Nothing could be more ill rewarding for the government of Pakistan than its friendship with the United States. Pakistan ditched the Taliban government in Afghanistan; arrested and handed over to the United States hundreds of so-called terrorists; hunted its own people and what not, to appease Washington.
But, in return, it was told 'that's not enough. Do more'. Not only that, its share of American assistance has been made conditional upon performance in the war on terror, as Washington completely overlooked Pakistan's interests while signing up a nuclear deal with India. If all this was not enough to short-change an old friend, a move seems to have been set afoot in the United States to prepare the ground for 'neutralising' Pakistan's nuclear programme.
A timely warning of the impending danger was sounded the other day by ex-ambassador Ghayoor Ahmad. According to him, Joseph R. Biden, chairman of the US Senate foreign relations committee, "has recently confirmed that President George W. Bush is consulting senior leaders on plans to neutralise Pakistan's nuclear capabilities if President Musharraf's regime collapses". "One cannot rule out this possibility altogether", he added.
The fear expressed by Ambassador Ghayoor Ahmad acquires a concrete form when seen in the backdrop provided by the findings of a joint survey recently conducted by the Foreign Policy magazine and the Centre for American Progress.
The opinions of 108 experts interviewed between May 23 and June 26 that constitute the basis of the survey, as widely reported in the media, are so heavily loaded against Pakistan that one would be left with no option but to concur with the ambassador.
After concluding that the United States should expect another 9/11 scale attack within the next decade, the survey reports that, according to the interviewed experts, Pakistan is most likely to be the next al Qaeda stronghold - even when compared with Iraq, Sudan, Somalia and Afghanistan.
As to which country is most likely to transfer nuclear technology to terrorists in the next three to five years, the survey puts Pakistan at the top (with 74 percent possibility), followed by North Korea (42 percent), Russia (38 percent) and Iran (31 percent).
Pakistan became a nuclear state not by choice but by the force of circumstances created by India. Pakistan started its peaceful nuclear programme in the 60's when in an ambience of 'atom for peace' international co-operation was available. But the 1974 Indian nuclear explosion dramatically changed the situation and Pakistan had to join the race.
Even then it was a reluctant nuclear player and worked tenaciously to make South Asia a nuclear free zone. Pakistan conducted its first nuclear tests only as tit-for-tat to India's in May 1998, followed by a moratorium on further testing signed both by India and Pakistan.
As a signatory to the Convention on Nuclear Safety, Pakistan is fully committed to the safety of its nuclear assets with the help of a well-defined Command and Control System which works under the National Command Authority.
The perception that Pakistan's nuclear assets can be taken over by terrorists is too simplistic and naive to be seriously debated, although the real issue that needs to be focused at is US's carte blanche to India under the guise of civilian nuclear co-operation agreement.
With ink on the agreement hardly dried, New Delhi has declared that it won't be bound by the non-testing clause. That is where the danger lies: if India violates the moratorium and conducts nuclear tests, Pakistan will follow suit. American experts need to look into these possibilities that can trigger a nuclear arms race in South Asia instead of stirring up controversies based on unsubstantiated allegations.