From: nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik)
Subject: Re: Bharat's (India's) Ballistic Missile Program !
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:56:39 GMT

mg819306@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Manoj Ghayalod) writes:
: >
: >     How long Pakistan is going to keep its eyes shut towards Bharat's
: >     Nuclear-Capable Ballistic Missile Program? 
: >
: >     This morning's news mentions Bharat(India) carrying out a second 
: >     test this month for short-range nuclear-capable ballistic missle,Prithvi. 
: >     Quotes: 
: >
: >	"The Prithvi has been developed as a deterrent against Pakistan, while
: >the Agni has been designed to strike targets deep inside China."
: >
: >     Bharat (India) was the sixth country in 1974 to denote nuclear device.
: >     Prithvi & Agni are nuclear capable.
: >     Prithvi: payload one-ton, range 150 miles, production begins 1993
: >     Agni   : payload over one-ton, range 1500 miles,production begins 1995
: >     Trishul: Ground-to-air Missile, in production.
: >     Akash  : An anti-tactical missile, in production.
: >     Nag    : An anti-tack rocket, in production.
: >
: >     This is not an exhaustive list, one wonders;
: >
: >     1. Why our friendly neighbor is so keen on stock piling long range
: >        missiles when it already has superiority of 4-7 times in military?
: >
: >     2. Why everyone is blind to such an aggressive nuclear program while
: >        there is an uproar because a canadian Pakistani was found with a 	
: >        'triggering switch?' Among thousands of applications, it can possibly
: >        be used in a nuclear power plant.
: >
: >     [One should be careful and not be found with a pen or paper either,
: >      it can possibly be used at some where inside a nuclear plant ;)   ]
: >
: >
: >Asim Mughal
: >
: 1. 4-7 superiority is good but 7-10 would be better.

This depends upon what section of the military you mean; in 1988 the
Indian army had 1,100,000 regulars and no reserves, and Pakistan had
450,000 regulars and 500,000 reserves. That is an Indian superiority
of roughly 5:2 regulars. India had a 2:1 advantage in fighter aircraft.
Indian naval advantage is considerably better (I cannot figure out the
exact ratio).

However, there has always been this imbalance right from the beginning.
This has never prevented Pakistan from defending aganist Indian
aggression. In 1948 Indian forces invaded Kashmir by surprise (I think
even as negotiations were going on at the U.N. ?). In 1965 Pakistani
army was within an hours march to Sri Nagar and as such technically it
constitutes for the Pakistani forces. (It still remakins  a mystery
why the Pakistani army didn't actually go into Sri Nagar because there
was nothing to stop it.) In 1971, East Pakistan was clearly indefensible
and India made no impression on (West) Pakistan. 

The conventional wisdom is that an attacking force needs at least a 3:1
superiority in manpower to succeed in overcomming an enemy in denfence.
The Indo-Pak wars seems to confirm this line of thinking. 


The loose joker in all of this is offcourse China. Whether India thinks 
that it is strong enough to take on Pakistan and China when Pakistan alone
is probably more than it can handle as an attacker is very doubtful. On the
other hand, will the Chino-Pak axis survive in the emerging New China 
with Capitalism catching fire etc. etc. etc. is perhaps the most fascinating
gambit at stake on the regional strategic chess-board.

: 2. N. Sharief wants Kashmir. India is all for the Kashmiris to
: decide but Pakistan should pull out first.

Two corrections: (1) All pakistanis and most kashmiris want Kashmir.
(2) India has consistently refused to allow *democratic* elections for
the people of Kashmir to decide for themselves. Pakistan has fully agreed
to the terms  of the UN resolutions on this issue.


As for the last bit, I have a better idea .. why not let India withdraw 
its bit of occupied Kashmir and let Pakistan hold elections for Kashmiris
which they wil. undoubtedly do with good-will, love and fairness ? :-)

: 3. Pakistan has attacked India in the past.

India has attacked Pakistan and China in the past.


[deletions] 

: If the west could stop India's missile program it would.

I am not sure about that. In the final analysis I think the West
would rather see India developed at the expense of Pakistan
rather than the other way round.

: When we exploded the nuclear bomb we did not need any
: components from abroad, it was totally built in India.

So was Pakistan's!!! :-) (Borrowing a few documents
from friendly Profs :-):-) here and there surely doen't hurt
anyone!:-):-) )
: 
: [One should not expect others to solve one's problems]

Totally agree with you here
: 
: Manoj

-Nadeem Malik	nadeem@p.igp.ethz.ch