In South Asia, India and Pakistan have also engaged in a technological nuclear arms race since the 1970s.

The nuclear competition started in 1974 with India detonating the device, codename Smiling Buddha, at
the Pokhran region of the Rajasthan state.[40] The Indian government termed this test as a "peacefulnuclear
explosion", but according to independent sources, it was actually part of an accelerated covert nuclear
program of India.[41]
This test generated great concern and doubts in Pakistan, with fear it would be at the mercy of its long–
time arch rival. Pakistan had its own covert atomic bomb projects in 1972 which extended over many
years since the first Indian weapon was detonated. After the 1974 test, Pakistan's atomic bomb program
picked up a great speed and accelerated its atomic project to successfully build its own atomic weapons
program. In the last few decades of the 20th century, India and Pakistan began to develop nuclear-capable
rockets and nuclear military technologies. Finally, in 1998 India, under Atal Bihari
Vajpayee government, test detonated 5 more nuclear weapons. While the international response to the
detonation was muted,[citation needed] domestic pressure within Pakistan began to build steam and Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif ordered the test, detonated 6 nuclear war weapons (Chagai-I and Chagai-II) in a
tit-for-tat fashion and to act as a deterrent.

Who would win a nuclear conflict between India and

Pakistan?
As India analyzes how best to respond to the attack on its military base, some figures in
the national press are calling for revenge. However it seems likely that Pakistan’s nuclear
capabilities will ultimately dissuade New Delhi from any attack.

Looking at the Arms Control Association (ACA) fact sheet for nuclear weapons, we can
analyze which of the nations has the stronger nuclear arsenal. According to ACA
estimates, Pakistan in fact has a higher number of nuclear warheads than India. Experts
believe that Pakistan has 110-130 nuclear warheads, while India has 100-120.

This data is echoed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) data,
which publishes the same figures. The report also says that both countries continue to
expand their nuclear arsenals in terms of the number of warheads and missile delivery
capabilities.

“Despite the ongoing reduction in the number of weapons, the prospects for genuine
progress towards nuclear disarmament remain gloomy,” comments Shannon Kile, Head
of the SIPRI Nuclear Weapons Project. “All the nuclear weapon-possessing states
continue to prioritize nuclear deterrence as the cornerstone of their national security
strategies.”

Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal growing fast

At this point in time it appears that neither country has deployed any warheads. Instead
they are maintaining them de-mated from missiles, with warheads in a central storage
facility.

Interestingly India’s nuclear warfare policy is built on a No First-Use (NFU) doctrine. In

contrast Pakistan has not adopted an NFU doctrine, although it has indicated a reluctance
to make a first nuclear strike.

As things stand Pakistan is on course to have the third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile
in the world, according to a research report from two think tanks based in the United
States. “Pakistan operates four plutonium production reactors; India operates one.
Pakistan has the capability to produce perhaps 20 nuclear warheads annually; India
appears to be producing about five warheads annually,” the study notes.

Islamabad could command third-largest nuclear arsenal

within 10 years
The report, which came out in 2015, notes that Pakistan could “have a nuclear arsenal not
only twice the size of India’s but also larger than those of the United Kingdom, China,
and France, giving it the third-largest arsenal behind the United States and Russia.”

“Many observers have concluded that Pakistan’s rate of fissile material production (and
assumed construction of nuclear weapons) gives it the fastest-growing nuclear weapons
stockpile,” the report continues.

The 2015 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace/Stimson Center report shows that
Pakistan is using more of its fissile material to make weapons than India.

India has about 600 kilograms of plutonium stockpiled, while Pakistan has about 170
kilograms of plutonium and 3.1 metric tons of highly-enriched uranium (HEU). If we
assume that one nuclear warhead would need 5 kilograms of plutonium or 15 kilograms
of HEU, India could make 120 weapons with its existing stockpile, compared to 240 for
Pakistan.

India ramps up rhetoric against Pakistan

At the same time India has an advantage in terms of plutonium stockpiles. Less
plutonium is required to make a fission bomb than HEU. As a result plutonium warheads
are lighter and better for use with ballistic missiles.
In the existing atmosphere of heightened tension the rhetoric from India has escalated in
its aggression. Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh called Pakistan a ‘terrorist state’
during an anti-Pakistan rant after hearing news of the deadly militant attack, and India
accuses its neighbor of masterminding the attack.

Singh said that “there are definite and conclusive indications that the perpetrators of
the Uri attackwere highly trained, heavily armed and specially equipped.”

“I am deeply disappointed with Pakistan’s continued and direct support to terrorism and
terrorist groups,” he said.

Pakistan ready to respond to any threat

For its part Pakistan has underlined its military preparedness and its willingness to
counter any attack from India, according to a report from The News. Sources claim that
although Pakistan will not make the first attack, it would retaliate with full force if
attacked by India.

The sources also maintained that Indians would not be allowed to cross the red line.
Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is currently in the U.S. at the United Nations
General Assembly, where he will try to convince the international community that the
problems in Kashmir are India’s fault. He has also discussed the situation with Chief of
Army Staff (COAS) General Raheel Sharif.

Pakistani sources maintain that India has blamed the country for its involvement on the
army base in Uri without undertaking a proper investigation. Pakistan continues to deny
the claims.

General Raheel also underlined that the Pak Army would respond to any challenge from
India. “Pakistan’s armed forces together with their resilient nation have surmounted every
challenge and will thwart any sinister design against integrity and sovereignty of the
country in future as well,” the COAS said.

Pakistan maintains that India is trying to cover up alleged human rights abuses in

Kashmir. Since anti-India protests broke out earlier this year there have been 80 reported
deaths in the region, most of them anti-government protesters.

The US and the race

While the United States does not have the same alliances in South Asia that it does in
Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, or the same threat of a would-be hegemonic
power threatening vital American interests, Washington has a major stake in the India-
Pakistan arms race.

First, as the world's only superpower, the United States has a responsibility to prevent the
potential threat of nuclear war. Second, America's bilateral relations with both countries
are essential. The United States has designated Pakistan a major non-NATO ally for their
decades-long strategic partnership, and Islamabad is too big and influential (and
dangerous) to ignore. Washington's relationship with India could be one its most
important in the 21st century, as New Delhi is set to see its economic power grow
steadily going forward. India could also be a balancing force against China's rise.

The United States is the only country with the right clout to manage an Indian-Pakistani
crisis and deescalate it. U.S. diplomacy, for example, was critical in preventing the 1999
Kargil War from getting far worse by putting appropriate pressure on Pakistan. In 2001,
Washington helped cool boiling tensions after a terrorist attack on Indian Parliament by
urging restraint from and putting pressure on India.

President Trump may very well be faced with a quickly deteriorating crisis between India
and Pakistan in the next four years. Cooler heads have prevailed in South Asia with such
incidents in the past. That may not be the case next time, however, and there will be a
next time. Trump and his secretary of state could be the only two able to bring both sides
together before the situation gets out of control. Let us hope they are planning for that
day.