PDA

View Full Version : Pakistan may also get N-cooperation from US: expert



candypreet
08-31-2005, 12:06 PM
By Anwar Iqbal

WASHINGTON, Aug 30: Pakistan can also receive civilian nuclear cooperation from the US if it can offer guarantees similar to what India is offering in return for the deal it has signed with the US, Stephen P. Cohen, an expert on India, Pakistan and South Asian security, told Dawn.

Mr Cohen, a senior fellow at Washington’s Brookings Institution, however, warned that because of Pakistan’s past record the international community would like to verify Islamabad’s assurances before offering it any deal.

Other experts disagreed. They said that Pakistan should not expect similar cooperation from the US because it did not have a good record of protecting its nuclear assets.

President Bush announced the deal to share civilian nuclear technology with India during Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the White House last month. The US Congress is expected to debate the deal during the fall session which begins on Sept 6.

The Indo-US agreement will have far-reaching consequences for Pakistan which, like India, is an unrecognized nuclear weapon state and has not yet signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

Mr Cohen said the proposed deal provides Pakistan with an opportunity to do the same thing that the Indians have pledged to do, which is to separate their civilian nuclear facilities from military facilities and make the civilian side “utterly transparent.”

He said the Indians recently made a new tough law about not sharing nuclear technology with others. “Pakistan already has a similar law but its record speaks for itself,” said Mr Cohen while referring to Dr A. Q. Khan’s confession that he supplied nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea.

India, he said, has agreed to abide by all the conditions of the NPT without signing it and Pakistan needs to do the same.

“Trust but verify,” said Mr Cohen when asked if the US could trust Pakistan after the discovery of the Khan network of nuclear proliferators. “They must keep their military nuclear facilities under lock and key. It is in Pakistan’s interest to do so.”

Asked if Pakistan could expect similar cooperation from the US as India was receiving if it provided these assurances, Mr Cohen said: “It would be possible, and the same would be true for Israel.”

He said India and Pakistan were in the same category while Israel was slightly different, but all three were non-NPT nuclear-weapon states.

Mr Cohen said it was possible to widen the Indo-US deal to include other nations as “it might strengthen the agreement if other countries brought into it.”

Michael Krepon, co-founder of another Washington think-tank, the Henry L. Stimson Center, however, believes that Pakistan is unlikely to get any benefit from the Indo-US deal because Pakistan’s track record over the past decade with respect to nuclear non-proliferation has not been good.

“Before Pakistan can achieve the same benefits that India has achieved from the Bush administration, it has to have a sustained outstanding record of nuclear stewardship,” he said.

Mr Krepon said the best Pakistan could hope for was to make this relaxation of nuclear commerce much more general, not India-specific.

“In Washington some will be in favor of this, particularly those who want to sell plants, but there will be a lot of scepticism about the wisdom of opening this door to everyone.”

Other members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, he said, might also seek exemptions for other countries.


http://www.dawn.com/2005/08/31/top9.htm

sidthereal
08-31-2005, 01:41 PM
dont be surprised, if at all bush gives nuclear technology to pakistan; nukes all over the world will have the
"made in the USA" tag to it.

candypreet
02-25-2006, 01:19 AM
dont be surprised, if at all bush gives nuclear technology to pakistan; nukes all over the world will have the
"made in the USA" tag to it.

and they will all be aimed at the US. Look at which countries were given the secret of the Bomb by Khan- Iran, korea etc - all FRIENDS of the USA. I have a feeling, Khan planned to give the bomb only to those countries which hate USA

candypreet
08-31-2006, 10:50 AM
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia in secret nuke pact


By Arnaud de Borchgrave
THE WASHINGTON TIMES



ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have concluded a secret agreement on "nuclear cooperation" that will provide the Saudis with nuclear-weapons technology in exchange for cheap oil, according to a ranking Pakistani insider.
The disclosure came at the end of a 26-hour state visit to Islamabad last weekend by Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler, who flew across the Arabian Sea with an entourage of 200, including Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al Faisal and several Cabinet ministers.
Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, the pro-American defense minister who is next in line to the throne after the crown prince, was not part of the delegation.
"It will be vehemently denied by both countries," said the Pakistani source, whose information has proven reliable for more than a decade, "but future events will confirm that Pakistan has agreed to provide [Saudi Arabia] with the wherewithal for a nuclear deterrent."
As predicted, Saudi Arabia — which has faced strong international suspicion for years that it was seeking a nuclear capability through Pakistan — strongly denied the claim.
Prince Sultan was quoted in the Saudi newspaper Okaz yesterday saying that "no military agreements were concluded between the kingdom and Pakistan during [Prince Abdullah´s] visit to Islamabad."
Mohammad Sadiq, deputy chief of mission for Pakistan's embassy in Washington, also denied any nuclear deal was in the works. "That is totally incorrect," he said in a telephone interview. "We have a clear policy: We will not export our nuclear expertise."
But the CIA believes Pakistan already has shared its nuclear know-how, working with North Korea in exchange for missile technology.
A Pakistani C-130 was spotted by satellite loading North Korean missiles at Pyongyang airport last year. Pakistan, which is estimated to have between 35 and 60 nuclear weapons, said this was a straight purchase for cash and strongly denied a nuclear quid pro quo.
"Both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia," the Pakistani source said, "see a world that is moving from nonproliferation to proliferation of nuclear weapons."
The Saudi rulers, who are Sunni Muslims, are believed to have concluded that nothing will deter the Shi'ite Muslims who rule Iran from continuing their quest for a nuclear weapons capability.
Pakistan, meanwhile, is concerned about a recent arms agreement between India, its nuclear archrival, and Israel, a longtime nuclear power whose inventory is estimated at between 200 and 400 weapons.
To counter what Pakistani and Saudi leaders regard as multiple regional threats, the two countries have decided to quietly move ahead with an exchange of free or cheap Saudi oil for Pakistani nuclear know-how, the Pakistani source said.
Pakistanis have worked as contract pilots for the Royal Saudi Air Force for the past 30 years. Several hundred thousand Pakistani workers are employed by the Gulf states, both as skilled and unskilled workers, and their remittances are a hard currency boon for the Pakistani treasury.
Prince Abdullah reportedly sees Saudi oil reserves, the world's largest, as becoming increasingly vulnerable over the next 10 years.
By mutual agreement, U.S. forces withdrew from Saudi Arabia earlier this year to relocate across the border in the tiny oil sheikdom of Qatar.
Saudi officials also are still chafing over a closed meeting — later well publicized — of the U.S. Defense Policy Board in 2002, where an expert explained, with a 16-slide Powerpoint presentation, why and how the United States should seize and occupy oil fields in the country's Eastern Province.
Several incidents have raised questions over the extent of Saudi-Pakistani cooperation in defense matters.
A new policy paper by Simon Henderson, an analyst with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, noted that Prince Sultan visited Pakistan's highly restricted Kahuta uranium enrichment and missile assembly factory in 1999, a visit that prompted a formal diplomatic complaint from Washington.
And a son of Prince Abdullah attended Pakistan's test-firing last year of its Ghauri-class missile, which has a range of 950 miles and could be used to deliver a nuclear payload.
President Bush was reported to have confronted Pervez Musharraf over the Saudi nuclear issue during the Pakistani president's visit to Camp David this summer, and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage raised the issue during a trip to Islamabad earlier this month, according to Mr. Henderson's paper.
"Apart from proliferation concerns, Washington likely harbors more general fears about what would happen if either of the regimes in Riyadh or Islamabad became radically Islamic," according to Mr. Henderson.
GlobalSecurity.org, a well-connected defense Internet site, found in a recent survey that Saudi Arabia has the infrastructure to exploit such nuclear exports very quickly.
"While there is no direct evidence that Saudi Arabia has chosen a nuclear option, the Saudis have in place a foundation for building a nuclear deterrent," according to the Web site.
•Arnaud de Borchgrave, editor at large of The Washington Times, is editor at large of United Press International as well.
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20031021-112804-8451r.htm


:) :)

candypreet
10-12-2006, 10:01 AM
:add09: :add09:

candypreet
01-02-2007, 06:52 AM
another bump for 2007.....

candypreet
07-14-2007, 02:15 AM
US renting Pak army at $100m a month


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/The_United_States/US_renting_Pak_army_at_100m_a_month/articleshow/2202421.cms


WASHINGTON: The US is virtually renting divisions of the Pakistan army, paying around $ 100 million a month for the deployment of 80,000 troops on its border with Afghanistan ostensibly for the war on terrorism, a key US official revealed on Thursday.

The money is meant to be "reimbursements'' to Pakistan "for stationing troops and moving them around, and gasoline, and bullets, and training and other costs that they incur as part of the war on terror,'' US assistant secretary of state Richard Boucher, told a Congressional panel. "That's a lot of money," Boucher admitted before the panel about what amounts to a $ 1.2 billion per year reimbursement. "I don't know if it comes to the whole amount of their expenses, but we support their expenses, yes." In all, US aid to Pakistan is now close to $2 billion a year, according to figures provided by Boucher, the top US diplomat for South Asia.

Besides, the $1.2 billion reimbursements, Washington also gave Pakistan an addition $738 million in 2006 in assistance programmes, including $300 million in separate military aid.

The overall figure would put Pakistan on par with Israel and Egypt — with a higher component ($1.5 billion) in overall military assistance — as the top three recipients of US aid.

The Pakistan allocations are being met with deep misgivings and scepticism in Congress and strategic circles where there are growing demands on the Bush administration to tie aid for Islamabad's military to its performance and delivery in the war on terror.

"There are far more jehadists, extremist madrassas, Al Qaida operatives, Taliban safe havens and international terrorist training camps than Pakistani government officials are willing to admit. Is our current aid package, one in which we are providing at least 10 times more for military aid than for basic education assistance, in the best long-term interest of US national security?" asked Congressman John Tierney, who chaired the hearing that for focused exclusively on the Pakistan question.

"And how do we in Congress justify to the American people writing cheques for billions of dollars to a regime that may not be the partner against terrorism the US needs it to be, but may actually be hurting national security interests of the US and our allies?" added Congressman Christopher Shays, after some of his colleagues pointed out that Pakistan was host to the world's most wanted men like Osama bin Laden and A Q Khan.

Richard Boucher maintained that the money was well spent and there was some accountability involved.

"Some of our money that we give Pakistan is reimbursements and so there is, you know, conditions that we pay for things," he said, later elaborating that "Pentagon is in charge of getting receipts and making sure they know how that money is being spent in the right places."

"If they didn't have the 85,000 troops in the border area, God knows what would be going on out there — not anything we could deal with ourselves, I'm sure," Boucher added.

Still, lawmakers remained sceptical of the Bush administration's Pakistan policy, even as the White House reviewed the situation in a special meeting on Thursday. Tierney urged the administration to ensure that the military support money went towards supplying equipment to fight terrorism, as opposed to bombers and submarines aimed at India.
But Boucher bluntly told the committee "we do try to do both ... help Pakistan with legitimate defensive needs, with its ability to patrol in the Arabian Sea and finance equipment and reimburse expenses for the war on terror."