The short-range ballistic missile Hatf-IX (Nasr) was termed a “weapon of peace” by the Director General of Pakistan’s Strategic Plans Division, Lt-Gen (retd) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, after its successful flight test. This year, Pakistan has conducted several tests of ballistic and cruise missiles that can deliver nuclear and conventional payloads at short and medium ranges.
Over the years, India had developed a doctrine to fight limited wars without crossing Pakistan’s nuclear threshold. India christened this policy as the Cold Start Doctrine. New Delhi has now started distancing itself from this doctrine and has replaced the moniker with the seemingly benign term, Proactive Defence Strategy. Some believe that India’s limited war thinking has been influenced by two phenomena. One, Pakistan’s 1999 attempt to retake territory in Kargil and internationalise the Kashmir issue. Two, conduct surgical operations to punish Pakistan for Mumbai-2008 type attacks, which it believes were not the deeds of non-state actors. Pakistan’s short-range ballistic and cruise missiles seek to deter India from contemplating war even if it has limited territorial and political aims.
The Western experience with short-range missiles brings up two concerns. One, these missiles pose challenges in command and control. Two, there is always a possibility that the use of short-range missiles would quickly escalate into a nuclear war. In Pakistan’s case, the control for these short-range weapons would presumably remain centralised and the orders to use them would emanate from the National Command Authority (NCA) that is chaired by the PM. The test of Hatf-VIII (Ra’ad) provided evidence that decision-makers at the NCA have the capability to effectively control all strategic assets with round-the-clock situational awareness in a digitised network centric environment. Indeed, short-range missiles increase the risk of nuclear war and this works as deterrent between rational adversaries.
If the reports about the successes in the flight tests of the short-range missiles were correct, Pakistan would logically follow up with simulated tests of different types of warheads these could carry. With technological prowess to build smaller warheads, Pakistan would inch towards making delivery systems for submarine platforms and multiple, manoeuvrable re-entry vehicles that could beat anti-missile defences. India is already experimenting with nuclear submarines and developing missiles for these. If Pakistan follows suit, both states would be deterred from a full-blown nuclear war.
It is ironic that Pakistan has to resort to developing weapons of peace. A Russian proverb captures the irony, doveryai, no proveryai, which roughly translates “trust, but verify”. While Pakistan would continue its efforts to build trust, it would not blink in keeping an eye on its adversary and reciprocate in developing weapons of peace.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 27th, 2012.
COMMENTS (35)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Rana Amjad
There are no false illusions. Pakistan has always achieved greater results on and off the battle field with far less resources at its disposal. Despite repeated efforts, India has not been able to destroy Pakistan until now only because India has effectively lost every war badly. Its leaders know this and survive by misleading poor and starving masses by making empty accusations and threats.
@Zafar: I agree with Zafar. Most of the comments on the article reflect lack of knowledge and pre-disposition. I wonder how many of these gents know that India has also developed short-range weapon called Prahaar. No body noticed it because, the Western commentators want Indian money and market - its all politics. Turn the pages of subcontinent's history - who did the first blood? Who nuclearised South Asia? Who has the largest military budget? Its not Pakistan...
Deterrence in notional but comes through tangible measures for creating psychosomatic prohibitions on an adversary. More so, Tactical Nuclear Weapons were largely considered as element of stability during the East-West confrontation in Europe, and going by this analogy these weapons are expected to perform the same function. However, nuclear weapons are regarded as political weapons and their utility lies in their none use and prevention of war, and this is what Pakistan appears to be pursuing. Well done Zahir, you have aptly highlighted the issue from a different angle.
Get real Mr. Author! People like you feed PK generals about false illusions of victory, which they take seriously & attack India.
"While Pakistan would continue its efforts to build trust, it would not blink in keeping an eye on its adversary and reciprocate in developing weapons of peace."
Truer words were never spoken.
If this missiles are weapons of peace & what are weapons of destructions? Still we have learned nothing & keep calling these monsters as weapons of peace.
Let's assume India attack Pakistan and Pakistan respond with small nuclear weapon of peace or some Pakistani general like Musharraf resort to some misadventure with nuclear attack on India. What will be the aftermath?
No guarantee that radiation effect of bomb won't be felt in Pakistan given the proximity with India. Even if India does not respond with nuclear arm for some reason, World won’t wait. US will wipe out Pakistan from world map. If India responds with Nuclear weapons, Pakistan will not be able to withstand the blow and wiped out from world map too. Even US and India both show restraint and does not use nuclear weapons, World will make sure Pakistan disintegrates.In any predictable/unpredictable scenario Pakistani state sponsored terrorism menace will end.
Please stop living in illusion and pray for true peace. Live and let live.
Some Moments of Truth: Logically India Think about Pakistan nothing more than a " Failed State". Pakistan's Budget as a whole county is less than what India Spend on their Army. Your weapons never have helped you in last 4 wars and they will never help you no matter what would you do. Take my words, in few years you will request India to sit and talk to you and India will not even listen a word. Sorry to say but your master degree in Defence will not protect me.
India called its first nuclear weapons test "Peaceful" nuclear explosion and set the tone for arms race in South Asia. Chengappa wrote a book entitled "Weapons of Peace" and the U.S. called their huge ICBM the "Peacemaker". So much for the names. What's significant is the possibility of the use of these weapons that can have a cascading effect with disastrous consequences. Nuclear weapons are designed to kill en-masse and thats why even half rational and half clever adversaries never used it - except the U.S. in 1945, once they knew no one could retaliate. Nukes almost deter effectively but leave room for misadventures like Indian Cold Start Doctrine. The author has a valid point that Pakistan "reluctantly" entered the fray i.e. in self defence, which is a right entrusted by the UN to all states. Conversely, Indian 1974 and 1998 tests were unprovoked and China is used a bogey because Indian nuclear weapons' ambition dates back to 1940s. South Asia does not need Weapons of Peace, rather it needs massive proliferation of Weapons of Aggression: socio-economic development, CBMs, disarmament, nuclear restraint regime and good governance. Will India and Pakistan shed peaceful means to aggressively raise the standard of living of billion plus people?
Scary! Future military leaders are taught this propaganda at NDU! No wonder they live in their own paranoid bubble where they are strategizing about nuclear weapons, but then complain they dont have the resources to tackle terrorists!
Why everry one got problem with pakistan missile programme what about others in the world are they are not dangerouse to world peace .......?
How about a strategic entry vehicle for North Waziristan to tackle the rag tag fanatics?
very well done written article, no doubt writer rose the good logical issues. History is witness that in south Asia region, India is the responsible of arms race.
"If Pakistan follows suit, both states would be deterred from a full-blown nuclear war." if India build more and more weapons then it would be compulsory for Pakistan to build sufficient weapons in order to deter India, and its integrity as well.
the famous proverb that "If you want peace, Prepare for war"
Get ready to use your weapons on the crazies who will invade from the West. India will come up with fancy ideas like 'Cold start Doctrine', 'Proactive Defence Strategy' or whatever else they can imagine. But make no mistake, the ones who will implement these fancy sounding strategies will come in from the West. Hope these tactical weapons can be used then. Or Maybe they can just be handed over after surrendering.
I find the end particularly amusing
While Pakistan would continue its efforts to build trust, it would not blink in keeping an eye on its adversary and reciprocate in developing weapons of peace. Where do these guy live? What goes on in their heads? Do they not wonder what could be the reasons that the government and establishment of Pakistan are not trusted by anyone at all in this world? When I come accross a premise so distorted, ignorant and far from reality together with the apparent conviction of these fools I get worried about the future of my children.@salman: " ... The development of tactical nuclear weapons like ‘Nasr’ has been a major leap forward in this regard and has made India to resconsider its strategic options. ... "
The way things are going, you will end up using your tactical arsenal on Afghanistan.
Wow, I couldn't believe I was reading this.....wish I could somehow go back in time to stop myself from reading this....also this is beyond scary that this is what our boys with their toys teach at the NDU...no wonder such great and wondrous ideas such as strategic depth and kargil operation e.t.c were designed and implemented and executed....even now I was reading google's chairmans note on Pakistan....he said the army was trying to explain the difference between extremism and fundamentalism and how they dont like extremism but support fundamentalism...these gems from army generals....they should all be locked up in some pagal khana with video games to act out all their fantasies.
Security is the prime national interst of every nation and more so for pakistan having a history of hostilities with its neighbor. Pakistan will continue to defend its prime national interest for as long as the threat lingers. The development of tactical nuclear weapons like 'Nasr' has been a major leap forward in this regard and has made India to resconsider its strategic options. The analogy of being a 'weapon of peace' is self evident in the purpose being served that is non other but to promote peace.
With you as a master’s student at the Strategic and Nuclear Studies Department of the National Defence University, Islamabad .. Pakistan will not require India / USA / Israel to diintegrate ... People like You have already put a foundation to it ...
" ... decision-makers at the NCA have the capability to effectively control all strategic assets with round-the-clock situational awareness in a digitised network centric environment… "
Which movie is this scene from ?
Why waste money on missiles in the poor country when you have plenty of "non state" actors for cheap?!
weapons of poverty?
Pakistan is preparing overtime for their imagined scenario of India's aggression and intention to take over or disintegrate Pakistan. All the while their threat perceptions are slowly being realized and have come true, not on the eastern front but from the western front. Those realities are being brought about by their own progenies called the Talibans who were nurtured by Pakistan , again to face the imagined fears about India. What an irony and what a colossol failure on the part of Pak army and think tanks.
Give funds to Higher education Commission it's worth more important than the weapon of peace.
"both states would be deterred from a full-blown nuclear war." - if sense prevails
"...decision-makers at the NCA have the capability to effectively control all strategic assets with round-the-clock situational awareness in a digitised network centric environment..."??? In a country that doesn't have electricity for half the day? Get real.
Only proof that the NDU's job is to produce graduates who can shroud our Army's paranoid actions in intellectual mumbo-jumbo. Each of these missiles is worth the education of several thousand Pakistani children; also, each is worth more than the $12 million allegedly stashed in a Swiss account by our President. That particular 12 million has the whole country abuzz, but these several million blasted away monthly by our Army never seem to register. India should ideally spend her resources elsewhere also, but that is their problem. If they aspire to be a world power on the basis of WMD, I reckon they can afford to do it far more than we can. 'Weapons of Peace' indeed. The original justification for these weapons of peace was that they would remove the need to keep up with India in military capability & secure our defense permanently. Mind commenting on how that played out, army scholar?
whatever term you use for these weapons.... they are NOT going to save pakistan in future
It is important for author to know that a significant section of the world believe Pakistan may disintegrate. Living with fear from india is not even the 10th most important aspect for you. If you have country, then you have an army. The question is do you have a country with a govt? Pakistan has aready lost here.Another act of terror, the story is closed.Forget about developing weapons. If your adversary thinks your nation is worth fighting,it makes sense. But they think you are nuisance so you will get punished no matter what you have!!
The concept of a limited nuclear exchange is not practicable -- the two countries are too close together making response times (ie decisions) almost immediate. Further -- Pakistan isn't in the same league as India - may not be popular concept but never the less is true. India is already committed to a ballistic missile shield, nuclear subs etc -- and Pakistan doesn't have the technology nor money to compete. India is competing with China -- Pakistan is competing with the Taliban.
We have to shift our Indian centric attitude of defense. we need to set global priorities just like what India is doing nowadays. we even need to go for ICBM'S as well.
Something unreal. A country, that cannot make railway locomotives, a country that hasn't got a car manufacturing unit (it has assembly units), a country that can't produce steel, a country whose best university ranks more than 2000+, a country that hasn't got any papers published in reputed journals, can produce missile after missile. India takes years to perfect a missile and Pakistan takes weeks. Something really odd.
A most erudite piece Mr. Kazmi. I thank you for bringing to the fore another point of view that has been missing from these pages for a while. Devising nuclear policy is always a divisive (esp. in a country with so many acute problems as Pakistan) and can lead to much jaw jaw amongst drawing room analysts. I am glad that an academic actually studying this realm has finally penned a piece. I sincerely hope that you'll continue to write for the ET, for you have a right to portray your point of view in an intellectually sophisticated and academically sound manner as demonstrated here. Similarly it would be interesting for somebody to write a response opinion piece within the realms of the academia without huffing and puffing and writing empty words. As for the rather macabre comments that are sure to ensue in this section, I hope that serious and intelligent gentlemen and gentlewomen will ignore them!