Business capitals are first targets for nuke attack

Business capitals are first targets for nuke attack
Dr Gursharan Dhanjal

New Delhi, June 3:Theories of deterrence based on the logic of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) have shown to be highly unstable and accident-prone.

During the cold war years, the world was brought to the brink of an "accidental" nuclear holocaust on nearly 800 occasions. In the case of India and Pakistan, the nuclear balance will be fraught with even greater risk as the travel-time for a nuclear-tipped missile is less than three minutes as against about 40 minutes in the case of a cold war nuclear conflict of yesteryears.

Despite good intentions on the part of India and Pakistan, deterrence can break down and a potential nuclear use will give very little time to people to react. And a nuclear face-off between the two historical belligerents will only leave nearly 100 million dead and tens of hundreds of surviving victims of nuclear radiation.

A nuclear war in South Asia will spare nobody. A regional nuclear holocaust could severely affect neighboring countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Burma and to an extent, China. Pakistan's Ghauri missile is capable of carrying one tonne conventional or nuclear payload and can strike up to 1000 miles-that virtually covers whole of India. On the contrary, India's Agni can strike up to 1500 miles and can be tipped with a payload of 1 tonne. This means say that whether it is the Pak F-16s, India's MiG 29s or Mirages, or even ballistic missile system, both the countries have weapon systems that cover the entire region. What next with this nuclear parity, if at all there is one?

In conventional military power, India probably has a two and a half to one advantage over Pakistan. Pakistan developed nuclear weapons to counter India's conventional might. Even in case of a "limited" war, with 10 bombs exploding in the major cities of each country, more than 6 million people are going to die in the immediate blasts and fire and from radiation.


In the first few seconds after the explosion, there are three effects directly related to the fireball, which typically account for the vast majority of casualties - blast or shock, thermal radiation and prompt nuclear radiation. Besides, there are effects due to the electromagnetic pulse that is produced by the interaction of charged particles generated by gamma rays with the earth's magnetic field.
The range for blast effect increases significantly with the explosive yield of the weapon. In a typical air-burst, these values of overpressure and wind velocity will prevail at a range of 0.7 km for 1 kiloton (Kt) yield; 3.2 km for 100 Kt, and 15.0 km for 10 Mt. Most of the material damage caused by a nuclear air-burst is caused by a combination of the high static overpressures and the dynamic or blast wind pressures.


The relatively long duration of the compression phase of the blast wave is also significant in that structures weakened by the initial impact of the wave front are literally torn apart by the forces and pressures which follow.


Therefore, the energy of a nuclear explosion is transferred to the surrounding medium in three distinct forms: blast (50%); thermal radiation (35%); and nuclear radiation (15%), causing lasting damages.
For both India and Pakistan, the nuclear targeting strategy will focus on "counter-value" targeting. Broadly defined, counter-value targets consist of the resources necessary for the sustenance of a modern society, including population centers like cities; critical economic and industrial production facilities, such as petroleum refineries, arms and ammunition production facilities, power plants, and national infrastructure assets like communications systems.


Nuclear research labs like BARC and Chashma are the primary targets after cities with more than 1 million population on either side. More than that, destroying the business capitals like Mumbai and Islamabad would make a dent in the economy and have a crippling effect on the nation's growth and development. Close to 80 per cent population in major target cities on either side will be wiped out. Out of all these, the urban centers and business districts remain the soft targets for reasons of not being adequately safeguarded.


It is believed that there would be as much as 2 million immediate fatalities on each side in a limited exchange on military centers; or 17 million (Pakistan) and 30 million (India) immediate fatalities, plus extensive to total economic disruption, in a large or full-scale exchange. In the event of an attack on military bases and cantonments-there are nearly 10 such target areas in Pakistan-the exchange would result in 600,000 immediate fatalities and an equal number of injuries. Fourteen prime targets are identified in India, leading to 550,000 immediate fatalities and 750,000 injuries.


According to estimates, Pakistan is spending 316 million rupees a day; 13 million rupees an hour; 220 rupees a minute and 3 rupees a second on defense. If the two countries could value investment in human priority areas, by diverting a portion of their defense expenditure, they could ensure universal primary education by 2010. In other words, both the countries need to divert their resources towards meeting the economic requirements of the masses rather than threatening each other with their nuclear weapons. This is truer in case of Islamabad as it is continuing to test fire its "already tested" missile systems one after the other.


For both India and Pakistan, the business capitals remain the most vulnerable targets, rather than the national capitals. This way, both New Delhi and Islamabad will have a diplomatic negotiation edge over the other in case of a first nuclear strike. Remember September 11 that rocked the US economy?

Both India and Pakistan have tested nuclear devices of up to 45Kt and 35Kt respectively. The destruction it can cause is at least four times larger and widespread, compared to Hiroshima or Nagasaki put together.


It is only by means of rationalizing "the day after" effects of a nuclear holocaust, that the US is attempting to broker peace in South Asia, as it seems that the deterrence theory is losing its relevance in the region. Rational calculation and fear of mutual destruction has somehow taken a back seat. And one dreads to think of "the day after".

(Dr Gursharan Dhanjal is an expert on South Asia Defence Studies)

http://167.216.192.98/faceoff/lead030602.shtml