Pakistan: Inside The Nuclear Closet

Naqshbandi (and Urstruly)#14: ``throughout history shias (iran) have stabbed sunnis in the back when it has suited them ...
the only country we should exchange such weapons with is the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries... ``

This is an interesting comment.

Iran has definitely stabbed Pakistan in the back, in the nuclear scandal. But is it really because Iran is a Shia country? I have always had difficulty understanding such arguments. The same Shia Iran has traditionally been one of the few countries that stood my Pakistan, during wars. And Pakistanis get better treatement in Shia Iran than in Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries (whose people treat Pakistanis like filth).

But let me try to argue it, within the boundaries of your frame of reference.

Both you and Urstruly have indicated that you would prefer Pakistan to be under Shariah of some sort. While I don`t doubt both of yours` patriotism and genuine dedication to Islam, I do think both of you are misguided and misinformed on Islam - specifically on this issue of Shariah. May Allah Subhan Ta`ala, someday, show the correct path to you in Islam. And take you off your current misguided path. Amen (I say this with all sincerity, since I have a fear, that on your current one-sided track, one day, a switch will flip and you will go to the other extreme and start hating Islam - much like SameerJB and hamidm).

Shariah is an absolutist form of law. It only allows for interpretation, but not for amendments. I personally oppose Shariah, since I don`t think any two Muslims can agree on any one interpretation of Shariah. Hence it is a recipe for disaster, even in its best of forms.

According to your interpretation of Shariah, what is the status of Shias? From your comment above, it seems like you consider them backstabbers. Not for any practical reason, but just for being Shia. Where exactly does that place the 15-30% of the population of Pakistan that is Shia? What about the various war heroes and shaheeds of Pakistan who were Shia? What about one of the most popular political leaders the country has ever had (Z. Bhutto), who was a Shia? And what about the founder of the country itself, Jinnah, who was a Shia? What are their statuses, under Shariah, in your opinion?

But, an even deeper debate emerges: Both you and Urstruly are like-minded on the status of Ahmedis, i.e. until they declare themselves to be non-Muslims, you don`t want them to have any anything to do with the govt. of Pakistan. But what about Shias, again. Urstruly seems to see them as an inherent part of Pakistan`s Shariah system, and wants them and Sunnis to join together, while keeping their own sects (if I understand him correctly). You consider them to be backstabbers. He is pro-Shia, while you are anti-Shia.

If both you and Urstruly had your wishes granted, and ended up on the Shariah council of Pakistan, we can see what you would do to Ahmedis. But what in the world would you do to Shias? How would both of you agree on the same Shariah for Shias? And if you couldn`t agree, then how can we say, there exists one interpretation of the Shariah?

Janab Tahmed32,
It just so happens that Swords can be oiled lightly. I was told that many swords in the museum are lightly oiled to prevent rusting. Of course it is best to keep the sword in its scabbard.

wajahat (to continue where I left off on my post #36): On the areas where we differ, I had said one was different perceptions of US presence in Iraq.

The reason I believe that the US presence in Iraq is benign (and arguably the best thing that has happened in the middle east since God invented falafil) is already before us: It has moved that society a step towards democracy. That step has already happened. If the Iraqis were smart like the Japanese and the Germans they would do what the Japanese and the Germans did after WWII: welcome US presence there (a half century later, US troops are still based in Japan and Germany, and (being smart) no one is complaining in Japan or Germany. The US (being smart) sees this to fit well with its strategic interests as well, and so everybody is happy. (``mian beewee razi, kya karay ga qazi``)

If the Iraqis lose this great opportunity to join the ranks of the world`s developed countries, they will have only the primitive nature of their own society to blame. It is this primitive nature where family and tribal ties are more important than abstract concepts upon which civilized societies are based, like the concept of the rule of law.


PS: By the way, you dont oil your sword - you sharpen it. And as such, and knowing your style of writing, I expect a sharp (but honest) response from you, not an slick and oily one as is the case with some posters on chowk. :-)

ferozk #33 I fully agree with you that the MMA compromise with Musharraf was indeed in the spirit of democracy. This was truly a step in the right direction for Pakistan politics. What would be interesting to see is whether it was a flash in the pan or something more lasting.

Good to hear from you, and hope you are keeping well.

Pakistan, does not need a neculear revolution. It needs a revolution of education and humanity. If we put all the effort that we have so far put terrorrism, and divert that to education and improving our economics we would be a gulistan that may of us have dreamed off in our reverrie. This is what pisses me off about our rulers. They live in the the 17th century. Janab, there is no point reliving old glories. We have to make new glories through educational and economic development. We should not be prown of copying 25 year old neuclear technology. We need to be proud of our youth and encourage them to attain more noble goals. This jihadi culture is killing our country and shooing away any of us who would ever want to go back to Pakistan. Face it... we pakis have become the laughing stock of the world. We always like to compare ourselves to india, but we never make a serious attempt to do so. All we do is do terrorrism and make our never ending claim on Kashmir. As far as I am concerned, the hell with Kashmir!! What has fighting over kashmir got us. It has drained us of our reason because it has filled us with hatered towards indians. This is why I am critical towards those Pakis who never cesase to beat the neuclear drum.
For me, I`d rather try to develop solar and wind energies. Anyway, I get frustrated everytime I read about the muslim bomb. This is all BS and I pary that it will end soon.

This article does Xerox Khan a terrible injustice, due no doubt to petty personal jealousy. There is no good reason why possession of the Ultimate Weapon should be solely reserved for the Masters of the Universe, for the Great and the Good, or for large stable democracies. Thanks to Xerox’s heroic efforts, your average bemedalled tinpot military dictator or petro-dollar funded jihadic crazy can wield his own bums for a very nominal sum of money. Taken to its logical conclusion, bums and the technical infrastructure for making them will become commodities like pork bellies and DRAM, subject to market forces, futures trading, etc.; and like stereo equipment, sports cars and AK-47s they will be backed by a thriving industry at every scale specializing in customization, modification, hot-rodding, fusion-boosting, cobalt-salting and the like, to suit the end-user’s particular need or fancy. A bum in every garage can only bode well for the destiny of mankind.

Xerox Khan is the Linus Torvalds of the world of nuclear proliferation. That is to say, his true genius is not technical but organizational; it lay in setting up a far-flung decentralized international network for the production of the components of a nuclear weapons program. Thus for instance low-tech Pakistan’s inability to machine centrifuge components to the required tolerances proved no obstacle when Malaysians could readily step into the breach.

A prophet is rarely honoured in his own time. Like that other wronged Pakistani genius Agha Hassan Abedi of BCCI, the radical novelty of Xerox Khan’s approach has not yet been adequately recognized. It may remain for an impartial future history of our times to evaluate the true significance of his Xerox Khan’s achievements in the commoditization of nuclear weapons infrastructure.

And finally, Pakistanis have little reason to fear any retribution for Xerox’s endeavours. If the sheriff of the global village shows up on your doorstep with his posse, you can invoke your Fifth Amendment Rights against self-incrimination, and your Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. As a last resort, you can always claim that India made you do it. That should work like a charm.

wajahat #35 ``So Sir, oil up that sword, we might be crossing iron again. ``

Shamsheer tyar hai! Even better, the keyboard is ready The keyboard being mightier than the sword. ;-)

Actually, I think we do agree that Iraq is better off today then it was an year ago under Saddam. And I think we both agree (as indeed do all well-meaning individuals) on the need for peace in Iraq.

Where we seem to have different perceptions is the future and different levels of comfort with US presence in Iraq. So, en garde sir, and be prepared for a response on these issues to which I shall return in due course. (I must hastily leave now to meet someone),

#30 tahmed

I am forever humbled by the expression of optimism that you portray through your posts and give you due credit for it. You spoke about the signing of the iraqi constitution, a milestone indeed. It happened at the most senior levels and partly would appear to pave the way of Iraqi self Determination albiet the 500 washington policy makers who will ``help`` iraq run its govt and the ``100000`` US soldiers for any contingency.

Now this was the Imperialist plan and is working out as they say in the South of US ``Mighty Fine`` for the Occupiers. However something really scary happened which is totally missing from your post, the horrific suicide bombings in Kerbala. Will the (Terrorists, Al Qaeda, Foreign Remananats, Dead Enders) as the rumsfieldian vocabulary will put it, go to such a bloody extent to ensue a Civil War. Already there is huge problems in the fact that Kurds want Tikrit, which is been a Sunni Stronghold and Shias are in the process of determining sides (read the daily Anti-American Rhetoric by the ``Supreme`` Shia leaders). In Kerbala after the suicide bombing the crowds would attack american convoys and western journalists.

My Point dear sir, is that there is a fundamental problem with this picture which no matter how unclear it might appear from a Western Media Perspective, the People if Iraq are going through. From my point of view all I wish to see in Iraq today is peace, and enough blood has been shed for my type of semi-fundoos to except the occupation as the final will of god, yet the people in Iraq might just have different Ideas and all the evidence suggests so. So Sir, oil up that sword, we might be crossing iron again.

Kind Regards

Syed Wajahat Ali

It is as if we live in a world were the punishment for the crime of theft is death for the perpetrator, and his whole family. There is a thief in Pakistan`s midst, and in a fit of self-righteousness Mr. Hoodboy is crying fowl and raising a ruckus - regardless of the consequences for him or his family.

That Mr. Hoodboy is doing the `right` or `moral` thing should be weighed against the possible backlash from his `testimony` from powers who don`t recognize justice, but only their own interests. Sometimes, staying silent is the right thing to do...

re: tahmed32

I agree with you that political compromise is the heart of a democratic tradition and more so, a sign of political tolerance.

Just one point of clarification to your post. Iraq was not the first nation to achieve this feat. Pakistan accomplished this in December 2003, when the government and MMA agreed to a compromise on the LFO. Just like the Iraqis, the government in Pakistan was not elected and the members of the parliament, were not voted to office but appointed. It is not the means, but the end which matters in the final analysis.

What do you do, when the devil tempts you to do good?

Ciao

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

wajahat #28 I think time has shown that what I predicted (on which we once crossed swords) is coming true: I had supported the Iraq war since, regardless of everything else, I had said it would result in the removal of an evil dictator (Saddam), and (given the past record of the US in introducing democracies in places it occupied - Japan, Germany) it most likely would introduce democracy for the first time ever in Iraq as well.

So, Saddam has been removed (and is going to be brought to trial for his cruel deeds in due course), and today the Iraqis did something unheard of in that country - they achieved a political compromise and signed their new constitution into law.

Of course they hypocrites of the muslim world will detract from this great step forward from their animal pat for the Iraqis by claiming that the signers were not elected via one man one vote. The truth nevertheless is that the signers represent the broad segments of Iraqi society - and the concept of political compromise (an alien concept to the cretins of the muslim world, but which lies at the heart of a democratic society) has been implemented in Iraq.

As for those nukes - only the cretins of the muslim world and of India think that copying 60 year old technology is a great achievement.

Here starteth the Prophecy

On the Second Day, there was the Pressed Conference, wherein spoke the King. The tasks of aggrandisement were completed, the great foresight of the ruler explained, the Heroic Father of the Bomb diminished forever, the nation asked to forgive and forget, and forgiveth and forgeth, the nation did, simply because there was no other choice.

On the third day, the people forgot, bigger problems appeared on our horizon, it appeared that the Chicken population had a flu, could it be a cover up, all those chicken tikkas and Chicken Biryanis stopped. The nation could not forgive and Forget. But it had no choice, and cows could be seen all over the country crying thick tears as the nearby chicken were seen chuckling to their end.

On the Fourth Day, the nation sleeps. The Bombs are locked up, the King Moves to Isloo. And the Imperialist forces too busy (Iraq, Afghanistan(for those afghanis who still havent got a Pakistani passport), Haiti etc) to worry about the small problem of Nuclear Proliferation by a client state that fullfill its current needs.

Therein lives the ghost of the Nuclear Future. In time the Neo Cons will find time to disarm the only Muslim Nation with a Full on Nuclear Program(read kerry on Pakistan). There will be debate, harsh words and then Preemption.

Here endeth the prophecy

Naqsh #22 Ha! Ha! The ManWorshipper dares to speak!!

From Dawn (Karachi) Monday March 8, 2004


Proliferation in perspective

By Mansoor Alam


The strong reaction caused in Pakistan to the news that Dr Qadeer and some other of our nuclear scientists were under investigation on suspicion of exporting nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea for personal gains was natural.

After all Pakistan`s nuclear programme unlike those of India and Israel was not for hegemonic purposes but to protect its territorial integrity and national independence against a powerful enemy.

The ``peaceful nuclear explosion`` conducted by India in 1974 had happened too soon after its military intervention in East Pakistan and was seen by the Pakistanis as a message either to submit to its domination or face the consequences.

It was, therefore, not surprising that the entire Pakistani nation stood solidly behind Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto`s declaration that we would have the bomb even if it meant eating grass.

Consequently, when Dr Qadeer succeeded in making the bomb in 1984, he became a hero for Pakistanis. Giving Pakistan nuclear capability in the teeth of international opposition led by the US was no less than a miracle and in doing so he had provided to the nation a sense of security and national pride that it had lost in 1971. This made him a figure larger than life. The people and the government put him on a high pedestal next only to the Quaid-i-Azam.

It was in this backdrop that the media broke the news that Dr Qadeer and some of our nuclear scientists and engineers were being interrogated on suspicion of having supplied nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and even North Korea. Pakistanis` first reaction was to reject it as false and US instigated with the ulterior motive to dismantle our nuclear programme, an old US objective.

Dr Kissinger had warned Mr. Bhutto that the US would make a horrible example of Pakistan if it tried to acquire the nuclear weapons. Subsequently, when Pakistan acquired the nuclear capability, the US Congress passed Pakistan specific Symington and Pressler laws for immediate application of sanctions in case Pakistan made the bomb.

During the war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan the US looked the other way and refrained from applying these laws, but President Bush senior did so as soon as the Soviet troops had left Afghanistan. Once again, as in 1965, the Pakistanis thought that the US was a selfish and unreliable ally.

Not only that, the US had also created a general impression among the Muslims all over the world that besides its perennial anti-Palestinian attitude and lack of sympathy for other issues of concern to the Muslims such as Kashmir, it did not want any Islamic country to acquire nuclear capability, the so-called ``Islamic Bomb``.

On the other hand, it had helped Israel in making the bomb and supported Israel`s blatant attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, which was then given highly adulatory coverage by the US media.

Most Muslims saw these as another evidence of US double standard and hostility towards Islam itself. The US attack on Iraq on ``sexed up`` WMD charges transformed their belief into conviction that the US agenda was to subjugate the Muslim world, appropriate its natural resources and perpetuate the Israeli hegemony in the region.

The revelation about Dr Qadeer, therefore, created strong suspicion among the Pakistanis that it was a US engineered plot to finish the Pakistani bomb. President Musharraf`s political opponents, particularly the supporters of the Taliban, for political reasons or out of respect for Dr Qadeer, spread the feeling that he had succumbed to American pressure.

The nation itself could not believe that Dr Qadeer had proliferated without the knowledge and approval of the generals who seem to have been in full control over KRL. Their natural conclusion was that President Musharraf was trying to protect his fellow generals.

Public support for Dr Qadeer was so strong that even when he admitted his guilt on the TV, Pakistanis thought that he had done so under duress or as an act of supreme sacrifice to save the country.

It never occurred to them that Dr Qadeer was human and could have used the same secret network he had established for Pakistan to supply the technology to others for personal gains. And even if Pakistan was involved, they should have kept quite out of respect for Dr Qadeer rather than place the country in a difficult situation.

It also did not occur to them that Dr Qadeer was a greater hero to the armed forces of Pakistan than ordinary Pakistanis because he had given to them a capability that had neutralized the Indian military superiority over them.

Therefore, President Musharraf could not have touched Dr Qadeer without the risk of a mutiny if there was not enough proof against him.

Nevertheless, a strong belief persists both at home and abroad that he could not have proliferated without the knowledge, if not the approval, of the generals. The allegations made against an ex-army chief in this respect by former US officials and a former member of Mr. Nawaz Sharif`s kitchen cabinet has only strengthened the suspicion against them despite the denial by the COAS concerned.

Under the circumstances it would have been better for the country and the army if President Musharraf had constituted an independent rather than an in-house enquiry, albeit in camera, led by a senior judge to remove all doubts about the involvement of armed forces personnel and to fix the responsibility for such a major security lapse.

It is still not too late to do that to clear the clouds of suspicion hanging over the generals and the president himself that he was protecting them. All democratic countries follow this course in matters of grave national concern as manifested by the Hutton enquiry in the death of Dr Kelly in the UK and the congressional enquiry now instituted by President Bush on the failure of the US intelligence in regard to the presence of the WMDs in Iraq.

Internationally serious questions are being raised about our ability to check proliferation. The American media thinks that the saga of Dr Qadeer is nothing but an attempt to cover up and proves ``Washington`s worst nightmare of nuclear weapons passing to the rogue states`` through Pakistan.

Many well-informed Pakistani columnists believe that it would be naive on our part to think that by putting all the blame on Dr Qadeer we could escape the day of reckoning.

We had handed over a ``loaded revolver to Washington which can be used against us at any time of their choosing``. We could now be declared an international pariah and might soon have to face the choice of either opening our nuclear facilities to intrusive inspection or face Iraq-like sanctions.

Although the US has been most vocal on the issue of proliferation the fact is that all other major powers, including China, share this concern. As stated by the French Foreign Minister during his recent visit to Islamabad, France and its partners want Pakistan to strengthen its nuclear export control, observe greater transparency of nuclear activities in close cooperation with the IAEA and participate in global non-proliferation within the framework of the UNSC resolution now being prepared.

All this indicates that Pakistan will have to create a watertight system of control over its nuclear facility or face the collective wrath of the international community. However the present lapse resulting from Dr Qadeer`s actions does not pose an unmanageable threat, as some analyst seem to think.

Firstly, the government has taken the right decision to question Dr Qadeer and others and admit that they had indulged in unauthorized proliferation. The Americans and the IAEA had too much proof obtained from Libya, Iran and other sources against them for a credible denial by us.

Secondly, it did the right thing in actively cooperating with the effort to dismantle the network within and outside Pakistan and assure the world that it had established a foolproof system of control.

Thirdly, individuals and enterprises mostly in the West were also involved and knew fully well what they were doing. However, governments of these countries are not being held responsible for their misdeeds.

Fourthly, since President Bush and Secretary Colin Powell have not accused Pakistan of proliferating officially and issued the requisite certification for the proposed grant of $700 million to Pakistan by Congress they cannot use the present episode to bring a charge later.

Nevertheless, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the Americans if it suits their interest in future may demand the dismantling of Pakistan`s nuclear capability, but they will have to use the doctrine of pre-emption and unilateral action rather than the present case of proliferation.

In that event our only protection will lie in the deterrence that Dr Qadeer has provided to the country. That is why Pakistanis regard him as a hero. Only if he had not done what he did, he would have not become a fallen hero, which is our deepest regret.

The writer is a former Ambassador.

E-mail: manalam@hotmail.com.