November
30, 2007
Washington’s Fear Mongers
Focus on Pakistan’s Nukes
A section of
the US media and some think tanks have started advocating
the extraction of Pakistan’s nuclear teeth
on the ground that the current political turmoil
in that country is leading it to an abyss and the
possibility of its nuclear assets being grabbed
by the religious extremists. An article by a resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and
a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, published
on November 19 by the International Herald Tribune,
foresees the following possibilities: “a complete
collapse of Pakistani government rule that allows
an extreme Islamist movement to fill the vacuum;
a total loss of federal control over outlying provinces,
which splinter along ethnic lines; or a struggle
within the Pakistani military in which the minority
sympathetic to the Taliban and Al Qaeda try to establish
Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.”
Urgent US attention to Pakistan is needed, advocate
the two writers, lest the country collapses and
it becomes almost impossible to stabilize a nation
of 160 million people. To preclude the possibility
of the nuclear warheads falling into the hands of
the religious extremists, a well-planned operation
of the Special Forces is indicated. Considering
the value attached to the weapons by the people
at large, the US forces will have to team up with
their Pakistani counterparts to secure critical
sites and move the material to a safer place. “For
the United States, the safest bet would be shipping
the material to some place like New Mexico.”
Since moving the critical items to any place in
the U.S. would be unacceptable to the people and
the armed forces, the article points out, it would
be advisable to move them to a redoubt within Pakistan
to be guarded jointly by international and Pakistani
troops.
American and international troops would be helpful
to Pakistani forces in the event of the extremists
taking them on. The U.S. troops should, to begin
with, help secure Islamabad and the adjoining areas
of Punjab -the country’s center- to thwart
any attempt of the radicals to overwhelm the most
sensitive part of the country.
The prevalent volatility in Pakistan is “as
much a threat to our basic security as Soviet tanks
once were”, contended the two think tanks
epitomizing the new perspective being developed
by these and other tendentious analysts. One may
place in this category the recent cover story of
Newsweek that presented Pakistan as the most dangerous
nation of the world, and Democratic Presidential
hopeful, Joe Biden’s remark that the nuclear
arsenal of Pakistan needed more urgent attention
than the ambitions of Iran.
According to the Washington Post (11/11), of world’s
nine declared and undeclared nuclear arsenals, none
provokes as much worry amid officials in Washington
as Pakistan’s. In support of their fear, they
point out the aberration of A.Q. Khan generally
acknowledged in Pakistan as the father of the country’s
bomb. Vast majority of the people entertain gratitude
to him for giving the nation a sense of security
against a bullying neighbor.
Fears are being regularly fanned that Pakistan’s
nuclear arsenal might not be meant for use only
in a war with India but it could become a security
threat to the US homeland in the event of its theft
and diversion to terrorist groups. “Because
the risks are so grave”, Washington Post (11/11)
reported, “ U.S. intelligence officials have
long had contingency plans for intervening to obstruct
such a theft”.
On the other hand, the Deputy Director of Pakistan’s
Strategic Plans Division, M. Khurshid Khan, told
on November 20 a meeting of Nuclear Counter Terrorism
Specialists, organized in UK by the United Nations
Atomic Agency, “There is nothing to worry
about the safety and security of Pakistan’s
nuclear weapons”. A division of 8,000 well-trained
guards oversee their security.
The standard procedure is that Nukes are always
kept in disassembled parts, unless the country is
at war or in a severe crisis calling for a resort
to such weaponry. That gives the advantage of preventing
any unauthorized or accidental use in case of theft,
or unauthorized launch. If you are not happy with
keeping the warheads mated with the trigger mechanism,
then keeping them apart will ensure against their
theft.
Nuclear weapons are not firecrackers that can be
used by a trigger-happy adventurer. The command
and control system is foolproof with built in codes
developed by Pakistanis themselves. The nukes need
to be taken care of and handled with utmost care
because their use, particularly against another
nuclear state leads to Mutually Assured Annihilation
(MAD).
Pakistanis are a moderate people and their armed
forces have an enviable record of professionalism
and discipline. It would be naïve to treat
them like irresponsible kids.
George Bush and Gordon Brown want to see the Middle
East free of nuclear weapons. Hence, they contend
that Iran should have no facility that could develop
bomb grade fissile material. The discomfort towards
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal may also be attributed
to this mind set.
But what about Israel, which is also located in
the same region? That Israel is a nuclear power
with a hundred or so warheads in its basement is
common knowledge. In December last year, the country’s
prime minister, Ehud Olmert, blurted out that Israel,
like America, France and Russia had nuclear weapons.
This exposed that its perennial “nuclear ambiguity”
was meant to keep receiving billions of dollars
in US aid despite the US law prohibiting aid to
any country in possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Do Bush and Brown want to ensure that the state
midwifed by the UK and nurtured by the US remain
the only nuclear power in the oil-rich region –the
only bully on the block. Two months back, Israel
bombed a site in Syria. Last year it launched a
war of aggression against Lebanon. It remains in
occupation of Palestinian lands. In Feb. 2001 it
used chemical weapons in Gaza, according to the
BBC, severely injuring 180 civilians.
Weapons in the hands of Israel pose existential
threat to its neighbors.
Pakistan has posed no such threat. Its weapons are
meant to create a balance of terror vis-à-vis
its unfriendly neighbor. Even with that country
Pakistan has been developing friendly relations.
And, at one stage Pakistan was considering recognizing
Israel.
Pakistan has throughout the past 60 years of its
existence been extremely friendly, even obsequious
on occasions, to the United States. During the period
of the defense pacts, Pakistan readily acceded to
Baghdad Pact, CENTO and SEATO. It fought wholeheartedly
the war against the Soviet incursion in Afghanistan.
It is a close ally in the current war on terror.
What other credentials are required to prove the
integrity of the nation? Why then are the schemes
against the nuclear weapons of the country? It strains
credulity to accept the fear that the weapons would
fall into the hands of the terrorists. No such attempt
has been made since the very inception of the country’s
nuclear program. Nor, any such attempt is likely
to be made in future. Friendship rests on trust
and trust is a two-way street.
arifhussaini@hotmail.com
