ISIS Eying Europe to Acquire Nuclear Material

 

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Pakistan is often sighted by many western analysts as potential source of supply of nuclear material for international nuclear terrorism. India has used these fear for her own geopolitical reasons. For instance, in May 2015, India "warns" the world that ISIS could obtain nuclear weapon from Pakistan.

Defence Minister Rao Inderjit Singh, while speaking on the sidelines of the Shangri-La regional security conference in Singapore, claimed "With the rise of Isis in West Asia, one is afraid to an extent that perhaps they might get access to a nuclear arsenal from states like Pakistan." 

To corroborate his claim he just had a statement issued by ISIS last year just days before Rao's speech in Singapore. Despite the lack of any proof, the statement of Indian minister got attention of wider western populace. But today, UK based news service, The Guardian, has exposed chilling details about ISIS's original plan to acquire nuclear material (for possible purpose of making a dirty bomb) and according to the news, ISIS is actually eying Germany for acquisition of nuclear material.  

According to the Guardian, Salah Abdeslam, a prime suspect in the Paris attacks, possessed documents about a nuclear research centre in Germany. The news outlet cited German newspaper reports as source of this disclosure.

The Juelich centre near the Belgium-Germany border is used for the storage of atomic waste. Thoguh German media is trying to downplaying the incident by saying "that there was no indication of any danger and that Juelich was in contact with security authorities and nuclear supervisors." But question remains, how an ISIS fighter was able to get its hands on such information.

As per Guardian's report, German media, however, confirmed that Abdeslam had photos of the Juelich chairman, Wolfgang Marquardt, in his apartment in the Molenbeek area of Brussels. This is serious development. Kidnapping of such officials at any nuclear facility could lead to far serious security dilemma. This revelations must also put the entire debate on nuclear security into a completely new perspective based on objectivity and transparency rather than geopolitical maneuvering by any nation state against anyone. 

  

Pakistan Has Second Strike Capability

(Dawn News) Former defence secretary retired Lt Gen Naeem Khalid Lodhi has claimed that Pakistan possesses second strike capability against India.

He was speaking at a seminar at Strategic Vision Institute (SVI), an Islamabad-based think-tank that works on strategic issues.

The issue of second strike capability came up in the context of the conventional superiority enjoyed by India and the options for Pakistan.

The second strike provides a military the capability to hit back at an enemy in a situation where its land-based nuclear arsenal had been neutralized.

The former defence secretary said that despite the growing conventional imbalance, Pakistan had certain strengths including the nuclear parity with India and credible nuclear deterrence.

The nuclear deterrence, he said, had been augmented by the second strike capability, efficient delivery systems and effective command and control system.

He did not explain any specifics about the second strike capability, which could be sea, air or land based.

It is still unclear if Pakistan was any closer to the submarine based ‘assured second strike capability’ for stable deterrence, particularly at time when India has already made the moves towards it.

Discussing Pakistan’s second strike capability, President SVI Dr Zafar Iqbal Cheema said that Pakistan had improved its second strike capability.

Pakistan’s second strike capability, Dr Cheema said, has been augmented by deployment of Hatf-VII/Baber nuclear capable cruise missile that is launchable from aircrafts and conventional submarines. It is further fortified by the deployment of Hatf-VIII/Ra’ad air launched cruise missile, he added.

Technically speaking, he maintained, the best mode of second strike capability is submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), which neither India nor Pakistan have deployed as yet.

Security & Threat Matrix Comment:

"Though it is known fact since the establishment Naval Strategic Force Command (NSFC) in 2013 that Pakistan has been working on second strike capability, this is first time a former defense secretary has disclosed that it is not only there but is also being enhanced."

Heavier munitions for Israeli air force, But what is the target?

According to IHS Janes,  The US State Department has approved the sale to Israel of over 20,000 guided bomb kits and 8,650 associated warheads, including additional 5,000 lb 'bunker busters', the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 19 May

.

Reportedly, the Israeli air force would also get 250 AIM-120C Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs) and 3,000 AGM-114K/R Hellfire missiles. Total cost of the deal is USD1.9 billion.

The details of this deal is rather interesting. Though the deal also includes 4,100 GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs (SDB), which is a 250 lb-class GPS-guided weapon with flip-out wings to increase its range. But it is the numbers of heavier air launched munitions which made this entire deal very intriguing. According to DSCA notification, Israeli Air Force would get 10,000 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) GPS guidance kits for 2,000 lb (907 kg) MK 84 general purpose bombs, 500 JDAM kits for 1,000 lb MK 83 bombs, and 4,000 JDAM kits for 500 lb MK 82 bombs.

The most interesting item in this Israeli wishlist is a request for 500 DSU-38A/B kits that can be used to upgrade JDAMs so they can be guided to their target using a laser designator as well as GPS, making them more flexible and accurate weapons that can be used against moving targets if needed.

The notification listed 1,500 Paveway laser guidance kits for MK 83s and another 500 for 2,000 lb BLU-109 penetrator warheads, which are used against bunkers.

In terms of warheads, the notification said Israel had requested 4,500 MK 83s and 3,500 MK 82s, but no additional MK-84s or BLU-109s.

And most notably, Israel has requested 50 BLU-113 warheads. The BLU-113 is a 5,000 lb penetrator used with the GBU-28 laser-guided bomb that is designed to destroy deeply buried and heavily fortified targets.

ANALYSIS:

Every weapon acquisition is done after carefully analyzing the potential target of new weapons. By looking at the elements of this deal, it would be prudent to assume that Israeli air force's plans to bomb Iranian nuclear infrastructure has been moved in advanced stage. The request for DSU-38 A/B kits and BLU-113 warheads is particularly important in this regard. In 1982, Israeli air force destroyed an under construction  Iraqi nuclear reactor, near Baghdad, using laser guided bombs and new deal also include large number of 2000 and 5000 pounds laser guided weapons.  

Such an acquisitions by Israel explains why despite a very stressed economy, Iran acquired, S-300 SAM system from Russia.

This deal also raise many questions about the future of the Obama's Middle East policy which excludes any military option against Iran's nuclear facility and is looking forward to resolve the issue related to Iran's nuclear program through negotiations. A deal in this regard is expected next month. Israeli opposition to this US strategy is not a secret and this current deal items also indicates that strategic thinking of Tel Aviv. 

Putting Iran's Framework Deal in Context

Shahzad Masood Roomi


Finally, after months of negotiations between Iran and P5+1 countries, an agreement has been reached on Tehran's nuclear program and its future. The deal has been praised by every state as it will pave the way for Iran to end its isolation in international community and on the other hand, Iran's nuclear program will come under IAEA inspection. Under the deal, Iran will also reduce its uranium enrichment capacity for a time period of 10-15 years in exchange for phased sanctions relief. After the deal both parties would work for drafting the final agreement which is to be finalized by 30 June.

Iran has agreed to redesign of its heavy water plant at Arak (IR-40) as well so that it cannot produce weapon grade plutonium. The number of centrifuges installed will be reduced by two third and its stockpile of low-enriched uranium will be reduced as well.

ANALYSIS:

Strategically speaking, the framework deal between Iran and P5+1 is a big win for Iran in its long term implications and a defeat for Israel (if you are not getting me, please recall the address of Israeli PM to US congress in which he was telling the US to back off). In order to understand the broader contours of final deal (which BTW is NOT signed yet, only parameters of the framework have been agreed upon on which the final deal would be signed) in its correct context it must remain clear that as long as Iran is able to preserve its uranium enrichment right as signatory of NPT, it will be a win for Tehran and this is exactly what Iran has successfully managed to achieve in interim deal (signed in 2014) and in this 'framework' deal.

Next, this deal makes it clear that Iran is not going to rollback its nuclear program but has agreed to put it in low gear for a time span of 10-15 years. Now if someone is anxious about the aspect of this deal which is going to impede bomb making capability of Tehran, please keep in mind, Iran never intended to make a  bomb in the first place. (Fatwa given by their spiritual leader in this regard) ... But even if they want to build a bomb, it is clear that maximum this deal can do in this regard is to stall the enrichment capability for a decade (means this is not a roll back but slow down in their nuclear program) which is No time in any nation's age. Iran has successfully secured their entire nuclear program and phased off the sanctions which for years have affected Iran adversely. Inflation is sky high there due to very limited exports. But now, Iran will be able to export their oil and gas.

This agreement is a good news for Pakistan as well as international sanctions on Iran will be lifted allowing Pakistan and Iran to pursue Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. All the world monitory institutions would agree to extend the credit facility.

Lastly, it must be clear that 2016 is election year in the US, and after Yemen which President Obama declared his success story in war on terror is in complete chaos, Democrats would need one major global issue which they can sell to US public as success story during those elections. Who much this work, only time will tell. But for now, the world has reached on an agreement without going to war over it is a big achievement in itself.

Snapshot of Interim Deal Signed between Iran and the US

Is a new war in making in Middle East over Iranian nuclear program?

The deadline, given by the US, for conclusion of talks over Tehran's nuclear program has passed. Though it is expected that this deadline would be extended. Many around the world wonder why after signing an interim deal, which was suppose to provide the basis for this final deal, things have become so tense between the two camps. The extract from Daily Telegraph's report answers this question.

"When John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, secured an interim agreement in Geneva last November, his only aim was to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Now Mr Kerry is no longer interested in freezing Iran’s progress; he is after “rollback”. Put bluntly, he wants Iran to start dismantling key elements of its nuclear programme, particularly its capacity to enrich uranium."

This is a clear negation of interim deal and also answers our main question about the potential threat of another war in Middle East. It seems that 5+1 states have changed their stance from what they agreed in interim deal earlier this year and Iran has left with no choice but to take a strong stance. These developments not only have stalled the progress in talks but has brought the region on the blink of another conflict.

Editor's Note:

There was no mention of rolling back Iran’s nuclear program at the time when this interim deal was signed earlier this year. 5+1 nations agreed and accepted Iranian right to continue Uranium enrichment activities for civilian usage. The focus was on keeping Iranian Uranium enrichment below the level of weapon grade. But now, in November 2014, it looks like the US wants a complete rollback of Iranian program and this has become a new bone of contention between both parties. This snapshot of interim deal –highlighting the important points agreed by both sides at that time –reveal the present change of stance by 5+1 nations. This new demand of complete rollback of Iranian nuclear program can derail the entire negotiations.  

The snapshot PDF can be accessed from link given below:

American Intrigue in South China Sea

Shahzad Masood Roomi

The US Navy has been conducting surveillance operations in South China Sea to monitor PLAN's maritime capabilities. These operations came to fore more than a decade ago when, in April 2001, two J-8s of Peoples Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) intercepted a US Navy EP-3E ARIES-II Surveillance Spy plane some 110 Kilometers south of Hainan Island in South China Sea. During the interception, a collision occurred between the EP-3 and one of the J-8s causing the death of a PRC pilot, and the EP-3 was forced to make an emergency landing on Hainan.This led to a serious diplomatic deadlock between two global players. China detained 24 member crew of spy plane after the incident who were released later on after the US government issued a statement about the incident. This was beginning of a quiet battle between the two states which still rages in South China Sea. The latest incident in this war took place when on 28th August 2014, China’s military told the United States to end air and naval surveillance near its borders, saying it was damaging relations between the Pacific powers and could lead to “undesirable accidents”.

Now question is, why the US is constantly undertaking such challenging and provocative maritime spy ops so close to the mainland China? Answer lies in the geography of the island and the fact that Hainan is home of PLAN's concealed submarine base; Sanya.  Hainan is located with in China's 200 km Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), it is not located in international waters though Chinese claim their territory far beyond the 200 Km EEZ. Next, the base houses PLAN's nuclear arsenal carried by Type-094 nuclear submarine. This is something that provokes so much reaction from Beijing over any US operation around the island province. Type-094 SSBN (Jin Class) carries JL-2 SLBM. According to the 2012 Annual Report  presented to Congress on ''Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China'' presented by the Office of the American Secretary of Defense, JL-2 has a maximum range of 14,000 kilometers. Due to these reasons, spying on PLAN submarine forces becomes strategic imperative for the US Navy.

PLAN's Type-094 SSBN

JL-2 SLBM would be part of the PLAN nuclear arsenal in coming years

Apart from this, even from a regional perspective, Hainan base is of critical importance for the PLAN as it is located in close proximity the Paracel Islands, known as the Xisha Islands. These reef islands are also a source of contention between China and the US strategic ally in the region, Taiwan. Controlled by PRC, Paracel islands are also claimed by Taiwan and Vietnam. All these factors have turned Hainan and South China Sea in a strategic hotspot in global politics and also explains the American intrigue in South China Sea.

What would be outcome of this American intrigue and maritime surveillance operations is still to be seen but one thing is certain, it would be pleasant if Americans keep on ignoring the Chinese warnings.           

Violations of International Law in Confronting the Production, Storage and Use of Nuclear Weapons

Shahzad Masood Roomi

Abstract: 

“In a complex geostrategic global environment issues like nuclear non-proliferation and enforcement of multiple international nuclear laws and treaties becomes even more critically important.  Nations faced with serious security challenges consider nuclear weapons an ultimate deterrence against their superior adversaries in conventional weapons. This security driven global political construct have compounded the issue of nuclear proliferation even more.

From a moral standpoint, the issue of nuclear non-proliferation and control regimes seems like a straight forward global obligation but today’s complex geopolitical realities are being dictated by the strategic goals of major power players in the world. Getting into the brass-tacks of historical perspective of nuclear proliferation in context of grand geo-strategy of major political forces in the world explains why the issue of nuclear proliferation is still endangering the global peace and why have we not been able to make the world a place without nuclear weapons despite adopting various control regimes. It is noteworthy fact that all members of P-5 club (US, UK, USSR, China and France) became nuclear states through proliferation in one form or other. This also explains why many of the nuclear control treaties have not been rectified by these major political players.   

So far, nuclear control regimes have failed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and keeping the evolving strategic developments in Middle East, Asia Pacific and South Asia in mind, it seems that this trend would continue as long as these issues would be used not for their indenting purposes but to achieve some vested interests of international power brokers.

This paper examines how on one hand the campaign of nuclear non-proliferation was used by various nuclear states as a policy tool to further their own political and strategic agendas while on the other hand they proliferate or facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons to their allies (Israel, India) in order to secure their long term strategic goals. In this backdrop, the paper also examines the loopholes in existing nuclear control regimes and how these are being exploited. In the end, paper purposes various suggestions on regional, multilateral and international levels to make the world more secure place by making the existing control regimes more transparent and effective.”

Read Complete Paper at following link:

https://www.academia.edu/7658504/Violations_of_International_Law_in_Confronting_the_Production_Storage_and_Use_of_Nuclear_Weapons