I would think the Pakistani doctrine is clear
| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| India asks Pakistan to declare its nuke doctrine |
| 2011-12-31 |
| India has pressed Pakistan to enunciate its nuclear doctrine to ensure "transparency and predictability" of its atomic policy, local media reported Friday quoting official sources. The demand was made at a meeting on nuclear confidence building measures (CBMs) earlier this week; the talks took place after nearly four years -- the last such engagement was in the Indian capital in 2007, Xinhua reported according to Financial Express. It is learnt that officials from the Pakistan Army were part of the talks on December 27 in Islamabad, which was led by officials from the foreign ministries of the two countries, the newspaper said. The sources said that in view of the concerns about the safety and security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, there is a felt need for an official doctrine on their nuclear "command and control". India, which has declared its nuclear doctrine, told Pakistan that if it demonstrates practical measures on "restraint and responsibility" towards its nuclear assets, it will be considered a "confidence-building measure" on the nuclear front, the newspaper said. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #2 The US faced the same problem with the Soviet Union, which was eventually clarified through treaties. Though on the surface they would seem to be meaningless, in reality there are a lot of things that don't matter strategically, but can prevent lethal misunderstandings. Some that come to mind: 1) Notification prior to detonation and missile tests, at least providing a window in which they will happen. Integral to this is some means to destruct off course test missiles, if not real ones. 2) Limitations on type and location of tests. 3) Nuclear accident protocols, if the other country may be impacted by downwind contamination. 4) Naval boundaries for vessels with nuclear weapons capabilities which are greater than for warships with conventional weapons. 5) Third nation arbitration of nuclear subject disagreements. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2011-12-31 09:52 |
| #1 I would think the Pakistani doctrine is clear |
| Posted by: john frum 2011-12-31 07:07 |