&w=3840&q=100)
India believed to have 'slightly expanded' nuclear arsenal in 2024: Report
India is believed to have once again "slightly expanded" its nuclear arsenal in 2024 and continued to develop new types of nuclear delivery systems, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a statement.
Pakistan also continued to develop new delivery systems and "accumulate fissile material" in 2024, suggesting that its nuclear arsenal might expand over the coming decade, it said.
The think-tank on Monday launched its annual assessment of the state of armaments, disarmament and international security in SIPRI Yearbook 2025.
The statement on the release of its yearbook also makes a reference to the recent military conflict between India and Pakistan.
The four-day military confrontation between the two nuclear-armed neighbours in May brought the two countries to the brink of full-scale war.
The SIPRI Yearbook provided a country-wise assessment of the state of armaments, disarmament and international security.
"Nearly all of the nine nuclear-armed states -- the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Israel --continued intensive nuclear modernisation programmes in 2024, upgrading existing weapons and adding newer versions," the statement said.
Of the total global inventory of an estimated 12,241 warheads in January 2025, about 9,614 were in "military stockpiles for potential use", it claimed.
"India is believed to have once again slightly expanded its nuclear arsenal in 2024 and continued to develop new types of nuclear delivery system," it said.
"India's new 'canisterised' missiles, which can be transported with mated warheads, may be capable of carrying nuclear warheads during peacetime, and possibly even multiple warheads on each missile, once they become operational," the think-tank claimed.
In early 2025 tensions between India and Pakistan briefly spilled over into armed conflict, it said.
The combination of strikes and third-party disinformation "risked turning a conventional conflict into a nuclear crisis," Matt Korda, Associate Senior Researcher with SIPRI's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme and Associate Director for the Nuclear Information Project at FAS (Federation of American Scientists), was quoted as saying in the statement.
"This should act as a stark warning for states seeking to increase their reliance on nuclear weapons," he said.
The think-tank further said since the end of the Cold War, the gradual dismantlement of retired warheads by Russia and the USA has normally outstripped the deployment of new warheads, resulting in an overall year-on-year decrease in the global inventory of nuclear weapons.
"This trend is likely to be reversed in the coming years, as the pace of dismantlement is slowing, while the deployment of new nuclear weapons is accelerating," it cautioned.
Key findings of SIPRI Yearbook 2025 are that a "dangerous new nuclear arms race" is emerging at a time when arms control regimes are "severely weakened," it claimed.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
‘Peace is nothing but illusion, we must prepare for uncertainty': Rajnath Singh's stark warning
Peace time is nothing but an 'illusion', and India must remain prepared for uncertainty even during periods of relative calm, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said while hailing the armed forces for the valour they displayed during Operation Sindoor. In an address at an event on July 7, Singh said the performance of the indigenously built equipment and platforms in the operation increased the global demand for India-built military products. "The world is looking at our defence sector with new respect. A single delay or error in financial processes can directly affect operational preparedness," he said. "Most of the equipment we once imported is now being made in India. Our reforms are succeeding because of the clarity of vision and commitment at the highest level," the defence minister said, addressing the Controllers' Conference of the Defence Accounts Department (DAD). "A single delay or error in financial processes can directly affect operational preparedness," he said, and called on the DAD to evolve from a "controller" to a "facilitator" in sync with increasing participation of the private sector in defence. Delving into the larger geopolitical situation, the defence minister cited an analysis by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which said the global military expenditure reached $2.7 trillion in 2024. This opens up tremendous opportunities for India's indigenous defence industries, Singh said. The defence minister praised the DAD's new motto "Alert, Agile, Adaptive" and noted that these are not mere words, but a reflection of the work culture required in today's rapidly evolving defence environment. Singh urged officials to undertake internal reform through self-introspection rather than rely solely on external audits or consultants. Improvements made through internal evaluation create living organisations. These reforms are more organic, with fewer barriers. "Peace time is nothing but an illusion. Even during periods of relative calm, we must prepare for uncertainty. Sudden developments can force a complete shift in our financial and operational posture," he said. "Whether it's stepping up equipment production or adapting financial processes, we must be ready with innovative techniques and responsive systems at all times," he said. He urged the DAD to incorporate this mindset into their planning, budgeting and decision-making systems. Highlighting the increasing strategic and economic significance of the defence sector, Singh called for a shift in perception from defence spending as mere expenditure to an economic investment with a multiplier impact. "Until recently, defence budgets were not seen as part of the national economy. Today, they are growth drivers," he added. Singh said India, along with the rest of the world, is entering a new phase of re-armament, marked by capital-intensive investments in the defence sector. Peace time is nothing but an illusion. Even during periods of relative calm, we must prepare for uncertainty. The defence minister called upon the DAD to incorporate defence economics in their planning and assessments, including social impact analysis of R&D projects and dual-use technologies.
Indian Express
20 hours ago
- Indian Express
India faces a Russia dilemma
India may again find itself in an uncomfortable diplomatic fix. US Senator Lindsey Graham is slated to introduce a bill that seeks to impose a 500 per cent tariff rate on American imports from countries that continue to buy products from Russia. He claims to have the support of 84 co-sponsors and the backing of the US President Donald Trump. If passed, India's diplomacy will be put to a stress test once again. It is likely to also trigger a debate around the strategic utility of India's relationship with Russia. Even if the bill fails to sail through, Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to India in the coming months will probably set off similar discussions. Practitioners and strategic analysts are divided on the issue. Russophiles have argued that the India-Russia relationship is rooted in history and has stood the test of time. The genesis of this thought lies in India's experiences with the Soviet Union during the Cold War years, with the India-Pakistan war of 1971 being the watershed moment in the friendship. That event created substantial affinity towards the Soviet Union (later Russia) among the Indian public and political elite, while concurrently generating deep antipathy and cynicism towards the US-led West. The Soviet Union also supported India through the sale of arms at a time when the West (primarily the US and the UK) would openly arm Pakistan with sophisticated and advanced weapons while turning down India's requests. Further, they argue the Soviet Union was India's sole trusted partner with a veto in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), particularly when the West raked up issues pertaining to Jammu & Kashmir. As per this school of thought, the experience of history demonstrates Russia's reliability and creates an obligation for India to support it. Russia, for them, stood with India when the latter found itself isolated by the West for most of the Cold War period. This school also contends that India and Russia are natural partners as their core interests do not conflict. Thus, they argue that the Moscow-Delhi relationship transcends any upheavals in the global order and is critical to maintaining India's strategic autonomy. Finally, any effort towards distancing from Russia would further push it into China's orbit of influence. Per them, an isolated Russia that is more dependent on China presents a significant challenge for India. Lately, a second strand of thought (Russoskeptics) has argued for strategic pragmatism when it comes to India's relations with Russia. It calls for a more pragmatic approach to modern-day Russia, notwithstanding the traditional and historical relationship with the Soviet Union. They endeavour to absolve India of any moral obligation by alluding to the latter's historically ambiguous and even contrary position on matters related to Indian interests vis-à-vis China. Moreover, they highlight, and rightly so, that in the Russia-Ukraine war, Moscow is an aggressor that has violated Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty in a blatant disregard for international law. And thus, Russia does not deserve India's moral support in its unjust war. In addition, they point to the deepening strategic partnership between Russia and China as threatening India's security interests. This school also views Russia as a declining power that can do very little to augment India's comprehensive national power. On the contrary, Russia's expansionist tendencies have an adverse impact on India's relationship with the US at a time when its interests align far more closely with the West, owing to the changing geopolitical realities. This has significantly altered the cost-benefit matrix for India when it comes to its relationship with Russia. Morals and ethics aside, there are legitimate strategic reasons, grounded in realism, to argue for either side. The Russoskeptics point out that India's diplomatic capital is not infinite. And thus, it would not be prudent to spend it all to salvage the relationship with Russia, mainly for two reasons. Firstly, Russia continues to be the primary adversary of the US. And there is a possibility that proximity to Moscow may impede cooperation between New Delhi and Washington. Secondly, Russia may no longer be trusted as India's biggest defence and energy partner, given its massive dependence on China, economically, militarily and diplomatically. Notwithstanding the pragmatism and realism displayed by the Russoskeptics, they must answer two critical questions: Will making an enemy out of Russia and pushing it into a possible China-Pak-Russia nexus serve India's security interests in Asia? And would New Delhi be comfortable with the idea of Moscow selling its premium weapons to Pakistan? Moscow is already flirting with Rawalpindi and testing the waters to see if Pakistan could be its new prominent military partner. Further, while the Sino-Russian relationship stands firm, we are yet to see it adversely impact India-Russia ties in any significant way. This perhaps suggests that either the Russia-China relationship is not deep enough, or India-China relations have not strained to a point yet for Beijing to resort to coercion through Moscow. Thus, India cannot afford to downgrade its relations with Russia yet, and it must persist with its balancing act. This would require four actions on India's part. First, conveying to their American counterparts that China should continue to remain the preeminent source of their strategic convergence. Second, while diversifying arms imports from Russia makes strategic sense, it would be imprudent to seek diversification beyond a certain limit, which makes Moscow a little insecure. India needs to find that acceptable ratio. Third, India would need to engage China to ensure that the bilateral relations do not stoop to a point that Beijing feels the need to capitalise on Russia's dependence. Lastly, India must urge Russia not to close the door on themselves. If it wants to avoid slipping into China's sphere of influence and wants India to be on its side as a friendly centre of power, it has to allow India some space to work with. A good start for Moscow would be revisiting its Eurasia policy. The writer is a research analyst with Takshashila's Indo-Pacific Studies programme
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
BRICS leaders to call for data protections against unauthorised AI use
Leaders of the BRICS group of developing nations will call for protections against unauthorized use of artificial intelligence (AI) to avoid excessive data collection and allow mechanisms for fair payment, according to a draft statement seen by Reuters. The diplomatic bloc is dedicating part of its discussions on Sunday to AI during a two-day summit in Rio de Janeiro. Big tech firms largely based in wealthy nations have resisted calls to pay copyright fees for material used to train AI models. Leaders of the BRICS group of developing nations also condemned attacks on Gaza and Iran, called for reforms of global institutions and presented the bloc as a haven for multilateral diplomacy amid violent conflicts and trade wars. With forums such as the G7 and G20 groups of major economies hamstrung by divisions and the disruptive 'America First' approach of U.S. President Donald Trump, expansion of the BRICS has opened new space for diplomatic coordination. In opening remarks to the summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva drew a parallel with the Cold War's Non-Aligned Movement, a group of developing nations that resisted joining either side of a polarized global order. 'BRICS is the heir to the Non-Aligned Movement,' Lula told leaders. 'With multilateralism under attack, our autonomy is in check once again.' BRICS nations now represent more than half the world's population and 40% of its economic output, Lula noted in remarks on Saturday to business leaders warning of rising protectionism. The original BRICS group gathered leaders from Brazil, Russia, India and China at its first summit in 2009. The bloc later added South Africa and last year included Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as members. This is the first summit of leaders to include Indonesia. 'The vacuum left by others ends up being filled almost instantly by the BRICS,' said a Brazilian diplomat who asked not to be named. Although the G7 still concentrates vast power, the diplomat added, 'it doesn't have the predominance it once did.' However, there are questions about the shared goals of an increasingly heterogeneous BRICS group, which has grown to include regional rivals along with major emerging economies. Stealing some thunder from this year's summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping chose to send his premier in his place. Russian President Vladimir Putin is attending online due to an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court. Still, several heads of state were gathered for discussions at Rio's Museum of Modern Art on Sunday and Monday, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. More than 30 nations have expressed interest in participating in the BRICS, either as full members or partners.
