| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan/South Asia |
| Give Pakistan civilian nuclear technology! Or Else! |
| 2005-09-11 |
| Daily Times Editorial. Typical Pakistani attitude - a bizarre and fanciful sense of equality with India and the tactic of negotiating with a gun to its head - "Sale of dangerous nuclear weapons technology is possible at all times when a state is under an economic crunch" EDITORIAL: Give Pakistan civilian nuclear technology! Pakistanâs ambassador to the United States, General (retd) Jehangir Karamat, said in Washington that Pakistan âshould have the same access to US civilian nuclear technology that President Bush has proposed for Indiaâ. He then went on to take exception to the Indo-US defence pact that will tilt the balance of power in Indiaâs favour, which might compel Pakistan âto start taking extraordinary measures to ensure a capability for deterrence and defence.â This immediately brought a repartee from the audience that India and Pakistan were poised to get into a nuclear arms race, producing more nuclear weapons than they needed, thus acquiring more nuclear warheads than possessed by France and the United Kingdom. President George Bush is going ahead with legislation that would allow the US to export nuclear technology to India despite the fact that India is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The Pakistani ambassador is of the opinion that the forthcoming legislation should not be country-specific but should similarly exempt other non-signatory states (Pakistan, Israel) âprovided they meet the same criteria as Indiaâ. The answer from the other side is that India is different from Pakistan in that it has democracy and has not indulged in the smuggling of lethal nuclear parts like Pakistanâs ânational heroâ scientist, Dr AQ Khan. Once India is exempted from the technology-export ban, it will open its civilian nuclear programme to full inspections by the IAEA. Pakistan can also submit itself to the same regime if it too is exempted from the ban. It may have a bad record with regard to its pledge not to export nuclear weapons technology, but it has come a long way from the period when people like AQ Khan operated without any let or hindrance. In fact, its policy of normalisation with India â more crucial than perhaps the world realises â will serve to strike at the very root of why Pakistan needed to have the bomb in the first place. Indiaâs record on democracy may be impressive but Pakistanâs turnaround after 2001 is in many ways more important. It has put itself squarely in the middle of a global effort to stamp out terrorism and has rolled back those policies that had propelled it towards international isolation and dangerous internal trends. At the present moment it stands on the verge of an economic revival that should serve to take the Pakistani mind away from military insecurity. It is planning together with India and Iran to provide against future energy shortages that South Asia will face if the regional economies take off. Because of the nuclear ban, both India and Pakistan have not been able to keep abreast of their demand for electricity. Both deserve to be encouraged to go down the economic road that will bring relief to their hungry masses. It would be dangerous to leave Pakistan out of the civilian nuclear deal, and unwise to let it feel once again that âbalance of powerâ in the region can be maintained through economic sacrifice. Another reason why the US must think of giving Pakistan civilian nuclear technology is Pakistanâs failure to develop an internal consensus on the management of its water resources to produce cheap electricity. Unfortunately India may not be persuaded under the Indus Water Treaty to divert waters belonging to it. This leaves Pakistan only the nuclear option in the field of energy. This means that as long as the ban is in place it has to make even nuclear electricity stealthily. But if nuclear technology for energy is made available in return for full-scope safeguards on civilian nuclear plants, this will help Pakistan come out of the closet. Sale of dangerous nuclear weapons technology is possible at all times when a state is under an economic crunch. As it is, the US is thinking of giving Pakistan a lot of military equipment including some 100 F-16 warplanes to maintain the âbalance of powerâ in the region. All this will come to naught if India is exempted from the ban and civilian nuclear technology is made available to it and not to Pakistan. More complications will be introduced into the international nuclear control regime if other nuclear powers start reconsidering the ban. For instance, it would be natural for China to reconsider its decision to exercise restraint with regard to nuclear technology export to Pakistan. A lot of positive developments are taking place in Pakistan to transform it into a ânormalâ cooperative state in the world community. A fair and even-handed approach by the US at this stage would help it along that road. * |
| Posted by:john |
| #4 The Pakistani ambassador needs to be told that there will be no equality of relations relative to India until such time as the Islamic people of Pakistan accept that western civilization has a right to exist and view the United States as a long-term friend and ally. Based on what I have read about Pakistan on Rantburg over the last few years, I would say it's not going to happen in his lifetime -- or his grandchildren's lifetime. If you embrace the 7th century, be happy living in the 7th century. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2005-09-11 16:41 |
| #3 Besides the pebble bed (South African technology) the Chinese are importing light water reactors from America and heavy water reactors from Canada. |
| Posted by: john 2005-09-11 14:20 |
| #2 On one hand, it would seem the sensible approach is to do what China has done: pebble bed reactors. That type of reactor is far less expensive to build, produces a goodly amount of electricity, is clean, and cannot be directly used to make enriched fuel for nuclear weapons. It is indeed a sensible solution for civilian nuclear power. It is not as powerful as a US reactor, but most uses don't require that much juice. However, the electrical power it produces *itself* is a problem. Enriching nuclear material needs an egregious amount of electricity. And, of course, these birds would use the entire output *not* to provide electricity for civilian use, but to process nuclear material for nuclear weapons. That is, though their economy needs more electricity, it doesn't need *that* much more electricity, as least as far as its governmental priorities go. The people can do without, as long as it helps them make their bombs. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-09-11 14:14 |
| #1 This means that as long as the ban is in place it has to make even nuclear electricity stealthily Nonsense of course. As Burns testified to the Congress this week, Pakistan's civil nuclear programme is a joke. The nuke reactors in Pakistan were never intended for power generation. |
| Posted by: john 2005-09-11 07:11 |