Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3822
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby saip » 18 Feb 2004 16:51

"No sir. It (Pakistan's nuclear programme) is not under the aegis of the military. It never was and it is not now," Musharraf told the Financial Times.
If it is not under the army control and the civilian pms are not allowed anywhere near it, who the hell is/was controlling it? Shouldnt he atleast lie more convincingly?

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4775
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby vijayk » 18 Feb 2004 17:58

Originally posted by jarugn:
Pakistan not in a nuke-race with India but will test fire Shaheen II - Musharaff

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/02/17/nuclear.pakistan.reut/index.html

"This is a very sensitive issue," he said. "Would any other nuclear power allow its sensitive installations to be inspected? Why should Pakistan be expected to allow anybody to inspect?"

Don't talk about other nuclear powers you moron.
They are not rougues like you are ...


"We are not hiding anything... what is the need for any inspection?" the president said.
That's the problem bozo! You are not hiding anything about technology of bombs!

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby kgoan » 18 Feb 2004 18:10

Where does Pakistan get it's uranium from?

Pakistan is supposed to have it's own mines, especially at Dera Ghazi Khan, but how good are Pak mines given the current situation? i.e. If they were selling everything else, why were they *not* selling yellowcake? Because they couldn't?

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3822
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby saip » 18 Feb 2004 18:21

We know that Xerox Khan was born in India. Now it appears that the guy who played the middle man in nuclear proliferation was born and educated in India.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/18/international/asia/18NUKE.html?hp

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Sam » 18 Feb 2004 20:22

West can't police our nukes: "missile macho" web page
"We are not hiding anything . . . what is the need of any inspection? What for?" he said.
He added that Islamabad was willing to "co-operate with any organisation, the International Atomic Energy Agency, or anybody", but would reject any attempt to "treat us as if we do not know what we are doing".

krithivas
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 20 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Offline

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby krithivas » 18 Feb 2004 20:24

San Fransisco Chronicle: Consul General of India response to recent editorial on Paki Proliferation.

Very weak letter. Implied reference to India, no reference to Pakistan. Price of the peace process.

R> Krithivas


San Fransisco Chronicle : Consul General Letter to Editor


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Wednesday, February 18, 2004



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


Nuclear proliferators must be punished

Editor -- Your editorial, "Stop nuclear epidemics," in the Feb. 16 Chronicle rightly focuses attention on the dangers of nuclear proliferation. However, the last paragraph is misleading. It seems to equate proliferators with those whose record in this area has been impeccable. This line of argument would send the wrong signal to potential proliferators.

While recent revelations and admissions of nuclear proliferation might have come as a surprise to many, these activities have been going on for decades and were ignored by the international community on the ground of short- term political expediency.

To effectively check proliferation, the guilty have to be punished and important steps put in place so that this does not occur again. Equating those who have committed rampant proliferation to others who have acted very responsibly is a self-defeating approach, which can only weaken the cause of genuine nonproliferation.

H.H.S. VISWANATHAN
Consul General of India

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

R> Krithivas

Raj Singh
BRFite
Posts: 101
Joined: 23 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Raj Singh » 18 Feb 2004 21:16

Quote ...............

Within Australia, we have not generally realised just what a profound crisis the world faces in Pakistan. On the face of this week's revelations, Pakistan has engaged in far worse nuclear proliferation than North Korea has ever dreamed of. We know now that Pakistan has actually done what the US, and the rest of us, only fear what the North Koreans might do.

The Americans bear a fair degree of indirect responsibility for this state of affairs. They pioneered the jihad technique for attacking the Soviets in Afghanistan, which Pakistan now uses against India in Kashmir and which has become an uncontrollable, worldwide movement.


Pakistan's chilling sense of humour

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8605579%5E25377,00.html

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby arun » 18 Feb 2004 21:30

Inspired by Rangudu's action in writing to the CFR and remaining somewhat disatisfied with the resulting amendment to the article, I too e-mailed the CFR as follows :



I refer to your article, " The Pakistan Network".

In the article you mention, India "could be trading nuclear information on the black market" given "insufficient security for its nuclear program".

Might I request you advise me of an instance, either fact or rumour, of India being involved in "trading nuclear information on the black market" that would warrant the listing of India among countries that constitute a "source of illicit nuclear technology".

Might I also request the reasons for the non inclusion of countries, the involvement of whose nationals in the A.Q.Khan ring has clearly
demonstrated that they have "insufficient security for its nuclear program", such as the UK ( Peter Griffin), Germany (Otto Heilingbrunner and
Gotthard Lerch), not to mention companies in Austria, Belgium, South Korea and Japan who are reportedly under IAEA investigation.

Then there is off course Israel, while not directly connected to A.Q. Khan supply to Iran/Libya/North Korea, nonetheless has one of her national's, Asher Karni , currently under trial in the US for supply of triggered spark gaps to Pakistan.

Let me conclude by saying that the inclusion of India in the list of countries that constitute a "source of illicit nuclear technology" and the exclusion of other countries with a poorer track record on nuclear proliferation issues, would suggest the application of higher standards of behaviour to India. Is that the case ?

I can only infer that the imposition of higher standards of behaviour may have crept in owing to a perception that India somehow constitutes a security threat to the US. Permit me to assure you, that India constitutes no greater a security threat to the US than the UK, Germany, Austria, Belgium, South Korea, Japan or Israel. The efforts of the Government of India in this direction should be proof enough.

Alternatively the inference for the inclusion of India in the list could be that nuclear weapon states outside the NPT constitute a "source of illicit nuclear technology". In that case why not Israel ?

A response to points raised when time permits would be much appreciated, if for nothing more than an understanding of where the CFR stands on issues regarding India.

To which I received this reply :



Thank you for your comments regarding my story. The piece reflects the views of the nuclear technology experts we interviewed, who mentioned that India could potentially have security issues regarding its nuclear stockpile--while noting that thus far this has not been the case. In fact,
they note --and the Q&A points out -- that India has had a much better security record than Pakistan. Certainly, as you point out, nationals from many other countries have been involved in the nuclear black market; however the particular question you refer to, "What other countries COULD be a source of illicit nuclear technology?" addresses only those nations which our experts identified as potential security risks on this issue.

The Council on Foreign Relations doesn't take partisan positions on issues;rather, we try to present the facts in as clear and non-biased a way as possible.

We appreciate your readership and your comments.

Win some, lose some.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Johann » 19 Feb 2004 00:02

Originally posted by Mohan Raju:
These Packees are ridiculous! Robert Oppenheimer had nothing to do with the Soviets getting the atom bomb. He was simply removed from his job (and his security clearance revoked) because he had started expressing peacenik sentiments. No transfer of classified information took place, none were attempted, and none were even alleged by Oppenheimer's critics.

The people who transferred Western atomic secrets to the Sovs were Klaus Fuchs and the Rosenbergs (Julius and Ethel, husband and wife).
Oppenheimer does not seem to be 'the' reason that the Soviets built the bomb as quickly as they did. There was an American physicist named Ted Hall who gave the NKVD detailed information about the actual core of the implosion device. His information was more damaging than the Rosenbergs or Fuchs in terms of shortening Soviet work, but unfortunately his role was not understood until much later.

Oppenheimer was not a paid agent, nor was he a crypto-communist. However there is strong evidence that he knowingly and willingly provided theoretical guidance to Soviet intelligence when approached because he believed in the deterrent effect of mutual assured destruction, ie, that the bomb would be less likely to be used if the Soviets had it as well.

Of course there's still controversy but the book 'Special Tasks' by Soviet intelligence officer Pavel Sudoplatov who was responsible most of these nuclear espionage assets largely settled it for me, especially when taken with all of the hints in the Venona materials.

Oppenheimer was not the only scientist or engineer on the Manhattan Project with such feelings. However, I very much doubt AQ Khan shared their passion for ideas like whirled peas, or was motivated by such. I also doubt that Khan acted without the approval of his national authorities, quite unlike the internationalists on the Manhattan Project.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54716
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby ramana » 19 Feb 2004 00:09

But all this talk of Openheimer begs the question. Espionage is not proliferation as TSP elite is making out to be.

Raj Singh
BRFite
Posts: 101
Joined: 23 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Raj Singh » 19 Feb 2004 00:11

Johann

However there is strong evidence that he did knowingly provide theoretical guidance to Soviet intelligence because he beleived in the deterrent effect of mutual assured destruction, ie, that the bomb would be less likely to be used if the Soviets had it as well.
I too recall vaguely, reading about this motive ( pacifism? )for passing on information/guidance to Soviets.

AJay
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 09 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby AJay » 19 Feb 2004 00:15

Originally posted by Tim:
I'm not sure why Pakistan can't. We know for a fact that other states, with imported technology, have created missile and nuclear capabilities - Iraq, Iran, Norh Korea, South Korea, South Africa, even Israel.
Tim

That is a strange statement. The way I read this sentence, you seem to imply that Israel lags Pakistan in technical ability. Obviously nothing can be far from the reality.

Raj Singh
BRFite
Posts: 101
Joined: 23 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Raj Singh » 19 Feb 2004 00:22

Tim

P.S. - in case it wasn't clear. I don't find the "nuke nude" hypothesis compelling at all. At a minimum, it's a bad idea to base policy on assumptions that some other power has solved all your problems for you. It's easy to get burned that way. Sorry if there was any confusion.
Thank you for clarifying/making your position more clear. Actually, your previous post really was not that clear and was giving the impression which apparently you did/do not want to give on this matter.

While reading that post, for a short while I thought, cause of confusion could be that it was pretty late in the night or early in the morning here, so ...... :)

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Sunil » 19 Feb 2004 00:29

So let me see if I understand this.

> Our experts mentioned that there were problems with India's stockpile security. So India has been listed as a proliferation risk.

That sounds like a fishing expedition to me.

These Non-Proliferation Mullahs seem to be convinced that the Pakistani nuclear arsenal is under control. They appear to be convinced that Pakistan's nukes are disassembled and kept separate from the warhead and that the chamber that contains the core of the bomb; is protected by a US made access control system. The US also knows where the actual storage chambers of the weapon cores are and it probably has these sites under surveillance. Should any attempt be made to penetrate these sites, the interlocks will delay the people from seizing control of the core and accessing the device. This delay will permit a QRF to interdict the attempt and obliterate the site. The quality of the structure containing the nuke cores will be sufficient to contain any release of radioactive materials.

The Non-Proliferation Mullahs also appear to be convinced as the US is in a position to sense any move by the Pakistanis to mate their warheads with their cores, it has an effective mechanism for escalation control in the India-Pakistan conflict context. The guys in the state department are probably convinced that this escalation control can be used in the great India-Pakistan balancing act.

Ideally the Non-Proliferation Mullahs would like India to subject itself to the same level of control that Pakistan has. This is a direct consequence of the equal equal mindset. This also sits quite well with the State Dept. types as they don't have to rethink their entire South Asia paradigm. People at places like CFR don't care either ways, fact of the matter is that they can't tell the difference between Indian and Pakistanis at all so when pointed to direct contradictions in what the CFR people are being told, they simply pretend there isn't a problem and side-step the issue.

This is getting very interesting - the CFR response is bordering on defensive - it seems to say

"Look Man - I don't care if it doesn't make any sense, I am just saying what they said.. you have a problem take it up with them... I have no mind of my own - of my own - of my own..."

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Johann » 19 Feb 2004 01:03

Would someone care to estimate

a)how much depleted uranium the Pakistanis ought to have on their hands based on the open source estimates of their LEU and HEU production

b) how much metal that could be turned in to.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Tim » 19 Feb 2004 02:32

AJAy,

My point was that Israel - in the 1950s, when it was quite poor and its economy was based on citrus and diamond exports - utilized foreign technologies (French reactors and missiles) and created substantial nuclear arsenals over time with them.

I have little doubt the Israeli scientific complex is far superior to Pakistan's. The distinction between the Israeli scientific complex of the mid-1950s and Pakistan's of the mid-1980s, I suspect, is not nearly as dramatic.

Evidently, I'm succumbing to Rumsfelditis. Pretty soon, I'll be talking about "known and unknown unknowns." Which I actually think was pretty clear, if you think about it.

My basic point was that a lot of states have developed nuclear capabilities based on a combination of theft, espionage, black and gray market transactions, and open scientific exchange. My strong impression is that Pakistan did this as well.

Calvin,

Ring magnets are necessary for P-2, not P-1. If Pakistan's initial HEU capabilities were based on P-1 cascades, they could have fielded weapons before the mid-1990s.

I may be off on this, but I seem to recall that when the ring magnets were transferred, media reports suggested they were replacement parts. I could be wrong. One more thing on a long "to-do" list. :)

Raj,

I will strive for clarity. Again, living in the Rumsfeld era undoubtedly increased my tendency towards tendentious and self-contradictory obfuscation.

You should have heard me when Al Haig was around :) .

Johann,

Good question. As far as I know, I'm one of the few people ever to point out that UNSCOM found that Iraq had been experimenting with DU slugs in 1990 from its nuclear experiments. They only produced about a dozen, but apparently were looking into munitions. I don't know how to calculate that stuff, however. You might check with David Albright at ISIS, if you're really looking for somebody who knows the technology.

Tim

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 19 Feb 2004 04:08

From BBC Monitoring. No URL.

German scientist investigated for Pakistan nuclear links

Source: ddp news agency, Berlin, in German 0939 gmt 18 Feb 04

Marburg: A scientist from central Hesse has been charged with having contributed to Pakistan's nuclear weapons' programme by supplying technical equipment. Marburg state prosecutors have initiated investigations against the man. A corresponding report published in Wetzlarer Neue Zeitung was confirmed by Senior State Prosecutor Hans-Joachim Woelk to ddp news agency on Wednesday [18 February]. The German scientist is suspected of having violated the weapons' export law, but has not been interrogated yet. Due to the absence of any danger of absconding or collusion, an arrest warrant against the man has been suspended but not lifted.

According to Woelk, the case involves the supply of four so-called calibration sources [Ger: Kalibrierquellen] and the attempted export of alpha-gamma spectrometry systems. Although both systems can be used for civilian purposes, they can also "serve the development of a nuclear weapons' programme", he said. Woelk added that there was an "indication" that the material supplied was used in Pakistan's nuclear weapons' programme.

According to the judicial authorities, the scientist had applied in vain for an export permit to the relevant Federal Office for Economic and Export Control in August 2002. The state prosecutor spoke of "false information" given by the scientist to receive the permit. The tools were officially meant to go to medical institutions. For the attempted export of the alpha-gamma spectrometry systems, which were officially intended for an engineering company in Islamabad, the man then no longer even bothered to apply for a licence, the state prosecutor added.

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 372
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Roop » 19 Feb 2004 04:24

Originally posted by Tim:

Again, living in the Rumsfeld era undoubtedly increased my tendency towards tendentious and self-contradictory obfuscation.
You don't say!! :rotfl: (BTW, that was a jab at Rummie, not at you, Tim).

Let me say what I think about Pakistan and its innate capabilities (or lack thereof):

A few years ago I saw a TV commercial that showed a man's wallet being stolen by a pickpocket chimpanzee. The grinning, squealing chimp didn't know what the hell he had, but he knew it was something his "master" wanted, and he scampered back to said master clutching the loot in his hand. This is a very good analog to the Pakistani situation: AQ Khan is the chimp and the Chinese are the chimp's "master".

It is beyond silly, it is laughable, to suppose that blustering, ignorant, fanatical, Mahmud-of-Ghazni-wannabe Pakistanis could make a nuclear weapon from stolen blueprints and telephone contacts with crooked European middlemen. Pakistan has a scientific/industrial/intellectual base roughly a decade ahead of Chad or Botswana. What they do have, however, is the mendacious but shameless backing of China and the US. This explains everything you ever wanted to know about the Pakistani nuclear weapons program but were afraid to ask -- Pakistan provided the criminal enterprise (the chutzpah, the muscle and the thuggery), China supplied the brains and America supplied the hypocrisy, the mendacity and the diplomatic cover.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Leonard » 19 Feb 2004 05:00

Mohan has put it very succintly

<<<
Pakistan has a scientific/industrial/intellectual base roughly a decade ahead of Chad or Botswana. What they do have, however, is the mendacious but shameless backing of China and the US. This explains everything you ever wanted to know about the Pakistani nuclear weapons program but were afraid to ask -- Pakistan provided the criminal enterprise [the chutzpah, the muscle and the thuggery], China supplied the brains and America supplied the hypocrisy, the mendacity and the diplomatic cover.
>>>

Tim [no dis-respect intended] :

Please find the Time to visit TSP, and "Truly Discover" its 'Industrial Strengths'.

akumar and other visitors have provided us First hand Glimpse of Paki Tech Skills ... :D :D

Seriously if Pakis can manfacture "toothpaste" or even "toilet paper", that would be a SURPRISE !!!

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 19 Feb 2004 05:41

I'd not advice the Government of India to gameplan its TSP policy based on a presumption of their nuke-nudity. It is too risky.

Having said that, I believe that it is eminently plausible that the Pakistani nuclear bravado is all bluster and nothing else. I base this upon my years long research on Pakistan and my understanding that a vast majority of the public presentation of Pakistani governments and the beliefs esposed by the Western observers about Pakistan has been proven to be lies. They have been lying from the historical times until now on everything - the Two nation theory, the partition, Kashmir, Bangladesh, Taliban, foreign policy etc. The pattern seems to be a blustery facade covering a house of falsehoods. That is one rationale.

I also believe that the US State Department is second to none when it comes to blatant lying to cover up inconvenient facts. But my second rationale is my strong belief that the US government, at its core, is zealous in its aims to protect America from attacks. Given this, the current US nonchalance on Pakistan would be inexcusable were Pakistani nukes and fissile material not under US control.

These two reasons give me cause to believe that the "Nuke-nude" theory is not only plausible, but quite likely.

Kuttan
BRFite
Posts: 439
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Kuttan » 19 Feb 2004 05:54

Given this, the current US nonchalance on Pakistan would be inexcusable were Pakistani nukes and fissile material not under US control.
Got it. "Inexcusable" would be no problem for Foggy Bottom where Alice in Wonderland would be rejected as being way too realistic and ordinary. But the defense of the USA is the domain of Rumsfeld. And I DO NOT see him sitting on his thumbs under the present situation, if Pakistan still had nukes.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Victor » 19 Feb 2004 06:08

We should doubt the nuke nude theory because SOMEBODY'S finger is on the trigger--the monkeys, the Americans, the Chinese--take your pick. I'm afraid that until we have our ICBM's, we shall have to be content with handing out regular jhaapads to the pakis to humiliate them in every sphere--social, economic, military-- while actively continuing to encourage, goad and engineer in every way that we can, the disintegration of that pigsty for the greater good of mankind. Nobody can prevent that.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby RayC » 19 Feb 2004 07:07

Originally posted by SaiP:
We know that Xerox Khan was born in India. Now it appears that the guy who played the middle man in nuclear proliferation was born and educated in India.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/18/international/asia/18NUKE.html?hp
Therefore, India is to blame.
:rotfl:

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Umrao » 19 Feb 2004 07:29

Huh! Comparing Israel and Pakis, what have the South Asian experts fallen to?

Reminds me of the quote of the Vice chancellor of Stanford University

“If education is expensive try ignorance”

And hello folks, from cyberbad

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54716
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby ramana » 19 Feb 2004 07:33

So how are things in Naidu land? What does aam janata think about the TSP nuke madness? Could you get the take from any Daily Siasat or Rahenuma- e -Deccan?
----------
The centrifuge technology was developed in early 70s was good enough for reactor grade fuel. Were the Germans proofing the higher enrichment via TSP? Otherwise it looks like everyone was sleeping on the job - Germans, UK and US offcourse had blinkers.
On a bigger picture was there a grand plan to arm the ummah against the FSU and coat tail hanger India? Remember its all in the 70s.Also in retrospect the Western European enabling technology was quiet an unfriendly act considering TSP was quite India fixated in its quest. Maybe payback time for the old foggies?

Rak
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 54
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rak » 19 Feb 2004 07:52


AnantD
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 04 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Aurora, Illinois, USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby AnantD » 19 Feb 2004 08:12

I think the reason for the non-chalance wrt TSP's nukes is that the US has a very very good idea about the entire Nuke operation, the people involved, the means and methods operationalizing them, where they are stored, and anything else critical wrt them. They probably listen in on anything they want to in TSP at any time, and the only thing left for TSP is to use hand and eye signals.

Hence the impression given to TSP's RAPE is that they are still in control, whereas if the need arose, those nukes would be snatched from them before they can even blink an eye.

This is the only plausible scenario for the non-chalance during the last few weeks after A Queer Khan was "pardoned". ;)

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby daulat » 19 Feb 2004 14:09

let us accept that the TSP nuke programme had flaws, perhaps many

let us also assume that unkil/dragon have corralled some of the nukes through PALS, supervision or confiscation

but let us for planning purposes also assume that atleast SOME working, deliverable nukes are left in Mushy's sweaty palms, and he may use them either formally or informally (using Jehadi Delivered Atomic Munitions - or JDAM's for short! ;) )

this means that from an Indian perspective, we have to be prepared for atleast one city strike scenario, perhaps two. unlikely that they will opt for tactical usage on the battle field, relying instead on trench fulls of houri-seeking jehadi canon fodder - which no doubt is what Ray has in mind when he talks about the difficulties of Indus crossing on D+4 scenarios

in this context, indian overkill w.r.t TSP is required to force an imbalanced stability, where TSP is the irrational first striker and India is the rational assured retalliatory obliterator

w.r.t china, there still needs to be credible minimum deterrence, which maintains strategic balance and shifts the focus to non-military competition

re TSP proliferation, all the noise about Libya and Iran is to do with them coming into Unkil's camp - yes, even Iran! but the proliferation chain now points the finger at the western companies that contributed components that the pakistanis (must have) put together in kit form to create their bomb. i am sure it started innocently enough, but at some point several people stepped over the line, and most probably for profit. raises some questions:

did their gov'ts know? allow it to happen?

or

were controls too lax to prevent capitalism from taking its natural course?

I am willing to believe that from early 90's or sooner, western gov'ts have been getting stricter about export controls

I still don't understand why xeroxbhai was selling manufacturing tech instead of completed warheads and/or delivery systems - double insurance policy for TSP in case of dual use? ultimate rip-off/shakedown?

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Sunil » 19 Feb 2004 16:16

Glad to see Jumrao is having fun, do get us all the word on the street. I never knew Jumrao could read urdu.

> JDAM - Jihadi Delivered Atomic Munitions!!

WoW!!! that is a good one.. congrats Daulat.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rye » 19 Feb 2004 18:55


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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby kgoan » 19 Feb 2004 20:20

Calvin has asked a number of times about Mush's Karachi dash, but there didn't seem to be any info on it to base even a guess on, but something is definitely up.

The Friday Times is kind enough to devote a page to tell us that Mush dashed of to Karachi for 4 days to settle a dispute betwwen the MQM and the JI!!

The sheer crudity of the explanantion seems to imply that Calvin was correct to keep asking that question. (Given Mush's security arrangements and ego, it's clearly silly to believe that he'd go to Karachi to talk to a couple of local politicians rather than summon them to Islamabad.)

So why the need to put out a "cover" story?

It's a long shot, but it might be worth keeping an eye on the pro-Sindh websites to see if anything comes out that could answer Calvins question.

Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Vivek_A » 19 Feb 2004 21:10

U.N. inspectors find link to Iran nuke program

Enrichment equipment found on air force base, diplomats sayThe Associated Press
Updated: 4:44 a.m. ET Feb. 19, 2004

VIENNA, Austria - U.N. inspectors have discovered high-tech enrichment equipment on an Iranian air force base, diplomats said Thursday. The find appeared to be the first known link of Tehran's suspect nuclear program to its military.

The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the gas centrifuge system was found at an air base outside of the capital. Such equipment is used to process uranium which can then be used for nuclear fuel or warheads, depending on the level of enrichment.

The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the designs were of a P-2 centrifuge -- more advanced than the P-1 model Iran has acknowledged using to enrich uranium for what is says are peaceful purposes. They said preliminary investigations by inspectors working for the International Atomic Energy Agency indicated they matched drawings of equipment found in Libya and supplied by the Pakistani network headed by scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby laxmibai » 19 Feb 2004 21:21

Sorry to be crass but perhaps Mush has a girlfriend in Karachi.

AJay
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 09 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby AJay » 19 Feb 2004 21:23

Posted by Tim: (In bold)
The distinction between the Israeli scientific complex of the mid-1950s and Pakistan's of the mid-1980s, I suspect, is not nearly as dramatic.

I think this is arguable. I suspect that a majority of the people working on the Manhattan project would have become dual citizens of US and Israel. What did Pakistan have in mid 1980's? Abdus Salaam - a great son of India, and the usurper AXK (and who incidentally was born in India but majority of the Indians want to forget that).

May be what you mean by "Scientific Complex" is the "Industrial Complex". That would a be a little more accurate.

Evidently, I'm succumbing to Rumsfelditis. Pretty soon, I'll be talking about "known and unknown unknowns." Which I actually think was pretty clear, if you think about it.

What I an saying may be hearsay on BRF, but I wish India had a Defence Minister with his kind of confidence. GF has some qualities but probably falls short in the area of the killer instinct.

Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Vivek_A » 19 Feb 2004 21:29

Rumsfelditis may sound funny the way he said it, but it's sound management theory.

The pie chart of knowledge breaks down into three parts.

1. Things that you know
2. Things that you know you don't know(you asked the question and didn't get the reply) AND
3. Things that you don't know that you don't know.(maybe you didn't ask the right questions).

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby TSJones » 19 Feb 2004 22:33


I suspect that a majority of the people working on the Manhattan project would have become dual citizens of US and Israel


You suspect wrong. First of all the statement supposes that mostly jews worked on the Manhattan project. I dispute this. I have no stats to to dispute it with but neither do you have the statistics. It's like the statement that mostly foreign scientists and engineers work for NASA someone made on this forum a number of years. It's simply not true.

Secondly, a number of the foreign jewish scientists stayed in the US into their retirements: Edward Teller, Berthe, etc. They didn't go running off to Israel. And Oppenheimer although jewish, was strictly American and he never leaked any info that I know of.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Leonard » 19 Feb 2004 23:45

Father of the dirty bomb?

Anil Narendra

"Pakistan's military ruler Pervez Musharraf may consider Dr AQ Khan a hero, but I think the internationally disgraced nuclear engineer is a thief and a criminal nuclear proliferator," says US President George W Bush. Indirectly indicting past Pakistani regimes, Mr Bush has said Dr Khan remained on the Pakistan Government's payroll earning a modest salary. Yet, he and his associates financed lavish lifestyles through the sale of nuclear technologies and equipment to outlawed regimes from North Africa to North Korea.




In another link with the nuclear black market emanating from Pakistan, UN inspectors in Iran have discovered undeclared designs of an advanced centrifuge used to enrich uranium. Preliminary investigations suggest the designs match drawings of enrichment found in Libya, supplied through the network headed by Dr Khan. Beyond adding a link to the chain of equipment, middlemen and companies comprising the clandestine nuclear network, the findings by UN nuclear inspectors last Thursday cast doubt on Iran's willingness to open its nuclear activities to international inspection.



What is inexplicable is the continued defence of Pakistan by the Bush Administration. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has said the results of the Pakistani investigation spoke "clearly of his (General Musharraf's) commitment to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction." He said the US appreciated Pakistan's efforts to break the network put in place by Dr Khan. "They have disrupted a network of WMDs. And they are a strong partner in the global war on terrorism, and we will continue to work closely with them on a number of fronts."



As for General Musharraf, he is trying hard to brush the issue aside and continue with his policy of fooling the world including his ally, the US. He has pardoned Dr Khan and accepted his plea for mercy after he admitted leaks. "Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him," he said in a news conference. More appalling, General Musharraf said Dr Khan could keep the slush funds! I suppose this was necessary because if the recipients were to be made public, many skeletons would have come tumbling out of the closet. To keep everything under wraps, General Musharraf has tried hard to push the issue under the carpet. He may try and fool the world that he was not aware of what was going on, but the fact is he was aware of how funds were collected for the bomb.



General Musharraf now claims Dr Khan acted purely out of "greed" and was aware of how funds were collected for the formation of the Engineering Research Laboratory (ERL) in July 1976. The finance for the project was arranged by then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto from Libya, Iraq and Saudi Arabia in return of the promise that Dr Khan would develop an "Islamic Bomb". An important fact that got brushed under the carpet is the Chinese connection with Pakistan's acquisition of the Ghauri missile. Pakistan boasts it has produced this missile. But we know the true story: There was no "production". Grateful North Koreans under instructions of the Chinese supplied the missiles in knock-down condition to Pakistan.



There are many in Pakistan and the Islamic world who find nothing wrong with what Dr Khan has done. After all, Iran and Libya are Islamic countries. Pakistan is not a signatory to the NPT, and therefore, by this morality, Dr Khan is above board. This view was shockingly expressed by Qazi Hussain Ahmed, the Chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, which enjoys a huge following within the Pakistani Army.



As if the situation wasn't bad enough, the Chinese connection with the nuclear theft has also come to light. Libyan arms designs sold by Dr Khan have been traced to China, providing clinching evidence of Beijing's involvement in Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme. US investigators, cited in The Washington Post, have revealed that China had transferred nuclear know-how to Pakistan in the early 1980s. The investigators discovered a packet of documents, some of which included text in Chinese, with step-by-step instructions on how to assemble an implosion-type nuclear device.



Where does all this leave us? Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda may have acquired nuclear materials for possible use in their war against India, Israel and the West. The knowledge that bin Laden has components for a nuclear device stems from the regular warnings from President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair that the Arab terrorist would commit worse atrocities than the attack on New York and Washington if he were able. It seems the US and UK have decided to pre-empt any nuclear attack by the jihadis. There is talk of another allied invasion. But the Americans and British have a very poor track record in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now with China in the scene, the entire perspective has changed. An informed source has told The Times that bin Laden appeared to have amassed a vast range of weapons although he insisted he did not have the capacity to launch a nuclear attack. Hopefully, Dr Khan or the Chinese haven't done the needful.


Al Keeda probably has the bomb

AJay
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 09 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby AJay » 19 Feb 2004 23:52

Originally posted by TSJones:
First of all the statement supposes that mostly jews worked on the Manhattan project. ... but neither do you have the statistics.
Some of the important personalities working on the project

Appendix: Key Figures in the Manhattan Project

Szilard, Einstein, Seaborg, Bohr, Feyman (SIC), Oppenheimer...

It is not my intention to say that they were not patriotic. I am merely pointing out the possibility of closer collaboration with Isareli scientists. It is only a guess. You are welcome to prove it wrong.

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Div » 19 Feb 2004 23:56

''Pakistan Exempt from Tough U.S. Stance on WMD''
http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=144&language_id=1

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

Re: Pakistan Nuclear Proliferation - 11 Feb 2004

Postby Rangudu » 20 Feb 2004 01:53

Another Nuke-nood pointer. Apparently, in that speech to the Paki mullahs today, Mush said that the Paki nukes are "vulnerable to foreign bombing raids" :roll: At the same meeting, however, he pledged that he would rather sacrifice his life than let anybody imperil the nuclear weapons' safety. Apart from diplomatic pressure, should their physical safety be in doubt in any way, our claim of having achieved deterrence looks pretty thin on the ground. Vulnerability to conventional attack would put a big question mark on the cost effectiveness of producing atomic weapons. A basic principle of deterrence is that one's nuclear arsenal should be so secured that only a nuclear attack, with all its consequences, is the enemy's only option to destroy them. Otherwise, if vulnerable to conventional attack, an enemy might take that relatively lower risk as a means of bypassing the nuclear deterrent.

The same fear of 'jeopardy of vital national interests, Kashmir, nuclear assets and economy,' was put forward by the President as the main argument for Pakistan to have hastily consented to join the so-called War on Terror, even though it meant a complete volt-face of our Afghan policy. Enough time should have elapsed since 9/11 for the National Command Authority to have adopted fail-safe methods to protect these vital national assets. [/quote]


Return to “Nuclear Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests