Of all the WMD threats, nuclear weapons remain the most dangerous, and the articles below explain why.
WMD terror expert Graham Allison sees "A Failure to Imagine the Worst" as being at the root of our weak response to nuclear terror threats. His Harvard Kennedy School colleague, Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, offers a timeline for Al-Qaeda's nuclear quest in "Al Qaeda's Pursuit of Weapons of Mass Destruction" (Jan. 25, 2010). This introduction to Larssen's full length version ends with this link to his full pdf report (30 pages).
What emerges are five central core truths about al-Qaeda's pursuit of WMD: (1) al-Qaeda's senior leaders are resolutely pursuing WMD capability; (2) al-Qeada devoted significant resources to WMD even as the 9/11 attacks were being prepared; (3) al-Qaeda's always pursues multiple alternate paths to WMD; (4) al-Qaeda's works in concert with other terror groups re WMD; (5) al-Qaeda focuses on bigger attack plans, scorning simple chemical, radiological attacks with low casualty count--9/11 is a benchmark to be exceeded via WMD.
Here is an assessment of growing risks to Pakistan's 60-100 nuke stockpile, by Brooking Institution scholar Bruce Riedel. A 4-pager from Foreign Policy adds highly informative detail on Pakistan's nuclear security arrangements--mostly, but not fully, reassuring. Back right after 9/11 Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf moved his country's arsenal to secure locations in 48 hours, fearing a US strike. Here is a longer piece from the Institute of International Strategic Studies on Pakistan's nuclear oversight reforms (pdf. file at the bottom prints at 12 pages).
The WP 5-page article on Musharraf's actions after 9/11 is especially worth a serious full read. Among the scarier tidbits: (1) Musharraf explored storing Pakistani nukes with--yikes!!!--the Taliban in Afghanistan; (2) Pakistan's arsenal is under Army control and is secure while guarded at bases, but more vulnerable when being moved; (3) the US does not know where all the nukes are stored; (4) at least one Pakistani nuclear scientist had interaction with Arabs close to the Taliban & al-Qaeda.
In a politically incorrect (hence: truthful) summary appraisal of the Muslim Crescent from Africa to Southwest Asia Ralph Peters says toss Afghanistan, contain Pakistan and turn towards India:
AFGHANISTAN: We're there, and we don't know why. We know why we went in 2001, but al Qaeda's long gone. Initially, we were welcomed. Now, the more troops we send, the stronger the Taliban becomes. We're tied to a corrupt, inept government despised by the people. Afghans wo'’t fight for that government, but they'll give their lives for the Taliban. And we're determined to turn the place into Disney World.
Should we just leave? No. Afghanistan provides a crucial base for striking the terrorists across the border in Pakistan. But a reduced presence and a willingness to back sympathetic Afghan tribes offers far more return on our investment of blood and treasure than trying to turn Islamist fanatics into third-rate Americans. In a war-torn tribal society, you have to pick your tribes.
Afghanistan is worthless in itself. Instead of concentrating on killing our enemies, we’re buying worthless real estate with American blood.
PAKISTAN: 180 million anti-American Muslims, thanks to generations of politicians who took American aid while playing the anti-American card with their constituents. The government won't crack down on the Taliban factions it's preserving for a reconquest of Afghanistan after we exit. It sponsors terror attacks against India, then leaves it to us to calm India down. Promised another $7.5 billion in aid, Pakistan's response has been not only to bite the hand that feeds it, but to gnaw it to a bloody pulp. And, in an act of strategic folly, we've left our troops in Afghanistan dependent upon a single supply line that runs for over a thousand miles through Pakistan.
And the Pakistani media, with the government's blessing, blames us when the Taliban bomb a marketplace. Isn't it about time we got a grip? Around Pakistan's throat?
But what about those nukes? What if they get mad at us and hand them over to terrorists? They won't. But if we're worried about the nukes, plan to destroy them — or leave that job up to India. Leaving the greatest power in history at the mercy of the impossibly corrupt regime in Pakistan guarantees that our troops lives are wasted next door in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan isn't our problem. Pakistan's the problem. And India's the future.
Bottom Line. An al-Qaeda WMD threat persists and grows as Pakistan's stability erodes.
Letter from the Capitol, LFTC, 9/11, National Security, Terrorism, Homeland Security, Nuclear Proliferation, Arms Control, WMD, Foreign Policy
Comments