Pakistan's Short Fuse

A new book, Deception, details the rise and menace of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program—and how the U.S. did nothing to stand in its way.

Mon November 19, 2007 12:00 AM PST

By now, the idea of "blowback"— that U.S. covert intelligence operations have yielded harmful, unintended consequences—is becoming widely known. Author Chalmers Johnson, most notably, has documented how our dirty dealings around the world, especially during the Cold War, have returned to haunt us. In recent decades, the men and women of our armed forces have been sent to vanquish despots that their own government once supported, from the CIA-trained Manuel Noriega to the U.S. arms recipient Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden, a beneficiary of U.S. funding to the Afghan mujahideen.


story continues below
story continued from above

But perhaps no secret operations have yielded more devastating consequences than those carried out in Pakistan, which was considered a vital and strategically placed ally against Soviet communism, and later against Islamist terrorism. Covert American support propped up the repressive military dictatorships that have ruled Pakistan for the better part of its history as a nation, leading right up through the current crisis. U.S. funding, channeled from the CIA through the Pakistani intelligence service to fuel insurgencies in Soviet-occupied Afghanistan, helped give rise to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Now, the research and documentation provided by two British investigative journalists show the extent to which Pakistan, emboldened by the purposeful neglect of U.S. policymakers and the American intelligence community, spread nuclear materials and technologies to such notorious U.S. adversaries as Libya, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq, and Iran. If we should go to war with Iran over nuclear weapons, we will have Pakistan—and ourselves—to thank for that as well.

This story is told in a new book called Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Secret Trade in Nuclear Weapons, by Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark, longtime correspondents for the Sunday Times and then the Guardian, who reported from South Asia for more than a decade. Earlier this week I spoke at length with Levy about Pakistan's proliferation activities, and America's acquiescence.

The critical period stretches from the inauguration of Ronald Reagan through the end of the Soviet-Afghan War in 1989, when, Levy and Scott-Clark contend, the CIA, State Department, and Pentagon allowed Pakistan's WMD program to remain on track. Reagan dismantled the federal Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and downgraded the National Security Council and the office of the National Security Adviser. The CIA, under zealous director William Casey, was in ascendance, and intelligence was employed to push forward the Reagan political agenda. "They busied themselves by disrupting and interrupting all of the operations mounted by the various agencies to [block] the WMD program that would arm Pakistan," explains Levy.

Pakistan is one of four nations that refuses to abide by the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (the others are India, Israel, and North Korea), and while it is nominally a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has a long history of resisting oversight from the watchdog group. Thus, with the United States looking the other way, Pakistan was free to develop and sell nuclear materials and technologies.

Pakistan's nuclear program got its start in the early 1970s under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (Benazir Bhutto's father) and was brought to fruition by the notorious Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, a German-trained scientist who had worked in a uranium enrichment facility in Europe and reportedly stolen technologies that he brought back to Pakistan. By the early 1980s, Pakistan, now under the military dictatorship of General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, possessed enriched uranium as well as bomb designs and other technology, much of it from China; by 1987 there was evidence that the country had usable weapons. (It is thought to have between 50 and 100 today.) During the 1980s, Levy says, "Pakistan stockpiled enormous amounts of fissionable material and ready-made assembled warheads and bombs without any check or security measures or command and control systems implemented. . .They had no idea how the security devices employed by the West worked, so there was no separation of warheads from triggers. . .and they didn't have any of the things we call ‘permissive' active links, which supposedly ensure a bomb can't go off accidentally."

After the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in 1979, Pakistan was exempt from a U.S. law that prohibited aid to countries that import materials for nuclear weapons. Both Reagan and George H.W. Bush resisted sporadic efforts by Congress to suspend aid—some of which was covertly channeled to the military and potentially used to build nuclear weapons—and continued to certify that Pakistan itself did not have the bomb, despite credible evidence to the contrary. According to Deception, "State Department officials [were] actively obstructing other arms of government which could not help but fall over intelligence about Pakistan's nuclear trade. Evidence was destroyed, criminal files were diverted, Congress was repeatedly lied to, and in several cases, in 1986 and 1987, presidential appointees even tipped off the Pakistani government so as to prevent its agents from getting caught in U.S. Customs Service stings that aimed to catch them buying nuclear components in America."

By 1990, however, the Soviets had withdrawn from Afghanistan, and Pakistan was no longer needed as a security springboard for the United States. When U.S. aid was suspended in October 1990, Levy says, the Pakistanis warned what the consequences would be of ending their "special" relationship. General Mirza Aslam Beg, chief of army staff and a man determined to defy the West, sought out three U.S. officials—Ambassador Robert Oakley, Centcom commander Norman Schwarzkopf, and Assistant Secretary of Defense Harry Rowan—and told them that "if America turned its back on Pakistan, it would sell its nuclear technology, and Iran would be the first client. All three officials reported back and they got no feedback from Washington."

According to information obtained by the authors of Deception, the Pakistani military and intelligence service, working with A. Q. Khan, wasted no time in carrying out General Beg's threat. In the fall of 1990, they opened a channel with North Korea, offering what Levy and Scott-Clark call an "hors d'oeuvre" in the form of Stinger missiles. The Stinger, supplied by the U.S. in large numbers to the Afghan mujahideen, was regarded as a key weapon in winning the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis were supposed to collect the unused missiles and return them to the CIA, which, needless to say, they did not do. (Former mujahideen Stingers are now thought to be in the possession of North Korea, China, Iran, and a number of terrorist groups.) By the middle of the '90s, Khan was making frequent visits to Pyongyang, and there were signs that the Pakistanis were trading nuclear technology for North Korean-built missiles and other arms—many of them duly noted by the CIA and British intelligence.

During the same time frame, in the fall of 1990, the world was reacting to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. On this matter, Pakistan appeared to be split: The civilian side of the government backed the Saudis who, of course, were socked into the American coalition. But the military, the real power in Pakistan, sided with Saddam Hussein. In fact, just as the United States began assembling troops for Desert Storm, a Pakistani agent arrived in Baghdad with the offer of designs for a nuclear bomb, and help in building one. The proposal seemed so outrageous, Levy says, Saddam thought he was being set up, and blocked the deal.

The details of the agent's offer came to light five years later, in 1995, when an IAEA inspection team raided a farm owned by General Hussein Kamel, Hussein's son-in-law, who had run Iraq's weapons programs. Gary Dillon, a Briton who led the inspection, found boxes of documents including a one-page memo headed "Top Secret Proposal" that referred to the code name "A/B." Dillon's people thought it was a fake. "The memo appeared to be from the Mukhabarat, the Iraqi intelligence service, and dated 6 October 1990," he told Levy and Scott-Clark in an interview for their book. "It was an account of a meeting that had taken place in the offices of the Mukhabarat."

Reportedly, the memo said, "We have enclosed for you the following proposal from the Pakistani scientist Dr. Abd-el-Qadeer Khan [sic] regarding the possibility of helping Iraq establish a project to enrich uranium and manufacture a nuclear weapon." The Pakistani offer included not only blueprints for making a bomb, but advice on how to build a uranium-enrichment facility and obtain components, which were to be run through Dubai, from European companies.

The inspection team was alarmed. "We registered our extreme concern to the IAEA and I tried to prick the U.S. interest, too," Dillon told the authors. After reviewing the documents, "I believed that they were an accurate representation of what Pakistan had put on the table—although we could never know for sure. As for the overall code name ‘A/B,' I puzzled over this for some time until I realized what the letters stood for: Atom Bomb. The truth is often far simpler than one thinks."

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.
Comments
no profile pic for comment author

The U.S. government's problem with Pakistan is similar to the one it had with Iran in 1979. The U.S. government placed Iranian Shah Reza Pahlavi in power in 1953, which extinguished the rising flames of democracy. This resulted in a populist Islamic revolution and extreme anti-American sentiment. Now, Pakistan's brutal dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, is facing a populist uprising.

The United States has supported Musharraf for years and continues to straddle both sides of the fence. It preaches democracy but has a long history of providing support to dictators. The U.S. government must practice what it preaches and stop enabling dictators.

The United States also should have supported former Pakistan prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who recently returned to Pakistan after eight years of exile. She, unlike Musharraf, is pro-democracy, pro-fair election and is against al-Qaeda. Bhutto has stated she would wage immediate war on the al-Qaeda sanctuaries that are ignored and, in some cases, protected by Musharraf.

no profile pic for comment author

People can not fix the world they have messed up. You better start praying to [S]omething and you better start soon!

no profile pic for comment author

The more we learn about U.S. foreign policy the more sinister it appears. We clearly have a demonstrated penchant for militarists with whom we can conduct our fascist business of weapons trade and world domination through bullying and bloodshed. I cannot recall a single insight into the sub rosa foreign policy machinations of this or any other administration that appears even remotely democratic, enlightened or designed for anything other than nefarious, nay, demonic purposes. At what point do we admit that we are, indeed, the great Satan? Can these all be mistakes or are they, more likely, examples of deliberate gambits with vile consequences for humanity for which Chalmers Johnson has unwittingly deigned to be innocent by labeling them "blowback", as in unforseen consequences? Are we that stupid, or are we that evil? This appears to be the choice. There is too much consistency for stupid, it must be the other. After all, the war profiteers who control Washington are doing just fine thank you.

no profile pic for comment author

How about an article about Israel's nuclear capacity and the zionist threat?

no profile pic for comment author

From outside the Empire, the perspective looks bleak indeed. The rest of the world view these dealings as incredible examples of recklessness and hipocrisy. Given this record (remember the lies thal led to the current massacres in Iraq too!), who could believe the Bush administration? Oh, right! I was forgetting the American public!

no profile pic for comment author

How many more schocking revaliations are out there about our obniable goverment actions? I have decided 'they ' are all the dame,demos.republicans.

no profile pic for comment author

It seems we have this tendency to ignore nuclear proliferation when it comes to our so-called friends, such as Pakistan and Israel, but threaten war and destruction on our so-called enemies. What's wrong with this picture?
xvet

no profile pic for comment author

As gross and horrible as this appears, it's only one aspect, one facet of US foreign policy. We have an American aristocracy that desires a world controlling empire. These people have run the country since the revolution and now have a strong chance of achieving their goals. At the expense of millions more innocent men, women and children. Perhaps billions. A small price to pay in their eyes. Despite what some people want to believe, the facts remain. It's barbarism. One entity vying to be the alpha taken to the grossest level.

no profile pic for comment author

Short sighted policies implemented by US and inability to differentiate between friend and foe has already turned them into the most hated governments of the world. Simple, innocent and loving American people are used every 4 years to bring the highly Satanic governments to power. American Governments are only to blame for all the bloodshed of innocent people in the world.

no profile pic for comment author

tiffany jewelry

That little blue box - everyone woman dreams of seeing it come their way. tiffany jewelry jewelry is world renowned for its stunning quality and top of the line artisanship; however, it also has a reputation for having a price tag that is way out of most people's leagues.
discount tiffany jewelry That doesn't mean you can't get that Tiffany look you want at a price you can afford, however. Thanks to replica Tiffany jewelry, you can look like you are draped in Tiffany jewelry, and yet still have the money left in your pocket to go out and show off your looks.

Post a comment
Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote> <img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options


Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com

Mother Jones Podcast
Get in on the conversation! We talk about culture, politics, the environment, the economy and more. Listen now!

TalkBackTees.com
A treasure trove of liberal wit, wisdom and quotations, from ancient to modern, on colorful, cotton tees.

Support Independent Artists
Amazing art, crafts, apparel, paper-goods and more. A carefully curated selection of sundries since 1999.

FREE CONNECTIONS FOR GREEN SINGLES
Meet progressive singles in the environmental, vegetarian & animal rights community who share your values