WI: Pakistan had no nukes?
- Thread starter Jonjo
- Start date
Pakistan hasn't had nukes for much of its history and you will note the absence of Indian occupation (unless you count Kashmir 
)
)Flocculencio
Donor
Thats because India gains nothing by occupying Pakistan. Kashmir aside there's little incentive for India to actually try to take Pakistan proper. Indian war aims have always been limited- even when Indian army units reached the suburbs of Lahore they were halted there. And that was back when India actually had much frostier relations with Pakistan.
I think an interesting question here is the consequences for nuclear proliferation without the A. Q. Khan network. Iran, Libya, and North Korea all bought technology and components from Pakistan. The North Korean weapons were based on plutonium, so this probably doesn't have a big effect there. But the Iranian program (such as it is) is based on uranium enrichment. I'm not entirely clear on where they got the technology, but the centrifuges Iran is running use the same technology as Khan's stolen URENCO designs.
What does Iran do without Khan? More generally, what is the state of international counterproliferation efforts without an example of a genuine nuclear black market? My guess is some kind of market would still emerge - there's a demand and someone will try to fill it. But it would be very different without Khan, although I'm not sure precisely how - maybe based on a different fissile technology. I'm not sure where this would go, but it could be interesting...
What does Iran do without Khan? More generally, what is the state of international counterproliferation efforts without an example of a genuine nuclear black market? My guess is some kind of market would still emerge - there's a demand and someone will try to fill it. But it would be very different without Khan, although I'm not sure precisely how - maybe based on a different fissile technology. I'm not sure where this would go, but it could be interesting...
Kargil War might get a little bigger but seeing as the last two big Indo-Pak wars fought before either side had nukes still remained fairly limited I'm not sure if the war would get that much bigger.
Flocculencio
Donor
That was part of the reason why it was confined to a glacier which had no real value but as the previous poster said, the two prior wars were fought before Pakistan had nukes and India still stuck to limited goals.
It's not in India's interest to take over a large hostile population which is why India has never seriously tried to do so. The Indian military has always limited itself to punitive goals- in 1971 they humiliated Pakistan by aiding the Bangladeshi revolution and capturing an entire Pakistani Army while smacking down Pakistani attempts at incursion on the Western front.
I agree that Pakistan would have been conquered by India which, as far as I know, is still bent of the Greater India project. Of course, the whole area would have been turned into a 24/7 war-zone and terror would be a huge problem for India, but at most the guys in charge would use this pretext to turn the country into a gigantic police state, with clear implications for whatever economic growth there ever was. The eventual breakdown of the whole country would accelerate.
As an aside, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan would probably have succeeded and who knows whether the Soviets would have gone down so early, or indeed at all. My thoughts anyway.
As an aside, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan would probably have succeeded and who knows whether the Soviets would have gone down so early, or indeed at all. My thoughts anyway.
Probably anytime that Pakistan steps out of line over what New Delhi sees as acceptable behavior (be it over territory, funding for various groups etc) then it will have a lot fewer qualms about smacking them into place - before the UN calls for a ceasefire.
No. As a number of posters said before, India has no plans of conqering Pakistan.
You know that pakistan only got nukes ~15 years ago? So there's no difference from OTL until the end of Cold War.
Perhaps, perhaps not. I tend to think that they did but never could.
True, but I’m thinking that the mere fact that a program was underway and, above all, at an unknown state of completion deterred the Soviets from either inciting India to attack Pakistan or else to themselves respond more aggressively to the overt help that Pakistan was giving to the afghani resistance.
But than again, China could have been the deterrent and not fear of a possible bomb.
Do you have a citation for that?
I know Iran got reactor tech from the West, and we offered (but they didn't end up getting) a reprocessing plant. But Iran's alleged weapons program is based on enriched uranium, not plutonium, and reactors don't help you enrich uranium. I know they were (and are) shareholders in the Eurodif enrichment plant, but I haven't seen any mention of technology transfers. And I know they've bought at least some kit from Pakistan.
Last edited:
Flocculencio
Donor
Hang on- is this the same India which smashed the Pakistani advance on Amritsar and halted in the Lahore suburbs in 1971? You'd think that if they were all that hell bent on conquest they'd have taken Lahore, if only to use as a bargaining chip.
And the idea of turning India into a police state is laughable. The nearest India got to that was the Emergency and even then Indira Gandhi never dared to try using the Army against the people.
The idea of any society, however docile of civilized, turning into a police state is anything but laughable. If facing a consistent threat for enough time any group of people will succumb to the temptation of exchanging freedom for security.
Now, it would be notable if at the very first sign of a problem the army was unleashed in the cities. But give India 10 years of almost daily terror attacks and you really believe that the place will not be turned into a police state?
This has nothing to do with India specifically: anyone would do it. I’m just imagining that under the premise, India would actually come to face such a threat.
But perhaps you’re right and they never intended to occupy Pakistan, even if given a chance.
Orville_third
Banned
Iran's program is primarily for research. Iran's nuclear weapons program was vetoed by the Ayatollah.
As for Pakistan, I could see a US bombing campaign possibly after 9/11.
As for Pakistan, I could see a US bombing campaign possibly after 9/11.