Agni-V bunker buster missile: Why India's indigenous missile system is bad news for Pakistan

The missile, reportedly under development by India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation, is an advanced version of the Agni-V ballistic missile platform.

Taking cues from a recent US military operation that significantly impacted Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, India is reportedly developing an advanced indigenous bunker buster missile system.

The new variant of the Agni-V, which is expected to be the first-of-its-kind weapon in the world, reportedly has already made Pakistan uneasy.

Last month after the US conducted airstrikes on deeply buried Iranian nuclear facilities using its GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOP), reports on bunker-buster missile surfaced.

What is Agni-V missile’s new variant?

The missile, reportedly under development by India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), is an advanced version of the Agni-V ballistic missile platform.

A bunker-buster missile is a specialised weapon designed to penetrate and destroy heavily fortified underground targets.

With a payload of up to 7,500 kg and speeds topping Mach 20, the new variant will reportedly be able to penetrate at least 200 feet underground before detonation, like its US counterpart.

According to a Times of India report, India aims at creating a cheaper and flexible platform to deliver bunker buster bombs compared to the highly expensive bombers currently used by the US and Russia. India does not operate any bomber.

The combat roles of bunker buster missiles include neutralising command and control centres, destroying missile silos, preventing the launch of ballistic or cruise missiles by targeting their protected launch sites and eliminating weapons.

Why is Pakistan worried?

Rabia Akhtar, a Pakistani expert on strategic affairs, expressed her concerns about the implications of India’s missile carrying a bunker-buster bomb.

In an article in the Pakistan daily Dawn newspaper, Akhtar said the weapon could be deployed in a future conflict with Pakistan. “This development blurs the line between conventional and nuclear strategy,” she wrote. According to her, “using a non-nuclear warhead to destroy an enemy’s nuclear assets might appear to avoid crossing the nuclear threshold” as India maintains a no-first-use policy.

According to the government estimate, over 100 terrorists, their trainers, handlers and associates were killed in well-coordinated strikes by our forces at nine terror infrastructure targets in Pakistan and PoK with precision. Most of the terrorists belonged to organisations like Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul Mujahideen, which have the open support of Pakistan Army and ISI.

In the wake of Operation Sindoor, India clearly stated that would not “tolerate any nuclear blackmail”. However, India asserted its right to retaliate against terrorism, dismissing any constraints, including nuclear threats.

Akhtar feared that India might attempt a limited conventional strike on Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure. She warned that such a move could trigger a nuclear war. “This is an illusion, perhaps even a dangerous hoax. From the standpoint of Pakistan or any nuclear-armed target, the method of attack matters far less than the target. Firing a high-speed ballistic missile at Pakistan’s missile silos or nuclear warhead bunkers would almost certainly be viewed as part of a nuclear first strike, regardless of the warhead type,” claimed Akhtar, who is also a visiting scholar at the Harvard Kennedy School.