Pakistani Leader Reviews Nuclear Security Amid Newly Reported Concerns

Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Rachel Oswald, Global Security Newswire
Sept. 5, 2013, 12:02 p.m.

WASH­ING­TON – Pakistani Prime Min­is­ter Nawaz Sharif on Thursday re­portedly said he was con­fid­ent “our nuc­le­ar fa­cil­it­ies are in safe hands” fol­low­ing new rev­el­a­tions that the U.S. in­tel­li­gence com­munity has been privately ex­press­ing con­cerns.

In re­sponse to a re­port this week in the Wash­ing­ton Post, Sharif con­vened a meet­ing of the Na­tion­al Com­mand Au­thor­ity, which has the re­spons­ib­il­ity of over­see­ing the na­tion’s nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al, ac­cord­ing to a Thursday art­icle in Pakistan’s DAWN news­pa­per.

Re­ly­ing on clas­si­fied doc­u­ments on the in­tel­li­gence com­munity’s so-called “black budget” leaked by former NSA con­tract­or Ed­ward Snowden, the Post re­por­ted that U.S. spy agen­cies have sub­stant­ively ramped up their sur­veil­lance of Pakistani nuc­le­ar, chem­ic­al and bio­lo­gic­al sites.

Re­tired Pakistani Lt. Gen. Khal­id Ahmed Kid­wai, who heads the army di­vi­sion tasked with phys­ic­ally pro­tect­ing the ar­sen­al, said that any ques­tions raised by the Post piece “re­gard­ing the safety of the nuc­le­ar fa­cil­it­ies are ground­less.”

The NCA body re­viewed se­cur­ity pro­to­cols to pro­tect the ar­sen­al, after which the prime min­is­ter in­sisted that the nuc­le­ar as­sets are se­cure.

The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion also con­tin­ues to pub­licly as­sert its con­fid­ence in the se­cur­ity of Pakistan’s nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al against the pos­sib­il­ity of ex­trem­ist at­tack or in­filt­ra­tion, des­pite the Post news re­port.

The U.S. State De­part­ment on Wed­nes­day said it was as­sured that Pakistan is ser­i­ous about the se­cur­ity of its nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al.

“The United States is con­fid­ent that the gov­ern­ment of Pakistan is well aware of its re­spons­ib­il­it­ies and has se­cured its nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al ac­cord­ingly,” de­part­ment spokes­wo­man Jen Psaki said in a re­leased state­ment.

“While there is room for im­prove­ment in the se­cur­ity of any coun­try’s nuc­le­ar pro­gram, Pakistan has a pro­fes­sion­al and ded­ic­ated se­cur­ity force that fully un­der­stands the im­port­ance of nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity,” Psaki said. “We re­cog­nize that Pakistan is fully en­gaged with the in­ter­na­tion­al com­munity on nuc­le­ar safety and se­cur­ity is­sues.”

Still, loc­al Taliban strikes on Pakistani mil­it­ary in­stall­a­tions in re­cent years have been “very am­bi­tious, well planned, well ex­ecuted at­tacks that in a num­ber of cases ap­pear to have had in­side as­sist­ance,” Bri­an Jen­kins, a ter­ror­ism ex­pert and seni­or ad­viser to the RAND Corp. pres­id­ent, said in a Thursday in­ter­view. “On the basis of that, the United States does have a con­cern” about the threat to Pakistan’s nuc­le­ar weapons.

The Post’s re­port­ing con­cluded that one of the prin­cip­al drivers of the U.S. sur­veil­lance ef­fort is a de­sire to learn more about how Is­lamabad pro­tects its WMD-com­pat­ible sub­stances, as the Pakistani se­cur­ity es­tab­lish­ment re­fuses to share with the United States most de­tails about how it pro­tects such ma­ter­i­als.

“Know­ledge of the se­cur­ity of Pakistan’s nuc­le­ar weapons and as­so­ci­ated ma­ter­i­al en­com­passed one of the most crit­ic­al set of … in­tel­li­gence gaps,” states the “black budget” sum­mary, as re­por­ted by the Post.

The ab­sence of this in­form­a­tion is par­tic­u­larly alarm­ing due to “the polit­ic­al in­stabil­ity, ter­ror­ist threat and ex­pand­ing in­vent­ory [of Pakistani nuc­le­ar weapons],” the re­port is fur­ther quoted as say­ing.

However, it is the United States’ own re­por­ted secret plan­ning of how to pro­tect Pakistani nuc­le­ar weapons from ter­ror­ist threats in a po­ten­tial in­ter­ven­tion that has con­trib­uted to long­stand­ing re­luct­ance among Pakistani of­fi­cials about shar­ing with Wash­ing­ton in­form­a­tion about se­cur­ity pro­to­cols.

Giv­en the de­gree of ex­trem­ist vi­ol­ence in Pakistan — in­clud­ing in re­cent years a num­ber of highly or­gan­ized and large-scale at­tacks on mil­it­ary fa­cil­it­ies — Pentagon de­fense plan­ners are be­lieved to have brain­stormed about what to do if Pakistani ter­ror­ists are on the verge of ac­quir­ing nuc­le­ar war­heads or the com­pon­ents to build their own crude ex­plos­ive device. 

A Novem­ber 2011 Na­tion­al Journ­al art­icle re­por­ted that the De­fense De­part­ment has de­veloped a range of op­tions for re­spond­ing to dif­fer­ent types of ter­ror­ist threats to Pakistan’s nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al. That kind of plan­ning, ac­cord­ing to the art­icle, has heightened Pakistani fears that the United States could swoop in at any time and steal its war­heads.

Pakistani of­fi­cials re­portedly re­spon­ded at the time by at­tempt­ing to cloak their move­ment of nuc­le­ar weapons from U.S. satel­lite sur­veil­lance by trans­port­ing them in ci­vil­ian-style vans along crowded streets. Meas­ures such as those likely have con­trib­uted to the heightened U.S. fears, as re­vealed by the Snowden doc­u­ment leak, about how little is known of the status of Pakistani war­heads and ma­ter­i­als.

Vi­p­in Narang, an as­sist­ant polit­ic­al sci­ence pro­fess­or at the Mas­sachu­setts In­sti­tute of Tech­no­logy, said there is strong reas­on to doubt Pakistani in­sist­ence about the se­cur­ity of its nuc­le­ar as­sets.

“The ap­par­ent sus­tained mil­it­ant in­terest in at­tack­ing Pakistan mil­it­ary in­stall­a­tions and their re­peated suc­cess in do­ing so would have no doubt privately con­firmed the sig­ni­fic­ant con­cerns the U.S. in­tel­li­gence com­munity has about the se­cur­ity of Pakistan’s nuc­le­ar as­sets,” Narang wrote in a Thursday e-mail.

“As the size of the Pakistan nuc­le­ar pro­gram has grown — both in terms of per­son­nel and as­sets — se­cur­ing it com­pletely against both in­sider and mil­it­ant threats be­comes in­creas­ingly dif­fi­cult,” he said.

What We're Following See More »
CAN’T WITHHOLD FUNDING
Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order Blocked
11 hours ago
BREAKING
EMERGING BUDGET FRAMEWORK?
Dems Proposes Obamacare-for-Defense Deal
11 hours ago
THE LATEST

"An emerging government funding deal would see Democrats agree to $15 billion in additional military funding in exchange for the GOP agreeing to fund healthcare subsidies, according to two congressional officials briefed on the talks. Facing a Friday deadline to pass a spending bill and avert a shutdown, Democrats are willing to go halfway to President Trump’s initial request of $30 billion in supplemental military funding."

Source:
WHITE HOUSE BLOCKING DOC REQUEST
Michael Flynn Remains A Russian-Sized Problem
12 hours ago
BREAKING

The Michael Flynn story is not going away for the White House as it tries to refocus its attention. The White House has denied requests from the House Oversight Committee for information and documents regarding payments that the former national security adviser received from Russian state television station RT and Russian firms. House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz and ranking member Elijah Cummings also said that Flynn failed to report these payments on his security clearance application. White House legislative director Marc Short argued that the documents requested are either not in the possession of the White House or contain sensitive information he believes is not applicable to the committee's stated investigation.

Source:
SENATE JUDICIARY HEARING
Sally Yates to Testify on May 8
17 hours ago
THE LATEST
MESSAGE TO PUTIN
U.S. To Conduct Exercises In Estonia
17 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The U.S. deployed "F-35 joint strike fighters" to Estonia on Tuesday. The "jets will stay in Estonia for several weeks and will be a part of training flights with U.S. and other NATO air forces." The move comes at a time of high tension between the U.S. and Estonia's neighbor, Russia. The two nations have been at odds over a number of issues recently, most of all being Vladimir Putin's support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in light of Assad's chemical weapons attack on his own people in the midst of a civil war.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login