Pakistan enhances second strike N-capability

[Cheetah786]

WASHINGTON: Pakistan has addressed issues of survivability in a possible nuclear conflict through second strike capability, says a US congressional report.

The first part of the report, published on Friday, deals with Islamabad’s efforts to develop new weapons, while the second part studies its strategy for surviving a nuclear war.

According to the report, Pakistan has built hard and deeply buried storage and launch facilities to retain a second strike capability in a nuclear war.

It also has built road-mobile missiles, air defences around strategic sites, and concealment measures.

The report prepared by the Congressional Research Service recalls that as the United States prepared to launch an attack on the Afghan Taliban after September 11, 2001, former military dictator Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf ordered that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal be redeployed to ‘at least six secret new locations.’ This action came at a time of uncertainly about the future of the region, including the direction of US-Pakistan relations. Islamabad’s leadership was uncertain whether the US would decide to conduct military strikes against Pakistan’s nuclear assets if Islamabad did not assist the United States against the Taliban. Indeed, Musharraf cited protection of Pakistan’s nuclear and missile assets as one of the reasons for Islamabad’s dramatic policy shift.

The CRS points out that these events, in combination with the 1999 Kargil crisis, the 2002 conflict with India at the Line of Control, and revelations about the A.Q. Khan proliferation network, inspired a variety of reforms to secure the nuclear complex. Risk of nuclear war in South Asia ran high in the 1999 Kargil crisis, when the Pakistani military is believed to have begun preparing nuclear-tipped missiles.

The report, however, notes that even at the high alert levels of 2001 and 2002, there were no reports of Pakistan mating the warheads with delivery systems.

The CRS refers to a Nov 5, 2007 statement by former prime minister Benazir Bhutto who said that while Musharraf claimed he had firm control of the nuclear arsenal, she was afraid this control could weaken due to instability in the country.

The report then quotes Michael Krepon of the Henry L. Stimson Centre, Washington, as arguing that ‘a prolonged period of turbulence and infighting among the country’s president, prime minister, and army chief’ could jeopardise the army’s unity of command, which ‘is essential for nuclear security.’

During that period between late 2007 and early 2008, US military officials also expressed concern about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei also said he feared that a radical regime could take power in Pakistan, and thereby acquire nuclear weapons.

Experts also worried that while nuclear weapons were currently under firm control, with warheads disassembled, technology could be sold off by insiders during a worsened crisis.

Since then, however, US intelligence officials have expressed greater confidence regarding the security of Islamabad’s nuclear weapons.

The Pakistani military’s control of the country’s nuclear weapons is ‘a good thing because that’s an institution in Pakistan that has, in fact, withstood many of the political changes over the years,’ says Donald Kerr, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence.

Washington has ‘no reason at this point to have any concern with regard to the security’ of Islamabad’s nuclear arsenal, argues a Pentagon spokesperson.
DAWN.COM | World | Pakistan enhances second strike N-capability: US report

 

[Patriot]

WASHINGTON: Pakistan has addressed issues of survivability in a possible nuclear conflict through second strike capability, says a US congressional report.

The first part of the report, published on Friday, deals with Islamabad’s efforts to develop new weapons, while the second part studies its strategy for surviving a nuclear war.

According to the report, Pakistan has built hard and deeply buried storage and launch facilities to retain a second strike capability in a nuclear war.

It also has built road-mobile missiles, air defences around strategic sites, and concealment measures.

The report prepared by the Congressional Research Service recalls that as the United States prepared to launch an attack on the Afghan Taliban after September 11, 2001, former military dictator Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf ordered that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal be redeployed to ‘at least six secret new locations.’ This action came at a time of uncertainly about the future of the region, including the direction of US-Pakistan relations. Islamabad’s leadership was uncertain whether the US would decide to conduct military strikes against Pakistan’s nuclear assets if Islamabad did not assist the United States against the Taliban. Indeed, Musharraf cited protection of Pakistan’s nuclear and missile assets as one of the reasons for Islamabad’s dramatic policy shift.

The CRS points out that these events, in combination with the 1999 Kargil crisis, the 2002 conflict with India at the Line of Control, and revelations about the A.Q. Khan proliferation network, inspired a variety of reforms to secure the nuclear complex. Risk of nuclear war in South Asia ran high in the 1999 Kargil crisis, when the Pakistani military is believed to have begun preparing nuclear-tipped missiles.

The report, however, notes that even at the high alert levels of 2001 and 2002, there were no reports of Pakistan mating the warheads with delivery systems.

The CRS refers to a Nov 5, 2007 statement by former prime minister Benazir Bhutto who said that while Musharraf claimed he had firm control of the nuclear arsenal, she was afraid this control could weaken due to instability in the country.

The report then quotes Michael Krepon of the Henry L. Stimson Centre, Washington, as arguing that ‘a prolonged period of turbulence and infighting among the country’s president, prime minister, and army chief’ could jeopardise the army’s unity of command, which ‘is essential for nuclear security.’

During that period between late 2007 and early 2008, US military officials also expressed concern about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei also said he feared that a radical regime could take power in Pakistan, and thereby acquire nuclear weapons.

Experts also worried that while nuclear weapons were currently under firm control, with warheads disassembled, technology could be sold off by insiders during a worsened crisis.

Since then, however, US intelligence officials have expressed greater confidence regarding the security of Islamabad’s nuclear weapons.

The Pakistani military’s control of the country’s nuclear weapons is ‘a good thing because that’s an institution in Pakistan that has, in fact, withstood many of the political changes over the years,’ says Donald Kerr, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence.

Washington has ‘no reason at this point to have any concern with regard to the security’ of Islamabad’s nuclear arsenal, argues a Pentagon spokesperson.
DAWN.COM | World | Pakistan enhances second strike N-capability: US report

I am glad she is dead.Scoring Political points by hurting national security.What a greedy *****.

 

[jawadqamar]

Gaddafi defends Pak N-Programme

Akhtar Jamal

Islamabad—Libyan Leader Moammar al-Gaddafi has strongly defended Pakistan’s nuclear programme and asserted that “Islam is the very foundation for the existence of Pakistan.”

The Libyan Leader in a rare but thought provoking article recalled that “The West, particularly America, and Israel never wished for Pakistan to possess a nuclear bomb. But on May 28, 1998, they woke up to the fact that Pakistan had become a nuclear state and blamed their intelligence services for failure to anticipate the nuclear tests.”

Qaddafi in his write-up published on Friday in Washington Times maintained “every effort was made to dissuade Pakistan from owning the bomb”. He added that the American Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger frankly had told the then Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, “if you make the bomb, we’ll make an example out of you.”

The Libyan leader said that “Mr. Bhutto, the founder of Pakistan’s nuclear programme was, of course, hanged. Gen. Zia-ul-Haq, who Islamized Pakistan and consolidated its nuclear programme was murdered. More recently, Benazir Bhutto, Mr. Bhutto’s daughter, was assassinated,” and warned that “Others still may face a similar fate.”

He elaborated that “the question, however, is: Why dont the Americans and the Israelis want Pakistan to possess the bomb.’

Pakistan is a Muslim country. In fact, Islam is the very foundation for the existence of Pakistan. Except for religion, there really are no other factors that unite Pakistanis. This explains why the Pakistanis are fanatic about religion. It is the essence of their nationhood.”

The Libyan Revolutionary Leader asserted that “Islam is for the Pakistanis as Judaism is for the Israelis, a matter of existence. This is not the same for other countries.”

“Pakistan is unique. There can be no Pakistan without Islam, as Islam was the basis for its separation from India and its raison d’etre as a state.... Islam for the Pakistanis is not a question of faith only but also a question of identity, he writes.

He maintained that “Islam in Pakistan does not exist in a safe region. It is surrounded by a hostile environment that provokes its very Muslim essence, facing Buddhism and Hinduism as well as fanatic doctrines and intolerance.”

He explained that “This is the reason behind the formation of violent Muslim groups affiliated with the fierce tribes in Afghanistan as well as al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.”

Qaddafi elaborated that “The danger such fanatic groups constitute for the Israelis and Americans is that they may hold the reins of power, to which they indeed aspire.

If these groups governed the state, which is a possibility that would be a very dangerous outcome for the Americans and Israelis.”

He suggested that “On the other hand, if political parties, such as the Pakistan People’s Party, or even the army, ruled, things would be relatively safe because they presumably constitute responsible institutions” but added that “Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that they can form sustainable governments.”

The Libyan Leader concluded his article with this sentence “Tension and anxiety will continue, as will the danger posed by a nuclear Pakistan. Attempts by the Israelis and Americans to extricate themselves from this quagmire, by all means, also will never cease. Either way presents a dangerous endgame to the region and the world.”

 

[Cockpuncher]

currently neither india nor pak has 2nd striike abilit rit?

 

[Infanteer]

currently neither india nor pak has 2nd striike abilit rit?

India does and it has no first use policy.

 

[s90]

Good news!

 

[BaburCM]

In the meantime, can't wait until we complete the nuke traid. That will surely make our strike capability impregnable.

 

[Sargodhian_Eagle]

All of u guys r knw very well abt honey bee n wasp. Every body is afraid of them. why? Reason is their sting. If u pulled out their stings u can catch them keep on ur face n hands.


Same example fits on Pakistan. Nukes r stings of Pakistan. Westren conturies, India n Israel r trying to pull out Pakistan's sting.

Because if Pakistani nukes r destroyed then there is no problm to attack Pak n conqure it in few moments.
Therefore congres of USA is publishing such reports. Actually they want to access Pak nukes n secondly they r posing that Pak nukes r unsafe n they r reachable for Talibans n USA is going to protect Pak nukes