The Nascent Nuclear Crisis in Ukraine and Broiling Strategic Stability in South Asia

The war in Ukraine has jolted the regional chessboard of Europe. However, as the world watches the consequences of Russia's Ukraine revanchism, the scholarship also discusses the need for a renewed understanding of strategic stability around the world. The Russian leadership's steadfast determination to keep nuclear weapons as an option remains a grave concern, particularly in light of the fear that, regardless of the Mutually Assured Destruction (also known as “MAD”) concept, nuclear states outside of Europe will be motivated to use the threat of nuclear weapons to achieve their goals through conventional means. A more nuanced understanding can be gained by examining strategic stability in South Asia and the potential consequences of the Ukraine crisis on the Pakistan-India nuclear gamble, which has been dogged by an unresolved border conflict over Kashmir, a nuclear flashpoint, since its inception.

Hitherto, scholars have argued that the chance for the use of nuclear energy still exists, further exacerbated by Putin’s actions which are eroding the nuclear taboo by targeting nuclear facilities. However, the fact remains that Ukraine is neither a nuclear state nor part of the western nuclear umbrella. As a result, Russia's actions against Ukraine, particularly the threat of using nuclear weapons, are based on Russia's political rhetoric that they can use nuclear weapons as a means of war. However, this narration is based on Russia's failure to achieve a quick end in Ukraine thus far. Therefore, this tit-for-tat struggle with the western front that is providing humanitarian, economic, diplomatic, and military support to Ukraine is making it difficult for Russia to achieve a swift victory. This remains the major reason as to why nuclear saber-rattling has entered the rhetoric to challenge the strategic stability equation, thus pushing the West on the back foot.

Moreover, if there is any conflict between Pakistan and India that is testing the limits of the nuclear threshold, the chicken dilemma persists. Both sides know that they have to “turn aside” to avoid a nuclear catastrophe, but if they don't, the Samson option exists, leading to a “head-on collision." Therefore, this idea does not remain between Ukraine and Russia or between Russia and the western nuclear state, which remained reluctant to take aggressive action when Russia invaded Georgia or annexed Crimea. However, between India and Pakistan, the stakes remain high in the case of any such step in Kashmir, and consequently, the stakes between hostile neighbours remain high in case of any aggression.

The "Ukraine Effect" can be accessed in terms of a full-spectrum deterrence equation as both states are moving towards increased military modernisation to support their doctrinal shifts. Since 2000, the arrival of Brahmos-1 in the nuclear equation has made India’s military a formidable one. This raised eyebrows in Islamabad, thus leading to an arms race for the building of tactical nuclear weapons. Scholars also believe that this arms race was observable since the instability/instability paradox leads towards such steps. As a result, both sides are more likely to develop new munitions, effective delivery systems, missile defence systems, short- and long-range missiles, hypersonic weapons, and nuclear triad capability. Hence, this level of arms race is more focused on maintaining the minimal threshold to keep the stakes of speedy war termination high so that once the situation escalates, the great powers will intervene and deescalate the nuclear crisis. This remains one major reason why Pakistan has maintained the position that nuclear weapons are not for political use but rather for military use, so that the fear of a low nuclear threshold will deter India as well as call on international actors to intervene during crisis situations.

Further, another impact of the war in Ukraine on the strategic stability in South Asia is the renewed faith in the need for nuclear arsenals. What is happening in Ukraine is the result of a mistake made in 1994 in which Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenals in exchange for security guarantees in the form of the Budapest Memorandum from great powers. To this end, Mearsheimer writes in 1993 that Ukraine should have maintained nuclear deterrence against Russia because Ukraine cannot match Russia in conventional symmetry. Somewhat similar scenarios would have existed in South Asia if Pakistan had not developed nuclear capabilities to deter India. Therefore, Pakistan's security balance vis-à-vis India after the 1999 nuclear test is due to its nuclear capability, which has ensured that no war will break out between the two countries. Nevertheless, both sides have a shared belief over the nuclear issue, which is similar to what was stated years ago in the Reagan-Gorbachev Statement: “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”

Nuclear weapons proliferation will be another source of concern for global nuclear embargo regimes. As a result, neither India nor Pakistan have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This means that the possibility of transferring nuclear technology between these two states still exists. Consequently, drawing from the Ukrainian conflict, more states will be looking to acquire this technology as they are become more aware of the fact that having their own nuclear technology is essential. Based on this, the proliferation of nuclear technology will remain a possibility as the threat of nuclear war escalates. Therefore, the international nuclear watchdog needs to keep a close check on the possibility of nuclear proliferation in India and Pakistan.

To conclude, the war in Ukraine has challenged the US-sponsored world order and raised questions regarding who is willing to stand for liberal international values. The world order will remain the same for now, but questions persist regarding the future of US hegemony. Accordingly, when several things are in question, the challenge to nuclear norms as set forth by the great powers is now in dispute regarding what the future order would entail for global nuclear watchdogs who remain vigilant to prevent any nuclear disaster. As a result, when the nuclear chessboard observes challenges from nuclear-armed Russia, the possible ramifications of such narratives raise the debate even in South Asia between Pakistan and India, whose unresolved border issue remains an older agenda in the United Nations.