, however, would remain giving lip service with extraordinary military spending & advancements under the tables. Pakistan needs to keep walking with head down, continue building all the "in-progress" mega projects from Iran-Pakistan pipeline, Neelam-Jehlum Project, Basha dam project, off-shore wind power projects with Turkey, new reactors in Khushab & Karachi, advancing its defense manufacturing abilities working alongside Chinese etc. These should be our blueprint of the future. Peace does not come easy. It always needs insurance, an economic & military insurance. We'll get there!
I think Mr. Khan is being taken in by the false western and Indian media narrative of India emerging as "superpower". I think a more realistic assessment is being offered by Indian diplomats and writers like Sashi Tharoor who recently said that "India is superpoor, not superpower" and Ramachandra Guha who wrote that “India should not try to be a dominant and powerful country, but a less discontented nation.”
http://www.riazhaq.com/2012/02/can-superpoor-india-become-superpower.html
Dear Mr Khan, Pakistan already has missiles which can cover whole of India. Agni 5 was made keeping China in mind. We now have the capability which we did not hve earlier.
However, the use of these missiles is only as a deterrent as the chance of Nuclear War is very low
India pakistan are now beyond the Enemy line & they know that time to think above that....
" ... India is in a transition from a soft state to a hard state. It may increasingly interpret conflict resolution as an exercise to be undertaken only on its terms. ... "
We'd also like India to turn into a hard state internally with zero tolerance for anybody found breaking the law. Heck yeah, I'd be o.k with people getting lengthy prison terms for changing lanes without a turn signal.