Asia Times: Media off target with Pakistan nuclear scare


	November 7, 2001	atimes.com

India/Pakistan

Media off target with Pakistan nuclear scare
By Mushahid Hussain

ISLAMABAD - American Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's arrival in Islamabad on Sunday coincided with concern voiced in the American media regarding the safety of Pakistani nuclear assets, fearing that they may fall into fundamentalist control.

However, a special emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' premier nuclear body, in Vienna on November 2, termed the possiblility of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons "in our judgement, the most unlikely scenario", and a "doomsday scenario".

The concerns were first raised in a story in The New Yorker magazine by Seymour Hersh, a journalist whose book The Samson Option exposed Israel's nuclear program. The story quoted US officials as saying that "only the most reliable military personnel remain in control of the [Pakistani] arsenal, and if there's any real worry he [President General Pervez Musharraf] would disarm them".

Despite this apparently authoritative assurance, the story published in the November 5 issue of the magazine but made public on October 29, stated that "in recent weeks, an elite Pentagon undercover unit trained to slip into foreign countries and find suspected nuclear weapons, and disarm them if necessary, has explored plans for an operation in Pakistan".

The story added that such training was being done in cooperation with an Israeli special operations military unit that "specializes in assassinations, theft and destruction of foreign nuclear weaponry".

Interestingly, the focus of these contingency plans, which probably exist given America's war in Afghanistan, is entirely on Pakistan, although Hersh states in the same article that India would be willing to exercise the nuclear option in a conflict over Kashmir.

In his book on Israel, he revealed that Israel contemplated using nuclear weapons as a last resort during the 1973 Arab-Israeli War.

A number of motivations may be behind this media hullabaloo. First, to justify the war effort, given the deadlock on the ground after a month of air strikes, since Washington itself has not foreclosed using the nuclear option in Afghanistan, as Rumsfeld himself stated on October 29; second, to retain American public backing since the war is now expected to be a long haul, and scaring American people will secure their sustained support.

A third reason may to be to pressure America's Muslim allies in order to keep the coalition against terrorism intact. Earlier, there had been negative stories regarding Saudi Arabia, now it may be Pakistan's turn.

However, the American administration has been categorical on this count, with repeated public assurances that Pakistan's nuclear program is "under the secure control of the Pakistan government". Rumsfeld reaffirmed this on November 1 when he responded "None at all" to a question whether there was any evidence of this "being compromised".

Despite this public assurance, Rumsfeld raised this issue during his visit to Islamabad, and the Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar announced at a joint media briefing on Monday that Rumsfeld had been briefed regarding "stringent measures for custodial safety of our nuclear assets".

And the next day in New Delhi, Rumsfeld, alluding to Pakistan, told the Indian media: "I do not personally believe there is a risk with respect to countries that have nuclear weapons [since] they take steps to manage their safe handling."

Concern over the nuclear program spreading was heightened with the arrest of two former senior Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission scientists, Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood and Chawdry Abdul Majid, who were taken into detention in Lahore on October 23. They were reportedly questioned by Pakistani and US intelligence agents over possible links to terrorist organizations linked to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Regarding the safety of Pakistan's nuclear assets, its track record speaks for itself. Launched by the civilian government of premier Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1975 as a response to India's Pokhran explosion of May 1974, the Pakistani program has never had any accident, maintaining foolproof safety and security despite eight prime ministers, four presidents, six army chiefs, four dismissals of government and two military coups in the past 25 years.

And Pakistan has kept its promise to the international community not to export, share, transfer or assist any country in nuclear technology. This promise was conveyed in writing twice: in November 1984, in a letter from General Zia ul-Haq to President Ronald Reagan, and in an October 1990 letter from President Ghulam Ishaq Khan to President George Bush.

Pakistan's chain of command to institutionally oversee the nuclear program predates India's. From 1975-1991, Pakistan's program was supervised by a committee under the premier civil servant-turned-politician who was elected president in 1988, Ghulam Ishaq Khan. Later, it evolved into a broader body, conceived and planned since 1991.

The National Command Authority, unveiled in 2000, is the institutional body that oversees the nuclear program. It is headed by the president and includes the relevant top civilian, military and technical personnel. The logistics of maintaining safety and security of the nuclear assets are under a well-organized, clearly delineated, maximum-security structure manned by the armed forces.

Given this context, the safety of Pakistan's nuclear assets is a non-issue. In any case, here too the United States is to blame as it turned down Pakistan's requests for assistance in upgrading its command and control systems on the plea that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) forbids assistance from a nuclear to a non-NPT state.

Such dichotomy in American policy has not been fully explained by Washington: expressing concern for the safety of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal but concurrently not providing assistance on the issue. In any case, such concern cannot be Pakistan-specific, and must include India and Israel as well, otherwise Muslims will be led to believe that, like terrorism, now nuclear bombs too have a religion.

Rumsfeld in India
While in India, Rumsfeld sought to allay fears in the country that the current military campaign against terrorism would be confined to Afghanistan.

India, a vocal supporter of the US-led military campaign in Afghanistan, has expressed disappointment that its scope has not so far been wide enough to cover violent separatist militancy in Kashmir, which it claims is sponsored by Pakistan.

"We will be pursuing terrorist networks wherever we find them," Rumsfeld said at a press conference after a meeting with Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes. Fernandes, who has been invited by Rumsfeld to visit Washington early next year, said the discussions covered "specifics of mutual defense-related partnerships, including certain items that India needed to acquire and also collaboration in defense".

At the weekend the US conceded to an Indian demand that two Kashmiri separatist militant organizations based in Pakistan, the Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed, be banned as terrorist outfits and their assets frozen.

The banning of the two groups preceded Rumsfeld's arrival in New Delhi from Islamabad and the departure on Sunday of Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on a tour covering Russia, Britain and the United States. Vajpayee is expected to meet US President George W Bush on November 9.

Rumsfeld said that he put great value on building a military relationship with New Delhi and announced the visit to India in the coming weeks of Admiral Denis Blair, chief of US forces in the Pacific, and Undersecretary of Defense for policy, Douglas Feith.

But Rumsfeld gave no indication that the US was about to change its policy of using Pakistan as a frontline state in its war on the Taliban or the likely shape of a post-war dispensation in Kabul. India has strongly opposed the inclusion of Taliban elements in any future government in Kabul, while Pakistan has insisted on including moderate elements within their ranks.

(Inter Press Service)