The Regression of Nuclear Policy
03 May, 2018 · 5462
Vice Adm(Retd) Vijay Shankar argues that the danger of mass destruction rests on the shoulders of leaders advocating doctrines of nuclear use
Vice Admiral Vijay ShankarDistinguished Fellow
Contemporary trends positing the reversibility of a nuclear exchange presupposes that the antagonists are able to understand mutual aims, objectives and have unimpeachable knowledge of boundaries within which the conflict is to be played out. In turn, these settings demand unambiguous appreciation of and total knowledge of decisions that will be taken by leadership on all sides. The act of trust that such a relationship rests upon is predicated upon crisis-proofed rapport. At any rate, in such a velvet-lined relationship the question that begs to be asked is: why on earth did one of the parties take recourse to nuclear weapons in the first instance? Awkwardly, this aberrant trend is gaining currency amongst states in possession of nuclear weapons.
A state inducting tactical nuclear weapons into its arsenal will in fact have aligned its nuclear doctrine for first use, incentivised proliferation, and blurred the lines between conventional and nuclear weapons. This in turn lowers the threshold of a nuclear response whose yield, magnitude and targets remain a choice made by the adversary. Delegation of authority to tactical commanders (which must follow) for release of low-yield nuclear weapons by nature of the tactical environment runs the peril of being governed for deployment by principles more appropriate for conventional warfare. The posture indulges in the preposterous illusion that the adversary will discern between tactical and strategic yields and suitably moderate his response in the midst of a nuclear exchange, while desisting from escalating and retaliating in a manner of choosing. The irrationality of it all is that some states in possession of nuclear weapons have displayed a ready acceptance of nuclear war-fighting, rather than reconsider their nuclear doctrines, postures, and capabilities towards strategic deterrence. The latter ought to be the hallmark of an evolved nuclear system with seven decades of maturity in approach to its superintendence and of styling policy.
Today, the US counter to a Russian
Chinese Energy Explorations in Afghanistan: A Case Study
Madhavi Chakravarti · 10 Mar, 2014 · 4330
Indian Navy: Responding to Perceptions of Being ‘All at Sea’
C Uday Bhaskar · 10 Mar, 2014 · 4334
Ukraine: Implications for Global Nuclear Diplomacy
Sheel kant Sharma · 10 Mar, 2014 · 4332
India-Pakistan-China: Nuclear Policy and Deterrence Stability
Vijay Shankar · 10 Mar, 2014 · 4331