Last week, PM Khan said that Pakistan will never start a “nuclear war.” The statement comes amid tensions with India over the issue of Kashmir. PM Khan further added that Pakistan won’t be the first country using nuclear weapons against any country. Khan’s statement regarding the use of nuclear weapons goes against Islamabad’s policy of using nuclear weapons first if situation escalated out of control in the conventional realm. Later, PM Khan’s statement was explained by the country’s Foreign office by saying that the former’s comments are being “taken out of context” and there is “no change” in Pakistan first use policy. It’s interesting that PM Khan’s comments on “not using nuclear weapons first” come after a statement from India where the country’s top leadership hinted at changing their “No first use policy.”At times, the states engage in such “war rhetoric” to appease their domestic audience and send a message to their adversaries, establish some new boundaries concerning their key policies or offer hints at changing their policies. For instance, Indian Defense Minister position concerning reviewing the country’s nuclear policy not only achieved domestic political mileage but also pointed towards the antagonism which has become a new normal in India. “By communicating to the enemy its stated intentions and resolve, nuclear doctrines help states to establish deterrence vis-à-vis its adversary during peace and once deterrence fails, guides the state’s response during war,” notes Observer Research Foundation (OBF). Moreover, the statement coming from India’s Defense Minister initiated conversations concerning an impending arms race in South Asia if New Delhi were to change its nuclear policy. Already, South Asia remains one of the least economically interdependent countries in the world. Currently, millions of Indians lives beneath the poverty line. The figures are not likely to get better as India’s economy enters a struggling phase, with projections of a long stressed period. Its’ in this state that India has not only started the illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir which requires massive financial commitments, but is also stoking flames of war with threat to occupy Azad Kashmir. A few days ago, India’s Army chief in a statement said that “the next matter on the Indian army’s agenda was to take over AJK and “making it a part of India”. At times, war rhetoric is calculated, intended and meant to achieve some goals. However, on other occasions, war rhetoric can prove costly as it feeds into a situation where miscalculations become likely when a conflict begins New Delhi’s suspected reviewing of policy may not go into practice but it sends a message of hostility and raise the threat level and involve the international community in the conflict. Yet, revoking the NFU would have its own costs. “India’s image as a responsible nuclear power is central to its nuclear diplomacy. Nuclear restraint has allowed New Delhi to get accepted in the global mainstream. From being a nuclear pariah for most of the Cold War, within a decade of Pokhran 2, it has been accepted in the global nuclear order. It is now a member of most of the technology denial regimes such as the Missile Technology Control regime and the Wassenaar Arrangement. It is also actively pursuing full membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group,” notes a study. Revoking the ‘no first use’ pledge and pursuing an aggressive policy would harm India’s nuclear image worldwide. However, its unexpected that India’s threat of using nuclear weapons first can deter Pakistan in any sense. “If India does opt for first use of nuclear weapons and given that it has two nuclear adversaries; it would require a far bigger inventory of nuclear weapons particularly as eliminating adversaries’ nuclear capabilities would require targeting of its nuclear assets involving multiple warheads. Similarly, first use of nuclear weapons would require a massive increase in India’s nuclear delivery capabilities. There is yet no evidence suggesting that India’s missile production has increased dramatically in recent times,” notes a recent study. In similar vein, PM Khan’s statement that Islamabad never believed in India’s “No First Use” is meant to nullify New Delhi’s claim at the strategic level. By stating that Islamabad never believed in India’s “No first use” to begin with, underscores that any change in this regard from New Delhi won’t make a difference in the context of the war as Pakistan remains prepared. Moreover, Pakistan’s claim that the country won’t “use nuclear weapons first” established an image of a nuclear state which is responsible. At times, war rhetoric is calculated, intended and meant to achieve some goals. However, on other occasions, war rhetoric can prove costly as it feeds into a situation where miscalculations become likely when a conflict begins. The writer is a freelance journalist