Defending the Arsenal

[Kursed]

Seymour M. Hersh has written an extensive article in the 'New Yorker' on the safety of Pakistani nuclear weapons, the American, Pakistani and Indian points of view and more.

I'm sharing some of the more interesting excerpts here.

High-level coöperation between Islamabad and Washington on the Pakistani nuclear arsenal began at least eight years ago. Former President Musharraf, when I interviewed him in London recently, acknowledged that his government had held extensive discussions with the Bush Administration after the September 11th attacks, and had given State Department nonproliferation experts insight into the command and control of the Pakistani arsenal and its on-site safety and security procedures. Musharraf also confirmed that Pakistan had constructed a huge tunnel system for the transport and storage of nuclear weaponry. “The tunnels are so deep that a nuclear attack will not touch them,” Musharraf told me, with obvious pride. The tunnels would make it impossible for the American intelligence community—“Big Uncle,” as a Pakistani nuclear-weapons expert called it—to monitor the movements of nuclear components by satellite.

A consultant to the intelligence community said that in one war-gamed scenario disaffected members of the Pakistani military could instigate a terrorist attack inside India, and that the ensuing crisis would give them “a chance to pick up bombs and triggers—in the name of protecting the assets from extremists.”
The triggers are a key element in American contingency plans. An American former senior intelligence official said that a team that has trained for years to remove or dismantle parts of the Pakistani arsenal has now been augmented by a unit of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the élite counterterrorism group. He added that the unit, which had earlier focussed on the warheads’ cores, has begun to concentrate on evacuating the triggers, which have no radioactive material and are thus much easier to handle.
“The Pakistanis gave us a virtual look at the number of warheads, some of their locations, and their command-and-control system,” the former senior intelligence official told me. “We saw their target list and their mobilization plans. We got their security plans, so we could augment them in case of a breach of security,” he said. “We’re there to help the Pakistanis, but we’re also there to extend our own axis of security to their nuclear stockpile.” The detailed American planning even includes an estimate of how many nuclear triggers could be placed inside a C-17 cargo plane, the former official said, and where the triggers could be sequestered. Admiral Mullen, asked about increased American insight into the arsenal, said, through his spokesman, “I am not aware of our receipt of any such information.” (A senior military officer added that the information, if it had been conveyed, would most likely “have gone to another government agency.”)

Zardari offered some advice to Barack Obama: instead of fretting about nuclear security in Pakistan, his Administration should deal with the military disparity between Pakistan and India, which has a much larger army. “You should help us get conventional weapons,” he said. “It’s a balance-of-power issue.

Last year, the Washington Times ran an article about the Pressler Amendment, a 1985 law cutting off most military aid to Pakistan as long as it continued its nuclear program. The measure didn’t stop Pakistan from getting the bomb, or from buying certain weapons, but it did reduce the number of Pakistani officers who were permitted to train with American units. The article quoted Major General John Custer as saying, “The older military leaders love us. They understand American culture and they know we are not the enemy.” The General’s assessment provoked a barrage of e-mail among American officers with experience in Pakistan, and a former member of a Special Forces unit provided me with copies. “The fact that a two-star would make a statement [like] that . . . is at best naïve and actually pure bullshit,” a senior Special Forces officer on duty in Pakistan wrote. He went on:

I have met and interacted with the entire military staff from General Kayani on down and all the general officers on their joint staff and in all the services, and I haven’t spoken to one that “loves us”—whatever that means. In fact, I have read most of the TS [top secret] assessments of all their General Officers and I haven’t read one that comes close to their “loving” us. They play us for everything they can get, and we trip over ourselves trying to give them everything they ask for, and cannot pay for.

Leslie H. Gelb, a president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, said, “I don’t think there’s any kind of an agreement we can count on. The Pakistanis have learned how to deal with us, and they understand that if they don’t tell us what we want to hear we’ll cut off their goodies.” Gelb added, “In all these years, the C.I.A. never built up assets, but it talks as if there were ‘access.’ I don’t know if Obama understands that the Agency doesn’t know what it’s talking about.”
The former high-level Bush Administration official was just as blunt. “If a Pakistani general is talking to you about nuclear issues, and his lips are moving, he’s lying,” he said. “The Pakistanis wouldn’t share their secrets with anybody, and certainly not with a country that, from their point of view, used them like a Dixie cup and then threw them away.”

A retired senior Pakistani intelligence officer, who worked with his C.I.A. counterparts to track down Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, said that he was deeply troubled by the prospect of Pakistan ceding any control over its nuclear deterrent. “Suppose the jihadis strike at India again—another attack on the parliament. India will tell the United States to stay out of it, and ‘We’ll sort it out on our own,’ ” he said. “Then there would be a ground attack into Pakistan. As we begin to react, the Americans will be interested in protecting our nuclear assets, and urge us not to go nuclear—‘Let the Indians attack and do not respond!’ They would urge us instead to find those responsible for the attack on India. Our nuclear arsenal was supposed to be our savior, but we would end up protecting it. It doesn’t protect us,” he said.
“My belief today is that it’s better to have the Americans as an enemy rather than as a friend, because you cannot be trusted,” the former officer concluded. “The only good thing the United States did for us was to look the other way about an atomic bomb when it suited the United States to do so.

Pakistan’s fears about the United States coöperating with India are not irrational. Last year, Congress approved a controversial agreement that enabled India to purchase nuclear fuel and technology from the United States without joining the Non-Proliferation Treaty, making India the only non-signatory to the N.P.T. permitted to do so. Concern about the Pakistani arsenal has since led to greater coöperation between the United States and India in missile defense; the training of the Indian Air Force to use bunker-busting bombs; and “the collection of intelligence on the Pakistani nuclear arsenal,” according to the consultant to the intelligence community. (The Pentagon declined to comment.)

Pervez Musharraf lives in unpretentious exile with his wife in an apartment in London, near Hyde Park. Officials who had dealt with him cautioned that, along with his many faults, he had a disarmingly open manner. At the beginning of our talk, I asked him why, on a visit to Washington in late January, he had not met with any senior Obama Administration officials. “I did not ask for a meeting because I was afraid of being told no,” he said. At another point, Musharraf, dressed casually in slacks and a sports shirt, said that he had been troubled by the American-controlled Predator drone attacks on targets inside Pakistan, which began in 2005. “I said to the Americans, ‘Give us the Predators.’ It was refused. I told the Americans, ‘Then just say publicly that you’re giving them to us. You keep on firing them but put Pakistan Air Force markings on them.’ That, too, was denied.”

During my stay in Pakistan—my first in five years—there were undeniable signs that militancy and the influence of fundamentalist Islam had grown. In the past, military officers, politicians, and journalists routinely served Johnnie Walker Black during our talks, and drank it themselves. This time, even the most senior retired Army generals offered only juice or tea, even in their own homes.

Source: New Yorker

[maz9009]

IMO main threat to Pakistani nuclear arsenal and it's existence is USA and India. Those barbaric suicide bombers are the least of our concern. We can handle and eliminate the terrorist threat if we manage to stop India's proxy war in the form of (supporting militants/terrorists).

It's a fact that winning a conventional war with India (as India allocates much more funding towards it's defense budget) was pretty difficult 10 years ago and it's nearing impossibility taking into account the fatiguing/tedious operation against terrorists our military has been conducting since last decade. The balance of power is greatly upset in this region and the only thing that is keeping India from attacking us are our nuclear weapons.

And Pakistani military shouldn't trust any foreign element concerning the safety of our nukes. We "alone" should do it. And God forbids if that Blackwater/CIA manges to seize control of them and deny us their usage in war we wouldn't stand a chance...

[nazareth]

Interesting article and response.

[Darth Vader]

During my stay in Pakistan—my first in five years—there were undeniable signs that militancy and the influence of fundamentalist Islam had grown. In the past, military officers, politicians, and journalists routinely served Johnnie Walker Black during our talks, and drank it themselves. This time, even the most senior retired Army generals offered only juice or tea, even in their own homes.

I guess he didn't visit the Maulanas then like all the US politicians and diplomats do. Our generals are just ignorant infidels, they don't know that all it takes for years of good Johnny Walking and playing the sandwich is a Hajj - which rids one of all sins like a newborn baby!~ Disgusting.

[maz9009]

Originally Posted by nazareth

Interesting article and response.

Nothing personal but US govt. has always used Pakistan for cleaning S**T and after the mop-up it dumps us like a tissue paper in a trash bin. We do all the dirty work and India get's pat on the back (in the form of cooperation in civilian nuclear technology and more military hardware that greatly risks the existence of Pakistan). India has always been the aggressor not us.

Just one question.
What has India done anything in War on Terrorism since last decade (except sitting in the lap of US and howling on us).

If USA seriously considers Pakistani nuclear deterrent as threat to it's national security then it should do one thing. It's guaranteed to work. Disarm India. Confiscate all of it's nukes and shutdown it's nuclear research. Put sanctions on it or control it's conventional military hardware so that it prevents India from starting a war against us. We will hand over all our nukes without a delay. We got them and are keeping them as a minimum deterrent.

They shouldn't be a threat to anyone except possible aggressors against Pakistan.

[nazareth]

No, I won't take it personally. Nor will I start or take part in a massive debate. I will point out that Pakistan receives US aid, especially in the wake of natural disasters. (Wasn't there an earthquake a few years back?)

As far as India, I don't like them any more than Pakistanis do. The ones I've met in a personal capacity tend to be arrogant asses.

I'm not aware of anyone who considers Pakistan a threat to us, and I agree with your last sentence completely.

We Americans are told that Pakistan is a valuable ally. This is why (with the forum's permission) I remain a member of WCCF

[Kursed]

The issue isn't entirely as 'black' and 'white', as we'd like to think.

No country can 'blackmail' the other, in order to support it. We've to have certain aces up our sleeves as well.

Why's India important for the US? The way I see it, for a couple of reasons;

1. Its ever increasing middle-class; with a buying capacity that forms an attractive option for American corporations. (It still is a capitalist world, the last time I checked and we're not Israel)

2. United States' strategic ambitions vis a vis China. India is more than ready to play US's top dog in the region, in order to check (and when possible curtail) China's sphere of influence in the immediate region.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that scenario, what're our realistic chances to survive and further our gains in this ever changing geo-political scenario?

For a second, forget about the current security challenges that faces Pakistan.


1. Get our asses back to work. There is absolutely no short-cut towards success, and we as a nation have failed to realize that over the course of last 6 decades. We do not want to work towards the success of our country, because we simply do not see a 'personal stake' in this country. That's where our politicians, intelligentsia and military have failed.

2. Put importance on economics, technical education (specially in science & technology). We've to have a workforce that is technically apt to operate, build and maintain new-age machines. Only then will we be able to push ahead of local challenges. We lose out on plenty of chances to incorporate new technology, simply because we lack in local workforce that is apt enough to incorporate, operate and maintain such technology.

3. China while successful is still lacking when it comes to an English speaking work-force; hence still looses some business to India. Whilst India OTOH is lacking in city infrastructure, even if it does have an English speaking work force.

Where do you think Pakistan features on that list?

All in all, if we want other nations to take us seriously. We have to take ourselves seriously, first.


What we can do?

1. Think that next time Pakistan should sign an agreement with any nation (for defense purposes or whatever involving aid), one of the clauses should include that nation in question would open a university and a poly-technical institution inside Pakistan.

2. Information technology. If there is one place, where we still have a chance at doing remarkable progress, without really busting our purse in order to get a good enough work-force. It's information technology.

3. Reduce regular development fund, spend over 5 billion USD / year on poly-technical colleges, regular colleges and schools for next 10 years. It's not like we can not afford it. The question is whether we'd like to do it or not, or if we can control our natural tenacity for corruption.

Let me know if you folks have got more points to add to my list, or if you'd like to correct me anywhere.

[hsyed26]

Originally Posted by Kursed

During my stay in Pakistan—my first in five years—there were undeniable signs that militancy and the influence of fundamentalist Islam had grown. In the past, military officers, politicians, and journalists routinely served Johnnie Walker Black during our talks, and drank it themselves. This time, even the most senior retired Army generals offered only juice or tea, even in their own homes.

I'm sorry, I have yet to understand this hilarious fascination with drinking. Just because all Muslims do it, doesn't mean they're completely liberal and will love America. Someone one explain to Hersh that it's a very very personal issue; those who do drink, more power to them; others that don't offer you oodles of booze everytime you walk in to their houses are following a new chain of life. Would you be alarmed if a vegan started serving you meat at their table to pacify you? No, they made a choice, you're aware of it, and learn to respect it.

Secondly this fascination with our nukes is amusing. India has a larger stockpile than us I believe. Why are we not concerned that a Maoist uprising may potentially target similar installations? Why not the right-wing Hindu parties access the nukes and blow us all, etc?

Regardless of the lack of coup d'etat nature of India, there's a threat ever present for their stocks as well. A similar threat exists with any country that has a nuclear arsenal. Why shouldn't we just all collectively invade other countries to check their arms inventories?

Thirdly, I sense alot of BS in the article. I do enjoy reading the New Yorker, but this seems so inflammatory, etc. I'm not asking for a rosy picture, but constantly naming unnamed sources, etc just reeks of pathetic investigating. If you feel that issue is this important, cite the people that are in the know. Don't hide behind this comfortable wall of "unnamed" sources.

Fourthly, yes I will appreciate my generals for keeping their mouths shut about our nuclear arsenal. It's not like the US shares every covert op that goes down in the world. Sovereignty is important to everyone. Keep your noses out of it. If there's an issue and we can't figure it, we'll contact you and vice versa. I love the naivety of these generals thinking that we're going to openly tell you what we have, etc. Seriously, we may be "backwards", "extremist", etc to the world, but we're certainly not that retarded.

In my opinion, if there's been a load of ridiculous hoo-ha, it's this article. Just the conflict alone shows how confused the author has been about presenting the issue. All I understood towards the end is this wonderful theme of "PAKISTAN WITH NUKES = DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM, since we can't see it either."

[nazareth]

1. Think that next time Pakistan should sign an agreement with any nation (for defense purposes or whatever involving aid), one of the clauses should include that nation in question would open a university and a poly-technical institution inside Pakistan.

2. Information technology. If there is one place, where we still have a chance at doing remarkable progress, without really busting our purse in order to get a good enough work-force. It's information technology.

3. Reduce regular development fund, spend over 5 billion USD / year on poly-technical colleges, regular colleges and schools for next 10 years. It's not like we can not afford it. The question is whether we'd like to do it or not, or if we can control our natural tenacity for corruption.

Again, I agree with Kursed.

I am surprised to learn that Pakistan lacks quality institutions of higher learning. I thought that many of you leave the country by choice, not neccessity.