Pakistan resorts to nuclear sabre-rattling as India conducts readiness drills

Dipen Gogoi

(gogoidipen3686@gmail.com)

Pakistan, increasingly anxious about India’s firm stance, has been issuing veiled threats of using nuclear force over the past few days. Such rhetoric has emerged from key figures including Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, Railway Minister Hanif Abbasi, and even Pakistan’s ambassador in Russia. Following India’s withdrawal from the Indus Waters Treaty, Pakistan responded with warnings of war. Recently, however, the country appears to be relying heavily on nuclear rhetoric, seemingly to project strength to its own citizens. In reality, this shift in tone coincided with the growing certainty of an Indian offensive, suggesting that these remarks are part of a strategic effort to exert pressure on India.

The core issue remains: whenever the threat of war looms over a nation, questions naturally arise about its military capabilities. In the case of India and Pakistan, the debate over which country holds the upper hand in military strength becomes increasingly relevant. Since 1947, these two nations have faced each other in four major wars. The current state of their respective armed forces will play a crucial role in determining how long each country can sustain its national defence. Moreover, their success in garnering international support through diplomatic channels will also significantly influence the outcome of any future conflict.

A nation’s defence largely depends on the size and capability of its military forces. Generally, the larger and more prepared the military, the stronger the country’s defensive posture. When comparing the military forces of India and Pakistan – two nations currently facing heightened tensions – we see a significant disparity.

India’s army comprises approximately 1,455,550 active personnel, whereas Pakistan has around 656,000 active personnel. In terms of reserve forces, India maintains 1,155,000 reserve personnel compared to Pakistan’s 550,000. Additionally, India has a large paramilitary force of 2,527,000, while Pakistan’s paramilitary strength stands at 500,000.

These figures indicate that India’s overall military manpower significantly exceeds that of Pakistan, both in active service and in reserves.

A closer examination of naval strength further highlights the military imbalance between India and Pakistan. The Indian Navy has 67,252 active personnel, more than double that of Pakistan’s 30,300. When it comes to fleet strength and maritime assets, India holds a significant advantage. India possesses a total of 293 naval vessels, which include a wide range of warships and support craft. Notably, India has two aircraft carriers – INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant – capable of launching fighter jets at sea, a capability Pakistan currently lacks.

In terms of specific naval assets, India maintains 18 submarines, 13 destroyers (Pakistan has none), 14 frigates, 18 corvettes, and 135 patrol vessels.

These figures underline India’s far greater naval reach and capability, which are crucial in controlling maritime routes and ensuring coastal defence. Pakistan’s comparatively smaller navy limits its strategic maritime presence and power projection in the Indian Ocean region.

In contrast, Pakistan’s naval strength is significantly smaller. It has a fleet strength of 121 vessels, including 8 submarines, 9 frigates, 9 corvettes, and 69 patrol ships. These numbers reflect a clear disadvantage when compared to India’s far superior naval arsenal. Critically, Pakistan lacks even a single aircraft carrier like India’s INS Vikramaditya, which can deploy warplanes at sea – giving India a significant edge in maritime warfare.

This imbalance in naval power was evident during the 1971 war, when Pakistan suffered a crushing defeat, particularly in the naval theatre. Given this historical context and the ongoing tensions, a major concern arises: how will Pakistan defend its strategic Karachi port this time?

With limited naval strength, Pakistan’s primary strategy seems to rely on foreign assistance, particularly from its close ally Turkey. Coincidentally, on the day of the Pahalgam incident, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif was visiting Turkey. During that visit, reports suggest he appealed to the Turkish leadership to stand by Pakistan in the face of rising tensions with India.

Following this, when India announced its intention to cut off Pakistan’s share of the Indus River waters, Turkey allegedly responded by secretly sending military support to Pakistan – a move that has sparked considerable international attention. More recently, Turkey has also dispatched the warship TCG Buyukada, along with naval personnel, to Karachi in a show of support. But why Turkey? The answer lies in both ideology and geopolitical ambition. Turkey has consistently backed Pakistan on the Kashmir issue, and in return, seeks Pakistan’s support in furthering its own aspiration of reviving the Caliphate – an ambition with deep symbolic and religious roots. As two Muslim-majority nations with shared strategic interests, their partnership reflects a growing alliance driven by mutual benefit and ideological alignment.

Following its strong naval power, India’s Air Force stands as one of the most formidable arms of its military. In terms of overall aerial strength, India holds a clear advantage over Pakistan in nearly every category.

Total aircraft: India possesses 2,229 warplanes compared to Pakistan’s 1,399.

Fighter jets: India has 513 fighters, while Pakistan has 328.

Helicopters: India operates 899, against Pakistan’s 373.

Attack helicopters: India has 80, compared to Pakistan’s 57.

Transport aircraft: India fields 270, while Pakistan has just 64.

Special mission aircraft (such as AWACS and surveillance): India owns 74, and Pakistan has 27.

Dedicated attack aircraft: India has 130, versus Pakistan’s 90.

This data underscores India’s broad aerial superiority in both offensive and support capabilities. However, there are a couple of areas where Pakistan holds an edge:

Aerial refuelling tankers: Pakistan has 9, slightly more than India’s 6.

Trainer aircraft: Pakistan operates 565, while India has 270.

Despite these exceptions, India’s overall air power – supported by advanced multi-role fighters, a robust helicopter fleet, and a strong strategic aviation infrastructure – significantly outweighs Pakistan’s capabilities. This aerial dominance further consolidates India’s upper hand in the event of a full-scale conflict.

On land, India’s army maintains a clear advantage over Pakistan in terms of both size and equipment. The number of main battle tanks in India stands at 4,201, significantly more than Pakistan’s 2,627. India also surpasses Pakistan in the quantity and quality of armoured fighting vehicles and towed artillery, giving it greater offensive and defensive strength in ground warfare.

However, there are a couple of categories where Pakistan maintains a numerical edge:

Self-propelled artillery: Pakistan operates 662 units, compared to India’s 100.

Mobile rocket launchers: Pakistan has 600, while India fields 264.

Despite these specific advantages, India’s overall strength in ground forces – including larger manpower, better logistics, and more advanced conventional equipment – provides it with a decisive upper hand in potential land-based conflicts.

After analysing the comparative strength of India and Pakistan in terms of naval, air, and land forces, it becomes even clearer when we consider the military budgets of both nations. India’s defence budget stands at a staggering $75 billion, while Pakistan’s is only around $7 billion. In terms of purchasing power parity, India’s military spending is estimated at 13,104 billion, whereas Pakistan’s is significantly lower at 1,347 billion.

When it comes to nuclear capability – a subject that often raises international alarm – India holds an estimated 180 nuclear warheads, while Pakistan has 170. Although the numbers are close, India’s superior delivery systems, intelligence infrastructure, and command control give it an operational edge.

All these indicators point to one clear conclusion: India is far more powerful than Pakistan in overall military capability. Understanding this imbalance, Pakistan has increasingly referenced its nuclear weapons in public rhetoric, hoping to internationalise the conflict and trigger global intervention. The strategy appears aimed at checking India’s assertive stance by involving major world powers. However, this approach seems to have backfired. In the recent United Nations Security Council meeting, Pakistan faced heavy criticism. Several member nations questioned its actions – ranging from harbouring terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) to conducting suspicious missile experiments. Rather than gaining sympathy, Pakistan has been put on the defensive in the international arena.

As the possibility of war between India and Pakistan intensifies, noticeable shifts are emerging at the international level. Pakistan’s growing alignment with Turkey and the visit of Iran’s foreign minister to Islamabad reflect efforts to build diplomatic support. Iran, in particular, appears to be positioning itself as a mediator in the conflict. However, India has firmly rejected any third-party intervention, stating clearly that it is capable of handling its own issues.

Among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, France and Russia have shown clear support for India. While the United States, the United Kingdom, and China have maintained a facade of neutrality, both the U.S. and the U.K. have expressed concerns over the Kashmir issue, albeit cautiously. China, Pakistan’s traditional ally, continues its ambiguous stance.

In a strong diplomatic signal, Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar recentlyd, We look for partners, not preachers,” addressing the European Union’s stance. Meanwhile, Home Minister Amit Shah’s announcement of nationwide mock drills has been interpreted by many as a subtle preparation for potential conflict.

Overall, India’s firm diplomatic messaging, combined with its military preparedness, appears to have heightened pressure on Pakistan, both externally and internally. The growing unease in Islamabad is now visible, as India continues to assert itself strategically and diplomatically on the global stage.