Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58707
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Singha » 28 Jan 2011 16:29

the american GBU28 penetrated 20 feet of concrete in test here, so the pakis will have poured atleast 40 feet atop that bunker. a hypersonic diving weapon might change the game again, forcing them into a deeper bunker...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11vZHrsJWjU

there was some talk of 'earth penetrator' bombs like supersized XXL durandals that dig in deep and then explode to crack concrete of runways...maybe what works up also works down..but has to one swatcat sized beast to burrow that deep and cause some damage.
Last edited by Singha on 28 Jan 2011 16:31, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16614
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Philip » 28 Jan 2011 16:30

It all depends upon how many layers of concrete are there,with gaps in between.Good example of "indestructible" structures,German U-boat pens in France.Never destroyed.Good books on the subject.

U-Boat Bases and Bunkers 1941-45 (Fortress)

The fortress serie from Osprey is quite interesting as it covers a topic only previously browsed by specialized books (and thus expensive).
The "U-Boat Bases and Bunkers" is a good start for whom want to know a little more about those concrete pens. 3D illustrations and present day pictures of the unbreakable survivors illustrate this book. The only drawback is that it lacks some infos about civil engineering (concrete technology, jobsites evolutions,..) and about the norvegian sites.


Hitler's U-Boat Fortresses

Hitler's U-Boat Fortresses is a caprivating, eye-witness account by a World War II participant of the Allies' campaign to capture the German U-Boat pens on the coast of Brittany. These submarine pens were active and responsible for sinking a massive amount of Allied ships right up until armistice.
As very little has been written about the Allied campaigns in Brittany and their importance to the overall European war effort, this book is essential for any reader of history.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12416
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Lalmohan » 28 Jan 2011 16:39

IIRC 22000lb mega-bombs were dropped on them...

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 28 Jan 2011 17:12

The bunker in Sargodha I think only caters to the Aircraft delivered nukes.

I will post pictures of the missile complex nearby, with identification of the various bunkers according to the missile types, and possible nuclear weapons storage for them. The missile facility seems to have a separate storage facility for nukes.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58707
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Singha » 28 Jan 2011 19:20

IAF has a bunch of conventional Prithvi planned mainly for striking at paki airbases. it is known that prithvi has a FAE warhead among other options. a FAE would collapse most overground structures and make a airbase fairly inoperative until mobile ATC/radar etc could be arranged. with a 30m CEP, its feasible to target specific areas of airbases.

question is will the political leadership authorize use of ballistic missiles like prithvi or close that option and allow only brahmos/nirbhay (unless the other party also uses ballistic missiles)

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12416
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Lalmohan » 28 Jan 2011 19:29

if we are hitting bunkers then all bets are off (i.e. red lines have been crossed)

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 28 Jan 2011 20:00

Sargodha Missile and Ammo Storage Depot

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32483
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby shiv » 28 Jan 2011 22:11

Singha wrote:
question is will the political leadership authorize use of ballistic missiles like prithvi or close that option and allow only brahmos/nirbhay (unless the other party also uses ballistic missiles)


The possibility exists that any weak Indian political leadership will get wiped out in a Paki attack leaving others to do what is needed. 8)

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12639
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby negi » 28 Jan 2011 22:15

^ Godspeed. :mrgreen:

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3286
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: India/US

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby hnair » 29 Jan 2011 01:49

(shifting the post from TSP thread)

Gagan-saar/Singha-saar, couple of minds that comes to mind

- If it was India they are protecting against, that bunker is inadequate, to put it mildly. I mean if the bunker was to protect their ping-pongs against a capable foe, Pakis would do what chinese would have advised them - dig tunnels under tall mountains and keep it there. Guessing here, but Kamra effort might be at Khan's goading to keep it under his eye, against jihadi encroachments (which itself is a hilarious concept, considering the ease with which PA's "professional soldiers" turn non-state). I assume, during real distress (when India is pissed and no talks of dossiers happen for a few days), they will take it out from there in a hurry, but during mild distress (inside turmoil), whomever khan pays to keep it locked, stays.

- Sargodha has those rocky hills around and might be a different story.

- That thing seems too much effort for non-special weapons. It has only one major exit with a road and a few ventilation ports that can act as alternatives, if the major exit is cratered

Also thanks Gagan for that excellent effort 8)

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6700
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby shyamd » 29 Jan 2011 03:09

Gaganji, excellent work! Keep it up

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8953
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby arun » 07 Feb 2011 21:09

Story on a Pakistani attempt to smuggle Uranium from the Democratic Republic of Congo:

Kenya: 'Pakistani Ran Uranium Smuggling Ring Locally'

The UK‘s Daily Telegraph has the cable leaked by Wikileaks, which forms the basis of the above story, on its website:

NUCLEAR SMUGGLING INCIDENT/PORTAL DETECTION IN KAMPALA- FEBRUARY 12, 2008

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1081
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Hiten » 08 Feb 2011 08:14

x-posting from the TSP thread

a report on AQ Khan made some time back

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iby6Z1tvzpI

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2011 08:20

Singha and LM. They are not immune to penetrating warhead version of the Brahmos. The crushing pressure is a function of the velocity of sound in the medium in other words the earth provides tamping pressure more than an air burst would.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 08 Feb 2011 10:13

Those bunkers in Kamra and Sargodha have two exits.
One is the ramp exit that we have all seen.
There seems to be a lift right in the middle of the bunker and we can see a road going there.
There is a garage for staff cars and vehicles for the afsars to park at at 7 o clock.
Image
What has been labelled as Ventilation ducts would contain refrigeration units for temperature control, fans to pump in air for ventilation (I wonder if the chinese/americans have made it NBC proof), and power generators. In one of the eariler pics I think one can see ventilation ducts being laid out on the roof of the bunkers. We don't know if this thing is single storied or has multiple levels.

Anyhow, taking those life support systems out in a small strike might make this bunker un-liveable.

There must be more such bunkers.

So Kamra is where they build components of the N weapons, and finally assemble them and disburse them to the other locations. The raw material arrives from the 3 uranium enrichment facilities to Kamra for final assembly.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 10 Feb 2011 19:23

Pakistan's Khushab Nuclear Complex

Image
_______________________________________________________________________________________

The 2nd, 3rd & 4th nuclear reactors being built by the Chinese
The images on google earth are dated Jan 2009, and not much is visible of the 4th reactor that is now under construction by the Chinese. But this seems to be the likely location based on what is visible.
Image

Image

Image
_______________________________________________________________________________________

50 MWt, heavy water and natural uranium research & Plutonium production reactor:
Image

Image
_______________________________________________________________________________________

There are MANPADS surrounding the old reactor and they seem to have Oerlikon AAA guns deployed. Pakistan seems to have 35mm Oerlikon AAAs.
Image
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Heavy Water Extraction Plant:
Image

Image

Water-H2S exchange towers: Notice the shadows too.
Image

Compare the Water-H2S exchange towers with these pictures below.
Image Image

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 11 Feb 2011 19:33

PAFB Risalwala, Faisalabad, 125Km (80 miles) west of Lahore.

There is yet another Bunker like the one in Kamra and Sargodha.
Image

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ShauryaT » 12 Feb 2011 18:15

PAKISTAN: Living on US dole, builds fourth plutonium reactor
The Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) announced on Wednesday that it has obtained commercial satellite imagery from January 15, 2011 that shows what appears to be a fourth reactor under construction at Pakistan's Khushab nuclear site. The reactor construction was not visible during a previous satellite pictures last November.

"Pakistan is determined to produce considerably more plutonium for nuclear weapons,"

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ShauryaT » 12 Feb 2011 18:22

Pakistan’s nuclear weapons
What’s at stake and who should be worried.

Foreign Policy ran a piece by SWJ’s Robert Haddick on recent disclosures about Pakistan’s increasing nuclear arsenal. Pakistan’s single-minded pursuit of destabilizing the subcontinent should not come as a surprise to those that have followed Pakistan’s weapons program. However, this article, like many others in the West, perpetuates the notion of an “arms race” in the subcontinent that Pakistan is swept helplessly into. This blogger finds such narratives very disturbing, and hence the rebuttal. Mr. Haddick’s first paragraph on Pakistan reads thus:

The most obvious and enduring explanation for the continuing buildup in Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile is the inescapable demographic and economic superiority enjoyed by India. India’s economy is nearly nine times larger than Pakistan’s, it spends 7.6 times more per year on its military and can mobilize 6.8 times as many military-aged males. Absent the arrival of previously unknown trust between the two countries, nuclear weapons are the only way for Pakistan to reassure itself about this unfixable strategic imbalance.

No, the explanation is neither the most obvious, nor enduring. Because it presupposes and rationalizes the argument that Pakistan must gain strategic parity with India under all circumstances. This, of course, is misleading because there simply is no reason for a country one-ninth that of India to try and gain parity with it, especially when India has never provoked conflict with it.

Let us also be careful about throwing about numbers on defense spending. Yes, India does spend considerably more than Pakistan does in absolute numbers. However, India’s defense spending, firstly, isn’t Pakistan-centric. And second, when considered as a percentage of GDP, Pakistan’s defense spending is at about 5%, while India’s is below 2.5%. This does not even factor in the $2 billion the U.S. provided Pakistan in overt military aid, which in and of itself amounts to about 1.2% of Pakistan’s GDP. That should put Pakistan’s defense “spending” at 6.2% of GDP for FYE11. And let us not even get into discussions about the misappropriation of aid provided to Pakistan.

Next, the article attempts to draw parallels between Pakistan’s increasing nuclear arsenal and the Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement:

The completion of the civil nuclear agreement between Washington and New Dehli was no doubt highly disturbing to Pakistan. With India’s nuclear technology and expertise fungible, the civil nuclear agreement allowed India to divert resources to its military nuclear program. Pakistan likely concluded that it had to respond to a potentially much larger Indian nuclear program at some point in the future.
Again, a very convenient excuse. No doubt, the civil nuclear deal between India and the U.S. does disturb Pakistan. But not because it “allows India to divert resources to its military nuclear program” but really because it negates the parity that Pakistan imagines it has with India.

If India really wanted to produce more nuclear weapons than it already has, it can, since it has sufficient fissile material reserves (as opposed to Pakistan). The fact that India hasn’t weaponized its reserves amply demonstrates that it is committed to maintaining minimum credible deterrence (something that Pakistan has never been committed to).

But here’s the kicker in the article:

The latest round of nuclear news out of Pakistan demonstrates that South Asia has not found a way out of the security dilemma it has long been in. Excuse me, “South Asia?” Let us not equate the actions of a rogue state with one that has been a constructive participant of several nonproliferation and disarmament discussions, including the FMCT talks. Let us not also assume that Pakistan has no option but to add more weapons to its stockpile because of India. If Pakistan was concerned about deterrence, it should revisit the unfolding of events subsequent to the December 13, 2001 attacks on the Indian Parliament and 26/11.

The question that the West must ask is why Pakistan continues to add weapons to its stockpile, especially when their payloads are unlikely to give India any more of a headache than they already do. Mr. Haddick alludes to one aspect of this in his discussions about Iran — but the key here isn’t Iran per se, it is Saudi Arabia.

Additionally, Rawalpindi sees value in portraying Pakistan to be an unstable and irrational state. An Islamic state teetering on the precipice while adding nuclear weapons to its stockpile quicker than any other nation is bound to attract Washington’s attention — and benevolence.

Pakistan’s most successful industry today is selling its irrationality to the rest of the world. Rawalpindi is the snake-oil salesman and Washington, the wide-eyed wonder. The U.S. has doled out billions of dollars to Pakistan since 2001. How does it know how the money was spent, and if it ever made it to its intended recipients? What has the U.S. received from Pakistan after 10 years of appeasement? The answer to these questions should worry D.C. more than it should New Delhi.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 17 Feb 2011 23:41

I've been sitting on this image for a few months now, so finally throwing this to the forum members.

Seen this at Sargodha in Area II A (Missile Garrison HQ East)
Identify this please:
Image

Looks like a HQ-9 SAM Launcher. Only problem is that the image on google earth image is about 14 m long. and the HQ-9 is ~7m long.
Image
The Pakistanis have signed a deal for an unknown number of these from the chinese in 2003, which they later denied.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Gagan » 18 Feb 2011 09:17

Or Stacked containers for Chinese built missiles?
In the 90s there were US satellite pics of Containers of M-11 missiles stacked at Sargodha.

I think we might be looking at it.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8953
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby arun » 20 Feb 2011 10:59

You can never say that the sense of entitlement of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan notwithstanding the years of proliferating nuclear weapon technology to some of the most irresponsible countries of the world , is anything less than fully developed :lol:.

President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari :

"If Japan is willing to cooperate with India in nuclear technology and (is) giving nuclear technology for peaceful purpose, I do not see any reason why we should not deserve the same.”

Read it all:

Pakistani leader seeks Japanese nuclear cooperation ahead of visit

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6692
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby JE Menon » 20 Feb 2011 18:00

arun, can you post snippets of that article... I cannot view it for some reason... seems like a subscription site...

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8953
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby arun » 20 Feb 2011 18:25

JEM, the same story by Kyodo is available here:

Pakistani leader seeks Japanese nuclear cooperation ahead of visit

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6692
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby JE Menon » 20 Feb 2011 20:36

Thanx...

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ShauryaT » 22 Feb 2011 20:30


Primarily regarding what’s happening in Pakistan it’s becoming increasingly unstable. The Taliban and Pakistani Taliban are moving into the heart lands and they are getting into alliances with local Punjabi groups and increasingly there are politicians who are working towards trying to get these groups on their side. They (extremists) can complete take over the state-run actors and here countries like the U.S. have already started locking down nuclear sites to prevent what would happen if something like that actually occurred in terms of transferring the nuclear weapons."

" There is some sort of symbiotic relationship between the nuclear programmes in Pakistan and China. We have seen this repeated again and again over the past 20 years. I think what we do need to realize is that China, what China in terms of its regional, and strategic aims, its important to have an ally in Pakistan. And, Pakistan is not a direct threat, Pakistan can be controlled "
DR. RASHMI SINGH, the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violcence (CSTPV), Scotland

"Pakistan is doubling its nuclear stockpile. But, the main issue is who is financing the projects and what is its purpose? Pakistan is using more than 8 per cent of its GDP for defence spending. The aid which Pakistan is getting from the U.S. and Gulf countries, it is `secretly’ using on defence and nuclear weapons. This is a very serious issue especially to the American people and to the European community, those who continue aiding Pakistan. " -- Muneer Mengal, Paris

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby svinayak » 22 Feb 2011 21:57

arun wrote:
President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari :

"If Japan is willing to cooperate with India in nuclear technology and (is) giving nuclear technology for peaceful purpose, I do not see any reason why we should not deserve the same.”

Read it all:

Pakistani leader seeks Japanese nuclear cooperation ahead of visit

It is more of a blackmail than a bi lateral agenda.

Pak view point is that - India is getting "exception" and hence Pakistan should also get that.

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Lisa » 23 Feb 2011 03:53

Singha wrote:IAF has a bunch of conventional Prithvi planned mainly for striking at paki airbases. it is known that prithvi has a FAE warhead among other options. a FAE would collapse most overground structures and make a airbase fairly inoperative until mobile ATC/radar etc could be arranged. with a 30m CEP, its feasible to target specific areas of airbases.

question is will the political leadership authorize use of ballistic missiles like prithvi or close that option and allow only brahmos/nirbhay (unless the other party also uses ballistic missiles)


Kindly correct if wrong. Most important thing to do is to seal the exits of
bunkers. If what is in cannot get out you have archived virtually the same
as destruction in that utility is not possible. Dealing with contents vis-à-vis
direct strikes to destroy contents can be done thereafter in ones own time.

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 716
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Guddu » 27 Feb 2011 07:56

Some info about paki nuclear program, from the declassified files
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb333/index.htm

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Lisa » 27 Feb 2011 23:18

Guddu wrote:Some info about paki nuclear program, from the declassified files
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb333/index.htm


Document 45: "Little Enthusiasm in Europe to Emulate our Position"
Gerard C. Smith to the Secretary, "Consultations in Europe on Pakistan," 15 November 1979, Secret
Source: FOIA release


A trip to Western Europe by special envoy Gerard C. Smith suggested that cooperation with western European allies would not be productive as State Department officials were hoping. Smith hoped that the French, British, Dutch, and West Germans would say to the Pakistanis what he and Vance had told Shahi: that a Pakistani nuclear test would have a bad effect on international relations. (Note 29) Smith found the allies to be unresponsive. The French said they had done enough by cutting off the reprocessing contract, the West Germans were also "non-committal," the Dutch had to think about it, and the British argued that the problem had to be solved through India. Both British and Germans officials observed that another recent visitor, Chinese Premier Hua Guofeng, had "advised against a tough line" because of Pakistan's major role in the regional "anti-Soviet structure." A week later, on 21 November 1979, U.S.-Pakistan relations reached their nadir when thousands of demonstrators, angered by rumors that Washington was behind a recent attack on the Grand Mosque in Mecca, invaded and burned the U.S. embassy compound. An officer with the Defense Attaché Office and a U.S. embassy guard were killed along with two Pakistani employees. Failing to break into the embassy vault, where the staff had taken shelter, the rioters had begun leaving the grounds by the time General Zia sent in army units. The Pakistani government later compensated the State Department for the destruction, but, according to NSC staffer Thomas Thornton, U.S. relations with Pakistan had become "as bad as with any country in the world, except perhaps Albania or North Korea."

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1081
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Hiten » 27 Feb 2011 23:43

Gaganji your GE photos are all gone. Could you make them available again? possibly in a Picassaweb or Flickr account [former would be better IMO] or if you wish to hotlink them here as was earlier done by you, a dropbox account with its software installed on the computer makes it very convininet

thanks

Maram
BRFite
Posts: 134
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 19:16

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby Maram » 28 Feb 2011 05:08

Gagan ji,

What can I say? Excellent work.After you have done all the hard work, we unpad gawaar get some map gyan from yourself. Thank you for your fantastic effort.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32483
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby shiv » 28 Feb 2011 05:54

Guddu wrote:Some info about paki nuclear program, from the declassified files
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb333/index.htm


Thanks for the link. Clearly Carter tried to do something contrary to my shrill accusations against the US in general. However there is another issue here. Clearly the 4 year cycle of US politics did not help. That 4 year cycle can often disrupt and defeat the so called long term continuity of US policy. US policy is a mixed bag that can sometimes be described as being consistent and sometimes contradictory.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ramana » 28 Feb 2011 06:43

SSridhar, On the timeline given above we should put the data we know. For instance in Note 5, in 1978 the US estimates that TSP is far away from a crude weapon. Yet by early 80s, the Pakis tested in PRC per the US officials book later on.

Shiv, Its not the four year election cycle but external events like FSU takeover of Afghanistan.

Also Note 23 and 24! In 23 they know TSP is moving far ahead of their earlier estimates and in 24 they want to clamp down on India to assure the TSP!

And Note 39.

In the end India didn't do anything till everyone knew TSP had the bomb and were sure about it. It was not like India didn't know what the TSP was doing and with whose help.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby svinayak » 28 Feb 2011 08:50

If you read from top to bottom it looks like a dog and pony show.

From Nov 1979 to april 1980 things changed dramatically.

10 November 1979
Also under review was a proposal to sell Gearing-class destroyers as a way to "keep the nuclear dialogue going." During the recent talks with Vance, foreign minister Shahi had given assurances that Pakistan would not manufacture nuclear weapons or help others do so and that the "present government" would not test nuclear weapons. State Department officials sought to expand the assurances so that they covered future governments headed by General Zia.


30 April 1980, secret, excised copy
Work on the Kahuta uranium enrichment plant was proceeding apace as were efforts to upgrade defenses against air strikes. Undoubtedly what made Islamabad more comfortable about the U.S. stance was that Washington was seeking Pakistani cooperation with its effort to thwart the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. That new priority put the Pakistani nuclear program more or less in the backburner, at least in terms of high-level initiatives, but Washington would continue to try to slow it down and complicate it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ramana » 28 Feb 2011 10:06

We need a compare and contrast the events as recounted above releases and KS garu's interview.

viewtopic.php?p=1025292#p1025292

Note he says he concluded in 1979 that TSP was working on the bomb.

So as I wrote above India was aware of what was going on and who was doing what.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5885
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby habal » 28 Feb 2011 10:13

shiv wrote:Thanks for the link. Clearly Carter tried to do something contrary to my shrill accusations against the US in general. However there is another issue here. Clearly the 4 year cycle of US politics did not help. That 4 year cycle can often disrupt and defeat the so called long term continuity of US policy. US policy is a mixed bag that can sometimes be described as being consistent and sometimes contradictory.


continuity of policy is ensured by bureaucrats, not by politicians who just make hay while sun shines.

In US, it is the state dept bureaurats & CIA which ensure continuity of pakistan policy. Upstarts like Obama can come and make noises initially in his term, but eventually these 2 will decide how the policy moves forward, because they are the ones who do the groundwork.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby svinayak » 28 Feb 2011 10:43

ramana wrote:We need a compare and contrast the events as recounted above releases and KS garu's interview.

Note he says he concluded in 1979 that TSP was working on the bomb.

So as I wrote above India was aware of what was going on and who was doing what.


From Nov 1979 to april 1980 things changed dramatically.
It was the Iranian revolution and the hostage crisis in 1979 which made US support the Sunni Bomb as a retaliation. But the soviet invasion also helped them to keep it low profile and make sure that new revolutionary Iran does not expand eastward into Afg.

1979
November 4 (13th of Aban): Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line occupied the U.S. embassy in Tehran which resulted in Iran hostage crisis.
November 6 (13th of Aban): Mehdi Bazargan, prime minister of The Interim Government of Iran, resigns, "unable to muster" support for "eviction of the students."[52] Khomeini immediately accepts his resignation along with all the other members of his cabinet.
December 18 (27th of Azar): Mohammad Mofatteh assassinated by Forqan group.
December 2 and 3(11th and 12th of Azar): New Constitution of Iran was approved by referendum by over 98 percent of the vote,[citation needed] but much lower turnout because of boycott. Khomeini becomes vali-ye faqih.[53]


Armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran started, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest declared war of the twentieth century.


[edit]

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2066
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby VinodTK » 06 Mar 2011 06:40

Pak toxic chaos plan changes nuke debate
In the case of Pakistan, however, nuclear strategic analysis faces an anomalous state with which it has yet to come fully to terms. In three important respects Pakistan differs from every other nuclear state that has emerged to date. First, in Pakistan it is the military and not the civilian government that controls nuclear weapons and it is military analysts (mainly within the Strategic Plans Division and Strategic Command) rather than civilian analysts that control the nuclear discourse.

Second, Pakistan is the only nuclear weapons state that hosts and backs sub-national terrorist and insurgent groups as instruments of security policy, greatly complicating the calculus of state-to-state dynamics and of nuclear escalation pathways as was evidenced in the Kargil crises of 1999, the military stand-off of 2001-02 in the wake of the attack on the Indian Parliament, and in the wake of 26/11.

Third, and most importantly, Pakistan is a revisionist and irredentist state, which accepts neither its own borders nor the regional status quo. As aconsequence, nuclear weapons in Pakistan have a different meaning and a different purpose from those held by other nuclear weapons states. For Pakistan, nuclear weapons are a tool to challenge the status quo and are subordinated —as are all other instruments of state policy —to that end. Thus, while the US, Russia, China, the UK, France, India and Israel seek to use nuclear weapons to maintain durable stability, Pakistan seeks to use nuclear weapons to maintain instability because to agree to durable stability is to accept the status quo. This does not mean that Pakistan is necessarily an irresponsible nuclear weapons state, but it does mean that it is not searching for nuclear stability but for a managed nuclear instability. The purpose of this instability is to keep India off balance, to resist agreement, to underpin uncertainty, and to generate ambiguity. This is the basis on which Pakistan's nuclear behaviour needs to be understood and it is rather different from that envisaged —before Pakistan even existed —by Brodie, Khan and others.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation

Postby ShauryaT » 06 Mar 2011 08:00

ramana wrote:We need a compare and contrast the events as recounted above releases and KS garu's interview.

viewtopic.php?p=1025292#p1025292

Note he says he concluded in 1979 that TSP was working on the bomb.

So as I wrote above India was aware of what was going on and who was doing what.
One clear source of such information was Bhutto himself from his jail cell. So, yes India know, around 1979 and specifically know about the status of the enrichment program.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], deejay, dsreedhar, Iyersan, mukhujje and 47 guests