Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The road to nuclear jihad
Rediff ^ | 12/8/05 | B Raman

Posted on 12/09/2005 11:07:11 PM PST by LibWhacker

If there is one country in the world which has been systematically violating with impunity all nuclear and missile proliferation regulations and from which there is a real danger of leakage of weapons of mass destruction and related technologies to al Qaeda and other pan-Islamic terrorist organisations belonging to Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front for jihad against the Crusaders and the Jewish people, that country is Pakistan.

The United States' double standards in this matter are evident from the alacrity and vigour with which it acted against Iraq despite the lack of any credible evidence against it and the care with which it protects the regime in Pakistan, despite all the evidence available against it.

Before October 2003, no other leader of a nuclear power had made stronger statements than Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf about the safety and security of its nuclear and missile assets.

How many statements he had made since he seized power in October 1999 that Pakistan's nuclear and missile assets were under the effective control of the army and that not even a fly could sit on them without the army knowing about it!

B Raman: No time to make overtures to Pakistan

How many statements he has made since October 2003, when Pakistan's proliferation activities in Iran, Libya and North Korea were exposed, absolving himself and the army of any responsibility in this regard and putting the blame totally on a group of about a dozen scientists headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the so-called father of Pakistan's atomic bomb!

This group brought in suitcases with millions of dollars in cash; bought real estate and invested millions of dollars in companies in Pakistan and abroad; travelled dozens of times every year all over Europe, Africa and Asia; carried sensitive drawings and designs abroad; invited foreign dignitaries from Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia and North Korea to visit Pakistan's nuclear and missile establishments into which even Pakistan's elected political leaders were barred access by the army and the Inter-Services Intelligence; received foreign scientists and engineers for training in the nuclear and missile establishments; invited North Korean scientists to witness its nuclear tests of 1998; invited North Korean and Iranian scientists to witness the Ghauri (nothing but North Korea's Nodong re-baptised) missile test of 1998; and sent to Libya, Iran and North Korea uranium hexafluoride and other sensitive material by special aircraft into which they were loaded in Pakistani airports.

And, yet, Musharraf tells us that all these were rogue operations by this small group of which the Pakistan Army and the ISI had no inkling till the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency brought them to his notice.

He has even had the audacity to find fault with the US for not detecting the rogue activities of his scientists even earlier and alerting him about them.

B Raman: Jihad's new anti-US front

One is told that these scientists did it for greed. Even if one accepts for argument's sake his explanation of greed as the motive, one could understand how the scientists must have been tempted by offers of millions of dollars by oil-rich Iran and Libya. But where is the question of greed as the motive in the case of North Korea, a bankrupt State, which did not even have a few thousand dollars in its coffers with which it could bribe the scientists?

One has lost count of the number of times Musharraf has changed his prevaricating statements.

Initially, he was saying that none of the Pakistani leaders, political or military, had any knowledge of these transgressions and hence they could not be held responsible. As the international concern and furore refused to die down, he changed his stand and started hinting that the controls over the scientists weakened while the elected political leadership was in power and hence such transgressions became possible.

His repeatedly asserted contention has been that after the interception by the intelligence agencies of the US and the UK of a ship in October 2003 -- which was carrying to Libya a clandestine consignment of centrifuges for uranium enrichment manufactured at A Q Khan's instance, by a company in Malaysia, with the assistance of a Sri Lankan Muslim -- he became aware of the extensive non-proliferation activities of the A Q Khan group and immediately acted against them.

According to Musharraf, details of the clandestine travels and the proliferation network of A Q Khan came to notice during the subsequent investigation.

Who's running nuclear Wal-Mart, asks Saran

Not many experts and analysts of the world have been convinced of the innocence of Pakistan's military in this affair.

Many of us have been pointing out that this proliferation started and continued at the instance and with the blessing of Pakistan's military leadership. I have also been pointing out in many articles that while the Pakistan's late military dictator Zia-ul-Haq, who ruled the country from 1977 to 1988, authorised the proliferation to Iran, Musharraf himself had authorised that to Libya and North Korea and was totally in the picture.

But, unfortunately, for reasons of realpolitik, the US administration chose to accept Musharraf's denials of military responsibility. It not only gave him a clean chit, but even rewarded him and his country by conferring on it the status of a Major Non-NATO Ally.

Despite Musharraf's efforts -- with the benediction of the US -- to keep his cupboard tightly shut, nuclear skeletons keep popping up here, there and everywhere much to his consternation.

The skeletons are everywhere -- if only the US wants to look at them.

The nuclear ghost of Pakistan's past doings continues to pop up from different and often unexpected quarters. On November 23,2004, the Central Intelligence Agency put on its web site edited extracts from a report on nuclear proliferation worldwide during the second half of 2003 submitted by it to the Congress. It had another bombshell for Pakistan.

The CIA report said: 'Before the reporting period, the A Q Khan network provided Iran with designs for Pakistan's older centrifuges as well as designs for more advanced and efficient models and components.'

What did the CIA mean by 'designs for more advanced and efficient models and components'? Pakistani analysts maintained it meant more advanced centrifuges.

Pak denies IAEA access to interrogate AQ Khan

But in an analytical article, The New York Times, as quoted in the Daily Times of November 27, 2004, interpreted it otherwise.

It said: 'A new report from the CIA says the arms trafficking network led by Pakistani scientist A Q Khan provided Iran's nuclear programme with significant assistance, including the designs for advanced and efficient weapons components.'

The Daily Times wrote: 'The [NYT] story is aimed at alleging that Pakistan gave a warhead design to Iran and wants to create exactly this impression. This is obvious from the reference to a closed-door speech to a private group by former CIA Director George Tenet and references to unnamed CIA officials. According to the NYT, Tenet described Mr Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapon's programme, as being at least as dangerous as Osama bin Laden because of his role in providing nuclear technology to other countries.'

Mystery shrouds top terrorist's death

As more and more disclosures emerge and as more and more inconvenient questions are asked, most analyses are coming back to the question: Could Dr Khan and a small group of scientists close to him have done this as a rogue operation without the approval and involvement of the political and military leadership of the country? Should the outside world be satisfied with Musharraf's contention that Khan had been thoroughly interrogated and that all the information given by him has been shared with others and that no further interrogation is needed? Definitely not by outsiders, Musharraf says.

Should the world be satisfied with Musharraf's assurance that it was a rogue operation by a small group of greedy scientists and that there is nothing more to be learnt?

One thing stands out clearly from the recent developments -- the entire truth has not come out. Only part of the story, as given out by Musharraf, has come out.

Is it not necessary for the safety of the lives of billions of innocent civilians, who face the threat of a possible use of weapons of mass destruction by jihadi terrorists, to find out the truth?

There is only one man in Pakistan who has the entire picture right from the day the late Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto launched a clandestine project for acquiring military nuclear capability in the 1970s, and made Khan -- then a young scientist working in Holland -- in charge of it.

Since then, scientists have come and scientists have gone, but Khan remained a constant, shining star in Pakistan's nuclear firmament. Leaders have come and leaders have gone, but Khan continued undisturbed as Pakistan's nuclear czar and became the blue-eyed boy of all leaders -- political or military, to whichever side of the political spectrum they belonged.

Without having him interrogated by an independent outside panel, the truth will never be known.

In a report from Washington carried on March 3, the Dawn of Karachi quoted a report of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security as saying as follows: 'In addition to money, Qadeer [A Q Khan] was also motivated by pan-Islamism and hostility to Western controls on nuclear technology.'

Till now, the focus of the investigation by the US and the IAEA has been on Khan's role in creating and running a Nuclear Wal-Mart for state aspirants to military nuclear power such as Libya, Iran and North Korea. How about non-State aspirants such as bin Laden's al Qaeda whose pan-Islamic ideology he shares?

In my past articles, I had referred to the suspected penetration of Islamic fundamentalist and jihadi terrorist elements into Pakistan's nuclear and missile communities. I had also drawn attention to reports carried by the Pakistani media on the annual conventions of the Lashkar-e-Taiba at Muridke near Lahore. These reports had referred to the presence of unnamed Pakistani scientists at these conventions. The LET is a member of bin Laden's International Islamic Front.

There is a greater danger of al Qaeda and other jihadi terrorists getting hold of nuclear and radiological weapons/materials from the supporters of their pan-Islamic ideologies in Pakistan's scientific community -- such as A Q Khan -- than from any other quarter.

Unless A Q Khan is interrogated outside Pakistani territory by a group of international experts not connected with Pakistan, the international community will never be able to establish the progress made by the terrorists in their efforts to acquire WMD weapons/materials.

If the international community is to prevent or pre-empt the use of nuclear or radiological weapons by the terrorists, it is of the utmost importance for the UN Security Council to force Pakistan to hand over A Q Khan to an outside agency for a thorough interrogation.

TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; alqaedanukes; aqkhan; binladen; globaljihad; islam; jihad; khan; lashkaretaiba; let; musharraf; muslims; nuclear; nuclearjihad; pakistan; proliferation; road; terrorism; terrorists; trop

1 posted on 12/09/2005 11:07:12 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Looks like it's just a question of time before they nuke us. We should just be prepared to take out all of the bad guys in one shot as a response - Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi, Syria, parts of Indonesia and more.

The only good news for us is that all of the targets that the Islamofascists are focused on are blue cities in blue states.

2 posted on 12/09/2005 11:38:47 PM PST by Bon mots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Q: Why is Khan still alive?

3 posted on 12/09/2005 11:39:55 PM PST by Bon mots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bon mots
Quadaffi and Musharraf will be judged by history to be two triumphs of the Bush administration.

Considering our options in Pakastan after 9/11, we have got about the best result we could have hoped for.

4 posted on 12/09/2005 11:49:02 PM PST by nathanbedford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker; All

The India-Pakistani Conflict... some background information-
various links | 5-25-02 | backhoe

5 posted on 12/10/2005 1:08:23 AM PST by backhoe (A Nuke for every Kook- what a Clinton "legacy...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

I've got to believe that the Bush administration knows Pakistan is our enemy as well. It's like being in bed with Stalin against Hitler in WWII. It's only a matter of time before the snake bites us anyway, that is his nature. The fact that we are still in a "relationship" with (if you can call it that) Saudi Arabia, the fountainhead of Al Quaeda and Wahhabism, confirms the fact that we have strange partners in this war on terrorism. Schizophrenic in fact.

I suspect the permanent military bases we are building in Iraq are there in order to deal with Iran, Pakistan, Syria, etc. as we proceed down this road in dealing with the madness of Islam in all it's manifestations. However, that's assuming Iraq will become a democracy (of some kind) and friend of the West. Only time will tell. History,in dealing with Islam, unfortunately, has not been promising.

6 posted on 12/10/2005 1:16:06 AM PST by john drake (roman military maxim: "oderint dum metuant, i.e., let them hate, as long as they fear")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

please nuk all muslamies

7 posted on 12/10/2005 1:17:17 AM PST by RIGHT IN LAS VEGAS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

The Pakistanis have been cooperating. Although I'd hate to see it used, our second strike capability is something nobody else would like to see either. As long as they stay on our side I don't see a double standard at all.

8 posted on 12/10/2005 1:44:54 AM PST by KarinG1 (Some of us are trying to engage in philosophical discourse. Please don't allow us to interrupt you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: john drake
It is not popular to observe on these threads that our only indispensable enemy in the fight against Islamist terrorism is a rational Islam. Ultimately, stakeholders in a rational society, which also happened to be Islamic societies, must come to an understanding that they must kill Islamist terrorists or die by their hands. I know that it's typical to find an Islamic society today which one could easily identify as "rational". Turkey, Jordan, perhaps parts of Malaysia are moving in that direction.

Before Bush began courting Mussarraf, the prospects were very real that Pakistan would tip into the the same abyss that had swallowed Afghanistan under the Taliban. Now at least those who are officially in power can be said at least in limited measure to be fighting Islamist terrorists They may be doing so halfheartedly to be sure, indeed, they may be riddled with spies and fifth columnists who effectively frustrate much of these efforts. But we are not confronted with the necessity to invade a nuclear power with an army that is clearly overstretched and embark on a campaign which would make the occupation of Iraq look entirely pacific..

One can see progress in Saudi Arabia as the powers that be come to understand that the greatest threat to the Saudi throne comes from the terrorists and fundamentalists. Whether the Saudis can be said to have had a real epiphany or not remains to be seen but I do not think it's naïve to say that what we got is better than what we had..

In this generation's long struggle against Islamist terrorism, our ability to motivate, recruit, and deploy rational Muslims against their crazed brothers is the ultimate key to our own national survival. That is why the undermining of America's image in the Islamic world with stories about Abu Ghraib or secret torture prisons are so terribly irresponsible.

9 posted on 12/10/2005 1:50:16 AM PST by nathanbedford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Bon mots

Boy, 'ya got me. As the author points out, the guy's at least as dangerous as bin Laden. Should've whacked him a long time ago.

11 posted on 12/10/2005 5:45:53 AM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KarinG1

I agree with you. The author's wrong about that.

12 posted on 12/10/2005 5:50:06 AM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
Killing AQ Khan doesn't make any sense. He's been well grilled by our CIA long ago. So, public posturing is what this story and this thread is all about. In the real world, AQ had already had his little brain explored and interrogated.

Are you serious about letting the UN's IAEA anywhere near adult weapons? Those morons are spreading nuke tech. just as readily as AQ Khan.

13 posted on 12/10/2005 7:00:24 AM PST by ConvienentCharade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson