[Marxism] NYT story on nukes ups hysterical tone on Pakistan

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

One issue: if they are going to push frenzy about nukes to justify expanding
the US invasion, don't they risk credibility if they go softer on Iran. It
is hard to miss that Obama-ist propaganda on south Asia (and we can throw in
Iraq here as well) is at this point converging more with that of the
Bush-Cheney administration.
Fred Feldman

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/world/asia/18nuke.html

May 18, 2009
Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says 
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER
WASHINGTON - Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings
that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by
insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of
dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan's nuclear
program.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the
assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on
Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense
Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an
increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal. 

"Yes," he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan's
sensitivity to any discussion about the country's nuclear strategy or
security. 

Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan's drive to
spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern,
because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when
Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an
arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of
Islamic insurgents.

The administration's effort is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is
producing an unknown amount of new bomb-grade uranium and, once a series of
new reactors is completed, bomb-grade plutonium for a new generation of
weapons. President Obama has called for passage of a treaty that would stop
all nations from producing more fissile material - the hardest part of
making a nuclear weapon - but so far has said nothing in public about
Pakistan's activities.

Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author
of Mr. Obama's review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the
administration's concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan "has
more terrorists per square mile than anyplace else on earth, and it has a
nuclear weapons program that is growing faster than anyplace else on earth."

Obama administration officials said that they had communicated to Congress
that their intent was to assure that military aid to Pakistan was directed
toward counterterrorism and not diverted. But Admiral Mullen's public
confirmation that the arsenal is increasing - a view widely held in both
classified and unclassified analyses - seems certain to aggravate Congress's
discomfort. 

Whether that discomfort might result in a delay or reduction in aid to
Pakistan is still unclear. 

The Congressional briefings have taken place in recent weeks as Pakistan has
descended into further chaos and as Congress has considered proposals to
spend $3 billion over the next five years to train and equip Pakistan's
military for counterinsurgency warfare. That aid would come on top of $7.5
billion in civilian assistance.

None of the proposed military assistance is directed at the nuclear program.
So far, America's aid to Pakistan's nuclear infrastructure has been limited
to a $100 million classified program to help Pakistan secure its weapons and
materials from seizure by Al Qaeda, the Taliban or "insiders" with insurgent
loyalties.

But the billions in new proposed American aid, officials acknowledge, could
free other money for Pakistan's nuclear infrastructure, at a time when
Pakistani officials have expressed concern that their nuclear program is
facing a budget crunch for the first time, worsened by the global economic
downturn. The program employs tens of thousands of Pakistanis, including
about 2,000 believed to possess "critical knowledge" about how to produce a
weapon. 

The dimensions of the Pakistani buildup are not fully understood. "We see
them scaling up their centrifuge facilities," said David Albright, the
president of the Institute for Science and International Security, which has
been monitoring Pakistan's continued efforts to buy materials on the black
market, and analyzing satellite photographs of two new plutonium reactors
less than 100 miles from where Pakistani forces are currently fighting the
Taliban.

"The Bush administration turned a blind eye to how this is being ramped up,"
he said. "And of course, with enough pressure, all this could be
preventable."

As a matter of diplomacy, however, the buildup presents Mr. Obama with a
potential conflict between two national security priorities, some aides
concede. One is to win passage of a global agreement to stop the production
of fissile material - the uranium or plutonium used to produce weapons.
Pakistan has never agreed to any limits and is one of three countries, along
with India and Israel, that never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty.

Yet the other imperative is a huge infusion of financial assistance into
Afghanistan and Pakistan, money considered crucial to helping stabilize
governments with tenuous holds on power in the face of terrorist and
insurgent violence.

Senior members of Congress were already pressing for assurances from
Pakistan that the American military assistance would be used to fight the
insurgency, and not be siphoned off for more conventional military programs
to counter Pakistan's historic adversary, India. Official confirmation that
Pakistan has accelerated expansion of its nuclear program only added to the
consternation of those in Congress who were already voicing serious concern
about the security of those warheads.

During a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Senator
Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, veered from the budget proposal under debate
to ask Admiral Mullen about public reports "that Pakistan is, at the moment,
increasing its nuclear program - that it may be actually adding on to
weapons systems and warheads. Do you have any evidence of that?"

It was then that Admiral Mullen responded with his one-word confirmation.
Mr. Webb said Pakistan's decision was a matter of "enormous concern," and he
added, "Do we have any type of control factors that would be built in, in
terms of where future American money would be going, as it addresses what I
just asked about?"

Similar concerns about seeking guarantees that American military assistance
to Pakistan would be focused on battling insurgents also were expressed by
Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman.

"Unless Pakistan's leaders commit, in deeds and words, their country's armed
forces and security personnel to eliminating the threat from militant
extremists, and unless they make it clear that they are doing so, for the
sake of their own future, then no amount of assistance will be effective,"
Mr. Levin said.

A spokesman for the Pakistani government contacted Friday declined to
comment on whether his nation was expanding its nuclear weapons program, but
said the government was "maintaining the minimum, credible deterrence
capability." He warned against linking American financial assistance to
Pakistan's actions on its weapons program.

"Conditions or sanctions on this issue did not work in the past, and this
will not send a positive message to the people of Pakistan," said the
official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his country's nuclear
program is classified.





________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu