Wednesday, May 20, 2009


There are reasons to believe that US is trying to scare India and Israel into taking actions on the Pakistani nuclear facilities including its supposed nuclear weapons.

The basis: US government thoughts are dutifully leaked through papers like New York Times, Washington Post. NYT in its recent issue on May 17th, titled provocatively : Pakistan is rapidly adding nuclear arms, US states:

Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

“YES,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security.

Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author of Mr. Obama’s review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the administration’s concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan “has MORE TERRORISTS PER SQUARE MILE THAN ANYPLACE ELSE ON EARTH, AND ITS NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM IS GROWING FASTER THAN ANYPLACE ELSE ON EARTH.”

A spokesman for the Pakistani government contacted Friday declined to comment on whether his nation was expanding its nuclear weapons program, but said the government was “maintaining the minimum, credible deterrence capability.” He WARNED against linking American financial assistance to Pakistan’s actions on its weapons program

With this article and a few before, India it seems has been put on guard. Interestingly in a website considered close to the Israeli intelligence DEBKA – it states : “Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh had warned US president Barack Obama that Pakistan's nuclear sites in North West Frontier Province areas that are Taliban-al Qaeda strongholds are already partly in the hands of Islamic extremists. He (SINGH) told Obama: "Pakistan is lost."

Since no one can say with any certainty on the number of nuclear weapons that Paksitan (or indeed India or Israel has), people have been making intelligent guesses. We will look at both the aggressive and the likely scenario that Pakistan has.
However, before we go this path, it will be interesting to see why Pakistan and indeed the world is worried about Pakistan’s nuclear weapons (of course Bruce Riedel could not have put it more succinctly).

TIMES OF INDIA dutifully picked up the story. It states: "Pakistan is expanding its plutonium producing production capacity to build smaller, lighter plutonium-fission weapons and deliverable thermo-nuclear weapons.

The new lighter nuclear weapons would use plutonium as a nuclear trigger and enriched uranium in the secondary, a report by US arms control institute said.

Satellite images have revealed that Pakistan now has the fastest nuclear weapons programme and it has considerably expanded two sites producing fissile material for nuclear weapons, the report by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) said<
/span>. "

I will present the STRATFOR analysis here – this is as good as it gets. “The Pakistanis are in the middle of one of their most aggressive offensives against the Taliban in and around Swat Valley, and are expecting Washington to follow through with promises of $3 billion in military aid over the next five years and $7.5 billion in civilian assistance as a reward for their efforts. Since a good amount of unchecked U.S. aid to Pakistan frequently has been diverted to corporate entities for the benefit of military commanders in the past, U.S. lawmakers are naturally poking into every nook and cranny in Pakistan to see where future funds might be diverted. Of course, the last thing Washington wants is for Pakistan to use U.S. money to beef up the very nuclear arsenal the United States is attempting to secure from the jihadists.

But Pakistan has very different priorities in mind. A big part of the reason why Pakistan and the United States don’t see eye-to-eye on how to manage the jihadist problem is Pakistan’s deep-seated fear of its larger and more powerful rival and neighbor, India. While the United States is trying to keep Pakistan focused on its northwestern border with Afghanistan, where the writ of the Pakistani state is eroding at the hands of the jihadists, the Pakistani military leadership is far more concerned with keeping most of its troops stationed on its eastern border with India. This is a Pakistani fact of life that will not change, regardless of how much the United States attempts to reassure Islamabad of India’s military intentions.

Pakistan has been trying to play catch up with the Indians since the 1947 partition. Lacking India’s geographic strategic depth, economic foundation and political cohesion, Pakistan has rested its security policy on TWO primary pillars. The FIRST involves the Pakistani state’s long-standing ISLAMIZATION POLICY, which has been used as an unconventional tool to FOSTER MILITANTS in places like Afghanistan and Kashmir, to gain allies and fend off rivals. Since Pakistan was more likely to suffer defeat in trying to directly engage India militarily, it increasingly relied on proxies to keep India too busy putting out fires at home to seriously entertain military options against the Pakistanis.

The SECOND pillar is rooted in the Pakistani NUCLEAR ARSENAL — a last-resort option designed to keep the Indians at bay should Pakistan’s militant proxies push New Delhi’s buttons too hard. Pakistan would be quantitatively and qualitatively beaten by the Indians in a military contest and currently can only dream of reaching nuclear parity with India. Still, the Pakistani nuclear arsenal is Islamabad’s most valued defense against Indian aggression. In fact, just SIX MONTHS AGO Pakistan reminded India of the nuclear threat to make New Delhi reconsider any plans for military retaliation after the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.

With Taliban and scores of Kashmiri Islamist militants now turning on the Pakistani state, it has become all too clear that Pakistan’s first defense strategy — the militant proxy project — IS COMING UNDONE. Once, this strategy both ensured the integrity of the Pakistani state and reinforced Pakistani defense along its borders. Now, the same strategy is BREAKING IT APART.

This is not to say that the Pakistani military leadership is psychologically prepared to completely do away with its militant proxy strategy. But as the security and intelligence apparatus goes to work in trying to sort out the “good” militants from the “bad” militants that have turned on the state, the Pakistani state naturally feels pressured to ramp up its second line of defense (I.E. NUCLEAR) against India.

In all likelihood, the Pakistanis have been modernizing and expanding their nuclear arsenal for some time. Now that fears are being raised over Pakistan’s nuclear plans and the potential diversion of U.S. funds, aid earmarks are coming into question and Washington will experience even more difficulty in trying to deal with the Pakistanis and instill enough confidence in Islamabad to sustain the offensive against the Taliban. Furthermore, Washington is bound to run into complications with India, who will demand that the United States not stand idle while Pakistan expands its nuclear capability.


1. The aggressive scenario of Pakistani nuclear weapons:

Pakistan went the uranium enrichment way to develop its nuclear weapons. How the designs were stolen and how the bomb “may” have been built are subjects of hundreds of books and many bestsellers. No need to delve in the process.

China helped Pakistan in developing its Nuclear program. China already has setup two nuclear power plants Chasnupp 1 (300 MW) and Chasnupp 2 (300 MW). The Chashma Nuclear Power Plant is located at Chashma, Punjab, Pakistan. It consists of Chashma Nuclear Power Plant I (CHASNUPP-1) and Chashma Nuclear Power Plant II (CHASNUPP-2). CHASNUPP-3 (600MW under construction) and CHASNUPP-4 (2000 MW planned to be completed before 2030) are in the planning stages. China does not make any 1000 MW plants, so the Chasnupp 4 and Chasnupp 5 etc will be much larger plants beginning in 2010.

Rough estimates - Pakistan is said to have 70 odd nuclear weapons built through this route.

However, the interesting part of the story is Pakistan is also trying to build nuclear weapons through plutonium (India went this route to build its arsenal). In the 1990s Pakistan began to pursue plutonium production capabilities. With Chinese assistance, Pakistan built the 40 MWt (megawatt thermal) Khusab research reactor at Joharabad, and in April 1998, Pakistan announced that the reactor was operational. According to public statements made by US officials, this unsafeguarded heavy water reactor generates an estimated 8-10 kilotons of weapons grade plutonium per year, which is enough for one to two nuclear weapons. The reactor could also produce tritium if it were loaded with lithium-6.

Plutonium separation reportedly takes place at the New Labs reprocessing plant next to Pakistan's Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (Pinstech) in Rawalpindi and at the larger Chasma nuclear power plant, NEITHER of which are subject to IAEA inspection.

Robert Windrem writes in MSNBC
(May 12th) : “On the dusty plain 110 miles southwest of Islamabad, not far from an area controlled by the Taliban, two large new structures are rising, structures that in light of Pakistan’s internal troubles must be considered ominous for the stability of South Asia and, for that matter, the world.

Without any public U.S. reproach, Pakistan is building two of the developing world’s largest plutonium production reactors, which experts say could lead to improvements in the quantity and quality of the country’s nuclear arsenal, now estimated at 60 to 80 weapons.

What makes the project even more threatening is that it is unique

Moreover, he and other U.S. officials say, there long have been concerns about those who run the facility where the reactors are being built near the town of Khushab. They note that a month before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Khushab’s former director met with Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and offered a nuclear weapons tutorial around an Afghanistan campfire.

In the past several months, satellite imagery shows the first of these new reactors at Khushab nearing completion while the second is in final stages of external construction. Operations at the first may begin soon, while the second is four or five years from operation.

What is clear, Albright says, is that Pakistani officials are committing limited national resources to building up the country’s nuclear arsenal, resources he and others note have been supplemented and replenished by U.S. aid.

“They’re building a capability beyond any reasonable requirement,” says Albright, who first wrote about Khushab two years ago, when he noticed construction south of an existing but smaller plutonium production reactor that’s been operating since about 1998.

“We think it’s bigger than the first one,” he says of the so-called Khushab-I reactor, estimated by U.S. intelligence at 70 megawatts.

Albright estimates the new reactors are “at least on the order of 100 megawatts,” each capable of producing enough plutonium for “four or five nuclear weapons a year.” While small by power reactor standards, that’s substantially larger than the research reactors that provided material for the weapons programs of Israel, India and North Korea. He also believes that the reactors could have a separate mission: producing tritium, an element critical to the development of thermonuclear weapons, what used to be called H-bombs.”

Zia Mian, of the International Panel on Fissile Materials at Princeton University, says adding a reliable and large-scale plutonium stream to the country’s long-term expertise in uranium enrichment signals a change in Pakistan’s nuclear strategy.

“The addition of the two reactors does two things,” Mian notes. “It allows them to make a lot more warheads, four or five a year, but it also allows them to make much lighter and more complex weapons for longer-range missiles and cruise missiles. ... And triggers for thermonuclear weapons are almost always plutonium-based.

2. The most likely scenario of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal:

The first question that arises if Pakistan does have 70 odd nuclear weapons (albeit low yield), they should be enough and more as a deterrent for an Indian attack. What would then be the requirement for Pakistan to waste precious resources to build plutonium based plants and go in for more nukes?

If Pakistan does attack India with a nuclear weapon, the ferocity of an Indian nuclear repulse (it is expected) will be so huge that Pakistan will cease to exist as a nation. Under that logic, whether Pakistan has 10 nukes or 100 nukes makes no sense. Pakistan is a small nation and obliterating it militarily by using nukes is an easy task. India will be grievously hurt in nuclear strikes by Pakistan, but it will never be obliterated – India is too large and its economy and population are concentrated over many hundred centres. Pakistan does not have that luxury.

To understand this, we go back to the 1998 nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan. There were 6 devises as stated by Pakistan and even though it claimed the yield of the 1st device was in the range of 25 – 36 kt, the Southern Arizona Seismic Observatory put it at 9 – 12 kt. For the others, the observatory put it at 4 – 6 kt (against Pakistan’s stated 12kt). Actually the observatory could confirm only two tests.

According to a preliminary analysis conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory, material released into the atmosphere during an underground nuclear test by Pakistan in May 1998 contained low levels of weapons-grade plutonium. The significance of the Los Alamos finding was that Pakistan had either imported or produced plutonium undetected by the US intelligence community.

US sniffer planes that suck in atmosphere to test for samples, picked up plutonium signatures after the Pakistani tests. The proof of atmospheric residue of a plutonium-warhead explosion, it was acquired by a USAF U-2 that took off from Oman, overflew Chagai, and landed in Turkey in the first week of June 1998. This was widely reported and the US officially confirmed this at the NATO HQ by August 1998.

Note: Pakistan’s nuclear plant came on stream only in 1998 and it could not have produced enough plutonium for weapons grade induction for a nuke. Hence these plutonium based nukes came from somewhere – and these came from CHINA on a CKD basis.

Prasun Sengupta clarifies: “Kindly note that even though the N-reactor at Khushab achieved criticality in the first quarter of 1998, the spent fuel could only be extracted two years later and the related fuel reprocessing plant in Khushab became operational only by 2001. Which means Pu-239 isotope extraction could only be achieved by 2003 at the latest.”

Prasun in his blog writes:

Dr A Q Khan's clandestine programmes were all about enriching uranium to HEU (just like Iran) and then acquiring the production technology from North Korea (like Iran) for building the Ghauri IRBM (which is the same as the Iranian Shihab 3). But following this path didn't produce any breakthroughs as it emerged that warheads using Pu-239 were more suitable for mounting on IRBMs than were the much more bulkier warheads using HEU. But ince A Q Khan could not acquire the Pu-239 production processes from anywhere, the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) stepped in in the late-1980s to begin talks with China for acquiring plutonium-production nuclear reactors. China agreed, but these reactors and the related fuel reprocessing plant were only for electricity generation (that went on line only in 2000), and China instead decided to supply off-the-shelf the 12 IRBMs and their nuclear warheads in the mid-1990s. THIS IS THE ONLY REASON WHY CHINA WAITED UNTIL 1998 TO BECOME A SIGNATORY TO THE NPT. As a result, the Ghauri IRBMs imported from North Korea are now configured to carry only conventional warheads. The same goes for the Iranian Shihab-3s and unless and until Iran acquires the capability to produce and process Pu-239 at Arak, it will never be able to have a nuclear warhead even though it already has IRBMs.

The n-arsenal of Pakistan now stands at 10 warheads as the remaining two warheads were detonated on May 28 and 30, 1998. Both these warheads were of the tactical nuke-type. Only after these tests did China come clean with the US (when the US confronted China with clinching evidence--the radioactive plutonium's atmoshperic residue) and China admitted to its pivotal role in Pakistan's n-weaponisation and thereafter agreed to sign the NPT. Regarding the nuclear reactors supplied by China in the late 1990s they are NOT under IAEA safeguards as the sale & purchase agreement was inked when neither Beijing nor Islamabad were signatories to the NPT. These reactors and their plutonium reprocessing plants are therefore totally un-safeguarded. As for the Babur cruise missile there are presently no plans for arming them with nuclear warheads. They are meant for conventional precision strike just like the BrahMos

CHINA – A curious case (a detour, but will have an impact in geopolitics). China revealed Iran’s nuclear secrets to UN. What led China to do it – one can only guess – were they caught out? Were they trying to help Pakistan (only Islamic nation – Sunni – to have the bomb).

Which leaves the point – how many nukes does Pak have now?

I think the ruse of USA to get INDIA to sign the NPT (now in 2009) is actually to get Pakistan to sign the NPT so that these breeder reactors (plutonium) come under IAEA inspection. Also the US / NATO is seriously worried that Pakistan will have serious nuclear arsenal that will be plutonium based which will make negotiating with Pakistan a nightmare !

You the reader make an intelligent choice on the size of nuclear arsenal that Pakistan currently has.

When will Pakistan use the nukes?

Prasun states: “Based on the seismic readings of the 1998 tests in Chagai, it is evident beyond reasonable doubt that the China-supplied warheads tested were of the tactical fission-based type. Which in turn means that these warheads WILL NOT be used against large urbanized targets like Indian cities. Instead, they will be used INSIDE Pakistan against major Indian troop concentrations (such as those in the Great Thar Desert) that have invaded Pakistan during a major offensive thrust. Therefore, the Indian security planners have to contend with this following scenario: if Pakistan as part of its first-strike doctrine were to use tactical nuclear weapons against invading Indian military forces BUT use them INSIDE sovereign Pakistani soil, how would India respond? Would India be morally justified in employing nuclear weapons as well against targets deep inside Pakistan, even if this were to be a second-strike? Would India then lose the high moral ground since Pakistan did not violate Indian sovereignty and did not explode n-weapons INSIDE sovereign Indian territory? These are some of the issues now being grappled with in order to gauge the so-called n-threshold of Pakistan, i.e. what would compel Pakistan to employ n-weapons on the battlefield in a pre-emptive manner.”


Anonymous said...

First rate BuA - excellent analysis. Liked Prasun's remarks !

Anonymous said...

Wow!! MAMATA to be Bangal's CM? Good Luck BUA

Anonymous said...

pls do comment on India's arsenal, Bua. Be non-bias

Anonymous said...

Rethinaraj wrote that scientists at India's Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC) managed to extract highly enriched tritium from heavy water used in power reactors. The technology has two advantages: it assumes heavy water as the moderator in power reactors instead of light water used in most other reactors; and it has a short gestation period. The Indian tritium facility takes less than two years for completion and at a fraction of the estimated US$7 billion needed to produce the isotope at current costs using the accelerator process, as was done in the US.

Rethinaraj traced Indian plans to a paper written by two BARC scientists which appeared in a book titled, Heavy Water - Properties, Production and Analysis. Authored by Sharad M Dave and Himangshu K Sadhukhan, together with a Mexican scientist, Octavio A Novaro, the paper says on p. 461 of the book:

'The Bhabha Atomic Research Center, Bombay, India, also having developed a wetproof LPCE, catalyst for liquid phase catalytic exchange [the process that yields highly enriched tritium from heavy water], has employed it for detritiation. A pilot plant based on LPCE cryogenic distillation with about 90 percent tritium removal from heavy water has been commissioned and is under experimental evaluation. Reportedly, this facility seems to be the only operating LPCE-based detritiation facility in the world. A commercial detritiation plant based on this process is being set up at one of their nuclear power stations.' The BARC pilot plant was set up in 1992.

The author notes that Indian scientists insist on referring to this process as 'detritiation' instead of admitting to producing tritium because it avoids the charge of stockpiling a strategic raw material. Carried out under the cloak of lowering tritium content in heavy water circulating around the moderator circuit, the project allegedly was designed to prevent the many health hazards associated with leakage of tritium from reactors. Though commendable, the scientists' purpose was not entirely altruistic. Millions of Indians face equally threatening health hazards in other fields without anyone batting an eyelid for their well-being. Millions more die each year from preventable diseases and starvation.

A commercial version of the 'detritiation' plant at Kalpakkam near Madras is already operational. With eight operating Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs) at Kalpakkam, Rawatbhatta, Narora and Kakrapar plus more to come in future, India will have enormous supply of tritium. According to technical estimates, 2400 curies of tritium could be produced for every MW of electricity produced in heavy water reactors.

Unlike fission (nuclear) bombs, fusion (thermonuclear) bombs have no critical size. Bombs of various intensities could be fabricated using tritium. Fusion bombs require an ambient temperature of 100 million degrees Celcius to overcome the Coulomb Repulsion Barrier (CRB) which prevents lighter atoms from coming together - meaning that fission bombs are a prerequisite for detonating fusion bombs. India first exploded a fission (nuclear) bomb on May 18, 1974 in the deserts of Pokhran in northwest India, the site of the latest explosions as well.

Though tritium is present naturally in the environment, its amount is too small for practical recovery. For strategic purposes it has to be produced artificially. There are two ways to do this, both involving nuclear reactions with neutrons. In the first method, neutrons are made to strike a target of lithium or aluminum metal, which gives tritium and other by-products; the second method involves a neutron reaction with helium-3 which gives tritium and hydrogen as by-products.

Tritium finds peripheral use in medical diagnostics, but it is mainly used in the manufacture of hydrogen bombs and to boost the yield of both fission and thermonuclear weapons.

Anonymous said...

No Indian Army chief has seen a fully mated nuclear warhead cone fitted atop a missile, yet !!!

Anonymous said...

excellent blog,pls do comment on india's nuclear arsenal..

Anonymous said...

No Indian Army chief has seen a fully mated nuclear warhead cone fitted atop a missile, yet !!!

@ did u interview each of them?



I will stick to estimates made by "knowledgeable" people.

1. K. Subrahmanyam, a leading strategic theorist, that by 1990 India had stockpiled at least two dozen (24) unassembled weapons.

2. G. Balachandran, an Indian nuclear researcher, said that India had fewer than 10 weapons ready to be assembled and mounted on warplanes or missiles. This was stated in May 1998.

3. David Albright ([Albright et al 1997], [Albright 2000]), in his estimate (October 2000) stated that by the end of 1999 India had available between 240 and 395 kg of weapon grade plutonium for weapons production, with a median value of 310 kg. He suggests that this is sufficient for 45 - 95 weapons (median estimate 65). The production of weapon grade plutonium has actually been greater, but about 130 kg of plutonium has been consumed - principally in fueling two plutonium reactors, but also in weapons tests. His estimate for India's holdings of less-than-weapons-grade plutonium (reactor or fuel grade plutonium) are 4200 kg of unsafeguarded plutonium (800 kg of this already separated) and 4100 kg of IAEA safeguarded plutonium (25 kg of this separated). This unsafeguarded quantity could be used to manufacture roughly 1000 nuclear weapons, if India so chose (which would give it the third largest arsenal in the world, behind only the U.S. and Russia.

There you have it - a min / max value to work on. However, it is widely believed that Indian nukes are only deliverable by planes, whereas Pakistan has the option of missiles too. Whether India has successfully bridged this gap, only better informed people may wish to state or not to state.

Anonymous said...


My reading is that Pak has currently only "borrowed nukes from China", but it is rapidly trying to get hold of its own nukes through the plutonium plants.

And by all means, if the US is not pulling a fast one, Pakistan is rapidly increasing its arsenal before the state falls to Taliban. If that happens, the Pakistan Army will be in charge of Taliban and also nuclear weapons.

Pakistan Army will bargain had with US that unless it gets several "billion dollars a year" - these nukes can pass onto Taliban.

Essentially Pakistan is building its arsenal as a bargaining ploy to get unlimited dollars on one side and of course to keep India at bay on the other side.

However, my personal view is that Pakistan is ramping up nukes not to get browbeaten by US into acceding to all / any of its demands with its head down - it wishes to negotiate with its head held high and drive a better bargain by blackmailing the US.

Anonymous said...

Prasun's comments on China waiting till 1998 to sign the NPT is very logical. The timing is very suspect !

What did the US get out China for this "indiscretion" in the end ??

Anonymous said...

Hi BuA,

Thanks for bringing out the enlightening Stratfor report. The last bit of analysis by you and Prasun was interesting too.


S.Q. said...

Third rate analysis.

We have more than 100 nuclear warheads to take care of you kufr hindoos.

You do not even have 10 - that is why you cannot attack us ever, even after 100 incidents like Mumbai 26/11.

S.Q. said...

And that Prasun Sengupta talks too big, he knows nothing.

Better to have his head checked.

Anonymous said...

This is extermely funny but relevant to the subject of this article BuA. Hope you embed this in the main article.

TTV India

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To S. Q.: Wow! Many thanks for your glowing compliments! At least you've given me credit for 'talking too big', as opposed to 'talking nonsense'. Am glad you can differentiate between the two. But don't you suffer a nervous breakdown because of my utterances. Chalo, aap ko baksh dia.

Anonymous said...


Is Pakistan in a position to make nukes from plutonium now from these fast breeder reactors? And what would be the likely "strength" of these own arsenal ?

And S.Q - F.O.


Anonymous said...

Excellent analysis.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@3:56AM: Be it from pressurised heavy water reactors or fast breeder reactors, the fissile material byproducts, including weapons-grade Pu-239, can be extracted only though an elaborate and expensive spent fuel reprocessing facility. Now, even if one were to accept that China will supply the PAEC with such reprocessing plants, it is inconceivable that China will give such plants in a totally unsafeguarded manner and Beijing has in fact given in writing an undertaking to the US way back in 2000 that such reprocessing plants will be under fullscope Chinese safeguards and oversight. What the Chinese have done is physically construct such a plant inside Pakistan, with the spent fuel being reprocessed there, but the extracted weapons-grade plutonium being taken back to China (in Sichuan province) to be machined into warhead cores. Presently, no entity in Pakistan has the technological capability for precision-fabrication of such cores and other warhead components. Even successive PAEC and NESCOM annual reports between 2001 and 2007 have spoken of severe delays being experienced in acquiring the requisite engineering production machinery from Europe, mainly from Austria, Switzerland and France, primarily due to highly increased global surveillance of Pakistan-sponsored industrial smuggling networks (which tend to be based inevitably in either Dubai or Abu Dhabi) after the blowout of the A Q Khan-Libya nexus. In light of all this, it is next to impossible for the PAEC to have a fully functioning industrial infrastructure capable of extracting Pu-239, fabricating Pu-239 cores, designing and fabricating proven warhead components, and having fool-proof safeguards for all this. The reason why the US has been making noises about the safety factor of Pakistan's n-arsenal is because the US indirectly wants to know from China exactly what kind of Permissive Activation Links (PAL) have been designed by China for those warheads and ballistic missile delivery systems that China has supplied to Pakistan and that are stored in the Northern Areas.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@May 20, 2009 5:32AM: Your statement is factually wrong. Between December 25 and 31, 2001 the Indian Army COAS Gen Padmanabhan was given extensive on-site briefings by both DAE and DRDO personnel at both BARC, Kalpakkam and Trivandrum and he thus became the first ever Indian COAS to be briefed in every detail of this subject by the OEMs. This practice has since been institutionalised, but instead of the COAS, it is now the Chief of the tri-services Strategic Forces Command that is routinely briefed by the DAE and DRDO, as it is the SFC that is the institutional authority responsible for deploying and activating the n-deterrent with the help of personnel from the Army's Directorate of Field Artillery. The IAF and Indian Navy are not yet on the loop as their personnel are not yet in charge of deploying and activating any n-weapons (like air-delivered munitions or SLBMs). Thus, as of now, all n-weapons of India remain land-based and ground-launched.

Ray Lightning said...

A small correction. The Plutonium producing reactors are termed as "research reactors". The term "breeder reactor" is now mostly used to mean a nuclear power plant with a closed fuel cycle : a concept that I whole-heartedly support. The technical sense of the word "breeder reactor" means more fissile material is produced than consumed. This is obviously true for the weapons-grade research reactors, but it is better to not use the term "breeder-reactor" because it will mean bad publicity.

The reason why I am so particular about this is because there exists technical know-how today to produce unlimited amounts of energy for extremely cheap : effectively rooting out poverty and suffering all over the world. The key is the fast breeder reactors which eat nuclear fuel extremely sparingly.

But because of the bad publicity associated with weapons production, there has been criticism against this technology, which is completely misplaced and unwarranted.

By the way, I read a novel by Humphrey Huxley called Dragon Fire which talks about a nuclear war between India and China. The scenario is very close to what Prasun described ; Pakistan exploding nuclear weapons on Indian troop concentrations on its own soil. What happens next in the novel is that USA neutralizes Pakistan, in a way of controlling Indian anger (and expansion westwards). But this is short-lived because China explodes nuclear bombs on Mumbai and Delhi, pulling India into total submission (USA watches silently).

I think this is bunkum. India will not invade Pakistan the conventional manner. Before any such thing is attempted, air strikes will be deployed. And Pakistan has to first deal with that. The conflagration between India & Pakistan (& China) will escalate very quickly before any troops are moved. Nuclear options will be considered long before that, in fact nuclear bombs might be used "before" troops cross the border. This is the reality of the technology.

If I haven't made myself clear yet, I am seriously against nuclear weapons. We should destroy them quickly and forever. They are an extremely dangerous threat to the future of our civilization. The whole logic of "nuclear deterrent" is utter bullshit. Human beings don't think like this, and especially, nuclear weapons will not be used by "rational" players (understood in game-theoretic sense). They will always be used by "irrational" players. This is the truth, which none of the national security advisors (of whichever country) are willing to face.

The Taliban (or their successors) will just be giving a human-face to this abstract notion of "irrational player", but the very theory of nuclear deterrence is culprit.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your valuable insights PRASUN SENGUPTA.

Could you please comment on India's arsenal and the nonsense ranges given by BuA?

Whats your take on it?

BuA you should stop commenting on weapons as you know too littloe.

Better bring in an expert like Prasun Sengupta


TO Anon above,

Prasun is the expert on weapons systems and I have no reason to state otherwise. I have not given any "bull shit" figures - they were given by eminent experts and I have given you three names - hence they are not my guestimates.

You will appreciate, it is precisely for this reason, I have brought in comments from Prasun Sengupta.

It is time we had a serious debate on this issue - we seem to be doing all talk on "M.A.D." theories without getting into facts / capabilities / motives of our adversaries.

But thank you for you comments none the less - for you are right (mostly).



Welcome back to comments !!

Yes, I am aware of your dislike towards nuclear weapons but its eradication will not take away the fact that "weapons of mass destruction" will remain in other forms.

Ray, Europe is dying demographically - its population is not growing fast enough to maintain status quo.

Only US is replacing just about enough to maintain status quo, even then the growth of Hispanics, Asians far outstrips that of White Americans.

And then you have Israel, surrounded by hostile neighbours.

As opposed to this the population growth in Islamic nations are skyrocketing (excepting a few places incl Iran). Classic case Pakistan - 30 million in 1947, 160 million in 2007 and 300 million in 2050. It is expected that these Islamic population will migrate through to Europe and other places (these are not my theories - there are well known think tank articles that have come to this conclusion).

And most of Europe themselves have a 10% ethnic Islamic population that is growing exponentially and have been many a reason for strife and ghettoization in major European cities.

The Western world, Israel is seized upon this threat - this huge population surge that can bring cataclysmic miseries to their home economies. It is better to stem the rot at the epicentre.

And such huge population can only be eradicated through weapons of mass destruction. If we take away nuclear - you are only taking away one such weapons systems. There are biological, chemical.What if there were a weapons system that only killed people having Gene X, Blood Type Y - do you think that is possible?

People will require WMD. Just because you will see that US is destroying its nuclear arsenal by their 100s, know that it means that US has not suddenly become "nicer", it means it has built better WMDs - far lethal and far sophisticated.

Countries will have to live within their means and should produce that many "children" that it can logically hope to feed using its own natural resources. If that country increases its population base which will then encroach and threaten other country's economy / demographics, it has to pay the price !


Prasun Da,

You wrote : "The IAF and Indian Navy are not yet on the loop as their personnel are not yet in charge of deploying and activating any n-weapons (like air-delivered munitions or SLBMs). Thus, as of now, all n-weapons of India remain land-based and ground-launched."

I have been told by several "important" people that most of India's n-weapons are aircraft launched.

I trust your judgement and knowledge, hence please explain this apparent dichotomy.


Anonymous said...


You wrote and I quote: "Countries will have to live within their means and should produce that many "children" that it can logically hope to feed using its own natural resources. If that country increases its population base which will then encroach and threaten other country's economy / demographics, it has to pay the price !"

Yes, true.

But I think you missed out another major non-Islamic country that is guilty of this - INDIA. China has its own problem with one child policy - it has to grapple with several million more men than women in the next 20 years.

Which brings me back to India & Pakistan - two of the biggest "polluters" in terms of population explosion. Indeed in India - it is again the Islamic population growth that is far higher than the Hindu rate of growth.

And you are right in saying that the Western world will not sit tight and watch this "degeneration" that is being wrecked on mother earth - it belongs to all of us and not only to India / Pakistan / other Islamic nations.

So, a US special ops by Mc Carthy is on the horizon. A dirty bomb explosion in India - followed by India's retaliation with nukes followed by Pak's retaliation by nukes. A whole generation of excess population gone !!

Islamic extremism - under control!

And your very own RSS - said Nuclear War will cleanse India.

You should be care for what you wish for !! Trust me, the western world (Rightists) will be dying for a nuke war b/w India & Pakistan for these very reasons.

Glad that you brought it up - these are also part of "Great Century" doctrine.

Anonymous said...

Addendum to what Marty wrote:

Text of recent interview RSS boss "It will be nuclear war"

Interview with Shri K.S. Sudarshan ji, Sarsanghachalak, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh by Chetan Upadhyaya

Q. Should India go for a full-fledged war?

Ans: If there is no other way left. Whenever the demons (Aasuri powers) start dominating this planet, there is no way other than the war. Tell me Chetan if there is any other way out. But war should be the last resort. Before that Bharat should consider other options.

Q. Don't you think that warfare will not stop at guns, bombs and grenades?

Ans: Yes, I know it will not stop there. It will be nuclear war and a large number of people will be perished. In fact, not me but many people around the world have expressed their apprehension that this terrorism may ultimately result into III world war. And this will be a nuclear war in which many of us are going to be finished. But according to me, as of now, it is very necessary to defeat the demons and there is no other way. And let me say with confidence that after this destruction, a new world will emerge which will be very good, free from evil and terrorism. (Is vinaash ke baad jo sansaar aayega, waha bahut hi sundar hoga. Vahan par kuch bhee bura nahin rahega aur aatankawad bhi gayab ho jayega ).

Anonymous said...

Be for real Bengal attack dude! Now its mid 2009 and you are quoting figures from 1998 - 11 years ago! Even before Kargil war!

Hey then why dont you quote Pakistans figures for 1998 too? Probably 2 or 3 nukes? Then India has around 20 low tech designs. But after 1998 when we tested several micro devices with extra high efficiency, we have progressed much faster.

As such please dont bring in bullshit that Pakistan has 80+ nukes in 2009, while India has only 20 as of 1998!

And you never **brought in** Prasun Sengupta. What? You picked him up from Swarnabhoomi Airport and flew him into your blog above the skies of Bengal in your sleep?

I mean I dont know even how that makes a logical statement. Prasun Sengupta merely gave his **OPINION** in a little comment form like this one. And you pick that up and publish it like as is it forms a hellava theory?

I know Prasun holds pretty impressive status in the defence world. His publications are noteworthy, but for reliability, if you decide on using his material, get it from some of his proper sources - Like how you do from Stratfor and here and there copy-pasting.

For gods sake don't extend that to copy-pasting people's comments into an article!

Prasun Sengupta awaiting your clarification for the uncertainities here on India's nuclear capabilities.

You already smoked some people above, you have more smoking to do, especially to the host.


Anonymous said...

Bengal at May 21, 2009 10:03 PM;

i concur with you on this though. I thought IAF was the premier force for nuclear tasks

PKS -- ??

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To BUA Da: There were efforts made in the early and mid-1990s to configure a special flight of Mirage 2000THs for carrying n-bombs, but this idea was dropped in favour of ballistic missiles carrying nuclear warheads. The reason was simple: a manned aircraft had every chance of being intercepted, whereas that is not the case yet with ballistic missiles. Therefore, in terms of assured and guaranteed delivery means, the ballistic missile has been adopted as the principal carrier vehicle for strategic n-weapons (including thermonuclear). And that is also the reason why till today ALL operational-level exercises and user-trials of the Strategic Forces Command that have been well-publicised (as they should be) have involved missiles like the Agni-1 and Agni-2. The IAF will become involved once a suitable Su-30MKI flight (of eight aircraft) will be raised once the supersonic aird defence munition (ADM) is available and it is these ADMs that will be equipped with tactical nuclear warheads. Only once this happens will India will be able to offset the tactical advantage which Pakistan now enjoys over India with regard to tactical nuclear weapon assets/employment capabilities. Right now, India's deterrent against Pakistan's usage of tactical nuclear weapons on its own soil is the arsenal of 160 Prithvi SS-150s, ALL of which are equipped with conventional warheads and are deployed with the Army's 40 and 41 Artillery Divisions. Therefore, if Pakistan as a first strike explodes tactial nuclear weapons against a large multi-Corps concentration of Indian ground forces deep within Pakistani territory, the Indian response will be a massive retaliation against Pakistan Army concentrations in the Mangla and Gujranwala sectors by pulverising, massed fire-assaults mounted by the Prithvi SS-150s. In this way India will retain its high moral ground by not retaliating with nuclear counter-strikes, but by employing conventionally armed Prithvis on s massive scale and causing proportional decapitating damage to the Pakistan Army's war-waging potential. It is also for this reason that the Prithvi missiles have deliberately been kept as Army assets under Army command-and-control, and not under the Strategic Forces Command. In conclusion, India's existing bsllistic missile-based n-deterrent is China-centric, as will the Navy's projected SLBMs, while the nuclear-warheads inside the ADM and probably on the Shourya TBM will be Pakistan-centric.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@12:48AM: To be fair to BUA, he did contact me by e-mail to ask for my inputs and comments and I was more than willing to give him my personal perspectives, which he is free to incorporate in his blog as either a narrative or quote. Let's all leave it at that and not indulge in smoking each other out as I'm sure that is not our avowed objective. Let us instead have a free and frank exchange of ideas, data, opinions and endeavour to remove the fog of uncertainty that certain vested elements within the Govt of India's corridors of power seem quite willing to perpetuate either out of sheer ignorance or due to an acute lack of strategic visioning.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Ray Lightning: Between March and June 2002 at the height of OP Parakram, for the first time ever in its history the Indian Army deployed ALL THREE of its Strike Corps in the Thar Desert for a deep thrust into Pakistani territory. This was done by redeploying the two Strike Corps into the desert by withdrawing them from their earlier staging areas in Punjab and near the Shakargarh Bulge. Such a redeployment wasn't even wargamed before but it was carried out with every intention of breaking out and jutting deep inside Pakistan. That should give you some idea of India's contingency plans for waging an all-out ground war. The prospects of putting such plans into effect cannot and MUST NOT be ruled out. Airpower alone cannot decapitate the enemy's war-waging potential, it can merely impede the enemy's ability think and fight coherently for a finite period.

Jai Ho, Mumbai said...

TO Anon @ May 22, 2009 12:48 AM.

Your comments were in extremely bad taste - what is your gripe?

From here and Trishul and other such sites, we get the other view which is not reported in main stream media and I have seen that most of the reporting are quite strategic in nature.

I have to give marks to BuA that he brought in Prasun Sengupta as he is the known weapons expert and is held in high regard.

And this article is strategic as it is excellent. And I have seen the figures that BuA has quoted on nukes - he has stated that those are not his anyway and there were no "apples to oranges" comparison.

If you have to dispute, dispute with logic. You seem angered without reason.

Jai Ho, Mumbai said...


Always a pleasure to read your comments and your blog. Thanks for "existing".

Ray Lightning said...


I think most criticism against population growth stems from racist ideas. I don't deny that racism is deeply engrained in our society (and think-tanks). Very little understanding of the population problem comes from proper science (environmental impact, resource planning etc).

Coming to the specifics of population growth in Islamic countries, it is the outcome of two issues (a) rampant illiteracy (b) opposition to birth control. Addressing these two causes is mighty difficult, but there is no other way out.

It is utterly silly to think of weapons of mass destruction (biological, chemical or nuclear) for handling the population problem. They will not work out. They will cause humongous suffering and mass-genocide true, but they will not wipe out the entire population (or alter the population balance). Only Hitler-style concentration camps can decimate populations, and it is outrageous to think in those terms. I would be deeply surprised if strategic think-tanks (however racist they might be) resort to such ideas in today's world. They will not work out. We humans have grown up, and will offer strict opposition to such methods.

Bottom line : in a war, there is no winner. This is particularly true with weapons of mass destruction. The next major use of these weapons (biological or nuclear) will happen from irrational actors, not from big powers. This is the reality, so we should think of how to deal with that.

In India, this is particularly relevant because we know very well who the irrational actors are, and how reckless they can get. An irrational enemy is far more dangerous than an evil enemy.


I am not saying that deployment of ground troops will not happen. But what I say is that air-attacks will happen first (by both airplanes and missiles). Naval blockade will also happen. Pakistan has to deal with how to respond to such attacks. The critical thinking of whether to use nuclear weapons or not, will have to be made even before ground troops are deployed.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I meant Mc Chrystal and not Mc Carthy.

Error regretted.

Anonymous said...

Jai Ho Mumbai, stop being BUA's ball-carrier.

Prasun Sengupta, thank you for your inputs. I remember reading your blog about ADM. can you offer us any updates?

To Prasun I am not angry with Bengal. I just dont like him implying Indias nuclear arsenal is shit by crapping out some 1998 figures. That apart i hold no heart feelings. and i am well aware Bengal will take it casually to churn out a logical discussion, the way he always has and not delete and frown over it.


Anonymous said...

contd... and prasun you too in the process of a relevant discussion should not feel pity to smoke Bengal if he is wrong. And he is right now. Those figures look like they are taken from a Pakistani level 5 math book

Prasun K Sengupta said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Jai Ho, Mumbai: Many thanks.

To Ray Lightning: As per the Indian Army's Pro-Active Strategy (aka Cold Start doctrine), any full-scale hostilities with Pakistan in future will last, at most, for no more than 10 days. Consequently, there will be NO/ZERO possibility of the Army waiting it out for even a day, in the hopes of the IAF carrying out air campaigns aimed at paralysing Pakistan's ground forces. It will have to be hyperwar or parallel war, with all three armed services of India participating in the hostilities at the same time. The notion of waging sequential-type wars like OP Desert Storm or OP Iraqi Freedom does not apply at all to the India-Pakistan war scenario. And this is exactly why Indian Army HQ is deeply worried as the IAF has clearly made its displeasure known over not being consulted by Army HQ when formulating the Pro-Active Strategy. The IAF has clearly stated that, as things now stand with a steadily diminishing combat aircraft fleet strength, the IAF will not be able to lend the required quantum of close air support to the Army for the first 72 hours of an all-out war with Pakistan. The Army is now thus in a quagmire as it does not have its own integral close air support providers (like attack helicopters or UCAVs) and the MoD continues to blunder along instead of displaying decisive leadership by putting its feet down and forcing IAF HQ to transfer its existing attack helicopter assets to the Army Aviation Corps! The MoD is even refusing to entertain the Army's request for acquiring UCAVs in a big way to compensate for the IAF'sd inability to power dedicated and persistent close air support. Unless and until this problem is resolved on a war-footing, no one from Indian Army HQ or IAF HQ will advocate initiating any kind of armed hostilities against Pakistan. That's the hard-to-digest truth. Kargil-type limited hostilities contained within a single theatre is possible, but all-out war throughout the India-Pakistan border remains a pipe-dream between now and 2018. Pakistan's military and civilian decision-makers have clearly realised this and it is for this reason that the present DG of ISI and Pakistan's President have boldly stated that they don't perceive India's military might as posing the principal/immediate existential threat. Regarding the Indian Navy's war plans against Pakistan, the Indian Navy has NEVER even contemplated the imposition of a naval blocade against Pakistan. Going by the Navy's exercise plan during Ex Brass Tacks in 1986/1987, its operational deployment during OP Vijay in mid-1999 and by its employment during OP Parakram in 2002, it is amply clear that the Navy at best will only create a 'cordon sanitaire' for a temporary period (six hours at most) by approaching Karachi from the north-western part of the Arabian Sea (facing Oman), conducting limited tactical interdiction operations against shore-based Pakistan Navy establishments and selective economic targets (like POL storage farms) in and around Karachi, and then withdrawing back to the northern Arabian Sea just outside the Straits of Hormuz. Given the type and number of assets at the Indian Navy's disposal, there's no way any naval operations planner will consider an extended deployment of an aircraft carrier-led battle group off Karachi, since the Pakistan Navy's maritime strike capabilities (i.e. its P-3C Orions and its three Agosta 90B SSKs) remain formidable sea-denial arsenals. Only if the Indian Navy deploys two aircraft carrier-led battle groups against Karachi will an economic blocade become a realistic possibility, not until then.

Jai Ho said...


2018 is a long long way off! And MoD remains chained to Mr Sluggish AK Anthony - that bugger is no good in pushing files - so there goes the dream of getting anything fast. He is not going to go out of his way and ruffle feathers to get strategic weapons for the Armed Forces.

Two aircraft carriers - well Gorshkov is way way off and the new negotiations have to be entered again - this is hopefully going to be the last.

Its shameful to think that a country like India cannot do the following to Pakistan:

1. Punish it punitively for terror acts inside India (even then here in black ops, Military intelligence far better than RAW).

2. No naval blockade

3. No air superiority for first 72 decisive hours.

The only way I see subduing Pakistan in face of a grave threat in that case, will be active support from another nation and we all know that that nation will NOT be USA.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Jai Ho: It would be terribly unfair to pin all the blame on the shoulders of A K Antony for India's strategic indecisiveness. The entire Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS) should be held accountable for the lapses, retrospectively. For instance, during the days of the NDA Govt the CCNS, immediately after OP Vijay in 1999 re-approved the construction of six strategically vital roads (which were originally approved by the Congress-I-led Govt way back in 1981 as part of Operation Falcon, but which the Rajiv Gandhi-led Govt abruptly terminated), but work on all this has not proceeded at all till today due to objections from the Ministry of Forests & Environment. The MoD can try its best to push through certain projects, but if the Union Ministry of Finance and the Prime Minister's Office do not act in sync with the MoD to secure the country's vital national security interests, it is then no use pointing the finger at others, be it within India or external entities. For instance, after 26/11 the former Union Home Affairs Minister Shivraj Patil and his state-level counterpart in Maharashtra should have been arrested on charges of criminal negligence and for not empowering the Mumbai Police for combatting such terrorist threats. But this has yet to happen, Why? Why is accountability not being enforced?

Anonymous said...

hmm, why shouldn't the USA take out Pakistan's reactors? Should be easy, for a hyperpower, to replicate what Israel did to Iraq's Osirak, back in the 80's. I am so surprised that GWB did not follow this strategy..and will the new USA prez have the guts to do it!? what do you think?

Jai Shri 3.1428571 said...

Anon above:

USA will NOT, I repeat, will NOT, take out any of the Pak nuclear reactors. The Pakis are very smart - they will not allow their nuclear installations to be OVERTLY taken over by Taliban or Al-Qaeda elements.

Read above - Pak Army has been infiltrated by second rung Islamists taken in during the ZIA regime whose loyalties lie with Taliban and Al-Qaeda. It is smarter that they do nothing now but bide their time, as a whole host of "brother Islamofascist" generals will be coming to power in the next couple of years.

USA does not have the wherewithal for a conventional air strike and the political will. Israel has, India may be "forced" to act due to some "incidents" inside INDIA.

USA is just interested in oil, gas, gold and copper and excavation and drilling rights. They were willing to deal with Taliban - remember. Well, ZAL - Khalilzad the American Afghan who hosted the Taliban back in those days, is coming to Afghanistan to do exactly the same - and bring Mullah Omar out of his cave.

The Americans gave Pakistan USD 10 billion, winked and smiled as Pakistan built their arsenal. Are you trying to tell me suddenly the mighty "hyper power" US is worried. Do you think US is stupid to let 10 billion dollar go without any "oversight". The truth is, US Generals and vested parties skimmed off at least 4 billion for themselves, the Pakistani generals also made another 3 billion or so. That left 3 billion for actual armament purchases. That is the way the dice rolls. US Generals love Pakistan Generals for this very reason - most have black accounts in offshore Dubai / Islamic emirates. And they will not want to upset this applecart.

A nuclear Pak with mullahs in charge frightens the Democrats but not the extreme rightwingers - and few elements in Republicans like Cheney et al. They find it easier to deal with Pak Army and Islamic Mullahs - they keep the whole bunch of illiterate Pakis under their solid control.

So, to summarize, will US blow the Pakistani nuclear sites - NO.

Do they want Pakistan defanged - YES. But only so much that India continues to be scared of a destabilized Pakistan.

After all, US does not want economic competition from a resurgent INDIA. They have to deal with a resurgent CHINA, a resurgent RUSSIA. And US is becoming bankrupt day by day. California, the 5th largest economy in the world, is BANKRUPT. Do you really see the mercantile US ceding way to INDIA. NO !!

Hence, US will never attack the nuclear facilities themselves. They will want to create a situation where India / Israel may have no alternative but to act. But US / CHINA will step in and stop the hostilities before Pakistan Army is decapitated.



Thanks for the nuggets - MoEF & MoD - and other such bureaucratic tussles will be the undoing of many a good "project" - pushing them to become a reality more on power point presentations and file cabinets.

Hope this Cong govt which has got a fairly good mandate do something proactively.

My personal fav - Phalcon AWACS coming home !!!

Jai Ho said...



Shivraj Patil arrested???

Which country you live in buddy? I know what you mean - in ideal conditions this would have been done. But Sengupta, this is INDIA - where Patil probably bent over his backside to get some "gochi" deals to happen as Home Min oversight - so that Cong gets moolah stashed in black accounts for poll funding. Hence Patil becomes an acolyte, a "performer" for the political party.

Anonymous said...

Did you hear about Ramlal Yadav BuA?? Check your friend AQ's site....

TTV India

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To BuA Da: I hate to destroy your enthusiasm about the first A-50E PHALCON's arrival, but I would hold my horses for the first six months to see if Russia's Rosoboronexport can live up to its product-support commitments. For it could well be that the Ruskie military-industrial complex could allow history to repeat itself and may be found wanting in terms of adhering to contractual commitments, if if this happens the PHALCONs could well end up spending more time on the ground than in the air! I hope the IAF has made contingency plans for procuring the aircraft-specific spares from Uzbekistan's Tashkent Aircraft Production Organisation (TAPO), which has an IL-76 final assembly line (although the components and complete PS-90A turbofans are still sourced from Russia). My personal platform choice for the PHALCON would have been the Airbus A310, which along with the PHALCON mission sensor/management avionics suite was originally jointly proposed by Israel Aerospace Industries way back in 2000 to both Australia (for Project Wedgetail) and India. I just hope that choosing the IL-76 platform was does not end up as being an ill-conceived decision.



Hilarious, I saw that. Ahmed Quraishi is now trying to put a spin that Baitullah Mehsud is a Hindu and is actually known as RAMLAL YADAV.

Well, since they are into it, might as well read this - from RUPEENEWS:

1. California was named after Calif(Ha)ronia: Caliph Haroon Rashid

2. THE FOUR SUPERPOWERS OF PROTO-HISTORY: China, Egypt, Iraq and Pakistan. The Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates delta, the Yangtze Delta, and the Indus, are the wombs of all civilizations on our earth. These river valley spawned and nurtured humanity

So TTV, there you have it. PAKISTAN as a superpower of PROTO HISTORY. Maybe BALUCHISTAN may claim it to be them now.



Prasun Da,

I know you are right - but hate to think otherwise.

Kannan,India said...

Does anybody have a profile on
Ahmed Qurashi..?
Is there any medical or fraud history! Its amazing he gets to write columns in mainstream Jang English(The and all..
btw..AQ Khan write inspiring pieces as is fun.. but time-consuming and there is always a danger that .if u read stuff repeatedly might over-write the facts you got from reading mainstream news media..

Anonymous said...

Avid Historian

Pakistan is a country without an identity. People like Ahmed Quarishi are rampant and rule public opinion there. Its a nation gone collectively mad. But the method in the madness is also interesting to observe. The problem is that the soft Indian govt. is unable to tackle anything. We are third class citizens in our own country. We expect events to take care of themselves and that right will eventually triumph evil. That it will, but the only question is : at what cost and finally when ?

Anonymous said...

exports consortium pardon candidate sustainable wavelength heat gladly disclosing mary utilize
semelokertes marchimundui

Anonymous said...

Very Interesting!
Thank You!

Anonymous said...

Hey guys,

I'm new here.
I'm looking for a [url= ]lawyer[/url]! :(
Can anyone help me out here!?

I've already tried

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Months after RIM introduced the Black - Berry 8800 the Black -
Berry World Edition 8830 was released to CDMA users in the United States.

Does the service or product provide real value to its customers regardless if they're involved with the company as a distributor. Having a dead cell phone can leave you stranded in the middle of nowhere and a laptop without charge mar your work plans or the purpose of travel itself.

Feel free to surf to my webpage :: state department travel advisories
my webpage >

Anonymous said...

Likе the ρlague, unless some snotty vegan trіes to corner them on the ground where I wanteԁ the pull-up
bar to be statіoned. Shrimp іs ѕeafood
usеd in several diet hot chocolate recipes. My carbs stаrtеd coming
from tubеrs such and sweеt potatoеs, and cаshewѕ.

The iΡhοne 4 S shows as 800 MH z, diet hot chocolаte 256
MB of RAM, and 512 MВ of RΟM. It's hugely frustrating and, occasionally, of medical concern.

Here is my webpage: paleo breakfast recipes

Anonymous said...

Look into your own and your families medical history for three generations and see
how that works for you and your content. The diet was low-carbohydrate, similar
to the ones that were consumed by our ancestors was not complicated in any manner.
Of course, this is the guy I'd be looking to for all things Paleo.

My webpage - The paleo diet for athletes

Anonymous said...

Is it okay for a couples therapist to do individual EMDR with their clients meaning not conjoint sessions
while doing EMDR and still be the couple's therapist in conjoint sessions?

Look into my web site - how to find an ex boyfriend

Anonymous said...

I just finished tracks with Ne-Yo [and] Jadakiss, but right now my main focus is soundtracks, movies and stuff like the Gatorade commercial.
The fact is, logical thinking is a neglected part of daily life especially in children's education and there are some great sites that provide cheat codes and strategy guides for various ps3 console deals.

My website :: buy mass effect

Anonymous said...

To entice drivers to try electric-powered Used Car Listings, auto makers are
lowering the price of entry to the zero-emission lifestyle.
The suspension, and most possible you can find them.

Although they are remarkably fast, it is recommended for ages 5 years
an up. Another resource for producing hydrogen will
include biomass and ethanol, wind farms,
tidal energy, hydroelectric energy, solar and other experimental resources such as Kijiji Winnipeg.
This is a big issue. An app for this purpose
but most of these components are common to both gas and electric 170.

Also visit my blog post :: best rated used
cars :: ::