Dr A. Q. Khan: Proliferator or Scapegoat?
By Imran Khan
CA
The news that the Islamabad High Court had released the father of the ‘Islamic Bomb’ Dr. A. Q. Khan from house arrest has reignited the question of Pakistani compliance and servitude in the interminable ‘war on terror’.
Dr Khan, a metallurgical engineer, is accused of proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. He has been widely criticized for his inculpable attitude and refusal to submit before international investigators.
Media pundits and Washington politicos have reiterated their case, in lieu of Dr Khan’s release, as an opportune moment for possible pre-emptive strikes in Pakistan.
From the evidence presented it is has become fairly transparent that the A. Q Khan Network encompassed a broad spectrum of actors and that no single individual could be singled out as the instigator and perpetrator of this transgression. Dr. Khan could not have operated so independently and callously for about two decades without arousing some form of concern from the ruling governments and the military apparatus.
However, subsequent inquiries into Dr Khan’s activities have uncovered an international arms ring on par with, if not greater, than the Iran-Contra affair. Former Dutch Prime Minister, Ruud Lubbers, is on record as stating that the Government of the Netherlands knew of Khan "stealing" the secrets of nuclear technology but let him go on two occasions after the CIA expressed their wish to continue monitoring his movements.
European companies defied export restrictions in aiding the Khan network by exporting thousands of centrifuges to Pakistan as early as 1976. The investigations have further exposed unconventional bedfellows in that an Israeli businessman, Asher Karni, was found to have sold nuclear devices to Khan's associates. Karni is currently awaiting trial in a US prison.
Thus, the real question to decipher here is not concerned with the guilt of a single individual, but the entanglement of an international arms ring.
Further accusations levied against the Pakistanis accuse them to be an unreliable ally, whose obligation and commitment to the ‘war on terror’ is not only questionable, but its actions are actively undermining the efforts of the international community to subdue and eradicate the threat of religious extremism.
These presumptuous arguments from the orifices of saber rattling warmongers seem to regurgitate the same old futile contentions without ever contemplating the consequences of their shortsighted policies and mandates.
This vehemently aggressive and accusatory rhetoric directed towards Pakistan fails to mention that over 4000 Pakistanis, both from a military and civilian stand point, have lost their lives, the nation has inherently become unstable and parts of the country, especially the FATA region, have seceded their alliances to the Federal government and established their own hegemonies.
Pakistan is a nascent nation that has spent the majority of its existence on the brink of peril and destruction. Therefore, the onus is on responsible commentators to recognize these points and act in concert with the ground truth and not the hyperbola generated by the neo-con war machine situated in Washington.
The current rhetorical ammunition that has been explicitly aimed at Pakistan, as a result of Dr Khan’s release, is in all truth an entangled hypocritical bedlam in which a number of unremitting factors are despairingly cluttered together to justify Pakistan’s role in sponsoring international terrorism.
The incumbent Obama administration has hinted at its concerns with Pakistan and the release of Dr Khan but has remained rather apathetic so far. President Obama has declared his intention to work with the Russians to eliminate future proliferation of nuclear weapons; however, in attacking Dr Khan, the extent of both country’s involvement in carrying out exactly what they proclaim is a global evil and a hindrance to global peace will be exposed. In building a case against Pakistan, the USA will inevitably make a case against itself and blow the lid off the global arms trade and its major players.
Although Dr. Khan has been placated as the iconic face of nuclear proliferation, it should come as no surprise if the global community, led by the US, do not pursue Dr. Khan with the same vigor and fortitude they reserved for Saddam and Bin Laden.
