,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
From Murphy's Laws of Combat Operations: If it’s stupid and it works, it ain’t stupid.
Having said that, we’re falling for the old trap of focusing too much on technical capabilities and not enough on how they apply in a certain operational/political environment.
Let me flesh that out a bit. Crying "ZOMG NUKE!" and testing missiles to send a message worked when India threatened an all-out war to invade and destroy Pakistan. Does it have the same effect when India isn't threatening war at all?
Does it work if India decides to quietly wage a limited war (what analysts call a "fifth-generation war" in their fancy jargon) that combines fire assaults across the LoC, a bit of salami-slicing here and there, and diplomatic/economic pressure (think FATF)?
Will it prevent India from openly carrying out a limited strike on Pakistan? We already have empirical knowledge that it won't.
newslaundry.com/2019/03/04/bal…
newslaundry.com/2019/03/04/bal…
Will it succeed in pressurising India to back off when India has already created ambiguity around its own nuclear doctrine? Something to think about, no?
firstpost.com/india/nfu-has-…
firstpost.com/india/nfu-has-…
Something tells me that the Indian establishment has already wargamed this. They won’t fall into the traps that Vajpayee and MMS did in 2002/2008.
One more nuclear threat. This time, the intended audience is the US/European establishments; the desired endgame being diplomatic intervention. I doubt it will work, but you gotta give him credit for trying.
