What's new

Israelis are becoming less confident of the US ability to control Pakistan's nukes

Salahadin

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Security of Pakistan nuclear weapons questioned

AFP – Pakistani soldiers patrol outside the army headquarters in Rawalpindi on October 11. A suicide bomber …

By CHRIS BRUMMITT and PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 20 mins ago
ISLAMABAD – An audacious weekend assault by Islamic militants on Pakistan's army headquarters is again raising fears of an insurgent attack on the country's nuclear weapons installation. Pakistan has sought to protect its nuclear weapons from attack by the Taliban or other militants by storing the warheads, detonators and missiles separately in facilities patrolled by elite troops.
Analysts are divided on how secure these weapons are. Some say the weapons are less secure than they were five years ago, and Saturday's attack would show a "worrisome" overconfidence by the Pakistanis.
While complex security is in place, much depends on the Pakistani army and how vulnerable it is to infiltration by extremists, said a Western government official with access to intelligence on Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.
Analysts say a more realistic scenario would involve militant sympathizers getting work as scientists at the facilities and passing information to extremists.
"It's not thought likely that the Taliban are suddenly going to storm in and gain control of the nuclear facilities," said Gareth Price, head of the Asia program at London think tank Chatham House. "There are enough command-and-control mechanisms in place to prevent that."
A U.S. counterproliferation official in Washington said strong safeguards are in place and there is no reason to believe the nuclear arsenal is in imminent jeopardy of seizure by militants.
The official, who commented on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the matter publicly, said there is a major difference between attacking a nuclear site and actually seizing and using the nuclear material stored inside.
Security at Pakistan's isolated nuclear installations is believed to be significantly higher than at the army headquarters, which was relatively relaxed by the standards of other nations. Thousands of people and vehicles enter the headquarters compound in Rawalpindi daily, and the 10 attackers, while able to take dozens of hostages Saturday and kill 14 people before a commando raid ended the siege, never penetrated to the heart of the complex.
Pakistan is estimated to have between 70 and 90 warheads, according to Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project of the Federation of American Scientists.
Shaun Gregory, an expert on Pakistani security at the University of Bradford in Britain, said militants have struck near an air base in Sargodha, where nuclear missiles are believed to be stored, and the Wah cantonment, where missiles that could carry nuclear weapons are believed to be assembled. He added that the attacks did not appear to have targeted nuclear weapons.
Pakistan uses armed forces personnel to guard nuclear weapons facilities, and it physically separates warhead cores from their detonation components, Gregory wrote in the July issue of The Sentinel, the monthly journal of the Combating Terrorism Center.
The components are stored in protected underground sites. The warheads themselves are electronically locked to ensure that they cannot be detonated even if they fall in terrorists' hands, Gregory said.
The Pakistan military carefully screens and monitors the officers vested with protecting the warheads, drawing them almost exclusively from Punjabi officers who are considered to have fewer links to religious extremists or with the Pashtun area of Pakistan, where the Taliban garners much of its support.
No action or decision involving a nuclear weapon can be undertaken by fewer than two persons. But Gregory acknowledged the possibility of collusion between cleared officers and extremists.
The personnel assigned to sensitive nuclear posts go through regular background checks conducted by Pakistan's intelligence services, according to a 2007 article in the journal Arms Control, co-written by Naeem Salik, a former top official at Pakistan's National Command Authority, which oversees the nuclear arsenal.
"It is being acknowledged by the world powers that the system has no loopholes," Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, a military spokesman, said Monday. "The system is foolproof, as good and bad as their own systems."
The U.S. and the British governments agree there is little risk of a weapon falling into militants' hands.
In London, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said there is no evidence "that has been shown publicly or privately of any threat to the Pakistani nuclear facilities, said.
Gregory said in an e-mail to The Associated Press that he did not share Miliband's assertion, adding that "there is plenty of evidence of threat."
Individuals in the Pakistan military have colluded with al-Qaida in providing safe houses for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and individuals in Pakistan's civil nuclear sector have met with al-Qaida figures, including Osama bin Laden himself, Gregory said.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton dismissed any suggestion militants could overthrow the government and gain control of the nuclear arsenal. "We have confidence in the Pakistani government and military's control over nuclear weapons," she said.
Kristensen said that while U.S. officials have said they have helped Pakistan increase security at its nuclear facilities, "they have not been allowed to go to those sites, so it's something they've had to do remotely."
Saturday's attack "somehow seems to show that the Pakistani military is perhaps a little overly confident" about some of its most important military facilities, he said.
"If a relatively small group of people is able to penetrate into their 'Pentagon,' then it might show something about the overconfidence of the Pakistanis, and that is worrisome — it's surprising that they were able to go in there relatively simply," Kristensen said.

He noted that the military headquarters is different from a nuclear facility. "One cannot compare insurgents going into an office building to them going into a nuclear facility for the nation's crown jewels," he added.
While stringent security checks on personnel are meant to prevent militant sympathizers from working at the facilities, Pakistan's nuclear establishment has seen serious leaks of nuclear knowledge and materials by insiders.
Top government scientist A.Q. Khan operated a global black market nuclear network for more than a decade until he was uncloaked by U.S. intelligence. And the CIA has confirmed a meeting between Khan associates and bin Laden before 9/11.
Israel has not taken a formal position on the danger of Pakistan's nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. However, in a parliamentary briefing last year, Defense Minister Ehud Barak mentioned such a scenario as a nightmare for the world, according to security officials speaking on condition of anonymity because the session was closed.
"Pakistan's weapons are less secure today than they were five years ago, and it seems they're even less secure than under the Musharraf government," said Gerald Steinberg, professor of political studies and conflict management at Bar Ilan University in Israel, referring to the previous administration of President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
Steinberg said Israelis are becoming less confident of the U.S. ability to control events and put plans into action that would protect Pakistan's nuclear stockpile.


Security of Pakistan nuclear weapons questioned - Yahoo! News
 
. .
Israel should be more concerned about UN war crime tag recently and may be try to remove the illegal settlement on Palestinian territories.

What the point of building all the homes , if they will eventually be re populated once two states are formed according to Obama ?:usflag:
 
.
Billi Kay Khawab May Cheechray!!!!
 
.
Thats a legitimate concern. The UN should pass a resolution to have a quarterly inspection of Pak nuclear facilities by IAEA inspectors to start with and then slowly start to denuclearize Pakistan so that they can start focusing on doing some hard work and earning their own money with their own sweat - what a great day that will be!
 
.
Thats a legitimate concern. The UN should pass a resolution to have a quarterly inspection of Pak nuclear facilities by IAEA inspectors to start with and then slowly start to denuclearize Pakistan so that they can start focusing on doing some hard work and earning their own money with their own sweat - what a great day that will be!

:blah::blah::blah::blah:
 
.
Thats a legitimate concern. The UN should pass a resolution to have a quarterly inspection of Pak nuclear facilities by IAEA inspectors to start with and then slowly start to denuclearize Pakistan so that they can start focusing on doing some hard work and earning their own money with their own sweat - what a great day that will be!

why don't India and Israel volunteer first ? in fact, it was India and Israel who ignited this Nuclear Arms threat in their respective regions . :angry:
 
. .
why don't India and Israel volunteer first ? in fact, it was India and Israel who ignited this Nuclear Arms threat in their respective regions . :angry:

India has different geopolitical and strategic necessities. In case of Pakistan, we have to be careful of the nukes falling in the hands of the Afghan taliban or the pak taliban, the bad taliban, the cute taliban, the al-qaeda or most importantly the state terror trader officials. Pakistan is a great ally in the WOT and it has sacrificed a lot to eradicate terrorism from this world. For the sake of a safer world, Pakistan should denuclearize to ensure that nukes dont fall in the wrong hands.

I think they should have included this condition in the aid package - A 5 year comprehensive program of peaceful nuclear disarmament in return for aid money for Pakistan people.
 
Last edited:
.
India has different geopolitical and strategic necessities. In case of Pakistan, we have to be careful of the nukes falling in the hands of the Afghan taliban or the pak taliban, the bad taliban, the cute taliban, the al-qaeda or most importantly the state terror trader officials. Pakistan is a great ally in the WOT and it has sacrificed a lot to eradicate terrorism from this world. For the sake of a safer world, Pakistan should denuclearize to ensure that nukes dont fall in the wrong hands.

I think they should have included this condition in the aid package - A 5 year comprehensive program of peaceful nuclear disarmament in return for aid money for Pakistan people.

For the sake of the safer world, and for the sake of the cowardly indians they should so it will give them enough incentive to attack Pak with out thinking of the repercussion.
 
.
For the sake of the safer world, and for the sake of the cowardly indians they should so it will give them enough incentive to attack Pak with out thinking of the repercussion.

India Fist detonated a Nuke in 1974.
The Smiling Buddha was the first nuclear test explosion by India on 18 May 1974 at Pokhran. It was also the first confirmed nuclear test by a nation outside the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council having been developed and executed with the help of Canadian nuclear reactors and expertise. Smiling Buddha was a crude nuclear device with a yield of not more than 8Kt.
-source wiki

Smiling Buddha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whilst it took Pakistan till 1998 to test first Nuke.(that's 24 years latter)

If India wanted to just nuke Pakistan we could have done it any time, between 1974 and 1998.
India and PAK, also did not have any wars After 1974.

After 1998, you started Kargil conflict in 2000.
:coffee:
 
.
First Pakista Got the Nuclear weapons from Sir Dr.Abdul Qadir Khan

The whole nation salutes his efforts

Secondly IAEA or IAEA inspectors Pakistan does not recognize them nor have we ever signed any treaty to allow , forigners to come in restricted High security areas of Pakistan's nuclear facilities

Its not Shereton Hotel , come and go as you wish ...

:coffee:

IAEA inspectors think they are some sorta god or something - tell them to come , Size 11 Lahori chapal will await them

:whistle:

By the way did we had 100 nukes I am sure we have 400 nukes :chilli:


Pakistan has a 205 billion dollar economy yearly we don't need 5 billion aid -


I think Nuclear disarment should be Alphabetical order

America....Britain......India....Israel.... Pakistan... alphabetical order please ...
 
.
Thats a legitimate concern. The UN should pass a resolution to have a quarterly inspection of Pak nuclear facilities by IAEA inspectors to start with and then slowly start to denuclearize Pakistan so that they can start focusing on doing some hard work and earning their own money with their own sweat - what a great day that will be!

day dreaming for Indians are good ;)

India is not providing us money so why you are concerned. why dont you ponder over decreasing your own financial problems instead of worrying for us.
 
.
Thats a legitimate concern. The UN should pass a resolution to have a quarterly inspection of Pak nuclear facilities by IAEA inspectors to start with and then slowly start to denuclearize Pakistan so that they can start focusing on doing some hard work and earning their own money with their own sweat - what a great day that will be!

israel and india can both shove their concernes up their back sides.

As a result of these 'concerns' Pakistan should tripple and quadruple the nuke production.

We need to stockpile enough nukes that should the need arise we can effectively defend the country.

These kind of rants from israel and india kind of confim what most people in Pakistan already know that all the drama that is being staged by enemies of Pakistan is because of the nukes.

Like they say .. Its the nukes stupid :taz:
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom