Acceptable Technology Use Policy: Fill & Download for Free

Bahawalpur in Pakistan.This is not a joke answer.Should full scale war break out between India and Pakistan and conventional conflict isn’t restricted to border fighting but proceeds to Indian forces making deep armor-mechanized advances into Pakistani territory, there is only one potential sector where such a scenario is possible and that’s the Bahawalpur-Sukkur-Hyderabad axis in mid-Pakistan.There’s a reason why the Indian army exercises back in 87 (Brasstacks) targeted this sector as a potential point of advance, with the bulk of forces concentrated towards Bahawalpur-Sukkur region to target the rail and road links that connected northern Pakistan with the southern port of Karachi.The reason why this sector in particular holds the potential for hosting the bulk of armored and mechanized thrusts is simple: The north is too fortified. The Kashmir border, Sialkot and Lahore sectors are dug in hard with entrenched forces and very heavy defenses. Most of the supplies, garrisons, reserves and logistics are a few kms from the border here and the area is too well defended to butt heads against in a war of attrition.The extreme north is mountainous while the extreme south in Sindh is either swampy marshes or the soft sands of the Thar desert. Tanks and vehicles cant maneuver easily on such soft sands and the sand here is murder on tank engines where it can get mixed with the internal machinery and oil and cause severe maintenance issues. A far cry from say the flat plains of Eastern Europe or the hard ground of the Sinai which permit long range maneuvers with armored divisions and mechanized infantry support.The only possible region on the border between India and Pakistan which is relatively more open spaced and with the proper terrain for armored and mechanized advances is the Bahawalpure-Sukkur axis. 21 Corp in the Indian Army would probably take the lead in such operations.You can read more about this in Ravi Rikhye’s book: The Fourth Round.The Fourth RoundNow, the way the current tactical nuclear doctrine in Pakistan has involved means that that the smaller kt nukes, mounted on the very short ranged but extremely precise missiles like Nasr act like just a variant of artillery. If fighting continues on long enough and Indian formations break through, there is a short window before they reach urban built up areas like Bahawalpur which are close to the border and the time it takes for field commanders to get authorization to use tactical warheads as they see fit.While the ideal situation would involve warheads being used closer to the deserted border in that particular region, and only military units being targeted, the reality is that there is a strong chance that in the confusion of fighting and time constraints, Bahawalpur or it’s outskirts might be severely impacted by Pakistan’s own tactical nuclear weaponry.But flip the table and you get the same result: Should the Indians choose to use nukes first, Bahawalpur might end up getting destroyed again.There is increasing evidence that Indian strategic nuclear policy vis a vis Pakistan is being decoupled from the Indian policy in general or the Indian policy towards China.This comes from several Indian strategic thinkers and policy makers themselves.For example, Lt. General BS Nagal, former Strategic Forces Commander in Chief, former National Security advisor Shivshankar Menon (mostly in his 2016 book) and 2016 Defense minister Manohar Parrikar have all come out against the No first use policy, particularly with regards to Pakistan.Shivshankar Menon is on record stating that India should use nuclear warheads in a pre-emptive manner if Indian forces were to detect Pakistani tactical warheads being moved into the combat theater or being prepared for launch.He gives a loose definition and makes a grey area over whether Indian Full Scale strike, in the form of a ‘Splendid First strike’ would take place in response to Pak forces using tactical warheads in Pakistani territory or whether they would be used pre-emptively the moment a potential tactical usage by Pakistani forces was detected.But all above mentioned policy makers are unanimous in their writings that No First Use as a policy should be decoupled from Pakistan related strategic policy making. Parrikar has repeatedly voiced his opinion while a sitting defense minister back in 2016 that India should refrain from even having a declared nuclear usage policy. And rather than engage in a tit for tat, escalating nuclear exchange with Pakistan, an overwhelming first strike to completely disarm Pakistan needs to be the need of the hour whether in response to Pakistani tactical warhead usage on it’s own territory or as a preemptive measure against Pakistani tactical warhead usage when it is imminent.To be fair, the slow erosion of No First Use policy in India vis a vis Pakistan began a while back, somewhere around when Indian policy makers stated that they would counter chemical and biological weapons usage with nuclear weapons usage.But in any case, the shift in Indian doctrine from initial counter force or counter value targeting and limited escalation to full on First Strike capability in the case of potential or actual usage of tactical nuclear weapons by Pakistani forces against Indian military troops in Pakistani territory is something that’s on the way to being implemented by Indian strategic forces under the direction of current and previous strategic policy makers.If nuclear weapons are used to target Pak strategic forces about to use tactical warheads, Bahawalpur falls into the line of sight again as it is in the theater where such weapons would most probably be used.While the Indian military doesn’t currently have the capability to locate and neutralize all of Pakistan’s strategic forces, Indian planners have worked up some work arounds which they believe will increase the probability of a successful first strike and reduce any retaliation.Focus only on the strategic warheads and leave the short range, tactical warheads out of the equation.Continue development of an ABM capability to shoot down any retaliatory strike missiles (or shoot down enough to make retaliation within acceptable margins for e.g. 10 million dead at most)I should mention though that this only one side of the equation as far as strategic policy making in India is concerned. There are plenty of Indian nuclear policy makers who have come out against such revisions of No-First-Use vis a vis Pakistan and urged political leaders to remain committed to India’s No First Use policy in the case of both Pakistan and China rather than decouple the two.Chairman of the NSAB in India, Mr. Saran, is perhaps the most vocal advocate of remaining committed to the NFU policy and current sitting Indian PM Modi has also signaled his intent to remain committed to the NFU in a statement where he endorsed PM Vajpayee’s declaration of NFU policy.Being a parliamentary democracy with civil command and control of the nuclear program also means that Indian policy making goes far beyond what a few sitting cabinet ministers and ex-Army officers say in their statements and in their blog posts.Any additional proof of no changes in the NFU policy are the current military technology trajectories in the Indian strategic forces which continue to develop along the paths of assured second strike capability (for e.g. SLBM carrying “Boomer” SSBN subs in the Indian navy).At the moment, Pakistan would most likely use tactical warheads first on it’s own territory, as declared by current Pak strategic policy. How India responds to that, will determine the tempo of the conflict in it’s aftermath.For further reading and additional source material:Decoding India’s Nuclear StatusAnd what this results in on our side of the border is folk either dismissing the more aggressive statements from Indian nuclear policy hawks as a bluff or using the pretext of an Indian First Strike premise to up strategic weapons production to increase their survivability in a first strike as well as plan out nuclear targeting of Indian population centers (rather than military targets) to make any second strike potent enough to dissuade the first strike in the first place.Meanwhile, investments are being carried out in new tracking and guidance systems, missile stealth, maneuverability and MIRV capability to beat an ABM system India chooses to deploy.One of the core elements that have prevented nuclear exchanges during the Cold War era between the US and the USSR or any other nuclear power has been the setting of definitive, red lines that have been acknowledged by both sides as the line beyond which nuclear exchanges become inevitable.This could be Soviet Troops about to break out from a certain bulge or cross a certain river in West Germany. Or US forces targeting strategic forces in China to the point of making their nuclear deterrent ineffective leading to a “use it or lose it’ situation.India and Pakistan have no red lines or worse, don’t recognize each other’s nuclear thresholds and red lines. Its a region more awash in old hatreds and a vicious impulse for violence than say the cold Geo strategic calculations that went into the Cold War between the USSR and the US.The constant escalation is endless. Cold Start introduced the concept of making a quick thrust to capture strategic territory and use it as a bargaining chip without provoking nuclear exchange. Tactical warheads were developed to negate Cold Start from the onset. ‘Splendid First Strike’ was introduced to negate or deter the use of tactical warheads. ABMs were introduced. MIRVs to counter them.Sometimes I am optimistic that both sides will pull back from the brink and exercise restraint. There have been several episodes in the past when we have done so. Other times, not so much.Perhaps the earth deserves better than our vicious, parasitic existence. Better we rid ourselves in our vicious hatreds, tribalism, egos, incapacity for patience and glorification of violence. And may the Earth that remains in the after math, be better off in our absence.There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;And frogs in the pools singing at night,And wild plum-trees in tremulous white;Robins will wear their feathery fireWhistling their whims on a low fence-wire;And not one will know of the war, not oneWill care at last when it is done.Not one would mind, neither bird nor treeIf mankind perished utterly;And Spring herself, when she woke at dawn,Would scarcely know that we were gone.There Will Come Soft Rains - Wikipedia, Poem by Sara Teasdale about the aftermath of a nuclear war.

Mate,During the war with Israel as well, Pakistan and Co. not only had greater firepower but also more no of troops.Everyone knows what happened as your great army failed.Now coming back to the point.Comparing India and Pakistan in terms of defense capabilitiesKindly confirm the same from the link belowCompare World Military Powers ResultsThese results are presented by a third party, which is based in the USA.Yes, There are statistics that Pakistan has around 10 more nuclear warheads than India but here’s the big picture.Pakistan has more percentage of mini-nukes(500kt< ) than Nukes with greater power, whereas India on the other hand has more of the bigger sized nukes.Moreover, Pakistan lacks nuclear triads, Sea based ballistics, aircraft carriers and a few more things. One can compare from the links below.India and weapons of mass destruction - WikipediaPakistan and weapons of mass destruction - WikipediaNow coming to the Aerial power -Neither India, nor Pakistan have 5th Gen Jet Fighters.The difference here however is that India are developing there own jets while Pakistan were willing to buy even the J-20s from China which are termed as “low man’s aircraft” upon rejection from the US due to the fact that Chinese play a big role in sustaining the Paki Army and could therefore get hands on their technology.Pakistan is not developing any air craft, it is simply buying them in order to cope up with IndiaThere goes the argument that Indians lack production quality, or in this case even the quantity.As a matter of fact, neither of the two nations would get their air crafts before 2020.India’s artillery power is however deteriorating but in any case it is ahead than that of its neighbors.Pakistan, since the independence has always tried to cope up with India in many aspects but has failed to do so in the most.Some people may find it difficult to accept but India’s defence capabilities are better than Pakistan’s, but again India respects every nation and hence we have the “no first use” policy.Namaste!

I would be more concerned that your employees use Browsec or other VPN like technologies. Think about it, all their traffic flows thru someone's data centers in Russia. And they can see what your employees do. Discourage the use of such technologies by unblocking sites your employees want to visit, and properly communicate the acceptable use policy.Or get a better firewall that inspects traffic and is capable of blocking Browsec.