How real is the risk of nuclear war?

There were neither ultimatums nor red buttons in the last confrontation of India Pakistan.

However, a cycle of military revenge, veiled signals and international mediation Swift calmly caused the most dangerous shadow of the region. The crisis was not a spiral against the nuclear war, but it was a reminder of how fast the tension could cause this ghost.

Even scientists have modeling how easy it can unravel. A study in 2019. The global team of scientists opened with The script of the nightmare where is the terrorist Attack on Parliament of India in 2025 causes nuclear exchange with Pakistan.

Six years later A real story – Although being held US-Breker ceasefire On Saturday – he fired a full -scale conflict. He also revived the difficult memories of how gentle stability in the region could be.

As the crisis increases, Pakistan sent “double signals” – in the non -paying, paying, announcing a meeting of the national team (NCA), calculated by the reminder of its nuclear capacity. NCA controls control and potential use of the country’s nuclear arsenal. Whether this step was a symbolic, strategic or true warning we will never know. He also came, as reportedly, US Secretary of State Mark Rubio entered to discharge the spiral.

President Trump said “Nuclear conflict”. On Monday, in an appeal to the nation, the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi said: “(There) there are No tolerance to nuclear blackmail; India will not intimidate nuclear threats.

“Any terrorist shelter that works under this pretext will face accurate and decisive blows,” Modi added.

India and Pakistan Each owns about 170 nuclear weaponsAccording to analytical centers of the International Institute for Peace (SIPRI). As of January 2024, Sipri estimated that there were 12121 nuclear warheads worldwide. Of these, about 9585 were held in the military reserves, and 3904 were actively opened – 60 more than last year. The US and Russia together make up more than 8,000 nuclear weapons.

The main part of the detailed arsenals of India and Pakistan lies in their missile forces on Earth, although both develop nuclear triads that can deliver fighting on the ground, air and sea, Christopher Claire reports, security expert at the USA University in the USA.

“India probably has a large air leg (planes capable of delivering nuclear weapons) than in Pakistan. Although we know that the least of the naval foot of Pakistan, it is reasonable to evaluate that the Naval India’s naval foot is more advanced and more capable than the nuclear power based on Pakistan,” he said BBC.

One of the reasons, according to Mr. Clair, is that Pakistan has invested nowhere near “time or money”, which India has in the construction of a submarine that works on the nuclear part, giving India a “clear quality” advantage in marine nuclear capacity.

Since the testing of nuclear weapons in 1998, Pakistan has never officially announced the official nuclear doctrine.

On the contrary, India has adopted a policy without first use after its own trials in 1998. But this position showed signs of mitigation. In 2003, India reserved right to use nuclear weapons In response to chemical or biological attacks – effectively allowing first use under certain conditions.

In 2016, an additional ambiguity appeared when the Manochrian’s Refance Minister was offered India should not feel “related” policyraising questions about its long -term authority. (Parricard said it was his own opinion.)

Lack of official doctrine does not mean Offer clear clues To its operational posture, according to Sadia Taslya from the Carnegie Fund for International Peace.

Pakistan’s nuclear threshold remains vague, but in 2001, Khalid Kidva – then the head of the NCA strategic plans – outlined four red lines: basic territorial losses, destruction of key military assets, economic stifling or political destabilization.

In 2002, then President Persian Musharraf said that “nuclear weapons is aimed exclusively at India” and will only be used if “the existence of Pakistan as a state”.

In his memoir, former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo wrote that he had not woken up at night to talk to an unnamed “Indian counterpart” Fearing that Pakistan is preparing for the use of nuclear weapons During 2019 confrontation with India.

Approximately at the same time Pakistani media quoted a high -ranking official By issuing India a terrible warning: “I hope you know what (national power) and what it represents.

During the Cargile War in 1999, Pakistan’s then Foreign Secretary “Healed to use any weapon” Protect your territory. Through the years, the official American Bruce Ridel showed that the exploration showed that Pakistan is preparing its nuclear arsenal for possible deployment.

But there is skepticism on both sides for such claims.

The former High Commissioner of India in Pakistan, Odzha Bisaria, wrote in his memoir that Pompeo overestimated both the risk of nuclear escalation and the role of the United States in reassuring the conflict in 2019. And during Cargill Pakistan “knew that the Indian Air Force did not intersect to its territory,” so there was no real anxiety even for the implicit nuclear threat, insist in Pakistani, analysts.

“The strategic alarm reminds the world that any conflict can spiral – both with India and Pakistan, the rates are higher than the nuclear laid. But this does not mean that any side is actively threatening nuclear use,” said the BBC based in Lahor.

But nuclear escalation may also happen by accident. “It can happen through human mistakes, hackers, terrorists, computer failures, bad satellite data and unstable leaders,” said Professor Alan Rub of Rutgers University, lead author “Landmark 2019” by the Global Scientists, BBC.

In March 2022 India accidentally fired a nuclear cruise missile Before it was reportedly damaged by civil property 124 km (77 miles) to Pakistan. Pakistan said India could not use the military hotline or issue a public statement for two days. If experts point out that this happened during heavy tension, the incident could go into serious conflicts. (A few months later the Indian government fired three Air Force officers for “random rocket shooting”.)

However, the danger of the nuclear war remains “relatively small” between India and Pakistan, Mr. Clair believes.

“As long as there is no serious land along the border, the danger of nuclear use remains relatively small and managed,” he said.

“In the ground battle, the problem” Use it or lose it “, which moves that your position will be overcome by the enemy.” (‘Use it either lose“Turning to the pressure that a nuclear armed country may feel to run the weapon before destroying them as a result of the first blow to the enemy.)

Sumit Gangula, a senior employee of the Guver Institute at Stanford University, believes that “neither India nor Pakistan want to be marked with the first nuclear taboo after Girosima.”

“In addition, any side that resorts to the use of nuclear weapons will face significant revenge and suffer from invalid victims,” ​​said Mr. Hangules BBC.

At the same time, as India, Pakistan appears to have deteriorated their nuclear arsenal.

With new delivery systems in development, four plutonium reactors and uranium enrichment, Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal can reach about 200 warheads by the end of the 2020s, reports Nuclear NotebookThe federation of the nuclear information project by American scientists is being studied.

And as of the beginning of 2023, it is estimated that about 680 kg of weapons in India – enough for Approximately 130-210 nuclear warheadsAccording to an international group of luxury materials.

Despite repeated crises and close calls, both sides have still been able to avoid a catastrophic slide into the nuclear conflict. “The stall is still holding on. All the Pakistanis made to respond to ordinary strikes with their own strokes,”- note Faruk’s dimension, an analyst based in Islamabad.

However, the availability of nuclear weapons introduces a constant risk of risk – one that can never be completely excluded, no matter how restrained the leadership and how restrained intentions.

“When nuclear weapons can be involved, there is always an unacceptable level of danger,” said John Erat, senior policy director at the non-profit and non-proliferation center control.

“The Indian and Pakistani governments in the past have moved these situations, so the risk is small. But with nuclear weapons even a little risk is too high.”