Pakistan claims to have shot down five Indian fighter jets, after India says it has struck 9 terrorist training camps overnight. "Both sides exchanged heavy artillery along their contested frontier into Wednesday. Pakistan reported 26 killed by Indian shelling, and India reported eight the other way." And although Pakistan denies that any of the sites targeted by India were terror camps, "[i]n a statement, Maulana Masood Azhar, a U.N.-listed terrorist in Pakistan, said today that 10 members in his family, including five children, have been killed in India’s strikes on Pakistan."
The real fear is that the conflict could go nuclear. "Both possess roughly comparable nuclear stockpiles of around 170 warheads but while India maintains a 'no first use' doctrine, Pakistan harbours no such restraint - raising global alarm over where this latest exchange could lead."
In "Pakistan’s First-Use Nuclear Policy in Conflicts with India," Professor L. Ali Khan explains:
There is a vast disparity between India and Pakistan regarding military assets and funding resources, as India has risen to be a top-10 economic power. India’s annual defense budget is USD $75 billion, whereas Pakistan’s is $7 billion. Per Global Firepower records, India has far more active personnel, total and fighter aircraft, helicopters, armored vehicles, fleet strength, and submarines. India has $627 billion in foreign reserves, and Pakistan has $13 billion. If a conventional war breaks out, India has significant resources to sustain a long war compared to Pakistan.
In nuclear weaponry, however, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, Pakistan commands a slight edge. Pakistan has over 200 nuclear warheads in 2025, which exceeds India’s nuclear warheads. Both nations have land-based, sea-based, and air-launched atomic payload capabilities. The production of Ababeel and Shaheen-III will empower Islamabad to have full-range coverage of India and its outlying territories. To fight India’s conventional might, Pakistan has developed “tactical” nuclear weapons to use on battlefields.
He also predicts that "Pakistan will likely use a tactical nuclear weapon if India closes the rivers that supply water to Pakistan." He elaborates:
As a broad principle, Pakistan will likely use a nuclear weapon to survive as a nation-state. Pakistan will use the nuclear option, for example, if India, using its conventional forces, occupies a portion of Pakistan’s territory or threatens its economic survival by blocking its seaports, choking international trade. Pakistan will also likely use atomic weapons to deter India from jeopardizing Pakistan’s existential survival by withholding the waters of the Western Rivers.
A 2019 Rutgers study predicted that a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would lead to over 100 million deaths immediately, and mass starvation around the world as the soot and other material in the atmosphere would block out sunlight and cool the planet. It would produce a famine for billions of people, according to the report. (Say, doesn't Bill Gates want to do the same thing to reverse global warming?)
A war between Pakistan and India could be a boon for China (provided it doesn't go nuclear). China now supplies 81% of Pakistan's arms imports. And since India is a major Chinese rival, both for control of key areas of the Himalayas and as an alternate manufacturing hub, a weakened India would only benefit China.
I might use this joke on my Friday blog, but this is really the Benny Hill war. They had a dogfight tonight with 125 active jets, tons of missiles fired, and no planes shot down. They're trying to do the gate opening ceremony, but with weapons. Neither of these are a serious country.
ReplyDeleteThey are countries that value cheating and nepotism over competence.
Delete