Rajnath Singh recently said that India’s nuclear doctrine of ‘no-first-use’ may change in future depending upon the situation. Because of the present tension between India and Pakistan, many considered it as a shift of nuclear strategy. Congress mentioned it as ambiguous. Pakistan termed it as irresponsible although Pakistan doesn’t espouse NFU (No-First Use). Point is whether India under Narendra Modi is being aggressive and will change its policies.
Before going there, we should discuss some other policy changes. Earlier, India used strategic restraint whenever there was a ceasefire violation. Post Modi era, the soldiers at the border are given freedom to retaliate with the double or triple measure. During the Kargil war, Atal Vajpayee’s clear instruction was not to cross LOC. But in the Modi era, Indian army crossed LOC during the Uri surgical strike and Indian Air Force too, during the Balakot air strike. That means the Narendra Modi government used a confronting or say retaliatory policy with Pakistan clearly indicating that ‘enough is enough.’ That naturally creates doubt among many that India may change its NFU policy.
Pakistan has always taken advantage of India’s mature and strategic restraint attitude. That’s why the Modi government after 1971, gave a message that India is not ready to tolerate more. But the nuclear policy is an important issue and India is a responsible country. Point to be noted that China has also a ‘No-First-Use’ policy and I feel that India’s ‘No-First-use’ policy is in the context of China as India and China have not shared friendship, especially after China’s blind support to Pakistan and unending border disputes. There was a war in 1962 followed a and a skirmish in 1967 at Nathu La. India was defeated in 1962 whereas in 1967, the Chinese retreated from then the Royal Kingdom of Sikkim. As per George Fernandes, during Pokhran-II, it appears that India’s nuclear doctrine is primarily aimed at China and not at Pakistan because Pakistan is conventionally way behind India in global firepower.
But then, Pakistan obtained also nuclear state status. Since then,time and again its ministers frequently threaten India that they can use a nuclear weapon. In fact, because Pakistan has not espoused NFU thus many Indian leaders and governments usually thought that retaliation would result in a nuclear war. In Modi era, government India wanted to call Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. Before Rajnath Singh, then Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar too said that India may review it’s ‘no-first-use’ policy. The surgical strikes by India proved that Pakistan in fact was bluffing on a nuclear weapon.
But then, India also needs to counter Pakistan on this aspect. India’s ‘No-First-Use’ policy is against countries with the same NFU policy. For countries who do not have such a policy, why should India be careful about its doctrine? Why should it wait till Pakistan attacks India with a nuclear weapon to retaliate? In fact, other than India and China, no other country has promised of ‘No-First-Use’ although many said that such a weapon will be used only defensively. That means except China and India, all other nuclear power can use nuclear arsenal in case they feel that they are being attacked. In today’s borderless states (allies of states) it would be hard to define what is defensive and what exactly is an attack. Thus, the NFU is not sacrosanct or must follow policy.
Whatever Rajnath Singh has said on the NFU, is just to call Pakistan’s bluff. In any case, if a country is at war, it can change any policy or doctrine suiting to the interest of its national policy. Thus, there’s no need to read between the lines and India must have the option of first use against countries having the same option.
In any case, Pakistan will never want a nuclear holocaust because land and business is closely tied to the army. However, India needs to call their bluff, and Rajnath Singh did exactly that. It is just a matter of tactic.