Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
India Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: India to limit missile program to aid US nuclear deal
Softwar    6/18/2007 12:43:16 PM
http://in.news.yahoo.com/070618/210/6h403.html Report: India to limit missile program to aid US nuclear deal Monday June 18, 07:35 PM India will limit its ballistic missile program to medium-range rockets in a bid to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with the United States, news reports said Monday. India has decided not to develop missiles with a range over 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles) as a goodwill gesture toward the U.S., the CNN-IBN news channel reported, citing unidentified government officials. The Indian Foreign Ministry and the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi declined to comment on the report. The proposed nuclear deal, seen as the cornerstone of an emerging partnership between the two countries, has been stalled in recent months. One of the biggest sticking points has been American reluctance to allow India to reprocess spent atomic fuel because of fears it would spark a nuclear arms race in Asia by allowing India to use extra nuclear fuel which the deal would provide to free up its domestic uranium for weapons. Reprocessing fuel is a key step in making weapons-grade nuclear material. The report said the move to limit missile range was intended to reassure the U.S. of India's peaceful intentions. In April, India successfully test-fired the Agni 3, a new missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads across much of Asia and the Middle East. India's current missiles are mostly intended for confronting neighboring archrival Pakistan. However, the Agni 3, India's longest-range missile, is designed to reach 3,000 kilometers (1,900 miles) _ putting China's major cities well into range, as well as targets deep in the Middle East. The nuclear deal, agreed to by the two countries' leaders in July 2005, would let the U.S. provide nuclear fuel and know-how to India in exchange for safeguards and U.N. inspections at India's 14 civilian nuclear plants. Eight military plants would remain off-limits.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3   NEXT
iSoldier       6/19/2007 8:40:59 AM

Why should India cap it's missile range ? give me one good reason ?
The day India tests Surya I, an arms-race will start between PRC and India: In my humble opinion India doesn't have the political, economic and technological endurance to finish, let alone win, the particular type of race that will start. So the choices are clear for India
(a) Never cross the limit set by China, or 
(b) Build up the endurance to run the race.
 
Both essentially reduces to the same thing: Limit your range. The only difference is that the first choice consigns you to perpetual limit, the second choice does not. Its devil and the deep sea - if you choose devil, you are doomed; with the sea you have a chance if you have built up the necessary endurance.

 
Quote    Reply

blitZ       6/19/2007 3:38:21 PM



Why should India cap it's missile range ? give me one good reason ?

The day India tests Surya I, an arms-race will start between PRC and India: In my humble opinion India doesn't have the political, economic and technological endurance to finish, let alone win, the particular type of race that will start. So the choices are clear for India

(a) Never cross the limit set by China, or 

(b) Build up the endurance to run the race.

 

Both essentially reduces to the same thing: Limit your range. The only difference is that the first choice consigns you to perpetual limit, the second choice does not. Its devil and the deep sea - if you choose devil, you are doomed; with the sea you have a chance if you have built up the necessary endurance.


Arms race with China ? How, where, for what ? China already has ICBMs, aimed at the US. If India develops ICBMs, they will also be for the US and Europe, not China. China is within IRBM range, and both Agni II and Agni III are sufficient.
Agni I & Prithvi series - Pakistan
Agni II & III - China
Agni III++ & Surya - USA, Europe

What arms race ?

By the way, heres an interesting and very technical article on the Agni III, according to which, Agni IIIs range is beyond 5000km.

h**p://www.indiandefencereview.com/articles/04-06-07/Strategic-Missiles_part2.html
 
Quote    Reply

iSoldier       6/20/2007 8:43:54 AM


Arms race with China ? How, where, for what ? China already has ICBMs, aimed at the US. If India develops ICBMs, they will also be for the US and Europe, not China. China is within IRBM range, and both Agni II and Agni III are sufficient.
Agni I & Prithvi series - Pakistan
Agni II & III - China
Agni III++ & Surya - USA, Europe

What arms race ?

By the way, heres an interesting and very technical article on the Agni III, according to which, Agni IIIs range is beyond 5000km.

h**p://www.indiandefencereview.com/articles/04-06-07/Strategic-Missiles_part2.html

Start with these articles for how of the arms-race between India and China:

h*tp://www.unidir.org/pdf/articles/pdf-art2115.pdf
h*tp://www.eias.org/publications/policybriefs/nuclearrace.pdf
I will leave it to your imagination and research to figure out where and for what. A clue already exists in this thread. 
 
Quote    Reply

blitZ       6/20/2007 8:15:48 PM
iSoldier, thanks for the links, very interesting. But it still did not support your statement, that India developing an ICBM would spark an arms race with China. The links you mentioned state that India/China are already in a slow arms race. So how would India's development of a missile which has nothing to do with China whatsoever concern them ?

The Agni 3 design already has a range of +5000km. The third stage was not tested deliberately, to keep the range artificially down to 3500km. So any cap put on the Indian ICBM programme would be a political cap, not technical. The capability exists. US pressure or no US pressure, once a country begins curbing its strategic systems for foreign relations, its leaves a wide hole in it's security, and sends the signal that India's strategic weapons programme is open to negotiations. That should be absolutely unacceptable.

I stand by my statement that the current UPA government has been infiltrated right upto the very top, and scaling down India's strategic weapons programme will be the biggest mistake our leaders make for a long long time to come. This decision will haunt India for decades.

 
Quote    Reply

mithradates       6/22/2007 3:07:01 PM

iSoldier, thanks for the links, very interesting. But it still did not support your statement, that India developing an ICBM would spark an arms race with China. The links you mentioned state that India/China are already in a slow arms race. So how would India's development of a missile which has nothing to do with China whatsoever concern them ?

The Agni 3 design already has a range of +5000km. The third stage was not tested deliberately, to keep the range artificially down to 3500km. So any cap put on the Indian ICBM programme would be a political cap, not technical. The capability exists. US pressure or no US pressure, once a country begins curbing its strategic systems for foreign relations, its leaves a wide hole in it's security, and sends the signal that India's strategic weapons programme is open to negotiations. That should be absolutely unacceptable.

I stand by my statement that the current UPA government has been infiltrated right upto the very top, and scaling down India's strategic weapons programme will be the biggest mistake our leaders make for a long long time to come. This decision will haunt India for decades.

India has made a very bad mistake with this move.  A nation's survival is never to be determined by a foreign power, but clearly India seems to believe otherwise.

There are other angles to this entire deal that really serves American(and surprisingly even Chinese) interests:

1.  The cap on missile range effectively precludes an Indian Nuclear deterrent against the CONUS in the medium term.  And Indian appeasement of U.S demands is another slap in the face for Russia.  So in one masterful stroke, the U.S not only removed the medium term possibility of an indigenous Indian Nuclear deterrent against U.S nuclear blackmail, but also the possibility of Russian extension of their nuclear umbrella to protect India in case of U.S nuclear blackmail.

2.  The part of the deal that prohibits India from doing further bomb tests basically prevents the nation from testing reliable modern miniaturized warhead designs.   That means effectively no MIRV technology for Indian IRBMs in the medium term.

Once again, I have to say that the U.S really played this off very well.  They have managed through this move to potentially stave off Indian nuclear ambitions for at least a generation.


 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Take The Hint....   6/22/2007 4:05:44 PM


India has made a very bad mistake with this move.  A nation's survival is never to be determined by a foreign power, but clearly India seems to believe otherwise.

There are other angles to this entire deal that really serves American(and surprisingly even Chinese) interests:

1.  The cap on missile range effectively precludes an Indian Nuclear deterrent against the CONUS in the medium term.  And Indian appeasement of U.S demands is another slap in the face for Russia.  So in one masterful stroke, the U.S not only removed the medium term possibility of an indigenous Indian Nuclear deterrent against U.S nuclear blackmail, but also the possibility of Russian extension of their nuclear umbrella to protect India in case of U.S nuclear blackmail.

2.  The part of the deal that prohibits India from doing further bomb tests basically prevents the nation from testing reliable modern miniaturized warhead designs.   That means effectively no MIRV technology for Indian IRBMs in the medium term.

Once again, I have to say that the U.S really played this off very well.  They have managed through this move to potentially stave off Indian nuclear ambitions for at least a generation.


Myth - you miss the whole point here.  India does not need to waste money pointing missile at places in the USA.  There are no US missiles targeted at India nor is there any reason to even start.  Of course, you would like India to do so because that spreads the US a bit thinner and makes it easier for your PLA buddies to do things naughty.
Beijing is the target for the new Agni and for good reason.  You have missiles targeted at India and have fought a war with them.  You have given NUCLEAR weapon technology to Pakistan.  You even admitted that the passing of A-bomb plans that fell into the hands of Dr. Kahn was an intentional, overt, act approved by the CCP.  Done deal.
 
Now look at it from the typical Indian military General's perspective.  If I waste money looking big by building missiles pointing at LA - I will never have a need to use them and they do no good.  On the other hand - if I build missiles pointed at Beijing - they do have a purpose and there is a real live enemy that can be deterred from doing stupid things (like claiming Indian territory as Chinese).
Finally, as Isolder and I have pointed out - the question of developing an ICBM for India is political not technical.  They have the capability to do so if they choose.  Perhaps you should take a hint - they have elected to not deploy because of Beijing not the USA.  This is a decision based on the threat to India made by Indians.
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates       6/22/2007 8:40:59 PM
Softwar:

You must understand that we are ENTIRELY in agreement with you on this matter.  The U.S will not hear a word of complaint from China about this deal.  You can rant the whole "India/US brothers forever" propaganda slogan, and we would gladly shoot off some fireworks and send you a batch of our finest mijiu! :)  You see, this deal serves your interests, and it serves our interests. 

India achieved a capability to hit most of China via single-warhead solid fueled IRBMs.  And if left to themselves, they would've developed and deployed fully MIRVed ICBMs capable of irreparably devastating China and hitting all the major Nuclear powers in 15 to 20 years.  But you Americans have put a fairly permanent cap on their independent nuclear capabilities with this treaty.  While you do this out of naked self-interest, we must nevertheless thank you.

Now, China proper being targeted by 30 to 40 Indian warheads is FAR better than being targeted by 300 to 400 Indian warheads, as India would be able to achieve independently if they did not sign the treaty.

You Americans have now eliminated the POSSIBILITY of the CONUS being hit by Indian nuclear warheads via ICBM for the medium term.   Thus, the U.S will reserve the right to use nuclear blackmail as it has done so in the past to India(and China, Russia, France, and U.K).  With this treaty, the U.S has also done much to break the bonds between India and Russia, thus maneuvering yourself as sole provider of Indian security, the only nation they can turn to, another good move.  

To achieve this end however, you have also drastically reduced the number of warheads that the India will be able to afford to place onto China proper in the medium term.  Thus, you have absolutely no complaints from us on this at all.  Say whatever lies you have to say to Indians, as long as you get them to follow through with this treaty, we're as pleased with this situation as you undoubtedly are as well. :)


Blitz:

This entire situation is like watching a rerunning of an old 1980s  Television show.  On your comments about bribery of Indian politicians, I would like to remind you of a similar past execution of this American game.  In the early 1980s, the U.S offered China a nuclear technology sharing agreement as well.  The terms were remarkably similar to this one.  China was told to cap the range of our ICBMs to be only able to hit Russia but not the CONUS, and we have to stop live testing of new miniature nuclear warhead designs.  Unlike India, China rejected the deal outright but something very interesting happened during the process.  Apparently a member of our Politburo was actively pushing for acceptance of the deal.  After the rejection, the member was suddenly imprisoned on vague corruption charges.  Only in the early 90s did information leak out that that member had received millions of USD from the Americans, and that he was imprisoned with corruption charges instead of treason only because they didn't want to dishonor his military family by branding him a traitor.  I would bet 100 RMB that the Americans have really bribed your government officials to accept this.

Still, I have to say that the U.S has managed to accomplish a move of great cunning and slyness, that even Zhu Ge Liang would be proud of.  When India wakes up from this, 15 to 20 years from now.  The U.S would've beefed up their ABM system so that it can reliably intercept hundreds of warheads.  At that point, India would probably have to either toe the U.S line or else.  When I say to Softwar that I am happy, it's so much that I'm happy about India accepting the U.S deal, it is that I am happy that my nation DID NOT accept the American offer.







 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    Ignorimg HtJ and Myth.   6/26/2007 8:44:22 AM
But addressing Softwar, Blitz, and Isoldier;
 
1. India's missiles are about where the US was in 1964. We had developed reliable solid-fuelled Minuteman and a so so Polaris.   
2, Anybody who can put a 100 kg satellite into lunar orbit can put a fission bomb anywhere he wants on the surface of the Earth.
3. India already has a working prototype of a miniature nuclear warhead. She tested it.
4. Don't confuse a political decision with current technical means, or throwmass with range limits. There is no reason to believe that the FRENCH haven't been helping India developing their solid propellant technology. The development of a lengthened first stage and a throttable third stage for the Prithvi III as has been noted here and elsewhere is a POLITICAL decision. What has been ignored is that getting such an uprated  rocket weapon-proofed and service ready is about 18 months in an emergency, about 30 months given the working IRBM base model . A New Delhi government can say one thing and quietly pursue another option at ANY time.
6. The 30M US$ Prithvi III 4000 kilometer range single warhead booster. is about as infrastructure expensive to install R&D after its RV is developed as a 45M US$ Prithvi III ER. As the RV still has to ride into the atmosphere at 4000+ mps, what is to stop the Indian engineers from having already overengineering the RV to meet the 5500+ mps descent velocities, or to study how to MIRV the warheads on the, cough "IRBM" cough, bus?  
7. Look at Brahmos. The official line is that it complies with international proliferation agreements at being a 290 kilometer treaty compliant cruise missile armed with conventional warheads. Right. Like anybody with half a mind believes that fairy
tale.   
8. Both Washington and New Delhi are as aware that Washington is powerless to reverse a New Delhi decision to opt for the extended range version which lies in New Delhi's means.if it so decides Both Washington and New Delhi recignize that as a fait accompli India is already capable of threatening the US interests strategically. Pointing a few bombs at the US isn't going to change the overall strategic problem THAT much. So the US SIOP cranks in New Delhi. Just as the bastards in Beijing hope that they can divert US interest onto a new "enemy" we have to look at the POLITICAL dimensions as we already KNOW that India within months has the TECHNICAL means at hand.,
9. Why announce the 5000 kilometer limit which is verifiably impossible to confirm and technically meaningless? WHY?
10. India wants a politically friendly US. Why?
 
Well one thing is obvious, the New Delhi government would want Washington to finally glom on to the fact that Pakistan, the stooge PRC client nation, is an American enemy state and should be so handled. This would open up so much for India if she could get Washington on her side just long enough to politically kick the US out of the Indian Ocean..
 
The heart of this scheme is "We understand the region. Let us as your partner and "ally" handle it."
 
With an isolationist America in the political cards the idea of strengthening India and letting them handle the mess in Pakistan, as well as assuming a greater share of the military and political burden in the Indian Ocean would appeal to the short sighted political idiots who will head the US government in the 2010s.
 
India can only profit as Japan once did when Britain ceded the Western Pacific to the IJN in the run up to WW I.
 
India sits within easy reach of the oil/NG  tanker routes of over 60% of the worlds reserves. With India's navy already having demonstrated that they know what seapower is and what trade means.........................
 
Does the picture start to crayon in folks?
 
New Delhi is playing a long deep game. Next to the Brahmins, the Beijing bandits look like geopolitical clumsy amateurs.
 
The 5000 kilometer limit is a "fool the US Congress" move. Pacify the Americans. Far from being a triumph for US colonialist imperialist hegemonism, as the liars of this board assert; it is another Indian geopolitical assertion of its non-aligned status, that it will do anything, say anything to maintain its freedom of action and to assert its own independence of policy of ANYONE.
 
Otherwise New Delhi would have announced a verifiable throwmass package that could not possible hide an ICBM capable rocket. Arbitrarily settong 5000 kilometers as the range limit 
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates    To the Indian Posters   6/26/2007 12:06:46 PM
Firstly, it must be said that Herald doesn't know what he's talking about here.  From his last post, it is clear that he does not even know the difference between a Privthi SRBM and the Agni IRBM.

Secondly, the "miniaturized" single warhead + enclosing RV design that India tested in 1998 was 1000 kg in mass, with a detected yield of 25 to 30 kilotons.  India in the late 1980s wanted to develop a 200 kg warhead design with a yield of 200 to 300 KTs, and all we know is that this design was definitely NOT successfully tested in 1998.

h!tp://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/agni-improvements.htm

The ban on testing of new nuclear warheads(made by this treaty) entirely limits Indian missiles to using the 1 metric ton ~30KT yield RV.  The Agni 3 can reach 3,500 km with a 1000kg payload.  If India can miniaturize the RV to 700kg(without changing the warhead design), then the range goes to 5000 km.

With that said, the combination of a test ban and a missile range cap means that India can not get a reliable high yield warhead design, it cannot get MIRVed missiles, and it cannot get beyond IRBM ranges in the medium term.

It is fairly obvious here that Indian political decision making is being compromised by the U.S at the highest levels as we speak.





 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    Mithradates   6/26/2007 5:43:05 PM
Did u know that China also has a deal with US to limit nukes--REALLY. We helped your economy in exchange, thats an old deal. Why do you think China doesn't have 1000s of nukes. Besides India lakes some carbon fibre technology for ICBM which US put a ban on for all export. INdia cannot make a military ICBM beyond its Satellite launchers which can easily be destroyed by US due to fueling time etc. Besides INdia cannot afford ICBM deployment.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics