印媒: 巴基斯坦和中国的核武器对印度意味着什么

SCARY! What Pakistan and China's nuclear weapons mean for India

可怕!巴基斯坦和中国的核武器对印度意味着什么？

 

Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is growing at a faster rate than predicted, with a reliable report from the non-profit Federation of American Scientists putting the figure at about 150 warheads now.

巴基斯坦的核武库正在以比预期更快的速度增长，美国科学家联盟（FAS）的一份可靠报告称，目前巴基斯坦的核弹头数量约为150枚。

In the FAS's Nuclear Notebook: Pakistani Nuclear Forces, 2018, the authors, Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris, suggest that this could mean the country is not only on target to have up to 250 warheads by 2025, but that its production of tactical nuclear weapons risked a quicker slide from conventional clashes to a nuclear war.

FAS的核笔记：2018年，《巴基斯坦核部队》，作者克里斯滕森和罗伯特·诺里斯，暗示这可能意味着这个国家计划到2050年拥有250枚弹头,而且战术核武器的生产有可能更快地从传统冲突转向核战争。

The report was put together using requests under the United States Freedom of Information Act and declassified documents. Dr Kristensen cautioned that the estimates came with considerable uncertainty, given that all the nuclear nations shrouded their programmes in secrecy.

这份报告是根据《美国信息自由法》的请求和解密文件整理的。克里斯滕森博士告诫称，由于所有的核国家都将他们的计划保密，这些估计是相当不确定的。

Dr Kristensen, director, FAS Nuclear Information Project, has a resume steeped in analytical research including, early in his career, a long stint at Greenpeace, the environmental non-profit that, among other issues, also argues against reliance on nuclear power, saying it is ridden with problems and could also help spawn new nuclear powers.

克里斯滕森博士：FAS核信息项目，长期从事分析研究，包括在其职业生涯早期,长期在绿色和平组织工作,也反对对核能的依赖,说这充满问题，还可助长新核大国。

"Once one side starts using nuclear weapons, all bets are off," Dr Hans Kristensen tells Rediff.com's senior US contributor P Rajendran.

“一旦一方开始使用核武器，所有的赌注都完了”克里斯滕森博士博士告诉Rediff.com网站的美国资深撰稿人P Rajendran。

 

You are reputed to provide the best publicly available information on nuclear arms worldwide. How do you go about analysing the information?

众所周知，你们提供了世界范围内关于核武器的最佳公开信息。你如何分析这些信息?

First of all, the fact that we are called the best estimates reflects that there are no official estimates -- the point being that none of those countries release any information about how many nuclear weapons they have. So it is up to others to make those estimates.

首先，我们称之为“最佳估计”，这一事实反映出，没有官方估计——关键是，这些国家都没有公布任何有关它们拥有多少核武器的信息。因此，做出这些估计取决于其他人。

What we have done over the years is to develop a methodology by which we combine information from declassified documents here in the United States and elsewhere and combine that with other information about the country's military postures, specifically what kind of weapons systems they have, what kind of strategy they have, and also how much fissile material they are thought to have available for their nuclear weapons programme.

这些年我们所做的是开发一种方法，通过这种方法将美国和其他国家的揭秘文件信息结合起来，并将其与其他国家的军事姿态信息相结合，具体包括武器系统,作战战略，有多少裂变材料是用于他们的核武器计划。

We try to combine all of these related information into estimates that obviously come with considerable uncertainty because we don't know the specifics of the country's nuclear weapons numbers.

我们试图将所有这些相关信息整合到评估中，这显然会带来相当大的不确定性，因为我们不知道该国核武器数量的具体情况。

 

You are also looking at the political situation in those countries, right?

你也在观察这些国家的政治形势，对吧?

Nuclear forces develop slowly and so the political climate can change and, of course, it can have an effect on weapons programmes.

核力量发展缓慢，因此政治气候可能发生变化，当然也可能对武器计划产生影响。

But over the years nuclear weapons programmes tend to follow longer-term plans rather than quickly change depending on the mood between countries.

但多年来，核武器计划往往遵循较长期的计划，而不是根据国与国之间的情绪变化而迅速改变。

So if a country plans to have nuclear weapons soon, such as in the case of Saddam Hussein, president and dictator of Iraq for about 23 years, it cannot develop one easily.

因此，如果一个国家打算尽快拥有核武器，比如萨达姆•侯赛因，这位伊拉克总统和读才者执政23年，也没能研制出核武器。

Yeah, there's a long period of design development that all countries must go through.

是的，所有国家都必须经历一个漫长的设计发展时期。

India and Pakistan went through that in the seventies, eighties and nineties before they got to the point of even detonating nuclear weapons.

印度和巴基斯坦在70年代、80年代和90年代都经历过这种情况，他们甚至还没有达到引爆核武器的地步。

 

Given the chaotic nature of the nuclear standoff in South Asia, and the fact that there are actually three actors present -- India, China and Pakistan -- can Pakistan's increased nuclear weaponry escalate the arms race there?

考虑到南亚核僵局的混乱本质，以及实际上有三个参与者——印度、中国和巴基斯坦——巴基斯坦增加核武器是否会加剧那里的军备竞赛?

Yes, specially India and Pakistan will look closely at each other's nuclear postures and obviously follow what the other side is doing. That can have real impact on what they decide to do.

是的，特别是印度和巴基斯坦将密切关注对方的核姿态，显然也会关注对方在做什么。这可能会对他们的决定产生真正的影响。

If you look at the Pakistani and Indian arsenals they were, for the first couple of decades, they were relatively closely linked in terms of what categories of weapons they developed.

如果你看看巴基斯坦和印度的军火库，在最初的几十年里，他们在开发的武器种类上有相对紧密的联系。

But within the last decade we have seen some change, for example, in the case of Pakistan, putting more emphasis on what appears to be more tactical nuclear weapons.

但在过去10年里，我们看到了一些变化，例如，巴基斯坦更加强调的似乎是战术核武器。

They have their reasons for doing that, and India seems to be putting more emphasis on longer-range systems because of the way it is planning vis-a-vis China.

他们这样做是有原因的，而印度似乎更强调远程系统，因为它是针对中国。

 

So Pakistan is planning for trouble with India, while India is planning in the longer term for China?

所以巴基斯坦是在为来自印度的麻烦做打算，而印度是在为中国做长远打算?

Well, India's planning for Pakistan and China.

印度对巴基斯坦和中国都有计划。

The Bharatiya Janata Party was the party in power when the first nuclear tests were conducted in 1998 (after India exploded an atom bomb in 1974) even though, as you suggested, all the material must have been ready for some time.

印度人民党是1998年进行第一次核试验时的执政党(印度在1974年引爆了一颗原子弹)，尽管正如你所说，所有的核材料肯定已经准备好一段时间了。

 

Did the perception that India's current BJP-led government is more combative have helped change Pakistan's posture?

目前印度人民党领导的政府更加好斗是否有助于改变巴基斯坦的姿态?

The main reason Pakistan has put more emphasis on tactical nuclear weapons appears to be their concern about what to do about India's larger conventional forces.

巴基斯坦更加重视战术核武器的主要原因似乎是他们担心如何对付印度庞大的常规部队。

(If) those forces invaded Pakistan would they be able to go in and basically win without India ever having to cross the nuclear threshold.

如果这些军队入侵巴基斯坦，他们能进入并基本上赢得胜利，而无需印度跨过核门槛。

The Pakistani planners concluded that they needed to have tactical nuclear weapons to stop such an invasion without having to resort to strategic nuclear attacks against India.

巴基斯坦规划者得出结论，他们需要有战术核武器来阻止这种入侵，而不必对印度发动战略核攻击。

 

Do you think any low-level nuclear use could lead to a larger nuclear war?

你认为任何低级别核使用都会导致更大规模的核战争吗?

Yes, that's always the danger, of course, not just in the case of India and Pakistan, but in all Nuclear Weapons States.

是的，这总是危险的，当然，不仅是在印度和巴基斯坦，而且在所有拥有核武器的国家都是。

Once the military starts to draw up plans for using nuclear weapons in what you could call the pre-strategic environment, then you get two situations.

一旦军方开始制定在所谓的战略前环境中使用核武器的计划，就会出现两种情况。

One, of course, is that nuclear weapons could be used earlier in a crisis than otherwise.

当然，其中之一就是核武器在危机中可能更早被使用。

Once you start using nuclear weapons on one side it is very unlikely that the other side will just be sitting there, saying, 'Oh, I guess we shouldn't do that.' They will take measures, of course.

一旦一方开始使用核武器，另一方就不太可能只是坐在那里说：“哦，我想我们不应该那样做。”。他们肯定会采取措施。

If India has decided that it is necessary to invade Pakistan for whatever reason and its forces are being annihilated inside Pakistan because of the Pakistani use of tactical nuclear weapons, it is very hard to imagine the Indians would say, 'I guess we were wrong, we're just going to pull back here.'

不管出于什么原因，如果印度已经决定有必要入侵巴基斯坦，如果因为巴基斯坦使用战术核武器，导致印度军队在巴基斯坦境内被歼灭，很难想象印度人会说,“我想我们是错了,我们将撤回去。”

So once one side starts using nuclear weapons, all bets are off.

因此，一旦一方开始使用核武器，所有的赌注都完了。

 

India does have a policy of no first use of nuclear weapons, but if there is this reason, could it go all the way?

印度确实有不首先使用核武器的政策，但如果出于这个原因，它会一直坚持不使用吗?

When countries have no first use policies, these are policies that play more of a role in peacetime.

当国家有不首先使用核武器的政策时，这些政策在和平时期发挥了更大的作用。

I have a hard time imagining that a country in a war where significant national interests were threatened, that it would say, 'Oh, gee, we should not use it first because we have a no first use policy.'

我很难想象一个国家在战争中，国家利益受到威胁时，它会说：‘哦，天哪，我们不应该首先使用核武器，因为我们有不首先使用核武器的政策。’

Once you get into that situation, countries will do pretty much what they think is necessary. I see the value and the message of no first use policies more as something that's important in peacetime.

一旦进入这种情况，国家就会做它们认为必要的事情。我认为不首先使用核武器政策的价值在和平时期更为重要。

 

The new government in Pakistan led by Imran Khan is believed to be working with or controlled by the military. Could that at least in the short term reduce the chance of a conflict with India?

据信由伊姆兰汗领导的巴基斯坦新政府正在与军方合作或由军方控制。至少在短期内，这会降低与印度发生冲突的可能性吗?

We don't really know what the new Pakistani government believes about these issues. It is in any case very unlikely to fundamentally change the role of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. So we'll have to wait and see.

我们真的不知道巴基斯坦新政府对这些问题的看法。无论如何，它都不太可能从根本上改变巴基斯坦核武器的角色。所以我们只能拭目以待了。

China is a bigger threat to India than Pakistan even if it is less likely to act precipitately.

中国对印度的威胁比巴基斯坦更大，尽管中国采取紧急行动的可能性更小。

When you wrote about Chinese nuclear weapons you addressed it essentially from the viewpoint of America.

当你写关于中国核武器的文章时，你基本上是从美国的观点出发。

 

China has had military standoffs with India. Could any of them move into the nuclear realm?

中国与印度存在军事对峙。他们中的任何一个会使用核武器吗?

Oh yeah. All conventional conflicts, of course, can escalate into nuclear use -- potentially.

噢,是的。当然，所有的常规冲突都有可能升级为使用核武器。

So, of course, given that India and China has had several serious border incidents over the years, that could, of course, happen again.

所以，当然，考虑到印度和中国多年来已经发生过几次严重的边境事件，这种情况当然会再次发生。

And if it does, it is possible that you could get to a potential role for nuclear weapons if the conventional phase of the crisis escalated to very serious levels.

如果是这样，如果危机的常规阶段升级到非常严重的程度，你就有可能使用核武器。

My guess is that you would have to see more than just a border skirmish for that to happen.

我的猜测是，要发生这种情况，你需要看到的不仅仅是边境冲突。

It would have be something that escalates to strategic attacks with conventional forces against cities or military bases of something like that for it to trigger that kind of (nuclear conflict).

它可能会升级为常规部队对城市或军事基地的战略攻击，从而引发核冲突。

 

You have said the capabilities of China's nuclear modernisation programme could influence its nuclear policy.

你说过，中国核现代化计划的能力可能会影响其核政策。

Yeah...

是的

What kind of changes do you expect to see?

你希望看到什么样的变化?

When countries modernise their forces that modernisation inevitably sooner or later provides the military planners different options.

当国家实现军队现代化时，现代化不可避免地为军事规划者提供了不同的选择。

They can begin to contemplate more limited strikes, more precise strikes, with less explosive yield into something that begins to look like a counterforce attack.

他们可以开始考虑更有限，更精确的打击，在较低的爆发力下，屈服于一种开始看起来像反作用力攻击的东西。

I have to caution that just because a country attacks a military base with a nuclear weapon doesn't mean they have a counterforce strategy, which is a much more ambitious strategy.

我不得不提醒大家，仅仅因为一个国家用核武器袭击军事基地，并不意味着他们就有核武器还击战略，这是一个更有野心的战略。

But if you look at the Chinese arsenal, they are mixing conventional and nuclear ballistic missiles in a way that seems to indicate that they would use force that could very quickly be misunderstood to be nuclear attacks.

但如果你看看中国的武器库，你就会发现，它们混合了常规弹道导弹和核弹道导弹，这似乎表明它们将使用武力，而这种武力可能很快就会被误解为核攻击。

There's no way in a confusing conflict to distinguish whether the launch of a Chinese DF21 is a conventional or nuclear weapons -- until it detonates, of course.*

在一场混乱的冲突中，没有办法区分中国发射的DF21是常规武器还是核武器——当然，除非它引爆了。

You could easily imagine some serious misunderstandings in such a crisis.

在这种危机中，你可以很容易地想象出一些严重的误解。

More flexible options, maybe even some limited scenarios in which they would use nuclear weapons, not just in the final retaliatory strike, but in ways to try to influence the military conflict.

更灵活的选择，甚至可能在一些有限的情况下，他们会使用核武器，不仅仅是在最后的报复性打击中，而是试图影响军事冲突。

But we'll have to see what happens. We are still in the early phases.

但我们得看看会发生什么，现在还为时过早。

 

Dr James Hansen, in a feisty interview with me some years ago, argued for some reliance on many small nuclear plants, if only to offset the damage done by climate-changing fossil fuels.

If other South Asians nations -- such as Bangladesh or Sri Lanka -- take up such options would there be a possibility of more nuclear states emerging in the region?

几年前，詹姆斯·汉森博士在与我的一次激烈的采访中主张，如果只是为了抵消气候变化的化石燃料所造成的损害，就应对许多小型核电站有所依赖。

如果其他南亚国家——比如孟加拉国或斯里兰卡——采取这种选择，该地区是否有可能出现更多的核国家?

Potentially, yes, because not only is that the way you get nuclear material (for weapons) but that is also the way you train technicians to be able to handle these technologies.

是的，有可能。因为这不仅是获取核材料的方式，也是训练技术人员掌握这些技术的方式。

All Nuclear Weapons States have evolved their nuclear capabilities from programmes that were originally mainly peaceful, of course the United States being different because it specifically started the project to go after the bomb. Other countries have done it the other way.

所有拥有核武器的国家都从最初主要用于和平目的的项目中发展出了自己的核能力，当然，美国之所以与众不同，是因为它专门开始这个项目是为了追求核弹。其他国家则采取了另一种方式。

Having said that, the danger of arguing that nuclear power is needed to reduce climate effects from coal power is, of course, a very simplistic line of argument because it only looks at one particular effect. There are other effects of nuclear power as well one has to take into consideration.

话虽如此，认为需要核能来减少煤电对气候的影响的观点当然是非常简单的，因为它只考虑了一个特定的影响。人们必须考虑到核能还有其他影响。

There is the problem of nuclear waste, for example, that remains radioactive for years...

例如，存在着核废料的问题，这些废料具有多年的放射性。

That's a big problem, and it's a real reason, for example here in the United States, for why nuclear power today is less and less attractive.

这是一个大问题，也是一个真正的原因，例如在美国，为什么如今的核能越来越没有吸引力。

It's a very expensive form of energy production and they still, after all these years, have not resolved the issue of what to do with the waste.

这是一种非常昂贵的能源生产方式，经过这么多年，他们仍然没有解决如何处理浪费的问题。

Countries Number of warheads

Russia 6,850

USA 6,450

France 300

China 280

UK 215

Pakistan 140 to 150

India 130 to 140

Israel 80

North Korea 10 to 20

核弹头数量

俄罗斯6850

美国6450

法国300

中国280

英国215

巴基斯坦140 - 150

印度130 - 140

以色列80

朝鲜10-20

* The Dong-Feng 21 is a single-warhead medium-range ballstic missile that can carry either nuclear or conventional armaments and which can go as far as 1,700 kilometres.

*东风- 21是一种单弹头中程弹道导弹，可携带核武器或常规武器，最远射程可达1700公里。

 

印度Rediff网站读者的评论

来源：三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/46131.html    译者：Jessica.Wu

外文：http://www.rediff.com/news/interview/scary-what-pakistan-and-chinas-nuclear-weapons-mean-for-india/20180920.htm

 

Scarey Pak and Chinese Nukes
by BN Nikam (View MyPage) on Sep 21, 2018 11:11 AM | Hide replies

Both Pak And China are equally scared of the Indian stockpile which is more than sufficient to completely destroy both of them. They will have to think twice before embarking on the use of NUkes

巴基斯坦和中国都畏惧印度核武库，后者足以消灭他们两个国家。

动用核武器之前，他们不得不三思。

 

Pakistan is Thriving Because of Weak Modi

...Modi is unable to contain Pakistan. Only if Modi works sincerely, killings along the border will cease.

Modi is too weak to take on Pakistan. His 56 inch is worthless.

莫迪无力遏制巴基斯坦。只有莫迪拿出诚意来，边界上的杀戮才会停止。

莫迪太软弱了，无力挑战巴基斯坦

 

Raghavendra Rao

We must arrange and keep around 10000 warheads at any cost by 2020. We must be no.1 in the whole World

无论付出任何代价，到2020年，我们都必须留着10000枚核弹头，我们必须争取成为世界第一

 

Re: More than Russia's

sir, not required. your 100 also is high. it can destroy whole planet. the more in ward robe will make you spend more for its security. what you need is better missile, precision pointing sensors.

先生，不需要那么多，100枚就够了，足以毁灭地球。

核武器越多，维护费用就越多。

我们需要更先进更精准的导弹

 

Agreed

One that digs a pit for others will definitely fall it one day. India has been stockpiling mostly for deterrance being a neighbor of rogue countries. The rouge country that has bad intentions will definitely be punished by the nature one day and it will be completely wiped off from the earth.

给别人挖坑者，必将自己陷进去。

印度核武器是用来威慑的。

流氓国家必将受到大自然的惩罚，并从地球上被抹去。

 

No Win Situation!!
In a nuclear stand off be it tactical or full blown there will be a no win situation for all parties concerned. Nations will have to stop stock piling their Nuclear weapons if world peace is to be achieved. SO dialogue is the only way forward come what may.........

发生核对抗，不管是战术性的，还是全面核对抗，不会有赢家的。

要实现世界和平，各国就不应去囤积核武器

对话是解决问题的唯一出路。

 

India should increase its Neculear Arsenal
by vasai (View MyPage) on Sep 20, 2018 10:34 AM

India should increase its nuclear weapon see small country like UK, France, Pakistan have more such weapon than us. With no enemy or border dispute why are they keeping this lethal weapon.

印度应扩大核武库，瞧人家英国、法国和巴基斯坦，核武器就比我们多。

既然没有敌人，也不存在边界纠纷，为什么这些国家要留着这么多致命武器

 

number
by arungopal agarwal (View MyPage) on Sep 20, 2018 10:10 AM | Hide replies

has no meaning even 10 are enough to fire.

没有意义的，10枚核武器就足够了