The Curious Case of Pakistan’s “Second-Strike” Capability

In a world where geopolitics and military strategy are intertwined with media narratives, a recent story by Ryan Grim, formerly of The Intercept, has caught the attention of many. The piece, published on Drop Site News, claims that Pakistan requested China’s help in providing a second-strike nuclear capability in exchange for a Chinese military base in Gwadar, a strategically vital port on the Arabian Sea. This claim, confirmed by Pakistani journalist Najam Sethi on a talk show, has set off a storm of questions — but the story behind the story is far murkier than it appears.

Also See: U.S. Sanctions on Pakistan’s Missile Program : Impacts and Geopolitics

What Is “Second-Strike” Capability?

At the heart of this narrative is a highly contentious concept: second-strike capability. For context, a second-strike capability ensures a country can retaliate with nuclear force even after a devastating first strike. It’s considered a cornerstone of nuclear deterrence, preventing adversaries from launching a first strike with impunity. So why is this concept being tied to Pakistan now? And more importantly, where are the sources for this claim?

A Look at the Sources and Their Credibility

Grim’s report on Drop Site News, which cites unnamed “military sources,”  purportedly within Pakistan, without offering specifics or evidence to substantiate these claims suggests that Pakistan’s military-backed government asked China for sweeping military concessions, including this second-strike capability. 

However, this raises several red flags. First, the sources cited in the article are vague at best. Drop Site News, which Grim has aligned himself with, has not been without controversy. The outlet and its connections are often called into question, particularly in light of Grim’s past work at The Intercept, an outlet previously associated with the publication of the infamous “Cipher” leaks, which some have speculated could have ties with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

The Unlikely Confirmation: Najam Sethi’s Support

But beyond the murkiness of the source, what raises further suspicion is the fact that Grim’s narrative is finding an unlikely confirmation — from none other than Najam Sethi. The senior journalist, known for his political analysis, echoed Grim’s report during an appearance on SAMAA TV, asserting that Pakistan’s nuclear demands were indeed part of its discussions with China.

While Sethi is a respected figure, this alignment with Grim’s report begs the question: What are the motivations behind this sudden focus on Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities? It’s important to note that both Grim and Sethi have significant ties to elements within the Pakistani opposition, particularly the alleged supporters of former Prime Minister Imran Khan. These individuals have been lobbying extensively in the United States, often casting Pakistan’s military leadership in a critical light. Could this be a larger push to discredit Pakistan’s nuclear program?

A Rebuttal from Experts

The specifics of the story itself deserve scrutiny. Responding to the Drop Site News story on December 15, at the social media platform X, Dr. Rabia Akhtar, a prominent expert on nuclear deterrence, dismissed it outright. “Anyone who has read the literature or followed Pakistan’s nuclear trajectory would know that Pakistan’s politico-military leadership has often declared quite candidly that Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence policy is based on Full Spectrum Deterrence. It has even specified the horizontal and vertical dimensions of the capability in fairly clear terms. That ought to include the possession of a second strike capability too! Why would Pakistan be going around asking for a capability that it already possesses?”

Dr. Akhtar further expressed her dismay at the narrative, stating, “This kind of fake news is so often spread by already well-known sources inimical to Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence capabilities every once in a while to malign Pakistan. Get a life, folks!”

She also highlighted the economic and technological constraints, adding, “Pakistan doesn’t have the money to buy SSBNs off the shelf. We already have the capability, and we’ll make do with alternatives until we can develop them ourselves.” Dr. Akhtar emphasized that Pakistan’s nuclear strategy is not just about necessity, but also long-term self-reliance. “The world is much bigger than your oyster,” she added, brushing off the jabs and offering a sharp rebuke to those questioning Pakistan’s capabilities. 

In addition, Indian defense analyst Pravin Sawhney has also said on the social media platform X that Pakistan already possesses a robust second-strike capability. It has long maintained nuclear-capable missiles, including submarines, capable of delivering retaliatory strikes if necessary. 

The idea that Pakistan is “demanding” a second-strike capability from China, as reported by Grim, seems inconsistent with the reality of Pakistan’s established nuclear strategy. 

As Sawhney points out, Pakistan would never “demand” such a capability but rather request it, which is a diplomatic nuance often overlooked in this narrative.

Adding to the critique of the Drop Site News story, geopolitical analyst Talha Ahmad dismissed the claims by Ryan Grim, and Najam Sethi as unfounded. Ahmad emphasized that while Pakistan’s second-strike capability might not be currently as robust as it could be due to platform limitations, this does not mean it is absent. He explained that Pakistan, much like India in the past, faces constraints in terms of the platforms required for a fully operational second-strike force. However, Pakistan’s capability is steadily evolving, and he points out that the development of such strategic assets takes time.

Drawing attention to India’s own journey, Ahmad noted that India, for years, struggled with similar platform limitations before making substantial investments in its own nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs). This recent development, Ahmad argued, has upset the strategic equilibrium in South Asia, disturbing the region’s carefully maintained deterrence stability.

However, Ahmad’s key point lies in the difference between capability and readiness. While Pakistan’s second-strike deterrent may not yet be fully developed, it is not a deficiency. Pakistan’s leadership, if undeterred by external pressures, has the potential to reveal a set of capabilities that would not only safeguard its strategic interests but would also force a recalibration of the entire regional security architecture.

Geopolitical Implications

The true question, however, lies in the broader narrative being spun. This isn’t just about the technicalities of nuclear capabilities or the military strategies at play. It’s about the geopolitical chessboard where narratives are often as potent as missiles. In the case of Grim’s report, there’s a larger story being told — one where Pakistan’s nuclear program is cast as the focal point of a sprawling, international controversy. But who stands to gain from framing Pakistan as a nation seeking to upgrade its nuclear deterrent through a controversial request to China? And more importantly, why now?

Timing and the Geopolitical Context

The timing of this story is not coincidental. As tensions escalate between the U.S. and China, with Pakistan caught in the crossfire, the stakes are high. Grim’s report feeds into a narrative that could isolate Pakistan further on the world stage, adding fuel to the fire of critics who believe Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is a destabilizing force. However, the lack of verifiable sources, the involvement of key figures with vested interests, and the broader political agenda all point to a more complex story beneath the surface.

The Power of Narrative: An Ongoing Game

In the end, the real question isn’t whether Pakistan is seeking a second-strike capability — it already has one — but why such a sensationalized claim has taken center stage. This story, crafted by Grim and bolstered by figures like Najam Sethi, is less about nuclear strategy and more about the power of narrative. And as Pakistan grapples with political unrest, economic woes, and it’s fraught relationship with both the U.S. and China, one thing is clear: this narrative is a part of a much larger game being played behind the scenes.

Ultimately, in a world where the lines between fact, fiction, and influence are often blurred, the only certainty is that stories like these serve a deeper purpose. The truth, it seems, may never be as simple as it first appears.

SAT Editorial Desk

Your go-to editorial hub for policy perspectives and informed analysis on pressing regional and global issues.

Related posts:

Khalil Haqqani’s Death: Kabul Blast Shocks Afghanistan

ISKP’s Threat to AIG: What’s at Stake for Afghanistan?

Al-Qaeda Affiliates Targeting Weak States: Implications for Pakistan