Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says | The War on Terrorism Homeland Security | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says
May 18, 2009
5:20 am
Avatar
Jaack
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 225
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/world ... ml?_r=2&hp

Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says

By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: May 17, 2009

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

“Yes,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security. Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan’s drive to spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern, because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of Islamic insurgents.

The administration’s effort is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is producing an unknown amount of new bomb-grade uranium and, once a series of new reactors is completed, bomb-grade plutonium for a new generation of weapons. President Obama has called for passage of a treaty that would stop all nations from producing more fissile material — the hardest part of making a nuclear weapon — but so far has said nothing in public about Pakistan’s activities.

Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author of Mr. Obama’s review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the administration’s concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan “has more terrorists per square mile than anyplace else on earth, and it has a nuclear weapons program that is growing faster than anyplace else on earth.”

Obama administration officials said that they had communicated to Congress that their intent was to assure that military aid to Pakistan was directed toward counterterrorism and not diverted. But Admiral Mullen’s public confirmation that the arsenal is increasing — a view widely held in both classified and unclassified analyses — seems certain to aggravate Congress’s discomfort.

Whether that discomfort might result in a delay or reduction in aid to Pakistan is unclear.

The Congressional briefings have taken place in recent weeks as Pakistan has descended into further chaos and as Congress has considered proposals to spend $3 billion over the next five years to train and equip Pakistan’s military for counterinsurgency warfare. That aid would come on top of $7.5 billion in civilian assistance.

None of the proposed military assistance is directed at the nuclear program. So far, America’s aid to Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure has been limited to a $100 million classified program to help Pakistan secure its weapons and materials from seizure by Al Qaeda, the Taliban or “insiders” with insurgent loyalties.

But the billions in new proposed American aid, officials acknowledge, could free other money for Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure, at a time when Pakistani officials have expressed concern that their nuclear program is facing a budget crunch for the first time, worsened by the global economic downturn. The program employs tens of thousands of Pakistanis, including about 2,000 believed to possess “critical knowledge” about how to produce a weapon.

The dimensions of the Pakistani buildup are not fully understood. “We see them scaling up their centrifuge facilities,” said David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, which has been monitoring Pakistan’s continued efforts to buy materials on the black market, and analyzing satellite photographs of two new plutonium reactors less than 100 miles from where Pakistani forces are currently fighting the Taliban.

“The Bush administration turned a blind eye to how this is being ramped up,” he said. “And of course, with enough pressure, all this could be preventable.”

As a matter of diplomacy, however, the buildup presents Mr. Obama with a potential conflict between two national security priorities, some aides concede. One is to win passage of a global agreement to stop the production of fissile material — the uranium or plutonium used to produce weapons. Pakistan has never agreed to any limits and is one of three countries, along with India and Israel, that never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Yet the other imperative is a huge infusion of financial assistance into Afghanistan and Pakistan, money considered crucial to helping stabilize governments with tenuous holds on power in the face of terrorist and insurgent violence.

Senior members of Congress were already pressing for assurances from Pakistan that the American military assistance would be used to fight the insurgency, and not be siphoned off for more conventional military programs to counter Pakistan’s historic adversary, India. Official confirmation that Pakistan has accelerated expansion of its nuclear program only added to the consternation of those in Congress who were already voicing serious concern about the security of those warheads.

During a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, veered from the budget proposal under debate to ask Admiral Mullen about public reports “that Pakistan is, at the moment, increasing its nuclear program — that it may be actually adding on to weapons systems and warheads. Do you have any evidence of that?”

It was then that Admiral Mullen responded with his one-word confirmation. Mr. Webb said Pakistan’s decision was a matter of “enormous concern,” and he added, “Do we have any type of control factors that would be built in, in terms of where future American money would be going, as it addresses what I just asked about?”

Similar concerns about seeking guarantees that American military assistance to Pakistan would be focused on battling insurgents also were expressed by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman.

“Unless Pakistan’s leaders commit, in deeds and words, their country’s armed forces and security personnel to eliminating the threat from militant extremists, and unless they make it clear that they are doing so, for the sake of their own future, then no amount of assistance will be effective,” Mr. Levin said.

A spokesman for the Pakistani government contacted Friday declined to comment on whether his nation was expanding its nuclear weapons program, but said the government was “maintaining the minimum, credible deterrence capability.” He warned against linking American financial assistance to Pakistan’s actions on its weapons program.

“Conditions or sanctions on this issue did not work in the past, and this will not send a positive message to the people of Pakistan,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his country’s nuclear program is classified.

What?

May 24, 2009
4:47 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

I imagine that Pakistan is increasing its nuclear arsenal because India has significantly more. Simple as, nothing to do with insurgents that wouldn't be worth wasting their precious nukes on. India's nuclear program is the only real reason Pakistan invests in its own, and the Pakistani authorities certainly wouldn't risk their tenuous relationship with the US by using nukes on non-nuke targets.

May 24, 2009
7:39 pm
Avatar
CodeBlack
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 907
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Really? I don't think the US would change its relationship with Pakistan if Pakistan took out al Qaeda. They'd be saving B.O.'s bacon. B.O. not looking so hot on the war on terror.

N2TheBlack

May 25, 2009
4:24 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Except that if Pakistan wasted nukes in nothing more than a counter-insurgency conflict against Al-Qaeda there would be universal condemnation from the rest of the world and the US would be hard-put to justify its relationship with a country reckless enough to take such measures.

May 26, 2009
2:03 am
Avatar
CodeBlack
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 907
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yeah and that has worked so well with Iran and North Korea.

N2TheBlack

May 20, 2009
2:02 am
Avatar
CodeBlack
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 907
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hey, why doesn't Pakistan use some of those nukes on al Qaeda. Would you care? Would anybody care? I'm ok with it. Haven't seen a good nuclear blast in a long time. That would pretty much put an end to al Qaeda in Pakistan.

N2TheBlack

May 20, 2009
3:34 am
Avatar
hxxx
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 253
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yeah the Pak's must have intelligence on AQ cells in America. Use nukes on 'em, right? After all that would solve the problem...

🙄

May 21, 2009
2:13 am
Avatar
CodeBlack
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 907
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ooooo, you're so fierce hxxx nut, wing nut.

N2TheBlack

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
58 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10228

bionic: 9870

at1with0: 9243

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 23918

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 8653

Posts: 123263

Newest Members:

mike, Sanchez, heartmom, ieltstips22, Vicente Vargas, Goldingsboy, Bauer Palmer, Spacemonkey, hondahonda, laundryroom

Administrators: John Greenewald: 558, blackvault: 1776