Public sentiment is divided yet primarily critical regarding the military's control over nuclear authority in Pakistan. While there are strong nationalist sentiments and pride in nuclear achievements, significant concerns are raised about the risks of impulsive military decision-making and the implications for regional security. Many express distrust towards the integrity of military and governmental narratives, highlighting fears of authoritarianism and foreign influence.

Pakistan Military

Pakistani Government

[deleted]

Pakistan has a basic enriched uranium, likely minimally boosted bomb. India has basic Teller-Ullam by all indications, including own military grade plutonium production.

Soviet Union and France played role in both countries' nuclear programs. USSR provided brains, and France machinery. Both countries had their nuclear scientists studying in Moscow en masse, with one very obvious aim.

baybal

Don't know how I missed this post:

  
[https://www.reddit.com/r/nuclearweapons/comments/1igltaj/does\_india\_have\_a\_problem\_staging\_their\_weapons/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nuclearweapons/comments/1igltaj/does_india_have_a_problem_staging_their_weapons/)

High_Order1

I've been digging:

&gt;**Pakistan's Nuclear Controls​**  
  


&gt;10 member National Command Authority in charge of all Nuclear Facilities  

&gt;The president will be the authority\&amp;#8217;s chairman and the prime minister its vice-chairman. The authority will include ministers of foreign affairs, defence, interior, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, chiefs of army, navy and air force, and director-general of the Strategic Plans Division. The director-general of the Strategic Plans Division will be the authority\&amp;#8217;s secretary.  

&gt;Standard "Two Man Rule" to authenticate access to nuclear release codes.  

&gt;Nuclear Warheads "De-mated" from missiles or bomb casings, and components are to be put into operation only with the consent of a National Command Authority.  

&gt;Pakistan has developed its own version of "Permissive Action Links," or PALs, a sophisticated type of lock the U.S. uses to prevent unauthorized launching.  

&gt;A comprehensive, intrusive Personnel Reliability System (along the lines of one in the US) that monitors employees, before, during and after employment.  

&gt;A ten thousand member Security Force, led by a two star General, dedicated to guarding the Nuclear facilities.  

&gt;Possible "phony bunkers and dummy warheads" to deter raids, by internal and external threats.  

&gt;Possibly between 100 to 200 nuclear warheads (Number of Missile Delivery Systems unknown)

  
[https://defence.pk/threads/security-of-pakistani-nuclear-assets-interview-of-director-spd-pakistani-nca.9042/](https://defence.pk/threads/security-of-pakistani-nuclear-assets-interview-of-director-spd-pakistani-nca.9042/)



[http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily\_detail.asp?id=57458](http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57458)

After the security leakages associated with A Q Khan, Pakistan's military leadership took important steps to establish improved safety and security practices. Pakistan's military authorities and civilian leaders also established a robust nuclear command and control structure after testing weapons in 1998. Today, the military's Strategic Plans Division devotes over 8,000 men, mostly undercover, to protecting Pakistan's weapons and fissile material. The Pakistani military is a highly capable and professional force. It is highly improbable that it would hand over its crown jewels to individuals or organizations that it cannot control during this period of unrest.







[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/washington/18nuke.html?pagewanted=3&amp;ei=5087&amp;em&amp;en=0a660d001add7cd0&amp;ex=1195534800](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/washington/18nuke.html?pagewanted=3&amp;ei=5087&amp;em&amp;en=0a660d001add7cd0&amp;ex=1195534800)

Nov 18, 2007

\#2

U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms



Article Tools Sponsored By

By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD

Published: November 18, 2007



WASHINGTON, Nov. 17  Over the past six years, the Bush administration has spent almost $100 million on a highly classified program to help Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistans president, secure his countrys nuclear weapons, according to current and former senior administration officials.

Skip to next paragraph

Haraz N. Ghanbari/Associated Press



The aid, buried in secret portions of the federal budget, paid for the training of Pakistani personnel in the United States and the construction of a nuclear security training center in Pakistan, a facility that American officials say is nowhere near completion, even though it was supposed to be in operation this year.



A raft of equipment  from helicopters to night-vision goggles to nuclear detection equipment  was given to Pakistan to help secure its nuclear material, its warheads, and the laboratories that were the site of the worst known case of nuclear proliferation in the atomic age



The American program was created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when the Bush administration debated whether to share with Pakistan one of the crown jewels of American nuclear protection technology, known as permissive action links, or PALS, a system used to keep a weapon from detonating without proper codes and authorizations.



In the end, despite past federal aid to France and Russia on delicate points of nuclear security, the administration decided that it could not share the system with the Pakistanis because of legal restrictions.

Technically any aircraft that can physically lift a nuclear bomb can be made nuclear-capable.  But as stated above, even if we did sell the hardware and software for the planes to arm and drop the bombs, it wouldn't do much good without the bombs themselves.  Using home-built weapons would be like trying to run Windows on a Mac.  It might be technically possible with a lot of reverse-engineering, but it's probably much easier to just install your own nuclear control system.  And if we could put nuclear systems on an F-100 in the 1950s then they can probably figure it out with modern electronics.

Delta_Hammer

India and Pakistan are not in violation of the NPT for the simple reason that they never signed it.


Beyond that nit, as far as I know, "nuclear capable" is about integration with command and control systems and that sort of thing. So it's not really portable between nations-i don't think there's anything intrinsically nuclear capable about an export F-16, beyond basics like weight and speed. Any integration would be up to the purchasing nation.

tomrlutong

Nuclear armament communications are typically nation-specific and dependent on the (overwhelmingly classified) arming and launch authorization protocols that an individual nation uses. 

The case of the F-16s sold to Pakistan is a good example, as while they’re capable of carrying the necessary equipment to arm US-owned nukes, that equipment is neither supplied or compatible with the weapons developed by the Pakistani nuclear program. 

For countries with the materials and technology, the hardest part is making sure that a bomb *doesn’t* explode unless explicitly authorized. That part is where most of the technical complexity and incompatibility lies

UsualFrogFriendship

I can strap a nuclear RPG from the 50s and 60s onto a cessna and it'd be "nuclear capable." We, nor the french, sold either country a nuclear capability. We sold those countries fighter aircraft, that like pretty much any modern combat aircraft, could be configured to drop a nuke. Theres a massive difference between a jet that can in theory be used to drop a nuclear bomb and actually having nuclear capability.

Soggy-Coat4920

None of these countries are stupid or lack engineers. The idea that they cannot figure out how to drop a bomb because we hold back something is just PR for allowing sales. Certainly the Israelis do it. The USA is full of engineers and scientists of Indian descent - that's a hint as to brain power. 

Given the war in Ukraine - expect many countries to arm up with their own programs. Sweden and South Africa had viable nuclear programs. Sweden for its own jets and SA for its Bucanners. Did the UK sell SA bomb dropping wiring? Doubt it.

StoutNY

Interesting! both country Nuclear developed by Muslims

ActiveRepair4769

Honestly, whatever respect pakistan has right now is because of this guy, else there'd be no difference between Iraq or Afghanistan and Pakistan.

wise-Username

It's his wish......dr abdul kalam stayed in india bec he saw his future in india while this man didn't

Anyone born before 1947 was technically born in India, though right? This would apply to any Pakistani or Bangladeshi as well.

TeslaModelE

I don't know what the point of this post is. Tons of Muslims left &amp; tons stayed behind. A few were successful in Pakistan, I'm sure many have also regretted the decision, considering India has been the more socio-economically better country than Pakistan over the decades. 

I, for one, am an Indian Muslim. This is my home. &amp; I remain loyal to my country.

AlliterationAlly

There are definitely many great Muslim minds but not given chance if you follow Islam. But if you go against Islam with Muslim name, then definitely welcome

piratekhan

Opposite_Freedom1294

NumerousCrab7627

Say thank you to Brits who took India in 36 pieces but only gave India back in 2 pieces.

**Reminder:** Please be courteous to each other and report any violations of the subreddit rules.

 * Debate the point, not the person.
 * Be respectful and avoid personal attacks.
 * No hate speech.
 * Report rule-breaking content to the moderators.

 


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/pakistan) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

For all the Nawaz and Bhutto fans crying that their leaders were unfairly removed through dictatorships, how does it feel to have these same guys bring in the next dictatorship through their support?

NoUtimesinfinite

Another dark and dangerous chapter in Pakistani nation's history of self-destructive Generals.  Wonder how this one is going to end?

reciprocal_space

Curious about #3, does it mean that if meri jind indulges too much in his favorite drink then goes out and shoots a bunch of people, he can claim he was practicing his powers to protect the state and there will be no questions asked? That’s saddam level immunity.

Frosty_Leading6756

Close enough, welcome back military state of Prussia

absman23

Wonderful_Try_7369

It's like North Korea 2.0, all hail the supreme leader Munir Jind Jan!

khumi01

Zia thought he was god, all they could find was his jaw. Asim thinks he’s god, we’ll see how that turns out.

hnk_1989

InshAllah this will be repealed in a few years. What a stupid amendment.

TitanMaps

Regarding number 1, does this also mean he'll hold the office of COAS and/or CDF for life as well?

Nonellagon

I wonder what whisky has on PPP And PMLUN that they all act like his bitches? FEAR cannot get better of everyone, there is something else.

hellocutiez

Deep down they know they have recognised "israel" but to afraid to announce it. If it's not the case then why life time immunity. Just hang in soon the whole nation will hear from trump that they have done it.

CuteJicama132

kaha gaye R kay bachay jo boltay hei "asim munir meri jind meri jan"

Fun-Negotiation7517

Phele naam ki tou democracy thi, ab tou woh bhi nahi rahi. Everyone should move out of pakistan takay so that general can rule themselves only.

kadhichawalsuperiorr

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

— John F. Kennedy

meowthisisme

Obvious_Onion_7359

Most-Coast7180

So basically a military dictatorship with a few more steps?

PeerSahab008

Is this true?? Sorry I’m out of country and completely out of touch with current affairs.

too_narcissistic

Least-Demand-3143

Can't we just...you know 🙎💥🔫-----&gt; ⚰️🪦
Something like this

Holding a gun to the politicians’ head works!

Ok-Bunch2099

It is an evidence that even top military leadership is not backing Gen. Asim and will not be backing him in future.

No_Neighborhood3467

Oldgun80

India say scripted jang jheet kay unsay zayada damage hamay howa ha 😔🙂‍↔️ afsos kabhi iss army kay lia dua kerte thay

Banda_Takeriyan657

India operates a nuclear triad similar in principle to those of the US and Russia, though much smaller and less diverse. It has around 180 warheads, most of which are intended for delivery by plane launched cruise missile. It also operates truck-mounted ICBMs and a single nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine. 

It is generally accepted that India can produce hydrogen bombs. The most powerful tested had a yield of around 60kt. Officially, India claims to be readily able to produce weapons of around a 200kt yield, which is a mid-sized hydrogen bomb.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Pakistani nuclear programme is very similar to the Indian one, but less well developed. It has a range of air and land launch capabilities, but has yet to build a nuclear submarine. It reportedly has about 170 bombs, with slightly lower tested and claimed yields.

Alesus2-0

Uh, They're both estimated to have around 170 nuclear weapons each. Neither country is confirmed to have h-bombs but it's suspected that India does.

India declared a no-first-use policy in regards to nukes back in the 1990's.

Both India and Pakistan have joined the conventions to disarm and ban chemical and biological weapons after the cold war. Egypt, North Korea, South Sudan, and Israel are the only countries who refuse to rule out this kind of weaponry.

All nukes create local fallout that's dangerous. And most nukes, depending on some factors, can create fallout that spreads in the weather. Potassium iodide, a stock supply of clean water for washing, and enough resources to stay indoors for days are how you can prepare to survive some fallout.

A whole nuclear halocaust use to seem unlikely to me, but now days I do worry that just a few too many bombs could start a mass fishing famine that would be globally disastrous in an apocalyptic way.

ForceDeep3144

India is estimated to have 180 warheads while Pakistan is estimated to have 170.

Largest test conducted by India was 45 kT, while Pakistan's was 40 kT. India claims to be capable of producing 200 kT warheads. For comparison, Hiroshima bomb was 15 kT, Minuteman (USA) yield is 170 kT and Topol-M (Russia) is up to 800 kT and Peacekeeper (USA) has 10 warheads, each 300 kT.

Risk of fallout - guaranteed within India and Pakistan, won't significantly impact anywhere outside India and Pakistan, except regions very close to the border. USA and Europe are safe.

Pesec1

Go play with this site and see what the damage of various bombs and the fallout would be for whatever location.

[https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/](https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/)

Anonymo123

People vastly overestimate the damage the nukes would do to the wider globe because of things like terminator.

PushforlibertyAlways

Here's a paper from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists from 2019. I've pasted the abstract below and added **bold** text to what I think helps answer your question; 

&gt;ABSTRACT This article describes how an India-Pakistan nuclear war might come to pass, and what the local and global effects of such a war might be. The direct effects of this nuclear exchange would be horrible; the authors estimate that 50 to 125 million people would die, depending on whether the weapons used had yields of 15, 50, or 100 kilotons. The ramifications for Indian and Pakistani society would be major and long lasting, with many major cities largely destroyed and uninhabitable, millions of injured people needing care, and power, transportation, and financial infrastructure in ruins. **But the climatic effects of the smoke produced by an India-Pakistan nuclear war would not be confined to the subcontinent, or even to Asia. Those effects would be enormous and global in scope.**

[https://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/IndiaPakistanBullAtomSci.pdf](https://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/IndiaPakistanBullAtomSci.pdf)

CJBill

Even a small nuke would destroy the water system they all use.

Abebob53

NoStupiQuestions but plenty of stupid answers

twarr1

To answer your question "What is the risk of fallout"

Fallout is caused by the explosion radius reaching the ground and drawing in debris.  If a nuclear explosion is high enough that the explosion itself doesn't touch the ground, the fall out is almost zero.  A ground level explosion produces a lot of fall out.  So the risk depends on how either nation uses a nuke.  If they explode one high over a city, like both A Bombs in Japan, there is little fall out.  If they use tactical nukes to attack ground level troops, there will be catastrophic localized fallout.

moccasins_hockey_fan

This is why we can’t have nice things.  This is also why it’s important to stop Iran from having Nukes

When we have a nuclear holocaust it’s not going to start with the us. Russia etc.

Aaarrrgghh1

I don't know if they have multi-stage weapons, or fission only. From what I've read, their warheads are low-yield: less than 100 kt. 

Fallout isn't the main concern for the rest of us, starvation is. One of the most commonly quoted scenarios in scientific studies is a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. Even the relatively 'small-scale' exchange would have substantial effects on climate and agriculture. Crop yields could be significantly reduced, for several years, leading to mass-starvation for a large portion of humanity. 

It wouldn't be the world-ending apocalyse of a full US-Russia exchange, but it would certainly leave millions dead and hundreds of millions more with food insecurity.

NoxAstrumis1

I hope they come together and solve each others issues.

Subtleabuse

According to [Wikipedia,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons) each possesses a total of roughly 200 warheads of which only a portion are ready to fire at any given time. India has a nuclear triad with two nuclear-armed submarines in addition to their aircraft and missile platforms, while Pakistan has no nuclear-armed submarines, only aircraft and missile platforms. Presumably all of their warheads are either modern medium-yield strategic thermonuclear warheads (in the hundreds of kilotons to low megaton range) or smaller tactical warheads, as neither of them were building the bulk of their arsenal at a time when high-yield warheads were favored. Presumably neither possesses any substantial defense against long-range ballistic missiles, but they could potentially shoot down nuclear-armed aircraft or cruise missiles. Additionally, either could probably arrange to smuggle a bomb into the other's territory beforehand if they put serious effort into doing so, and there is no defense against a bomb that is already planted.

In a full-scale nuclear exchange between the two countries, probably at least several dozen warheads on ballistic missiles would reach each side. If they are aimed at civilian population centers, that corresponds to perhaps ten million deaths on each side from the immediate effects of the explosions. Warheads aimed at military targets would cause fewer casualties. The bombs themselves would have little effect on any other country; some smoke produced by burning cities would spread through the atmosphere, but the dangers from radioactive material would be minimal. The geopolitical and industrial implications of the exchange would cause far more harm to other countries than the actual bombs. India would probably incur a larger number of absolute casualties as it has more large, dense cities to aim at, but Pakistan would almost certainly take *proportionally* more damage because it's a smaller country with a less powerful nuclear arsenal; the caveat being that if either possesses a secret missile defense or gains the benefit of someone else's missile defense, they might take less damage than predicted.

green_meklar

If India and Pakistan launched all their nuclear weapons, and all launched weapons exploded, the *total* yield would be comparable to the Tsar Bomba (50 MT) and *way* less than the total of all atmospheric nuclear tests to date.

forkedquality

It takes scarily few nukes to completely destabilize global food chains and cause mass starvation that would kill billions worldwide.  If these two countries nuke each other we're all fucked.

Far_Mycologist_5782

No one seems to be giving a full answer:

The risk of fallout to the rest of the world is negligible. HOWEVER: Pakistan and India possess enough high-yield nukes to lead to nuclear winter. The result of them trying to use all of their nukes would be global crop failure and as much as a 50 percent decrease in the caloric intake of food worldwide. Without making any major production changes, 2 billion people would starve to death over the 10-15 year period it would take the climate to recover.

Video explaining various scenarios: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LrIRuqr_Ozg&amp;pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD

BorlaugFan

Lotsa risk of lotsa fallout.

We’ve lived this way for 30 years, in case you’re concerned that Armageddon is tomorrow…..

dvolland

India has those dudes that bend rebar on each other, that's more powerful than any kind of nuclear weapon that has even been conceptualized so far.

1nTh3Sh4dows

fallout depends on 2 things  Composition of the bomb and how it is detonated.    With India and Pakistan's bombs their design would produce a small amount of localized fallout if there was an air-borne detonation but considerably more if there was a surface detonation.

India has that massive retaliation policy, this means it's safe to assume india tries to fit as much destructive power as possible in a package they can still deliver using their missiles for that good old "city killer" capability. India has alap successfully tested H BOMBS back in 1999.

Pakistan on the other hand have a "first strike" policy but their foreign policy also involves pointing a gun at it's own head while sitting on the nuclear button.

This means that while they will have a sizeable amount of nukes that cause massive destruction, they also have lots of small "tactical" nukes that can very easily be stolen by some terrorist group in the event Pakistan falls, they haven't tested H bombs yet and there are no signs they possess those.

This is all the info you are going to get, countries usually aren't keen of telling everyone anything about their best weapons.

bhavy111

Well, lets think of a nuclear exchange between both.... Pakistan will bomb only Northern India (the rest is Muslim), so, all bombs will mostly go up in nearly the same latitude in Pakistan and India. Exactly where the *subtropical westerly Jet Stream* is located. 

This jetstream will pick up all the ash and fallout from all mushroom clouds reaching a certain hight. 

Which means, that all the radioactive shit will come down over half of Asia, especially over the Chinese Breadbasket. And boy, they will not be happy. 

  
A weakened India (after the Exchange) will also mean that China then retaliates and just occupies wider swaths of northern India, maybe even Pakistan. China and India already had some harsh border conflicts. With the important centers of Hindu India being bombed to Ashes... yeah. Additionally there might be an Inner-Indian War then breaking out, between Muslims and Hindus, for bombing Pakistan. 

Also, Arabic Nations might see something there to be done then.... 

The thing - as i see it - India might be a real big nation, in fact, a subcontinent. But its just BARELY. Thats A billion people with a set of VERY different languages and even cultures. And while 86% of them define themselves "Hindu", there is a lot of difference betwetween South and North. Practically a whole subcontinent worth. 

It would totally not surprise me if they would - with their political center gone with the Blastwave - that the whole thing splitters up in a lot of Mogul states....

Llewellian

loud-listener

TLDR, it's probably enough to create a small nuclear winter (though maybe not global) but not enough to melt the face of the planet.

Selenbasmaps

Dont think the fallout would be a nuclear war... India fired missiles and killed civilians for which pakistan will launch missiles at india soon as well and that would be the end of it.

Not the first conflict, it happens every time elections are close in India, happened in 2019 as well when india tried to bomb some targets but failed and dropped the bombs on some trees, pakistan responded back then too and bombed some military sites, downed 2 indian fighter jets and captured and indian pilot named Abhinandan.

This time india has killed ppl because of which the response would have to be bigger.

lock_clock_talk

That's not to ask who would back them. You children don't understand it. Haven't been old enough or just don't care.

Basically, if India and Pakistan engage in a nuclear war, the whole world is fucked. You only need about 70 to 80 nuclear weapons (depending on the size) to launch the world into a nuclear winter.

JJISHERE4U

The 27th constitutional amendment in Pakistan centralizes nuclear authority under the Army Chief, raising concerns over impulsive decision-making and regional security.

Pakistan Military Control and Nuclear Authority

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want