8 April 2010 The road from Hell is also paved with good intentions

8 April 2010 The road from Hell is also paved with good intentions


“Nuclear terrorism is most urgent threat

By Valerie Plame Wilson, Special to CNN

“Editor's note: Valerie Plame Wilson is a former covert CIA operations officer who now works at the Sante Fe Institute, a nonprofit science research think tank.

(CNN) -- The story of how I became a national figure in the media is widely known, but few people know what I actually did for the CIA.

I was a covert operations officer specializing in nuclear counter proliferation -- essentially, making sure the bad guys didn't get the bomb.

My job was to create and run operations that sought to peer into the procurement networks and acquisition chains of rogue nations. It was intense, tactical, creative and demanding. I believed that there was no more important work to be done.”





http://us.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/08/plame.wilson.nuclear.danger/index.html?hpt=T2



In her commentary, Ms. Wilson provides a link to Global Zero. You may wish to view the information on the organization. For your use, I’ve also included it here, along with a brief excerpt of Global Zero’s purpose statement.

“In December 2008 in Paris—in response to the growing threats of proliferation and nuclear terrorism—100 leaders from around the world launched Global Zero. They announced a plan for the phased, verified elimination of nuclear weapons, starting with deep reductions in the U.S. and Russian arsenals, to be followed by multilateral negotiations among all nuclear powers for an agreement to eliminate all nuclear weapons—global zero”

http://www.globalzero.org



WWII concluded with the use of nuclear weapons against Japan by the United States. The bombs dropped upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki are, to date, the only such devices deployed by any nation against another. These were truly terrible weapons used to bring Japan to the realization that it was defeated. There have been many arguments advanced since then that the weapons were not necessary by the time they were deployed; that we did not use nuclear weapons against the Third Reich because Germany is Caucasian but that our institutional racism allowed us to use them against Japan.

I can only speak for myself, but I believe the use of these bombs saved countless American soldiers’ lives, as well as many Japanese lives. The war with Germany was over before the first bomb was ready to use. From what I know of Harry Truman, he would have ordered such weapons to be used against Germany just as he did against Japan Racism was not a factor for Truman. He was concerned, primarily, with the lives of our service men and women. Both my parents would have been at risk had the war with either Germany or Japan continued.

I grew up in the Cold War. I recall all too well duck and cover drills. Missouri was one of the primary locations for the Minute Man solid fuel missile silo constellations. Given the lack of accuracy common to the Soviet ICBMs in those days, any exchange would have likely left central Missouri along with St. Louis, a smoking rubble field, uninhabitable for centuries. I remember a neighbor digging through the foundation of their house and into a hillside in order to build a fallout shelter. The Cuban Missile Crisis is just as frightening today, more so in fact, than it was then. I have a much greater appreciation of the risk to people during a nuclear exchange, and a more accurate awareness of how close we actually came to launching nuclear weapons.

The Cold War is essentially over. There is remaining hesitance among Russian leaders to trust us and too many of our citizens and leaders have a problem separating the USSR from Russia. We don’t need to worry about Russia throwing missiles at us over an ideological dispute. Both nations are at risk from Capitalistic excesses such as those that led to the current global recession. And both nations are subject to risk of attack by Islamic fundamentalists. Given that huge threat we should be closely allied with Russia in an attempt to limit such terrorist groups gaining control of fissile material or actual bombs.

While it is currently politically incorrect to link global terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, there are major conflicts driven by this religion-driven grouping of people willing to kill and maim in the name of a deity. There are currently on-going wars in the Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan as Moslems try to seize and reconstruct sectarian governments or non-Islamic theocracies. Israel is at continual risk of terrorist attack within its borders and shelling from outside its borders. Russian has been attacked many times by Chechnyan rebels who wish to leave the federation with Russia and form an Islamic nation. The U.S. has been attacked in several foreign nations and twice on our own soil by Islamic terrorists. There is an ongoing conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia for control of Islamic holy sites and for control of the future of Islam.

Pakistan is the only Islamic state that has nuclear weapons. India is the only Hindu nation to be so armed. The current great powers are:

United States. Russia (former Soviet Union), 4United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea, & Israel. Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, the United States has provided nuclear weapons for Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey to deploy and store. Canada Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, hosted nuclear weapons until 1984. Greece Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, hosted nuclear weapons until 2001

South Africa had nuclear weapons but claims to have disassembled them. Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus had nuclear weapons while part of the USSR. Those have reportedly all been secured and are now controlled by Russia.

While the NATO weapons are under careful control, the weapons and fissile materials from the former Soviet states were much less stringently controlled and accounted for. There have been several attempts to smuggle fissile material and to buy nuclear weapons, thwarted by Russian and U.S. agents. There well may have been more that were not thwarted.

N. Korea may become desperate enough to sell a nuclear bomb to Islamic fundamentalists. Pakistan is only a coup away from having control of its weapons fall into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists. The Pakistani Taliban is fully aware of the power that would afford them in the constellation of Moslem nations.

Iran protests that their nuclear programs are designed only for power production. In actuality Iran wants to supplant Pakistan as the pre-eminent Moslem state. Making their own nuclear weapons would allow them to threaten Israel and possibly attack Israel. It would also challenge Saudi Arabia for supremacy and control in the middle east. Iran wants very much to change the balance of power in the middle east and nuclear weapons will do it.

But the large nations are unlikely to attack us with nuclear weapons. The potential for obliteration is too great for most nations to chance. While Iran may convince its most rabidly anti-Israeli leaders that a strike against Israel is worth the risk, most world leaders understand that MAD can be a one way equation.

With that in mind I agree with the current weapon reduction agreement between the U.S. and Russia. There is no need to possess that many weapons between us. I don’t necessarily agree with the new nuclear weapons policy the Obama administration has developed. I consider the use of biological or chemical weapons to cause large numbers of deaths among our citizenry to be equivalent in intent to a nuclear strike. While I would prefer we not pursue a policy of nuclear first strikes, I would not publish our plans with regard to use of such weapons except to publish the facts that any NBC attack upon our armed forces, our soil, or our citizens may be met with nuclear weapons.

I prefer to keep all options open so as to not provide any arguments in favor of NBC strikes by small nations or by terrorists. I have no doubt that the various Islamic fundamentalist organizations are actively seeking fissile materials and/or nuclear weapons. While nations may appreciate the risk of attacking us and losing their existence in a nuclear response, those religious fanatics willing to seek martyrdom would welcome the ride to paradise and may well count upon our proclaimed unwillingness to use such weapons to provide refuge in hard to reach and hard to damage hideouts.

The use of Tora Bora by bin Laden made it difficult for us to bring either ground or air forces into effective play. While our best window to capture him was thrown away by Rumsfeld and Cheney in concert with the Afghani army, a small nuclear device would possibly have ended the conflict with bin Laden. The practice of sheltering in remote desert areas must not be allowed to become a certain sanctuary for enemies of the U.S. It may, at some time, become necessary to use special weapons to eliminate risk to our citizens.

I have no doubt that some of the more virulent Islamic fundamentalists will eventually penetrate our security and strike major cities and other sites. If, by using nuclear weapons I could prevent such strikes, I would be hard put to deny their use.

Ms. Plame’s efforts to limit proliferation and the existence of nuclear weapons is highly admirable. I applaud her efforts and hope her work is successful. However, the genie can never be put back into the bottle. The technology to build such weapons exists now in many places. The hard parts, the physics, has been done and published. We can never be certain that terrorists won’t be willing to pay the price necessary to attack us.

I’m all for abolishing nuclear weapons. But I sincerely want the U.S. and Russia to be the last nations or forces on this planet to possess them.