Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

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

Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 12 Feb 2004 03:37

All,

Please use this thread for news and views on Pakistani nuclear proliferation and related matters.

Thanks

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby kgoan » 12 Feb 2004 03:46

R, check the CEIP site, http://www.ceip.org/

They used to have pdf files with maps showing locations of Pak (and Indian) nuke sites etc.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 03:56

Retirement revelations
Sir: Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan should now spend his time writing his memoirs...

In his memoirs, Dr Qadeer may explain many things. Here are some possible titles that Dr Qadeer may consider for his book: “Nuclear bombs for all,” “The Bomb makes good money,” “Nukes for the poor,” and “Nukes, anybody?”
*******
Lahore
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_12-2-2004_pg3_8

Manu
BRFite
Posts: 765
Joined: 28 May 2003 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Manu » 12 Feb 2004 03:57

From my Beloved News Source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/3473117.stmz

Pakistan's nuclear confession

By Humphrey Hawksley
BBC correspondent, Delhi

Last year, amid the hot smells of a Delhi summer, a mixture of market spices and uncollected rubbish , I squeezed through a queue of shoppers outside a paint-peeling tenement block.

After Dr Khan's confession, I called a Pentagon friend in America. He seemed frustrated with the view of the world from this side of the Atlantic.

"You anti-war Europeans still don't get what is going on," he said. "We hit Iraq to show we could and we would. Then we got Libya to come round and disarm. That gave us the hard evidence of what Pakistan was doing. We are talking to Iran and an American delegation was at the North Korean nuclear facility last month. When all this is over, believe me, we will all be sleeping more peacefully in our beds at night."

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54781
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby ramana » 12 Feb 2004 04:04

We should summarize what is now known about the TSP program from all these revelations. Otherwise collecting all these prolif tamasha is just that. What does all this mean to India and then the rest of the world?

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 12 Feb 2004 04:09

Can someone please give a quick tutorial on TSP's efforts to acquire plutonium as a nuclear bomb fuel?

I know it started with the aborted Chashma deal with the French and now they have it thanks to China, but can someone list out the various steps in the middle?

Also, can someone point me to any open source on TSP's "posession" of a plutonium implosion device?

Thanks

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby SaiK » 12 Feb 2004 04:17

A pattern that does exists and will exists atleast in the near future..

Any super-power, acts for his own policies and interests. He always is the master. Even, under the guidelines of "global rules", he stands and would like to stand that way to say things la king of the jungle type.

I think, India should learn from this, its karmic type of stances are great! but does not cause any ripples outside our boundaries.

What is happening between pakistan and USA, is really very bad for the world. USA, cannot be taking them to be allies after all these. I am not saying by any prejudice.. or saying with the same counter-bias as USA has for pakistan.

same story, cold-war friends are die-hards now. They can't relinquish old relationships at all. It would be insane on our part to think, that USA must punish pakistan for all bad deeds. Never this would happen in the near future [my feelings]... going just by the behavior of pakistan would never change, it would sustain in cheating the civilized world forever to come. That means, USA will ever be cheated and played with, and never they can say anything bad against pakistan.

We need to look things in a way, perhaps a positive way like chinese do in tie-ing up with this economic giant super power for our gains, rather to wait for opportunities or try to expect anything to happen based on our call to set up relationships with our enemies.

The problem can never seize to exists. Unless, we can cleanly separate or build huge walls. or, we accept whatever our enemy does!

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby svinayak » 12 Feb 2004 04:21

Pakistan will share findings of N-probe with Japan: Musharraf

Staff Report

ISLAMABAD: President General Pervez Musharraf on Wednesday said Pakistan would share with Japan the results of its internal investigations on any illegal transfers to North Korea when the investigations were completed.

“It was inconceivable that Pakistan would do anything that would affect peace and security of North-East Asia and especially of Japan,” the president was quoted as saying while talking to Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister Ichiro Fujisaki who called on him.

The president told the Japanese deputy foreign minister that investigations into “illicit transfer of nuclear know-how” to North Korea had not yet concluded. “Pakistan respected Japanese concerns about the dangers of nuclearisation of the Korean peninsula,” President Musharraf said.

He said that as a responsible nuclear weapons state Pakistan was committed to nuclear non-proliferation. “Pakistan had taken effective steps to safeguard its nuclear assets and facilities which were now under the National Command Authority (NCA),” the president said.

He said reports of collusion between a few scientists with the global nuclear underworld were being investigated. “As a responsible state committed to non-proliferation, Pakistan had exposed the complicity of a few individuals with the unclear black market and was taking appropriate action against them.”

Mr Fujisaki conveyed greetings and good wishes from Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the president and exchanged views on bilateral and regional issues as well as on matters relating to nuclear non-proliferation. President Musharraf reciprocated the greetings from the Japanese prime minister and thanked Japan for providing economic and technical assistance to Pakistan. He also detailed Pakistan’s perspective on promotion peace and security in South Asia and the Middle East and stability in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Japanese deputy foreign minister praised efforts by the president and Government of Pakistan to promote peace with India and regional cooperation in South Asia.

The Japanese minister is visiting Islamabad for a high level Economic Policy Dialogue, the initiation of which was agreed upon during President Musharraf’s visit to Tokyo in March 2002.

-


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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 04:29

Okay, we good Pakis are now part of the solution. So says a furiously spinnin' and lyin' Zehra:

Nuclear Pakistan now a partner in counter-proliferation :roll: no Pakistani source has been responsible in actually enabling a country to acquire a bomb. Also no sub-state actor has been able to acquire technology through this third unsuccessful wave of proliferation.

The international community’s accountability thrust for Pakistan is not headed in a punitive direction, instead in a cooperation-seeking direction.
[/quote]http://jang.com.pk/thenews/feb2004-daily/12-02-2004/oped/o1.htm

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 04:52

Editorial. Investor's Business Daily.

Nuclear Nightmare
http://www.investors.com/editorial/issues.asp?v=2/11

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby svinayak » 12 Feb 2004 05:04

Op-ed: Courting disaster —I M Mohsin

While the fire-fighting by the regime has been customary, the potential for mischief against Pakistan remains substantial. General Musharraf, so far, has adopted the carrot and stick policy to run the country

These are dangerous times. A hard-hitting US media campaign against Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation has caught every one’s attention. The campaign casts serious aspersions on our country which the administration has wilfully been sweeping under the carpet.

Washington Post asserts, “Now the administration must confront the reality that Pakistan’s military leadership has done more to threaten US and global security with weapons of mass destruction than either al Qaeda or Saddam Hussein. Were Pakistan not a professed ally of the United States, its behavior would meet the criteria for preemptive military intervention outlined in Mr Bush’s national security strategy”. The very next day in another editorial the newspaper concluded, “Perhaps there is no alternative to a relationship with the general”. The New York Times was not far behind when it commented that, “Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s military ruler, has a history of strong declarations, followed by weak and contradictory actions”.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s January report was critical of the US decision to invade Iraq. This has muddied the waters considerably. The US is in the grip of the primary season and the Democrats are training their guns at George Bush. Lately, Gore has charged the president with betrayal and promoting the culture of fear to win the next election. The crisis was aggravated by the statements of David Kay who admitted that the intelligence community was ‘wrong’ about Iraqi WMD. The administration’s position is also constrained by the lack of proper progress by the 9/11 Commission. It wants to buy time, the Democrats allege, so that the electorate can be bamboozled with ‘orange alerts, cancelled flights and other scares’.

Traditionally, Americans are a good people who tend to be quite naïve. They favour the incumbent whenever there is an emergency. The Republicans are counting on this to return to the White House. Generally, the mood in the US is quite reflective, due to job losses, tax-cuts, healthcare and what Gore calls an ‘ill-conceived’ war in Iraq which was ‘preordained and planned before 9/11’.

Former Secretary Treasury O Neil has also corroborated this version in his book The Price of Loyalty. With the American soldiers dying regularly and the cost of occupation going up, the administration’s claim to success in Iraq sounds unconvincing.

Dr A Q Khan’s appearance on television, followed by the official statements, indicate two things. First, Pakistan did not do anything illegal because, like India, it is not a signatory to NPT/CTBT. Second, it would be morally reprehensible for any country to proliferate fissile material. However, discretion demands that Pakistan should conform to the general standards of nuclear security despite the apartheid being practised in this field. As such Dr Khan acted honourably in assuming personal responsibility for whatever happened.

While the fire-fighting by the regime has been customary, the potential for mischief against Pakistan remains substantial. General Musharraf, so far, has adopted the carrot and stick policy to run the country, showing contempt for the people. The army is running the country. Such a situation does not auger well for us. It is an albatross around Pakistan’ neck which stigmatises us internationally besides aggravating the civil-military divide. The charade of democracy fools no one.

Pakistanis must wake up to the new realities before it is too late. With such political instability, foreign investment will not flow in. In fact there is a risk of Pakistan being denied foreign aid. This will threaten our economic viability. Already poverty is growing rapidly.

Our home scene is bedevilled by contradictions. Under the 1973 Constitution, Pakistan is a parliamentary democracy where authority is supposed to be exercised by the people’s representatives through a prime minister responsible to a sovereign parliament. But in violation of the constitution, the COAS has become president without being directly elected and the parliament is virtually sidelined.

While civil society, including the major political parties commanding more than 50 per cent of vote, are against such a set up, General Pervez Musharraf hangs on. The fact that he is supported by George Bush helps prolong his rule. If we have to salvage our position, General Musharraf should quit one of the two offices he holds. That will ensure the autonomy of the army. It may also rehabilitate its image.

Right now we are being brutalised by a one-man rule. Threats looming on the horizon demand that we should have a genuinely representative government. Fresh elections should be held, duly overseen by multilateral organisations, to ensure that they are fair and authentic. The sovereign parliament should elect a president through an election as laid down in the constitution. If General Pervez Musharraf is elected president through these elections, so be it. Alternately, a national government should be set up to heal the national wounds and bridge the civil-military divide. It should restore power to the people. Only then can we face the coming challenges and join the comity of nations as a free people.

The writer is a former Secretary Interior. He can be reached at Imnor@brain.net.pk

-

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 05:15

R., you are right. They stuffed that article into the archive soon after I posted that link. It is not a very strong edit, unfortunately. Here is the text:

Investor's Business Daily
February 11, 2004 Wednesday
HEADLINE: Nuclear Nightmare
WMDs: Pakistan's top nuclear scientist admits he was shopping nuclear weapons around to terrorist states. Americans better note this clear and present danger.

It's now quite clear that there was an active black market for nuclear weapons headed by Pakistan's Abdul Qadeer Khan, the so-called father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb.

Just last week, after a three-month investigation by Pakistan's government, Khan admitted he had leaked nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. And a senior U.S. official, speaking to the Washington Post, revealed further "mind-boggling" evidence that Khan had also tried to sell nukes to Iraq and Syria.

Khan's mysterious activities make for scary reading. Because, if true, they indicate that some very unsavory characters may now have the blueprints for making a workable nuclear device.

What's worse, the nuclear cancer seems to be metastasizing across the Mideast. A separate report this week suggests that al-Qaida may have nukes. The London-based Arabic-language Al-Hayat, quoting "sources close to al-Qaida," claims the terror group acquired nuclear weapons from the Ukraine, once part of the USSR.

The latter accusation can't be proved yet. But if confirmed, it would be the single most frightening development in the war on terror -- one that would require a significant response from the U.S.

Still more worrisome is that the proliferation seems to have been going on since at least 1998. That means U.S. intelligence missed another threat. Or that it knew about it, but kept mum.

It also underscores how real the threat of weapons of mass destruction -- whether in Iraq or elsewhere -- really is. We don't want to be alarmist, but it doesn't take much to imagine the threat.

Let's just take one possible scenario: Rogue groups like al-Qaida may have nukes. Meanwhile, a report this week says the U.S. government thinks hundreds of terrorists trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan have come to the U.S. to activate "sleeper cells" here.

You get the picture. And it isn't very pretty. Terrorists on the loose in America, possibly with suitcase-sized nuclear bombs.

That's why we're more than a little perplexed over the debate about Iraq, WMDs and the Mideast. Yes, U.S. intelligence in Iraq should be probed -- if only to make sure we get it right next time.

But that doesn't alter the rationale for our actions in the Mideast one bit. And while debate over the war on terror and WMDs is needed, at some point we have to recognize what faces us: A long war with a foe utterly committed to our complete destruction.

That threat, sad to say, is real. That we haven't been hit with a second cataclysmic terror attack may just be a matter of luck. Or time.

That's why we're happy to see President Bush will soon unveil a sweeping plan to promote democracy in the "greater Middle East."

His plan will seek to get U.S. allies on board to create stable, functioning democracies in the region -- in place of the autocratic, terror-coddling medieval regimes that rule there now.

We've already replaced very bad regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq with much better ones. They're far less likely to aid or support terrorists, as both Saddam Hussein and the Taliban did.

But another 20 nondemocratic nations in the Mideast have also supported terrorism. They include Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Like it or not, we'll also have to deal with them -- either as friendly democracies, or as deadly threats.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Johann » 12 Feb 2004 05:18

Some had asked on the other thread why Libya, Iran and N.Korea were co-operating, besides the fear of American or Israeli force and international isolation.

AQ Khan provided centrifuge expertise and a procurement network to create an enrichment capability, and even weapon designs.

Thats very useful, but at the end of the day all three countries still each need a considerable amount of uranium to enrich in their cascades.

Unlike Pakistan, neither Libya nor Iran, nor the DPRK have uranium mines. Iran appears to have deposits, but is some way off from extracting and processing what it needs.

These countries may not have been able to secure a reliable and discreet source of ore, yellowcake or LEU to produce useful amounts of weapons grade material in a reasonable timescale.

Which in turn suggests that the kind of proliferation the Chinese were willing to engage in may have changed from the 1980s when they secretly sold to Brazil and South Africa.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby svinayak » 12 Feb 2004 05:40

Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan

The hero of Pakistan's nuclear weapons capability was born in present day India, in Bhopal State, in 1936 - the son of a teacher in a family of modest means. For five years, between the 1947 establishment of India as an independent state and 1952, Khan was a citizen of India. Then the Muslim Khan immigrated to Pakistan with his family as did millions of other Muslims before and after the 1947 partition of the two states. After graduating from school in Karachi he went to Europe in 1961 to continue his studies. First in Germany he attended the Technische Universität of West Berlin, then in Holland where he received a degree in metallurgical engineering at the Technical University of Delft in 1967. Eventually Khan received a Ph.D. in metallurgy from the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium in 1972.

Since Khan had lived in Europe from 1961 on and was married to a Dutch national (as the Dutch security service BVD believed) the very personable Khan had little trouble getting a security clearance - a limited security clearance. Curiously Khan's wife Henny was not Dutch though, but a Dutch-speaking South African holding a British passport.

Despite the secrecy and security, Khan has taken the public spotlight on numerous occasions, attracting some criticism for seeking publicity in contrast to his more discrete counterpart in India, Abdul Kalam.

It was on such an occasion - an interview in February 1984 - that he first made the claim that Pakistan had achieved nuclear weapons capability.

And when the 1986-87 Exercise Brasstacks crisis was at its height on 28 January 1987 - an outbreak of warfare between India and Pakistan seemed imminent due to a confrontation over military exercises near the border - A.Q. Khan made threatening remarks regarding Pakistani nuclear retaliation to Indian journalist Kuldip Nayar, apparently intending that they be conveyed to the Indian government. Nayar however shopped the story around for a few weeks, and it was not published until 1 March, after the matter had been resolved. Nonetheless it left a lingering sense of nuclear threat with India.

Khan's public pronouncements also helped generate the tense atmosphere in which India's 1998 nuclear tests were conducted. In an inauspiciously timed visit, Bill Richardson led a high level U.S. delegation that visited New Delhi and then Pakistan on 15 April. During the visit Khan, told the Urdu daily Ausaf "We are ready to carry out nuclear explosion anytime and the day this political decision will be made, we will show the world," during an informal chat with journalists.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Calvin » 12 Feb 2004 06:40

Folks: Bush's speech is not a positive development, not censuring Pakistan and holding significant pitfalls and intrusiveness in the Additional Protocol. The intrusiveness required flies in the face of the glide path.

RajeshG
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 29 Mar 2003 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby RajeshG » 12 Feb 2004 06:42

[url=http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?player=realplayer&type=v&quality=high&reposid=/multimedia/tds/headlines/8097.html">link</a>

courtesy sulekha newshopper

<a href="http://www.sulekha.com/hoppercomments.asp?cid=326843]http://www.sulekha.com/hoppercomments.asp?cid=326843[/url]

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4836
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby vijayk » 12 Feb 2004 07:31

Originally posted by jrjrao:
[b]Retirement revelations
Sir: Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan should now spend his time writing his memoirs...

In his memoirs, Dr Qadeer may explain many things. Here are some possible titles that Dr Qadeer may consider for his book: “Nuclear bombs for all,” “The Bomb makes good money,” “Nukes for the poor,” and “Nukes, anybody?”
*******
Lahore
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_12-2-2004_pg3_8[/b]
I got a couple of ideas for Khan....

Nukes for Dummies
Duke it with Nukes..

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Calvin » 12 Feb 2004 08:10

Repost from other thread with additional notes:

11/2000 - US issues proliferation concern regarding KRL

3/2003 - US Sanctions on KRL

5/2003 - Armitage visits to discuss sanctions on KRL

6/24/2003 - Musharraf meets Bush at Camp David.
6/2003 - Addressing a public rally while Musharraf is at Camp David, Gen. Aziz Khan says that people in uniform 'should not play politics'. Describes the US as the “no. 1 enemy of the Muslim world”. Goes on to say that resolving Kashmir would not lead to peace between India and Pakistan. ISPR attempts to supress the story, which is reported in the Washington Times.

7/2003 - Fazlur Rehman visits India.

8/2003: Musharraf's ceasefire proposal rejected by the Indian government.
8/2003: Laloo Prasad Yadav visits Pakistan
8/29 - Pakistan states no link with Iran program

10/1 - Armitage criticizes Pak support for resurget Taliban (in DC)
10/2 - Jamali meets Bush at DC
10/3 - Hatf III tested
10/4 - Two days earlier on the 4th of October, German charter freighter BBC China destined for Tripoli with an unlisted cargo of centrifuge parts loaded in Dubai was diverted to the Italian naval base of Taranto with the co-operation of the owners. The intelligence for the operation became available to the UK and US in September. The components had been acquired through AQ Khan's procurement network of international fixers, in this case largely from Malaysia, via a Muslim Sri Lankan middleman in Dubai.
10/5 - Pakistan launches "offensive" against Taliban
10/6 - Abizaid, Rocca and Armitage visit Musharraf (Army House), Provide CIA documents on AQK links to Iran/Libya
10/6 - Azam Tariq is gunned down
10/6 - Azam Tariq and 4 companions assassinated in his car in Islamabad. Some 70 protestors attempt to storm ISI headquarters but are turned away by SSG troops.
10/8 - Pakistan tests Shaheen I
10/8 - Pakistan launches "crackdown" on Zalikhel-Qarikhel tribe in South Waziristan
10/14 - Ariel Sharon declares once again that Libya may become the first Arab country to build the bomb, with the help of North Korea and Pakistan. Unlike his statements in September 2002, Iraq’s name is absent from the list of those providing assistance to Libya, and there is much greater certainty over Pakistan’s involvement.
10/15 - Hatf IV tested
10/16 - US declares Dawood Ibrahim a terrorist based in Pakistan
10/18 - Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah visits
10/18 - Borchgrave warns of Pak Nukes being moved to Saudi
10/18 - Pak-China naval exercise in Shanghai
10/20 - ARD President Javed Hashmi convenes a press conference to release a letter written by dissident PA officers. Army leadership is described as corrupt and incompetent, and Musharraf as a traitor to the cause of Islam for his assistance to the Coalition in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The letter urges parliamentarians to seek greater accountability for Kargil and other matters. Hashmi is arrested a week later.
10/20 - ACM Kareem Sadaat visits China for 7 day visit
10/22 - Jamali visits Iran reaches agreement on "defence cooperation" with Khatami
10/22 - India announces 12-step CBMs
10/22 - Indo-China border meeting in New Delhi
10/23 - Pakistan and Turkey reach agreement on "defence production"
10/29 - Javed Hashmi arrested
10/30 - Saudis announce extension of $1 billion "oil facility"
10/31 - Musharraf visits China

11/3 - Pak-China sign defense agreement.
11/5 - 5-6 NOV 2003: Pakistani Education Minister Zubaida Jalal visits Washington DC to meet NSA Rice, Dty Sec Def Wolfowitz, Asst. Sec State for South Asian Affairs Rocca and senior members of Congress to discuss reform and control of Pakistani madrassas.
11/5 - Dawood reportedly moves from Karachi to Islamabad following US tag of "global terrorist"
11/6 - Pakistan protests bugging of HC in London
11/8 - Iranian delegation led by a deputy foreign minister, Gholam Ali Khoshru, arrived in Islamabad, use "careful formulation" to say they had acquired components and designs in '87 from the black market -- they mentioned Dubai -- and said two of the individuals involved were of South Asian origin, though not from the same country. They hinted they were under scrutiny from the IAEA and would have to make these declarations" about who had supplied the technology. - One South Asian is Tahir (Sri Lankan), is the other AQK?
11/13 - Iran admits to enriched uranium
11/13 - Centcom chief Gen. Lance Smith calls on Musharraf.
11/14 - Pak says agrees with new US "strategy" on terrorism
11/15 - Pak receives CIA report on proliferation
11/16 - Pak re-bans 3 terrorist groups
11/20 - IAEA letter to Pakistan on proliferation
11/2? - Pak team visits Vienna (IAEA)
11/? - Pak team visits Iran
11/24 - Ceasefire offer

12/3 - Banned terror groups bank accounts frozen
12/6 - First four nuke scientists debriefed
12/8 - US launches "Operation Avalanche" in Afghanistan
12/8 - Amir Mir (journo) that broke the D-Company operations in Karachi warned, finds car burnt down by ISI agents.
12/13 - Assassination Attempt on Musharraf
12/13 - Saddam Captured
12/16 - Bhutan launches operations against ULFA
12/19 - Libya owns up to Nuke Program
12/22 - AQK is questioned for the first time
12/26 - Assassination Attempt on Musharraf (Real one?)

1/1 - Asher Karni arrested at Denver for selling 400 spark gaps to Pakistan - nuclear triggers also used in medical equipment
1/1 - Parliament Endorses Musharraf's presidency
1/4 - SAARC Summit ends
1/6 - India/Pak Agreement for dialogue
1/6 - US says Musharraf not involved in Libyan nukes
1/8 - Pak launches "offensive" on Afghan border
1/12 - Brajesh in China for Border Talks
1/13 - Bush announces strategic ties with India
1/13 - Hurriyat invited for talks on 1/22
1/17 - Top Hizb commander killed in JK
1/17 - Eight more nuke scientists to be debriefed
1/18 - Gorshkov deal signed
1/21 - Sinha meets Bush, Powell discuss next steps on strategic path
1/21 - Powell says Musharraf is taking "right steps"
1/22 - Hurriyat agrees to a "durable" solution
1/23 - Musharraf meets Cheney at Davos "we will act over nukes"
1/24 - David Kay replaced
1/26 - New Afghan Constitution is signed into law
1/28 - US plans for "spring offensive" publicized
1/29 - GHQ to be shifted to Islamabad
1/29 - AA missiles around Islamabad noted
1/29 - Pakistan Joint Chiefs meet
1/31 - AQK removed

2/1 - AQK admits guilt
2/5 - Tenet admits intel lapses in Iraq
2/5 - Musharraf pardon's AQK
2/6 - Kamran Khan discloses that CIA report was provided in October by US, revealing that profits from sales went back to Pakistani Authorities
2/8 - Musharraf says AQK can keep his money.
2/8 - Musharraf talks to Powell, Powell to visit Pak soon.
2/8 - Brajesh and Kasuri in Munich
2/8 - NYT says Pak weapons are implosion type similar to Nagasaki weapon - implies Pu device
2/8 - US says that Pak nukes under US Liaison Committee control, including launch codes and PALs.
2/9 - Pak says AQK not given "blanket" pardon - probably result of Powell conversation.
2/11 - Bush announces his policy against WMD.
2/11 - CIA team including Tenet in "Secret" visit to Islamabad via Chaklala base. Arrive at 7pm Wed night, leave on Thu afternoon.http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_13-2-2004_pg1_5; http://www.dawn.com/2004/02/13/top5.htm
2/12 - Musharraf, at National Defence College (Islamabad?), admits Pak forces launching attack into Afghanistan, must be stopped
2/12 - Musharraf makes unscheduled visit to Karachi amid tight security.
2/13 - Rocca (Asst Secy State) meets Shashank and Arun Singh, key Indian negotiators ahead of Feb 16 I-P meeting. Nancy Powell said in ND on "private visit" will meet Pak HC Aziz Ahmed Khan. GAIL said to explore opportunities in Pak Gas.
2/14 Musharraf in Karachi, meets Corps Commander, Lt-Gen. Ahsen Saleem Hayat and discuss matters relating to "operational preparedness, administration and welfare of the troops."
2/14 Pioneer reports that the Pak scientists who went to Myanmar are believed to be in China.
2/15 AQK suffers a heart attack
2/15 Dawood reported to have had facial reconstructive surgery
2/16 Jamali to visit Tehran for D-8 summit, will talk about Iranian gas for India
2/16 Talks with India/Pakistan begin

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rudra » 12 Feb 2004 08:30

any link to news report 2/8 about liaison committee controlling paknooks ?

quite an effort there Calvin, you are approaching S2s collation abilities!

laxmibai
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 23
Joined: 26 Sep 2003 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby laxmibai » 12 Feb 2004 08:38

Is it this one?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4201930/
U.S. program to protect Pakistan's arsenal

Last month, President hinted at the covert cooperation, “Yes, they are secure,... and that’s important.”

It’s called the U.S. Liaison Committee: American nuclear experts spending millions to safeguard Pakistan’s more than 40 nuclear weapons.

They meet at least every two months and are helping Pakistan develop state-of-the-art security — including secret authorization codes for the arsenal.

“The chances for leakage are very, very slim, and the chances for accidents are very, very slim,” according to former U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Robert Oakley.

and

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4201686/
Full interview with Ambassador Robert Oakley

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jarugn » 12 Feb 2004 08:51


Sam
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 84
Joined: 06 Aug 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Sam » 12 Feb 2004 08:57

Originally posted by Calvin: Bush's speech is not a positive development, not censuring Pakistan and holding significant pitfalls and intrusiveness in the Additional Protocol. The intrusiveness required flies in the face of the glide path.
Being an election year Bush Admin appears to be playing it over safe regarding Pakistan's proliferation. Imagine admitting mistakes about Iraq as well as those related to Pakistan? I am also surprised that no economic punishment for Pakistan is being spelled out.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54781
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby ramana » 12 Feb 2004 09:10

That Oakley quote & the US laison committee putting authorizing codes onover 40 weapons is diturbing noting that the TSP's stated target is India. If they are worried about loose nukes falling into extremist hands xhouldnt they corral them or better yet take them out? Otherwise India would have to consider this an adverse act.

Raahi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 07 Dec 2003 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Raahi » 12 Feb 2004 09:27

Originally posted by Sam:
Being an election year Bush Admin appears to be playing it over safe regarding Pakistan's proliferation. Imagine admitting mistakes about Iraq as well as those related to Pakistan? I am also surprised that no economic punishment for Pakistan is being spelled out.
Americans (the public) are watching situation in Iraq and Pakistan, they're baffled too. To them it is like a medical malpractice case...The CT scan shows the the clot in the right side of the brain, but the surgery has been performed on left the side.

************
For a change, try to solve this puzzle that I posted here...

VRaghav
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 25 Dec 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby VRaghav » 12 Feb 2004 09:38

Today's Diane Rehm Show:

http://www.wamu.org/ram/2004/r1040211.ram

Featured Terence Taylor and Mike Krepon. Taylor kind of dragged India into the very first response that he gave about AQ Khan's national hero status in Pak. He said even in India such scientists are hailed as national heros etc etc.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rudra » 12 Feb 2004 09:44

welcome back Vraghav, I remember you from the "good old days"

VRaghav
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 25 Dec 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby VRaghav » 12 Feb 2004 09:57

Hi Rudra/Guru D from the good old days :) . Thanks much for recognizing me and welcoming me back. It's been quite a while I know. I have been in the lurk mode all this time. Times have changed, some members have (dis)appeared ;) and indeed for the better!

Interesting to see Bush admin in a catch-44 situation (Iraq on one hand, TSP on the other). It could soon be in a catch-66 if India breaks its thundering silence. Let's wait and watch what happens. In the meanwhile, I will go back to my lurk mode again.

Night.

Rich
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 46
Joined: 09 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rich » 12 Feb 2004 14:04

The Khan Artist - Maureen Dowd in The NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/12/opinion/12DOWD.html

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 15:07

Responding to Pakistan's proliferation
By C. Raja Mohan
http://www.hindu.com/2004/02/12/stories/2004021200861000.htm
The U.S. needs Gen. Musharraf for a variety of purposes — including the pursuit of its objectives in Afghanistan. While offering an exit from the corner that Gen. Musharraf finds himself in, Washington would like to extract as much as possible from the Pakistani leader on the nuclear question. That is what the current bargaining between Washington and Islamabad is about.

In any case, there is no way that India can influence the outcome of the current deal-making between the U.S. and Pakistan. The Bush administration and Gen. Musharraf need each other. Having invested in Gen. Musharraf for the success of the new peace process with Pakistan, India is not in a position to protest too much at the political cover Washington is offering him on the nuclear question. The outcome of the U.S.-Pakistan bargain would be determined by a variety of political factors. But whatever may be the results of this deal-making, it would have important implications for India.

The new set of initiatives on nuclear proliferation now being contemplated will have a more enduring and wider impact on India's own security. India has a big stake in preventing these new rules from working against its own interests. More important, India has a historic opportunity to shape the emerging global debate by offering sensible proposals for international action and joining global initiatives that are in everyone's interest.

If it effectively intervenes in this debate, India could find ways to achieve a goal it had set for itself long ago — to differentiate its nuclear programme from that of Pakistan.

The National Security Adviser, Brajesh Mishra, has gone a step further. Addressing an international security conference in Munich last Saturday, Mr. Mishra offered India's own diagnosis of the new threats and the kind of responses the world is contemplating....

Many of these provisions are sweeping and some of them go beyond the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. These measures are part of an effort to build structures and mechanisms outside the NPT to strengthen the global nuclear order. Mr. Mishra's remarks at Munich suggest an Indian readiness to cooperate with the new non-proliferation initiatives provided New Delhi is fully consulted and its own interests are taken on board. That is the core of the new Indian nuclear position, which has many other elements.

First, India shares the objective of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons despite the fact that it has stayed outside the NPT. Secondly, India's record on non-proliferation has been a responsible one and its nuclear policies and programmes cannot be equated with those of irresponsible states. "Clubbing partners against proliferation with countries of true proliferation concern is a self-defeating approach, which can only weaken the cause of genuine non-proliferation," Mr. Mishra said. Thirdly, in identical statements issued by Mr. Bush and the Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, last month, it was underlined that India and the U.S. "are partners in controlling the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction." The challenge for New Delhi and Washington now is to find creative ways to make this proposition a reality. This demands intensive Indo-U.S. consultations and practical cooperation that go beyond the old NPT framework to find effective ways to counter the growing threat from the spread of nuclear weapons.


VirenH
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 16
Joined: 19 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby VirenH » 12 Feb 2004 19:15

NY Times Cover Story today :D

(subscription site so posting in full - admin can snip if he wishes :D )
Link


A Tale of Nuclear Proliferation: How Pakistani Built His Network
By WILLIAM J. BROAD, DAVID E. SANGER and RAYMOND BONNER


The break for American intelligence operatives tracking Abdul Qadeer Khan's nuclear network came in the wet August heat in Malaysia, as five giant cargo containers full of specialized centrifuge parts were loaded into one of the nondescript vessels that ply the Straits of Malacca.

The C.I.A. had penetrated the factory of Scomi Precision Engineering, where one of the nuclear network's operatives — known to the workers only as Tinner — watched over the production of the delicate machinery needed to enrich uranium for nuclear bombs.

Spy satellites tracked the shipment as it wended its way to Dubai, where it was relabeled "used machinery" and transferred to a German-owned ship, the BBC China. When it headed through the Suez Canal, bound for Libya, the order went out from Washington to have it seized, according to accounts from American officials.

That seizure led to the unraveling of a trading network that sent bomb-making designs and equipment to at least three countries — Iran, North Korea and Libya — and has laid bare the limits of international controls on nuclear proliferation.

Yesterday, President Bush proposed to enhance that system by restricting the production of nuclear fuel to a few nations.

The scope and audacity of the illicit network are still not fully known. Nor is it known whether the Pakistani military or government, which had supported Dr. Khan's research, were complicit in his activities.

But what has become clear in recent days is that Dr. Khan, a Pakistani national hero who began his rise 30 years ago by importing nuclear equipment to secretly build his country's atom bomb, gradually transformed himself into the largest and most sophisticated exporter in the nuclear black market.

"It was an astounding transformation when you think about it, something we've never seen before," said a senior American official who has reviewed the intelligence. "First, he exploits a fragmented market and develops a quite advanced nuclear arsenal. Then he throws the switch, reverses the flow and figures out how to sell the whole kit, right down to the bomb designs, to some of the world's worst governments."

The story of that transformation emerges from recent interviews on three continents — from Islamabad, Pakistan's capital, to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; from the streets of Dubai, where many of the deals were cut, to Washington and Vienna, where intelligence agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency struggled to understand and defuse the threat.

Taken together, they show how Dr. Khan assembled a far-reaching organization of scientists, engineers and business executives who operated on murky boundaries between the legal and the illegal, sometimes underground but often in plain view, unencumbered by international agreements that prohibit trafficking in nuclear technology.

Dr. Khan started in the mid-1980's, according to nuclear proliferation experts, by ordering twice the number of parts the Pakistani nuclear program needed, and then selling the excess to other countries, notably Iran.

Later, his network acquired another customer: North Korea, which was desperate for a more surreptitious way to build nuclear weapons after the United States had frozen the North's huge plutonium-production facilities in Yongbyon.

And in the end he moved on to Libya, his ultimate undoing, selling entire kits, from centrifuges to enrich uranium, to crude weapons designs. Investigators found the weapons blueprints wrapped in bags from an Islamabad dry cleaner.

In his speech yesterday, Mr. Bush said the network even sold raw uranium to be processed into bomb fuel. He also identified Dr. Khan's deputy — "the network's chief financial officer and money-launderer," he called him — as Bukhari Sayed Abu Tahir, a businessman in Dubai, who, investigators say, placed the order for the Libyan equipment.

One longtime trading partner of Dr. Khan's was Peter Griffin, a British engineer who said in an interview that he had been a supplier to Pakistan for two decades, in the period when Dr. Khan was building nuclear weapons.

"Anything that could be sent to Pakistan, I sent to Pakistan," he said. But he said that all his sales had been approved by British trade authorities.

Mr. Griffin is also the partner in a Dubai company that investigators said placed the order for materials that wound up on the ship headed for Libya, although he denies knowing anything about that shipment.

For years hints of Dr. Khan's operation circulated widely among intelligence officers and officials in Pakistan, the United States and elsewhere. But Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, confronted Dr. Khan only after the BBC China was seized on its way to Libya and evidence of the network tumbled out. Last week Dr. Khan issued a public confession and then was pardoned by General Musharraf.

The deference shown Dr. Khan at the end began decades before, when he was working secretly and successfully to make his country a nuclear power.

"Khan had a complete blank check," said one aide close to General Musharraf. "He could do anything. He could go anywhere. He could buy anything at any price."

Research Roots in Holland

Dr. Khan's start came with India's first atomic test in 1974, an event that so traumatized Pakistan that developing its own weapon became the country's most pressing goal. "We will eat grass or leaves, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own," said Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, then the prime minister.

Dr. Khan, a bright young Pakistani metallurgist working in the Netherlands, lent his aid. From his perch at Urenco, a European consortium, he possessed blueprints of the world's best centrifuges — the hollow metal tubes that spin very fast to enrich natural uranium into bomb fuel.

A set of thousands of centrifuges, called a cascade, concentrates the rare U-235 isotope to make a potent fuel.

"I saw top-secret technical drawings in his house," recalled Frits Veerman, a Dutch colleague who shared an office with Dr. Khan.

Dr. Khan stole the designs, Dutch investigators found, and he fled back to Pakistan in 1976. He used the blueprints and his knowledge to set up an enrichment project in Kahuta, near Islamabad, that reported directly to the prime minister. He drew heavily on Dutch lists of nearly 100 companies that supplied centrifuge parts and materials.

"They literally begged us to buy their equipment," Dr. Khan boasted in 2001 in a publication celebrating the 25th anniversary of his Pakistani laboratory. "My long stay in Europe and intimate knowledge of various countries and their manufacturing firms was an asset."

Business executives and merchants, including German, Dutch and French middlemen, flocked to Pakistan to offer price lists for high-technology goods and learn what Pakistan needed. The multilingual Dr. Khan led the acquisition effort. His shopping spree spanned the world.

"Africa was important because of the materials needed," said a senior Pakistani official involved in the investigation of Dr. Khan. "Europe was crucial for bringing in high-tech machines and components. Dubai was the place for shipments and for payments.

"We were not the first beneficiaries of this network. But the intensity of Pakistan's nuclear acquisition effort did enlarge the market. Everybody knew that there is a buyer out there, loaded with money and hellbent on getting this ultimate weapon."

Even in the early days, the trade was no secret. Washington sent Germany dozens of complaints about their leaky export-control system that let "dual use" technology leave even though some was clearly intended for Pakistan's nuclear program, said Mark Hibbs, a Germany-based editor of a technical journal, Nucleonics Week. But many of those warnings were ignored, he said.

Mr. Veerman said Dutch companies continued to work with Dr. Khan after it was clear he was developing centrifuges for a weapon. Dr. Khan even sent scientists to the Netherlands in the late 1970's for centrifuge-related training.

Eventually the flow of technology reversed, two senior Pakistani military officials involved in the probe of Dr. Khan said. "These contacts and channels were later used for sending technology out of Pakistan by certain individuals," a military official said, "including Dr. A. Q. Khan."

From Buyer to Seller

Dr. Khan had three motives, investigators say. He was eager to defy the West and pierce "clouds of the so-called secrecy," as he once put it. He was equally eager to transfer technology to other Muslim nations, according to a senior Pakistani politician. "He also said that giving technology to a Muslim country was not a crime," the politician said.

But another motive appears to have been money. As Dr. Khan's nuclear successes grew, so did his wealth. He acquired homes and properties, including a tourist hotel in Africa.

A family friend said Dr. Khan spoke of the centrifuge designs he perfected as if the technology belonged to him personally, not to Pakistan. A senior politician said that in meetings with Chaudry Shujat Hussain, leader of a pro-Musharraf political party, Dr. Khan never spoke of selling the technology, only of "sharing" it.

He started slowly. He simply ordered more parts in the black market than he needed for Pakistan.

At first, Western intelligence agencies tracking Dr. Khan were perplexed.

"In the 1980's, I remember being told by officials that Khan was over-ordering centrifuge parts and they couldn't understand why," recalled Simon Henderson, a London-based author who has written extensively about Dr. Khan. It eventually became clear that the extras went to clients outside Pakistan.

Around 1987, Dr. Khan struck a deal with Iran, which wanted to build 50,000 centrifuges of a type known as P-1, for Pakistan-1, an entry-level model, Western investigators found. If ever completed, a plant that size would let Tehran make fuel for about 30 atom bombs each year.

As Pakistan's own technology became more sophisticated, Dr. Khan sold old Pakistani centrifuges and parts, Western investigators found, some contaminated with highly enriched uranium.

Iran appears to have acquired such second-hand gear. "They were not happy to discover they overpaid for old wares," said one American intelligence official. But for Iran, it was a start.

A Pakistani military official involved in the investigation of Dr. Khan said foreign requests for technology "came on paper, in person, through third parties, in meetings with Khan himself."

The scientist then used the vast logistic system available to him, which included government cargo planes, to ship the components to middlemen, who cloaked the source.

"The same network, the same routes, the same people who brought the technology in were also sending it out," said the military official.

In the final stages of his export career, Dr. Khan simply used his middlemen to order large shipments of parts for foreigners, even if Pakistan had no apparent role in the transaction and appeared to receive no direct benefits, American investigators said.

A Made-to-Order Customer

When Libya embarked on a two-step effort to become a nuclear-weapons nation, Dr. Khan's network was presented with an opportunity to sell a particularly sophisticated system. The network was moving to a new level of ambition.

Libya's initial focus was the aging P-1 design, American and European investigators said. But eventually the Libyans sought a more efficient technology, the P-2, made of maraging steel, a superhard alloy. That design has steel rotors that could spin nearly twice as fast as earlier aluminum ones, doubling the rate of enrichment.

The central figure in the Libyan P-2 effort, American officials said, was Mr. Tahir, a Sri Lankan native who had moved to Dubai as a child. Dr. Khan had attended Mr. Tahir's wedding in 1998, Malaysian officials said.

In his speech yesterday, Mr. Bush said Mr. Tahir used a company in Dubai, SMB Computers, "as a front for the proliferation activities of the A. Q. Khan network." Corporate records list him as an owner.

Another associate whose name surfaced in the Libyan deal was Mr. Griffin, the British engineer who long procured gear for Dr. Khan, according to investigators in several countries, corporate records and company officials.

Interviewed by telephone from France, Mr. Griffin, 68, declined to discuss details of his early relationship with Dr. Khan but said he had known him for decades. "We met ages ago," he said.

Mr. Griffin said that all the items he sent to Pakistan were approved by the British Department of Trade and Industry and that he had done nothing illegal. He said the British authorities had seized his computer in June from his home in France. That had given rise to false "suspicions that Gulf Technical Industries and myself were doing things for Libya," Mr. Griffin said. "There's no such truth in it."

In June 2000, according to investigators and public records, Mr. Griffin set up a trading company in Dubai, Gulf Technical Industries. The following year, it contracted with a Malaysian manufacturing conglomerate to make sophisticated parts.

The manufacturer, Scomi Group Berhad, said it signed a contract with Gulf Technical in December 2001 to supply the components. Mr. Griffin and Mr. Tahir had met with company officials months earlier, in February 2001, to discuss the possible deal, said Rohaida Ali Badaruddin, a Scomi spokeswoman. After the contract was signed, Scomi set up Scomi Precision Engineering, hired some 40 workers, bought costly machine tools and began work, she said.

Dr. Khan provided the blueprints for the machines and parts, said a close aide to General Musharraf who is familiar with the Pakistani investigation. "He had given most of the designs," the aide said. At one point Dr. Khan suggested that two of his senior aides join the Malaysian enterprise, the aide said.

Scomi Precision made its first shipment to Gulf Technical in December 2002 and the last in August 2003. Investigators said the shipments were largely P-2 centrifuge parts.

Throughout the work at Scomi Precision, the man known as Tinner, an engineer sent from Dubai by Mr. Tahir, was on site overseeing the work, a Scomi official said.

In a statement, Scomi said the shipments had consisted only of "14 semifinished components." Company officials said they never knew of the intended use of the parts.

A senior Bush administration official disputed the company's account, saying it would be highly unlikely that someone there did not know what they were producing. American and European weapons experts also said that the shipment headed for Libya contained thousands of centrifuge parts.

"Their goal was far reaching," a top European nuclear expert said of the Libyans. "They had ordered this very large amount."

Mr. Griffin acknowledged that he had been to Malaysia and that he and Mr. Tahir had met with Scomi officials. But he said the discussion had to do with exports of tank trucks, a deal he said never materialized. Mr. Griffin said that if Mr. Tahir had continued to meet with Scomi officials, or struck any deals, he had not authorized it.

But a Scomi official insisted the meeting was to discuss Scomi's contract for finely tooled parts.

Malaysian officials said Mr. Tahir was under investigation in Malaysia, but was not under arrest. His younger brother, Sayed Ibrahim Bukhari, said in a telephone interview this week that Mr. Tahir does not hold any ownership position in SMB Computers.

Mr. Bush said the Malaysian authorities had assured Washington that the Scomi factory was no longer producing centrifuge parts.

An American expert said the Libyans planned on making at least 10,000 of the machines. Such a complex would make enough highly enriched uranium each year for about 10 nuclear weapons.

But the advanced centrifuges never reached Libya. They were seized on the BBC China.

When investigators went to Libya, they found that Dr. Khan's network had also provided blueprints for a nuclear weapon. For investigators, it was a startling revelation of how audacious and dangerous the black market had become. And it made them recognize that they did not know who else out there was buying and selling.

Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said, "We haven't really seen the full picture."

Reporting for this article was contributed by David Rohde and Talat Hussain from Pakistan, Craig S. Smith from the Netherlands and Tim Golden from New York.


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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 19:32

In addition to the aluminum merry-go-rounds disclosed before, Iran says it now has even the sturdier steel ones.

UN Uncovers New Iranian Atomic Secrets-Diplomats
Several Western diplomats told Reuters on condition of anonymity the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found parallels between Libya's nuclear weapons program and Iran's atomic program, which Tehran says is purely peaceful.

"They bought the same stuff from the same people," said one Western diplomat who follows the IAEA closely.

The IAEA's latest discovery is blueprints based on the so-called "G2" centrifuge developed by the British-German-Dutch enrichment consortium Urenco.

The steel G2 centrifuge is better than the earlier aluminum G1, a version of which Iran has been mass producing for its enrichment facilities at Natanz.

"I think it's safe to assume that Khan offered Iran the weapons designs which Libya bought for $50 million," Samore said.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 19:36

And in response to all this, Al Kapone says he would like to run for the District Attorney's office in town...

China Backs Bush on Illicit Arms Battle
China declared its support Thursday for President Bush's call for steps to halt illicit arms trafficking, saying it had a "common interest" with Washington in fighting the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

"China resolutely opposes the proliferation of WMD as well as its vehicles of transportation. So China has a common interest with the United Sates," Zhang said. "China consistently advocates strengthening international cooperation in the field of nonproliferation." :)

"We are very concerned with the proliferation of vehicles for WMD," she said. "We also hold that political and diplomatic means should be taken, within the framework of international law, to solve this problem."

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 12 Feb 2004 19:49

With reference to the Iran-Libya parallel story above posted by JRJ, it would be interesting to find out if AXK gave Iran the blueprints for the bomb that he gave Libya.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby jrjrao » 12 Feb 2004 19:53

US cements Pakistan links despite fear of nuclear deals
Questions are being raised in Congress, however, about the legality of the president's proposed aid package for Pakistan. It was expected to be presented to legislators later this year, for spending to begin in 2005. Some officials suggested that the president would need to issue a waiver so Pakistan would not become subject to existing sanctions legislation on nuclear proliferators.

The officials, who asked not to be named, said the aid package was expected to go ahead, given Pakistan's role in the "war on terror".

However, they acknowledged that Pakistan's continued co-operation with the nuclear investigation could become an element in a final decision.

Former officials and analysts, expressing the widely held opinion that the Pakistani military establishment was involved in nuclear deals with at least North Korea, said the Bush administration's message to Mr Musharraf was much tougher in private. But there was also the assessment that he was vulnerable. :roll: "Do you punish Pakistan for its roguish behaviour in the knowledge that it will only undermine Musharraf and what comes next may be even more unstable?" commented Ilan Berman of the American Foreign Policy Council, a Washington think-tank.

James Bund
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 08 May 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby James Bund » 12 Feb 2004 20:09

So here come the open acknowledgements that the US did indeed suspect Pakistan of clandestinely procuring parts for its program as early as the late 1970s. Now to admit that they were not serious in pursuing Pakistan because of USSR in Afghanistan and the stage is set for some serious hand-wringing. India should resist the temptation of uttering a 'I told you so'. As I have alluded several times, Pakistani nukes are not India's problem, they are America's problem. And I can't think of much the Americans haven't finished once they are determined. So long Pak suckers!

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rye » 12 Feb 2004 20:18

Originally posted by ramana:
That Oakley quote & the US laison committee putting authorizing codes onover 40 weapons is diturbing noting that the TSP's stated target is India. If they are worried about loose nukes falling into extremist hands xhouldnt they corral them or better yet take them out? Otherwise India would have to consider this an adverse act.
From the very beginning, it appears that one of the motivations for "supporting in public" pakistan's wish to hold nukes after they have been proven completely untrustworthy, is that the non prolif crowd would like to use this as leverage to get India to join the NPT as a non nuclear state. recent statements from the EU and US SD pushing exactly this line seems to validate this line of thought at least partially.

Mr. Brajesh Mishra's statement has made clear as to where the US can get off, it looks like. Pakistan is CLEARLY telling the US that it would be willing to sign any treaty the US wants as long as India signs before it. This would fall in line with their paki line of thinking all these years.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 12 Feb 2004 20:46

Nuclear expert Simon Henderson writes for the National Review.

Henderson asks why the CIA and MI-6 went AWOL on Abdul X. Khan!

Musharraf’s Mess

More nuclear questions for Pakistan.

By Simon Henderson

Thursday's front page of the New York Times has a breathless account of Pakistan's rogue nuclear network, and quotes British engineer Peter Griffin as saying he had been a supplier to Pakistan for two decades. To my knowledge, the last time Peter Griffin was quoted anywhere was on the front page of the Financial Times, in an article I wrote on August 22, 1979 (yes, 1979). Headlined "U.K. deals may aid Pakistan atom bid," it accompanied a longer inside investigative piece I had written: "Pakistan's nuclear shopping list: the British link."

Griffin was the director of a small trading company that had tried to buy pieces of electrical equipment, called inverters, and export them to Pakistan. Inverters are used in the spinning industry to give a reliable flow of electricity. With the right specifications, they are also needed to spin high-speed centrifuges for enriching uranium. The ones that Griffin had tried to buy were destined for what was Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan's then-nascent uranium enrichment plant at Kahuta, outside Islamabad.

I had traveled down to South Wales to interview Griffin and arrived unannounced on his doorstep. He invited me inside, though hardly welcoming me, and cautiously told me what business he was doing in Pakistan. "I am not helping Pakistan make a nuclear bomb, but why shouldn't Pakistan have a nuclear bomb anyway?" was, I recall, his line of argument. He told me that he had sold 800,000 pounds worth of equipment (several million in today's dollars) to the Special Works Organization in Pakistan (the cover organization building the Kahuta enrichment plant). The orders included machine tools as well as buses and ambulances. None of the exports, he claimed, breached regulations.

That implicit approval by the British authorities is the same pitch Griffin gave in today's New York Times. I don't think London was happy, but Griffin's trading probably gave them a glimpse of what Pakistan was up to. I am not aware that Griffin ever illegally exported anything, but I suspect he went fairly close to the line. I heard later that he had retired to France; perhaps he had made enough money. More likely, I suspect, he thought he might be pushing his luck. In March 1981, the director of a Swiss company supplying Pakistan with equipment to make uranium hexafluoride, the gaseous feedstock for centrifuges, had the fence surrounding his backyard neatly destroyed with explosive charges. It was presumed to be a subtle (if that's the right word) warning by the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency.

All this talk these days about the role Dubai also brings on a great sense of déjà vu. In the late 1970s, Pakistan tried to obscure its procurement efforts — and perhaps safeguard them from the attentions of the Mossad — by using the Persian Gulf sheikhdom as a cut-out. (Kuwait and Sharjah were also used.) I wrote another investigative piece for the Financial Times on December 22, 1980, revealing that inverters bought in Canada had been sent to Khalid Jassim General Trading, a Dubai company whose director was a then business partner of Griffin. I visited the company's offices and noticed a large package labeled "infrared thermometers," made by Mikron Instruments of New Jersey. Subsequent enquiries suggested to me that these thermometers would be ideal for measuring temperature without actually touching an object, for example, a centrifuge spinning at high speed (although they were supposedly destined for a Sharjah cement factory).

So, where were the British MI6 and the CIA when Dr. Khan started to export centrifuge equipment via Dubai to Iran, Libya, and North Korea? Some will say they were asleep. Wittier critics say they were looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or fabricating the evidence. There is another possibility: I think there is much more to the emerging story than we are being told.

The official Pakistani explanation of Khan's nefarious deeds loads all the blame on him and says it was realized he was up to no good before his forced retirement in 2001. The explanation I am waiting for is why a May 2002 test-launch of a nuclear-capable Ghauri missile (technology swapped by North Korea in return for centrifuge secrets) was observed by delegations from North Korea and Libya, as solid sources report. (I am told there was also a Saudi prince there as well.) How does President Musharraf explain that one? After all, it was, as they say, on his watch.

— Simon Henderson is a London-based associate of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24155
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby SSridhar » 12 Feb 2004 21:01

NPT Regime - Editorial in The Weekly Independent
As usual, trying to blame evryone else except TSP. And, as usual, the attempt to conflate with India.
Talking about attitudes, it is the first time that India and Pakistan have agreed to challenge the NPT regime by not becoming signatories.
However,[color="red"] they have agreed in principle to clamp down on proliferation.</font> This is a welcome move and could go a long way in building of regional alliances.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54781
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby ramana » 12 Feb 2004 21:23

Some Issues:
1) How did TSp peddle China's designs to third parties? Was there no end use controls put in by China or was it with their assent?
2) The prolif supply chain always originated in Western Europe. Were these folks proofing their systems in TSP?
Its always German hardware at the core. Sort of like in the movie Odessa File. So what going on. After GWI Germany paid restituion to Israel by supplying subs to Israel. So what is Germany going to do for India which has been endangered by German proliferation to TSP.
3) Why does this Brit Griffin feel that TSP deserves the bomb. Is it any old colonial link?


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests