THE SPINE SEPTEMBER 28, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
It is not I who designated Pakistan’s nuclear bomb “the Islamic bomb” but Time. So it is more than 30 years since Pakistan actually launched its rogue atomic weapon and an aggressive program to enhance its capacity and sweep. The research actually began perhaps five years earlier, financed by Col. Qaddafi, another atomic aspirant, and devolved piece-meal in North Korea and Iran. The pioneer was Abdul Qadeer Khan, a sleazy but charming physicist who understood secret scientific papers he was asked to translate while working in the Netherlands which had a research program of its own. He aspired to raise Pakistan’s military stature and to distribute the power of the nuke to the Muslim world, especially because the intelligence agencies told him that India already had its atoms neatly arranged for battle.
Who knows how much the Pakistani government knew about Khan’s scheme? Since Pakistan is not actually a coherent country and does not have a coherent government it is likely that some factions of Pakistan’s elite knew about his arms venture and some did not. In any case, he became very rich and was never charged with anything. In fact, if you want one hero of the Pakistanis, it is he.
So what people call his bomb—it’s now a function of an enormous technological enterprise—concentrates the mind of the arms control crowd in America and elsewhere—and, to be sure, the security establishment of Pakistan’s neighbor, India. It is also why the relentless terror attacks of Muslim extremists in India are seen to be so serious. India may get impatient and take revenge. (Although it has recently made an enormous effort to soften the conflict in Kashmir.)
You would think that a rogue nuclear establishment under the precarious control of a fissured country would not be the choice of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency to sit at its head. Especially, as it has refused to sign the treaty which the I.A.E.A. administers. Of course, this is the U.N., and comedy and tragicomedy are its metier.
Perhaps Israel should be Pakistan’s successor at the agency.
13 comments
"You would think that a rogue nuclear establishment under the precarious control of a fissured country would not be the choice of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency to sit at its head. Especially, as it has refused to sign the treaty which the I.A.E.A. administers. Of course, this is the U.N., and comedy and tragicomedy are its metier." It depends on how many votes the Muslim States have at the UN. "Perhaps Israel should be Pakistan’s successor at the agency." Not unless there are 60 plus Jewish States in the world. It's all about oil (money) demography (votes) and the power to intimidate.
- jdyer
September 28, 2010 at 7:33pm
60 plus Jewish states? The mind boggles. :):):)
- Sophia
September 28, 2010 at 8:51pm
It was meant to boggle. It's very impossibility shows the amount of power the Muslims have at the UN. The deck is stacked against Israel and increasingly against the US too.
- jdyer
September 28, 2010 at 9:30pm
Interestingly, the Times of India reports that India is not worried about Pakistan chairing the IAEA. In fact, it says the two countries form a bloc at the IAEA -- as non-signatories to the (nuclear) Non Proliferation Treaty.... Pakistan in IAEA chair doesn't bother India TNN, Sep 29, 2010, 01.26am IST NEW DELHI: Western countries are collectively choking at the thought of nuclear renegade Pakistan heading the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)'s governing board for the next year. But not India. At the IAEA, India and Pakistan are often on the same side, mainly because both countries are opposed to western attempts to make the IAEA the "secretariat" of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Both India and Pakistan remain outside the NPT, but both enjoy equal privileges and rights in the IAEA. India and Pakistan are part of the MESA (Middle East- South Asia) group in the global body. This means every eight years, the top job comes to this group and is divided between India, Pakistan and one Middle East country. In 2002, it was Kuwait which occupied the chair, India's turn was in 1994, and this year, it's Pakistan's turn. Pakistan's choice for the job is Ansar Parvez, chairman of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and the chief of the Chashma nuclear complex. China last week announced its intention to build two more nuclear reactors in Chashma, a deal that was not grandfathered by China when it joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group. For the coming year, Pakistan will be occupied trying to work out a modus vivendi between the US and Iran on Tehran's nuclear programme. Pakistan will be in a position to help keep the primacy of the IAEA in the Iran nuclear negotiations, which is now in the UN Security Council. Recently, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad indicated he was willing to reopen talks on the nuclear question. On Pakistan too, the question of safeguards for the new reactors will come up if the NSG gives a go-ahead to the China-Pakistan nuclear deal. Pakistan chaired the IAEA board in 1962 and 1986, while India had the post in 1970 and 1994. Read more: Pakistan in IAEA chair doesn't bother India - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Pakistan-in-IAEA-chair-doesnt-bother-India/articleshow/6645265.cms#ixzz10si2aPyq
- grosof
September 28, 2010 at 10:26pm
Well, I think it's important to keep in mind that Pakistan isn't a monolith. It's pretty complex politically and socially, with plenty of pro-Western people. Their government: compared to Iran there is no contest; this is not to minimize the danger from extremists and also possible collusion from within the security forces. One has to look on the bright side. Perhaps Pakistan can help work things out with Iran. Anecdotes I have read about antisemitism in Pakistan are pretty frightening though, as well as anti-Western sentiment - some of the worst extremists in Britain are of Pakistani descent.
- Sophia
September 28, 2010 at 11:31pm
Sophia "Well, I think it's important to keep in mind that Pakistan isn't a monolith." Pakistan is officially an Islamic State. The "diversity" is a diversity between different Islamicist parties. Some are more strict than others but none of them recognize the free practice of religion.
- jdyer
September 29, 2010 at 9:09am
More threats from Islamicists being reported by ABS News: http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11747364 "'Credible But Not Specific' Threat of New Terrorist Attack Officials in Europe, US on High Alert for Commando-Style Raids After Capture of Suspected German Terrorist By RICHARD ESPOSITO, RHONDA SCHWARTZ, MATTHEW COLE and ANNA SCHECTER Sept. 28, 2010 — US and European officials said Tuesday they have detected a plot to carry out a major, coordinated series of commando-style terror attacks in Britain, France, Germany and possibly the United States. A senior US official said that while there is a "credible" threat, no specific time or place is known. President Obama has been briefed about the threat, say senior US officials. Intelligence and law enforcement authorities in the US and Europe said the threat information is based on the interrogation of a suspected German terrorist allegedly captured on his way to Europe in late summer and now being held at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan. US law enforcement officials say they have been told the terrorists were planning a series of "Mumbai-style" commando raids on what were termed "economic or soft" targets in the countries. Pakistani militants killed 173 people with guns and grenades during the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India. In testimony before Congress last week, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "We are all seeing increased activity by a more diverse set of groups and a more diverse set of threats." Officials in France have put the country on high alert for a terror attack and authorities in Paris shut down the Eiffel Tower for the second time in two weeks today after what was termed a "false alarm." No bomb was found but officials in France are taking no chances, given what they believe is a very real threat. "We currently have reached a spike in the threat of an attack, which is unquestionable," said the head of the French National Police last week. He also said France was at particular risk from al Qaeda's North African affiliate. The new threat to France, and to Germany and Britain and the U.S., is coming from Pakistan, according to intelligence officials. The captured German reportedly said several teams of attackers, all with European passports, had been trained and dispatched from training camps in Waziristan and Pakistan. Officials say the German claimed the attack plan had been approved by Osama Bin Laden. US intelligence officials said they believed an attack on American soil was more likely to come from terrorists connected to the al Qaeda group in Yemen, known as AQAP, al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula. But an official of the New York Police Department said while the most specific information was about Europe, NYPD intelligence officers were following the new information closely. "Nobody here is letting their guard down, the NYPD is watching," the official said. " Read the rest here: http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11747364
- jdyer
September 29, 2010 at 9:28am
JD--is Syria an Islamic state? They seem to be going out of their way to keep things from going nutso-sharia-jihadist. Though it's obv Also, as far as I know, Pakistan's elite want to keep it a secular country. I don't think you're forced to bow down six times a day, and women as far as I know are allowed to drive. Lebanon, at least to the north, is pretty secular as well. Apparently they have a great night life.
- MOLLYSIMON
September 29, 2010 at 12:04pm
Also, I never said this (usually b/c I'm disagreeing with Peretz) but I find it very touching that Marty has kept Gilad Shalit's photo posted.
- MOLLYSIMON
September 29, 2010 at 12:09pm
grosof: thanks for the good background. And, Pakistan actually has leverage with Iran in several ways, not least because "Islam is the official religion of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan". Molly: links to entries for each Muslim majority country are at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population if you want to understand the different approach to Islam in the 60 countries with Muslim majorities.
- K2K
September 29, 2010 at 6:58pm
MOLLYSIMON “JD--is Syria an Islamic state? They seem to be going out of their way to keep things from going nutso-sharia-jihadist. Though it's obv Also, as far as I know, Pakistan's elite want to keep it a secular country. I don't think you're forced to bow down six times a day, and women as far as I know are allowed to drive. Lebanon, at least to the north, is pretty secular as well. Apparently they have a great night life.” As far as Pakistan is concerned, it depends on what region of the country one is talking about. Moreover the government isn’t really in charge in many of the provinces there. The Pakistani secret service and military were and some still are on the side of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Syria too is a mixed bag. The government is run by the Alawites a sect that constitutes 20 percent of the population. They tend to suppress the Islamicist because they are afraid that they will sponsor the Suni majority to rebel. Still, while suppressing the Suni Islamicist at home they are allied to the Islamic State of Iran and sponsor Hamas, the Islamicist organization. In any case, the trend in most Muslim majority countries is towards more religion rather than less religion.
- jdyer
September 29, 2010 at 7:26pm
grosof “Interestingly, the Times of India reports that India is not worried about Pakistan chairing the IAEA. In fact, it says the two countries form a bloc at the IAEA -- as non-signatories to the (nuclear) Non Proliferation Treaty…” It’s an alliance of convenience like that of the US and Soviet Union during the Second World War.
- jdyer
September 29, 2010 at 7:32pm
This makes even less sense than Iran and Iraq co-chairing the Disarmament commission, because at least there they were following protocol of the alphabet. Pakistan is not a signatory to the NPT, and also the largest proliferator in the world, so what gives?
- perseus353
September 30, 2010 at 8:16am