http://councilforstrategicaffairs.blogspot.com/2015/10/rewarding-rogue-regime.html
The
cat is finally out of the bag! As a very much diminished Pakistani PM
Nawaz Sharif arrived for a much truncated summit with Barack Obama on
October 22nd, initial Pakistani denials about a civil nuclear
deal gave way to admission that Pakistan has already developed
India-centric tactical nuclear weapons. The US side was more frank in
admitting that a civil nuclear deal was being discussed with Pakistan
for last few months but it will not be signed during the current visit
owing to lack of agreement.
Initial US postures:
The first inkling about any possible civil nuclear deal between
Pakistan and the US was a beautifully staged interview of General Khalid
Kidwai, the former director of Pakistan’s Strategic Planning division.
The interview was done during Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace’s Biennial Nuclear Policy Conference in March 2015. Peter Lavoy, a
foremost Pakistan expert threw softballs at General Khalid Kidwai who
took a very anti-India aggressive posture in the presence of still
practicing Nuclear Non-Proliferation Ayatollahs of the American think
tanks in Washington, DC. General Kidwai got away with regurgitating
stark lies about the so-called “Cold Start Doctrine” of Indian Army and
half-truths about India’s nuclear posture.
This was followed in August 2015 by a 48 page long joint report by
Carnegie Endowment and Stimson Center authored by Toby Dalton and
Michael Krepon. Titled a “Normal Nuclear Pakistan”, it advocated putting
four brackets on Pakistani nuclear program in exchange for some
concessions by the US and a carrot of the NSG membership and other
international regimes. The report exhorted mainstreaming of Pakistan’s
nuclear program if it agreed to sign and ratify the CTBT without waiting
for India, agreed to limit production of fissile material and stop
blocking FMCT, agreed to separate civil and military nuclear programs
and agreed for limits in production of short range missiles and tactical
nuclear weapons. In essence the report exhorted Pakistan to implement a
paradigm shift back to “Credible Minimum Deterrence” from the “Full
Spectrum Deterrence” in exchange for mainstreaming!
US Debate:
This was followed by selective disclosures and pleadings from former
CIA officers like Kevin Hulbert and journalists including David Ignatius
and David Sanger. Characterizing Pakistan as “Too big to fail”, Kevin
Hulbert emphasized the nuclear threat posed by Pakistan. Labeling
Pakistan as probably the most dangerous country for the world, he
enunciated his case for more nuclear engagement with Pakistan as that
country poses triple threats of terrorism, failing economy and the
fastest growing nuclear arsenal. David Ignatius, the Washington Post
columnist disclosed the ongoing exploratory discussions of civil nuclear
deal with Pakistan on October 6th 2015. Ignatius reported
that Pakistan has been asked to consider accepting “brackets” on its
nuclear program and delivery systems without weakening the Pakistani
nuclear deterrence towards India! David Sanger in his October 15th
piece clarified that Pakistan is not being offered the civil nuclear
deal similar to India. He reported that US is trying to explore ways to
relax NSG rules for Pakistan with a long-term goal of allowing it to
join the NSG. Apparently China’s flagrant violation of the NSG rules and
nuclear commerce and proliferation with Pakistan is the reason
necessitating relaxation of rules. Essentially, US bureaucracy is
searching for a fig-leaf to hide its shame in not being able to control
the nuclear proliferation activities of China and Pakistan! US is too
weak economically and militarily to confront China & Pakistan for
both vertical and horizontal nuclear proliferation activities as part of
the CHIPNOKISS network.
A lively debate has ensued in the US about inadvisability of the WH
initiative of rewarding this rogue state. US think tanks have taken
pro-Pakistani positions while politicians oppose it. Lisa Curtis a
respected analyst has urged not rewarding the rogue state. George
Perkovich, the vice-President for Carnegie Endowment used the sales
pitch that “If Pakistan would take the actions requested by the US, it
would essentially amount to recognition of its rehabilitation and would
essentially amount to parole”. The phrase “rehabilitation and parole”
used by Perkovich angered the Pakistani establishment.
Congressman Ted Poe, who is Chairman of the Subcommittee on
Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Trade, in a strongly worded letter to
Obama urged the POTUS to not engage in any negotiations regarding a
US-Pak civilian nuclear agreement because "Pakistan has repeatedly
proven itself to be deceptive and deceitful!"
Daniel Markey, a senior research Professor at the John Hopkins SAIS
and Adjunct Senior Fellow at the CFR summarized his crisp opinion by
stating that “there is simply no time for nuclear deal” because
Pakistan’s current condition raises other fundamental questions about
its long-term relationship with the US. Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal
continues to pose serious threats like insider theft, onward
proliferation, accidents, sabotage or unauthorized use by rogue Jihadi
officers!
Senator John Cornyn, Senate Majority Whip for the 114th Congress,
said "it is ill-advised" to pursue any type of civil nuclear agreement
with Pakistan. Senator Cornyn, founder and Co-Chair of Senate India
Caucus, reminded that the issues surrounding Pakistan's growing nuclear
arsenal are of significant concern, and serious doubts persist regarding
the security of its nuclear weapons. He also focused on Pakistan
government’s clandestine nuclear proliferation network that provided
nuclear weapons technology to rogue regimes in Iran, North Korea, and
Libya. Cornyn’s reminder about this illegal network that has been dubbed
as Nuclear Walmart or the CHINOKISS network is indeed a very timely
reality check.
Pakistani Postures:
The initial inkling of any possible US-Pakistan nuclear deal came
from Saira Bano, a Pakistani visiting fellow at the Stimson Center on
June 22nd 2015. She disclosed that Pakistan had again
demanded an India-style civil nuclear agreement under the auspices of
the US-Pakistan dialogue during the 7th round of the
US-Pakistan Security, Strategic Stability and non-Proliferation Working
Group in June 2015. Advising Pakistan that the road to civilian nuclear
cooperation begins in Islamabad, she exhorted Pakistani government to
emulate India by focusing on economic growth and increasing trade
relations in order to minimize the political temperature. Creating a
soft international image of Pakistan with responsible behavior was her
mantra for Pak establishment.
Following the disclosure from the White House, the ostensible
Pakistani response was a vehement denial coupled with assertions that
Pakistan will never accept any “brackets” on its nuclear and delivery
system program. Pakistan is focusing on IRBMs and nuclear-powered
submarines supplied by China for second strike capability.
Munir Akram, the disgraced former Pakistani Permanent Representative
to the UN gave the initial defiant response that Pakistan will not
negotiate its nuclear assets and will not accept any brackets in view of
it doctrine of “Full Spectrum Deterrence”. This was followed by a frank
admission by Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry that Pakistan has
developed tactical nuclear weapons that are primarily India-Centric.
Appointment of recently retired General Nasser Khan Janjua as the new
national security advisor is indicative of the fact that General Raheel
Sharif wants to negotiate directly with the WH without the constraints
of dealing with the civilian administration of Nawaz Sharif.
Shahzad Choudhry, a retired Pakistani air-marshall acknowledged that
the suicidal threats of “Full Spectrum Deterrence” should be the
leitmotif for a dance drama by Nawaz Sharif before Obama. He opened the
window for Pakistan to bite the bullet and reverse back to doctrinal
shift to credible minimum deterrence. It is again rationalization of
nuclear blackmail by the rogue state with a gun pointing at one’s own
head. Following the good cop, bad cop tactic, Dr. Zafar Nawaz Jaspal,
director, School of Politics and International Relations at the
Quaid-e-Azam University characterized the reported offer of waiver for
Pakistan for admission into NSG as “lollipops”. While Pakistan wants to
be member of all the export control regimes, it is not willing to accept
restrictions on its nuclear weapons program. Zahir Kazmi of the
Strategic Vision Institute of Pakistan dubbed these expectations of
Pakistan agreeing to “brackets” as wishful thinking! He opines that
Pakistan should reject any such deal because the cost of “mainstreaming”
is too high in terms of accepting conditions. Dr. Zafar Iqbal Cheema,
the president of Strategic Vision Institute demanded parity and
hyphenation with India in accepting any nuclear deal. Dr. Cheema
rejected demands for reversion from “Full Spectrum Deterrence” back to
“Credible Minimum Deterrence”.
Indian Response:
While the Government of India has remained very restrained and
measured about any possible nuclear deal between US and Pakistan, the
hyperactive Indian press and analysts have discussed it threadbare. The
Ministry of External Affairs responded in the following words: “We’ve
seen these reports and it is not for the first time this issue has
surfaced. Whosoever is examining that particular dossier should be
well-aware of Pakistan’s track record in the area of proliferation. When
India got this particular deal it was on the basis of our own
impeccable non-proliferation track record. That is the reason the U.S.
gave us 123 Agreement in 2005 and that is why we got a NSG waiver in
2008. Pakistan’s track record is completely different, so we hope that
will be taken into account in making any such decision”.
Happymon Jacob who teaches Disarmament and National Security at the
School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi.in his op-ed piece in the Hindu takes the pro-US views about
“Mainstreaming Pakistan” and wants New Delhi to offer conditional
support to Pakistan’s inclusion in the global nuclear order. He
enthusiastically wants the U.S. and other stakeholders to press
Islamabad to stop stalling the FMCT negotiations, and agree to a nuclear
‘No-first-use’ agreement with India, which is already part of the
Indian doctrine. He advocates obtaining firm commitments from Pakistan
on clamping down on terrorism in the country in order to reduce the
likelihood of nuclear terrorism in the region. He suggests
re-hyphenation of India with Pakistan, as part of the deal, and to
negotiate nuclear confidence building measures (CBMs) with that country.
What he totally forgets is that any commitment by Pakistan in the past
have been worth the used toilet paper! Pakistan’s strategic behavior
does not change with engagement strategies. C Mohan Raja another pro-US
analyst cogently highlighted the inherent contradictions in the proposed
deal that make it very difficult to sell to both US and Pakistan.
Seema Sirohi, a Washington based journalist analyzed the behaviors
and motives of the US actors behind the sudden blockbuster proposal and
characterized the proposal as part revenge and part grandstanding. Peter
Lavoy, the point person for South Asia in the US National Security
Council is the chief architect of this blockbuster plan has deep links
to Pakistani army. She further highlights that the joint think tank
report states that India should not be allowed to join the NSG before
Pakistan thus re-hyphenating India with Pakistan. The US deep state
still romanticizes the Pakistani allies of the cold war era and are
pining for the return of the intimate relationship.
Kanwal Sibal, a former foreign secretary, in a very detailed analysis
explicitly states that US-Pakistan nuclear deal will be a threat to
India’s security. Noting the historical US soft spot of Pakistan, the
China Pakistan Nuclear Axis the proposed deal, he argues would be a
reward for Pakistani military as the nuclear program is under control of
military without any civilian input.
The most cogent analysis was done by Dhruva Jaishankar, who has
inherited Indian strategic genes. He bluntly described America’s Pak-Af
policy as the definition of insanity! The real reason for Pakistan’s
nuclear expansion isn’t India — it is for blackmailing the US to collect
more rent. He argues that the US has been so fearful of Pakistan’s
nukes being sold, stolen, lost, sabotaged, or accidentally used that
during George W. Bush’s administration, $100 million was spent trying to
secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal. Since 2001, the Pakistan Army has
also received more than $20 billion in military support from the US,
even though it has continued to support terrorist groups like the
Haqqani network that have killed hundreds of Americans. US has been
gullible to trust successive Pakistani rulers who have adroitly shook
down the superpower without US realizing that it has been conned! Rakesh
Sood, India’s former representative at the Conference on Disarmament
highlighted the shortcomings of previous US administrations when Reagan
deliberately overlooked Pakistan’s clandestine nuclear activities.
Pakistan’s obsession of nuclear parity with India encourages the US
non-proliferation lobby to attempt re-hyphenation of India and Pakistan
thereby rewarding that rogue nation.
The US-Pak Joint Statement:
While the US-Pakistan joint statement released on October 22nd
is silent about any possible civil nuclear deal mainstreaming Pakistan
immediately, it does comment on strategic stability, nuclear security,
and nonproliferation. Using banal Diplomatese jargon the statement is
high on rhetoric and low on content. Advising maximum restraint the statement exhorted Pakistan to work toward
strengthening strategic stability in South Asia. The statement
acknowledged the importance of regional balance and stability in South
Asia. The joint statement highlights the continuing threat of nuclear
terrorism and the need for Pakistan to work with US on Nuclear Security
Summit. The joint statement noted Pakistan's efforts and aspirations to
improve its strategic trade controls and enhance its engagement with
multilateral export control regimes. Recognizing the importance of
bilateral engagement in the Security, Strategic Stability and
Non-Proliferation Working Group, the joint statement hinted that both
sides will continue to negotiate on a future “mainstreaming deal”.
The Aftermath:
Post the summit, Nawaz Sharif gave the ultimatum to the US to take
Pakistan's side in its long-standing dispute with India or run the risk
of escalating nuclear conflict. He stated that Pakistan was ready to
help US and Afghanistan revive peace talks with Taliban rebels. Seeking a
quid pro quo he made it clear that his main
priority was seeking international support to compel India to negotiate
over the future of Jammu & Kashmir.
The US, on the other hand, has categorically ruled out any kind of
negotiations with Pakistan on India-type civil nuclear deal (123
Agreement), nor are they seeking country specific waiver for Pakistan
from the NSG. The US insists that they have ongoing discussion on
Pakistan’s nuclear safety and security along with promotion of strategic
stability. What is not ruled out is a future deal that Pakistan may
choose in near future if it does not insist on nuclear parity with
India.
Gazing the Crystal ball:
Pakistani politicians and military take pride in brandishing their
nukes at drop of a hat. Sartaj Aziz, the outgoing NSA of Pakistan
boasted recently: “We are a nuclear armed country and we know how to
defend ourselves”. From an Indian perspective, any civil nuclear deal
between US and Pakistan would be strategically dangerous because it will
further embolden the GHQ/ISI/Jihadi/Wahabi terror complex in Islamabad
in staging acts of terrorism utilizing the services of non-state actors
against India. It will be perceived as endorsement of Pakistan’s
anti-India postures by the rogue military elite of that country. Having
said that, how much India would be able to influence the POTUS remains
very questionable because in the 1980s Reagan administration brushed
aside India’s concerns.
WWOD (What Would Obama Do)?
Obama’s legacy factor may trump all the rationale courses of action
for the US. Obama is now a lame duck President hobbled by a
dysfunctional Republican Congress who is looking for his foreign policy
legacy. Despite his domestic failures, he has already made history by
starting reengagement with Cuba and signing of a nuclear deal with Iran.
However, he has proven ineffective and mediocre while dealing with the
strategic chaos in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and in ending Pak-Af
terrorism challenges. His administration is trying to offer a candy to
Pakistan to cajole it to cooperate with the US’s and Obama’s deeply
flawed Pak-AF strategy. Following into the footsteps of George W Bush,
Obama regime has offered 8 new F-16 fighter planes to Pakistan
ostensibly to deal with the insurgency in Balochistan besides the 70
F-16’s that Pakistan already has. Whom is Obama administration trying to
fool?
There is limited time window of only 14 months between now and
January 2017 when a newly elected US President will take office. Obama’s
lame duck regime is likely to go on a fast track to finalize a nuclear
deal with Pakistan at the cost of India in order to glorify Obama
presidency for the posterity! Although negotiations for such a deal
takes months and years, both parties are eager to win the trophy before
January 2017. The US think tanks have an incestuous relationship with
Pakistan from the cold-war era. They are, indeed, cheering for Pakistan
and egging on the Obama administration to reward the rogue nation.
Pakistan may reluctantly consider signing the nuclear deal with
“brackets” having no intention of sticking to the limits or caps or
brackets. Reneging agreements and treaties has been the persistent
behavior pattern of the Pakistani state. A future POTUS may disregard
Pakistani nuclear indiscretions reflexively in “larger US strategic
interests” as Reagan had done in the past. In this regard it is
important to review Pakistan’s past performance. Hussain Haqqani, the
former Pakistani Ambassador to US and currently the Director for South
and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute makes a candid confession that
US policies have aggravated Pakistan’s dysfunction; reignited and
reinforced the magnificent delusions that the US cannot simply manage
the world without Pakistani help. He makes a point that Pakistan
acquired nuclear weapons while promising the US it won’t go nuclear if
it gets US economic and military assistance in 1970s and 1980s.
Internally, because of the deep divisions in the US policy
establishment, this issue may get dragged into the presidential
electoral politics. Obama and his acolytes forget that any
legitimization of Pakistan would embolden Saudi Arabia and other gulf
monarchies to develop their own military nuclear programs. Since Saudi
Arabia has been the paymaster for the Pakistani nuclear program,
post-deal Pakistan will indulge in nuclear commerce again albeit legally
instead of through clandestine CHIPNOKISS network. Furthermore,
Pakistan is not a normal state. It is an artificially contrived
transitional entity which has been facetiously dubbed as an ideological
Islamic Army with a country. Nothing else is farther from the truth than
this blunt statement. There are major ideological similarities between
the Daesh/ISIS/ISIL/The Islamic state and the GHQ/ISI/Jihadi complex of
Islamabad. In both cases, an ideologically driven fighting force is
holding civilians to ransom in the land they control. Welfare of the
citizens is not the concern. Retired Pakistani military officers and
nuclear scientists in past have volunteered their services to Al Qaeda.
Leakage, theft, diversion and sabotage will remain serious limitations
of Pakistani nuclear arsenal even if gets “mainstreamed”!
The current Republican party dominated US Congress may not approve
any civil nuclear deal (123 Agreement) with Pakistan because of
Pakistan’s consistently stellar record of duplicity and cheating forever
on bilateral and multilateral agreements. America’s India-bashing
cold-warriors who serve as the high priests and Ayatollahs of the US
non-proliferation industry will make a last-ditch effort to reward the
rogue state of Pakistan in order to further humiliate India for
strategic autonomy and for her principled stand on NPT and CTBT. India
must watch out for her strategic interests.
DR. ADITYANJEE
PRESIDENT,
THE COUNCIL FOR STRATEGIC AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI
adityancsa@gmail.com
twitter@DrThinkTank
No comments:
Post a Comment