Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby arun » 16 Jan 2004 21:32

Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Press Center Briefing on January 14, 2004 :



QUESTION: Haider Masood. I represent Dawn of Pakistan. Sir, recently, I mean, (inaudible) there have been accusations in the American press about media, about Pakistan sharing its nuclear secrets with the likes of Iran or Libya, and that Mr. Musharraf's credibility is at stake. What is the position now of the State Department on these reports?

And I have a follow-up, which is that President Bush, yesterday, on Monday, as a matter of fact, announced a sharing of high-tech technology with India. How do you think it will impact the relations between India and Pakistan?

MR. ERELI: On the question of proliferation from Pakistan, it is an issue of concern with the United States. We have discussed it with the Government of Pakistan. We have received assurances from President Musharraf that he will act decisively to investigate possible cases of proliferation and act to prevent further cases. To date, we have been very satisfied with President Musharraf and his fulfillment of those commitments.

On the question of high technology cooperation with India, it was announced by the President on Monday, the so-called "Glide Path Program," and its impact on Pakistan -- I don't think it should have an impact. We have a strong bilateral relationship with India. We have a strong bilateral relationship with Pakistan. Those relationships we see as mutually reinforcing. One does not come at the expense of the other. We deal with each country on its merits, not as a function of our interest with the other country.

What we are discussing with India, it is fully possible we can discuss with Pakistan; missile defense, for example. The key thing here is export controls, regulatory controls, following through on commitments in a phased approach.

That's the basis on which the agreement with India is premised, and there is no reason why it couldn't be with Pakistan. It just depends on, frankly, how far things get along. But with Pakistan, as I said, missile defense is something that we are perfectly willing to discuss with Pakistan.

URL.

If anyone gets hold of the transcript of the SD background briefing covering President Bush's announcement on progressing the strategic partnership with india, please do post. I would love to see it in its entirety.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 17 Jan 2004 08:51

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/17/international/asia/17NUKE.htm

U.S. Officials Try to Trace Illegal Sale of Nuclear Technology

By ERIC LICHTBLAU

ASHINGTON, Jan. 16 — American law enforcement officials said Friday that they were trying to determine whether the Pakistani government was involved in a plot by a South African businessman to export trigger devices that could be used for nuclear weapons.

"That's one possibility that we're investigating," said one official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We know these devices went to Pakistan. What we're still investigating is where exactly they ended up and who was behind it."

Asher Karni, an Israeli who lives in South Africa, was arrested in Denver earlier this month on charges that he had illegally exported the devices to Pakistan without a license. In court documents, the American authorities charge that Mr. Karni, 50, was at the center of a global operation that used front companies and false billing records to route the trigger devices from a private manufacturer in Salem, Mass., to South Africa, the United Arab Emirates and ultimately Pakistan.

The devices, high-speed electrical switches called triggered spark gaps, are typically used in hospitals to break apart kidney stones. But hospitals usually keep only a few on hand — not the 200 that Mr. Karni is accused of ordering from an American supplier, PerkinElmer Optoelectronics, of Salem.

A Pakistani diplomat in Washington said Pakistan would cooperate in the investigation, and that it had no knowledge of the plot that American authorities laid out.

Mr. Karni remains in federal custody in Denver. On Monday, United States Magistrate Judge Michael Watanabe agreed to free him on $75,000 bond and confine him to the home of a rabbi in Potomac, Md., pending his trial.

But the Justice Department objected, saying Mr. Karni is "an extreme flight risk," and the judge agreed to delay his release until a hearing is held next week. Mr. Karni's attorney could not be reached Friday.

"We are not involved in any proliferation activity," said the Pakistani official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "There's no basis for this, no question about it."

But American officials said they had come to focus on the possibility that the Pakistani government was involved for several reasons, beginning with the large number of devices that Mr. Karni ordered.

In addition to that, a Pakistani businessman named Humayn Khan who received the trigger devices had ties to the Pakistani military and appears to have been involved in jet fighter production, American officials said.

"This case represents one of the most serious types of export violations imaginable," federal prosecutors said earlier this week in a court filing in Denver. "Karni has exported goods that are capable of detonating nuclear weapons to a person he knows has ties to the Pakistani military."

The government's filing said: "Although Pakistan's current leadership has vowed to curb the spread of this technology, that region of the world remains volatile, and Islamic militants in the area have made no secret of their desire to obtain nuclear weapons. The threat that Karni's conduct posed was real."

The government's investigation appears to have begun last summer, when investigators with the Commerce Department and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement received information from an anonymous source in South Africa about the possible diversion of American equipment to Pakistan <u>and India</u> :roll: :mad: , according to court papers.

In an affidavit filed in the case, James R. Brigham, an agent with the Commerce Department, said Mr. Karni tried to buy up to 400 of the trigger devices.

Investigators learned that Mr. Karni, working through a New Jersey contact, placed an order last year with PerkinElmer for 200 triggers at a cost of $89,400, Mr. Brigham said. Mr. Karni told the manufacturer the devices were to be used at a South African hospital, but officials at PerkinElmer said most hospitals would need no more than five or six, Mr. Brigham said.

Working with government officials, the company agreed secretly to disable the first shipment of 66 triggers by closing off the gas in-take lines, the government's affidavit said. But officials said it was not known if Mr. Karni had succeeded in exporting any other working triggers to Pakistan.

Earlier, Mr. Karni tried to buy triggers in France and have them sent directly to Pakistan, American officials said. But that effort failed when the sales agent told Mr. Karni that he would have to get an American export license, officials said.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 18 Jan 2004 05:59

A nice summary of Paki nuke dealing in The Guardian's Sunday version, The Observer.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1125614,00.html

Revealed: how Pakistan fuels nuclear arms race

Antony Barnett investigates the illegal global market in nuclear equipment and expertise and how the weapons programmes of Iran, Libya and North Korea all lead back to Pakistan

Sunday January 18, 2004
The Observer

The Austrian village of Seibersdorf is so anonymous that cab drivers from nearby Vienna have difficulty finding it. But it is home to a laboratory complex whose scientists have the power to start a war or keep the peace.
Hunched over electron microscopes and mass spectrometers, they are the world's nuclear detectives, analysing minute fragments of radioactive matter collected by UN inspectors in places such as Iran and Libya. Testing particles as small as one-hundredth of the width of a human hair, they can spot the secret yet indelible signs of a nuclear programme.

It was in Seibersdorf last summer that a scientist analysing dust taken from a cotton swipe used inside facilities in Iran discovered evidence of highly-enriched uranium - the key component of an atomic bomb. It was the first hint of a programme that had remained hidden for 18 years.

Like DNA from a crime scene, analysis of these particles also provides vital clues to the source of any nuclear material. Each radioactive isotope has its own signature.

Scientists at Seibersdorf work for the UN's nuclear watchdog - the International Atomic Energy Authority. They are just one part of a nuclear police force that is at the forefront of a war against a growing black market in nuclear material, equipment and atomic know-how. The battle involves rogue scientists selling their technical knowledge, nations desperate to join the nuclear weapon states and middlemen turn ing a quick buck by trading equipment and material.

Dramatic evidence from Iran and now Libya reveals a clandestine and sophisticated network stretching from North Korea, Malaysia and China to Russia, Germany and Dubai. Yet one country more than any other stands accused of easing this proliferation. In the network of illegal radioactive trade, all roads point to Pakistan. More precisely, they lead to the Khan Research Laboratories in Kahuta in north Pakistan.

Uranium 235 is the holy grail in bomb-making. It is a specific radioactive isotope whose atoms can split in two, releasing the huge amount of fissile energy vital to an atomic weapon. One way of acquiring it is to obtain uranium ore from the ground - which has minute amounts of uranium-235 - then 'enrich' it using thousands of centrifuges. This involves putting unrefined uranium into a tube and spinning it at twice the speed of sound to expel any impurities. By doing this, the amount of uranium-235 becomes more concentrated.

While this process may not sound too complicated, it requires a feat of supreme technical engineering involving a number of complex components. In particular, the rotors of the centrifuge spin so fast they need to be made of extremely strong material and be perfectly balanced.

In the mid-Seventies, these engineering problems were faced by a Pakistani metallurgist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. An ardent nationalist, he had just seen India test its first nuclear bomb. At the time he was working in Holland for an Anglo-Dutch-German nuclear engineering consortium called Urenco. Through his work there, Khan became aware of secret blueprints for two types of uranium enrichment centrifuges: one based on rotors made of aluminium and another based on a highly-strengthened alloy of steel.

Khan went on to steal the blueprints and a list of Urenco suppliers. With the blessing of the then Pakistani government, he established the Khan Research Laboratories near Islamabad and, with the help of the Chinese, went on to secretly develop the country's atomic bomb.

When, in 1998, Pakistan tested its first nuclear bomb in the desert of Baluchistan, Khan became a hero in his home country as the 'father of the Pakistani nuclear programme'. He once said: 'All Western countries are not only the enemies of Pakistan but in fact of Islam.'

His fundamentalist sympathies mean that it is perhaps no surprise that he is also known as the 'godfather of the Islamic bomb'. Evidence has now emerged from Iran and Libya that Khan's programme in Pakistan may be the source of the greatest level of nuclear weapons proliferation since the Cold War.

The Observer has learnt that UN inspectors who have recently visited a number of facilities in Libya discovered large amounts of aluminium centrifuge parts that had 'all the hallmarks of the Urenco designs' stolen by Khan. Pakistan used these to enrich uranium before later turning to the more complex steel centrifuges.

A Vienna-based diplomat familiar with the Libyan inspections said: 'The big surprise was that components found were almost off-the-shelf turnkey equipment. It was as if somebody had been shopping at Ikea and just needed to put the bits together.'

The diplomat said this was unlike Iraq's secret nuclear programme, which required large teams of scientists to deal with research issues and solve mechanical problems. He said: 'The worry is that if a country like Libya - with little industrial infrastructure and a small population - could lay its hands on this equipment, then a large country might be able to set up a weapons programme at a very fast pace indeed.'

Libyan authorities have been helping the IAEA to piece together the 'cartel' of middlemen feeding this clandestine network of nuclear know-how and equipment. They have been helped by the US seizure of a German-registered ship in the Suez Canal last October destined for Libya with thousands of parts - believed to be Malaysian-made but based on Pakistani designs - for aluminium centrifuges.

The UN inspectors uncovered evidence that many of the same middlemen were responsible for arming Libya and Iran. Last November, Iran finally admitted to a vast, secret procurement network that acquired thousands of sensitive parts and tools from numerous countries over an 18-year period.

It is believed that rogue scientists from Pakistan, motivated by million-dollar payouts, were helped by German middlemen and Sri Lankan businessmen based in Dubai. The middlemen are believed to have secured items for Iran from European, Asian and North American companies.

Until the end of last year the Pakistani government furiously denied that any of its nuclear technology had been 'exported'. However, it now accepts that 'certain individuals might have violated Pakistani laws for personal gain'. Last month Pakistan announced it was questioning four of its scientists over the sale of nuclear secrets, including Abdul Khan, but Western officials fear little will come of this inquiry.

The political sensitivity of 'arresting' a national hero such as Khan would inflame Islamic sentiment and backfire on both the US and President Pervez Musharraf, who is an important ally in the war on terrorism. Yet while the 'rogue scientist' theory is helpful to all parties in explaining how Pakistani equipment has ended up in Libya and Iran, an added complication is the role played by North Korea.

US intelligence claims that the Pakistani government, through the Khan laboratories, struck a deal which swapped Pakistani nuclear centrifuge technology for North Korean long-range missiles.

South Korean intelligence agents were reported to have discovered the transactions in 2002 and that summer US spy satellites photographed Pakistani cargo planes loading missile parts in North Korea.

Pakistan has denied such a deal, but pressure is mounting for Musharraf to clamp down. Reports have also emerged of Pakistani nuclear scientists visiting Burma. It is clear that the extent of the black market in nuclear weapons technology is only just beginning to emerge. As one of the scientists in Seibersdorf said: 'This year looks like being a busy one.'

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4486
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby putnanja » 18 Jan 2004 12:06

From hindu update section..

Pak's N-proliferation no surprise: Sergei Ivanov
Moscow, Jan. 18 (PTI): Moscow was aware of transfer of nuclear technology by Pakistan to other countries and is to closely interact with New Delhi to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction and their falling in the wrong hands, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov, has said.

"I would leave for my namesake (Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov) to make any public statement on this as the investigations are under way. At least it was neither unexpected nor a surprise for me," Ivanov said commenting on recent media reports of Pakistani scientists proliferating nuclear secrets to Libya and Iran.

Ivanov, who begins his three-day visit to New Delhi tomorrow, said proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has posed a threat and issues of regional and global security would be high on his agenda during his parleys with the Indian leadership.

"The proliferation of WMD is one of the most dangerous threats and both Russia and India have a common views on this. We cannot let the WMD-nuclear, chemical or biological, fall into the hands of rogue or I would say 'irresponsible' States and terrorists," :D Ivanov told Moscow-based Indian journalists here in an interview.

Besides parleys with Defence Minister George Fernandes, Ivanov is scheduled to hold talks with Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani, External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha and National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra on a wide range of issues including defence and security of the two nations in the changing world scenario.

jarugn
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 05 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jarugn » 18 Jan 2004 22:10

Pak nuke scientists and army officers quizzed

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/01/18/pakistan.scientists/index.html

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040118110609990002&_mpc=news%2e10%2e3

Pakistan Questions Nuclear Scientists
By MATTHEW PENNINGTON, AP

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (Jan. 18) - Pakistan has expanded its investigation of the country's premier nuclear weapons laboratory, detaining as many as seven scientists and administrators for questioning, amid allegations that sensitive technology may have spread to countries such as Iran, North Korea and Libya, officials said Sunday.

Also Sunday, Pakistani agents arrested seven al-Qaida suspects and confiscated weapons during an early morning raid in the southern city of Karachi, an intelligence officer said.

As many as 60 armed officers carried out the raid at the Qasim Apartments complex in the Gulistan-e-Jauhar area of the city, surrounding the building before moving in, witnesses said.

Officers arrested five men and two women in the 3 a.m. raid, the intelligence officer said on condition of anonymity. Two of the men were Egyptians, three were Afghans and the two women were Arabs, he said without giving details about their alleged ranks in the terror network.

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said, "Our information is that these are al-Qaida people. One is a recognized man."

He had no further details.

Addressing the detentions of nuclear scientists, Ahmed said that over the past two or three days between five and seven personnel at the Khan Research Laboratories had been taken in for "debriefing."

Among them was Islam-ul Haq, a director at the laboratory. Two uniformed men believed to be intelligence agents picked him up as he was dining Saturday at the residence of the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan.

The laboratory is named after Khan, a national hero for leading Pakistan to its underground test of the Islamic world's first nuclear bomb in 1998, designed as a deterrent against its larger rival, India. Haq is Khan's principal staff officer.

"We have had no contact with him," Haq's wife, Nilofar Islam, told The Associated Press. "We don't know where he is and what he is being asked."

She was informed of Haq's detention by Khan.

Though all the men remained in custody, Ahmed played down the detentions, saying the personnel being debriefed were not "necessarily involved in something or have allegations against them," he said.

In the past two months, Pakistan has interrogated a handful of scientists at the laboratory, after receiving unspecified documents from the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency about Iran's nuclear program, officials say.

Among those who have been questioned is Khan, although he has not been detained and is still treated as an official dignitary in Pakistan.

Pakistan has strongly denied any official involvement in possible proliferation to Iran, Libya and North Korea, but has acknowledged that individual scientists acting on their own account may have transgressed that rule.

In his first-ever speech to Parliament on Saturday, Pakistan's military ruler, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, noted that the world suspects Pakistan of being a nuclear proliferator and that the country must show that it is a responsible power.

Secretary of State Colin Powell said this month that American officials have presented evidence to Pakistan's leaders of Pakistani involvement in the spread of nuclear weapons technology.

The New York Times reported earlier this month that sophisticated centrifuge design technology used to enrich uranium had been passed to Libya even after a pledge by Musharraf to rein in Pakistani scientists. Pakistan dismissed the allegation as "absolutely false."

Libya, like Iran, has recently opened its nuclear program to U.N. inspections.

Musharraf has previously denied suggestions that Pakistan swapped nuclear technology to North Korea in return for missiles.

The Jan. 2 arrest at a Denver airport of a businessman accused of smuggling nuclear bomb triggers to Pakistan has deepened suspicions of Pakistani involvement in the nuclear black market.

Asher Karni, who heads a South African company, is accused of being the middleman for a Pakistani company's purchase of dozens of triggered spark gaps - electronic devices that can be used to trigger nuclear weapons - allegedly using an elaborate scheme to try to get around U.S. export restrictions to Pakistan.

The proliferation allegations are an embarrassment to Washington, which calls Pakistan a key ally in the war on terrorism for its help in rounding up al-Qaida suspects and support in toppling the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan in late 2001.

Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan, spokesman for Pakistan's powerful military, on Sunday said Pakistan remained "committed to nonproliferation."

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby arun » 19 Jan 2004 06:47

Sources: Nuclear scientists questioned in Pakistan
From Syed Mohsin Naqvi
CNN

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) --Authorities in Pakistan are questioning three former army officers and four people in the country's nuclear program as part of an investigation into the possible spread of the country's nuclear weapons technology, Pakistani intelligence sources said Sunday.

Pakistani army spokesman Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan told CNN that the questioning was related to Pakistan's ongoing investigation of Pakistani scientists who are suspected of passing nuclear technology to Iran.

Those being questioned include two retired brigadier generals, a retired major, three scientists and a technician, the intelligence sources said.

Sultan said the interrogation is a routine procedure, "part of the greater investigation that has already been under way" and that "these people were taken in to fill in the gap."

The investigation was opened in mid-November 2003. Pakistani authorities questioned three nuclear scientists in December. One has completed the debriefing session and two others are still being debriefed, according to Pakistani authorities.

CNN's Ash-har Quraishi and Syed Mohsin Naqvi contributed to this report.
CNN.

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jrjrao » 19 Jan 2004 06:51

Pakistan holds scientists over sale of nuclear secrets
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=482570
[color=blue]A former Pakistani official said: "Pakistan has always acquired its nuclear technology on the sly. There has to be deniability. That's why they use these kinds of murky businessmen - if it ever came out that our government was involved in trying to break US laws like this, it would be very embarrassing all round."</font>

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24101
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby SSridhar » 19 Jan 2004 07:54


A Bhushan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 15 May 2003 11:31
Location: NJ
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby A Bhushan » 19 Jan 2004 09:21

More Masala from more sources around the world
---------
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=7&id=285419

Aide to Pakistan nuclear scientist detained

Monday, January 19, 2004 at 06:10 JST
ISLAMABAD — A senior aide to Pakistan's top nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan has been taken into custody by security authorities, his family said Sunday.

Mohammad Islam, principal staff officer to Khan, was arrested Saturday evening at Khan's residence in Islamabad and taken away for interrogation. (Kyodo News)

jarugn
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 05 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jarugn » 19 Jan 2004 09:22

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/19/international/asia/19S TAN.html?ex=1074488400&en=eff39e8624b40067&ei=5059&partner=AOL

Pakistan Questions 8 Connected to Its Nuclear Program
By DAVID ROHDE

Published: January 19, 2004

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Jan. 18 — Authorities in Pakistan are questioning eight officials from its nuclear weapons program — including the personal assistant to the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb and two retired brigadiers — regarding allegations that nuclear weapons technology was shared with Iran, the government's information minister said Sunday.

The wife of Maj. Islam Ul Haq, the personal assistant to Dr. Khan, said Dr. Khan told her that the major had been detained by two uniformed intelligence agents on Saturday night while the two men were eating dinner at Dr. Khan's house, The Associated Press reported. Major Haq is a director at the Khan Research Laboratories.

A senior Western diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity said Dr. Khan should be the focus of any inquiry. "It's completely impossible for there to have been any proliferation activities without A. Q. Khan's knowledge," the diplomat said. "That much is clear."

But Pakistani analysts said it would be political suicide for General Musharraf to detain or prosecute Dr. Khan. Tariq Rahman, a professor at Quaid-e-Azam University, said the public would regard it as an unacceptable bid " to destroy Pakistan's nuclear scientists and its nuclear weapons."

Opposition political groups have dismissed the American charges as false claims aimed at weakening the world's only nuclear-armed Muslim country.

S. A. Shamsi, a spokesman for a coalition of hard-line religious parties that holds the third largest number of seats in Parliament, criticized the government for what he called capitulation to American pressure. "Our government is doing things that others are demanding," he said Sunday.

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jrjrao » 19 Jan 2004 16:51

From this NY Times story:
Opposition political groups have dismissed the American charges as false claims aimed at weakening the world's only nuclear-armed Muslim country.

S. A. Shamsi, a spokesman for a coalition of hard-line religious parties that holds the third largest number of seats in Parliament, criticized the government for what he called capitulation to American pressure. "Our government is doing things that others are demanding," he said Sunday.

Questions regarding nuclear technology and Pakistan continue to percolate.

On Jan. 2, the police in Colorado arrested Asher Karni, an Israeli businessman who lives in South Africa, on charges of trying illegally to export to Pakistan triggering devices that could be used in nuclear weapons. American officials have said the Pakistani government may have been involved.

Mr. Karni planned to use front companies to ship the switches to South Africa, then to the United Arab Emirates and ultimately on to a company in Islamabad, federal law enforcement officials charged. Court papers said the recipient in Pakistan was to have been a company called Pakland PME. The company's Web site says its sells dozens of kinds of electrical equipment, including oscilloscopes and transformers. It lists an office address in downtown Islamabad, roughly a mile from the Parliament building.

This weekend, calls to the telephone number listed by the company went unanswered.

<u>Workers in the office building said they had never heard of such a company.</u>
:eek:
When NY Times reporters go sniffing around Islamabad, asking uncomfortable questions about tenants and occupancy in buildings which are less than a mile from the parliament, all with an obvious intent to prove that Pakistani officials are liars, is when we know that H&D is in full bloom onlee...

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jrjrao » 19 Jan 2004 16:55

Recall all those reports where Xerox Khan was quoted as indignantly claiming that he had never set foot in Iran??

This in the Washington Post today:

Pakistan Detains Scientists - Nuclear Experts Held in Alleged Technology Transfers
By John Lancaster and Kamran Khan
The officials maintain that if Pakistani scientists did lend their expertise to Iran's nuclear program, they did so for money and without authorization from the Pakistani government.

Other Pakistani officials however, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Khan, the former lab director, and several other Pakistani nuclear scientists had visited Iran more than once in the late 1980s with the full knowledge of the Pakistani government.

"The government had responded positively to the Iranian request for cooperation in its nonmilitary nuclear program," one Pakistani official said. "It has now emerged that some scientists may have crossed the limits."

Twice in recent weeks, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, has held one-on-one meetings with Khan, :eek: who currently serves as his adviser on nuclear issues, to gather what one presidential aide called "first-hand" information about the whole saga.

Pakistani officials also said that Khan, during his debriefing, maintained that Pakistani-Iranian nuclear cooperation was authorized by then-army chief of staff Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg. :eek:


Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 19 Jan 2004 22:03

This Korean paper seems to get the hint.

Dr. Khan in Pakistan, the Main Culprit of Spreading Nuclear Weapons Technology

JANUARY 19, 2004 23:27
by Jin Lee (leej@donga.com)

There have been mounting global concerns over the suspected transfer of nuclear information and equipments from Pakistan to North Korea, Iran, and Libya, and now the investigation is focusing on a Pakistani nuclear expert.

The father of Pakistan’s nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan(69), is at the center of the global concerns. The international community seems to be certain that he is the main culprit of the nuclear proliferation.

The Investigation is Going On—

The Financial Times said on Monday that Islam-ul Haq, who served as the principal secretary to Dr. Khan, has been detained over the possible transfer of nuclear technology to Iran.

Pakistan has allowed U.S. information officials to participate in the nuclear program investigations launched last December in an effort to show the world that Pakistan has not been officially involved in nuclear proliferation. Six scientists and intelligence agents were questioned last month, and Mr. Khan was reportedly interrogated as well.

The Associated Press said that the arrest of Asher Karni, who has Israeli nationality and was accused of smuggling nuclear bomb triggers to Pakistan, deepened suspicions of the country`s involvement in the nuclear black market.

Main Culprit —

The latest issue of Time Magazine reported that Pakistan and the U.S. are identifying Mr. Khan as the mastermind of spreading nuclear technology to other nations. They have reached an interim conclusion that Mr. Khan and his aides transferred nuclear information to other countries in the interest of money or Islamic causes.

Dr. Khan worked at a Europe-based laboratory which had successfully completed uranium enrichment technology by using sophisticated centrifuge. When Dr. Khan returned home in 1976, he secretly brought the draft of the centrifuge and then established a laboratory to localize the technology. In 1998, Pakistan successfully conducted its underground test of the Islamic world’s first nuclear bomb.

The U.S. intelligence bureau believes Dr. Khan supplied nuclear components by using bogus companies and middlemen. Dr. Khan is reported to have visited Pyongyang ten times and Iranian nuclear facilities several times.

Punishment for Dr. Khan is Unlikely —

Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf said on Saturday the country must convince the world that Pakistan is not a proliferator of nuclear weapons. However, the investigation into Dr. Khan’s involvement in the nuclear transfer is likely to end in smoke because the arrest of Dr. Khan, who has been lionized as a national hero, would infuriate Islamic extremists or military regime in the region.

In an attempt to gain consistent support from Pakistan in the war on terrorism, the U.S. seems to be satisfied with Pakistan’s denial of any official involvement in sharing technology with other nations. Dr. Khan has claimed that he has approved his aides’ visits to North Korea, Iran, and Libya, but he had no idea that his aides might secretly trade its nuclear program. Time Magazine said that the U.S. intends to block Dr. Khan’s activities, curbing the possible leak of the nuclear information to other nations in the future.

Leonard
BRFite
Posts: 190
Joined: 15 Nov 2000 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Leonard » 20 Jan 2004 00:01

Link Leaks
The Iran-Pakistan nuclear story continues to unfold.

By Simon Henderson

“My father told me that if ever anything happened to him, I was to call you," said the plaintive, attention-grabbing voice of a young Pakistani woman on the telephone to me Sunday. Her father, a nuclear scientist, had been detained by Pakistan's feared Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). They had come in the evening and told her father to pack a small bag, with personal articles sufficient for a few days. Barely able to hold back the tears, she passed me onto her brother. "There had been five or six standing by the door and another three or so in a four-wheel-drive vehicle and another car outside," he told me.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/henderson200401190957.asp

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 20 Jan 2004 00:11

This Simon Henderson character seems to be interesting. He has written in the past that TSP's nukes and missiles are "superior" to India's because they are Chinese and Korean imports respectively while India chose the indigenous route. He also says that TSP's Samar Mubarakmand "developed" a plutonium device which was tested in 1998. He used to work for Financial Times and has interviewed Xerox Khan before.

Prateek
BRFite
Posts: 310
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Prateek » 20 Jan 2004 01:48

'Pak responsible for proliferation in Iran, Libya, North Korea'

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/431221.cms

AGENCIES[ MONDAY, JANUARY 19, 2004 05:35:11 AM ]
LONDON: The clandestine nuclear weapons programmes of Iran, Libya and North Korea were all fuelled by the Khan Research Laboratories in Kahuta in north Pakistan, a leading London weekly reported on Sunday.

“Dramatic evidence from Iran and now Libya reveals a clandestine and sophisticated network, stretching from North Korea, Malaysia and China to Russia, Germany and Dubai. Yet one country more than any other stands accused of easing this proliferation.

In the network of illegal radioactive trade, all roads point to Pakistan. More precisely, they lead to the Khan Research Laboratories in Kahuta in north Pakistan,” the Observer stated in a special report.


........
...........

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 20 Jan 2004 03:11

Pakistan probes link to Iran nuke program

Pakistani authorities have told United Press International the country's top nuclear scientist may have been involved in the transfer of nuclear-bomb-making technology to Iran.

Abdul Qadeer Khan is considered the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb and on Monday officials in Islamabad confirmed they had detained some of his senior aides for questioning. Khan has already been questioned about his possible involvement in selling bomb-making know how to Iran.

"So far, our investigations indicate that only one man is behind this alleged transfer," a senior Pakistani official told UPI Monday on condition he not be identified. "It is wrong to blame an entire nation for the mistakes of an individual."

Without naming Khan, the official said: "We gave him the status of a national hero when he did something for the country but now if he makes a mistake, he will have to pay for his mistake as well."
:roll:

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 20 Jan 2004 04:06

Dung report

Nuclear scientists’ debriefing linked to IAEA letter

By our correspondent

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has received a letter from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and some individuals are being questioned to have information in this regard, Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told the Senate on Monday.

Giving a policy statement on floor of the House in reply to different point of orders raised by opposition members about taking into custody of nuclear scientists, the minister said eight nuclear scientists and retired military officials were taken into custody for questioning and debriefing. "Those being investigated included four nuclear scientists, three retired military officers, and a technician," he said.

The minister dismissed reports of conducting a raid at the house of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan. "Dr Qadeer is respectable for us and continues to hold a government portfolio," he added. Rashid said those detained were "not necessarily involved in something or have allegations against them". These detainees were being debriefed, he told the House.

He made it clear that cases of some individuals found guilty of transferring nuclear technology would be dealt in accordance with the law. "Any question of a compromise on nuclear and missile programmes does not arise," he added.

Rashid said Pakistan has a strong case to respond to the IAEA as "we are not a rouge, but a responsible state". "We will not let them fulfil their nefarious designs. We are preparing answer to IAEA’s letter." He assured the Senate that the government would not compromise on keeping its nuclear programme intact. "There will be no bargain on the national interests and efforts would be made to safeguard and protect national interests," he added.

He denied state’s involvement in any transfer of technology, adding the process of debriefing is extended keeping in view fresh reports. "We are probing the charges to avoid the fate like those of North Korea, Iran and Libya. He said some scientists may have passed nuclear technology out of personal greed and ambition. They would have to pay the price as "it was the most sensitive issue and national interest is supreme to us".

Answering a point of order by Senator Raza Rabbani that the IAEA letter be produced before the House for proper consideration, the minister said: "I don’t want to go into technical details of it but I want to assure that the treasury benches have similar feelings as the opposition benches have. "We are passing through a critical era and this needs to be dealt with complete vision and sagacity," he added. He said there is no doubt that the government firmly believes in non-proliferation and it has proved this by its actions. He said he was among those who favoured detonation of a nuclear device. "We preferred to go nuclear instead of keeping reliance on conventional weapons only for a better defence." Earlier, on a point of order, Professor Abdul Ghafoor of the MMA complained that the nuclear scientists had been taken into custody by the intelligence agencies after mid-night raids at their homes. He deplored: "We are adopting insulting attitude towards our national heroes who made the country nuclear power, while Indians elevated a nuclear scientist to their country’s president."

Prof Khurshid Ahmed condemned harassment of the pioneer of country’s nuclear programme, Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, and taking his aide into custody. He urged the government to take the nation into confidence instead of harassing Dr Khan and other scientists. PPPP Parliamentary Leader Mian Raza Rabbani demanded an in-camera session of parliament to debate the issue.

Tim
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Tim » 20 Jan 2004 04:56

Rangudu,

I don't know anything about Simon Henderson's knowledge of Pakistan. As an investivative journalist, however, I will say that he did OUTSTANDING work on Iraq in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Might be worth a look, if this is what he's getting into.

Tim

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 20 Jan 2004 04:59

Thanks Tim.

Prateek
BRFite
Posts: 310
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Prateek » 20 Jan 2004 05:13


SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24101
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby SSridhar » 20 Jan 2004 08:24

I see KRL being more frequently referred to as Kahuta Research Labs rather than Khan Research Labs.

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jrjrao » 20 Jan 2004 18:14

LA Times:

[url=http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-nukes20jan20,1,2279151.story?coll=la-home-world]Dutch Confirm Possible Spread of Arms Secrets -Nuclear technology developed by European consortium apparently made its way to Libya, Iran and North Korea, perhaps via Pakistan.
[/url]
"Some countries have developed their technology without the system to control it," said a European diplomat. "Pakistan does not have clean hands if it doesn't have control over its individuals."

Sunil
BRFite
Posts: 634
Joined: 21 Sep 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Sunil » 20 Jan 2004 18:52

All this proliferation foam is going to get washed out in the equal-equal tide.

The Pakistanis are in damage control mode. They are hanging A Q Khan out to dry - figuratively that is - in the hope that everyone is convinced of their sincerity.

Proliferation is a dagger Musharraf holds to the West's back. He will let go of it.

The Bush Administration is looking for some visible success in the War on Terror, it is possible that this latest round of `proliferation discoveries' and the act of `stemming them' is just a part of that. The Pakistanis for their part are probably trying to set up a smokescreen to deflect attention from something else they have going under the table.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby ramana » 20 Jan 2004 21:25

One thing that bothers me are all the Iraqi bio and chem warfare scientists accounted for? Are they lurking in TSPland?

jarugn
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 05 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby jarugn » 20 Jan 2004 23:32

Pak Nuke scientists - Fall from grace

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAZ60M8OPD.html

Div
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 16 Aug 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Div » 21 Jan 2004 00:09

From Aug. 2002:

Pakistani Nuclear Scientists: How Much Nuclear Assistance to Al Qaeda? (David Albright and Holly Higgins)
http://www.exportcontrols.org/pakscientists.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby ramana » 21 Jan 2004 00:44

It looks too convienent to lay all the blame on the scientists when they were all along minded and tended by the Army. To me it looks like a white wash attempt to reduce interantional pressure by making scape goats of the scientists. Remember the Army is the key institution that holds TSP together. In all these prolif stories it is still clean!

Also note how much the TSP was protected from this prolif charge till now. And all this came out because Iran and Libya decided to come clean about their sources.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 21 Jan 2004 00:51

Ramana,

See this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,171-970125,00.html

Pakistan nuclear arrests

Zahid Hussain in Islamabad

January 20, 2004, Tuesday

The maverick Pakistani former Chief of Army Staff who allegedly tried to sell nuclear technology to Iran for $ 12 billion (£6.7 billion) was being questioned last night.

General Aslam Beg was held after Abdul Qadeer Khan, architect of the Pakistani nuclear programme, told investigators during a debriefing that nuclear co-operation with Iran had been authorised by the army officer.

General Beg, one of a number of senior officers with Islamist sympathies, was the Chief of Army Staff from 1988-91, the period during which the country's nuclear secrets were allegedly passed on to Iran. He also served as head of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency. He is said to have tried to persuade the civilian governments in power during that period to transfer nuclear technology in return for the money that Iran was allegedly prepared to pay and which would have underwritten the Pakistani military budget for a considerable time. The offer was rejected.


Pakistani authorities have also detained eight other officials linked with its premier nuclear weapons laboratory. Among them were two retired brigadiers who until recently had served as directors at the Khan Research Laboratories (KRL) and a retired major.

Major Islamul Haq, a close aide and principal staff officer to Dr Khan, was detained by two intelligence officials while dining at Dr Khan's house. His wife said that she had heard nothing of him since.

The authorities are also questioning two more senior scientists in the latest sweep. Nazir Ahmed and Mohammed Saeed were attached to the uranium enrichment facility at KRL, named after Dr Khan. Last month Pakistani intelligence officials questioned Dr Khan and at least three other scientists who had key roles in the Pakistan nuclear test of 1998. Seven scientists have now been detained.

Masood Khan, a Foreign Ministry official, said: "There is no presumption of guilt; it is probable that some of these people would be cleared."

Pakistani authorities deny any involvement in the proliferation of nuclear technology, but admit that some scientists "motivated by greed" might have sold nuclear secrets to other countries.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby ramana » 21 Jan 2004 00:54

Thnks, R. Now for the rest of the coterie! What is needed is a link to OBL and all this prolif bazi and we will see some serious fur flying.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Rangudu » 21 Jan 2004 00:55

Was Aslam Beg also the DG of ISI at some point as it says above?

When was that?

Sunil
BRFite
Posts: 634
Joined: 21 Sep 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Sunil » 21 Jan 2004 01:10

> Beg being questioned.

Wow... (whistle)... talk about big game hunting!

Okay TSJ for the record - I am officially impressed.

Time to surf the net.

iirc Beg's brother was killed in a helo crash at MeS in Afghanistan. He was with a bunch of ISI guys directing the battle at MeS in 1997.

My records don't show MAB as having been DG ISI.

kgoan
BRFite
Posts: 264
Joined: 30 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby kgoan » 21 Jan 2004 01:27

R;

The Iran prolif most probably happened during Beg's time. Matter of fact, it was Beg's attitude to Iran that p!ssed the US enough for them to back BB to drop him.

There was a fair degree of Pak-Iran bhai-bhai during Beg's turn as el-supremo in Pak land. And it remains to be seen whether the US slapping on of sanctions was connected with US antipathy for Iran rather than the nuke angle.

Personally, I think the slide in US-Pak relations in the early 90's was more due to Pak-Iran relations going upside, than any nuke angle.

The later collapse of Pak-Iran relations didn't bring the US streaming back in again because, in my opinion, the US wasn't sure whether the Paks were going to play a "China trick" on them with Iran.

That, I think, was probably of more importance than the balderdash of US "apathy" or "abandonment" of Pak.

parsuram
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 May 2002 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby parsuram » 21 Jan 2004 01:33

Recall a news item on SA Tribunne about "nuclear scientists" in pakistan going missing. I wonder now if some principle actors in this prolif. excersise got an early heads up. Would be par for this sand trap.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Umrao » 21 Jan 2004 01:39

Unkil did not expect this turn of events, He just wanted to slap the wrists of Libya & Iran, but they exposed more than unkil wanted, there by forcing unkil to do the unexpected and unwanted de briefing , and check the Pu balls hanging in TSP, no wonder Beg is being asked to cough (up) to see how his Pu balls are doing.

(incidentally IAEA also forced the hand of unkil by calling the trumps)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby ramana » 21 Jan 2004 01:40

parsuram, the missing boffins were supposed to have gone to Myanmar.
kg, could be true. Wasnt Beg making intemperate statements during Gulf War I? We need to look at events during his tenure in new light.
Kashmir, Khalistan, threat to attack Delhi with nukes during 1990 etc. Also I read he was from India.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Umrao » 21 Jan 2004 01:56

http://www.friends.org.pk/Beg-articles.htm

becareful this site has virus though.

ramana garu>> here is the one in which he talks about what you mentioned.
http://www.friends.org.pk/barbarous%20war.htm
*********
Barbarous War on Iraq

Consequences and Compulsions



By

General Mirza Aslam Beg,

Chairman FRIENDS
The war on Iraq has been unleashed in violation of all norms of civilized behaviour “to strike awe and terrors” into the hearts of the Iraqi nation. It is a repeat of 1991 war, energized by the shock of 9/11 episode and aiming to achieve Global Primacy and pre-eminence of USA. In 1991, I was the army Chief, and had the courage of conviction, to expose the sinister designs of USA. I was run-down by the government functionaries and others for my views, but, now, all and sundry are saying the same, what I said, vindicating my stand. Allah be praised.

The inevitable has happened and the war on Iraq has begun in spite of all the protestations from across the world and the UN Security Council, to avert war and give peace a chance. But it was not to be, because, USA and the coalition partners have an agenda of their own, similar to the war on Afghanistan, which they won but lost peace. The purpose of war on Iraq, therefore, is to cause psychological impact on the Iraqi forces, breaking their morale and the will to fight, by launching a massive attack by air, land and sea. The central idea is, to cause dislocation, disruption, isolation, rendering Iraqi forces paralysed, with no clear-cut direction to defend the country, against the invading forces. While these operations have been launched, small commando units, agents and saboteurs are being infiltrated, to cause disruption behind the lines.

Coalition forces also have the advantage of marked superiority in the field of electronics, which they are using with advantage, by jamming the communication network, radars and all other electronic systems, thus reducing the operational capability of the Iraqi armed forces. Since oil is an important commodity - thicker than blood, therefore coalition forces would attempt to capture the oil wells and installation at the early stages of war, while the CIA claims to have bought-over the loyalty of some senior Iraqi commanders, who are likely to defect, when the going gets rough. On the other hand, Iraqi forces have organised their defenses around cities and towns, to force battles of siege on the attacker and inflict casualties, while the border areas and vast territories have been left undefended which, the coalition forces would occupy in the next few days time, in order to gain space and position themselves, for employment against strongly defended areas, around big cities and towns.

The war on Iraq may produce, both negative and positive results. The negative aspect are, that UN has been rendered ineffective, and the European Union and the NATO stand divided. The USA will gain control over the oil resources of the region as well as control over the routes of supply, thus creating a dangerous situation for the countries whose economy depends on oil. The positive aspect of the war is that the challenge has emerged to US unipolarity from France, Germany, Russia and China, which is the most significant development, as it would put a check on US unbridled acts of terrorism - 1991 war on Iraq; 1998 war on Cassova; 2001 war on Afghanistan and now the war on Iraq. The contours of a Bipolar World Order have emerged and likely to become a reality after the war, thus correcting the global balance of power.

USA and coalition forces have an agenda of their own. They aim at regime change in Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. In all probability, USA may also create an autonomous region of Kurdistan, carved-out of Turkey, Iraq and Syria, and use it as a base for projection of power and influence in the very vital region of the Muslim world. By positioning itself in Iraq, USA will be able to capture the market in the region which is under-developed. Russia and France will be edged-out of Iraq and the existing agreement of billions of dollars, for exploitation of Iraqi oil, will be annulled. And, of course, Israel will get all the boost including US$ 8 billion tranche, already granted by USA.

Pakistan US relations will not be affected because of the war. The 19th March parliament session is an indicator. The session called specifically to pass a resolution on war, was adjourned for want of quorum, so skilfully manipulated. The ‘regime change’ in Pakistan, therefore has delivered what was expected of it, under the so called norms of democracy There is no possibility of Indian attack on Pakistan, because last year India tested our mettle and failed. In fact the stand-off 2002 happened to be the watershed, defining the conventional and nuclear balance paradigm between the two nations, creating a stable nuclear deterrence, despite the fact, that the armed forces of India and Pakistan remained in eye ball to eye ball contact, for almost ten months, without any serious development, on a common borders of over 2900 Kms. There is no serious threat to our nuclear assets either. Pakistan abides by its policy of Nuclear Restraints, while maintaining a minimum credible deterrence. Notwithstanding such aggressive military posturing and coercive diplomacy, 2002 Stand-off helped Pakistan gain credibility for its nuclear programme and a stable and credible deterrence, as well as conventional balance, which was achieved, after a series of crises and confrontations, since 1974 to 2002.
The war on Iraq provides an opportunity to the Muslim world to do intensive soul searching, to find out why it is subjected to such blatant aggression and discrimination? Unity will be conceived as the only remedy to muster strength and adopt a strategy of defiance based on collective consensus. Non alignment movement (NAM), of necessity, must gain strength and momentum, to forge a new approach. France, Germany, China and Russia are emerging as a block, to restore balance of power in the global order.
The war is likely to proliferate global terrorism. After Palestine and Afghanistan, Iraq will produce more terrorists, creating global insecurity. Palestinian and Kashmir issue will come to the global attention and there would be pressures for finding a durable solution for these issues. Afghanistan is in a state of flux and the present regime has not been able to restore peace in the country, with rising pressure for political restructuring of the country, so that a truly representative government, comprising all ethnic groups, comes into being.
It is too early to predict, about the time, the war will take to come to an end but the recent development appear to take a new turn. Iraqi forces are putting-up tough resistance, inspite of brutal bombing of Baghdad and other cities of Iraq. The war has not gone the way Americans had planned. Ground offensive from the North could not start, because, Turkey did no allow their territory to be used. Ground offensive from the South is facing tough resistance from fortified defenses at Umm-e-Qasr, Naseeria and Najaf, thus imposing considerable delay on the advancing delay. And, as more delay is improved, the approaching summer will take its own toll. But what is certain, is, the change in the global power equation - unipolarity giving way to bi-polarity - and re-establishment of global balance of power. Regime change in Iraq may have a snow-balling effect on Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and other regional countries. The Americans are likely to create an autonomous region of Kurdistan, to serve as the bastion of American power and influence, within and around the heartland of the Muslim world. The Muslim world is divided and rudderless. Third world countries and NAM have lost their voice. In the emerging scenario, the UN, European Union and the NATO are split and they need to galvanize to re-establish their lost élan and vitality.

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer rightly warns against a series of US-led ‘disarmament wars’ against other countries in the wake of presumed victory over Iraq, as part of doctrine of pre-emption. He says: “US power is a decisive factor for world peace and stability, but a world order cannot function when the national interests of the most powerful nation are the defining criteria for the deployment of the nation’s military might. There must be the same results for the big, the middle-sized and the small countries.” Pointing to history, he said “being against war was not cowardly - United States had not suffered as Europe had done. The Americans have not had a Verdun (of World War-I) on their continent. There is nothing in the United States to compare with Auschwitz or Stalingrad, in World War II”. And yet, the war has been unleashed defying all norms of civilized behaviour.
The immoral, seemingly has triumphed over moral. But as the saying goes: “conscience is a cur that will let you get past it but that you cannot keep it from barking.” Global conscience will moan and lament what super power has made of humanity.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Umrao » 21 Jan 2004 02:01

Pakistan's Nuclear Propriety
Pakistan's security - internal and external, is precariously compounded by a host of interacting factors. The threat is incremental. The gravity warrants a dispassionate and cool assessment of options and modalities to be able to meet the imperatives of the challenge, because national security is uncompromisable. The geography has uniquely placed Pakistan, sharing common borders with countries having rich civilizational heritage. Iran's civilizational roots are profound and deep as that of Afghanistan, Central Asian states and China. The Gangetic civilization of India and that of rich Indus valley of Pakistan, are great treasures of history. To be at the cross-roads of such cultural configuration, has endowed Pakistan with a hybrid identity of a civilizational bouquet. The construction of the Friendship Highway has strengthened the bond of amity and cooperation with China. Pakistan's relations with its neighbours are reflective of trust and understanding, except India, where, there is a historical antipathy. Even after lapse of over half a century, India has not reconciled to the existence of Pakistan, and to annul the division of the Subcontinent is its overriding passion. Three wars have been imposed upon Pakistan. The terror and barbarism so callously being perpetuated on the hapless people of occupied Kashmir, reflects a dehumanized sensibility of a kind, which is much too rare in history. On the line of control (LOC) in Kashmir, there is a running battle with the horrendous consequences as both India and Pakistan have gone nuclear.

In blatant disregard to South Asia's non-nuclearised identity, India propelled by its need to reign supreme in the region, exploded the nuclear device in 1974. Pakistan, even though nourished no nuclear ambition, was left with no choice, but develop its own nuclear programme, so that at least, a non-weaponised nuclear status could be achieved. It had resolved not to make an overt test, as it would be a precursor to a nuclear race in the region. But Pakistan's complacence lasted for only over a decade as India, shocked the world by carrying out a series of tests in May 1998. All progress with respect to non-proliferation regime, thus came to a naught. Three nuclear bombs denoted on May 11, 98 and two sub critical tests on 13 May, 98 were a miscalculated attempt to become the Sixth member of the nuclear club. They also thought that Pakistan was operating under a nuclear bluff and that India's detonations would expose it.

Pakistan's nuclear credibility however, was fully established by counter-explosions on May 28 and 29 May 1998 which not only baffled the Indian strategic mind, but brought a tinge of realism, and the tone and temper of the Indian leaders which were of marked bellicosity, suddenly changed into that of pleasant accommodation and understanding with Pakistan. This, however, can not be taken as a sincere gesture, as it may only be a tactical shift in modality, without renunciating the objective of seeking permanent dominance in the region, which indeed is the greatest threat to regional peace and harmony and if not timely countered, it may prove perilous. There are even potent dangers that nuclear ambitions of India may have spill over effects on Central Asia, which my be impelled to enter the nuclear race with ominous consequences for the region. India therefore must not saddle into power with unbridled rein, and cognize the imminent threat looming over the region. Sagacity demands that it enters into a sincere dialogue with Pakistan to control the nuclear programme of both the countries so that the dread of nuclear war is eliminated.

Pakistan has to objectively assess as to what extent it can limit its nuclear capability without jeopardizing its security imperatives. It is in this perspective that, Pakistan's policies with respect to CTBT and FMCT may be determined. These two have relevance in the overall context of NPT, which is aimed at ensuring the non-proliferation regime. This Treaty has been signed by 182 countries, and the Five Nuclear Nations are committed to nuclear disarmament. Only four countries - India, Pakistan, Israel and Cuba have not yet signed it. The world attention was drawn towards India and Pakistan when they both carried out nuclear tests in May 1998. Pressure on Pakistan has particularly mounted so that it signs the CTBT, by September 1999. The specific steps to be taken in this respect are:

Exercise strategic restraint
Put a ban on further nuclear tests.
Cut off production of fissile material.
Ban the export of nuclear material and technology.
Initiate Confidence building measures (CBMs).
It is interesting to know that Pakistan, on its own volition, had undertaken all the above steps which were in keeping with the spirit of CTBT and FMCT, which are now being propagated. As early as 1989, the policy of strategic restraints was adopted by Pakistan, based on the rational assessment that Pakistan had achieved the objectives of the nuclear programme which late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had set for Pakistan in 1975 and that there was no reason why Pakistan should pursue it any further. The following were the measured decisions taken by Pakistan's Nuclear Command Authority in 1989:
A low level, non-weaponised minimum credible deterrence, will be maintained.
Ban on nuclear tests.
First use option will be retained as an essential element of deterrence.
Cut off in fissile material production.
Ban on export of nuclear material and technology
An important element of the above decision was that Pakistan's nuclear programme was India specific and therefore it was of no consequence to Pakistan what other nuclear power nations decided for themselves. Thus Pakistan adopted the policy of strategic restraints, as early as 1989, and had India not exploded its devices in May 1998, the nuclear race would have been kept at bay. The non-weaponised deterrence, which Pakistan deemed a functional imperative, was changed by India, and now a near reality of weaponised deterrence has emerged. One can easily differentiate that, while Pakistan has been following the moral imperative of strategic restraint, Idea's mind is obsessed with nuclear jingoism. To baracket them together, is indeed a gross distortion of reality and a failure to distinguish who nourishes 'peace' and who is propelling nuclear dread!
CTBT, therefore may be signed by Pakistan as it would not make any material difference. It would only tantamount to a formal declaration of what it had already done voluntarily in 1989 and subsequently vindicated in 1998. All apprehensions about CTBT therefore are ill founded, yet the following must be kept in view:

CTBT is not targeted to the roll back of our nuclear programme.
It does not entitle foreign agencies to inspect our nuclear installations, and that our freedom in this respect would be maintained.
There is no discriminative clause in the CTBT, and all nuclear nations would be treated at par.
The inspection teams will inspect only that site, which would be earmarked for nuclear tests and that too not without concurrence of Pakistan.
It would be in the best interest of both India and Pakistan, simultaneously sign the CTBT. With respect to FMCT, which may come up some two years later, the following aspects are important:
To sign FMCT, would mean that both India and Pakistan freeze their stock-pile of fissile material.
Both India and Pakistan will have to allow inspection of their nuclear sites.
By signing the Treaty the nuclear race would considerably be reduced. · Pakistan would be entitled to seek the symmetry in relation to Indian stock pile.
It would be proper if both India and Pakistan sign the FMCT, simultaneously.
Pakistan has achieved the objective of a minimum low-level credible nuclear deterrence, and it is vital that it is maintained at that level. Pakistan has remarkably achieved its security needs and it need not worry any more. It has stockpiled sufficient number of nuclear weapons and the fissile material. To determine what is the minimal deterrence, is the responsibility of Nuclear Command Authority (NCA). It is the nuclear attitude which makes the difference. Pakistan certainly is for limiting it rather than accelerating it, which is evident from the philosophy of nuclearism which grips the mind of Indian strategic thinkers. In other words, the decision to keep the deterrence to a minimal credible level is the responsibility of the military experts and political leaders.
Pakistan's nuclear programme was not of its choosing, but the redeeming feature is that contrary to popular belief, it has been very economical for Pakistan. Since 1975, till 1990, it can be said with certainty that the total cost incurred was below $ 250 millions, which is less than the price of one submarine, which costs nearly $ 300 million. Viewed in this light, it is all the more necessary for Pakistan to keep the minimal nuclear deterrence as it is not only economical but very crucial for our security. The facilities thus created are now been utilized for production of commercial grade uranium for our nuclear power plants. If one takes an overview of the land forces, out of India's twelve lac soldiers, six lac (600,000) are engaged in Kashmir to quell freedom fighters. In view of this India can not even think of ground offensive against Pakistan, particularly in view of the offensive Defence Strategy of Pakistan, India's ground forces quantum is relatively insufficient. However one can not deny the relative air and naval superiority of India. The recent exercises conducted by India was to intimidate Pakistan with its superior naval and air power. But such intimidations can not unnerve Pakistan. Perhaps the time to hold an exercise like Zarb-e-Momin (carried out in 1989), has come to send a clear message to the adversary that even in conventional field, Pakistan is quite a formidable force. True to the dictum 'Face the Sun and all the shadows will fall behind you', Pakistan is well poised to face any ordeal.
Top



Nuclear Substances and Equipment for Sale


There is an old adage: “when business is good, it pays to advertise; when business is bad you’ve got to advertise”. It is the latter, which seems to be at the root of the insightful move to publish a full page advertisement, by the Ministry of Commerce, for issuance of “No Objection Certificate”, by Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC), for export of Nuclear Substances, and the requisite equipment for production of nuclear energy and harnessing it for the well-being of the humankind - electricity generation being one. It is a concrete step towards what President Eisenhower, had once promised, but never delivered - Atom for peace. Military power monopolized “atom”, and ‘peace’ receded into the realm of utopia. When the trauma of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was overbearing, the only user of the dreadful mass destruction weapon - USA - made a solemn commitment that the nuclear knowledge would be shared particularly with the developing world and helped to acquire the technology, so that the energy unleashed through splitting atom, could be channelled for bringing the deprived segment of humanity to a respectable level to fulfill the imperative of equity.

The Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in its preamble contains a paragraph:


“Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-product which may be derived by nuclear weapon states from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all parties of the Treaty, whether nuclear weapon or non-nuclear weapon states.” It was further elaborated to state: “Convinced that. in furtherance of this principle, all parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in cooperation with other states, to the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes.”

Article IV, 1 and 2 of NPT are specifically devoted to the desirability of using nuclear energy for “peaceful purposes” and that the “need of the developing areas of the world”, were specially to be taken into account. Human proclivity, however, for destructive pursuits, side-tracked nobler sentiments, and the five nuclear powers, in varying proportions, emerged to form an exclusive “Club”, and in their frantic obsession to build nuclear arsenals, transformed the world into what someone characterized in a metaphoric depiction: “It would indeed be a tragedy of the human race, proved to be nothing more than the story of an ape playing with a box of matches on a petrol dump. Far from being an imaginary apocalyptic prediction, Nuclear Winter conjures up the most frightening prospect of the End of the World Scenario - the seductive lure of the Death Wish. The Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, under whose tenure the ‘bomb’ was first used, later characterized it as “dreadful”, “awful” and “diabolical”.

As if five nuclear powers were not enough, the Sixth one - India also joined the nuclear club - first in 1974 - under a contrived “ruse” to camouflage the test explosion as ‘peaceful’ one and naming it Smiling Buddha - the most outrageous perversity to associate the apostle of peace with such heinous an activity. Later on India, renunciating its covert nuclear status, opted to seek global visibility as a prestigious nuclear power, by conducting five tests on 11th and 13th May 1998, at Pokhran. The ostensible objective was to take South Asia, in its firm strategic grip, and to intimidate Pakistan to a magnitude that the Kashmir uprising would be brought to a naught, and extra regional dividend would be the gaining of ‘veto-power’ status in the Security Council. Killing two birds with one strategic arrow, perhaps could materialize, had Pakistan exhibited nuclear timidity. Pakistan was thought to be a nuclear ‘bragger’ and ‘bluffer’. Before it could achieve the capability, India would not only burst upon the world as a China - equalizer - a strategic need of the West, but also so restore the ‘nuclear order’ in their favour. Seventeen days waiting on the part of Pakistan, was to see how the western powers reacted to this strategic protégé’s act of nuclear irresponsibility, reinforced India’s nuclear will. Pakistan, was shocked and dismayed that nothing beyond cosmetic criticisms were expressed, and it was left with no strategic options, and gave a befitting response on May 28, and 30, by six counter nuclear blasts to unequivocally convey that nuclear intimidation would not work as a “control” mechanism. It is indeed ironical that instead of appreciating Pakistan’s compulsions, and sympathizing with its predicament, it was subjected to economic sanctions, and all other pressure techniques were unleashed, to render it weak and fragile in economic terms and thus compound the miseries of the common people, and resultantly to destabilize its political structure. The deferment of IMF loans and the excruciating conditionalities, are with a view to constricting its strategic options, and bringing it to accept the fact that without signing CTBT, NPT and FMCT, Pakistan would become a strategic orphan. No sensitivity exists to take cognizance of the fact, that Pakistan’s nuclear choice, can not be treated at par with India, and that as far back as 1979, Pakistan, when it had reached nuclear capability, it had, out of its own volition, embarked upon a Policy of Nuclear Restraint, which contains all that constitute the spirit of CTBT:

- A low level, non-weaponised minimum credible deterrence, to be maintained.
- Ban on nuclear tests.
- First use of option to be retained as an essential element of deterrence.
- Cut off in fissile material production.
- Ban on export of nuclear substances and transfer of technology.

To ensure all these a very fool proof Command and Control Structure was created, which is functioning effectively till today. What is intended to convey is that, the restraint, Pakistan has chosen to exercise, was not due to external pressures, but in fulfillment of the moral imperatives. Pakistan is neither nuclear proliferator nor a hoader of nuclear materials.

The policy of the Government to sell nuclear materials requiring NOC include a list of specified substances, with full transparency and there is no ambiguity involved. Similarly the list of nuclear equipment has also been identified and any agency seeking these can place orders and only after assuring who be the End-Users, and for what purposes, the NOCs for export would be issued. Pakistan wants to share the facilities for productive and useful uses, as ensured in Eisenhower’s proclamation. The fear that it would promote proliferation regime, is baseless and unfounded. Actually, the reverse is true. Nations for want of hard currency dollar have been selling these in the global market through surreptitious means. “Nukes in brief cases”, available for acts of “terrorism” are frequently heard. The policy Pakistan has initiated, is a respectable way of the much needed foreign exchange, just as nations are embarking upon exporting Information Technology. Why nuclear technology can not be used for constructive enterprises, and also fetch money to get rid of economic hardships Pakistan is currently facing? It is indeed a very sagacious way to pay off debt which is an enormous burden on the national ‘psyche.’ Pakistan has a right to earn legitimate dollars.

Martin Luther King Jr., made a very apt observation. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but when he stands at times of challenge and controversy. What is true of a human, is also true of nations. Pakistan is passing through perilous times, which is essentially one of a challenge. The way out is what the Nuke advertisement has set forth to achieve.
Top


Indian Nuclear Intimidation - Grim Challenge and Rational Response
There is a Chinese adage: "It takes more that one cold day for a river to freeze three feet deep". Indian obsession to become nuclear power to be able to seek entry into the prestigious nuclear club as its sixth member, extends nearly over half a century, when Dr. Bhabha established the Indian Atomic Energy Commission in 1944, three years prior to gaining independence. Since then the spree with which it has gone to add nuclear prefix to its power preponderance in the region, is indeed phenomenal. The explosion of the device in 1974 camouflaged as the peaceful one, only depicts a typical mind-set of the Indian Congress to hoodwink the world by virtue - loaded words - like secularism, peace and non-alignment, but in essence, working for the fulfillment of the same dream - the revival of the past glory - the essential Hinduness of India. The present Bhartiya Janata Party Government (BJP) has only bluntly communicated the same through bang and not whimper - the explosion of three nuclear devices - low yield, fission and fusion - on the same day, 11th May 1998 and two on 13th May 1998 to complete the so-called series. The attempt seemingly is to clear the cloud of confusion and ambiguity and unequivocally assert that India has the full capability of making all types of nuclear weapons including tactical to be hurled by artillery guns; Hiroshima type atomic bomb and the most ferocious and devastating, in its kill capability - the hydrogen bomb.

To describe the blast effect, the first nuclear fission bomb, dropped on Heroshima, Japan in 1945, released energy equaling 15,000 tons (15 Kilotons) of chemical explosives from less than 130 pounds (60 kilograms) of uranium. Fusion bombs, on the other hand, have given yields upto almost 60 megatons (one megaton equal to one million tons). Fusion devices are inherently vastly more powerful than those utilizing only fission. The strongest opposition against proceeding with the hydrogen bomb programme came from the nuclear scientists chaired by Oppenheimer. In their report, they recommended strongly against initiating an all-out effort, believing "that extreme dangers to mankind inherent in the proposal wholly outweigh any military advantages that could come from this development". A Super bomb, they went on to say might become a weapon of genocide. Despite the consensus not to produce the Super bomb the US military minds prevailed to go ahead with the hydrogen bomb programme and President Truman gave a green signal for manufacturing various kinds of nuclear bombs including hydrogen bombs.

The-Truman-like callous sensibility and the triumph of the military mind, found its replay in the Indian strategic thinking resulting in the recent blasts, particularly taking the fact into account that a good number of retired Indian military higher-ups, who constitute the think-tank of the BJP, do reflect on avowedly Jingoistic Hindu spirit. Display of the nuclear power is the compulsion of the Indian psyche, irrespective of whichever government happens to be in the saddle of power. Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, projected otherwise as an apostle of peace, had very impatiently enquired from his nuclear mentor - Bhabha, around 1957 as to how soon he would be able to give the nuclear bomb to India. The gratifying answer was: "within two years", and eversince, every conceivable logistical support was provided towards this end. By now, over forty nuclear bombs are ready on the shelves, besides a vast quantum of fissile material (Platinum and Uranium), for instant manufacturing of these when required. Equipped with eight nuclear power reactors and a constant zeal to increase it further, reveals that India is out to become a mighty nuclear gargantuan and has practically gone berserk to fulfill this ambition.

This is evident from its establishment of elaborate research programmes - nearly forty five organizations wedded to the development of thermonuclear bombs and a whole array of missile systems. These are indeed mind boggling. No strategic mind can ever be convinced that these emanate from the need for security. It is only an attempt to rationalize a far deep-seated urge to dominate and be the successor to the British hegemony in the region. So over-powering is the urge that the reactions to the nuclear blasts, five in a span of forty eight hours-have found, by and large, approval from all the major political parties. The Congress supporters attribute this capability to the strategic vision of their stalwarts. The former Prime Minister Gujral said that India had proved that it was second to none in the area of high technology, and that the credit went to his government for the efforts to achieve this objective. The euphoria was also articulated by President Narayanan: "This event is a major break through in the realm of national security".

Why should India at this stage demonstrate its nuclear prowess, when no one ever doubted its scientific and technological capabilities. After all the massive testings of five types of missiles -developed by Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) including Trishul - the short range tripple-role missile, surface to surface, surface to air and with added use of the Navy, was fired on the same day when nuclear blasts were made. After all, missiles are nuclear delivery systems and what else?

The BJP government s decision to fulfill one of its major commitments of integrating nuclear weapons in its defence system, was the major prime-mover, for on this issue there was an overwhelming national consensus. It was thus a very shrewd way of stabilizing otherwise sinking political boat, under pulls and pressures from its coalition partners. Moreover, in the event the government collapsed and new elections had to be conducted, the BJP deemed it expedient that the dramatic impact of the explosions would serve as an insurance policy to come back with a massive mandate. The implicit message to the voters would be that, BJP was capable of implementing what it promised, and that its manifesto was not a sheer rhetoric or window-dressing.

There are other determinants which can not be brushed aside are:

a. India was finding it utterly difficult to suppress the freedom movement of the Kashmiris, despite massive induction of the armed forces. There were also reports of their soldiers getting demoralized, and discipline was hard to maintain. Failure to suppress the uprising had thus marked frustrating impact on the minds of the Indian leaders as well as the Army top-brass. The nuclear explosion, in a way was an attempt to rescue the sinking morale, and an over-compensatory mechanism as a manifest expression of excessive frustration due to failure of its policy in quelling the freedom struggle in Kashmir, exacerbated by accentuating fissiperous trends, in. practically every major province of India. In this context, one may mention a brilliant analysis made by John Bright, considered a great orator in the House of Commons in 1858. Incidentally, the book from which this extract is taken was presented to Beverly Nicholas by Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. "How long does England propose to govern India? Nobody can answer this question. But be it 50 or 100 or 500 years. Does any man with the smallest glimmering of common sense believe that so great a country, with its 20 different nationalities and its 20 different languages can ever be bounded up and consolidated into one compact and enduring empire confine. I believe such a thing to be utterly impossible".One only wonders,if nuclear power alone can really act as glue to weld the nation together? The Soviet experience does not lend support to this hypothesis. Viewed in this light one can interpret the display of nuclear might not as much an attempt to convince others as it is to convince oneself.

b. If India is pressurised to sign the CTBT when President Clinton visits the sub continent, it would do so with a position of strength - a fait- accompli situation - that it was at par with other five nuclear powers of the world. In other words a quid-pro-quo could be negotiated so that India finds a coveted seat in the Security Council and gains a prestigious nuclear power status.

c. Realising that USA has a strategic compulsion to contain China and also the so-called Islamic Fundamentalists in Iran and the region, India deems it wise to play its diplomatic cards dexterously so as to maximise the economic and military benefits. What was a minor border skirmish of a very short duration between China and India in 1962, has been cashed by India to its maximum.

d. Both Soviet Union and USA provided massive help to India to augment its power potential. There is also a historical legacy of USA s leaning towards India to counter the so called Chinese power and influence. Senator Hubert Humphrey, as far as back as 1964, had said that USA must make India "strong enough to exercise leadership in the area".When China detonated the atomic bomb in 1964, Chester Bowles made a solemn promise; 'a closer military alliance with United States could bring the entire nuclear power of the Seventh Fleet into frontier struggle on the side of India, and India would have not only the atomic bombs, but the much more devastating hydrogen bombs at her disposal in the Fleet arsenal of weapons . So markedly skewed was American pubic opinion in favour of India that New York Times and Washington Post even went to the extent of advocating the bizarre idea of confederation between India and Pakistan, linked by a joint defence over Kashmir.

e. It is therefore not without significance that just prior to the detonation of the nuclear bombs, Indian Defence Minister George Farnandes, out of the blue, came out with a startling revelation that China posed a great threat to India, when indications were totally to the contrary, as the ties of friendship and cooperation were being built between these two vital geopolitical actors of the region. Such statements were not spontaneous expressions but were calculated to extract a favourable dividend from USA.

f. On 2 April 1998, the government of Pakistan warned the five nuclear states and other friendly countries, that India was making preparations for the nuclear tests and therefore India must be restrained from taking such irresponsible step, but this warning fell on deaf ears. Pakistan therefore would now be fully justified to take necessary steps to safeguard its national security interests.

g. What lends credence to the above appraisal is that there could be a connivance and a tacit approval on the part of USA and that its sophisticated surveillance satellite system could not detect the preparations for detonating five nuclear devices. If at all, it is true, then it speaks very poorly of the US intelligence net-work, or could it be that all its vigilance is for Pakistan, because within no time sanction was imposed on Pakistan for test firing of Ghauri, on the whimsical plea that Pakistan acquired it through North Korea.

h. When Bill Richardson Ambassador of the US to the United Nations, visited India and Pakistan, he did not bring the question of Kashmir, which is the major irritant and the only impediment towards peace in the region. However he had the audacity to warn Pakistan, "not to be the perpetrator of terror in Kashmir". Knowing fully well if Kashmir issue were resolved, there would be no need for India to build even conventional weapons what to speak of nuclear ones.

j. Samuel Huntington, a master architect of civilizational conflict, paid a recent visit to India to lend intellectual support to Hindu chauvinism and vociferously pleaded for USA (as a Christian civilization leader) to have attitudinal harmony and understanding with Hindu civilization to jointly face the so called menace of Islamic Fundamentalism and its collaboration with Confucian civilization. It was indeed a very pernicious theme to build up a case for BJP, out to establish a monolithic Hindu culture in India.

k. Imposition of sanctions against India is being taken very lightly by the strategic analysts, as they seem to nourish an idea that USA will have to renege its decision in this respect as soon as India agrees to sign the CTBT. Russia and France have already sided with India on this issue. So a very vital strategic gain would be achieved by India to become a nuclear power and not encounter any international wrath or punishment on that account.

The situation as it emerges, is indeed very critical for Pakistan demanding "a meticulously calculated response, untempered by the least bit of reflexive impulsiveness and outrage". Apart from other considerations, the two main aspects of this response should be:

a. Prepare to carryout tests at a time of our choosing and demonstrate all range and variety of our nuclear capabilities. We have in our possession a credible nuclear deterrence, which shall remain our functional imperative.

b. Task the armed forces of Pakistan to provide material help and support to the freedom fighters in Kashmir and bring to an end the barbarity and the brutality being committed endlessly on the helpless people of Kashmir by the Indian occupation forces, while remaining prepared to fight an all-out war with India.

While remaining within the framework of the above two policy decisions, Pakistan has to weigh these options with prudence and not with passion. The following should be the vital considerations:

a. We have not been the initiators of the nuclear or the missile race. Rather, traditionally we have followed a policy of restraint, for building-up our defenses against India; After the nuclear detonation by India in 1974, Pakistan took almost fifteen years to establish the much needed deterrence and then in 1989, decided to restrain the programme. Similarly, Indian missile programme, initiated in early 80 s was matched in the late 90 s with the firing of the Ghauri missile. And now in the present situation, let us keep ambivalence, and workout a well calculated response, to ensure security to our all vital interests.

b. A policy of restraint, which we have followed so far, would pay dividends in that, we can test USA intentions and the response of other countries to punish India for their intransigence, while we can ask for the quid-pro-quo, mainly on two issues mainly: Firstly, in its own right Pakistan must be free to re-establish the nuclear power balance in the sub-continent, while India is made to pay the price for disturbing this balance. Secondly, the free world must come forward to solve the Kashmir problem, before it is too late.

c. Sizing the mood and temper of USA and its erstwhile supporters, who are out to gun for Pakistan at every opportune moment, our gain would not be commensurate with the losses that we would encounter and India would get the relief. In any case, rationality demands that irrational overtures of our adversary should not be paid back through similar irrationality.

d. The changed regional paradigm demands that, in order to ensure peace in the region and to contain the hegemonistic and expansionist ambitions of India, Pakistan should work towards establishing a nuclear power equation between nuclear capable states in the region China has to play its due role in maintaining the nuclear balance.

e. Nuclear deterrence has helped maintain peace in the sob-continent since 1971 like it did in Europe during the cold war period but it was experienced that deterrence being volatile and unstable has to give way to detente, which must be pursued with force, to achieve the objectives of peace.

India must be made to realise its folly and a world opinion be aggressively mobilized to see that the nuclear adventurists do not get away so easily, who threaten regional and global peace. One is reminded of John F. Kennedy, who once said: "The men who create power, make an indispensable contribution to the nation s greatness, but the men who question power make a contribution as indispensable."

The DAWN, May 21, 1998
Top

What entails Signing CTBT?
There is a Spanish adage: “Drink nothing without seeing it, sign nothing without reading it”, and one may add “accept nothing without understanding it”. Confucius rightly cautioned: “If a man takes no thought about what is distant, he will find sorrow near at hand.” CTBT is indeed not an easy matter to resolve as it has far reaching consequences for every individual of the country. Prudence, sagacity and caution are the pre-dispositional pre-requisites before exercising the excruciating choice.

Pakistan’s present predicament is awfully morbid and distressing. The economy is in distress, and life of ordinary citizen, due to spiraling prices of essential commodities, is miserable, to say the least. The Kashmir issue, in metaphoric sense is the bleeding wound, which has assumed cancerous proportions and the remedy is no where in sight, due to the obduracy of the Indian mind, fed on excessive military prowess. In the neighbouring Afghanistan, due to the excessive meddling of foreign powers, the situation has turned much too complicated and frightening. Added to the overall geopolitical dread, is the surreptitious design to degrade Pakistan’s nuclear capability and limit it to a point where it ceases to fulfill its deterrent objective. The pressure to ink signature on CTBT, therefore, is increasingly mounting. What must Pakistan do, requires a dispassionate appraisal..

India made nuclear adventure in 1974, by exploding a device, euphemistically terming it for “peaceful” purposes, which in turn, disturbed the power equilibrium of South Asia. It undoubtedly goes to the sagacity of late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who in the supreme interest of the country, resolved to restore the imbalance: “If India builds the bomb, we will get one of our own, we have no alternative.” He further elaborated: “It would be dangerous to plan for less ... our plans should, therefore include nuclear deterrent.”

Within a span of twelve years, Pakistan, through relentless efforts, acquired the requisite nuclear capability. In 1989, when Benazir Bhutto was the Prime Minister, a strategic decision of far reaching consequence was made. The policy of “Nuclear Restraint” was adopted, based on the rational assessment that Pakistan had achieved the objectives of the nuclear programme which late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had set for Pakistan in 1975 and that there was no need for Pakistan to stockpile fissile material. Therefore, the measured decision was taken by the Nuclear Command Authority (NCA) in 1979, contained the following elements:

· Enrichment of the fissile material, to be brought down to 3% and below.
· A low level, non-weaponised minimum credible deterrence to be maintained.
· Ban on nuclear tests to continue.
· Ban on export of nuclear material and technology to continue.
· First use option will be retained as an essential element of deterrence.

This historic decision was not made under duress, or due to limitations. It was a volitional act based on objective assessment of our strategic options. This policy was religiously adhered to until India once again made display of its overt nuclear power status, through a second blast in 1998. Pakistan was left with no option, but to establish the patent reality that its nuclear capability was not a bluff, and consequently a counter blast was an apt reply.

As for signing of CTBT was concerned, Pakistan had nothing to worry about, as its ‘Policy of Restraint’ had symbiotic relationship with the objectives contained in the CTBT. Pakistan could have signed it, as it would have make no material difference. It would only tantamount to formal declaration of its policy of “strategic restraint” it had voluntarily adopted in 1989 and was subsequently vindicated in 1998. All apprehensions about CTBT, therefore were ill founded, because:

· CTBT is not targeted to the roll back of our nuclear programme.
· It does not entitle foreign agencies to inspect our nuclear installations, and that our freedom in this respect would be maintained.
· There is no discriminative clause in CTBT, and all nuclear nations would be treated at par.
· The inspection teams will inspect only that site, which would be earmarked for nuclear tests and that too not without our concurrence.

Now, the time to sign the CTBT has passed, because the situation has significantly changed after India’s atomic tests of 1998 and promulgation of its Nuclear Doctrine containing within it, the passion for nuclear power and transcending the weapons capability to a pathological obsession to adopt nuclearism in its “strategic culture”, thus drastically altering the South Asian nuclear power balance. The Indian Nuclear Doctrine, envisages the grand ambition to be the nuclear lord of the region and beyond. It is not difficult to follow India’s nuclear ambitions, as the strategic thinker Subrahmaniam makes it no secret: “None should expect India to negotiate away its significant capability against Pakistan’s possession of a couple of bombs which they dare not use.” Pakistan “dare not use” its nuclear capability nor India has the courage to use it either – a situation which precisely serves the purpose of nuclearance deterrence, which is the objective of our policy of Nuclear restraint. Pakistan has no desire to stockpile nuclear weapons, or missiles and enter into an armed race with India. Status quo is the answer

Under the present constraints Pakistan cannot embark upon clipping its nuclear wings. It has to dispassionately reason out its options and give a serious thought to restrain itself from signing the CTBT. Bhutto very explicitly stated: “If Pakistan restricts her nuclear advantage, [it would] impose a crippling limitation on the development of Pakistan.”

“One must not take down the fence, unless one took into consideration why was it raised”, said a wise man. This we must adhere to with respect to the nuclear fence, as well. The political fall out of compliance to signing the CTBT, would be incalculable, compounded by the existing frustration of the broad masses; political suffocation and radical forces looking for such an opportunity to ride the bandwagon.

Some one rightly said: “Every age needs men, who will redeem the time by living with a vision of things that are to be “. That vision is the imperative of the time.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Umrao » 21 Jan 2004 02:02

Why despair?

General Mirza Aslam Beg

The Islamic World is facing unprecedented aggression and injustice. Their struggle for liberation is labeled ‘terrorism’, and there is a systematic plan to annihilate them. Be it Chechniya, Palestine, Afghanistan or Iraq, their rightful upsurge for freedom is ruthlessly being crushed through state terrorism. Despondency looms large and Muslims are in a state of trepidation and fear. This is only one side of the story. The other side, if one sees with a discerning eye, the dawn of hope is bristling with light. It is the surging tide of their élan and vitality, energized through unflinching commitment to their faith and ‘iman’. The citadels of contemporary power and glory are tumbling and nothing seems to come in their way. The frustrations they have encountered over centuries are reversing to ensure their deliverance. It is an age of Islamic resurgence. It is a patent reality that there are fifty seven Islamic countries who have attained their freedom, whereas before the World War II there were only three sovereign Muslim states. It is a reality which the non-Muslim world finds difficult to gracefully accept. It is also true that whosoever sought to confront their emerging power, had to face humiliating defeat. Examples are:

· Iraq was induced to attack Iran through a covert encouragement at the behest of USA, Europe and Israel in the decade of 1980. After eight years of war, when Iran after crossing ‘Shat-ul-Arab’ was poised to move towards Basra by through the territory of “Fah”, Iraq committed the most outrageous and inhuman act of using chemical weapons against Iran, which were provided to it by the so called ‘civilized world’. Iran lost thousands of its soldiers and was constrained to accept the cease fire. But it attained moral victory. The revolution was consolidated and the imperial powers failed to achieve their nefarious objectives.

· Soviet Union launched aggression against Afghanistan in the decade of 1980. USA sought the support of the Jehadis. They were organized and given military training, which turned to be the 20th century’s fiercest covert war, which was fought so overtly. After eight years of deadly encounter the aggressor was routed and as a consequence, the Soviet Union got dismantled. After the defeat of the rival super power, USA abandoned the Afghan Jehadis as it was deemed expedient not to transfer power to the valiant freedom fighters.
In the beginning of 21st century USA launched aggression on Afghanistan and Iraq to avenge the 9/11 act of terrorism, and by occupying the power centers of Islam, sought to dilute the spirit of jihad and install puppet governments which would ensure their monopoly and control over the rich reservoirs of oil, thereby protecting the interest of USA and Israel. But soon the chapter of defiance and resistance has taken a turn which seems to undermine the military power of USA, thereby rendering their plans and objectives to a naught. USA appears totally disenchanted and is desperately seeking escape route to get out of the quagmire, but the road is nowhere visible.

During the last three decades the Islamic power has humbled two super powers and the arrogance and pride of Europe and Israel are on the wane. Where lies the nucleus of Islamic power? From where are these Jihadis pouring in numbers? What is the estimate of their size? George Tenet, the CIA Director answers these questions. He says: that thousands of Mujahideen took part in the liberation struggle against Soviet Union, we (the Americans) trained them, equipped them with weapons to be pitted against the Soviet forces, which ultimately faced defeat. Thereafter these Mujahideen returned to their homes and their number was around sixty thousands or more, but it is increasing every day. This is the power which constitutes the “global resistance force” fighting in Chechniya, Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan and Iraq, to liberate the people from dominance and usurpation. They are the torch bearers of their lofty tradition to fight for dignity and freedom. They are the men of Allah, utterly unknown, whom USA used as “mercenaries’. But these are the very people who are hard to subdue and be conquered by the mightiest military power – USA and its allies.

The force of resistance of the Islamic World has grown out of the confrontation with Soviet Union and now USA. This unimpregnable force emanates from wherever the Muslims reside. What is the source of their inspiration and who guides them to surmount enormous difficulties that they encounter in their fight of righteousness against the evil. Who sustains their ‘will’ against such enormous Super Power? The source is Allah which the west finds beyond their comprehension and does not want to reconcile with. The miracle nevertheless is very perceptible. Muslims are rising out of the debris of decay and deprivations and scaling incredible heights. The western sensibility is out to malign it as terrorism, defying the norms of rationality and realistic appraisal of the situation. In short it is reluctance to accept their defeat. They are only chasing the shadows, and have lost the sense of direction. It is time that they concede to the reality and recognize the Islamic resurgence as a fact of life. It is outright distortion to call it “Clash of Civilizations”. It is too pretentious to claim that Western civilization has reached its apex. Human struggle to reform socio-economic order is a recurrent phenomenon. Islamic World is finding its rightful place in the global order. The struggle for independence cannot be construed as civilizational conflict, nor these are acts of terrorism. Such semantic distortions tend to conceal the dignity and the rightful aspirations of the people. Failure to accept it only adds to the chaos that prevails in the world.

What would be the shape of things in the coming future as a consequence of the Islamic force fighting for its dignity and right against the forces of oppression, is indeed hard to predict. But the war of liberation in Afghanistan is no different from the wars that are being waged in Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir and Chechniya. The Afghan resistance movement has a latent message to convey, which symbolizes their resolve and commitment. “We shall continue our struggle for independence till such time that the aggression is reversed. When the war was launched against us, we purposefully retreated but now we are regrouping to mount an all out retaliation, which is our inalienable right. We are not nations like Germany and Japan who surrendered and accepted to barter their freedom for Marshal and MacArthur plans for the reconstruction of their countries. If we accept the designs of the occupation forces, it would tantamount to loosing our freedom, which is against the Afghan ethos and sense of dignity. We shall build a new future by correcting our past mistakes and invite all people of Afghanistan under one banner.” This, in essence, constitutes the power of their faith. Afghanistan shall be liberated by the will of Allah and nothing shall deter Afghans from accomplishing their cherished objective.

The unjust and unwarranted war in Afghanistan and Iraq has destroyed all the infrastructure and administrative institutions, typical of a revolution. The reconstruction cannot be done by the occupation forces. Only the people of Afghanistan and Iraq can accomplish it. They are resolutely committed to their independence. Terrorism no doubt has emerged, which is different from the war of liberation. The cause of terrorism lies in the discriminatory acts of the so called civilized world, which has dismantled all the norms of propriety and justice. Osama bin Laden was a symbol of resistance against the then Soviet Union. He was a part of jihad but when the Soviet Union met its Waterloo he was put in the category of miscreants and terrorists. Osama under went a great psychological torture as his citizenship along with his associates was canceled by Saudi Arabia. They were suddenly transformed into being non-citizens of the world.
This blatant injustice turned into revenge. The same was true of Afghanis who became outcast after their heroic struggle against the Soviet Union. 9/11 tragic episode is a manifestation of the blatant discrimination. Terrorism no doubt is condemnable, but it is mainly due to failure to see the difference between war of liberation and wanton acts of killing and destruction.

Seeing with cursory eye the Muslim World is thoroughly disenchanted and undergoing enormous hardships and sufferings. There is no sense of direction, nor their voice is being heard. Under the excruciating predicament Allah provides the message of “La-Taqnatoo” – Do not despair. Muslim world is energized with this conviction and it shall build its own destiny.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 25 Dec 2003

Postby Umrao » 21 Jan 2004 02:09

http://www.subcontinent.com/sapra/military/m_1998_03_01.html

http://www.twf.org/Library/WOI/genbeg.pdf

****
Read the first para carefully
**
Pakistan helped US in Afghan air strikes: Beg
ISLAMABAD (NNI, August 24,1998): Former Army Chief General Mirza Aslam Beg Sunday accused Nawaz Sharif government of assisting US missile attack in Afghanistan and disclosed that a day before attack he had personally warned the Afghan leaders about an imminent US attack.

"It is impossible to bomb specific targets without the cooperation of the incumbent Pakistani government," Beg told NNI in an exclusive interview rejecting government's statement that it had no role in US attack in Afghanistan. He said he had advised the "people in Kabul" not to communicate with Osama on wireless sets or phones" as the US satellites could easily track Osama's location by picking up the communication signals.

Beg currently heads Awami Qiyadat Party (AQP) which has formed an alliance with opposition parties outside the parliament.

Saying that the Cruise missiles fired from the American fleet in Arabian Sea violated Pakistan air space of 1200 kilometers, Beg described as unfortunate, what he said American spy-plane, P-3 Orion, flying over Pakistan and providing 'Mid-Course Guidance' to the Cruise Missiles.

"If Nawaz Sharif claims that his government had not allowed its soil for US strikes, they how the Toma Hawk missile were guided to hit the specific targets in Afghanistan's mountainous area," he questioned. The Toma Hawk missile, he said, has the range of 1600 kilometers and can carry conventional and nuclear warheads. One Cruise missile can drop about six bombs.

He disclosed that according to his information an American spying team was allowed to use Pakistani soil to identify Osama Bin Laden's bases and provide "Terminal Guidance" to American Cruise Missiles to reach their targets. He said members of the American spying team also visited the southern Afghan town of Khost to identify these targets.

The former Army Chief however said there was "a general impression" that President Clinton gave prior information to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif so that Pakistani leaders should not be disturbed by the operation to kill Osama.

He referred to the reports that Osama Bin Laden was planning to reach the bombed place for having dinner there "but by the grace of Allah Almighty he could not reach the camp."

Accusing the government of bartering national interests Aslam Beg pointed out that a minister had been telling the nation about an imminent 'good news'. "Now the rulers have taken a sigh of relief that they have strengthened their chair," he said.

He said the US administration has offered thanks to the rulers on Pakistan's cooperation. "The people at the helms of affairs should tell the nation as to what kind of assistance was extended to the United States which prompted President Clinton and State Department to thank Pakistan," he wondered.

Asked about his interview with a Pushto language newspaper one day before the American attack in which he predicted the attack, Aslam Beg said there were irrefutable indications that the Americans were planning to launch attack.

"I told some people in Kabul to be aware of the looming attack on Afghanistan. I apprised them of the American spying team and suggested them not to use wireless and other communication facilities with Osama Bin laden as it could be picked by the spies," he said.

He said that Chechan leader Ahmed Dawkhar Dedayev was killed in bombing after Russian traced his hideout while he was communicating with his colleague.

He said the Prime Minister, Foreign Office and ministers are now misleading the nation that they did not cooperate with the Americans in air strikes but he said now they can no more make fool the masses. "Time has come for the people to reject those politicians who believe in give and take while bartering national interests," he said.


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests