http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_19-8-2005_pg1_7
Pakistan could have 110 N-bombs by year end
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: By the end of the current year, Pakistan will have produced enough weapons grade uranium to manufacture 50 to 110 nuclear weapons against India’s 75 to 110.
According to a study published by the Non-proliferation Centre of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, India may be producing significant quantities of highly enriched uranium at its gas-centrifuge plant in Trombay, outside Mumbai, though the amounts produced remain unknown. The study says both India and Pakistan possess components to deploy a small number of nuclear weapons within a few days or weeks, with fighter-bomber aircraft being the most likely delivery vehicle.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are stored in component parts, with the fissile core separated from the non-nuclear explosives. It is not known where the fissile material and warheads are stored. India, states the study, continues to produce nuclear materials for use in weapons and has not officially said how many weapons it has and how many it intends to produce. Pakistan has been equally discreet.
One of the authors of the study, Miriam Rajkumar, has authored a brief that criticises the Bush administration for reversing decades of US non-proliferation policy by agreeing to provide India with nuclear fuel. “President Bush thus accorded India a much sought after seat in the ‘responsible’ nuclear club,†she wrote.
‘Nuclear Arsenals,’ as the study is named, makes the point that from an Indian perspective, the nuclear tests of 1998 raised its visibility and clout in the post-Cold War era. “If US attention is a measure of respect and status, then the nuclear tests have ultimately achieved India’s objectives,†according to the authors. The study said the Bush administration has forgotten the benchmarks set by its predecessor for India and Pakistan to be allowed out of the nuclear “doghouse†after their 1998 tests that led to punitive US sanctions.
“Beyond ensuring that Kashmir does not explode, the Bush administration has decided to downplay nuclear nonproliferation concerns so that it can renew defence ties and establish strategic relations with India. It also believes that Washington and New Delhi “see eye-to-eye on anti-missile systems†and predicts that all Indian governments will remain committed to weaponisation, even if budget and technical realities and international political considerations continue to act as a restraining factor.
A study by the Congressional Research Service meanwhile that if the Indo-US nuclear accord is endorsed by Congress, the resulting cooperation would contravene the multilateral export control guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). “At a time when the United States has called for all states to strengthen their domestic export control laws and implementation and for tighter multilateral controls, US nuclear cooperation with India would require loosening its nuclear export legislation, as well as creating a an NSG exception.â€
Such a deal could prompt other suppliers like China to justify their supplying other states, like Pakistan. The report does not consider the steps India has agreed to take as sufficient. “Separating civilian and military facilities, placing civilian facilities under IAEA safeguards, and applying additional protocol and all positive steps, but place India squarely in the company of nuclear weapon states. There are no measures in this global partnership to restrain India’ nuclear weapons programme,†the Congressional Research Service maintains.
It argues that the existence of India’s nuclear weapons programme negates potential nonproliferation assurances that nuclear safeguards on civil facilities might provide. It says, “A significant question if how India, in the absence of full-scope safeguards, can provide adequate confidence that US peaceful nuclear technology will not be diverted to nuclear weapons purposes.†The report points out that even if Congress approves the Indo-US deal, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission would still have to license nuclear exports under the agreement.
The US president would also need to waive certain provisions of existing US law to keep India supplied because of India’s continuing nuclear weapons programme.
On the same subject, New York Democratic Congressman Joseph Crowley told India Abroad in an interview that the Indo-US nuclear deal would be a “tough sell†to Congress because of is implications for nonproliferation. Asked how he would vote on the issue, he replied, “I’ll have to take a look and see just how it comes up and what the parameters are that the bill comes under and what amendments will have to be made in order to allow India to be qualified for that technology.
There may be room here for compromise.†He was of the view that India would do well to sign the NPT, something India has refused to do – like Pakistan – as it considers the Treaty discriminatory.
____________________________________________________________
:eek :eek :eek i thought we only had something like 10-40
Pakistan could have 110 N-bombs by year end
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: By the end of the current year, Pakistan will have produced enough weapons grade uranium to manufacture 50 to 110 nuclear weapons against India’s 75 to 110.
According to a study published by the Non-proliferation Centre of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, India may be producing significant quantities of highly enriched uranium at its gas-centrifuge plant in Trombay, outside Mumbai, though the amounts produced remain unknown. The study says both India and Pakistan possess components to deploy a small number of nuclear weapons within a few days or weeks, with fighter-bomber aircraft being the most likely delivery vehicle.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are stored in component parts, with the fissile core separated from the non-nuclear explosives. It is not known where the fissile material and warheads are stored. India, states the study, continues to produce nuclear materials for use in weapons and has not officially said how many weapons it has and how many it intends to produce. Pakistan has been equally discreet.
One of the authors of the study, Miriam Rajkumar, has authored a brief that criticises the Bush administration for reversing decades of US non-proliferation policy by agreeing to provide India with nuclear fuel. “President Bush thus accorded India a much sought after seat in the ‘responsible’ nuclear club,†she wrote.
‘Nuclear Arsenals,’ as the study is named, makes the point that from an Indian perspective, the nuclear tests of 1998 raised its visibility and clout in the post-Cold War era. “If US attention is a measure of respect and status, then the nuclear tests have ultimately achieved India’s objectives,†according to the authors. The study said the Bush administration has forgotten the benchmarks set by its predecessor for India and Pakistan to be allowed out of the nuclear “doghouse†after their 1998 tests that led to punitive US sanctions.
“Beyond ensuring that Kashmir does not explode, the Bush administration has decided to downplay nuclear nonproliferation concerns so that it can renew defence ties and establish strategic relations with India. It also believes that Washington and New Delhi “see eye-to-eye on anti-missile systems†and predicts that all Indian governments will remain committed to weaponisation, even if budget and technical realities and international political considerations continue to act as a restraining factor.
A study by the Congressional Research Service meanwhile that if the Indo-US nuclear accord is endorsed by Congress, the resulting cooperation would contravene the multilateral export control guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). “At a time when the United States has called for all states to strengthen their domestic export control laws and implementation and for tighter multilateral controls, US nuclear cooperation with India would require loosening its nuclear export legislation, as well as creating a an NSG exception.â€
Such a deal could prompt other suppliers like China to justify their supplying other states, like Pakistan. The report does not consider the steps India has agreed to take as sufficient. “Separating civilian and military facilities, placing civilian facilities under IAEA safeguards, and applying additional protocol and all positive steps, but place India squarely in the company of nuclear weapon states. There are no measures in this global partnership to restrain India’ nuclear weapons programme,†the Congressional Research Service maintains.
It argues that the existence of India’s nuclear weapons programme negates potential nonproliferation assurances that nuclear safeguards on civil facilities might provide. It says, “A significant question if how India, in the absence of full-scope safeguards, can provide adequate confidence that US peaceful nuclear technology will not be diverted to nuclear weapons purposes.†The report points out that even if Congress approves the Indo-US deal, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission would still have to license nuclear exports under the agreement.
The US president would also need to waive certain provisions of existing US law to keep India supplied because of India’s continuing nuclear weapons programme.
On the same subject, New York Democratic Congressman Joseph Crowley told India Abroad in an interview that the Indo-US nuclear deal would be a “tough sell†to Congress because of is implications for nonproliferation. Asked how he would vote on the issue, he replied, “I’ll have to take a look and see just how it comes up and what the parameters are that the bill comes under and what amendments will have to be made in order to allow India to be qualified for that technology.
There may be room here for compromise.†He was of the view that India would do well to sign the NPT, something India has refused to do – like Pakistan – as it considers the Treaty discriminatory.
____________________________________________________________
:eek :eek :eek i thought we only had something like 10-40
