Saudi Arabia looking for nuclear weapons

[Robert0288]

Via National Post (http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/07/saudi-arabia-has-nuclear-weapons-on-order-ready-to-deliver-from-pakistan-report/)

Saudi Arabia has nuclear weapons ‘on order,’ ready to deliver from Pakistan: report

Saudi Arabia has reportedly invested in the Pakistan nuclear program and has atomic weapons “on order” ready to be delivered.

The Saudis have long been interested in obtaining nuclear weapons to counter the possibility of an nuclear-armed Iran.

The BBC quotes a senior NATO source saying Pakistani nuclear weapons are ready and waiting to be delivered to Saudi Arabia.

The Newsnight report also cites former chief of Israeli military intelligence, Amos Yadlin, who told a conference in Sweden last month that if Iran acquired a nuclear bomb, “the Saudis will not wait one month. They already paid for the bomb, they will go to Pakistan and bring what they need to bring.”

Saudi Arabia purchased nuclear-capable ballistic missile launchers in the late 1980s from China, the report says.

The BBC also cites American intelligence reports and a former Pakistani security officer.

Gary Samore, who was U.S. President Barack Obama’s counter-proliferation adviser until earlier this year, told Newsnight: “I do think that the Saudis believe they have some understanding with Pakistan, that in extremis they would have claim to acquire nuclear weapons from Pakistan.”

However, the Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has dismissed the allegations as “baseless.”

Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan has been accused by the West of selling nuclear secrets to Libya and Iran and dismissed the report.

He told the Telegraph that neither Saudi Arabia or Pakistan had anything to gain by such a deal.

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah said in 2009 that his country would move to obtain nuclear weapons if Iran built its own arsenal.

Pakistan declared itself a nuclear state in 1998 and has never signed up for non-proliferation agreements.

Saudi Arabia has been “generous” to Pakistan’s defence sector for years, the BBC says.

Because we really need more countries in the M.E. to have WMDs.

 

[blacktriangle]

Great. My favourite country!

 

[pbi]

They're looking for nuclear weapons....?

Oh, no. 

Where did they put them?

 

[CougarKing]

Please note what was discussed about the Saudis in this other related, thread below in the International Security/Current Events section of this forum:

"US official says Saudi Arabia poised to make shift major shift in relations AWAY from US"

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It does mean the Saudi's will have to pay to keep them maintained in working order and it's anyone's guess that the people they pay will do that. The Saudi's won't mind as long as they have the ability to make people believe they have the threat. This is all to do with countering Iran's regional power threat. the chattering class will blame Israel, but you will note that Saudi never felt the need to go down this road over the last 20 years when they where quite aware of Israel abilities. The difference is that Israel is not interested in challenging directly anyone in the region unless they are stomping on Israel directly.

 

[pbi]

...This is all to do with countering Iran's regional power threat. the chattering class will blame Israel, but you will note that Saudi never felt the need to go down this road over the last 20 years when they where quite aware of Israel abilities...

Interesting take, and one that many would miss.

I wonder if the Shia/Sunni thing will be sufficient (if combined with regional power aspirations), to kick up a serious regional war (almost like an Arab Civil War). By this I mean an interstate war that will go beyond the proxy "factional" fighting we've seen in Syria.

 

[Teflon]

One would think they would do regular verifications on things like that, you know, just to keep a grip on them!  ;D

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Interesting take, and one that many would miss.

I wonder if the Shia/Sunni thing will be sufficient (if combined with regional power aspirations), to kick up a serious regional war (almost like an Arab Civil War). By this I mean an interstate war that will go beyond the proxy "factional" fighting we've seen in Syria.

The west I think completely underestimates the depth of the hatred that exists between the two beliefs. I have no doubt that there are nutbars on both sides that feel flinging nukes is the only way to cleanse the earth of the Kufrul-'Inaad. Thankfully there are pragmatics on both side that realize that nuclear war may interfere with enjoyment of their illgotten gains. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

Interesting take, and one that many would miss.

I wonder if the Shia/Sunni thing will be sufficient (if combined with regional power aspirations), to kick up a serious regional war (almost like an Arab Civil War). By this I mean an interstate war that will go beyond the proxy "factional" fighting we've seen in Syria.

Just like 1618 ...  ;D

 

[a_majoor]

So now Iran may have to adjust its nuclear ambitions to deal with nuclear threats from Israel, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, as well as the United States...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect Iran is better organized for the long term effect of a nuclear standoff. From what I see, nuke armed nations move to proxy wars to avoid direct conflict with their nuke armed enemy as direct conflict risks are to high. Iran having nukes of any type basically negates the invasion threat, which is the lesson they learned from the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Nukes at the tactical level are also a threat to domestic populations, Iran as I recall has only a 51% Persian population with Restive Kurds and Balach in the North and South respectively. If things went south quickly the threat of a small nuke on a town might be taken at face value by the locals. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

I suspect Iran is better organized for the long term effect of a nuclear standoff. From what I see, nuke armed nations move to proxy wars to avoid direct conflict with their nuke armed enemy as direct conflict risks are to high. Iran having nukes of any type basically negates the invasion threat, which is the lesson they learned from the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Nukes at the tactical level are also a threat to domestic populations, Iran as I recall has only a 51% Persian population with Restive Kurds and Balach in the North and South respectively. If things went south quickly the threat of a small nuke on a town might be taken at face value by the locals.

There is also an argument that widespread nuclear armaments would have a civilizing effect ~ its the same as the argument for allowing everyone to carry concealed weapons. When Iran is a nuclear state then it will deal with its neighbours on a different basis, so the theory goes, a more civil basis because the military stakes just got a lot higher. If Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and a handful of other Middle Eastern states are all nuclear powers then tensions in the region might arguably, lessen as they all have to act in a more responsible fashion.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I see more of a Indian-Pakistani situation forming. With Iraq and Syria filling in for the Kashmir.