http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/12/13/indias-nuclear-doctrine-coming-out-of-the-closet/
India’s Nuclear Doctrine: Coming Out of the Closet
Indian defence minister’s penchant
for verbal gaffes has acquired respectability. One strategic community stalwart
has suggested that the defence minister’s voicing of his ‘personal
opinion’ on India’s No First Use (NFU) pledge is designed to build in ambiguity
in India’s nuclear posture. He suggests that for deterrence, it is necessary to
keep the nuclear adversary guessing.
Releasing itself from the NFU
pledge will enable India to build-in the option of nuclear first use in its
nuclear preparedness and posture. A nuclear adversary (read Pakistan) would be
fearful that its nuclear preparations might trigger off India’s preemptive
strike(s). For India, the advantage in Pakistani hesitation to reach for its
tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) is in enabling India to employ its superior
conventional forces to wrap up the Pakistani military, pinch back territory in
J&K and make territorial gains elsewhere.
Currently, India is stumped by
Pakistani brandishing of its TNW. India is hesitant to use its conventional
advantage honed at considerable cost. This has forced India to be boxed-in. The
situation in J&K has turned a full circle back by a couple of decades when
conventional forces were locked in trading blows across the Line of Control.
India would instead like to make its conventional preparations on the
doctrinal, organizational and equipment fronts, count. The latest controversy
over India’s NFU is an instance of India attempting a doctrinal breakout from
the cul-de-sac of Pakistani TNWs.
Analysts have pointed out that an
Indian nuclear posture that is readier-to-go could prove counter-productive. It
would induce Pakistan to go first instead, fearing it would lose its nuclear
capability if were to wait for India’s nuclear first use. Presently, the major
threat India faces is from TNW being used against its forces in case of
incursions that flirt with Pakistani nuclear thresholds. It is not a bolt-from-the-blue
attack or a first strike attempting to degrade India’s nuclear strike back
capability. However, in case India was to rescind NFU, the latter would emerge
as a grave threat.
Therefore, if India wishes to
jettison NFU then it would have to reassure Pakistan that should India resort
to nuclear first use, it would not be in the form of higher order nuclear
strikes. This may be counter-intuitive, but it is well known in strategic
theory that nuclear deterrence and reassurance go together.
Currently, India’s deterrence is
predicated on a ‘massive’ counter strike. India professes to believe nuclear
weapons are political weapons meant for nuclear deterrence and not
war-fighting. This means its nuclear forces are configured for higher order
nuclear retaliation – counter city and counter force and not counter military
targeting. Since higher order strikes are liable to being countered equally
vehemently by Pakistan, higher order nuclear first use by either side would
amount to all-out nuclear war.
This helps with deterrence at the
upper end of the spectrum; that of higher order strikes. However, the promise
of higher order strikes is taken as incredible against TNW use. This is the
conundrum India is in. If India rescinds its NFU without a corresponding change
in its philosophical approach to nuclear weapons - that is, if it continues to believe
these are not for war-fighting - then espying Pakistan reaching for its TNWs,
it will likely go in for higher order - preemptive - first use of its own.
India promises being ‘punitive’
as to inflict ‘unacceptable damage’. This might not be possible any longer in
light Pakistan also maintain strategic weapons, available for higher order
strike back. To ensure that fewer of these get to India, India’s nuclear first
use would require being of first strike levels of attack – first strike defined
as an attempt to tamp down on Pakistani retaliatory capability.
Pakistan is reportedly a step
ahead of India in nuclear numbers and in the variegation of its missiles. It
thus has a second strike capability, enough to deter India’s first strike
levels of nuclear first use. South Asia is in its era of ‘mutual assured
destruction’ (MAD). Therefore, if Delhi is to give up NFU, a pillar of its
nuclear doctrine, it would also require giving up the other pillar of its
doctrine – higher order nuclear use. In a state of MAD, nuclear weapons no
longer deter nuclear weapons but deter only higher order nuclear use.
This means that in case of
nuclear first use preparation by Pakistan, India could get its nukes in first,
but at levels duly cognizant of escalation dynamics. The ability for lower
order strikes does not preclude possession and use of strategic weapons for
higher order nuclear use. Thus, deterrence at the upper end of the nuclear use
spectrum is assured, even as escalation control is enabled by lower order
nuclear use. It would be easier to stop a nuclear conflict before cities have
started being consumed.
As for ambiguity, it is intrinsic
to the nuclear domain. Tom Schelling’s deterrence concept of ‘leaving something
to chance’ implies that since no war has witnessed a nuclear exchange, it is a
domain of which much has been written about, but only vicariously. Going in for overkill in terms of ambiguity can
lead to self-delusion that deterrence will work.
Ambiguity increases the threat of
nuclear first strike under the logic of what Tom Schelling termed, the
‘reciprocal fear of nuclear attack’, defining it inimitably as, ‘he thinks, we
think he'll attack; so he
thinks, we shall; so he will; so we must.’ Consequently, reassuring one’s
own population and the adversary’s nuclear decision maker is also important.
Jettisoning default higher order nuclear use is one such measure.
India’s current government has
questioned many verities of India’s nationhood – such as secularism - and is
known for taking what its supporters regard as ‘bold’ decisions. The Modi
government can and should overturn India’s declaratory nuclear doctrine. The
makeover is in a sense is to move towards nuclear war-fighting. The advantage
of this is in enabling an end to nuclear war at its lowest threshold. South
Asia can only then hope to get away at affordable – even if avoidable - levels
of nuclear war.