Claims for control of the region of Kashmir have tested the relationship between India and Pakistan almost constantly since the two countries gained independence from Britain in 1947. Islamic separatists fighting for an independent Kashmir state have carried out attacks on Indian targets since the early 1990s. India has accused Pakistan of supporting Kashmiri militants, a charge Islamabad denies.

In 1998, the dispute took on a more ominous tone as India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons within months of each other. There were fears around the world that if a conventional war broke out between the two countries over Kashmir, it could quickly escalate into a nuclear confrontation.

Most experts believe both countries have nuclear weapons comparable to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, about 20,000 tonnes of TNT. That blast is estimated to have killed about 140,000.

How many and what kind of nuclear weapons are available to both countries?

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, which is believed to have the most reliable estimate of the nuclear capabilities of both countries, has not released any figures. Figures from other groups vary.

India

• Janes, the military analysis group based in London, estimates India has between 50 and 150 nuclear warheads.
• The Institute for Science and International Security in Washington says India has about 65 warheads.
• The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates India has between 25 and 40 warheads.

Pakistan

• Janes estimates Pakistan has between 25 and 50 nuclear warheads.
• The Institute for Science and International Security in Washington says Pakistan has about 40 warheads.
• The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates Pakistan has between 15 and 20 warheads.

Type

Analysts believe that both sides have a variety of nuclear warheads ranging from small “low-yield” weapons - less than one kiloton - to a possible high for India of between 150 and 200 kT. Most weapons are believed to be in the 15 to 20 kT range, similar to the Hiroshima bomb. Pakistan has claimed to have tested a weapon in the 25 to 36 kT range. India has claimed to have tested a weapon in the 43 to 60 kT range (although intelligence sources told the Federation of American Scientists that it was actually between 12 and 25 kT).

Attack Systems

India

Short Range Ballistic Missiles
Prithvi I - range 150 kilometres
Prithvi II - range 250 kilometres
Dhanush - 250 kilometres (not all tests successful)
Medium Range Ballistic Missiles
Agni – 2,000 kilometres
Agni II – 2,000 kilometres

The Prithvi and Dhanush missiles are capable of carrying 20 kT warheads. The Agni missiles are capable of carrying 150 to 200 kT warheads.

Cruise and other missiles

The United States Department of Defence says that India has anti-ship cruise missiles and short-range tactical air missiles that might be converted to carry small nuclear warheads.

Aircraft

Janes says that India has French Mirage 2000 fighter jets, British Jaguar strike fighters and old Soviet MiG-27M fighters that could carry nuclear warheads.

Pakistan

Short Range Ballistic Missiles
Haf 1 - range 80 kilometres
Haf 3 - range 300 kilometres
Shaheeh I - range 750 kilometres

Medium Range Ballistic Missiles

Shaheeh II/Ghazanavi – range 2,000 kilometres
Ghauri 1 – range 1,500 kilometres
Ghauri 2 - range 2,300 kilometres

The Shaheeh and Ghauri missiles are capable of carrying 20 to 25 kT warheads.

Cruise and other missiles

The United States Department of Defence says that Pakistan has sea and submarine-launched anti-ship cruise missiles and short-range tactical air missiles that might be converted to carry small nuclear warheads.

Aircraft

Janes says that Pakistan has American F-16 Fighting Falcons that could carry nuclear warheads.

Is there a “nuclear doctrine?”

During the Cold War, both the NATO allies and the Soviet Union developed various “nuclear doctrines” which governed the use of nuclear weapons in the case of conflict and kept those weapons under the control of both the political and military leaders. The U.S. defense department says India has discussed but not adopted a “limited” nuclear doctrine of “credible minimal deterrence” and that included the use of nuclear weapons as “retaliation only,” noting that it would respond to an attack with “punitive retaliation.” The decision to use nuclear weapons would be made by the Indian prime minister. The U.S. report makes no mention of any nuclear doctrine in use by Pakistan and notes that the weapons are under the sole control of the military.

One potential problem recently expressed by the U.S. Department of Defence is that one side could launch missiles carrying conventional warheads and that other side could launch nuclear weapons in retaliation under the assumption that it was under nuclear attack.

Are the weapons reliable?

Although India and Pakistan have tested both missiles and nuclear warheads under controlled conditions, that is no guarantee that they would work in combat conditions. Andrew Brookes of the International Institute for Strategic Studies has noted that after launch, the warhead must survive both separation from the missile and re-entry to the atmosphere above its target.

What could happen?

An analysis of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, conducted by the U.S. Department of Defence and leaked to the New York Times estimates up to 12 million people would be killed immediately in a nuclear exchange and as many as another 7 million injured.

The Defence Department noted that those figures “were just immediate casualties” and more would die in the resulting firestorms in cities and even more as a result of disease and starvation.

A more limited attack would kill about 3 million people and injure 1.5 million, says a second report obtained by the British magazine New Scientist.

Both reports are based on one key assumption, that the bomb would “air burst” at least 600 metres above a city, similar to the American bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If the bombs explode on the ground—a ground burst—both reports say the results would be much more devastating. A ground burst would send tons of soil into the atmosphere and spread radioactive fallout over a wide area.

Airburst or ground burst, wind conditions could send the radioactive fallout back toward the attacking country.

The report obtained by the New York Times says a nuclear war would immediately overwhelm hospitals across the Middle East and South Asia, require massive foreign aid, and could trigger famine across South Asia. The Americans are worried that after such a war, the world would then call on the United States to help the victims and help clean up the resulting physical and radioactive damage.

Do India and Pakistan have other weapons of mass destruction?

India acknowledged in 1997 that it has a chemical weapons program, but it did sign the chemical weapons convention and has opened its facilities to international inspection. Pakistan has not had a formal chemical weapons program but the U.S. Defence Department notes that both countries have chemical industries that could easily be converted to weapons production. Pakistan has signed the chemical weapons convention.

Both India and Pakistan have the capability of producing biological weapons. The U.S. says both countries have conducted “limited” biological warfare research.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]