hembo
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 3,395
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Pakistans Nuclear Surge
Photos obtained by NEWSWEEK reveal a more aggressive buildup than previously known. So why does Washington still stay mum?
Exclusive satellite imagery taken in April 2011 exposes a new nuclear facility (circled) in Khushab, Pakistanwhich now has the fastest-growing nuclear program in the world. The facility was undetectable in satellite images take as recently as December 2009. Pictured directly above the circled area are two white boxes which are also nuclear reactors.
Even in the best of times, Pakistans nuclear-weapons program warrants alarm. But these are perilous days. At a moment of unprecedented misgiving between Washington and Islamabad, new evidence suggests that Pakistans nuclear program is barreling ahead at a furious clip.
According to new commercial-satellite imagery obtained exclusively by NEWSWEEK, Pakistan is aggressively accelerating construction at the Khushab nuclear site, about 140 miles south of Islamabad. The images, analysts say, prove Pakistan will soon have a fourth operational reactor, greatly expanding plutonium production for its nuclear-weapons program.
The buildup is remarkable, says Paul Brannan of the Institute for Science and International Security. And that nobody in the U.S. or in the Pakistani government says anything about thisespecially in this day and ageis perplexing.
Unlike Iran, which has yet to produce highly enriched uranium, or North Korea, which has produced plutonium but still lacks any real weapons capability, Pakistan is significantly ramping up its nuclear-weapons program. Eric Edelman, undersecretary of defense in the George W. Bush administration, puts it bluntly: Youre talking about Pakistan even potentially passing France at some point. Thats extraordinary.
Pakistani officials say the buildup is a response to the threat from India, which is spending $50 billion over the next five years on its military. But to say its just an issue between just India and Pakistan is divorced from reality, says former senator Sam Nunn, who co-chairs the Nuclear Threat Initiative. The U.S. and Soviet Union went through 40 years of the Cold War and came out every time from dangerous situations with lessons learned. Pakistan and India have gone through some dangerous times, and they have learned some lessons. But not all of them. Today, deterrence has fundamentally changed. The whole globe has a stake in this. Its extremely dangerous.
Its dangerous because Pakistan is also stockpiling fissile material, or bomb fuel. Since Islamabad can mine uranium on its own territory and has decades of enrichment know-howbeginning with the work of nuclear scientist A. Q. Khanthe potential for production is significant.
Although the White House declined to comment, a senior U.S. congressional official who works on nuclear issues told NEWSWEEK that intelligence estimates suggest Pakistan has already developed enough fissile material to produce more than 100 warheads and manufacture between eight and 20 weapons a year. Theres no question, the official says, its the fastest-growing program in the world.
What has leaders around the world especially worried is whats popularly known as loose nukesnuclear weapons or fissile material falling into the wrong hands. Theres no transparency in how the fissile material is handled or transported, says Mansoor Ijaz, who has played an active role in back-channel diplomacy between Islamabad and New Delhi. And the amountthey have significant quantitiesis whats so alarming.
That Osama bin Laden was found in a Pakistani military community, and that the country is home to such jihadi groups as Lashkar-e-Taiba, only heightens concerns. Weve looked the other way from Pakistans growing program for 30 years, says Sharon Squassoni, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. What were facing, she says, is a disaster waiting to happen.
A Defense Department official told NEWSWEEK that the U.S. government is confident that Pakistan has taken appropriate steps toward securing its nuclear arsenal. But beyond palliatives, few in Washington want to openly discuss the nightmare scenario of terrorists getting hold of nuclear material or weapons. The less that is said publicly, the better, says Stephen Hadley, national-security adviser to President George W. Bush. But dont confuse the lack of public discussion for a lack of concern.
The bomb lends the Pakistanis a certain diplomatic insouciance. Nukes, after all, are a valuable political tool, ensuring continued economic aid from the United States and Europe. Pakistan knows it can outstare the West, says Pakistani nuclear physicist Pervez Hoodbhoy. Its confident the West knows that Pakistans collapse is too big a price to pay, so the bailout is there in perpetuity. Its the one thing weve been successful at.
Pakistani leaders defend their weapons program as a strategic necessity: since they cant match Indias military spending, they have to bridge the gap with nukes. Regretfully, there are several destabilizing developments that have taken place in recent years, Khalid Banuri of Pakistans Strategic Plans Division, the nuclear arsenals guardian, wrote in response to NEWSWEEK questions. Among his countrys concerns, Banuri pointed to Indias military buildup and the U.S.s -civilian nuclear deal with India.
Most Pakistanis believe the jihadist scenario is something that the West has created as a bogey, says Hoodbhoy, an excuse, so they can screw us, defang, and denuclearize us.
Our program is an issue of extreme sensitivity for every man, woman, and child in Pakistan, says former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf, adding that the nukes are well dispersed and protected in secure locations. When asked whether the U.S. has a role to play in securing the arsenal, Musharraf said: A U.S. role to play? A U.S. role in helping? Zero role. No, sir. It is our own production?.?.?.?We have not and cannot now have any intrusion by any element in the U.S. To guard its strategic assets, Pakistan employs two Army divisionsabout 18,000 troopsand, as Musharraf drily puts it, If you want to get into a firefight with the forces guarding our strategic assets, it will be a very sad day.
For now, the White House appears to have made a tacit tradeoff with Islamabad: for your cooperation in Afghanistan, well leave you to your own nuclear devices. People bristle at the suggestion, but it follows, doesnt it? says Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, formerly the CIAs chief officer handling terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. The irony is that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the money were giving them to fight terrorism, could inadvertently aggravate the very problem were trying to stop. After all, terrorism and nukes is the worst-case scenario.
With this fourth nuclear facility at Khushab coming online as early as 2013, and the prospect of an accelerated nuclear-weapons program, the U.S. is facing a diplomatic dilemma. The Pakistanis have gone through a humiliation with the killing of Osama bin Laden, says Nunn. Thats never a time to corner somebody. But with both recent and preexisting problems, we are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe. Both sides need to take a deep breath, count to 10, and find a way to cooperate.
With Ron Moreau in Islamabad and Fasih Ahmed in Lahore
Photos obtained by NEWSWEEK reveal a more aggressive buildup than previously known. So why does Washington still stay mum?
Exclusive satellite imagery taken in April 2011 exposes a new nuclear facility (circled) in Khushab, Pakistanwhich now has the fastest-growing nuclear program in the world. The facility was undetectable in satellite images take as recently as December 2009. Pictured directly above the circled area are two white boxes which are also nuclear reactors.
Even in the best of times, Pakistans nuclear-weapons program warrants alarm. But these are perilous days. At a moment of unprecedented misgiving between Washington and Islamabad, new evidence suggests that Pakistans nuclear program is barreling ahead at a furious clip.
According to new commercial-satellite imagery obtained exclusively by NEWSWEEK, Pakistan is aggressively accelerating construction at the Khushab nuclear site, about 140 miles south of Islamabad. The images, analysts say, prove Pakistan will soon have a fourth operational reactor, greatly expanding plutonium production for its nuclear-weapons program.
The buildup is remarkable, says Paul Brannan of the Institute for Science and International Security. And that nobody in the U.S. or in the Pakistani government says anything about thisespecially in this day and ageis perplexing.
Unlike Iran, which has yet to produce highly enriched uranium, or North Korea, which has produced plutonium but still lacks any real weapons capability, Pakistan is significantly ramping up its nuclear-weapons program. Eric Edelman, undersecretary of defense in the George W. Bush administration, puts it bluntly: Youre talking about Pakistan even potentially passing France at some point. Thats extraordinary.
Pakistani officials say the buildup is a response to the threat from India, which is spending $50 billion over the next five years on its military. But to say its just an issue between just India and Pakistan is divorced from reality, says former senator Sam Nunn, who co-chairs the Nuclear Threat Initiative. The U.S. and Soviet Union went through 40 years of the Cold War and came out every time from dangerous situations with lessons learned. Pakistan and India have gone through some dangerous times, and they have learned some lessons. But not all of them. Today, deterrence has fundamentally changed. The whole globe has a stake in this. Its extremely dangerous.
Its dangerous because Pakistan is also stockpiling fissile material, or bomb fuel. Since Islamabad can mine uranium on its own territory and has decades of enrichment know-howbeginning with the work of nuclear scientist A. Q. Khanthe potential for production is significant.
Although the White House declined to comment, a senior U.S. congressional official who works on nuclear issues told NEWSWEEK that intelligence estimates suggest Pakistan has already developed enough fissile material to produce more than 100 warheads and manufacture between eight and 20 weapons a year. Theres no question, the official says, its the fastest-growing program in the world.
What has leaders around the world especially worried is whats popularly known as loose nukesnuclear weapons or fissile material falling into the wrong hands. Theres no transparency in how the fissile material is handled or transported, says Mansoor Ijaz, who has played an active role in back-channel diplomacy between Islamabad and New Delhi. And the amountthey have significant quantitiesis whats so alarming.
That Osama bin Laden was found in a Pakistani military community, and that the country is home to such jihadi groups as Lashkar-e-Taiba, only heightens concerns. Weve looked the other way from Pakistans growing program for 30 years, says Sharon Squassoni, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. What were facing, she says, is a disaster waiting to happen.
A Defense Department official told NEWSWEEK that the U.S. government is confident that Pakistan has taken appropriate steps toward securing its nuclear arsenal. But beyond palliatives, few in Washington want to openly discuss the nightmare scenario of terrorists getting hold of nuclear material or weapons. The less that is said publicly, the better, says Stephen Hadley, national-security adviser to President George W. Bush. But dont confuse the lack of public discussion for a lack of concern.
The bomb lends the Pakistanis a certain diplomatic insouciance. Nukes, after all, are a valuable political tool, ensuring continued economic aid from the United States and Europe. Pakistan knows it can outstare the West, says Pakistani nuclear physicist Pervez Hoodbhoy. Its confident the West knows that Pakistans collapse is too big a price to pay, so the bailout is there in perpetuity. Its the one thing weve been successful at.
Pakistani leaders defend their weapons program as a strategic necessity: since they cant match Indias military spending, they have to bridge the gap with nukes. Regretfully, there are several destabilizing developments that have taken place in recent years, Khalid Banuri of Pakistans Strategic Plans Division, the nuclear arsenals guardian, wrote in response to NEWSWEEK questions. Among his countrys concerns, Banuri pointed to Indias military buildup and the U.S.s -civilian nuclear deal with India.
Most Pakistanis believe the jihadist scenario is something that the West has created as a bogey, says Hoodbhoy, an excuse, so they can screw us, defang, and denuclearize us.
Our program is an issue of extreme sensitivity for every man, woman, and child in Pakistan, says former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf, adding that the nukes are well dispersed and protected in secure locations. When asked whether the U.S. has a role to play in securing the arsenal, Musharraf said: A U.S. role to play? A U.S. role in helping? Zero role. No, sir. It is our own production?.?.?.?We have not and cannot now have any intrusion by any element in the U.S. To guard its strategic assets, Pakistan employs two Army divisionsabout 18,000 troopsand, as Musharraf drily puts it, If you want to get into a firefight with the forces guarding our strategic assets, it will be a very sad day.
For now, the White House appears to have made a tacit tradeoff with Islamabad: for your cooperation in Afghanistan, well leave you to your own nuclear devices. People bristle at the suggestion, but it follows, doesnt it? says Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, formerly the CIAs chief officer handling terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. The irony is that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the money were giving them to fight terrorism, could inadvertently aggravate the very problem were trying to stop. After all, terrorism and nukes is the worst-case scenario.
With this fourth nuclear facility at Khushab coming online as early as 2013, and the prospect of an accelerated nuclear-weapons program, the U.S. is facing a diplomatic dilemma. The Pakistanis have gone through a humiliation with the killing of Osama bin Laden, says Nunn. Thats never a time to corner somebody. But with both recent and preexisting problems, we are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe. Both sides need to take a deep breath, count to 10, and find a way to cooperate.
With Ron Moreau in Islamabad and Fasih Ahmed in Lahore
