Perspectives
The rumpus over the nukes
M Abdul hafiz
Last year in September the government of Tony Blair released the first of the two intelligence dossiers outlining the threats posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The dossier included, among other things, now infamous claim that those weapons could be deployed within 45 minues of an order to do so. It became a political scandal when Robin Cook, the former British Foreign Secretary testified recently that Tony Blair knew before going to war that Iraq had no WMD. In the US, the CIA-conducted survey could not find, to the embarrassment of Bush Administration, any trace of WMD in Iraq, now under their occupation, where nothing could be concealed; neither could any trick be resorted to. It is naive to believe that the Bush Administration wasn't aware of it earlier. It was an open secret that Iraq failed to restart its nuclear plant after being bombed out in 1981 by the Israelies and there could not have been any facility left to produce any kind of WMD after a decade-long stringent sanction and weapon inspection.Yet an Anglo-American leadership with an warped worldview embarked on what the powerful always did in the past -- twisting the arms of the weak with an ulterior motive while ensuring minimum cost and no risk, if possible. They found a soft target in Iraq where a WMD was only a figment of imagination while skipping over countries with proven record of possessing WMD -- like Israel. Although it never officially declared itself a nuclear power, Israel is by some distance the mightiest nuclear power outside the Big Five. Israel is estimated to have a stockpile of more than half tonne of plutonium and an unknown quantity of weapon-grade highly enriched uranium. It's plutonium stockpile is more than the combined stockpile held by other non-Big Five nuclear-capable countries. Experts estimate that Israel has around 200 nuclear devices. "Our antennae are up" so said a senior UN official watching worldwide nuclear proliferation efforts. "The international community can rest assured we do keep track of the events, if they go beyond talk". But a defaulting Israel could always skip those antennae while the stragglers like North Korea and Iran are invariably caught. But the 'preemption' lords are circumspect enough not to dabble with them lest they are provoked to field their nukes which are a bit more real than those of Iraq. The jury is still, of course, out on whether North Korea has the bomb. During the eighties the country stockpiled enough plutonium for a couple of bombs. But a 1994 agreement with the Clinton Administration froze the programme. However that agreement broke down last year amid fresh row over North Korea's nuclear ambition. Washington believes that the country may have at least two devices in its hand. As regards Iran's bomb there is as yet no wherewithal. However, the recent discoveries and question marks point to the tracing of two different types of weapon-grade uranium at an underground uranium enrichment centre under construction in central Iran. North Korea's estimated two bombs and some vital disclosure about Iran's nuclear programme have ostensibly been enough to unnerve Washington's neo-conservatives who seem to be opting for caution in handling these two defiant nuclear aspirants. The response-pattern has however sent a signal that nukes are perhaps the only safeguard against the pre-emption attacks rendered by Bush doctrine. Small wonder that there is a new spate of nuclear proliferation as the new aspirants queue up for acquiring nuclear device as deterrent. Saudi Arabia, in response to current upheaval in the Middle East, has embarked on a strategic review that includes the question of acquiring nuclear weapon for the Kingdom. A strategy paper being considered at the highest level in Riyadh sets out three options. * To acquire nuclear capability as deterrent. * To maintain or enter into alliance with an existing nuclear power that would offer protection. * To try to reach regional agreement on having a nuclear-free Middle East. It is for some time that the Saudis are wary of US military presence in their country and would like them packing up. Their experience of each other have not always been savoury. The relationship may one day come to a head when, to take over the control of Saudi oil fields, the US may as well subject the troubled ally to the doctrine of pre-emptive attack. America did not have much compunction in dumping once-friendly Iraq, having the world's second largest oil reserve, when the crunch was felt. What is the guarantee that the US will not repeat it for a country having the world's largest oil reserve, the Saudis genuinely worry. Saudi Arabia does not regard Iran, a past adversary with which Riyadh has restored friendly relation, as a direct threat. But it is unnerved by the possibility of living with two nuclear neighbours -- Iran and Israel -- on its two flanks. Riyadh is also worried about a string of apparent leaks in American papers that the US administration is critical of Saudi Arabia. The country has long enjoyed the US security umbrella including protection from nuclear onslaught from any quarter. But the relations between the US and Saudi Arabia steadily declined in the wake of nine-eleven terrorists' attacks in America: 15 of the 19 attackers were Saudi. As a result Saudi Arabia is no more covered by the US' security guarantee; neither does it have its own deterrence arrangement to Parry a nuclear conventional assault. Apparently there exists a security vacuum for her at this juncture. As regard an option for nuclear-free Middle East the prospect are thin indeed. The Arab countries have been persistently urging International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, to get tough with Israel to let inspectors assess its nuclear programme in line with similar pressure on Iran. So far, enormous of such urges and appeals went in vain. Israel became only stronger in its nuclear muscles. The Saudi quest for a nuclear deterrence is not new. In 1988 Saudis bought from China intermediate-range missiles capable of reaching any part of Middle East with a nuclear warhead. Four years ago Saudi Arabia sent a defence team to Pakistan to tour its secret nuclear facilities and to be briefed by Abdul Qadir Khan, the father of Pakistan's bomb. There have also been rumors going back 20 years that the Saudis wanted to pay Pakistan to do the research and development on nuclear weapons. According to Washington-based Institute of Science and International Security there are doubts that the Saudis would try to build a nuclear bomb, preferring instead to buy a nuclear warhead. Whatever may be the manner in which the Saudis would obtain a nuclear deterrence, there's obviously a lot of restlessness in the Middle East today prompting and pushing the nations like Saudi Arabia to produce a nuclear deterrence. But whenever they are about to have it cannot be without a great deal of furore over the old problem of proliferation which is still as real as ever. Apart from five permanent members of the Security Council which are all nuclear powers, around 25 other countries have sought to obtain nuclear weapons with varying degrees of success. It is yet to be seen how a Saudi initiative in this regard will be dealt with by international community represented by various UN agencies which are already tainted by brazen bias. Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.
| 
