You have to stand guard over the development and maintenance of democracy, social justice and the equality of mankind in your own native soil. [Mohammed Ali Jinnah]
Showing posts with label Nukes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nukes. Show all posts

Monday, December 8, 2008

American columnist’s advice

ONE would begin with the story of two identical twins named Ecilop and Noog. One grew up to become a scientist while the other took to gangsters. Ecilop would develop novel kinds of weapons and Noog would use them to shock and awe any challengers to his domain.

Along the line, Noog came up with an ambitious plan, went to a country named Ebolg and offered to become its chief policeman. As his foremost qualification, he cited the possession of frightful weapons invented by his brother, which he claimed, could vapourise any opponent and turn a rebellious territory into a wasteland.

Understandably, he got the job and, over time, acquired power and riches in Ebolg. But, towards the end of his tenure, his conscience pricked him about a number of his misadventures and he publicly owned up to these. The people of Ebolg felt cheated and decided to fire him.

Some of the perceptive readers may have noticed that Ecilop is actually ‘Police’ spelled in reverse, while Noog is ‘Goon’ and Ebolg is the globe. This fable is meant to show the role United States has played in the world from WW II on, in trying to be its policeman.

First, it incinerated and vapourised nearly 200,000 innocent Japanese men, women and children in 1945 through atomic bombs, which was ultimate terrorism. Then, in the Vietnam war it used Agent Orange to wipe out forests serving to conceal the enemy forces. Apart from millions killed in that needless war, the defoliant permanently affected millions more.

The newest adventure has been in Iraq, where over a million Iraqis have met an untimely death just because America decided to invade it. Now, perhaps bothered somewhat by his conscience, Mr Bush said the other day that he felt sorry his intelligence agencies had provided wrong information about Saddam Hussain’s WMDs.

However, he never expressed any sorrow over the huge Iraqi casualties and the four million who became homeless. It reminds me of Shakespeare’s words: “Man proud man, dressed in a little authority, plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven as make the angels weep.”

In this backdrop comes an article by the Washington Post columnist Robert Kagan, who is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington. He has advised placing Pakistan’s tribal belt and areas where terrorist groups allegedly have their bases under international control.

Mr Kagan suggested forming an international force to invade those areas and destroy the bases although such an undertaking would violate Pakistan’s sovereignty. He has argued that “Pakistan and other states that harbour terrorists should not take their sovereignty for granted. In the 21st century, sovereign rights need to be earned. (Dawn, Dec. 3).

Who had given the right to the US to kill and maim millions of people in the 20th and 21st centuries? It was a ‘right’ earned not by its compassion or humanism but by sheer force of WMDs and gunboat diplomacy. The American broadcaster, writer and intellectual David Bersamian has revealed much about the unlawful and outrageous acts of his nation, during lecture tours of Pakistan.
Before faulting Pakistan, people like Mr Kagan must show some realism, if not empathy, by trying to understand the troubles that have shaped its present predicament.

India hounded us right from 1947. The occupation of Junagadh and Kashmir, among other places (including Goa), is an indelible proof of New Delhi’s aggressiveness and expansionism, with the first two issues still pending before the UN. Anyone with any sense of justice should first call for resolution of the underlying causes of hostility in the region. The breaking up of Pakistan by India in 1971 is another undeniable fact. Things like these, as well as the latter’s detonation of an atomic device in 1974, deceptively named the ‘Smiling Buddha’, forced Islamabad to take the nuclear path, which bothers the West so much. If the world powers had checked India’s covetousness and hegemonies, there would have been no militarism, no nukes or desire in some Pakistanis to wage jihad for Kashmir. Similarly, the British philosopher and peace activist Bertrand Russell, who had worked for India’s freedom until 1947, was so disillusioned by the time of the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 that in his book ‘Unarmed Victory’ he accused India of having double standards regarding Kashmir and Nagaland. He also held India responsible for initiating the war with China. In view of all these facts, Pakistan needs a sympathetic and helpful approach, not occupation of its territory. If the root problems are resolved, the militancy will wither away rapidly.

QAMAR IQBAL
Karachi

DAWN - Letters; December 08, 2008

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

A Pakistani view of U.S. nuclear weapons

[I found following column very interesting and decided to share it, it was published at TheBulletinOnline, i was quiet amazed to see the publish date because it was published on 5th Feb 2008 but the incident was not well publicised through the media]

"The [U.S.] Air Force has made substantial changes in its handling of nuclear weapons in the wake of a B-52 flight last August during which the pilots and crew were unaware they were carrying six air-launched cruise missiles with nuclear warheads."

-- "Air Force Alters Rules for Handling of Nuclear Arms," Washington Post January 25, 2008.

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN, JANUARY 25--At a press conference in Islamabad today, Pakistani Brig. Gen. Atta M. Iqhman expressed concern about U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. Iqhman, who oversees the safety and security of the Pakistani nuclear force, said that U.S. protocols for storing and handling nuclear weapons are inadequate. "In Pakistan, we store nuclear warheads separately from their delivery systems, and a nuclear warhead can only be activated if three separate officers agree," Iqhman said. "In the United States, almost 20 years after the end of the Cold War, nuclear weapons still sit atop missiles, on hair-trigger alert, and it only takes two launch-control officers to activate a nuclear weapon. The U.S. government has persistently ignored arms control experts around the world who have said they should at least de-alert their weapons."

Iqhman also questioned the adequacy of U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. He expressed particular concern about the August 29, 2007, incident in which six nuclear weapons were accidentally loaded under the wing of a B-52 by workers who did not observe routine inspection procedures and thought they were attaching conventional weapons to the B-52. The flight navigator should have caught their mistake, but he neglected to inspect the weapons as required. For several hours the nuclear weapons were in the air without anyone's knowledge. "The United States needs to develop new protocols for storing and loading nuclear weapons, and it needs to do a better job of recruiting and training the personnel who handle them," Iqhman said.

Iqhman added the Pakistani government would be willing to offer technical advice and assistance to the United States on improving its nuclear weapons handling procedures. Speaking anonymously because of the issue's sensitivity, senior Pentagon officials said it is Washington's role to give, not receive, advice on nuclear weapons safety and surety issues.

Iqhman pointed out that the August 29 event was not an isolated incident; there have been at least 24 accidents involving nuclear weapons on U.S. planes. He mentioned a 1966 incident in which four nuclear weapons fell to the ground when two planes collided over Spain, as well as a 1968 fire that caused a plane to crash in Greenland with four hydrogen bombs aboard. In 1980, a Titan II missile in Arkansas exploded during maintenance, sending a nuclear warhead flying 600 feet through the air. In a remark that visibly annoyed a U.S. official present at the briefing, Iqhman described the U.S. nuclear arsenal as "an accident waiting to happen."

Jay Keuse of MSNBC News asked Iqhman if Pakistan was in any position to be lecturing other countries given Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan's record of selling nuclear technology to other countries. "All nuclear weapons states profess to oppose proliferation while helping select allies acquire nuclear weapons technology," Iqhman replied. "The United States helped Britain and France obtain the bomb; France helped the Israelis; and Russia helped China. And China," he added coyly, "is said by Western media sources to have helped Pakistan. So why can't Pakistan behave like everyone else?"

Iqhman's deputy, Col. Bom Zhalot also expressed concern about the temperament of the U.S. public, asking whether they had the maturity and self-restraint to be trusted with the ultimate weapon. "Their leaders lecture us on the sanctity of life, and their president believes that every embryo is sacred, but they are the only country to have used these terrible weapons--not just once, but twice. Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the plane that bombed Hiroshima, said he never lost a night's sleep over killing 100,000 people, many of them women and children. That's scarcely human."

While Iqhman glared reproachfully at Zhalot for this rhetorical outburst, Zhalot continued: "We also worry that the U.S. commander-in-chief has confessed to having been an alcoholic. Here in Pakistan, alcohol is 'haram,' so this isn't a problem for us. Studies have also found that one-fifth of U.S. military personnel are heavy drinkers. How many of those have responsibility for nuclear weapons?"

John G. Libb of the Washington Times asked if Americans were wrong to be concerned about Pakistan's nuclear stockpile given the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Pakistan. Colonel Zhalot replied: "Millions of Americans believe that these are the last days and that they will be raptured to heaven at the end of the world. You have a president who describes Jesus as his favorite philosopher, and one of the last remaining candidates in your presidential primaries is a preacher who doesn't believe in evolution. Many Pakistanis worry that the United States is being taken over by religious extremists who believe that a nuclear holocaust will just put the true believers on a fast track to heaven. We worry about a nutcase U.S. president destroying the world to save it."

U.S. diplomats in Pakistan declined comment.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

It won't be a surprise if Musharraf engineered terror attacks: General Chishti

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan (AFP)

A retired Pakistani General who opposes President Pervez Musharraf said he would "not be surprised" if Musharraf had engineered terror attacks to manipulate his image in the West. Former Lieutenant General Faiz Ali Chishti heads the influential Pakistan Ex-Servicemen Society, which last week issued a blunt open letter signed by more than 100 senior officers calling on Musharraf to quit.

The statement fuelled Western speculation that Musharraf may be losing support in the military following his resignation as army chief in November, a potential blow with parliamentary elections only three weeks away.

"Musharraf is an intellectually dishonest person. He is a clever ruler, who makes the US and the West believe that they can only effectively deal with Al-Qaeda as long as he is in power," Chishti told AFP in an interview."But what is Al-Qaeda and who are Taliban? I will not be surprised if this clever ruler is behind all suicide attacks,"

he said.
Pakistan has been buffetted by more than 50 suicide attacks in the past year, culminating in the assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto on December 27, which led to planned January 8 general elections being delayed.

The government blames Bhutto's killing on an allegedly Al-Qaeda-linked tribal warlord, Baitullah Mehsud, but many of Bhutto's supporters have accused the government or parts of the military of involvement.

Musharraf, who seized power in a coup in 1999, has rejected those claims, and last week he angrily brushed aside the calls for his resignation by Chishti and the other generals.

"They are insignificant personalities," Musharraf told the Financial Times in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. "Most of them are ones who served under me and I kicked them out... They are insignificant. I am not even bothered by them."

In another interview with the BBC he said that the retired officers had no clout with today's 500,000-strong, nuclear-armed military.

But Chishti -- a former federal minister and the one-time corps commander for Rawalpindi, a key post in the Pakistani army -- urged current and former servicemen to push for change.

"My request as head of the society, is that retired General Pervez Musharraf should also step down as President," Chishti said.

"We request all ex-servicemen and even those, who are in uniform to vote for persons, who are fit to do something for this country and people."

Chishti himself is no stranger to military rulers, having supervised the imposition of martial law in July 1977 in Pakistan. He went on to become a close associate of late dictator General Zia-ul-Haq.But he said that the situation now was different, partly because of Musharraf's close ties to Washington.

"Musharraf is in league with the US and the West for the sake of his own survival. The majority of Pakistanis feel he... has been taking illegal, unconstitutional and unlawful actions for his survival," Chishti said.

He rejected Western "propaganda" about Musharraf being able to safeguard Pakistan's nuclear weapons from Islamic extremists, saying it was the army's job.

"Is he carrying these nuclear weapons in his pocket? The answer is no," he said.

Chishti also accused Musharraf of "taking sides" and campaigning for the former ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Q party ahead of the elections on February 18.

The government meanwhile has rejected the ex-servicemen's claims. Information Minister Nisar Memon told state media that their demands for Musharraf to resign were unconstitutional, adding that he was "dismayed" by their "lack of understanding of national issues."

Monday, January 7, 2008

Hillary Clinton proposes joint oversight of Pakistan nukes

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire, Jan 6 (AFP) - US White House hopeful Hillary Clinton late Saturday said she would propose a joint US-British team to oversee the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal if she is elected president.

“So far as we know right now, the nuclear technology is considered secure, but there isn't any guarantee, especially given the political turmoil going on inside Pakistan,”

she said during a Democratic debate here. If elected president, the US senator said,

“I would try to get Musharraf to share the security responsibility of the nuclear weapons with a delegation from the United States and, perhaps, Great Britain, so that there is some fail-safe.”

This guy has proven himself a real 'Security Risk' for this country. He dragged this country into such a situation. Are we going to get rid of our insane commando or will let him to ruin this country for his own RULE ?

Blogged with Flock

Monday, November 26, 2007

Who Loves Pakistan?

Friends,

How current regime operates in Pakistan is understood by many in many different ways. But to me the picture is dangerous, I love my country and have done so since I was a kid. This happens to be my identity.

Afghanistan's war was dragged first into Pakistan's tribal area by our rulers, now they have dragged this war into mainland Pakistan (Swat, Lal Masjid, etc.). We did not have many friends in Balochistan (because of how they were dealt with, of course) already. Now we do not have many friends left in NWFP. Sindh has its share of problems already, with water sharing and other disputes.

And currently we are going nowhere, we are not trying to improve the situation. With US already taken over Pakistan's nukes (ref: Pak nukes already under US control), planning to deploy its army to "protect" Punjab/Islamabad (ref: Pakistan's Collapse, Our Problem By FREDERICK W. KAGAN and MICHAEL O'HANLON), whats the message?

It seems to me they are waving bye bye off to the rest of what is left of our home Pakistan. Is this home going to be broken. I hope and pray that I am totally mistaken. But read the following article, see the map linked with it (attached below), the news is not good... Google on "Greater Middle East Project" and you will find a lot more stuff to read and to ponder upon e.g. Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a "New Middle East".

Blood borders
How a better Middle East would look
By Ralph Peters

International borders are never completely just. But the degree of injustice they inflict upon those whom frontiers force together or separate makes an enormous difference — often the difference between freedom and oppression, tolerance and atrocity, the rule of law and terrorism, or even peace and war.

The most arbitrary and distorted borders in the world are in Africa and the Middle East. Drawn by self-interested Europeans (who have had sufficient trouble defining their own frontiers), Africa's borders continue to provoke the deaths of millions of local inhabitants. But the unjust borders in the Middle East — to borrow from Churchill — generate more trouble than can be consumed locally.
more at ... http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899 and the map that goes along with it... http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/xml/2006/06/images/afj.peters_map_after.JPG


Long Live Pakistan
Numan Sheikh