Pakistan has worked hard and successfully to build diverse nuclear capabilities. It will retain these capabilities for the foreseeable future as a necessary deterrent against perceived existential threats from India. At this juncture, Pakistan’s military leadership in Rawalpindi can choose to accept success in achieving a “strategic” deterrent against India — a nuclear force posture sufficient to prevent limited nuclear exchanges and a major conventional war. Alternatively, it can choose to continue to compete with India in the pursuit of “full spectrum” deterrence, which would entail open-ended nuclear re- quirements against targets both near and far from Pakistan. These choices would lead Pakistan to two starkly different nuclear futures and places in the global nuclear order.
Pakistan is now competing successfully with — and in some respects is outcompeting — India. Paki- stan operates four plutonium production reactors; India operates one. Pakistan has the capability to produce perhaps 20 nuclear warheads annually; India appears to be producing about five warheads an- nually. But given its larger economy and sizable nuclear infrastructure, India is able to outcompete Pa- kistan in fissile material and warhead production if it chooses to do so. Pakistan has prepared for this eventuality by investing in a large nuclear weapons production complex. Whether New Delhi chooses to compete more intensely or not, it is a losing proposition for Pakistan to sustain, let alone expand, its current infrastructure to produce greater numbers of nuclear weapons and their means of delivery. Just as the Soviet Union’s large nuclear arsenal was of no help whatsoever for its manifold economic and societal weaknesses, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons do not address its internal challenges.
Pakistan seeks to be viewed as a “normal” state possessing nuclear weapons, as exemplified by member- ship in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Its diplomats seek a civil-nuclear cooperation agreement similar to the one accorded to India. A commercial pathway to being mainstreamed into the global nuclear order is highly unlikely for Pakistan, which lacks the commercial leverage and support that resulted in a nuclear deal for India. A different path toward mainstreaming is available to Pakistan, via nuclear-weapon-related initiatives. Having succeeded in achieving the requirements of “strategic” deterrence, Pakistan is in a position to consider nuclear initiatives that would clarify its commitment to strengthening nuclear norms, regimes, and practices, and would address widely held perceptions that its nuclear deterrence practices are a major source of danger in South Asia.
We propose that Pakistan consider five nuclear weapon-related initiatives:
- Shift declaratory policy from “full spectrum” to “strategic” deterrence.
- Commit to a recessed deterrence posture and limit production of short-range delivery vehicles and tactical nuclear weapons.
- Lift Pakistan’s veto on Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty negotiations and reduce or stop fissile material production.
- Separate civilian and military nuclear facilities.
- Sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty without waiting for India.
None of these initiatives would impair Pakistan’s successful accomplishment of strategic deterrence against India. They would, however, require difficult and fundamental adjustments to thinking about nuclear weapons and Pakistan’s deeply ingrained habits of transactional bargaining. Precisely because these initiatives would be so difficult and unusual for Pakistan, they would change perceptions about Pakistan and its place in the global nuclear order. As such, they could facilitate Pakistan’s entrance into the nuclear mainstream, while strengthening nonproliferation norms, bolstering global disarmament hopes, and setting the bar higher for new entrants into the NSG.
The global nuclear order will not be strengthened by trying to accommodate a Pakistan that is greatly increasing its nuclear capabilities while rejecting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. Nor will Pakistan become a normal, nuclear state by competing with India or by harboring groups that could spark a war with India. The international community is unlikely to accommodate Pakistan’s desire to enter the nuclear mainstream without corresponding steps by Paki- stan to align aspects of its nuclear policy and practices closer with international norms. The steps we propose lend themselves to mainstreaming. More importantly, these steps would advance Pakistan’s national, social, and economic security interests...

Comments(15)
It is a very strange proposal to say the least lopsided. Couple serious flaws here: "Pakistan has the capability to produce perhaps 20 nuclear warheads annually" no one knows the exact capacity of the four plutonium plants at Khushab. PAEC nor the Government of Pakistan has ever disclosed the capacity of these four plants, it is purely an assumption on the part of the experts based on imagery. "Sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty without waiting for India" just the thought of this idea dispels the understanding of the authors about the regional issue. Why is India, who happen to introduce nuclear weapons in South Asia, be given a rain check on this issue. As far as the other tactical and strategic issues concern about the delivery system, Pakistan's stance is very clear and more or less it is a copy of NATO's Flexible Response doctrine.
Why am i not surprised that Pakistan totalled ignored India`s No First Use policy!! Like it means nothing at all. It would have been a great gesture by Pakistan for peace in the region,if it had done the same. But if course not,who gives up on a strategic advantage. A half baked democracy that Pakistan is cannot do anything better. If peace in the region was ever Pakistan`s priority,this development starved region would have done so much better. Instead of wasting resources on nuclear power and fighting terrorists. Moreover,the power of the Pak army over the political institutions and their soft corner for radical outfits make the possession of n power extremely dangerous and volatile. So let`s not talk about lobsided views here.
Let me begin by assessing your study as myopic and generally ignorant of the geo-strategic realities of South Asia. Thought, you will talk about conflict - resolution measures to reduce the nuclear risks inherent in the Pak - India equation. Yes, a wicked issue like Kashmir is hard to resolve, but if US and other Western powers are determined, this seemingly arduous challenge is surmountable. this is the KEY to achieve the objective of strategic stability in South Asia. Goes amiss, unfortunately. Secondly, India is enjoying all the benefits of being a NSG member, without having been inducted in the Group, and, surely, Pakistan will be deprived of all such perks even if it becomes signatory to CTBT, FMT or anyother nuclear non- proliferation regime. This is a reality; you know it well. Then, what is the incentive in losing one's liberty pf action; by endorsing and yet not getting the due benefits. India's Cold Start / Pro-active Operations strategy is an existential threat for Pakistan in essence, if not in form. Indian Strike Corps have been concentrated on Pakistani borders from erstwhile deeper locations in Indian hinterland. For what? paksiatn' s Nasr will actually induce strategic stability by foreclosing the possibility of an escalation.
The fifth suggestion to Pakistan sounds amusing .. "CTBT - without waiting for India"..
Maybe you can add China`s continued assistance to Pakistan as well. The latest being a multi million dollar nuclear reactor they are building for Pakistan. And of course let`s not forget how the US has considered Pak as their long standing strategic ally. Both China and US are permanent members of the UNSC. Will they take any resposibilty of how they have contributed to this? Or is there any other nation except India who will keep trying to wake this world up from their perpetual slumber. International Peace has been blattantly ignored by all these so called super powers. US will keep creating Frankensteins like the Taliban. Very soon there will be nukes in the hands of terrorists,unless of course they already have it.
Nuclear - weapon related initiatives proposed in the Paper are discriminatory i.e. asking Pakistan to go extra extra miles and not seeking the reciprocatory / matching measures from India - the raison d'etre of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. The Paper also misses out (deliberately) the need of conflict - resolution, albeit Kashmir Dispute, for ensuring sustainable strategic stability in South Asia. So - called 'Strategic Restraint' displayed by India in dealing with Pakistan is an exaggerated assessment. Permanent relocation of strike corps along Pakistani border by moving them from garrisons deep in Indian hinterland is manifestation of the Indian intent to operationalize the Po-active Strategy ( Cold Start Doctrine) - posing existential threat to Pakistan. Good that the authors have justified the Pakistani nuclear capability to respond to this threat spectrum. Wish the authors had not seen the strategic environment purely from Indian perspective; only then an objective assessment and workable way forward for Pakistan could be proposed.
I've no faith in India, Pakistan should continue full spectrum deterrence, as India under Modi is fundamental Hindu state, A natural threat to Pakistan and it's Ideological Borders. But we shouldn't compromise on our economy too, i like your Soviet Union Example. Thank You
Sadly, the recommendations continue to be pro-India, as always. Such great Think Tanks in US, generously funded, staffed by the best brains yet continue to remain oblivious to the cause of Conflict between Pakistan and India. While they fail to note the Cause of Conflict, they also offer no help in its Management. UN has been pushed into a dignified dysfunctional body and US focuses on its own strategic aspirations. Regional conflicts are not being addressed by the erstwhile sole-superpower not the UN. How does a small country like Pakistan 'negotiate' with a seven times bigger country saddled with historic venom and prejudice? Oh please Gentlemen of the Great US Think Tanks, let Pakistan manage the Conflict till a wiser, balanced leadership emerges at strategic plain in India.
Have you been to Pakistan, please?
This can be at best a wishful thinking, treating Pakistan with discrimination while letting free hand to India to continue building its nuclear arsenal with out any precondition. Will you rise above the miopic approach, self serving motives and prejudice s towards Muslim world?? Such pseudo-intellect is quite apparently interpreted. Do not befool yourself. This country precise understand its security concerns and the needs. And the writers are not sellable community...... It is sacred profession.
Toby Dalton has written brilliant article without good understanding of Pakistan's security problems. I wish that he should follow a policy of non-discrimination with Pakistan. There is no need to create panic situation about Pakistan's nuclear programme which is very much for defensive purpose and have no offensive strategy. for this reason Pakistan will continue to maintain a minimum credible nuclear deterrence and the country remains fully committed to protecting its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. In this context, Pakistan without engaging in an arms race, Pakistan will maintain credible minimum deterrence to ensure regional security and stability. The majority of Pakistani are hopeful that the West including America will change their discriminatory policies and it is our hope that the US would follow an evenhanded and non-discriminating approach in fields like civil nuclear cooperation. The west must understand that without the protection of country there will be no revival of the economy which is the key to progress and development. Moreover, the west must realise that nuclear ability is essential for our social sector, energy sector, economic development and it is also an essential prerequisite for strengthening democracy and the rule of law. Remember weaker Pakistan cannot better for the regional stability and stronger Pakistan will be the gate way of peace, prosperity and stability of the world. Thus, lets international community support Pakistan in dealing with India and its aggressive behavior and without fair attitude of New Delhi there will be no economic progress in the region. Dr. A. Z. Hilali- University of Peshawar-Khyber Pakhtunkhwa- Pakistan
The authors propose that Pakistan should consider five nuclear weapon-related initiatives. But they conveniently ignore how Washington’s blind support to India over the past decade, in an effort to raise India’s regional profile has disturbed the strategic balance in South Asia, making it extremely difficult for Pakistan’s nuclear establishment to observe nuclear restraint. Furthermore, the authors argue that Pakistan cannot be viewed as a normal nuclear state because it continues to expand its stockpile of nuclear weapons. What makes this claim totally egregious is that Pakistan is not the only country in the world to increase the size of its nuclear arsenal. India continues to produce fissile material for weapons and spends more than $5 billion annually on its nuclear programme.
One has to agree with the analysis of Rabia, based on her arguments and the facts quoted. Unfortunately, the writers have cleverly deflected the focus from Indian rapidly growing nuclear weapons program and ignored tons of fissile material stockpiles held with India. Why? The answer is very simple. It's just another effort of the authors to shield India from any kind of scrutiny and drumbeat Pakistan's modest strategic weapons program initiated in response to Indian threats. Objectivity demanded that facts were highlighted about Indian turbo - charged growth of nuclear weapons (including thermonuclear devices) and development of longer range missiles and other platforms - besides billions of dollars being spent on development of threatening conventional capability to operationalize the Pakistan - centric Cold Start Doctrine, disrupting the strategic stability in South Asia. US would do well to avoid discriminating between a new friend (common foe of China) and an old Non - NATO Major Ally and play a facilitative role to resolve the disputes between the two countries for greater startegic restraint and stability in the Region.
India cheated Canadians and US by diverting nuclear tech acquired for peaceful purposes. Pakistan's WMDs programme and delivery vehicles (2700 KM maximum range) are India centric. India under Hindu fanatics, countless fissile material and WMDs equipped ICBMs is going to pose national security threat for US. Strategic stability and NWFZ South Asia can be achieved if US gets serious for instance US should provide conditional support to Indian bid for UNSC's seat by asking India to join the NPT as a NNWS and get the membership. However, if cheats again as it had in the past it's membership will come to an end.
the mentions the one side while keeping india safe at all paths seems quite embarassing to me and posses a wide range question are these all international laws regarding the mainstreaming of nuclear weapons were just been made for pakistan not israel,usa and india seems to enjoy the better perspective.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.