Guarding Pakistan’s Nukes
Amid the chaos, could radicals get ahold of the Bomb?
The latest turmoil in Pakistan has sparked new worry over the prospect that Al Qaeda or other Islamic radicals will acquire access to the country's nuclear arsenal. Pakistan has an estimated 50 nuclear bombs (compared with about 80 in India), which are dispersed throughout the country. U.S. officials acknowledge they do not have as much information about their location and security arrangements as they would like.
Yet despite Pakistan's political convulsions, U.S. officials say their fears about loose nukes are not as great as they once might have been. After the 9/11 attacks, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell and his deputy Richard Armitage discussed the problem with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. According to two former U.S. officials familiar with the matter, Musharraf agreed to install safeguard mechanisms that would "lock" nuclear weapons if they should fall into unauthorized hands.
Even so, the threat of Pakistan as a "ticking nuclear time bomb" should be a "real concern," said Graham Allison, a former assistant secretary of defense for planning in the Clinton administration who now teaches at Harvard. "It is quite possible to describe scenarios in the destabilization of Pakistan in which control of nuclear weapons would be splintered—and in which some of those splinters could be Taliban or Al Qaeda sympathizers." Those scenarios have taken on new urgency in the past few days, after Musharraf suddenly declared emergency rule, sparking widespread protest throughout the country.
The prospect of Al Qaeda getting ahold of Pakistan's nukes haunted U.S. officials after the September 11 attacks—in part because of intelligence that some of Pakistan's top nuclear scientists were members of Umma Tameer-e-Nau, a shadowy Islamic charity associated with Osama bin Laden. In his memoir published earlier this year, former CIA director George Tenet described how the agency received reports from a friendly intelligence service that, just before 9/11, two UTN leaders met around a campfire in Afghanistan with bin Laden and his principal deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and "discussed how Al Qaeda should go about building a nuclear device."
Those reports, combined with an escalation in Pakistani-Indian tensions, produced widespread alarm among U.S. officials and prompted Powell and Armitage to fly to Pakistan beginning in 2002. Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff at the time, told NEWSWEEK that Powell and Armitage intensely lobbied Musharraf to install the same kind of protective fail-safe systems that the United States uses to guard against accidental or unauthorized launches of nuclear systems.
The systems, known as "permissive action links" (or PALs), require that two separate operators enter codes or turn keys to arm and launch nuclear weapons. Wilkerson said that both India and Pakistan were "very receptive" when U.S. officials explained to them how PALs would help them stand down their nuclear arsenals from what had previously been a "hair trigger" launch status.
In part because of those steps, U.S. fears that Pakistan's nukes could fall into extremists' hands abated, according to Xenia Dormandy, former National Security Council director for South Asia affairs under President Bush. The fear that Al Qaeda might gain access to a Pakistani bomb "was a big concern after September 11," she said. "But in the last two to three years, our level of confidence over Pakistan's nuclear weapons has grown."
The view of the U.S. intelligence community—as explained by two U.S. officials who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information—is that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal appears to be under the firm control of special nuclear security units of the Pakistani military. These units are led by senior officers regarded as trustworthy by both Musharraf and the U.S. government.
It is "always a concern" that something unexpected could happen, given the current disorder in Pakistan, said one Bush official. But at present, said the official, there is "no indication" that any of Pakistan's atomic weapons or related nuclear materials are in any jeopardy of falling into the wrong hands. "There are no alarm bells ringing" at present in Washington among counterterrorism or nuclear security experts inside the U.S. government, the official acknowledged—though he conceded that the longer Pakistan's political turmoil continues, the greater the risk of a possible compromise of Pakistan's nuclear complex by Islamist sympathizers or other government insiders.
Even if the current mess intensifies, says Michael Krepon, a Pakistan expert affiliated with the Stimson Center, a Washington think tank, the country is a very long way from a nuclear crisis. Krepon notes that two other nuclear-equipped states have suffered serious political upheavals in the past—China during the cultural revolution and the Soviet Union during its collapse—and neither of their nuclear arsenals was compromised. "The situation in Pakistan is bad, but it doesn't begin to approach these convulsions," Krepon says. "There's a lot to worry about in Pakistan before worrying about the country's nuclear arsenal."
Krepon and Leonard Spector, a former senior nuclear-nonproliferation official for the U.S. Energy Department during the Clinton administration, noted that Pakistan's nuclear weapons and the facilities that manufacture and store them are under the control of a special nuclear-safety branch of the military high command called the Strategic Plans Division. According to U.S. estimates, this division has as many as 8,000 to 10,000 troops assigned to nuclear-related duties. Within that force, says Matthew Bunn, a nonproliferation expert at Harvard, is a special Nuclear Security Division with at least 1,000 officers.
Heading the Strategic Plans division is Khalid Kidwai, a lieutenant general in Pakistan's army who is highly regarded by U.S. officials. Spector, the former Clinton advisor, described Kidwai as being "at the top of his game." Last year, according to U.S. experts, Kidwai made a tour of the United States during which he spoke to officials about Pakistan's nuclear security measures.
Several U.S. experts also note that in the Pakistani system nuclear warheads are stored separately from missiles that can deliver them. And the most critical parts of the nuclear warheads—the radioactive cores, made up of plutonium or highly enriched uranium—are in turn stored separately from the other parts of the warheads. According to the experts, if terrorists were to get access to parts of the system—even the nuclear cores—they would not necessarily be able to use them to set off a nuclear explosion. Also, the separation of the various elements of the nuclear weapons systems would make it much more difficult for rogue elements of Pakistan's military to seize complete nuclear weapons and threaten other countries with attacks.
Despite such expressions of confidence, U.S. officials acknowledge that in the past Pakistan's nuclear program has been notorious for leaks of equipment and technology. For years before 9/11, the founder of Pakistan's nuclear program, A. Q. Khan, operated a secret nuclear-proliferation ring that disseminated atomic bomb manufacturing equipment and know-how to rogue regimes like North Korea, Libya and possibly Iran. The ring was only dismantled several months after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when Libyan leader Muammar Kaddafi renounced his nuclear ambitions and turned over equipment and details of how he obtained it to U.S. and British spy agencies.
U.S. experts say there still may be radical sympathizers in both the Pakistani nuclear establishment and, more critically, inside ISI, Pakistan's sprawling intelligence service, which has its own history of close contacts with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The political instability spurred by Musharraf's current crackdown is unsettling at best. "We're talking about a nuclear power, and a nuclear power that is potentially imploding," said Dormandy.
Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Michael Isikoff has been an award-winning investigative correspondent for Newsweek since 2004. He has written extensively on the U.S. government's war on terrorism, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, presidential politics and other national issues. His book, "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War," co-written with David Corn, was an instant New York Times best-seller when it was published in September, 2006. The book was hailed by the New York Times Book Review as "fascinating reading" and "the most comprehensive account of the White House's political machinations" in the run up to the war in Iraq. Since January 2009, Isikoff has been an MSNBC contributor, making regular appearances on the Rachel Maddow Show and Hardball w/ Chris Matthews.
Ever since the events of September 11, Isikoff has broken repeated stories about the U.S. government's war on terror and won numerous journalism awards. His blog "DeClassified: Investigative Reporting in Real Time," which appears regularly on Newsweek's Web site and is written with MarkHosenball, has become a must-read for senior U.S. intelligence officials. Isikoff and Hosenball won the 2005 award from the Society of Professional Journalists for best investigative reporting online.
Isikoff's June 2002 Newsweek cover story on U.S. intelligence failures that preceded the 9-11 terror attacks, along with a series of related articles, was honored with the Investigative Reporters and Editors top prize for investigative reporting in magazine journalism. He was honored, along with a team of Newsweek reporters, by the Society of Professional Journalists for coverage of the Abu Ghraib scandal. For that coverage, Isikoff obtained exclusive internal White House, Justice Department and State Department memos showing how decisions made at the highest levels of the Bush administration led to abuses in the interrogation of terror suspects. Isikoff was also part of a reporting team that earned Newsweek the National Magazine Award for General Excellence in 2002, the highest award in magazine journalism, for their coverage of the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks.
Isikoff's exclusive reporting on the Monica Lewinsky scandal gained him national attention in 1998, including profiles in The New York Times and The Washington Post and a guest appearance on "Late Show with David Letterman." His coverage of the events that lead to President Bill Clinton's impeachment earned Newsweek the prestigious National Magazine Award in the Reporting category in 1999. Isikoff's reporting also won the National Headliner Award, the Edgar A. Poe Award presented by the White House Correspondents Association and the Gerald R. Ford Journalism Prize for Reporting on the Presidency. In 2001, Isikoff was named on a list of "most influential journalists" in the nation's capital by Washingtonian magazine.
Isikoff is the author of "Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter's Story," a book that chronicled his own reporting of the Lewinsky story and was hailed by a critic for The Washington Post-Los Angeles Times news service as "the absolutely essential narrative of the scandal with revelations that no one would have thought possible." The book, also a New York Times bestseller, was named Best Non-Fiction Book of 1999 by the Book of the Month Club.
Isikoff came to Newsweek from The Washington Post, where he had been a reporter since September 1981. There he covered the Justice Department and the Persian Gulf War, reported on international drug operations in Latin America and worked on the Post's financial news desk. Isikoff graduated from Washington University with a B.A. in 1974 and received a Masters in Journalism from Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism in 1976.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.




Comments