Pakistan refuses to hand over AQ Khan

[Spirit of Spartacus]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_19...00500020000.htm (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1917060,000500020000.htm)


Disgraced Pakistan nuclear scientist AQ Khan will not be handed over to Washington for questioning despite an American bill, which could force Islamabad to do so.

Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Tasneem Aslam told reporters here that Islamabad is hoping that the Bush administration will intervene to make the final legislation more balanced, and added that US queries should be forwarded to the Pakistan Government, which would investigate and then respond.

The proposed law called the Nuclear Black Market Counter Terrorism Act, recently passed by the US House of Representatives, requires President Bush to submit a report identifying any country or person connected with transactions with the nuclear proliferation network that supplied Libya, Iran, North Korea within 90 days of its enactment.

Another provision of the proposed law, which if enacted, could force Pakistan to hand over Khan, says the President will send to Congressional committees a description of the extent a country is cooperating with the US to stop proliferation, including the degree to which the it has satisfied requests for information and grant of access to key persons involved in proliferation.

Emphasising that Pakistan was a 'nuclear state,' Aslam said, "The Senate is yet to come up with its own version. The two versions will be discussed in the conference stage."

Khan is currently held under house arrest in Islamabad after he confessed of proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

The bill was adopted along with another which required President Bush to certify that Pakistan was doing all it could to counter the Taliban and Al-Qaeda before financial aid was released.



So it seems that President Musharraf is not exactly in Washington's pocket, is he?

Despite the fact that our military dictatorship has been all too willing to cooperate with US imperialism, it appears that there are limits to this cooperation.

How much could this disagreement damage the relations between the imperialist super-power and its South Asian side-kick (Pakistan)?

[Question everything]

the U.S. already treats Pakistan like dirt... the Pakistanis are always accused of harboring terror, CNN does it every 2nd night, and they ussually have a clip of Bush making the accusations, this will just get the U.S. pissed of and make the U.S. able to make Pakistan look like they are fighting against America in this so-called "war on terror"...


How much could this disagreement damage the relations between the imperialist super-power and its South Asian side-kick (Pakistan)?

Is it just me, I alway thought India had that job...

[Fawkes]

Disgraced Pakistan nuclear scientist AQ Khan will not be handed over to Washington for questioning despite an American bill, which could force Islamabad to do so.

Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Tasneem Aslam told reporters here that Islamabad is hoping that the Bush administration will intervene to make the final legislation more balanced, and added that US queries should be forwarded to the Pakistan Government, which would investigate and then respond.

The proposed law called the Nuclear Black Market Counter Terrorism Act, recently passed by the US House of Representatives, requires President Bush to submit a report identifying any country or person connected with transactions with the nuclear proliferation network that supplied Libya, Iran, North Korea within 90 days of its enactment.

Another provision of the proposed law, which if enacted, could force Pakistan to hand over Khan, says the President will send to Congressional committees a description of the extent a country is cooperating with the US to stop proliferation, including the degree to which the it has satisfied requests for information and grant of access to key persons involved in proliferation.

Emphasising that Pakistan was a 'nuclear state,' Aslam said, "The Senate is yet to come up with its own version. The two versions will be discussed in the conference stage."

Khan is currently held under house arrest in Islamabad after he confessed of proliferating nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

The bill was adopted along with another which required President Bush to certify that Pakistan was doing all it could to counter the Taliban and Al-Qaeda before financial aid was released.
Either I'm reading this wrong or this is one of the most blatant examples yet of how the U.S. are "world police". How can a bill passed in the U.S. Senate force other countries to hand over certain people?

[Question everything]

with a little something they invented 50 years ago, called a nuke... :(

[Spirit of Spartacus]

the U.S. already treats Pakistan like dirt... the Pakistanis are always accused of harboring terror, CNN does it every 2nd night, and they ussually have a clip of Bush making the accusations, this will just get the U.S. pissed of and make the U.S. able to make Pakistan look like they are fighting against America in this so-called "war on terror"...

Despite the fact that the military kills Pakistani citizens in an effort to cooperate with the US.




How much could this disagreement damage the relations between the imperialist super-power and its South Asian side-kick (Pakistan)?


Is it just me, I alway thought India had that job...

Not at all. That honor has always been reserved for Pakistan. <_<

During the Bangladeshi Liberation War, the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the U2-spying flights over the USSR, all these times Pakistan had the...ahem..."privilege" of standing by the imperialist government of the US.

[Guerrilla22]

The Pakastani population would go nuts if that happened, it wasn&#39;t that Musharef didn&#39;t want to hand Khan over, the guy is so respected there that there would be millions rioting and would possibly lead to the overthrow of Musharef if he did.

[Severian]

If the Bush administration was going to demand the extradition of A.Q. Khan, it could have done so some time ago. There&#39;s nothing in this bill, even supposing it passed unchanged, that would force the Bush administration to demand that.

It&#39;s just posturing by some Representatives: the Bush administration is free to "report" or "certify" whatever degree of Pakistani cooperation it wants.


So it seems that President Musharraf is not exactly in Washington&#39;s pocket, is he?

Despite the fact that our military dictatorship has been all too willing to cooperate with US imperialism, it appears that there are limits to this cooperation.

Certainly there are limits. As shown by the Pakistani regime&#39;s peace treaties with the Taliban in Waziristan. Washington&#39;s not too happy with those either, especially since they have not stopped cross-border attacks into Afghanistan.

But the Musharraf regime did shut down Khan&#39;s "nuclear supermarket". Whether those responsible for those past activities are extradited is less important to Washington.


During the Bangladeshi Liberation War, the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the U2-spying flights over the USSR, all these times Pakistan had the...ahem..."privilege" of standing by the imperialist government of the US.

Sure, that&#39;s the traditional relationship. It&#39;s shifted some already: India simply has more potential value as a client regime. The Indian capitalist class commands a much larger economy.

Unless the Pakistani ruling class wants to see Washington wholly shift to supporting India against it.....it will have to more or less comply with Washington&#39;s demands.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

The Pakastani population would go nuts if that happened, it wasn&#39;t that Musharef didn&#39;t want to hand Khan over, the guy is so respected there that there would be millions rioting and would possibly lead to the overthrow of Musharef if he did.

Precisely. I don&#39;t know if it could lead to the overthrow of the Musharraf regime, but it would certainly raise the level of opposition to a dangerous level (from the point of view of the military, of course)




But the Musharraf regime did shut down Khan&#39;s "nuclear supermarket". Whether those responsible for those past activities are extradited is less important to Washington.

True. But few people in Pakistan really believe that the "nuclear supermarket" was being run purely by Khan. It&#39;s far more likely that our military was fully involved in it, although of course they won&#39;t let any proof of that come out.

That&#39;s why Khan is under virtual house arrest.




During the Bangladeshi Liberation War, the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the U2-spying flights over the USSR, all these times Pakistan had the...ahem..."privilege" of standing by the imperialist government of the US.


Sure, that&#39;s the traditional relationship. It&#39;s shifted some already: India simply has more potential value as a client regime. The Indian capitalist class commands a much larger economy.

Unless the Pakistani ruling class wants to see Washington wholly shift to supporting India against it.....it will have to more or less comply with Washington&#39;s demands.


Well there are some more factors you need to consider here.

For one, India has some semblance of bourgeois democracy and Liberal democratic traditions. To manipulate India into supporting US imperialism would certainly require a lot more dealing, a lot more negotiation and consequently a lot more arm-twisting from the US.

Pakistan has had a tradition of undisguised military rule, which means that its easier to coax or coerce the regime into cooperating with the US...after all, the US has to deal with just one general instead of dozens of interest-groups in the Indian political system.

Add to that the fact that Pakistan is located more "strategically", bordering both Afghanistan, Iran and China.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Spirit of [email protected] 03, 2007 01:52 pm
True. But few people in Pakistan really believe that the "nuclear supermarket" was being run purely by Khan. It&#39;s far more likely that our military was fully involved in it, although of course they won&#39;t let any proof of that come out.
In which case Washington has even less need to demand Khan be punished. They do need to demand changes of policy from the Pakistani regime.


For one, India has some semblance of bourgeois democracy and Liberal democratic traditions. To manipulate India into supporting US imperialism would certainly require a lot more dealing, a lot more negotiation and consequently a lot more arm-twisting from the US.

They&#39;ve largely done that already. Or at least Washington seems convinced they have - consider for example the recent deal on nuclear technology.

There are plenty of parliamentary governments in the world who act as U.S. clients, starting with Latin America. Lately Washington even seems to prefer them, as more stable and predictable.


Add to that the fact that Pakistan is located more "strategically", bordering both Afghanistan, Iran and China.

Certainly Washington needs the Pakistani regime&#39;s cooperation on Afghanistan, and to a lesser degree Iran. That&#39;s one factor slowing the shift towards India.

The shift is real, though. If possible, Washington would prefer to have both states as clients. But the past preference for Pakistan seems over.

[Janus]

Despite the international controversy over Khan, he is still very much regarded as
a hero within Pakistan; Musharaff himself has pardoned Khan. As for handing over Khan, that seems extremely doubtful especially given the fact that the Pakistani government itself was probably involved in some of the nuclear proliferation. Thus, it would be too much of a political embarassment for Pakistan.

[Guerrilla22]

The US government is probaly concerned that Kahn will still sell his nuclear expertise to other clients around the world, possibly Iran, however from a stability standpoint, it would be wise of them to basically let the Pakistani government keep him under wraps inside Pakistan.