The South Asian subcontinent has an unmatched geo-strategic salience. On the lateral plane it connects the Middle East with the Far East and on the longitudinal axis it is the gateway to the Indian Ocean for Russia, China and Central Asia. As a landmass, it dominates the oil routes from the Persian Gulf to the Bay of Bengal. It is also important because one fifth of the humanity resides in this region. The area has tremendous prospects for growth but its progress has been stunted because for the past six decades it has been wracked by wars and near warlike situations. It is a perennially instable region. At the heart of the conflict lies the unresolved issue of Kashmir. Since no solution seems forthcoming, this area is expected to remain turbulent in the near future. The nuclear explosions of May 1998 have impacted in various ways on the stability of the region. It has mainly created a state of mutual deterrence between India and Pakistan, which is somewhat akin to the situation that prevailed within the superpower equation during the Cold War. This form of fragile stability has its advocates and detractors. Some are of the view that due to the short warning times and sudden spikes of tension witnessed in South Asian context, the likelihood of moving quickly up the escalation ladder and crossing the nuclear Rubicon are far greater than the East West conflict. There is, however, historical evidence that during Cold War was equally dangerous. There were a number of touch and go occasions, when nuclear weapons were brandished aggressively but better sense prevailed because of the specter of the ‘mutually assured destruction.’ Nuclear deterrence in short became the guarantor of strategic stability during the East West conflict. Carefully calibrated the fear of mutual destruction can keep stability in South Asia too. This study is devoted to understanding the dynamics of strategic stability based on the ubiquitous use of nuclear weapons in the South Asian scenario.