Jump to content

India-Pakistan Nuke War Card

Recommended Posts

Indian - Pak war from rising tensions - Extinction 

Greg Chaffin 11, Research Assistant at Foreign Policy in Focus, July 8, 2011, “Reorienting U.S. Security Strategy in South Asia,” online: http://www.fpif.org/articles/reorienting_us_security_strategy_in_south_asia

The greatest threat to regional security (although curiously not at the top of most lists of U.S. regional concerns) is the possibility that increased India-Pakistan tension will erupt into all-out war that could quickly escalate into a nuclear exchange. Indeed, in just the past two decades, the two neighbors have come perilously close to war on several occasions. India and Pakistan remain the most likely belligerents in the world to engage in nuclear war. ¶ Due to an Indian preponderance of conventional forces, Pakistan would have a strong incentive to use its nuclear arsenal very early on before a routing of its military installations and weaker conventional forces. In the event of conflict, Pakistan’s only chance of survival would be the early use of its nuclear arsenal to inflict unacceptable damage to Indian military and (much more likely) civilian targets. By raising the stakes to unacceptable levels, Pakistan would hope that India would step away from the brink. However, it is equally likely that India would respond in kind, with escalation ensuing. Neither state possesses tactical nuclear weapons, but both possess scores of city-sized bombs like those used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. ¶ Furthermore, as more damage was inflicted (or as the result of a decapitating strike), command and control elements would be disabled, leaving individual commanders to respond in an environment increasingly clouded by the fog of war and decreasing the likelihood that either government (what would be left of them) would be able to guarantee that their forces would follow a negotiated settlement or phased reduction in hostilities. As a result any such conflict would likely continue to escalate until one side incurred an unacceptable or wholly debilitating level of injury or exhausted its nuclear arsenal. ¶ A nuclear conflict in the subcontinent would have disastrous effects on the world as a whole. In a January 2010 paper published in Scientific American, climatology professors Alan Robock and Owen Brian Toon forecast the global repercussions of a regional nuclear war. Their results are strikingly similar to those of studies conducted in 1980 that conclude that a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union would result in a catastrophic and prolonged nuclear winter, which could very well place the survival of the human race in jeopardy. In their study, Robock and Toon use computer models to simulate the effect of a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan in which each were to use roughly half their existing arsenals (50 apiece). Since Indian and Pakistani nuclear devices are strategic rather than tactical, the likely targets would be major population centers. Owing to the population densities of urban centers in both nations, the number of direct casualties could climb as high as 20 million. ¶ The fallout of such an exchange would not merely be limited to the immediate area. First, the detonation of a large number of nuclear devices would propel as much as seven million metric tons of ash, soot, smoke, and debris as high as the lower stratosphere. Owing to their small size (less than a tenth of a micron) and a lack of precipitation at this altitude, ash particles would remain aloft for as long as a decade, during which time the world would remain perpetually overcast. Furthermore, these particles would soak up heat from the sun, generating intense heat in the upper atmosphere that would severely damage the earth’s ozone layer. The inability of sunlight to penetrate through the smoke and dust would lead to global cooling by as much as 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit. This shift in global temperature would lead to more drought, worldwide food shortages, and widespread political upheaval.¶ Although the likelihood of this doomsday scenario remains relatively low, the consequences are dire enough to warrant greater U.S. and international attention. Furthermore, due to the ongoing conflict over Kashmir and the deep animus held between India and Pakistan, it might not take much to set them off. Indeed, following the successful U.S. raid on bin Laden’s compound, several members of India’s security apparatus along with conservative politicians have argued that India should emulate the SEAL Team Six raid and launch their own cross-border incursions to nab or kill anti-Indian terrorists, either preemptively or after the fact. Such provocative action could very well lead to all-out war between the two that could quickly escalate.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indo-Pak nuclear war will escalate globally and destroy the planet

Caldicott 02, Founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility

[Helen, The New Nuclear Danger: George W. Bush’s Military-Industrial Complex, p. X]

The use of Pakistani nuclear weapons could trigger a chain reaction. Nuclear-armed India, an ancient enemy, could respond in kind. China, India's hated foe, could react if India used her nuclear weapons, triggering a nuclear holocaust on the subcontinent. If any of either Russia or America's 2,250 strategic weapons on hair-trigger alert were launched either accidentally or purposefully in response, nuclear winter would ensue, meaning the end of most life on earth. 



Chinese soft power controls Indo/Pak tensions

Naseer and Amin, Assistant Professor in the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies & Berkeley Journal of Social Sciences, 11 (Rizwan and Musarat, 1/1/11, “Dynamics of Balance of Power in South Asia: Implications for Regional Peace” http://www.berkeleyjournalofsocialsciences.com/Jan%202.pdf)

ABSTRACT: South Asia is geopolitically and geo strategically important due to unique location. Starting from Russia to Down China, India and Pakistan are four nuclear powers. One shares border with the other nuclear actor. Security is very important in this nuclear armed belt. Any event can lead India-Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war. If the Balance of Power is maintained in the region it may create an environment of mutual deterrence. As cold war between US and USSR remained a cold war. Dynamics of balance of power are very important in South Asia. Whenever the Balance of power of the region got disturbed there happened a war between Pakistan and India. China as a biggest stake holder in Asia plays a role in maintenance of Balance of power in the region. Theoretical framework: This World is anarchic. All the states are sovereign actors and there is no central government in International society of states. Every state struggles to maximize its power in the anarchical global system. If States do not acquire power they can become subservient to other powerful states and will lose their security and prosperity. Anarchical structure thus compels states to increase their power, because security and physical survival cannot be divorced from power maximization. As a result, the competition for power becomes a natural state of affair in international politics1 . States, especially small states, often cannot achieve security on their own. So they have to depend on powerful states for attaining a balance of power against a powerful enemy. The term balance of power refers to the general concept of one or more states’ power being used to Balance that of another state or group of states2 . Threatened states could also adopt the internal balancing strategy of building up arms, that is, to obtain countervailing capabilities and thereby attempt to balance the rising power’s military strength. The key means by which states balance one another are by building up arms through internal production or by procurement from outside sources, and by reaching military alliances. By contrast, theorists suggest that peace is generally preserved when an equilibrium of power exists among great powers. Power parity among states prevents war because no actor can expect victory3 .The balance of power system strongly affirms to the norms and principles of Westphalia sovereignty; that is, sovereign states have a legitimate right to exist, regardless of their size and power capabilities, and that the equilibrium in power is essential to prevent a “lawless situation” from emerging4 . In case of South Asia, when India detonated its first nuclear device, resultantly the balance of power was disturbed between both states (Pakistan and India). This nuclear superiority endangered Pakistan to the great extent and pushed Pakistan to kick off its own nuclear plant to restore the balance of power in the region, essential for peace and stability of South Asia. China and Pakistan have played the balancing game rather than bandwagoning to secure their respective sovereignties. Balancing is alignment against the threatening power rather than the most powerful one; while bandwagoning is alignment with dominant power, either to appease it or get some profit from it.




An Indo/Pak war will cause extinction – very short timeframe

Sherwell 13 “India-Pakistan nuclear war could 'end human civilization”, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/10507342/India-Pakistan-nuclear-war-could-end-human-civilisation.html, Philip Sherwell 10 Dec 2013 - based in New York and reports on the Americas for The Sunday Telegraph in his role as US Editor. He is a former Chief Foreign Correspondent who covered the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo and was previously based in Bangkok and Berlin for the Telegraph titles.

India-Pakistan nuclear war could 'end human civilization'. Even limited nuclear exchange would devastate food production around the world, according to International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would set off a global famine that could kill two billion people and effectively end human civilization, a study said Tuesday. Even if limited in scope, a conflict with nuclear weapons would wreak havoc in the atmosphere and devastate crop yields, with the effects multiplied as global food markets went into turmoil, the report said. The Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and Physicians for Social Responsibility released an initial peer-reviewed study in April 2012 that predicted a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people. In a second edition, the groups said they widely underestimated the impact in China and calculated that the world's most populous country would face severe food insecurity. "A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparalleled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilization," said Ira Helfand, the report's author. Helfand said that the study looked at India and Pakistan due to the longstanding tensions between the nuclear-armed states, which have fought three full-fledged wars since independence and partition in 1947. But Helfand said that the planet would expect a similar apocalyptic impact from any limited nuclear war. Modern nuclear weapons are far more powerful than the US bombs that killed more than 200,000 people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. "With a large war between the United States and Russia, we are talking about the extinction of the human race. "In this kind of war, biologically there are going to be people surviving somewhere on the planet but the chaos that would result from this will dwarf anything we've ever seen," Helfand said. But given the state of endless enmity between India and Pakistan, they are more likely to launch a nuclear war than the superpowers who possess far more and far deadlier nuclear weapons. Helfand told CNN that in an India-Pakistan nuclear war scenario, more than 20 million people would be dead within one week from the explosions, firestorms and immediate effects of radiation. “But the global consequences would be far worse,” he said. The study said that the black carbon aerosol particles kicked into the atmosphere by a South Asian nuclear war would reduce US soybean production by around 10 percent over a decade. The particles would also reduce China's rice production by an average of 21 percent over four years and by another 10 percent over the following six years. The updated study also found severe effects on China's wheat, which is vital to the country despite its association with rice. China's wheat production would plunge by 50 percent the first year after the nuclear war and would still be 31 percent below baseline a decade later, it said. The study said it was impossible to estimate the exact impact of nuclear war. He called for further research, voicing alarm that policymakers in nuclear powers were not looking more thoroughly at the idea of a nuclear famine. But he said, ultimately, the only answer was the abolition of nuclear weapons. "This is a disaster so massive in scale that really no preparation is possible. We must prevent this," he said. `

Edited by ConsultVerminSupreme

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly OT, but I might actually have an indo-pak war impact turn that I found somewhere once... I'll post it if I can find it, it's pretty useless, but might catch someone off guard.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...