Reality Check: Can Pakistan Really ‘Take Half the World Down’? Decoding Asim Munir’s Nuclear Threat

Reality Check: Recently the spectre of a nuclear contestation in the sub continent was raised by the field Marshal of Pakistan army, General Asim Munir when the latter was paying a visit to the United States. Munir made an emphasis on the aspect of mutually assured destruction or a certain attack against India on which its current and future critical infrastructure depends in the near future. The above latest stunt of theatrics can be analyzed against the backdrop of the new strategic landscape that has presented itself through the incessant policy by the New Delhi to counter in several decades old sponsoring of terrorism by the Islamabad. It is expected to seek the backing of the global society in the efforts to delegitimise and limit conventional military alternatives against Pakistan misadventures.

Also Read: Chinese Foreign Minister to Visit India Next Week for Talks with NSA Ajit Doval

What Is (In)significant About Munir?

The comments of Munir and his threats to use the nuclear weapon are rhetorical and at the same time essential criticisms in four ways. To begin with, the sentiments against India-based existential security threats have provided the rational basis on which the Pakistan, mainly the elites and the military, have both given life and given project in its policies. With the army as the most dominant constituents, the Pakistan military takes frontline in the narrative both locally and internationally. Therefore, the statements of Munir, the Field Marshal carry some weightage as he has redefined the language of the domestic audience to reinforce the image of the military as an institution and its willingness to protect the integrity of the nation.Second, as a most senior officer in the Pakistan army, his speech in a foreign land, i.e. US to that matter, is a step in re-enforcing the threat of asymmetric escalation, which is a part of Pakistani nuclear doctrine. The ulterior motive is closely linked to religious doctrinaire inclinations of Munir to bring out the image of the entity of India as a state of Hindutva ideologies threatening Pakistan.

In this respect, the focus of the nuclear weapons is to recalibrate and restore the aspect of strategic stability with regard to India. Since its open nuclearisation in 1998, Islamabad has been trying to enforce structural requirements on New Delhi, which has the sub-conventional war that is characterised by imposing cost by sponsoring terrorism. In its turn, India has been taking a more risk-acceptance strategy to re-establish deterrence and achieve new realms of engagement within the nuclear context as seen in its action through conventional means of armed response. Pakistan is trying by all means to exaggerate the (in)stability factor as a means to coerce New Delhi. Consequently, it sets the precedent that in the event that India carries out an Operation Sindoor 2.0 or any other military action in future, Pakistan would be forced to employ (tactical) nuclear weapons. But the problematic aspect remains that Pakistan risks for nuclear means with certain retaliation on the part of India.

Mutual Vulnerability

Third, Munir makes statements that are meant to cement the Pakistani understanding of the concept of mutual vulnerability, in a bid to ensure that India has no room to respond in conventional level. But to this building of mutual vulnerability, the Indian response had already broken at a certain level and sphere in an evolutionary approach as adopted in Operation Sindoor. The limitation of weakness within the established area at the bottom of the ladder of escalation and charge of ensuring the stability has been more extended to Pakistan in such a scenario.

Fourth, Pakistan army being the custodian of its ideological state has taken an asymmetric nuclear stance against India preeminence in the area of strategy. Pakistan possesses an all blazed deterrent position with the utilization of tactical nuclear weapons in case of a use offer a low target of India aggression. Nevertheless, India has made efforts to resist this ruling by replying to the terrorist attacks in the form of the Uri surgical strike, the Balakot air strike, and the recent Operation Sindoor.

To build a structural third party component in the India-Pakistan nuclear dyad are the threats by Munir against India and the possible realization of the mutually assured destruction. His emphasis on nuclear hazard is technology to induct the international community especially the US as a form of structural control on Indian response and deterrence policy. This catalytic nuclear stance may perhaps be mistaken that they are trying to develop a safety valve against the new position of Indian policy that any attack into Indian soil will be deemed as an act of war.

Also Read: Woman Raped in Delhi’s Mundka on Pretext of Job Offer, Accused on the Run

New Realities

Deterrence is entirely mental-cum-psychological in the area of strategy both initiated and terminated. The history of Pakistan trying to escalate the nuclear factor towards India and at the same time trying to seek the interest of the international community only confirms the old French saying; the older things change, the older it stays. Pakistan has a strategic aspect of ambiguity which borders on first use but its operationalisation has been blurred due to a paradox which projects nuclear bombs as a first use and last resort at the same time. India has been using this paradox to re-establish deterrence as witnessed in the Balakot and Sindoor operation episodes.

Therefore, the rhetoric of Munir is one within the frustrations about the overdeterministic attachment to nuclear stance of Pakistan and his attempts at recovering his domestic following. In this respect, Pakistan is likely to develop new capabilities in terms of India in its new normal following Operation Sindoor. Recent intelligence report of the US speculates that Pakistan is also developing intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) technology to not only counter the upward move of India but also to confront it.

China can be the invisible hand to be of assistance to Pakistan since they had cooperated in the past with Pakistan in the proliferation of nuclear products and the acquisition of missile technology. The ultimate objective is to deprive India the footing to have a serious deterrence avenue against Pakistan in the conventional nuclear arena.

In opposition to these trends, New Delhi should not hesitate about bulking both nuclear and non-nuclear strategic capabilities to become part of its increasing number of arsenals and overall foundation. Indian policy makers will need to quell the rhetoric calmly because it will enable Pakistani to build on its catalytic nuclear status by introducing US as a structural variable in India Pakistan nuclear dyad.

However, despite Washington reiterating that its ties with both India and Pakistan are in the same rope, and keeping its diplomats engaged to the two states, New Delhi will be forced to declare as illegitimate, both, in the short run as well as in the long run, attempts by Pakistan to focus its stability and security on nuclear armaments.

Also Read: Couple Killed in Road Accident in Assam’s Kamrup District