Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

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.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2415
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Prem Kumar » 07 May 2009 02:58

This was in one of the comments by Prasun Sengupta on his blog - is there any truth to this?

"As regards the nuclear weapons deployed in Pakistan I'm not too worried about them at all since all of them and their delivery systems have been supplied by China off-the-shelf and are therefore under the total control of a detachment of China's People's Liberation Army's 2nd Artillery Corps located in Pakistan's Northern Areas."

blog link: http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2009/05/hums-for-su-30mki.html

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7897
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Gerard » 07 May 2009 03:02

It was headed by Bashiruddin Mahmood


This is the Jinn Energy scholar

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 07 May 2009 03:28

Blackwill also says:

Pakistan threat ‘worst since Cuban missile crisis’

Quite scary. So what he is doing is warning India that the TSPA will split and control of nukes is not assured.

Its all bets are off.

But then what about the PRC and its issue of nukes and delivery vehicles.

Need to think this one thru.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7897
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Gerard » 07 May 2009 03:33

wrt Chinese command and control
Dragon's Fire: The PLA's 2nd Artillery Corps
During wartime, control over the 2nd Artillery Corps' missile brigades differs as to their payload. Units fielding nuclear armed weapons, most notably the ICBM brigades, report directly to the Chinese national command center west of Beijing.... As previously mentioned, it is likely that the garrisoned TELs are not kept uploaded with missiles and armed with warheads. Inside a missile brigade's force structure, there are six departments: headquarters, political, logistics, technical and equipment, missile storage, and launch battalions. These are present in both conventional and nuclear missile brigades. The missile storage department consists of a central depot, and a missile/warhead transfer section. This implies that there is a storage facility for the missiles and warheads, or perhaps separate facilities for each. No garrison facility possesses the secure, hardened facilities needed to adequately store and protect these assets, so it must be assumed that they are located off-site. The logical assumption is that the vast network of UGFs located near the missile garrisons and launch sites are used to protect, store, and transfer these items. Storing warheads and missiles in UGFs allows TELs to be loaded and armed under protected cover, and away from the prying eyes of intelligence satellites attempting to gauge force readiness. This also allows the garrisons themselves to be situated in or near large population centers, as most of them are, without fear of any accident or incident leading to a catastrophe.


Apart from separate storage of warheads in secure facilities, there is mention of a 'two man' rule.

Vishal_Bhatia
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 01 May 2009 09:51

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Vishal_Bhatia » 07 May 2009 09:25

ramana wrote:Any more details and pointers to links?

Thanks in advance,

ramana


Sir,

Whatever I have said, I have read it on a forum. The post was made by a man who is "the" source for any news/events/history related to PLA/PRC.

I have contacted him, and am awaiting his response.

I did find some links though:

http://books.google.com/books?id=iGTLKI ... #PPA259,M1

http://www.ibiblio.org/chinesehistory/c ... 05s04.html

http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/r ... hnev2.html

Hope this suffices (for now atleast :( ).


Regards
Vishal Bhatia

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby svinayak » 07 May 2009 10:05


I have read the account and these details are given in those accounts.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 07 May 2009 10:47

Vishal, Those links look like they are about the Ussuri River clashes of 1968. We are talking about 1971. Am I wrong?

Vishal_Bhatia
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 01 May 2009 09:51

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Vishal_Bhatia » 07 May 2009 11:38

ramana wrote:Vishal, Those links look like they are about the Ussuri River clashes of 1968. We are talking about 1971. Am I wrong?


Sir,

While the clashes were the worst aspect of the whole stand-off, the impasse continued for the next few years. During this period (mid/late-1960s to early/mid-1970s), the Red Army maintained 45 fully-mechanized divisions on the Sino-Soviet border while the PLA retreated 100 miles from the border and numbered no more than 10 divisions.

Sir, Brezhnev asked Nixon as to what would NATO do if the Red Army took out Lop Nor using nukes. Nixon made it very clear that America would not take it lightly. Now what America intended to do was not clear, but the Soviets realized that America would take advantage of the situation if the Soviets strike first for "no valid reason". Sir, this is the time when America and PRC began making plans to cozy up to each other to beat Uncle Joe.

Now this is where India and 1971 come into the picture. When India signed the 1971 treaty, it got Soviet backing (against China and America) and arms. Now what did the Soviet Union get beside an "unwilling" and "not entirely non-independent" ally? Two things. The Soviet Union considerably limited America's influence in the sub-continent and also got a valid reason to attack PRC, something which Nixon would find hard to argue against. Now this reasoning was based on the assumption that PRC would aid Pakistan and attack India.

The PRC played smart and left their ally to suffer defeat. America (read Nixon and his ilk) tried its best to help Pakistan but the speed with which East Pakistan fell, foiled everybody's plans. America also wanted PRC to enter the fray, but the CCP was uncertain whether America would go all-out across the Fulda Gap for the PRC. Hence, China did squat during 1971.

Hope that explains Sir.


Regards
Vishal Bhatia

tripathi
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 12:35

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby tripathi » 07 May 2009 11:53

Nuclear surrender?

IF the Boston Globe report is any way close to the truth, Pakistani officials are in talks with the US about its demand to fly the stock of highly enriched uranium Islamabad possesses to the US, to be disposed of there. That demand is based on the Americans' consuming fear that the dangerous stuff could fall into the hands of militants, who are, they believe, knocking at the door of Islamabad and would like to use it against the US on gaining control of the reins of government in Pakistan. The newspaper cites two unnamed Administration officials with direct knowledge of the discussions to secure Pakistani weapons. Another story on a survey underlines that 87 percent of Americans are "somewhat concerned" and 60 percent "very concerned" about the security of these weapons. President Obama's National Security Advisor General James Jones has told BBC that though he has been assured by Pakistan Army about the safety of nuclear weapons, Washington needed further guarantees since "the world would like to know...that there's absolute security and transparency."
Much to the surprise of the Pakistani nation, which would under no circumstances countenance any compromise on the nuclear assets so vital to our survival in the hostile climate we live in, the Boston Globe reports that officials from Islamabad have shed their secretiveness about the programme and are willing to cooperate. They feel that they have a reason to do so in the face of the threatening inroads of the militants, the report adds. That, if true, is indeed a serious matter.

nsa_tanay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 96
Joined: 11 Nov 2008 16:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby nsa_tanay » 07 May 2009 16:47

Link

However, the new measures under consideration would for the first time give the United States access to some of Pakistan's nuclear ingredients, though not the actual weapons, which are reportedly stored unassembled under the control of a 10,000-member security force headed by a two-star general.



Any idea who this general is ?

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 07 May 2009 19:58

Any idea who this general is ?

Khalid Kidwai from what I have read...
(Eg http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/news/kidwaiNov06.asp)

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 07 May 2009 20:09

Gerard wrote:
It was headed by Bashiruddin Mahmood


This is the Jinn Energy scholar

Indeed, and the author of famous "The Mechanics Doomsday and Life After Death" :lol:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 07 May 2009 20:59

Amber G. wrote:
Any idea who this general is ?

Khalid Kidwai from what I have read...
(Eg http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/news/kidwaiNov06.asp)


Kidwai is already retired but recycled. He is on extension or contract.

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 07 May 2009 21:22

Also from the nytimes article (Jan 2009) (The article, FYI, has lot of details about Paki command and control etc.. and was written by Sanger..)
...Inside the gates, officers in the army and the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, known as the ISI, live in trim houses with well-tended lawns. Business is conducted in long, low office buildings, with a bevy of ell-pressedadjutants buzzing around. Deep inside the garrison lies the small compound for Strategic Plans, where Khalid Kidwai keeps the country’s nuclear keys. Now 58, Kidwai is a compact man who hides .....


Also, IndianMavricks is correcting me..

I think DG SPD is Maj. Gen. Khalid Jaferi. Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai is "retired".
(Kidwai is 3 star, while Jaferi is 2 star and that was what was referred to )

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 08 May 2009 22:10

X-posted....
A_Gupta wrote:From a comment on a blog:

Dear Col Lang:

I have a technical difficulty which prevents me from posting comments on your blog; however, in regard to AF-PAK I wished to pose the question of the 'elephant in the room' of China.

Your post on AF-PAK elicited the following two comments which give me an opportunity:

"There are reports (from India, thus not 100 percent reliable) that a division of Chinese PLA is inside Pakistan, as part of an agreement with the Pak Army and government, to secure the Pakistani nukes, in the event things get totally out of hand.

Posted by: Harper"

"Didn't the Pak military shift the bulk of its nukes to deep bunkers Chitral after 911? Yes or no? And would not the Pak military prefer their allies the Chinese take over responsibilities for these weapons rather than have them fall into the clutches of white folks like the US? Yes or no? And don't the Chinese have sufficient ground forces in the general area to be able to "help" the Paks protect such nukes in Chitral? Yes or no? And don't the Chinese want to maintain these Pak nukes for strategic leverage against India? Yes or no? And aren't Chinese technicians involved with the Pak nukes? Yes or no?

Posted by: Clifford Kiracofe"

When I originally read the analysis that you posted by Richard Sales on the Pak nukes, I was ultimately puzzled because the analysis really didn't seem to come down on one side or another on the question of how much control the US has over those nukes--can the US prevent unauthorized use or even use the US doesn't want, and does the US even know where all the nukes are? Moreover, what size are these things, i.e. how portable might they be?. Moreover there was not a word in that analysis on the role of China.

From what I've read, China helped Pakistan build its nukes, presumably so that Pakistan would be a counterweight to India. But that suggests that China has no interest in Pakistani nukes falling under US control or being destroyed by the US in a take-out strike. Whether the reports from India are correct or not that Harper references (see
above) I don't know at all, but surely it would be naive to think that once Pakistan got its nukes "up and running" then the Chinese went home.


Hence, it seems to me that a thorough analysis of the role of China is necessary in any discussion of what is happening in Pakistan.

Moreover, if Pakistan's strategic objective is a Pakistan-friendly Afghanistan, what is China's objective in Afghanistan? Surely they would want pretty much the same thing as a counterweight to India.
Are the Chinese completely absent from the Afghan scene or acting very quietly? I don't know the answers, but surely these are things that should be clarified.

Best of everything,

Eagle in the Mountains"

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby svinayak » 08 May 2009 23:25

Amber G. wrote:
Also, IndianMavricks is correcting me..

I think DG SPD is Maj. Gen. Khalid Jaferi. Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai is "retired".
(Kidwai is 3 star, while Jaferi is 2 star and that was what was referred to )


Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai - SOmebody who has met Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai told that he looks just like Sourav Ganguly- Indian Cricketer.

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 08 May 2009 23:32

From - Yale global article:
Kayani-Kidwai Duo Practically Controlling Nuclear Arsenal

Also Kidwai's picture(s) and lot of useful details are in the this NY times article (Jan 11, 2009)

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby negi » 08 May 2009 23:44

Man indeed Yale==JNU

Just check the TOI article linked on the same page as posted by Amber ji.

Save Pakistan to Save Us All
by
Gautam Adhikari
The Times of India, 12 January 2009

And here we debate over US aid to TSP :evil:

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 08 May 2009 23:50

Negi- Don't forget, Yale caused a major controversy (even for Yale) when it admitted a Taliban (correction Ex-Taliban) (who successfully completed 4th grade) Rahmatullah Hashemi '09 to its undergraduate program.. (While many pay $40K /year for tuition for that privilege - He did not have to pay :twisted: ) :!:
Last edited by Amber G. on 08 May 2009 23:52, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 08 May 2009 23:51

Looks like lot of smoke and mirrors to pretend there is a civilian participation in the command and control setup in place. the Yale Global article makes it clear its exclusively military in the loop setup. So all the more to worry about Khalid Kidwai morphing into Khaild ibn al-Walid.

(For the non cogniscenti Khalid ibn al-Walid was also called Sword of Allah)

BijuShet
BRFite
Posts: 1575
Joined: 09 Jan 2008 23:14
Location: under my tin foil hat

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby BijuShet » 09 May 2009 00:05

Amber G. wrote:From - Yale global article:
Kayani-Kidwai Duo Practically Controlling Nuclear Arsenal

Also Kidwai's picture(s) and lot of useful details are in the this NY times article (Jan 11, 2009)


Amberji did not find pictures of Lt-Gen Khalid kidwai on the NYT article link you posted but this is what I found via googly

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/news/kidwaiNov06.asp

http://www.pak-times.com/wp-content/upl ... encies.jpg

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6985
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Amber G. » 09 May 2009 00:16

Yes (also the link www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/news/kidwaiNov06.asp is also posted by me just a few posts above.:)

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3524
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Rudradev » 09 May 2009 00:20

Wow, what a bhola-bhala-SDRE looking guy! :lol: He reminds me of that "Quizmaster" Siddhartha Basu who used to compere the show Quiz Time on Doordarshan some twenty years ago.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21125
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Prem » 09 May 2009 02:36

Talking about Nukes

Greetings From the Most Bombed Place on Earth (I am gonna visit this long weekend)

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local ... html?yhp=1

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Rahul M » 08 Nov 2009 23:57

X-post from khan's link in mil forum.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009 ... ntPage=all
Defending the Arsenal
In an unstable Pakistan, can nuclear warheads be kept safe?
by Seymour M. Hersh
.............
A senior Pakistani official who has close ties to Zardari exploded with anger during an interview when the subject turned to the American demands for more information about the arsenal. After the September 11th attacks, he said, there had been an understanding between the Bush Administration and then President Pervez Musharraf “over what Pakistan had and did not have.” Today, he said, “you’d like control of our day-to-day deployment. But why should we give it to you? Even if there was a military coup d’état in Pakistan, no one is going to give up total control of our nuclear weapons. Never. Why are you not afraid of India’s nuclear weapons?” the official asked. “Because India is your friend, and the longtime policies of America and India converge. Between you and the Indians, you will ****** us in every way. The truth is that our weapons are less of a problem for the Obama Administration than finding a respectable way out of Afghanistan.”
..............
Musharraf also confirmed that Pakistan had constructed a huge tunnel system for the transport and storage of nuclear weaponry. “The tunnels are so deep that a nuclear attack will not touch them,” Musharraf told me, with obvious pride.
..............
Early this summer, a consultant to the Department of Defense said, a highly classified military and civil-emergency response team was put on alert after receiving an urgent report from American intelligence officials indicating that a Pakistani nuclear component had gone astray. The team, which operates clandestinely and includes terrorism and nonproliferation experts from the intelligence community, the Pentagon, the F.B.I., and the D.O.E., is under standing orders to deploy from Andrews Air Force Base, in Maryland, within four hours of an alert. When the report turned out to be a false alarm, the mission was aborted, the consultant said. By the time the team got the message, it was already in Dubai.
.............
Zardari spoke with derision about what he depicted as America’s obsession with the vulnerability of his nation’s nuclear arsenal. “In your country, you feel that you have to hold the fort for us,” he said. “The American people want a lot of answers for the errors of the past, and it’s very easy to spread fear. Our Army officers are not crazy, like the Taliban. They’re British-trained. Why would they slip up on nuclear security? A mutiny would never happen in Pakistan. :rotfl: :rotfl: It’s a fear being spread by the few who seek to scare the many.”
.............
The article quoted Major General John Custer as saying, “The older military leaders love us. They understand American culture and they know we are not the enemy.” The General’s assessment provoked a barrage of e-mail among American officers with experience in Pakistan, and a former member of a Special Forces unit provided me with copies. “The fact that a two-star would make a statement [like] that . . . is at best naïve and actually pure bullshit,
.............
I have met and interacted with the entire military staff from General Kayani on down and all the general officers on their joint staff and in all the services, and I haven’t spoken to one that “loves us”—whatever that means. In fact, I have read most of the TS [top secret] assessments of all their General Officers and I haven’t read one that comes close to their “loving” us. [b]They play us for everything they can get, and we trip over ourselves trying to give them everything they ask for, and cannot pay for. [/b]
.............
Some military men who know Pakistan well believe that, whatever the officer corps’s personal views, the Pakistan Army remains reliable. “They cannot be described as pro-American, but this doesn’t mean they don’t know which side their bread is buttered on,” Brian Cloughley, :wink:
..............
The former high-level Bush Administration official was just as blunt. “If a Pakistani general is talking to you about nuclear issues, and his lips are moving, he’s lying,” he said. “The Pakistanis wouldn’t share their secrets with anybody, and certainly not with a country that, from their point of view, used them like a Dixie cup and then threw them away.”
.............
A $7.5-billion American aid package, approved by Congress in September, was, to the surprise of many in Washington, controversial in Pakistan, because it contained provisions seen as strengthening Zardari at the expense of the military. Shaheen Sehbai, a senior editor of the newspaper International, said that Zardari’s “problem is that he’s besieged domestically on all sides, and he thinks only the Americans can save him,” and, as a result, “he’ll open his pants for them.” :lol:
.............
A retired senior Pakistani intelligence officer, who worked with his C.I.A. counterparts to track down Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, said that he was deeply troubled by the prospect of Pakistan ceding any control over its nuclear deterrent. “Suppose the jihadis strike at India again—another attack on the parliament. India will tell the United States to stay out of it, and ‘We’ll sort it out on our own,’ ” he said. “Then there would be a ground attack into Pakistan. As we begin to react, the Americans will be interested in protecting our nuclear assets, and urge us not to go nuclear—‘Let the Indians attack and do not respond!’ They would urge us instead to find those responsible for the attack on India. Our nuclear arsenal was supposed to be our savior, {in case of a terror strike in India, good to see that this much is admitted} but we would end up protecting it. It doesn’t protect us,” he said.
..............
I flew to New Delhi after my stay in Pakistan and met with two senior officials from the Research and Analysis Wing, India’s national intelligence agency. (Of course, as in Pakistan, no allegation about the other side should be taken at face value.) “Our worries are about the nuclear weapons in Pakistan,” one of the officials said. “Not because we are worried about the mullahs taking over the country; we’re worried about those senior officers in the Pakistan Army who are Caliphates”—believers in a fundamentalist pan-Islamic state. “We know some of them and we have names,” he said. “We’ve been watching colonels who are now brigadiers. These are the guys who could blackmail the whole world”—that is, by seizing a nuclear weapon.

The Indian intelligence official went on, “Do we know if the Americans have that intelligence? This is not in the scheme of the way you Americans look at things—‘Kayani is a great guy! Let’s have a drink and smoke a cigar with him and his buddies.’ Some of the men we are watching have notions of leading an Islamic army.”


worth a read.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4351
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby sanjaykumar » 09 Nov 2009 01:05

You can imagine the intelligence assts India has in place to "watch colonels".

Impressive.

Akshut
BRFite
Posts: 353
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 15:06

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Akshut » 09 Nov 2009 02:13

The problem I feel is that, everyone including America itself, think that America is in-charge, but America itself is too perplexed about its "strategic needs" and whats good for it and the world, neither it wants to let the baton go, nor does it want to run over the mine-field which is growing exponentially now.

And end result isn't going to be good for anyone.

The calpihate and caliphatees need to be nipped in the bud, otherwise everyone will be praying to Allah, in heaven onlee.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Lalmohan » 09 Nov 2009 03:01

Akshut wrote:The calpihate and caliphatees need to be nipped in the bud, otherwise everyone will be praying to Allah, in heaven onlee.


might be too late already

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23789
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby SSridhar » 09 Nov 2009 08:37

If we leave it to the Americans, they will mess it up.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby JE Menon » 09 Nov 2009 15:46

Or worse, they will co-opt it to ensure that the Caliphate ambition is focused primarily on India, hoping there won't be a blowback job on the existing administration, and pass it on for future administrations to deal with!!! This has been the SOP so far.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby shiv » 09 Nov 2009 19:07

Lalmohan wrote:
Akshut wrote:The calpihate and caliphatees need to be nipped in the bud, otherwise everyone will be praying to Allah, in heaven onlee.


might be too late already


It is too late. By all and I mean _ALL_ accounts the Pakistani armed forces have been changed deeply. If you read serial accounts of Pakistani behavior - leave alone armed forces behavior - you will see that things have been changed drastically. A link of this forum right now states that all of Pakistan has just about 120 theaters and Pakistan is making 12 movies a year. All accounts of the armed forces say that even drinking - which was allowed in the 1960s, became private by the 1980s and is now completely disallowed as far as I can tell.

Again - all accounts state that the Pakistan army was actually afraid to confront India in an all out conventional war - bluster aside. Yes - afraid, and I am not using that in a jingoistic sense - I am saying that as what I suspect was a Pakistani army realistic assessment of their chances. Zia recognized this as early as 1972-3 and understood that ONLY Islamic radicals would have the guts to fight and die for Pakistan - not the army and decided that more Islam was needed in the armed forces. Besides, it was a uniting factor in a fissiparous state. I suspect that nobody in Pakistan really suspected that those Islamic radicals would go out of control.

Pakistanis have a tendency to gloss over realities. They consistently speak of "moderate Pakistanis" and a Pakistan that is far "wealthier the India" without actually counting the rural poor or the radicals. They have also tended to think "Oh we are Muslims - so our devout Muslim brothers will not harm us". So whan radical Islam comes near them Pakistanis don't see what is coming. And when it comes there is denial and an insinuation that Christians, Hindus, Jews, US, India , Israel are causing all the problems.

I have also noticed a change in the international behavior of Muslim states towards Pakistan, but they too have a problem. They all realize that Pakistan is going down shit creek and is getting their beloved Islam a bad name - but no Muslim state has the balls to stand up and say that what Pakistan is doing is not Islamic probably because their own mullahs will agitate.

So we already have a radicalized Islamic army with nuclear weapons and not the "Moderate secular Army" that the US with their phenomenal blindness tend to see. The only silver lining here is that India now becomes only one of the enemies. The US and Israel become co-enemies. IMO it will be difficult for the US to direct fire way from itself without pulling out. If the US pulls out it will be an Islamic nuclear armed army in Pakistan versus India. But while nobody might believe it - this was exactly what we had in 1998. They are better equipped now from US funds - but their character is the same.

It will be in India's interest now to kowtow to the US and bandwagon with the US. This will direct the ire of Pakistan at the US for "siding with India".

Whichever way you look at it the US has a responsibility and the US must be forced to take its share of responsibiliy by chankiannss and not by needless chootiyapanti on India's part. They (US) gave money and arms to Pakistan and looked the other way when Pakis got nukes, so if India is going down we must pull the US down with us. Or else we cooperate to gradually chip away at Pakistan and make it weaker and weaker and weaker from infighting. And it is essential to cooperate with the US to squeeze all further nuclear development in Pakistan. The US itself needs to be given Hobson's choice - or else they will face most of Pakistan's nukes.

For a moment drop your jingoism and imagine that India allows itself to be radicalized and allows parts of North and central India to be occupied by Islamic radicals making an extended Pakistan. Guess who will face the music when that happens? It will be the west. So the US has a role to ensure that Indians don't capitulate and Pakistan doesn't get stronger.

In many ways this is just the game India has played - much to the disgust of many jingos. India has appeared to capitulate to Pakistan so many times by inaction and olive branches that the Islamic radicals think that they are getting into a winning situation. If they are in a wining situation, it is the US that will get in trouble next - so India now has an opportunity to negotiate with the US by holding a gun to its own head. India needs to tell the US "Unless you stop arming Pakistan and start helping to disarm her - we (poor country) are going to capitulate. without a fight.

If India looks strong to the US the the US has more sympathy for Pakistan. India should appear weak and pliable to the US. It is Pakistan playing the "We are so weak card" that wins over the US. India needs to play that card too.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby SaiK » 09 Nov 2009 21:02

my point is this.. why are we giving weights to paki-centric factorizations for our strategic plans? why is that khan politics take precedence over our chankyan own?

we have to be very careful in trying to play one with other, we don't outplay our strategies, and go orthogonal to the plans. its better to look third angle, when things get acute.

if pakis are a problem then look at china. yadi yada..

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 11 Nov 2009 21:51

X-posted...
While Hersh sow fear and confusion Nigthwatch says on 11/10/09

Pakistan-China: China agreed to sell Pakistan two squadrons of J-10 fighters for up to $1.4 billion, The Financial Times reported, citing Pakistani and Western officials. A Pakistani official said more sales may follow, but denied that a deal had been made to buy up to 150 fighters.

The Pakistan Air Force expects to buy at least 250 JF-17 Thunder fighters in the next four to five years. Without Chinese arms assistance, Pakistan could not maintain the pretense of having a conventional military capability to fight India. :mrgreen:

Even with Chinese assistance, Pakistan’s conventional military forces would be defeated easily and quickly by the Indian Army. This state of vulnerability is one of the many legacies of Musharraf’s neglect of the armed forces he commanded. Nevertheless, the myth of Pakistani capabilities would tie down numbers of Indian forces in a future fight between India and China by threatening a multi-front conflict. :rotfl:

If India intended to destroy Pakistan, it could not have a better opportunity than the present, when an entire army corps is engaged in counter-insurgency operations in South Waziristan. Indian restraint is uncharacteristic, since the general rule of military strategy in South Asia is to kick the dog when it is down. :mrgreen:

Nevertheless, the Pakistan Army Corps commanders, encouraged by the Pakistani Taliban, consider India the existential threat to Pakistan. :?: The truth is that Pakistan cannot defend itself without resort to nuclear weapons and would probably lose a nuclear war as well. The Paks do not know how to be grateful. :mrgreen:



Quite perceptive. In a two front war it will be fight to finish on TSP side and a holding one on PRC side. And if it goes nuke then Beijing et al go too.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Rahul M » 12 Nov 2009 22:46

SSridhar wrote:If we leave it to the Americans, they will mess it up.


another person thought on similar lines. :wink:
You may be sure that the Americans will commit all the stupidities they can think of, plus some that are beyond imagination.
Charles de Gaulle

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21125
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Prem » 12 Nov 2009 23:16

ramana wrote:X-posted...
While Hersh sow fear and confusion Nigthwatch says on 11/10/09

Quite perceptive. In a two front war it will be fight to finish on TSP side and a holdin gone on PRC side. And if it goes nuke then Beijing et al go too.


Chinese are stupid as Pakistan is their weakest link at strongest point.They sacrifice their superpowerdum at the alter Paki Follishness.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 20 Nov 2009 09:52

ShyamD posted....

Article from October 16th Issue of DNW
Terrorists Close in on Nukes
Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal in Jeopardy, US Special Forces on Standby


See attached map

Less than six months ago, DEBKA-Net-Weekly military sources revealed in its 396 issue of May 15 that terrorists had come within reach of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. They confirmed the Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh assertion in a conversation at the time with President Barack Obama:

"The (Pakistani) nuclear weapons and the missiles are already partly in the hands of the Muslim extremists… There is no longer any way to prevent them from taking control.”

He referred to two locations as keys to Pakistan's nuclear and missile arsenals: Kohat and the Wah Cantonment Pakistani Ordnance Complex in the city of Kamra - both in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

(See attached map - Image)

Dominated by mountains and hills, Kohat is the capital of the district of that name at the northern tip of Waziristan. It has an important air base, airport and is connected to Peshawar, seat of the Northern Air Command, 60 kilometers to the north, by a Japanese-built 2-kilometer tunnel link.

Kamra is roughly 180 kilometers northeast of the Kohat air base. It is home to the Pakistani Wah Cantonment Ordnance Complex, which consists of three armament facilities in Wah (Pakistan Ordnance Factories - POF), Kamra (Air Weapon Complex - AWC), and Taxilia (Heavy Industries Taxila -HIT).

This cluster holds most of the storage and assembly facilities serving Pakistan's nuclear weapons and components, especially those at the "screwdriver level." The modification of aircraft and missiles for nuclear attacks also takes place there.

The Air Weapon Complex at Kamra houses air-to-surface missiles and is probably the site of the development and storage of nuclear warheads.



US special forces on standby to secure Pakistan's nukes



Taliban has seized control of key sections of Kohat town and the roads connecting it to Kamra 180 kilometers away. Our military sources stress that if Kohat falls completely to the Taliban, Islamabad and the Pakistani high command will be cut off from Kamra and its nuclear depots.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly counter-terrorism sources report that on Saturday, October 10, when the Taliban attacked the Pakistani military central command compound in Islamabad, it concurrently seized parts of the military road to Peshawar and the tunnel-link, which has created a short cut between Peshawar and Kohat. Insurgent forces based in the Darra Adam Kheil tribal belt carried out the attack.

Although no-one in Washington or Islamabad will admit it, after the Saturday attacks, the White House had the Pentagon order US special operations forces units trained to take control of Pakistan's nuclear facilities to stand by for further directives at their bases in Afghanistan.

The order was repeated Thursday, Oct. 15, after another round of Taliban attacks in Pakistan.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources describe these units as trained specifically to cross into Pakistan at short notice, seize control of its nuclear sites, empty out the stores and remove their contents to a safe hiding place in the west.

At that moment too, Pakistani Chief of Staff Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani placed the special detail responsible for securing the nuclear arsenal on the ready, out of two considerations:

1. Because the 10 uniform-clad Pakistani fighters who invaded the military headquarters in Islamabad on Oct. 10, may have been heading for the special command responsible for the security of the nuclear arsenal; or.

2. Because officers from this command may have been among the 42 hostages Taliban seized in that attack and held for 22 hours. At least 12 of the hostages were killed or died in the rescue raid. Islamabad has not so far identified any of them.



Taliban again hammers Kohat road link to nuclear sites

A U.S official in Washington, speaking anonymously a few hours after the dual-track terror attack began, said strong safeguards are in place and there is no reason to believe the Pakistani nuclear arsenal is in imminent jeopardy of seizure by militants. There is a major difference, he said, between attacking a nuclear site and actually seizing and using the nuclear material stored inside.

But our sources note that this official, like other American and Pakistani spokesman, made no mention of the sync between the military headquarters attack and two other strikes, one near the Sargodha air base, where nuclear missiles are believed stored, and the Wah cantonment, where nuclear-capable missiles are believed assembled.

Neither had the Pakistanis by Oct. 15 yet updated the security situation in these highly-sensitive North Western Frontier locations or revealed whether or not the Taliban assault had been repelled.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military analysts note that on Thursday, the Taliban used the same tactic as it employed five days earlier: It mounted a major attack in a big city - Lahore, this time - targeting the Federal Investigation Agency, which investigates terrorist attacks, and two police training academies, one for elite counter-terror forces. This strike was likewise synchronized with a second covert operation which brought the insurgents and terrorist forces ever closer to Pakistan's nuclear stores.

Outside Lahore, they blew up a police station in a suburb of Kohat, killing at least 10 people and injuring 22. Many officers were buried under the rubble. But at the same time the Taliban gunmen built on their progress of Oct. 10, when they began fighting for control of the main road hub connecting Kohat and Kamra to Islamabad so as to be able to cut these nuclear centers off from the government and high command. Five days later, they advanced another step and tightened their siege on the Sargodha air base south of Kohat, which holds some of Pakistan's nuclear warheads.


India, Israel, mistrust Pakistani security personnel loyalty


It is true that the component parts of Pakistan's nuclear devices are stored in secured underground chambers and warheads are electronically locked separately to ensure they cannot be detonated even if they fall in terrorist hands.

However, DEBKA-Net-Weekly sources note, as Indian prime minister Singh told President Obama back in May, the base assumption of Indian intelligence is that the loyalties of the Pakistani officers and soldiers guarding the nuclear weapons may be up for grabs once Pakistan's nuclear treasures are in Taliban or al-Qaeda hands.

Quoting Indian intelligence reports, Singh said some Pakistani officers of the units guarding the Wah complex are in daily communication with Taliban chiefs in an effort to keep them at bay. He added: "We see the situation (of Pakistan's nuclear weapons) with the same clarity as Israel does." In other words, the Indian prime minister shares Israeli skepticism about the integrity of Pakistan's nuclear security.

Shortly after the Oct. 10 attack, Gerald Steinberg, a professor of conflict management at Bar Ilan University, Israel made this comment: “The Israeli view is that Pakistan's weapons are less secure today than they were five years ago, and it seems they're even less secure than under the Musharraf government."

He reported declining confidence in America's ability to control events and put plans into action for protecting Pakistan's nuclear stockpile.

------------------------

I agree possession of nukes will change the loyalties of TSPA. The nukes are the new Zulifqar of the modern TSP.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby ramana » 21 Nov 2009 01:39

Editorial from Tribune, 19 Nov 2009

Chinese stamp on Pak bomb
The nexus is strong and functioning

THOSE who doubted Chinese complicity in Pakistan’s nuclear weapon programme should revise their opinion, at least now. The Washington Post’s disclosure quoting Pakistan’s top nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan about Beijing supplying the necessary design and enriched uranium to Islamabad to make two nuclear bombs in 1982 provides fresh proof of China’s act of nuclear proliferation to help its “all-weather” friend. The proof is incontrovertible as it is contained in an 11-page note Khan prepared for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies after he was put under house arrest in 2004 during the Pervez Musharraf regime. The note found its way to an old acquaintance of Khan, a Western journalist, and then to the Washington Post scribe, who gave a detailed account of China’s dangerous role in Pakistan quickly realising its nuclear ambitions. It is surprising how the US thinks China can be allowed a monitoring role in South Asian affairs.

Ever since the signing of the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal Pakistan has been trying for a similar agreement with China after the US said “no” to Islamabad in view of its well-known nuclear proliferation activities. Pakistan has not succeeded so far, but it is hopeful of clinching a “civilian” nuclear deal with China any time in the future. As Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi stated a few days back, nuclear cooperation between the two countries was an “ongoing process”. He indicated that if an accord on the lines of the Indo-US nuclear deal was not on the cards today, it might be there tomorrow. In the meantime, China has agreed to assist Pakistan to build two new nuclear reactors --- Chashma-I and Chashma-II. This is one of the achievements of Pakistan President Asif Zardari’s recent visit to Beijing.

It is time China’s nuclear proliferation activities were exposed. China has been no less guilty of indulging in this dangerous game than Pakistan. If China had not provided 50 kg of weapon-grade enriched uranium to Pakistan in 1982, as part of a secret agreement reached in 1976 between the two countries, Islamabad could not be in a position to help North Korea, Iran and Libya to embark on a nuclear weapon programme. Libya has abandoned the race for the ultimate weapon, but the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran continue to pose a serious problem.


Link:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20091120/edit.htm#3

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 799
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Y. Kanan » 21 Nov 2009 08:49

---
Last edited by Y. Kanan on 21 Nov 2009 09:08, edited 1 time in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Rahul M » 21 Nov 2009 09:06

self deleted.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 799
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Nuclear Threat From Pakistan : Boom or Bluff ?

Postby Y. Kanan » 21 Nov 2009 09:08

Rahul M wrote:
Ah... armchair generals still desperately trying to have their war on Pakistan without actually a war

ahem, the "armchair general" you are quoting was a senior diplomat in the IFS and an officer in the Indian Army before that.
I daresay he knows a thing or two, perhaps as well as the internet warriors.

p.s. also, your post is unfortunately OT. this thread is NOT for theorising on India's possible responses but an appraisal of TSP's nuclear capability, as should be obvious from the thread title.
kindly move it to an appropriate thread and delete the above post.
I'll delete this post afterwards.


Fair enough - done.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anupamd, DrRatnadip, nithish, Sachin and 36 guests