Army power between india and pakistan relationship

Power Asymmetry and Nuclear Option in India-Pakistan Security Relations

army power between india and pakistan relationship

Will a new government is Pakistan, only the second democratic handing over of power in the country's year history, bring any change to the. Origins of India's nuclear program dates back to , the nuclear power infrastructure throughout the country. In , India gained military and political momentum over Pakistan, after a. Mass appeal, and military approval, brought Khan election victory He pledged to improve relations with Pakistan's neighbours, India and.

At the time of second Indo-Pakistan war inthere was considerable imbalance in air and naval strengths. Each of these squadrons consisted of 16 aircrafts.

army power between india and pakistan relationship

In addition, nine Russian MIG supersonic fighters were also in service and the number of transport aircrafts and helicopters was more than three hundred. Similarly in naval strength, Indian Navy contained an aircraft carrier, two cruisers, six destroyers and eleven frigates while Pakistani Navy had only a single cruiser, five destroyers and three frigates Rahman, In addition, India achieved numerical and qualitative superiority in mechanized ground forces.

Indian army was expanded from , men and was also equipped with nine mountain divisions Ganguly, India leads Pakistan two-to-one in tanks and three-to-one in modern tank capabilities Lavoy and Smith, India, being geographically large and having more than 15, km of frontiers and 6, km of coastline, has large conventional forces Rajain, According to the analysis of Rodney Jones, Pakistan has two key vulnerabilities at the conventional level Jones, The first vulnerability is that the growing air power imbalance has enabled India to achieve a qualitative advantage over Pakistan.

ByIndia had considerable advantage over Pakistan on inventories of modern and high-performance combat aircrafts, the ratio was 3. This aerial advantage could deny Pakistan control over its own airspace and its ground forces may be exposed to systematic air raids.

Secondly, geography also does not favour Pakistan.

army power between india and pakistan relationship

If India were to attack, Pakistan may possibly be sliced into two portions on its longitudinal axis, south of its own Punjab province. In fact, Pakistan is a narrow country and most of the industrial centres and major cities situate unfortunately close to the Indian border, where there are no geographical impediments such as a major river or a mountain range to slow advancing forces Smith, The primary concerns and anxieties of the international community about the nuclear tests were based on two arguments, the potential to undermine the non-proliferation regime and the possibility of developing Kashmir as a nuclear flashpoint Mudiam, For India and Pakistan, there might be a number of factors that enabled them to acquire nuclear weapons.

It is also sure to mention that all the factors are bound to portray every reason in the name of national security Balakrishnan, Among them, the power asymmetry, the urgent need of self-reliance to safeguard its national security and the aspiration to become a greater power are the most important factors that drove both countries to the path of nuclear proliferation.

army power between india and pakistan relationship

In relation to the command and control structure, the draft report further states that after nuclear weapons are inducted into the armed forces, the Prime Minister would have the authority to release them for use Rajain, Indian intention is to use its deterrence simply to give pause to any would-be attacker or black-mailer Chellaney, In the early s, Dr.

He harboured a vision on seeing India becoming the sixth member of the nuclear club Smith, FromIndia started receiving necessary funds for its nuclear research and nuclear energy development under the auspices of the Department of Atomic Energy Rajain, In JanuaryNehru announced that if adequate resource were diverted, India could make atomic bomb in three to four years Menon, InIndia succeeded in operating Apsara, its first nuclear reactor.

  • Navigation menu
  • Pakistan election: victor Imran Khan hits former ruling party in its heartlands
  • Pak-US ties 'under stress'

The development of nuclear power generation further advanced steadily with the technical assistance from the United States and Canada.

The Canadian-Indian Reactor, U. CIRUS the second research on heavy reactor began operating in while the Trombay plutonium reprocessing plant was constructed in April Izuyama and Ogawa, India considered that while nuclear science and technology was common intellectual property, the use of atomic energy was just a choice of sovereign state Rajain, InNehru announced that although India could make the bomb in two years, it chose not to do so as he did not think an atomic bomb could help India in any of its problems at that time Menon, Politicians in northern India who had strong anti-Chinese feelings and atomic energy scientists with strong techno-nationalistic intentions, maintained that India should carry out its own nuclear tests to counter China Izuyama and Ogawa, From that time onward India began militarizing its nuclear program Rajain, Although India decisively won the third Indo-Pakistan war ofthe actions of India were said to be greatly constrained by the three nuclear powers, the U.

However, the statement should be referred to as the option policy which means that India would continue its weaponization provided that there is a new strategic threat Izuyama and Ogawa, It is said that Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi officially gave permission for the development of nuclear weapons in Izuyama and Ogawa, Raja Menon, a retired Rear Admiral from Indian Navy argues that if Pakistan had not made the nuclear bomb first, India would have never needed a nuclear arsenal against Pakistan Menon, Dixit mentioned that if the Indian initial request to nuclear power states for nuclear guarantee had received positive responses, India would not have gone for a nuclear program.

Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts - Wikipedia

Thus, it is arguable that the nuclearization of Pakistan facilitated Indian nuclear development. Department of Defence believes that India has both the ability of manufacturing complete sets of components for plutonium-based weapons and a small stockpile of such components.

Estimates on the number of nuclear warheads vary from a few to Some believe that India possesses around nuclear weapons stored in component form Squassoni, As inthe Federation of American Scientists estimated that India has a stockpile of around nuclear warheads Kristensen, India is expanding its stockpile and most believe that India probably can deploy a few nuclear weapons within a few days to a week and can deliver these weapons with fighter aircraft.

Soviet-origin MiG Flogger fleet combat radius with external fuel tanks of kmwere also undergoing an upgrade in Kristensen and Norris, As inIndia had three types of land-based missiles that may be operational: The Prithvi could reach almost all parts of Pakistan posing major security risks Perkovich, Agni-I missile with more than km range was deployed with the th Missile Group in Kristensen and Norris, It was deployed with the th Missile Group in Kristensen and Norris, Pakistan has pledged no-first-use only against non-nuclear-weapon states but has not ruled out first-use against a nuclear-armed adversary, such as India Lamont and Bukhari, Pakistan at first sought nuclear program for civilian use.

Under this scheme, the Nuclear Research Laboratory was set up in with the aim of providing research facilities to students Rajain, On 11th Augustthe Pakistani government signed an agreement with the United States on cooperation concerning the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. In the meantime, Indian Prime Minister Shastri stated in response to the Chinese nuclear test of Octoberthat he was in favour of developing nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes.

In addition, the humiliating loss of East Pakistan in the third Indo-Pakistan war of triggered a political decision to embark upon nuclear weapons program. She stated that such a centralised, military-dominated economy prohibited poor or middle class people from accessing more resources, building a recipe for conflict, apart from leading people to turn to Islamist or other right-wing religious groups to try and expand their power.

She added that rather than holding the country together, the army's power exaggerated the existing power of Punjab province and caused conflict in smaller provinces such as Balochistan, whose people resented the domination of both the military and of Punjab. MacDonald, however, expressed optimism that Pakistan's vibrant civil society, as recently illustrated by the Pashtun Long March, would continue its peaceful opposition to the military's influence.

Pakistani military says 'no space for war' with India

In her presentation, Dr. Siddiqa, well known for her book on the Pakistani military, focused on comparing the fledging democracies of Pakistan and Egypt and the role of their militaries. Siddiqa said that her now-famous concept of 'Milbus' military business is not benign wherever it takes place, as no matter how it is justified, it has an inherent illegality because it is meant for the personal benefit of the military fraternity, yet is neither recorded nor part of the defence budget.

She highlighted both key differences and similarities between the Egyptian and Pakistani military systems. According to her, the Pakistan army was much more hierarchical, with fewer chances of coups from within, though in both nations the military had a greater sense of the national good.

Dominance of military turns Pakistan into a failing state, says experts

The fall of the Turkish army was the main focus for military commentator Dr Hamid Hussain, who described the army's view of itself as a doctor tending to the sick child, secularism, that resulted from the marriage of democracy and Islam.

He offered an overview of the Turkish army's role as guardian of the Kemalist tradition and spoke about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's rise to power, and the dynamic between him and the military. Brenner from the University of Surrey spoke on the Myanmar military and the country's move towards democracy in a top-down, military-led transition.

He gave a short history of Tatmadaw's the army's emergence from the struggle for independence from Britain, considering its perception of itself as a 'guardian of the nation' that prevents the Union of Burma from disintegrating, and spoke of how it maintained its economic sources of power through control of assets, resources such as jade and gold, and strategic infrastructure.

Also speaking on the subject of Myanmar was Dr. Khan, Labour MP from Tooting, who has personally witnessed the humanitarian crisis of the Rohingya people in the refugee camps in Bangladesh's Cox's Bazar. Describing what is happening to the Rohingyas in Myanmar as 'nothing short of a genocide', she condemned the West's failure to call to account those who perpetrate such atrocities.

He thanked the panel, and TDF for organising the event, which was, he said, a timely reminder of why democracy is valuable. He urged everyone present to use the analysis of the seminar to consider the dangers to democracy and to think about how lack of transparency and accountability can affect us all, not only those living under authoritarian regimes.