Iran: Pakistan Helping Saudis Develop Nukes

[Rudey]

Interesting how countries whose existence is not threatened are seeking nuclear weapons. It makes no sense. Even an ally like the Saudis is. The case could be made for Pakistan that it needed them since it had no large conventional military I guess. But why the hell do we have such good relations with the Saudis at this point? Will this be like the good relations we had with Iraq in the past that will blow up in our face in 10 years?!?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/511493.html

Iran: Pakistan helping Saudis develop nukes

By Ze'ev Schiff, Haaretz Correspondent


Official Iranian sources are claiming that they have information about Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signing an agreement in 2003 in which Pakistan promised to help Saudi Arabia develop nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them.

The reports are coming out as Iran reached an agreement with the three European powers - the United Kingdom, Germany and France - about a cessation of uranium enrichment and the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of directors issues its report on Iran's nuclear activity.

The Iranian reports emphasize that the nuclear cooperation between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is at an advanced stage and that for the first time the Saudis have access to nuclear technology.

The international news agency United Press International (UPI) reported that Iranian Prof. Abu Mohammed Asgarkhani claimed in a lecture that Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear arms picked up after it learned about the Pakistani-Saudi deal and the possibility that Saudi Arabia would eventually acquire nuclear weapons.

Israeli and Western sources are not attributing much significance to the Saudi ability to develop, even partially, nuclear weapons.

Pakistan owes Saudi Arabia a great deal because Saudi Arabia essentially financed development of the Pakistani bomb. A Saudi representative may have been the only foreigner invited to visit Pakistan's nuclear facilities. Pakistan was also the middleman between Saudi Arabia and China for the purchase of long-range Chinese missiles. Those missiles, based in Saudi Arabia, have meanwhile become obsolete, and the Saudis want to upgrade them. The Americans told the Chinese that would be a violation of an agreement in which the Chinese promised not to sell missiles. The Chinese say it would not be a missile sale, but an upgrade of an existing missile sold a long time ago, but Washington remains opposed to the deal.

The Iranian reports about nuclear dealings between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is apparently motivated by Iran's interest in pointing out that other countries in the region are involved in military nuclear development and that they are not coming under international criticism because they are friends of the U.S.

-Rudey

[PhiPsiRuss]

That is scary. I think that there might now be a race in the Middle East to become a hegemon by authoritarian nations. Now that there is a strong prospect for a viable democracy in Iraq, the Saudi Royal Family has to feel threatened.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
That is scary. I think that there might now be a race in the Middle East to become a hegemon by authoritarian nations. Now that there is a strong prospect for a viable democracy in Iraq, the Saudi Royal Family has to feel threatened.

Of course they do. Last weekend there were two good programs on McLaughlin and Rose discussing this. The nations like this are racing to get a weapon to stay in power for at least 50 more years. Iran now is becoming successful in getting Euro backing for its unpopular regime and I bet the Saudis will do the same thing.

-Rudey

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

ahem.

Iran: Alright, we'll tattle. Abdul Khan sold us technology for our nuclear program, and now he's selling it to Saudi Arabia!

Well...
Iran, Libya and N. Korea all bought nuclear technology from the United State's "Major Non-NATO Ally" Pakistan through Abdul Khan.
He was running a regular nuclear supermarket out of Pakistan... but the US was uninterested in questioning Khan regarding what was sold to who.

Why?
Bush looks the otherway and allows Pakistan's nuclear treachery to continue.
Nuclear proliferation abounds and endangers the entire planet.
In return the Pakistani government stops harboring bin Laden.
American troops are allowed in Pakistan to hunt bin Laden.

Really- this news is not surprising at all.

[AlphaSigOU]

About time we parked a couple of boomers (ballistic missile submarines) out in the Arabian Sea and a squadron of B-52s, B-1s and B-2s to Diego Garcia. Then we send a diplomatic note that's the equivalent of Tony Montana's "say hello to my little friend!" to their governments.

Attention all you wannabe nu-cu-lar rogue states: Ignore or rebuff this less than subtle warning at your peril...

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
the United State's "Major Non-NATO Ally" Pakistan through Abdul Khan.

No. Pakistan and the U.S. have had hot/cold relations for years. They were in the dog house with the U.S. prior to 9-11.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
About time we parked a couple of boomers (ballistic missile submarines) out in the Arabian Sea and a squadron of B-52s, B-1s and B-2s to Diego Garcia. Then we send a diplomatic note that's the equivalent of Tony Montana's "say hello to my little friend!" to their governments.

Attention all you wannabe nu-cu-lar rogue states: Ignore or rebuff this less than subtle warning at your peril...

That would intensify their desire to procure nuclear weapons.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
Attention all you wannabe nu-cu-lar rogue states: Ignore or rebuff this less than subtle warning at your peril...

tell me again what is the reason for America's holier-than-thou-only-we-can-have-nukes position?

From my discussions and debate on IAEA issues- it would be much more productive for states with extensive nuclear technology and the IAEA to support and nurture the development of non-weapon nuclear programs in states that attempt to develop nuclear weapon programs than to present a hostile position towards the state for developing a nuclear weapons program.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
tell me again what is the reason for America's holier-than-thou-only-we-can-have-nukes position?

Its not about being "holier-than-thou." Its about preventing further proliferation. The U.S. has been reducing stockpiles for years, so there is moral authority on this issue.

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
From my discussions and debate on IAEA issues- it would be much more productive for states with extensive nuclear technology and the IAEA to support and nurture the development of non-weapon nuclear programs in states that attempt to develop nuclear weapon programs than to present a hostile position towards the state for developing a nuclear weapons program.

Tell that to France. They just love to export dual use nuclear technology.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
No. Pakistan and the U.S. have had hot/cold relations for years. They were in the dog house with the U.S. prior to 9-11.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3814013.stm
"I hereby designate the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as major non-Nato ally of the United States for the purposes of the Arms Export Control Act," President Bush's statement said.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
Tell that to France. They just love to export dual use nuclear technology.

*nods* Part of the discussions I had in Chicago on IAEA policy was to encourage nations to develop transparent organizations to record the import/export of dual-use technology to keep track of who may be developing nuclear weapons programs in secret.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3814013.stm
"I hereby designate the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as major non-Nato ally of the United States for the purposes of the Arms Export Control Act," President Bush's statement said.

Right. After 9-11.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

and the continued selling of nuclear technology to Iran and NKorea (and even Yemen, I believe) was also after 9-11.
What is your fascination with 9-11? It makes no difference to Bush's ignoring Pakistan's nuclear treachery.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
and the continued selling of nuclear technology to Iran and NKorea (and even Yemen, I believe) was also after 9-11.
What is your fascination with 9-11? It makes no difference to Bush's ignoring Pakistan's nuclear treachery.

OK - so you're displaying a ton of knowledge on the subject, but you're being circular and not building to a point. Where are you going with this?

How does the change in US/Pakistani relations apply to Iranian or Saudi (or N. Korean) nuclear arms proliferation?

If we know Khan did business with these nations, what else is there to question him on?

I guess I see a lot of raging, but not a lot of direction - enlighten me, you know much more about this subject that I do. Where does it all go? What's the next step, and who takes it?

[Shortfuse]

Correct me if I'm wrong but when did Saudi Arabia become a rogue state? To be honest, Pakistan, Iran, nor Iraq are rogue states are they?

I think a definition of rogue state would be a country that is not recognized. For example if I took over Hati and renamed it to MYCOUNTRY. Or how the Chinese view Taiwan.

I could be be wrong.