In a chilling statement that has rekindled concerns of a nuclear standoff in South Asia, Pakistani politician Hanif Abbasi recently declared that Pakistan's 130 nuclear weapons are solely aimed at India. The remarks come amid rising tensions between the two nations, especially following the recent Pahalgam terror attack, which India has hinted may have Pakistani links. Abbasi's warning, paired with additional comments by Pakistan's Defense Minister about using nuclear arms as a "last resort," has fueled fresh anxieties over regional security.

But beneath the loud threats lies a more complex picture. Pakistan's internal vulnerabilities, military protocol constraints, and global diplomatic implications make a full-scale nuclear confrontation with India highly unlikely.

Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal: Strength on Paper

Pakistan reportedly maintains a triad-based nuclear arsenal comprising:

• 36 air-based weapons

• 126 land-based missiles

• 8 sea-based weapons

All nuclear warheads are believed to carry a minimum yield of 12 kilotons—the same magnitude as the Hiroshima bomb. Missiles like Ghauri, Shaheen, and Ghaznavi give Pakistan a strike range from 200 km to 1,500 km. The Shaheen-III, for instance, can reportedly reach targets as far as Israel. Yet, capability alone doesn't guarantee action.

From Improvisation to Deterrence: The Making of Pakistan's Nuclear Program

Pakistan’s journey to nuclearization wasn't a high-tech sprint but a "jugaad"-driven marathon. Initiated after India's first nuclear test in 1974, Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions were sparked by then-PM Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s defiant vow to "eat grass but build the bomb."

Here's how Pakistan reportedly assembled its nuclear puzzle:

• Funding: Backed by Libya ($100 million) and Saudi Arabia.

• Technology: Designs stolen by A.Q. Khan from a Dutch uranium enrichment facility.

• Bomb Design: Supplied by China (Chic-4).

• Missile Technology: Imported from North Korea (e.g., Ghauri = No Dong missile).

• Testing Ground: China's Lop Nor desert, where Pakistan allegedly tested its first bomb on May 26, 1990.

Summary: "Made in China, Paid by Arabs, Engineered by Khan."

Procedural Hurdles: Why a Nuclear Strike Isn’t Just a Button Push

Despite public posturing, launching a nuclear missile isn’t an impulsive action. Pakistan’s nuclear command is governed by a multilayered National Command Authority. This includes bureaucrats, military chiefs, and the Prime Minister, who holds the final say. Also, Pakistan’s nukes are non-mated, meaning warheads, missiles, and launchers are stored separately.

To strike India, the following steps would need to occur:

1. Transport the nuclear bomb from Kahuta or Dera Ghazi Khan.

2. Assemble it with a missile at a site like Tarawanah.

3. Shift the system to launch pads like Mashrur or Shahbaz.

This labor-intensive, highly traceable process would likely trigger international monitoring and intervention before completion.

Internal Chaos: Pakistan’s House Is Not in Order

Even as it threatens India, Pakistan is grappling with internal breakdowns:

1. Karachi Blockade

• Citizens protesting a water diversion project blocked access to Karachi Port.

• Result: 30,000 trucks stranded, including 1,000 fuel tankers—risking a nationwide fuel crisis.

2. Sindh Water Protests

• Farmers accuse the Army of diverting Indus River water for corporate farming.

• Protests have revived calls for "Sindhudesh," a long-standing separatist demand.

3. Balochistan’s Explosive Rebellion

• April 25: 3 IEDs kill 10 Pakistani soldiers.

• March 18: BLA claims to have killed 90 troops in one ambush—worse than Pulwama.

• Annual attacks by BLA now exceed 150.

4. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Insurgency

• April 28: Bomb kills six; 54 Taliban fighters attack Pakistani Army in Waziristan.

• TTP’s objective: Establish a separate Pashtunistan.

5. PoK Unrest

• Mass protests over the Mines and Minerals Bill.

• Citizens claim exploitation under the guise of "Azadi".

Global Deterrents: The Diplomatic Minefield

Despite all the sabre-rattling, launching a nuclear attack comes with irreversible consequences:

• Violation of Nuclear Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) with India.

• Breach of global non-proliferation norms.

• Loss of remaining diplomatic allies—China and Turkey included.

Even Russia, a superpower, faced harsh sanctions after a conventional war in Ukraine. For economically fragile Pakistan, international retaliation could prove existential.

Historical Precedents: Why It’s All Talk, No Boom

Pakistan didn’t retaliate with nukes during:

• 1999 Kargil War

• 2016 Uri Surgical Strike

• 2019 Balakot Airstrike

CIA assessments from the 1990s pegged the probability of nuclear war at just 20%—and that was when Pakistan’s economy was stronger.

The Politics of Distraction: A Convenient Threat?

Pakistani journalist insiders suggest the Pahalgam attack was orchestrated by Army Chief Asim Munir to distract from corruption probes. With inflation, unemployment, and internal strife rising, stoking anti-India rhetoric helps redirect public frustration.

India's Posture: Calm but Calculated

India, under its "No First Use" nuclear policy, remains committed to restraint. However, recent comments suggest a shift in tone. The Prime Minister has reportedly granted the military full discretion to decide the nature and timing of any retaliatory action.

Strategic analysts believe this could range from:

• Airstrikes in PoK

• Targeted elimination of terrorist handlers

• Cyber or economic warfare

India is no longer the nation of just "strong condemnation"—it is now a country of "strong action."