Aziz Al Ateeqi

Mustafa Malaki

Affirmative Debate Plan:

Nuclear Pakistan

Links to other sites on the Web

Back to the Debate Page
Back to the Year 2001 Debate Team Page
Back to the KDL Page

Resolved: The United States Government should substantially change its foreign policy towards South Asia

First of all, allow me to define the terms of the resolved…

- United: joined together, made or become one; acting together, cooperating;

- State: political community under one government or forming part of a federation; civil government;

- United States: country made up of the North American area extending from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean between Canada and Mexico;

- Government: a group or organization governing a country;

- should: auxiliary verb used to express duty or obligation;

- substantially: considerably;

- change: adjust, amend;

- foreign policy: course or general plan of action adopted by a person, organization, or country dealing with a country that is not one’s own;

- towards: in relation to;

- South Asia: a region of Asia that includes the following countries/states: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Nepal, and Bhutan.

The current policy of the Government of the United States of America towards the region of South Asia is full of flaws and represents a large loophole in US foreign policy. The United States foreign policy changed drastically with the end of the Cold War, and such a change was noticed in its relations with Pakistan. Today, relations are not as strong as before. With the military coup and numerous human rights violations in Pakistan, the US faces a new challenge in reducing or eliminating the nuclear arms race. Therefore, the status quo is inconsistent with the trend of US policies regarding other regions and countries of the world.

Harm #1:

The government of Pakistan poses a serious nuclear threat to the region as a whole, and possesses the technology of manufacturing nuclear weapons.

Evidence #1:

a) "Pakistan is believed to possess enough weapons-grade uranium for about 15 to 25 nuclear bombs", Leonard Spector and Mark McDonough with Evan Medeiros, Tracking Nuclear Proliferation (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1995), p. 97.

b) "As part of a longer term nuclear build-up, Pakistan will soon begin operation of its 40 to 50 megawatt plutonium production reactor at Khusab that has been completed"

c) "Once Pakistan begins operating the reactor, approximately 10 to 14 kilograms of plutonium could be produced each year, enough for two to three bombs."

Source: The Nonproliferation Review; Spring-Summer 1997, volume 4, number 3; Monterey Institute of Int. Studies

d) "Images of the circular Khushab site showed a heavy water research reactor with the ability to produce enough plutonium for up to five bombs a year."

"Pakistan’s Nuclear Strength Revealed"; Rory McCarthy; The Guardian, (London); March 16th, 2000.

e) "The inventory ranges between seven and fifteen weapons, at least some of which are deliverable by airdrop from C-130 or F-16 aircraft."

"Pakistan: Military Production"; www.

f) "In [1999], Pakistan spent about five percent of its $61 billion GDP on defense."

"Pakistan & Terrorism"; B. Raman, South Asian Analysis Group .

Harm #2:

The United States’ policy towards Pakistan fails to deter the Pakistani government and General Pervez Musharraf from supporting and financing Islamic Jihad military training centers in Pakistan and the state of Punjab in particular.

Evidence #2:

a) The situation is dangerous for officials in Pakistan: "Killers equipped with sophisticated assault rifles raided the house of a key lawyer for deposed Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in Karachi today and killed the lawyer and two other persons, official sources said."

"Sharif’s Lawyer Gunned Down in Karachi"; Calcutta-on-Net Newspaper; Friday March 10th, 2000;

b) "[In] Islamabad, certain madrasses, or ‘religious schools’, actually serve as conduits for terrorism."

Patterns of Global Terrorism 1999 of the US State Department website

c) "In November four US employees of Union Texas Petroleum and their Pakistani driver were murdered in Karachi when the vehicle in which they were traveling was attacked 1 mile from the US Consulate in Karachi".

d) "Deadly incidents of sectarian violence, particularly in Punjab Province, surged in 1997. According to press reports, 200 people died during the year. In addition, five Iranian Air Force technicians were killed in September in Rawalpindi. Lashkar i-Jhangvi, a violent offshoot of the anti-Shiite Sunni group Sipah i Shahaba Pakistan, claimed responsibility."



e) "According to press reports, more than 900 persons were killed in Karachi from January to September, 1998, the majority by acts of domestic terrorism."

f) "At a press conference held in Islamabad in November, former Harakat ul-Ansar and current Harakat ul-Mujahidi, (HUM), leader Fazlur Rehman Khalil reportedly vowed: ‘We will kill one hundred Americans for one Muslim’ Other Kashmiri and domestic Pakistani sectarian groups also threatened to target US interests".

g) "Kashmiri militant groups continued to operate in Pakistan, however, raising funds and recruiting new cadre. These activities created a fertile ground for the operations of militant and terrorist groups in Pakistan, including the HUA and its successor organization, the HUM."


Harm #3:

The United States’ policy towards Pakistan has led to economic recession of Pakistan’s economic status.

Evidence #3:

1- "The worst of the tension seemed to have passed - until Nawaz inexplicably moved against Musharraf…The White House canceled a $1.7 million health program, operated by private organizations."

"Another Country on the Brink"; Newsweek Magazine; October 25th, 1999.

2- The budget deficit in FY 1996-97 was 6.4%, reduced to 5.4% in 1997-98, and reduced further to 4.3% in 1998-99, but revised data indicates that the deficit is now probably over 5.0%. (Note that this article has been published in 2000, after the coup, so the deficit increased from 4.3% to 5.0% from FY 98-99 to FY 99-00)

3- "The October 1999 overthrow of the democratically elected Sharif government triggered an additional layer of sanctions under Section 508 of the Foreign Appropriations Act, which includes restrictions on foreign military financing and economic assistance. Presently, the US government’s assistance to Pakistan is limited to refugee and counter-narcotics assistance."

Background Notes: Pakistan; US Department of State March 2000; Bureau of South Asian Affairs;

Harm #4:

The United States’ policy towards Pakistan heightens tensions amongst countries in the region due to the increase of Pakistan’s importation – from China – and manufacture of various forms of weapons and arms.

Evidence #4:

1- "China is the brains behind Pakistan’s instant ripostes to Indian nuclear and missile tests."

2- "Most irksome has been China’s alliance with Pakistan, which gave Pakistan a nuclear capability and China a way of dividing India's energies."

"The Most Dangerous Place on Earth"; Economist Magazine; May 22nd, 1999.

3- "China and Pakistan vowed on Tuesday to strengthen their strategic and military partnership as General Pervez Musharraf wrapped up his two-day visit with firm support for his government. Chinese President Jiang Zemin told Musharraf in talks on Tuesday that China wanted to develop further the ‘strong relationship’ between the two states, official radio reported."

"China hopes Pakistan will maintain stability: Stronger strategic partnership pledged"; the Dawn Group of Newspapers online; January 19th, 2000.

4- "The recent US intelligence reports suggest that, despite Chinese pledges to the contrary, it has continued to provide Pakistan with specialty steels, guidance systems and technical expertise in the latter's effort to develop long-range ballistic missiles."

"China's Missile Exports and Assistance to Pakistan"; Center for Non-proliferation Studies website; December 1999.

5- "China today offered the much-needed backing to Pakistan’s military government, declaring that it would continue to foster its ‘comprehensive partnership’ with Islamabad, irrespective of changes taking place internationally or domestically."

"China is believed to have been providing assistance to the Khusab reactor as well as an adjoining, unidentified nuclear facility and a plutonium separation plant at Chasma."

"China’s support to Pakistan Regime"; The Hindu newspaper; January 17th, 2000.


Need #1:

The US needs a system that would neutralize the Pakistani nuclear threat.

Need #2:

The US needs a system that would halt the practices of supporting, re-opening, and/or establishing military training centers for the Islamic Jihad militants in Pakistan.

Need #3:

The US needs a system that would get Pakistan back on the track of economic progress.

Need #4:

The US needs a system that would prevent any further accumulation/amassment of chemical and biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction, in addition to nuclear-fission materials and devices, in Pakistan.


Plank #1:

The United States of America will pass a bill in Congress approving of a defense/protection treaty to be signed between the United States and Pakistan for a period of 50 years.

Plank #2:

Under this treaty, the United States will:

One) Deploy and station its navy in the regional waters of Pakistan

Details: 4 naval vessels will be stationed on the Southern coast of Pakistan located in the regional waters of Pakistan. Naval forces will compose of 5,000 naval personnel and 40 officers both evenly divided between the four.

Two) Station troops on the border of Pakistan and India

Details: US Troops of 10,000 soldiers will be stationed on the border of Pakistan and India, (which is empty desert), to protect Pakistan from any Indian attack.

c) The United States will remove all economic sanctions against Pakistan.

d) The United States Congress will send nuclear experts to oversee the operations of all Pakistani reactors.

Details: 75 peace-time nuclear experts will be sent into Pakistan , (5 to each of the fifteen nuclear facilities in Pakistan), to aid, assist, and train the Pakistani officials on how to use their nuclear facilities for peaceful purposes such the generation of electricity and various forms of energy. Their supervision of processes carried out in these nuclear facilities will span a period of five years.

Plank #3:

In return, Pakistan is obliged to:

i) Place ALL of its nuclear weapons, devices, and fissionable materials under the control of the U.S. navy until the expiry of the treaty.

ii) Take all measures to prevent any terrorist acts against American officials or personnel while in Pakistan.

iii) Close all madrasses and arrest those suspect of terrorist acts.

Plank #4:

After the above treaty has been ratified, the United States will continue to provide aid in the form of loans to Pakistan. The US will pass a bill Congress issuing a 8% tariff on Pakistani imports.


Details #2:

The US will provide Pakistan with $1.015 billion each year for a period of ten years. This is the amount of money the US originally loaned to Pakistan before the sanctions. Pakistan will repay the loans with 2% interest on each loan. Pakistan will be required to start paying back each loan with the interest as of the passing of ten years of the issue of each loan. Also, free trade between both countries will resume as was the case before the sanctions were imposed in 1990.

Plank #4:

If the government of Pakistan does not abide by any terms of this treaty, the US reserves the right to confiscate all nuclear weapons and claim ownership of them permanently.


The funding for carrying out this plan for one year would cost a total amount of around $1,065,000,000 billion. Loans that the United States would have to pay would add up to $1.015 billion. $45 million will be used to fund the military operations. $5 million will be used for the accomodation and stay of nuclear experts in Pakistan. These figures are based on similar UN operations from the Global Agenda 1999-2000. Our source of funding would come from 8% tariff on Pakistani goods imported into the US, that is 8% of $7.7 billion dollars, which equals 620,000,000. The rest will be extracted from the US frozen assets of other countries such as Iran since the US can use them at any time. Leaving these assets unused for 21 years would be way too much.


b) A Global Agenda: Issues Before the 54th General Assembly; 1999-2000 Edition; Tessitore, John and Woolfson, Susan; Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.; 1999: New York.


This plan is significant for the following reasons:

With such a treaty, the United States gets to place its navy in another strategic region of the world. Furthermore, it will take control of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. This gives the US one less country that would be a nuclear threat to the United States. Also, India would not dare attack Pakistan or the US since Americans are ready to strike back. China would also be confined as it would now be surrounded by three regions full of American navy. Thus, America will be under less threat of

any Chinese possible attack.

The US loans to Pakistan total a sum of $1.015 billion a year before 1990. each loan will be repaid with 2% interest per loan, therefore, after ten years, Pakistan would have to pay $10.353 billion. On top of that, the US will gain 784 million/year because of its exports to Pakistan. The United States will also be placing an 8 % tariff on the Pakistani goods imported into the US from Pakistan by US businessmen and firms. This would approximately amount to 620,000,000 per year. Therefore, the total US gain would be approximately $11.8 billion, which constitutes about about 4.7 % of the US military budget ($255 billion). Since this is about 5%, our plan is significant.

This plan is also significant because it promotes further cooperation between both countries. The US would have a strong ally in that strategic region. Also, democracy will be promoted. This will be consistent with US foreign policy and reputation, and is even better for the Pakistani people.


Working Models:

a) A very obvious working model is Japan. Japan has allowed the United States to stations its navy and troops in its waters for defense purposes. Although it does not possess nuclear weapons, it has formed an iron-clad treaty with the United States regarding mutual defense. South Korea is also a similar working model in which the United States navy protects it against any threat by the North Korean nuclear weapons. Both the South Koreans and Americans have benefited from their defense treaty.

b) Another working model is Myanmar. Although the military government is in power, it has held public and secret talks with the opposition party of the country. This is a very big step towards democracy