Vanderbilt Political Review Winter 2014 | Page 27

MARCH 2014 when the Saudi government purchased CSS2 ballistic missiles from China. The close relationship between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia which is characterized by Saudi Arabia’s financial support for Pakistani defense initiatives only further contributes to the plausibility of these concerns. Despite this, Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies explains some of his qualms with the belief that Pakistan would ever transfer nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia: “I doubt that Pakistan is ready to send nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia. Pakistan’s reputation suffered greatly the last time they assisted other countries with nuclear weapons technology (i.e., the sales by A.Q. Khan, with some governmental support or at least acquiescence, to North Korea, Iran and Libya). Pakistan knows that transferring nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia would also incur huge diplomatic and reputational costs.” David Albright, the director of the Institute for Science and International Security, supports this statement and points out that if Saudi Arabia accepted Pakistani nuclear weapons, there would be costly and immediate responses. One such response would be for the United States to cancel its arms sales to Saudi Arabia. With the United States currently selling Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates close to eleven billion dollars of weaponry per year, it is unlikely Saudi Arabia would turn to Pakistan for nuclear weapons. Civil Nuclear Development W hile security analysts in Washington continue to worry about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, Pakistan has shifted focus to a number of ambitious civilian nuclear goals. Last November, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, along with the Chinese ambassador to Pakistan and agency heads from the Pakistani Atomic Agency Commission, ceremonially broke ground on a new nuclear reactor complex in Karachi. With the Chinese ready to build the two new reactors, the endeavor marks the largest joint nuclear program between the two nations. Pakistani officials claim the deal was designed to alleviate the rolling black- INTERNATIONAL outs affecting large cities like Karachi and Hyderabad. Prime Minister Sharif, who campaigned on a platform of solvingPakistan’s crippling energy crisis, said the nuclear reactors would be a “big source of energy” and increase the nation’s electricity capacity by 15%. According to the Financial Times, the agreement also benefits the Chinese, who gain new customers for their civilian nuclear technology. One big concern is that the deal between China and Pakistan violates the terms of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The Nuclear Suppliers Group, comprised of forty-seven countries, sets strict yet non-binding guidelines on the export and transfer of nuclear material and technology as well as “dual-use technology.” While it appears the transfer of two nuclear reactors to Pakistan would be a violation of the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines, Pakistan is not a signatory of the NPT and is not bound by its standards and restrictions. Because of this, Chinese leaders remain confident that international opposition will be minimal. Zhang Li of the Institute of South Asian Studies at Sichuan University points out China will likely argue the current project is an extension of an existing nuclear deal between Pakistan and China. The original deal, which led to the construction of the Chashma nuclear power complex in 2000, was thus “grandfathered” and exempted from the Nuclear Suppliers Group guide- lines. In a phone interview with the New York Times, Zhang stated “My analysis is that this issue won’t trigger too much controversy…The Indian government will certainly respond, but I don’t think that this will fundamentally harm Sino-Indian relations, because it’s not something that has come out of the blue. China and India have exchanged views on this many times.” While some Indian politicians may be vocal in their opposition, it’s likely the United States will be more subdued, given that in 2006 the United States signed a civilian nuclear deal with India which similarly violated the terms of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The United States successfully petitioned the NSG for a waiver since India, like Pakistan, is not a signatory of the NPT. Since the Nuclear Suppliers Group lacks an enforceable treaty and operates by consensus decision making, it appears unlikely China or Pakistan will face significant roadblocks on the path towards nuclear cooperation and energy security. Last year will rightly be remembered as the year in which the world came one step closer to a nuclear peace with Tehran. But it should also be remembered as a year in which Islamabad made significant strides to secure its nuclear weapons and expand its nuclear energy. Collectively, the actions taken by the Pakistani government in 2013 send encouraging signs to the international community regarding the direction of Pakistan’s nuclear program. 27