You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
CIA fears Syria could go nuclear
2004-07-07
INVESTIGATORS tracking the spread of nuclear technology and know-how through the clandestine sales network of the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan believe that Syria might have acquired centrifuges that can purify uranium for use in nuclear bombs. Khan, the so-called father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, is known to have helped Iran, Libya and North Korea to acquire centrifuges and other nuclear components on the black market, but American intelligence sources believe his net was cast wider. A hero in his own country, Khan was sacked as President Pervez Musharraf’s special scientific adviser this year after admitting that he had passed on nuclear secrets to other countries.

John Bolton, the US undersecretary of state for arms control, has voiced fears that Khan had “several other” customers seeking to acquire the bomb. “There is more out there than we can discuss publicly,” he told the United Nations in April. “It’s one of the reasons why the depth of our concern about the international black market in weapons of mass destruction is as substantial as it is.” Danielle Pletka, an expert on Middle Eastern nuclear proliferation at the American Enterprise Institute, said: “There’s very wide suspicion that Syria was part of the A Q Khan network.” The scientist visited Syria in the late 1990s and is thought to have met Syrian officials secretly in Iran. Pletka claims the scientist cut a deal with Musharraf, limiting his confession to the three countries that were already proven to be part of his nuclear sales ring while avoiding mention of three other interested parties: Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
I figured as much.
“The Syrians have long had a chemical weapons programme but to the best of people’s knowledge never had a nuclear programme, but there is mounting evidence that this is no longer the case,” Pletka said. The CIA reported to Congress last year that it viewed “Syrian nuclear intentions with growing concern”. Recent intelligence intercepts suggest that Syria not only might have acquired centrifuges, but might be operating them. Opinion is divided in the intelligence community as to the extent of the threat. The American State Department said: “The United States government has consistently outlined our concerns with regard to Syria’s pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. We are very interested to learn the scope of the A Q Khan network, but we are not in a position to say with certainty that Syria has centrifuges.” Bolton has been frustrated by limited co-operation from Khan and his associates. “If part of that network is exposed, you don’t really know whether you’ve exposed all of it or not, or brought it down,” he said earlier this year.
The Paks won't let us question Khan directly, and the Malayians have kept a tight lid over Tahir, so far.
Tensions with Syria have been ratcheted up by the conflict in Iraq. There are concerns that the Syrians are letting fighters, terrorists and weapons cross its borders and the prospect, however distant, of a nuclear-armed Ba’athist state is particularly chilling to Americans. The acquisition of centrifuges would be an important step towards obtaining the weapons-grade material needed to develop a nuclear bomb. “It’s no secret the Syrians have historically sought an answer to Israel’s overwhelming conventional superiority and have an active biological and chemical weapons programme,” said Steven Cook, of the Council on Foreign Relations. “If they could acquire a nuclear option it would shift the strategic situation in the region.” Cook doubts, however, that Syria has the capacity and infrastructure to produce a nuclear bomb, even if it has acquired some of the technology. “They’d still be looking to buy missiles,” he said.
Earth to Steve, Syria builds Scuds, that's all they need to hit Israel.
President George Bush imposed trade sanctions on Syria last month, claiming that its actions posed an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy” of America. He accused Syria of pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missiles, in particular advanced chemical weapons capabilities.
Posted by:Mark Espinola

#14  dang, zenster...took the words right off of my keyboard.

;)
Posted by: anymouse   2004-07-07 9:21:45 PM  

#13  Damascus might go nuclear, but only as a target not as a power.

That would be my call as well, RWV.
Posted by: Zenster   2004-07-07 6:38:42 PM  

#12  Damascus might go nuclear, but only as a target not as a power. I suspect that one or two of the ambiguous weapons in the bunkers at Dimona have Assad's name on them. He pushes too hard and they'll be delivered.
Posted by: RWV   2004-07-07 5:46:59 PM  

#11   earthquake-damping?

Is it avaialble in pill form?
Posted by: Tappy Toe Wiley   2004-07-07 4:55:31 PM  

#10  Sucker'd go thataway, in a hurry.
Simple way to correct that would be to build a double barreled gun, fire a equal mass in opposite direction. One down to your target on earth, one into empty space to cancel each other out. Similar to a recoiless rifle.
Posted by: Steve   2004-07-07 4:30:30 PM  

#9  mojo - When I saw the post, I recalled seeing a piece way back when in Defense Weekly about a system that would counter the shot reaction - similar to earthquake-damping. IIRC it indicated that in the vacuum, sitting at a LaGrange point, they could precisely calculate the damping req'd to maintain station. Hey, I dunno if they were right. The subscription wasn't mine, damnit, long gone. It was preceeded, IIRC, a couple of months earlier by some incredible super-slow motion shots of a proto-rail gun firing a piece of plastic, looked like a Bic pen cap, hitting a block of pig iron 2.5 inches thick at approx 2.5 km/sec. Liquified the iron and the plastic projectile wasn't even singed. Biggest eye-opener in memory for me - and the materials crowd, too, as they suddenly discovered some new behaviors when materials were stuck by hyper-speed shock waves, heh.
Posted by: .com   2004-07-07 4:20:38 PM  

#8  .c - "Re: rail gun - Earth or orbit based?"

Earth. Firing heavy projectiles at high velocities is no way to stay in orbit. Sucker'd go thataway, in a hurry.
Posted by: mojo   2004-07-07 3:57:30 PM  

#7  I'ma 11 again!
Posted by: Shipman   2004-07-07 3:52:27 PM  

#6  MMmmmm, now that's an Eden I could live in ;-)~
Posted by: Frank G   2004-07-07 11:16:35 AM  

#5  Ship - click the jeannie link - IIRC, you and Frank appreciated the Genie - and I just came across this one - best of the lot.

Re: rail gun - Earth or orbit based?
Posted by: .com   2004-07-07 11:09:35 AM  

#4  I sure as hell wouldn't put a chem warhead on a scud. The damn things go off just as often as they go up...
Posted by: mojo   2004-07-07 11:08:21 AM  

#3  Buckle Up and build more ABM systems.
And hey?
Wouldn't a railgun be a purdy fair ABM first layer?
Posted by: Shipman   2004-07-07 11:04:13 AM  

#2  JM - Amen, bro. Knowledge, especially in the age of the 'Net and our open society, can't be un-distributed or un-learned. Done deal.

Gonna hafta take the drastic road, now. Buckle up.
Posted by: .com   2004-07-07 10:50:08 AM  

#1  The world is definetly a much more dangerous place now than it was 20 years ago. The genie is out of the bottle, and the US is the only country with the stones to jam him back in. I have my doubts that we will though.
Posted by: JerseyMike   2004-07-07 10:28:28 AM  

00:00