Ashley J. Tellis voices his opposition to the recent sale of Chinese nuclear reactors to Pakistan (“Stop the Sino-Pak Nuclear Pact,” op-ed, Aug. 17). As a former State Department official, Mr. Tellis exhibits in his stance the same shortsightedness and double standards that often mar U.S. foreign policy.

By opposing Chinese-made nuclear plants with International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards in Pakistan, the U.S. would be denying a valuable energy source to a key ally whose stability is threatened by a crushing energy deficit. How would Mr. Tellis suggest Pakistan bridge its 4,000-megawatt energy gap, which is expected to grow by another 22% by 2015?

There is also a clear double standard embedded in Mr. Tellis’s criticism. The U.S.-India nuclear pact that Mr. Tellis helped negotiate exempts eight power plants, including Indian “breeder reactors,” from the IAEA-inspected civilian list. (Breeder reactors produce more fissile material than they consume.) The exemption allows India to advance its military nuclear program and only sets back U.S. nuclear nonproliferation efforts.  [According to Mr. Tellis himself, the operation of India’s unsafeguarded plants alone would provide enough weapon-grade plutonium to add more than 2,000 nuclear weapons to India’s arsenal.]

For the U.S. to be taken seriously in South and Southwest Asia, it needs to have clear and consistent policies [towards its allies, foes and] on major international issues [(e.g., non-proliferation)].  [Mr. Tellis’ opinion does not serve that end.]

At the INSIDER BRIEF, we believe that instead of opposing the Sino-Pak nuclear pact, the U.S. should be looking to support the Chinese sale.  Chinese support of Pakistan should be viewed as welcome relief to the United States, which over the last decade, has almost singlehandedly helped stabilize Pakistan.

Pakistan and its seemingly endless crises present an opportunity to draw the U.S. and China together in strategic cooperation.  By approaching each other as partners in bolstering the stability of an ally — through economic support, beating the energy deficit and curbing Islamism — the U.S. and China can work to reduce their trust deficit in South and Central Asia.

1. December 8th – Pakistan received the first of seven Saab 2000 Erieye Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS).  The Erieye systems should go a long way in improving the situational awareness of Pakistan’s air force and monitoring of IAF movement deep within Indian territory.  However, the benefits of the AWACS won’t be felt until Pakistan receives more (so that it can maintain constant air presence of the systems) and has more time to develop and “operationalize” tactics associated with the technology.
2. December 7th -  Insider Brief sources reported that Pakistan had successfully test flown a drone based on U.S. technology.  The sources reported that the technology was drawn from a drone shot down in September 2008 and had been secretly shipped to China for study — in line with our expectations from last year — though I’m a little surprised at the gestation period.  Reverse engineering a Predator drone and translating those learnings into a prototype in a little over a year seems ambitious, but may have been enabled by Chinese involvement and the fact that Pakistan already has an established UAV industry.  The new drone likely has greater endurance, altitude, and range — notable limitations for Pakistani UAV technology in the past.  A greater boon would be if the downed Predator drone from last year was a UCAV (capable of firing Hellfire missiles).
3. November 23th – Pakistan inducted its first domestically produced JF-17 fighter.  The plane, co-developed and co-produced with the Chinese, is a major milestone on Pakistan’s path for self-reliance in combat aircraft.  The JF-17, once inducted en masse, will significantly boost Pakistan’s overall capability as we detailed back in 2007.
4. November 11th – Pakistan announced that it would be purchasing J-10 fighters  from China in a preliminary agreement.  The J-10 acquisition is a good move that displays the PAF’s continued fiscal discipline and long-term thinking.  The J-10, considered on par with later block F-16′s that Pakistan’s purchased from the U.S., would help diversify Pakistan’s suppliers of hi-tech aircraft all the while sidestepping the threat of potential U.S. arms embargoes.  With a mix of J-10′s, F-16′s and JF-17′s coupled with Erieye AWACS, Pakistan’s air force will be creating a highly potent and cost effective model for minimum deterrence.  (I note fiscal discipline in that the J-10, though expensive, is not as pricey as other Western options in the market.)

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED?
Hillary Clinton is many things, but one thing she is not is unintelligent. Nor are those she surrounds herself with. Her foreign policy team — which includes former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, and of course, her husband, former President Bill Clinton — is painfully aware of how impractical her proposal for joint oversight is. After all, it was under President Bill Clinton’s watch that Pakistan defiantly tested its nuclear weapons, despite the threat of new sanctions when its economy was teetering on the brink of collapse.

So then why did she issue such an undeniably flawed policy statement?

The answer is right in front of us in the media’s response. Following her third place finish in Iowa at the hands of Senators Barack Obama and John Edwards, Sen. Clinton’s policy appears to be a ploy designed to attract attention to her campaign on the eve of the crucial New Hampshire primary. With a media that thrives on soundbites, it’s a ploy that in the past has proven effective.

NUCLEAR FALLOUT
Not convinced that the proposal is a campaign tactic? Assume for a moment that Clinton is serious in proposing joint US-UK stewardship of Pakistani nuclear weapons. Implications abound, the proposal would risk severe fallout for Pakistan as well as US interests in the region:

Violent and Vocal Reaction in Pakistan. It’s safe to say that any sitting government in Pakistan that would agree to US oversight of the nation’s nuclear weapons would be overthrown either in a military coup or by an overwhelming response from the Pakistani public. President Pervez Musharraf is afraid to openly acknowledge American boots on the ground in Pakistan’s northwest, let alone American oversight of Pakistani nukes. (Just today, Pakistani spokepeople were bristling at alleged deliberations by the Bush administration to give the CIA expanded powers to operate within Pakistan.)

Spike in Anti-Americanism in Pakistan and the Muslim world. Pakistan is currently the world’s only Muslim nuclear weapons state. US supervision of Pakistan’s nukes would be viewed as a continuation of the American “crusade” against Muslims. Pakistanis in general have long been convinced that the US is seeking to destablize their country in the hopes of an excuse to defang its nuclear capabilities. Many average Pakistanis are convinced that the US had a role to play in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto for that very reason. Sen. Clinton’s proposal is a sure fire way of stoking anti-Americanism and bringing Islamists to power in Pakistan.

Disruption of Sino-US relations. China was heavily involved in helping facilitate the funding and technical expertise towards the Pakistani nuclear program. China’s involvement reflects a long-standing strategic relationship between itself and Pakistan. The Chinese will not take pseudo-US control of nuclear weapons in their backyard lying down. The US government should be prepared for a severe reaction from the Chinese govement including aggressive behavior around Taiwan, Central Asia and the support of a military coup in Pakistan.

Loss of Credibility for the Democratic Party in Pakistan. The Pakistani establishment has long favored the Republican Party given the party’s record of, more often than not, engaging Pakistan. Many in Pakistan have not forgotten the treatment meted out to them by President Bill Clinton, particularly during his second term in office. If Hillary Clinton pushes her policy proposal, she would be helping ensure a poor working relationship with the government of Pakistan anytime a Democrat is in office.

The aforementioned are only a handful of the potential (frightening) outcomes from the promotion/imposition of Sen. Clinton’s proposal. It’s unlikely that the likes of Madeleine Albright, Richard Holbrooke, or Hillary Clinton herself would have overlooked these.

LESSONS LEARNT
The buzz generated by Clinton’s statement lasted a heartbeat and as of now, she trails behind Barack Obama by 9 points in New Hampshire. It’s a poignant lesson for all presidential candidates who seek to use controversial statements as a short term means of boosting their respective campaigns. Instead of formulating strong messages backed by well thought out policies, they end up right back where they started while looking, well, unintelligent.

• The constitution is suspended.
• Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar replaced Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry.
• Provincial and federal assemblies in tact.
• Shaukat Aziz: General Elections may be delayed (for up to one year).
• Judges across the country have been sworn in under the PCO.
• Opp. leaders arrested (e.g. Atizaz Ahsin, Javed Hashmi, Imran Khan, and Asma Jehangir).
• Benazir Bhutto has stated that she is willing to work with Musharraf.
• Private news outlets are now under strict operating guidelines.
• The country remains relatively calm.

Intel Forecasts Validated
Last week, we had reported that a major decision would be made on November 1st relating to the Musharraf government. Both our sources and Dawn are now reporting that the decision to declare a state of emergency was made on November 1st. Back in September, we had also stated that there moves were afoot by the government to force then-Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s resignation and that he would be out of office in a month; a month and a half later, Chaudhry finds himself out of a job.

What’s next?
As of yesterday, sources are reporting that the state of emergency will be short lived and that Musharraf will remove his uniform. If this is going to be Musharraf’s strategy, it’s a wise one. Keeping emergency rule short and removing his uniform shortly thereafter, will dampen opposition to him and preempt the organization of a large-scale protest movement that he will not be able to contain. He will also have accomplished his goal of removing one of the biggest thorns in his side: f0rmer Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry.

As of now, the opposition is in disarray with much of its leadership and nearly 500 activitsts already detained. Though talk of emergency rule had reached a fever pitch the day before, no one believed Musharraf would follow through thinking that move would be political suicide. Interestingly, the public for the most part has been quiet. But even if Musharraf is able to ride this out and successfully transition back to democracy as a civilian president, we do not foresee him completing his second 5-year term.

In the coming days, there may be full-on military activity in Pakistan’s northwest, specifically Swat and North Waziristan. Militants in the area may already be expecting this and are likely looking to come to an accord with the government. This was exhibited with the release today of the remaining 250 Pakistan Army troops that had been captured in late August. According to our sources, Pakistan currently has over 100,000 troops in the northwest. In addition to two heavy infantry divisions, two more infantry divisions have been moved in to the region with the intention of retaking each tribal agency/provincial district one at a time.

International Reaction
International reaction has almost universally been one of “disappointment” and “concern.” In reality however, these public statements are just lip service. For countries whose opinion actually matters for Pakistan — namely the United States and China — the primary concern was and still is the war on terror.

The United States. The White House termed Musharraf’s move as “disappointing” calling for him to remove his uniform and hold elections in January. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice echoed similar sentiments calling for calm and a swift return to constitutional order. She also said that financial assistance to Pakistan would be reviewed. To retierate, these are all face saving statements for consumption by the domestic US audience and international community. The Bush administration cannot be seen as supporting anti-democratic moves. It should also be remembered that the Vice President’s office runs all Pakistan-related foreign policy, not the State Department.

However, the most noteworthy and underreported statement came from the Pentagon stating that emergency rule would not effect US military support for Pakistan. Behind closed doors, all that matters for the Bush administration and other Western governments is that the war on terror continue full force and the Pentagon statement highlighted that.

China. China is Pakistan’s closest ally and largest benefactor, bar none. China has been mum over the last few months when its come to the state of affairs in Pakistan in line with their policy of domestic non-interference. After yesterday’s imposition of emergency rule, the Chinese came out and stated that they were “concerned,” but that the Pakistani government and people were capable of solving their own problems. So long as the government in Islamabad enacts policies that will not destabilize the region or specifically China’s own troubled Xinjiang province, the Chinese will continue to support Pakistan and in this case, Musharraf.

Musharraf’s Address: “Pakistan First”
IB readers can view Musharraf’s nearly hour long address to the nation last night below as well as in our newly added media section. Most of the address is in Urdu but beginning at 36:30, he speaks briefly in English for his “friends in the West.” To quickly summarize, Musharraf criticized the Supreme Court’s “judicial activisim” saying that it impeded on the government’s ability to prosecute the war on terror and manage the economy. He also went on to say that terrorists had become too emboldened and that the government needed to be able to take swift action against them; thus he had taken this action for emergency rule.

Resources

• Text of the Proclamation of Emergency
• Text of the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO)
• Text of Musharraf’s first PCO in October 1999
• Text of the former Supreme Court Order Voiding the PCO