What's new

Pak qualifies for civil N-coop at int'l level: NCA

Pakistan will do what it has to (without compromising its national interests) in order to satisfy international concerns - the complexity of the process of obtaining an NSG waiver is obviously understood by the GoP and concerned institutions to be a long term one given expressed Western concerns and the dynamics of the US-India nuclear deal.

That said, these and other statements by the Pakistani Prime Minister and other GoP and military officials are factually correct and part of a lobbying & PR process that is very much a part of the path to obtaining an NSG waiver.

The world is not going to change its mind if Pakistan does not elaborate upon and flaunt the strengths of, and changes and improvements in, its nuclear program and various security and anti-proliferation systems and processes.

BTW, can you tone down the inflammatory rhetoric, such as references to Somali pirates and what not, please. This is becoming a bit of a trend now and there have already been two suspensions.

Thanks.

Nice, but what was so embarrassing? I know I have been suspended twice, and thanks to you. You said I trolled. I didn't actually.

AM, did you get my PM or my open message in the Sania Mirza thread, where a TT was threatening me?

Be fair, control the people from both sides. I am not dying to get a ban. But if I have to, so be it. Just because I am an Indian, never expect me to keep shut, just because of this forum. This is a $285 forum, my country and my freedom is priceless.

Thank You.
 
.
This is a $285 forum, my country and my freedom is priceless.
Exactly - keep that in mind when comparing Pakistan to 'Somali pirates' and baiting people. Pakistanis love and care for their country just as much.

You retain no moral high ground when you engage in the same behavior you accuse others of doing. There are plenty of Indians who resist that temptation and stick to reporting posts and their protestations are given weight.

As for being even handed, given that the frequency of accusations from both the Pakistani and Indian side of being 'biased' is increasing, I thing we are doing a pretty good job and need no advice on how to go about it.

Stick to the topic please and avoid inflammatory rhetoric.
 
Last edited:
.
Pure BS. Pakistan has got more to prove than even Somalian Pirates to even think about any deal.

The international community is quite impressed by the maturity with which Pakistan has dealt with The Taliban, I believe that it is very likely for us to strike a civil Nuke deal with the U.S before the end of 2012.
I will pretend that you were high on Bhang when you wrote the last bit and didn't know what you were doing, that way we can prevent an unnecessary argument.
 
.
WASHINGTON: The 22,000-word US Nuclear Posture Review shows a deliberate attempt to keep India, Pakistan and Israel out of trouble, although there are several clauses that could lead to punitive actions against states seeking to gatecrash into the nuclear club.

This key policy document also reflects the US desire to keep Pakistan on its side in the effort to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear material, instead of singling it out as a possible violator, as some anti-Pakistan lobbyists in Washington desire.

Underlining nuclear terrorism as “today’s most immediate and extreme danger,” the NPR notes that Al Qaeda and their extremist allies are seeking nuclear weapons.

“We must assume they would use such weapons if they managed to obtain them,” it warns, adding that the vulnerability to theft or seizure of vast stocks of such nuclear materials around the world, and the availability of sensitive equipment and technologies in the nuclear black market, “create a serious risk that terrorists may acquire what they need to build a nuclear weapon”.

Lobbies in Washington often use both concerns --- the terrorists’ desire to acquire nukes and the presence of a nuclear black market --- to rope in Pakistan.

They never tire of blaming Pakistan for using the black market to make its own weapons and are apt to point out that the so-called Khan network of proliferators provided sensitive nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea.

They link these with the presence of Al Qaeda connected terrorists in the Pak-Afghan region to demand the outlawing of Pakistan.

But diplomatic observers in Washington told Dawn that the Obama administration appeared to have accepted Pakistan’s argument that it’s far better to work with Islamabad to deal with these threats rather than isolate it as a rogue state, as anti-Pakistani lobbies desired.

The new US policy is also critical of “additional countries” who desire to acquire nuclear weapons, “especially those at odds with the United States, its allies and partners, and the broader international community”.

This condition creates room for Pakistan as a country which is not only allied to the US and its partners but also is playing a key role in their efforts to defeat terrorism.


The document, however, makes no such exception for Iran and North Korea, and points out that in pursuit of their nuclear ambitions, the two countries have “violated non-proliferation obligations, defied directives of the United Nations Security Council, pursued missile delivery capabilities, and resisted international efforts to resolve through diplomatic means the crises they have created”.

The document blames their ‘provocative behaviour’ for increasing instability in their regions, which “could generate pressures in neighbouring countries for considering nuclear deterrent options of their own”.

The NPR warns that continued non-compliance with non-proliferation norms by these and other countries would seriously weaken the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), with adverse security implications for the United States and the international community.

A chapter titled, “preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism”, declares that the United States will lead expanded international efforts to rebuild and strengthen the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and to accelerate efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism.

“Concerns have grown in recent years that unless today’s dangerous trends are arrested and reversed, before long we will be living in a world with a steadily growing number of nuclear-armed states and an increasing likelihood of terrorists getting their hands on nuclear weapons,” the document warns.

Therefore, for the first time, the 2010 NPR places this priority atop the US nuclear agenda.

The document commits the United States to renewing and strengthening the NPT and the global nuclear non-proliferation regime it anchors to cope with the challenges of non-compliance and of the growth of nuclear power.

Another clause opens up the possibility that like India, at some stage Pakistan may be allowed to benefit from nuclear technology to cope with its alarming energy crisis.

“We support expanding access to the benefits of peaceful nuclear technology, but this must be done in a way that does not promote proliferation of nuclear weapons capabilities,” the NPR says.


But it warns that “states without nuclear weapons will not acquire them, states with nuclear weapons will move toward disarmament, and all parties can have access to peaceful nuclear energy under effective verification”.

As part of this effort, the United States seeks to bolster the nuclear non-proliferation regime by: Reversing the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran, strengthening International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, creating consequences for non-compliance and by impeding sensitive nuclear trade.

DAWN.COM | Front Page | US nuclear policy makes exceptions for Pakistan
 
.
Pure BS. Pakistan has got more to prove than even Somalian Pirates to even think about any deal.

Nonsense BS rhetoric.

Are you an ambassador with a vote at the NSG? What role do you have to play in this whole debate? Your personal feelings about what is and is not BS are completely immaterial and irrelevant, other than the fact that they expose your intent to troll here.

If you can't see that the position of the US has already softened considerably from where it was a year ago, that China is publicly supporting the effort and that the latest US nuclear posture report carefully avoids stepping on Pakistani toes, then that is a failure of comprehension on your part. Nothing anybody here can do about it.
 
. .
My view is that its the lack of maturity of Civilian nuclear technology that prevents sharing of civilian nuclear technology with countries because of fear of proliferation. With the huge focus on green technology i believe this problem is going to get addressed sooner or later (my view, within this decade). Post that this discussion becomes meaningless...That is apart from the issue of egos on both side ;)
 
.
Nonsense BS rhetoric.

Are you an ambassador with a vote at the NSG? What role do you have to play in this whole debate? Your personal feelings about what is and is not BS are completely immaterial and irrelevant, other than the fact that they expose your intent to troll here.

If you can't see that the position of the US has already softened considerably from where it was a year ago, that China is publicly supporting the effort and that the latest US nuclear posture report carefully avoids stepping on Pakistani toes, then that is a failure of comprehension on your part. Nothing anybody here can do about it.

@TL, the softening of US stand in my view at this time is more of a lip service.. The issue is not Pakistan proliferating the technology but the risk of terrorist misuse .. And understand that guarding a few military weapons compounds is a different ball game than preventing terrorist strikes on civilian nuclear buildings..

Like most of other things, the only obstacle standing between Pakistan and its aspirations is the terrorist situation in the country..The talks of closing a nuclear deal by 2012 is a bit of pipe dream.. But if the terror situation is really taken care of in next 2-3 years, its a possibility in the administration of the next US president..
 
.
@TL, the softening of US stand in my view at this time is more of a lip service.. The issue is not Pakistan proliferating the technology but the risk of terrorist misuse .. And understand that guarding a few military weapons compounds is a different ball game than preventing terrorist strikes on civilian nuclear buildings..

Karan, we are all free to interpret the situation to the best of our abilities. Even if it is lip service, no such service existed until a few months ago. And as for the fear of terrorist misuse, while it is a much ballyhooed story, I don't think the people who matter put much credence to it.

This article argues that there has been a genuine realignment of thinking in Washington due to the strong case Pakistan's representatives have made, and that Washington has concluded that working with Pakistan is the only practical path forward. The careful and "non traditional" tone of the latest Nuclear Posture Review document appears to be more than lip service.

DAWN.COM | Front Page | US nuclear policy makes exceptions for Pakistan
 
.
Karan, we are all free to interpret the situation to the best of our abilities. Even if it is lip service, no such service existed until a few months ago. And as for the fear of terrorist misuse, while it is a much ballyhooed story, I don't think the people who matter put much credence to it.

This article argues that there has been a genuine realignment of thinking in Washington due to the strong case Pakistan's representatives have made, and that Washington has concluded that working with Pakistan is the only practical path forward. The careful and "non traditional" tone of the latest Nuclear Posture Review document appears to be more than lip service.

DAWN.COM | Front Page | US nuclear policy makes exceptions for Pakistan

I dont think I am saying anything different. Its just the timing. US today sees Pakistan cracking down on terrorist strongholds in the country and hence the softening of the stand. What remains to be seen is if that continues to a successful completion. If it does, then I dont really think that a civ n deal is that big a challenge. But right now I feel its a little too soon to say that
 
.
Nuke deal for Pak: China proposes, US disposes?
Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN, Apr 8, 2010, 07.52pm IST

WASHINGTON: The Obama administration has once again publicly rejected Pakistan’s plea for a civilian nuclear deal on the lines of a similar one Washington and the international community reached with India, saying it was not on the cards ''right now.''

Washington’s rebuff came within hours after Pakistan, which has been persistently seeking such an agreement despite US reservations, upped the stakes by drafting China’s support for a fresh pitch. Pakistan’s envoy to Beijing, Masood Khan, reportedly brought China’s assurance of support to a preparatory meeting in Islamabad where Prime Minister Gilani once again reiterated Pakistan’s desire for a nuclear deal.

Maintaining that his government ''fully accepted the responsibility of nuclear security,'' evidently with an eye on reassuring the international community ahead of the Nuclear Security Summit next week, Gilani said Pakistan’s highly-trained manpower and well-established foolproof safety-and-security culture fully qualified it ''for equal participation in civil nuclear cooperation at the international level, which could help address immediate energy problems and bring greater stability.''

But the Obama administration appeared unmoved by the assurance or the logic. ''We are focused on Pakistan’s energy needs. But as we said last week, right now, that does not include civilian nuclear energy,'' State Department spokesman P.J.Crowley said.

Pakistan has been unrelenting in its quest for a civilian nuclear agreement despite being in the dock for proliferation and seen widely as the ground zero of terrorism, believing that it can extract a deal through a mix of despair (through projected energy shortages) and bravado (by implying it is the sole gateway to Afghanistan). Its moment in the sun has been enhanced by the fall from grace of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the turbulent events in Kyrgystan, which is the lesser US supply route to Afghanistan.

The China card is the latest in its bag of tricks, although Islamabad has a history of exaggerating Beijing’s most notably during the 1971 war with India when it waited for China (and US) to rescue it from rout. In more recent times, China has been cool to Pakistan’s entreaties for greater economic aid, allowing Islamabad to go instead to Washington with what one Pakistani commentator called the biggest begging bowl in history.

Besides, it requires more than Beijing, or the Obama administration, to push through the deal; there is no appetite in the US Congress for such a deal for Pakistan and Pakistan lacks the clout to ignite support on the Hill. There is also the 45-member NSG which had a difficult time arriving at a consensus about India -- which has far greater clout than Pakistan can ever summon – for the US-India deal. Even the patronage of Senator John Kerry, conferred a Hilal-e-Pakistan award for services rendered to Islamabad, is unlikely to stir the Congress into action.

Still, the Obama administration is keeping a small window of hope open for Pakistan. Despite its dodgy record on proliferation and its perceived vulnerability to terrorists, US officials from the President down have expressed confidence in the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. ''I’m not going to break any new ground here. I think various US. leaders have expressed confidence in the security of the Pakistani weapons,'' Crowley added on Wednesday.

Obama too has lined up Prime Minister Gilani for a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of Nuclear Security Summit, along with separate meetings with President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Singh.

Meanwhile, ahead of the summit, Obama’s much bally-hooed Nuclear Review Posture, once again tacitly recognizes India, Israel and Pakistan, all attendees who have not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, as de facto nuclear powers in a different category from ''outlier'' states such as Iran and North Korea. India, in particular, comes in a unique category of NPT outsider with the rights and privileges of a nuclear weapons power, a situation that still rankles many non-proliferation hardliners.

But the Obama administration defended the status first conferred by the Bush administration and subsequently confirmed by this administration. ''India will play an important role, both in the National Security Summit next week as well as the NPT Review Conference in May, both in terms of reinforcing and strengthening the NPT but also demonstrating how it can both protect nuclear technology while also allowing the growth of civilian nuclear capacity.'' Crowley said on Wednesday, projecting a sense of comfort with New Delhi’s exceptional status despite of being a NPT outsider.

Also suggesting a new confidence about the region’s nuclear stability following Pakistan’s growing expression of responsibility, Crowley said as the Nuclear Posture Review reflected, Washington is now “less concerned about the exchange of nuclear weapons among states...and more concerned about how we keep nuclear technology and know-how out of the hands of outlier states and rogue elements.”
 
.
Back
Top Bottom