WI India and Pakistan nuclear war.

Could any of the numbeorus conflicts between India and Pakistan have resulted in a full scale nuclear war?

Nope. It was never on the cards. The only reason Pakistan got the bomb was because India had it. Basically, this was to retain the status quo- before both countries went nuclear, India wasfar larger and more powerful than Pakistan and could have steamrollered them at any time. The Pakistani army could have hurt the Indian Army but not stopped it. With nukes, the situation was the same. neither country had sufficient nuclear capacity to do more than strike a few targets. However, this would still hurt Pakistan much more than India. The reason Pakistan remains independent is because India really doesn't want to conquer it and deal with the resulting chaos and insurgency.
 
Uhm, Pakistan made it clear it would use nukes if it was about to lose badly in a conventional war.

I think the last crisis 2001 had a potential to go nuclear, if a war had erupted.

Perhaps last in the line of options was the military option, which required India to clearly understand its politico-military objectives. High on the escalation ladder of the military options was the use of air power on terrorist training camps, which at best would have been few tents, with the trainee terrorists probably dispersed deep inside Pakistan. The second option was the use of Indian Special Forces and dropping para-commandoes close to where these camps are. Most of these camps, like Oghi village, Ojheri camp, Para Chinar, Saidgali and Sargodha, have already shut down operations, however. A third option could have been a "hot pursuit": envisaging "salami slicing" of Pakistan administered Kashmir. India had to consider whether it was willing to occupy and retain territory, or whether closing down training camps would have been its only objective. Obviously, these camps can be quickly established elsewhere. A fourth option could have been an all out war involving regular armies.

All military options, of course, involved the risk of escalation to a nuclear level. The two countries should not lull themselves into thinking they can call each other's bluff. If India does cross the Line of Control or the international border and Pakistan decides that it is threatened and issues a warning, explicit or implicit, that it is contemplating its nuclear options (better used early enough to deter), what would be the Indian response? Would India stop the air strikes and/recall its troops, calling off the operation? Or would it go ahead and continue in the hope that Pakistan would not make good on its nuclear threats. An element of strategic uncertainty obtains here. It is precisely this kind of uncertainty that could breed misperceptions that lead to miscalculations.

http://www.cdi.org/nuclear/ipcrisis.cfm
 
Basically both countries are in a small scale version of the MAD situation that the US and USSR were in during the late 1970's; early 1980's.... and they both know it.
 
Nope. It was never on the cards. The only reason Pakistan got the bomb was because India had it. Basically, this was to retain the status quo- before both countries went nuclear, India wasfar larger and more powerful than Pakistan and could have steamrollered them at any time. The Pakistani army could have hurt the Indian Army but not stopped it. With nukes, the situation was the same. neither country had sufficient nuclear capacity to do more than strike a few targets. However, this would still hurt Pakistan much more than India. The reason Pakistan remains independent is because India really doesn't want to conquer it and deal with the resulting chaos and insurgency.

Even if a nuclear war would hurt Pakistan more than India, it still would put a relative halt to India's economy if Mumbai, New Delhi, Chennai, and Kolkata went up in flames. Besides, Pakistan has up to 60 nuclear missiles, which can strike a bit more than "a few" locations and targets.
 
Top