Rightsizing of the Armed Forces

This is article on Iranian nuclear program. Reference to Pakistani assistance as usual.

---
Inspectors in Iran Examine Machines to Enrich Uranium
By MICHAEL R. GORDON

WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 — International inspectors visiting Iran this week were shown a network of sophisticated machinery to enrich uranium, spurring concerns that Iran is making headway in its suspected program to develop nuclear weapons, Western officials and international diplomats said today.

The site in question is near the city of Natanz and was visited on Friday by Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who went to Iran to assess the status of its nuclear program. It was the first time that inspectors had visited the installation.

During the visit to the Natanz site, inspectors found that it included a small network of centrifuges for enriching uranium. The inspectors also learned that Iran had components to make a significant number of additional centrifuges.

American officials believe Natanz is part of a long suspected nuclear weapons program, an Iranian project that American intelligence believes has benefited from Pakistani assistance and that is far more advanced than the effort by Iraq.

The officials say Iran`s goal is to mine or purchase uranium, process the ore and enrich it to a purity suitable for making weapons — a process that would give Iran a largely indigenous capability to make nuclear weapons.

Iran insists that its aim is to make fuel for a civilian nuclear power program, and it maintains that it is opening its plant in Natanz to the atomic energy agency to demonstrate its peaceful intentions.

The new information on Iran`s program comes at an awkward time for the Bush administration, which is making final military preparations for a potential American-led invasion to topple the government of Saddam Hussein, an action justified partly on grounds that Iraq is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Noting that North Korea`s and Iran`s nuclear programs are far ahead of Iraq`s, critics of the Bush administration have contended that it has focused too much on a lesser proliferation problem. Administration officials contend that it is important to act before Iraq becomes a nuclear power and say the United States is trying to devise strategies to try to head off North Korea`s and Iran`s weapons programs.

Dr. ElBaradei, who had planned to visit Iranian sites for three days, cut short his visit to Iran and left today. Two senior officials from the atomic energy agency plan to continue their work in Iran for several days.

The site near Natanz has long been of concern to American intelligence agencies, which had concluded that Iran was building a large gas centrifuge plant there to enrich uranium.

The plant under construction there has thick concrete walls and is being built underground, an apparent precaution against a military attack. After the work on the plant was disclosed by an Iranian opposition group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, Dr. ElBaradei asked that it be included in his visit to Iran.

The agency also pushed for the visit because of Iran`s announcement in September that it was proceeding with an ambitious nuclear power program, one that is planned to give it an indigenous ability to make and reprocess its own fuel. One objective of Dr. ElBaradei`s visit was to ask Iran to adopt an additional protocol that would provide the agency with significantly greater access to sites in Iran and information about its nuclear program.

American and foreign intelligence services believe Iran`s program would work as follows: Iran would mine natural uranium at domestic sites or buy it abroad. The uranium would then be taken to a facility at Isfahan, where it would be converted into uranium hexafluoride, a gas.

The fuel would then be taken either to the centrifuge facility at Natanz or, perhaps, to some covert centrifuge plant. The progress that Iran has made in centrifuge technology, as documented by the inspectors, reinforces concerns that Iran is moving forward in this major area.

Iran says Natanz will be used to produce low-enriched uranium for civilian power plants that it has yet to build. The plant that Russians are building at Bushehr would not need low-enriched uranium from Natanz because Russia is supplying the fuel.

Iran also says the Natanz facility will be under international safeguards, which means there will be monitoring equipment and regular inspections to make sure that no enriched uranium is diverted.

But American and British intelligence officials have several concerns. One is that if Iran is able to build a civilian plant in Natanz, it can develop a clandestine nuclear enrichment plant elsewhere. Another is that Iran might somehow divert material from Natanz and take it to a secret centrifuge plant for enrichment to weapons-grade material.

Still another concern is that Iran will complete the Natanz plant under international inspection but then withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which it is legally allowed to do with three months` notice. It could then reconfigure the installation to make weapons-grade uranium. A rule of thumb is that it takes 1,000 centrifuges of the type Iran is using to make a bomb`s worth of fissile material per year.

An urgent question is whether Iran has run some uranium hexafluoride through the small network of centrifuges at Natanz. That would produce small amounts of low-enriched uranium but would be a violation of Iran`s obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Those obligations require that the production of nuclear material be reported.

Asked to comment on the centrifuges observed at Natanz, a spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency declined to respond.

``Iran will attempt to justify Natanz as part of its civilian nuclear power program, but it is actually an effort to develop a nuclear weapons breakout capability,`` said Gary Samore, director of studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies and former expert on proliferation on President Bill Clinton`s National Security Council.

``It makes no technical sense for Iran to do this for civilian purposes because Russia has agreed to provide lifetime fuel services for Iran`s only nuclear power plant under construction, the one at Bushehr,`` Mr. Samore added. ``The Iranians will argue that they have plans to buy an additional four or five plants from Russia. But it would make more economic and technical sense for Russia to provide the fuel for those plants.``

Natanz is just one Iranian plant that is of concern. According to American intelligence, Iran has been building a plant near Arak in west-central Iran to produce heavy water, which can be used to make plutonium. Iran has yet to build a reactor that could use the heavy water.

Earlier this week, the Iranian resistance group asserted that research and testing on centrifuge technology was being carried out at a front company near Tehran called the Kola Electric Company. Iran says the company is a watch factory.

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT

Sorry if this comes a little late, but probably the best response to your assertion that Pakistan was successful in the 1965 conflict would be the following link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm

This should perhaps open your eye to the fact that the Pak. Army is indeed the ONLY

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT

Sorry if this comes a little late, but probably the best response to your assertion that Pakistan was successful in the 1965 conflict would be the following link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm

This should perhaps open your eye to the fact that the Pak. Army is indeed the ONLY army that hasn`t won a single war!!

Pakistani army has some amazing leaders. Compare the offer made to Turkey in contrast to the peanuts Pakistan got after Sep-11.

re: Paki Army
Let us face it, Pakistan is going down the drains all that Pakis can do is to justify one bad thing after another. There is a lot of intellectual masturbation going on here by people like Romair (who have nothing better to do) who want to prove that Mushy was the best bet but somehow things did not work. You want a political role model for Pak? Look next door: a sustsained democracy for 50 years, an intact constitution, rule of law and an abiding faith in the political process by its one billion citizens. India is the role model. Look no further.
Sridhar

[b]Pakistani general vs. American generals[b]

AFP has reported that the Pentagon?s inspector general is investigating undisclosed allegations of improprieties leveled at US Army General Tommy Franks, the commander who would likely lead US forces in any invasion of Iraq. Currently General Franks is commanding US forces in Afghanistan.

His boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld expressed ``full trust, respect and confidence`` in General Franks, calling him ``and enormously talented commander and a man of the highest integrity.``

What are the charges against General Franks? According to Washington Post, the general was being investigated for abuse of office by allowing his wife sit in on meetings at which classified information was discussed, had a soldier assist her on almost full-time bases, and assigned a military bodyguard to protect her.

Pakistanis should read the charges once again and then look at their own generals. General Tommy Franks is being investigated for abuse of office; do Pakistani generals abuse their offices? He is being investigated for allowing his wife to sit in on meetings at which classified information was discussed; don?t Pakistani generals let their wives run around all over Pakistan. Inspector general is investigating General Tommy Franks for having a soldier assist his wife on almost full-time bases; don?t Pakistani generals have army of soldiers at the disposal of their wives on full-time basis to run their family chores? He is being investigated for assigning a military bodyguard to protect her; don?t our generals have bodyguards to protect their families?

This is a small point-by-point comparison between US General Tommy Franks and Pakistani Generals for which he is being investigated; otherwise, our generals abuse their offices thousand times more than General Tommy Franks has done. Pakistani generals are eating Pakistan?s economic pie hundred percent leaving nothing for the people of Pakistan. They grab best rural and urban lands to sell and make money. Pakistani generals illegally takeover Pakistan and surrender it to enemy without considering themselves liable to answer to any authority in Pakistan. They trample the constitution of Pakistan and go scot-free. They hold fraudulent referendums and become illegal presidents and nobody investigates them. They crown criminals in positions of responsibility without fear of investigation.

Indeed they are very lucky generals. They are generals of the poorest country in the world but they are on the top in the list of richest generals in the world.

Poor General Tommy Franks just picked up a few minor things from Pakistani generals and he is in hot waters. Perhaps in the company of Pakistani generals he forgot that he was not a Pakistani but an American general. Therefore, he did not have the luxury to have a soldier assist his wife or provide her a bodyguard.

General Tommy Franks also forgot that Pakistani generals are real generals whereas he is a fake general. Better he should learn from his first investigation and he should not make such mistake again!

Courtesy
A Fauji`s Diary
http://www.pakistanweekly.com
Saturday February 08, 2003

General Mahmood planned to overthrow Musharraf
reported by Pakistan second largest daily newspaper (alas in Urdu) today (15/2-2003).

http://www.nawaiwaqt.com.pk/daily/feb-2003/15/ak4.htm

Filth produces filth. Intervention of the military in political affairs is not only harmful for the civil society, it is much more detrimental for the army itself. It is a matter of time that these generals will be plotting against each other, planning each other’s assassinations and cutting each other’s legs.

Please, for God sake wake up, before it is too late.

Ref ahmadzai #93

[I agree with you that Pakistanis were arrested by NA fighting needlessly in Afghanistan. But tell me should we really have believed the NA immediately after the conflict when the passions of NA were running very anti-Pakistani? If 60,000 Pakistanis were fighting in Afghanistan, NA should have allowed those arrested a POW status and some neutral body could have easily found out the truth.]

Exactly what kind of status was to those NA and other forces` fighters who fell into the hands of the Taliban?

The Swift Sword of Death for the enemies of Taliban means that when those enemies come back into power, you are going to have the Taliban and their Pakistani brethren locked up in airless shipping containers in 120 degree heat.

If you Pakhtoons cannot put up with Hazaras and Tajiks because you are Sunni and they are Shia or because you worship Allah five times a day and you suspect they are godless Communists, then don`t ask for Geneva Convention rights when you are picked up fighting against them. Expect to get the same treatment that you gave them. It is called being paid back in the same coin.

I feel sorry for those stupid Pakistanis who went into Afghanistan even after 9-11 thinking they were going to fight the wars of 1847 when there were no Americans with daisycutters. Somebody ought to capture their mullahs and hang them from lampposts. For stupidity, not for inciting violence; one ought not to allow these mullahs to further breed their stupid genes.

My response to Sadna at # 92 is as follows:

I agree with you that Pakistanis were arrested by NA fighting needlessly in Afghanistan. But tell me should we really have believed the NA immediately after the conflict when the passions of NA were running very anti-Pakistani? If 60,000 Pakistanis were fighting in Afghanistan, NA should have allowed those arrested a POW status and some neutral body could have easily found out the truth.

I have written it before and I am repeating it. As pro-communism Tajiks and Uzbeks were being migrated out of former USSR into Afghanistan in the 70s to destabilize it and turn it into a communist country, lot of the Pashtoons were migrating out of the Tajik and Uzbek dominated lands, where they were a minority, into Pakistan. These Pashtoons tended to keep dual nationalities. In addition, the distribution of some Pashtoon tribes (Ahmadzais are also distributed almost 50-50) across the border makes it easier for these people to keep dual nationalities. If the prisoners had been interviewed by neutral bodies, they would have found out that most of them were these anti-NA Pashtoons, who wanted to settle old scores.

About the media interviews, don`t you recall how CNN and BBC were showing Afghan women as Burka cladded oppressed people and NA as heroes. Did the burka go after the Talibans? Recall what the emancipators of oppressed Afghan women like RAWA had to say about NA - that under its rule before Talibans, it had inflicted same amount of atrocities on Afghan women as had Talibans.

I am not disagreeing with you to the extent that I believe that there were some Pakistanis too, who were mis-lead into the `Jihad` by some fundamentalist Islamic parties. But I will again argue that they were a very small and an insignificant number.

As to your last sentence, I have not fooled anyone. All of my posts clearly indicate that I am dead set against MMA, which came into being last year and comprises 6 parties, including a Shia Group (please read my response to Romair at # 90). I have also expressed my opinion on Bush Administration`s recent inept measures, which are being seen as anti-Muslim, and are making MMA stronger and General Musharraf`s and an average Pakistani`s job that much more harder to curtail them. I have also expressed my reasons why Bush Admin. might be doing it. This I am doing with a clean concious - I want extremism in the name of religion to leave all Pakhtoons. I want to see ourselves as progressive people. Religious yes, but not living in dark ages in the name of a great religion.

ahmadzai #91
The comparison between MMA and Sangh Parivar led mobs is a bit disingenous.

A church or a temple or a few measly members of Pakistani minorities are small fish for MMA who for the last 25 years, have been motivating, recruiting and training fighters for the Afghan jihad. According to an estimate made a few years ago, at least 60,000 Pakistanis fought in the Afghan jihad.

A few Pakistani jihadis , imprisoned in NA prisons, when interviewed said that their leaders in Pakistan told them to go and fight the infidel Soviets who hadnot left`. Others said they joined up for Kashmir but were told by their leaders to go to Afghanistan to `train for Kashmir`.

When MMA was fighting in such wide battlefields for jihad, for so much potential ideological ground to be won stretching deep into Central Asia, and so much money pouring in from every quarter for this purpose, they occupied pride of place as spearheads of Pakistan`s foreign policy, so why the heck they would be interested in attacking at home a few Pakistani Hindus and Christians who, to save their outrage, werenot even allowed to VOTE with them?


Sangh Parivar is exactly as bad as anyone can say it is. But as for the rest of the cr_p, you can fool your fellow Pakistanis, but not many others.

Urstruly and Harimau from 83 to 85:

No its not possible in Pakistan. We cannot learn from India and our MMA Mullas, although abhorable, are not comparable to Indian Sangh Parivar. For one, not a single leader of theirs has lead a march to bring a church or a temple down in Pakistan.

Also, the last time some of their followers were given a chance to burn sleeping Hindus, they chickened out - puck puck puck puck. Instead, they burnt a US flag down.

Finally, at the moment, they are more interested in challenging General Musharraf and PML Q rather than issuing threats to Indians of complete anhiliation and to isolate them in the world.

;)

In response to Romair at #87, who wrote:

``You seem to be a stronger supporter of Musharraf then even I am``.

First of all, EID MUBARAK to you and your family.

Being a nationalist from the NWFP, I think I am a supporter of General Musharraf purely from a selfish point of view in that I want Pakhtoons of Afghanistan (well, Pashtoons there) and Pakistan to be liberal, broad-minded and educated group of people, who are able to contribute positively to our respective countries and to the world as a whole. For too long, we have let ourselves ensnared in backwardness on the excuse of our love for religion. I strongly believe that the current Government can deliver that.

I hate Mullas, because they are exploiting the emotions of our people and are bent upon taking us (Pakhtoons) back to dark ages. Since at my family level I cannot do much about it, I am reclined to take an easier route of hating the enemy;)

I also dislike them for they are competent enough to destabilize Pakistan through creating anarchy and once Pakistan is destabilized, they will control a large mass of devouts, who will set out to destabilize Russia, China and India. Just imagine the population involved and the magnitude of pain that will follow. I mean all of us want to live in peace and prosperity. I don`t want to see people follow that dangerous a course, although at the moment they are set to.

My personal love for Musharraf ends here. The next part is my analysis of the events:

I bet your 3rd forecast about General Musharraf will also come true, but with a little difference. He will put off his uniform and will assume the leadership of PML Q. This will happen once the political dust settles and once he gets a firm nod from the leaders of the PML Q. Have this in writing from me. Your 3rd forecast will come out good.

As regards feudals, just take note of the labor pains of controlling Mullaism in Pakistan. I mean note all the wrath that he is earning from our far right. What you are suggesting is a course that would have doomed all his undertakings at this critical juncture. Btw, Mullaism is not as big a problem in military, and being from the army perhaps you will subscribe to this viewpoint, as we are made to believe. But feudalism is. Children of feudals are now serving at highest ranks in various services. I bet General would have gone out for getting feudals by their balls before the Mullas. Devolution of power was a step in that direction. However, just too much of sectarian killings, other terrorist acts and finally the friendly advice of Bill Clinton to Pakistanis, prompted him to go after Mullas first (on 14th August 2001 to be precise, i.e. a month before the tragic 9/11). The later event of 9/11 reinforced the need for him to continue on that path.

Taking all the evils in one go would not have been possible for the military. Taking on Mullas and feudals at the same time would have turned a large segment of top brass military officers against the well-wishers of the country within the military.

This is regarding the discussion on satellites and space programmes. There was an article recently in the New York Times that said that the Russina space program had shrunk so much that its budget was only two percent of NASA`s budget! But the more surprising thing was that NYTimes mentioned that Russia`s space budget was only 50% of India`s space program budget.
It shows how steeply Russia has fallen and how much India has risen.

The culture, values and principles of Pakistan Army`s lower strata i.e. from a foot soldier to Lt. Colonel, are different from those who wear swords on their shoulders with a red tape on the collars. The lower strata of the Army believes in Jihad, is always ready to die for the country and Islam, committed to the defence of Pakistan`s frontiers from external and internal enemies and stands with the people of the country on every issue ranging from the restoration of democracy to the restricted role of Army in the politics.
The top brass of the Army has different priorities. The culture they inherit revolves around absolute authority. They live to capture even the slightest opportunity to overthrow the elected governments, occupy the positions like President, Governors, and Ministers, use the civilian bureaucracy as their personal servants, get expensive real-estate in posh areas of the cities, make fiefdoms in the interior of the provinces after getting huge agriculture farms free of cost or on throw away prices.
Today`s Pakistan Army has two faces - one a pro-people and the other a pro-colonial.

http://www.weeklyindependent.com/backpage3.htm

ahmadzai #81: You seem to be a stronger supporter of Musharraf then even I am (or was for the three year period).

The Army, if it comes in, must come in when the situation is completely disastrous. That was the case in 1999, and that is why nearly every Pakistani supported the coup (except a few arm-chair revolutionaries on Chowk).

It should then work honestly to the best of its ability to stablize things. It obviously will not have the dexterity and skills of honest civilians in running a civilian enterprise, but it should do the best it can, with the help of competent civilians. Which it did this time around.

During its brief stay, it should take on every evil in the society, head-on. I don`t know why it never goes after feudals. The feudals are sh//t scared of the military (and of maulvis), becasue these are the only groups that can knock them out. Ayub and Zia`s families actually ended up joining the feudal political crowd. Luckily, Musharraf hasn`t done that. But, he didn`t take on the feudals either (until this is done, Pakistan will never progress).

After wiping out the status quo, the Army should quickly leave, and hold elections, with completely new faces, under completely new rules.

Musharraf hasn`t done this last part. And I can make a bet it will cost him. His approval ratings till the referendum were sky high in Pakistan (according to magazine surveys). Now, they are going down and down. The only two things he has going for him is that everyone knows he is scruplously financially honest and that he is still better than the other corrupt lot. If you are just better than the worst, then you don`t have much to go by, if you ask me. You are required not for your own virtues, but to keep other people`s vices in check.

The one thing Pakistan needs more than anything else is not someone who is popular when he is in power (Musharraf achieved that in the pre-referendum days). But someone who leaves when he is popular. Which Musharraf could have done also.

Pakistanis need political role models. Someone they can compare the corrupt politicians (and other corrupt Generals etc.) to and tell them, ``Woh bhi tau tha, jo imandari say kaam kar kay, voluntarily kursi chaur gaya.``

Currently, they can only say this about Jinnah. Not about any other leader, civilian or military. I think Musharraf was the best possible candidate for this. I opposed Zia, even when I was in the military. However, I supported Musharraf from the start. Primarily, because I still feel I can pick a good General from a bad one. He is the best the military has to offer, as far as dictators go. Uptil his referendum, he did everything I predicted he would do, under super-tough circumstances.

I stated he would hold elections. Which he did. I said he would go after maulvis, while others on this site tried to paint him as a mullah. Which he did. The only prediction I was wrong on was that I thought he would completely leave after three years. He has only partially left. And this is his achilles heel.

He should now resign from the military and put his name up for Presidentship. If the NA does not elect him, then he has done his share. People will still respect him. He could probably come back in five years and win an NA election in a landslide, if he is interested in Public Service. Imran Khan would have given him a position in his party (the party I support).

Eventually, Pakistanis have to pay for their own selections. Non-Constitutional govts. should only come under desparate circumstances, when the elected ruler has started storming Supreme Courts and filling Swiss Acounts. After that, they should quickly leave. Musharraf alone, regardless of how well-intentioned he maybe, cannot solve all of Pakistan`s problems. He has done his share, which was stabilization over three years. Now he needs to become a civilian.

Had I been in his shows, I would have ruthlessly wiped the slate clean in three years - gone after the feudals, mullahs, corrupt business and beaurecracy. I would have then in the final year, internally reorganized the Army. Would have dictatorially changed the Constitution, banning uniformally anyone who had been in the Assemblies before. Held a clean election. And then retired to the Boston.

Sounds like a lot. But the Army is powerful enough to do the above.

Re freeing of the press of Pakistan.
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/social_statistics/newspaper_average.pdf


The combined circulation figures of daily newspapers from the Govt. of Pakistan site are as follows:
(these are circulation figures for 2000, there are no figures for 2001 and 2002).
Urdu dailies : 4.6million
English dailies : 501,643
Sindhi : 508,345

Being `freely` criticised in 500,000 odd copies of English newspapers in 140 million population doesnot constitute much of a threat.