“NAVIGATING NUCLEAR CHALLENGES: INDIA’S DOCTRINE AND FUTURE”

Syllabus:

GS 2: (Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice and International Relations)

GS 3: (Technology, Economic Development, Biodiversity, Environment, Security and Disaster Management)

Focus:

India’s nuclear doctrine is under scrutiny due to evolving regional threats from Pakistan and China, technological advancements by adversaries, and debates over the No-First-Use policy. These factors highlight the need to reassess and adapt India’s nuclear posture to maintain strategic stability and effective deterrence.

source:dacu.net

Understanding the Origins of India’s Nuclear Doctrine:

  • Post-Pokhran Context: Following India’s nuclear tests in 1998, the country quickly moved towards establishing a formal nuclear doctrine. Within 15 months, a draft was ready.
  • Key Contributors: K. Subrahmanyam, convenor of the first National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), played a pivotal role in drafting the doctrine.
  • Public Disclosure: On August 17, 1999, the draft was presented to Brajesh Mishra, India’s first National Security Advisor, and was made public to invite scrutiny and suggestions before finalisation.
  • Government Endorsement: Although the draft did not receive an official stamp initially, its principles were later operationalized in 2003 through a government press note.
  • Political Context: The doctrine reflected India’s conceptualization of its role as a nuclear-armed state, emphasising a political rather than a purely military role for nuclear weapons.
What is a Nuclear Doctrine?

  • Employment Strategy: Defines how a nuclear state would use its nuclear weapons in both peace and conflict scenarios.
  • Deterrence Establishment: Aims to establish deterrence by clearly outlining the conditions under which nuclear weapons would be used.
  • Communication of Intent: Helps communicate the state’s intentions and resolve to potential adversaries, reinforcing strategic stability.
  • Guidance for Response: Provides a framework for the state’s nuclear response during wartime, ensuring coherent and planned actions.
  • Strategic Clarity: Ensures clarity in nuclear strategy, reducing ambiguity and potential miscalculations by adversaries.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT):

  • Background: Signed in 1968 and entered into force in 1970, with 190 member states.
  • Objectives: Aims for non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, disarmament, and the right to peaceful nuclear technology use.
  • India’s Stance: India did not sign the NPT or signed and then withdrew, joining Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, and South Sudan in this category.
  • Discriminatory Perception: India views the NPT as discriminatory, arguing it reinforces the monopoly of the five recognized nuclear weapons states (U.S., Russia, China, France, and the UK).
  • Opposition to NPT: India has consistently opposed the NPT, claiming it unfairly limits nuclear capabilities of non-signatory countries while legitimising the existing nuclear powers.
  • First Nuclear Test: India conducted its first nuclear test in May 1974, asserting it was for peaceful purposes.
  • Refusal to Sign: India opposed the indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995 and has maintained its stance against signing the treaty.

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Context:

  • 1998 Nuclear Tests: India conducted nuclear tests in May 1998, showcasing its military nuclear capabilities.
  • Regional Response: Pakistan followed with its own nuclear tests, heightening regional nuclear risks.
  • International Reaction: The global community criticised the tests, leading to sanctions on both nations, which were later lifted.
  • No First Use (NFU) Doctrine: India adopted an NFU policy in January 2003, committing to use nuclear weapons only in retaliation to a nuclear attack.
  • Contrasting Stances: Unlike India, Pakistan has threatened first use of nuclear weapons multiple times, escalating regional tensions.

National Security Council (NSC) of India:

  • Apex Agency: Oversees India’s political, economic, energy, and strategic security concerns.
  • Chief Executive: Led by the National Security Adviser (NSA), a key advisor to the Prime Minister.

Three-Tier Structure:

  • Strategic Policy Group: Formulates strategic policies and assesses national security issues.
  • National Security Advisory Board: Provides advice on national security matters and strategy.
  • Secretariat: Includes the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), coordinating intelligence and security operations.
  • Historical Context: Prior to the NSC, security matters were managed by the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister.

Core Principles of the Doctrine

  • Credible Minimum Deterrence: The doctrine emphasises maintaining a nuclear arsenal sufficient to deter adversaries but not an excessively large stockpile.
  • Retaliation-Only Policy: India’s nuclear posture is strictly retaliatory, avoiding the initiation of a nuclear conflict.
  • Sobriety and Restraint: The principles reflect a restrained approach, aiming to avoid an arms race and nuclear brinkmanship.
  • Nuclear Force Structure: The doctrine directs the creation of a nuclear force that is effective, enduring, diverse, flexible, and responsive to strategic needs.
  • Deterrence Posture: The doctrine underscores the importance of a stable deterrence posture that discourages adversaries from considering a first strike.

Evolving Security Environment:

  • Pakistan’s Full-Spectrum Deterrence: Pakistan has adopted a more aggressive nuclear posture, emphasising first-use and full-spectrum deterrence.
  • China’s Nuclear Expansion: China is significantly expanding its nuclear capabilities, raising concerns about regional stability.
  • Dual Adversary Challenge: India faces the potential challenge of deterring two nuclear-armed adversaries simultaneously, which complicates strategic calculations.
  • Technological Advances: The adversaries’ advances in technology, such as accurate conventional delivery systems, cyber capabilities, and ISR, pose new challenges to India’s nuclear forces.
  • Strategic Environment Dynamics: While India’s nuclear arsenal grows at a measured pace, the doctrine’s flexibility allows for adjustments based on the evolving strategic environment.

No-First-Use Policy: A Pillar of Stability:

  • Defensive Posture: India’s no-first-use (NFU) policy is a key component of its nuclear doctrine, emphasising a defensive rather than aggressive stance.
  • Criticism of NFU: Some critics argue that NFU cedes the initiative to adversaries and encourages disruptive behaviour by Pakistan and China.
  • Deterrence Value: The NFU policy, supported by a credible second-strike capability, provides deterrence without the risks associated with a first-use posture.
  • Challenges of First-Use: A first-use strategy requires a sophisticated and expensive arsenal, along with robust ISR capabilities, which are challenging to maintain.
  • Ambiguity Risks: Dispensing with NFU in favour of strategic ambiguity could lead to misperceptions, increasing the risk of conflict escalation.

Tactical Nuclear Weapons: A Dangerous Misconception:

  • Critique of Tactical Use: The idea of using tactical nuclear weapons for limited destruction and controlled escalation is criticised as overly optimistic.
  • Unpredictable Outcomes: The use of any nuclear weapon, even tactically, could lead to uncontrollable and catastrophic escalation.
  • Doctrine’s Position: India’s doctrine does not include tactical nuclear weapons as part of its deterrence strategy, recognizing the inherent risks.
  • Adversary Response: The adversary’s response to tactical nuclear weapon use would likely be unpredictable and could lead to full-scale nuclear conflict.
  • Stability Concerns: Emphasising tactical nuclear weapons undermines stability and increases the likelihood of nuclear warfare.

Relevance of the Doctrine in Contemporary Times:

  • Unchanging Fundamentals: Despite the changing security environment, the core principles of India’s nuclear doctrine remain relevant and effective.
  • Beacon of Stability: India’s doctrine stands out for its calmness and restraint, providing stability in an otherwise volatile nuclear landscape.
  • Arms Race Avoidance: By adhering to credible minimum deterrence and NFU, India avoids being drawn into an arms race with its nuclear-armed neighbours.
  • Strategic Flexibility: The doctrine’s flexibility allows India to adapt its nuclear force structure and posture in response to new threats without fundamentally altering its principles.
  • International Perception: India’s nuclear doctrine is viewed internationally as a model of responsible nuclear stewardship, promoting global nuclear stability.

Challenges Raised Against India’s Nuclear Doctrine:

  • Changing Regional Dynamics: China’s modernization and expansion of its nuclear arsenal strain India’s minimum deterrence policy, impacting crisis response capabilities.
  • Pakistan Tactical Nuclear Weapons: Pakistan’s development of tactical nukes challenges India’s No-First-Use (NFU) policy and could escalate conflicts in a limited war scenario.
  • Credibility of NFU Policy: Doubts about India’s commitment to NFU if faced with an imminent threat could undermine the doctrine’s deterrence value.
  • Credibility of Deterrence: Questions arise about whether India’s arsenal is sufficient to deter aggressors, especially with China’s growing capabilities.
  • Lack of Counterforce Strategy: Absence of a counter-force strategy limits India’s options against adversaries’ military assets in a nuclear conflict.
  • Vulnerability to First Strike: The NFU policy may expose India to a significant first strike, potentially compromising retaliatory capabilities.

What Should Be Done?

  • Maintain Strategic Restraint: Continue adherence to “No First Use” and “Credible Minimum Deterrence” policies to preserve stability and a responsible nuclear posture.
  • Engage in Dialogue: Regularly engage in strategic dialogues with China and Pakistan to manage concerns, reduce misunderstandings, and prevent conflicts.
  • Strengthen Conventional Capabilities: Enhance conventional military capabilities to deter conventional conflicts and reduce the risk of nuclear escalation.
  • Promote Nuclear Disarmament: Advocate for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, supporting international treaties and urging adoption of NFU policies by other states.
  • Enhance Crisis Management: Improve crisis management through hotlines, joint exercises, and confidence-building measures to prevent accidental escalation.
  • Invest in Missile Defense: Develop and deploy advanced missile defence systems to counter threats from modernising nuclear arsenals.
  • Cooperate with Allies: Strengthen cooperation with allies like the U.S. for intelligence sharing, joint exercises, and coordinated defence strategies.

Conclusion:

India’s nuclear doctrine, established 25 years ago, remains largely relevant despite emerging challenges. The principles of credible minimum deterrence and No-First-Use continue to provide a stable strategic framework. However, adapting to technological and geopolitical changes is essential to preserve deterrence and ensure national security.

Source: The Indian Express

Main Practice Question:

How should India adopt its nuclear doctrine to address the challenges posed by evolving regional threats and technological advancements? Discuss the implications for strategic stability and deterrence.

Associated Article:

https://universalinstitutions.com/nuclear-signalling-the-need-for-new-guard-rails/