Author:
Publication: The Telegraph
Date: February 4, 2004
URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/02/04/dl0401.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/02/04/ixportal.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=143385
There was something shocking about
the photographs of a garlanded Abdul Qadeer Khan after Pakistan had exploded
its first nuclear bomb. The reasons for the test were obvious - arch-rival
India had detonated a similar weapon a couple of weeks before - but fêting
such a devastating device with flowers had a sinister ring. Pakistan was
rejoicing in heightened tension in a region that Bill Clinton was later
to call the most dangerous in the world.
Nearly six years on, that unease
appears more than justified. Dr Khan not only developed Pakistan's nuclear
arsenal, but in the process also passed on the designs and technology for
producing enriched uranium to Iran, North Korea and Libya. The first two
are part of George W Bush's "axis of evil", while the third has recently
agreed with America and Britain to dismantle its programme for developing
weapons of mass destruction. Islamabad, a key ally of the West in the war
on terror, has turned out to be a proliferator on a par with Pyongyang.
These highly embarrassing revelations
have shown General Pervaiz Musharraf in a poor light. First, he attempted
to ascribe the nuclear "leaks" to the greed of Dr Khan and his fellow scientists,
acting on their own. That never rang true; nuclear policy has long been
tightly controlled by the army. Now it is believed that the president will
pardon Dr Khan rather than put him on trial for treason. The garlanded
scientist is such a hero that the army fears the political consequences
of letting the law take its course. Moreover, in the witness box he might
well implicate Gen Musharraf and other officers in the sale of nuclear
technology. The Khan case has again demonstrated the limits of the president's
power. First over guerrilla infiltration into Kashmir and Afghanistan,
now over nuclear proliferation, he falls well short of what the West would
like.
The problem for Washington and its
allies, for which they deserve sympathy, is that a successor to Gen Musharraf,
especially of the Islamist variety, might be a good deal worse. For that
reason, the Bush Administration is likely to accept any pardon of Dr Khan
through gritted teeth, arguing that Pakistani proliferation is a thing
of the past. Washington still needs Gen Musharraf's co-operation in lowering
tension with India and in allowing Afghanistan to hold elections under
its new constitution.
The Democrats hoping to challenge
Mr Bush in November are unlikely to fall in with such realpolitik. They
will argue that he is condoning actions worthy of a rogue state, and thereby
sending a disastrous signal to other would-be proliferators. In that, they
will be backed by the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency,
to which Iran has admitted it was a recipient of Pakistani nuclear technology.
Mr Bush finds himself caught between
particular needs in one theatre of operations and a strategic determination
to halt proliferation. The contradiction is among the most striking thrown
up by the seismic shock of September 11.
