Why Pakistan gets a pass

[eridani]

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092306F.shtml

"Why wait?" asked William Kristol in a July 24 Weekly Standard op-ed calling for a preemptive military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. "Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later." By August, the usual array of neoconservative pundits were chanting the "Why wait?" mantra, as their supporters within the administration, most notably Donald Rumsfeld, issued dire warnings against "appeasement."

Yet in the midst of saber-rattling, the Bush administration was quietly doing its own share of appeasing - in the literal, if not historical, sense. In late July, the Institute for Science and International Security issued a report revealing that Pakistan was building a heavy-water reactor capable of producing enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nuclear weapons a year. The response from Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the National Security Council, was surprisingly mild: "The reactor is expected to be substantially smaller and less capable than reported."

There also wasn't much hand-wringing on September 6 when Pakistan's military dictatorship announced a peace treaty with militants in North Waziristan, described by one analyst as al-Qaeda's "center of gravity." Vice President Cheney's response: to praise President Pervez Musharraf as "a man who has demonstrated great courage under very difficult political circumstances and has been a great ally for the United States."

<snip>

In stark contrast to its Middle East policy, the Bush administration's strategy with Pakistan has prioritized pragmatism over ideology, preferred diplomatic persuasion to military aggression and, most strikingly, displayed a willingness to tolerate Islamic extremism that does not directly challenge its interests. Pakistan hints at both a different, realpolitik side to the Bush foreign policy and a disconnect between the administration's moral and ideological rhetoric and its underlying goals.

[babylonsister]

1. So the US just could be arming the Pakistanis with nukes. Just

great.




But, any clues on Armitage and the BFEE?

[eridani]

2. A whole bunch of links on DU relating this to Plame n/t

[Dogmudgeon]

3. Pakistan already has nukes

They had a nuclear program as a "response" to the Indian nuclear program. IIRC, they Pakistanis are said to have about 10 to 25 atomic bombs in the Little Boy / Fat Man range. (About 20 kT.)

Now that the nationalist Indians are in disrepute and out of power, the Pakistani "need" for nukes is much less, but they still have them.

--p!