Paper
George Perkovich
{
"authors": [
"George Perkovich"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"Pakistan"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Nuclear Security in Pakistan: Issues and Implications
Tensions between the United States and Pakistan over the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal are fueled by Islamabad’s perception of close U.S. ties to India and by Washington’s fear of internal disarray in Pakistan.
Published on Feb 23, 2011
According to the Pakistani press, U.S. interest in Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and the security of its fissile materials appears to be guided by self-interest rather than concern for Pakistan’s welfare, said Carnegie’s George Perkovich, speaking at a panel co-sponsored by the Hudson Institute, the Partnership for a Secure America, and the Stanley Foundation. He was joined by Harvard’s Matthew Bunn, and Aparna Pande of the Hudson Institute. Perkovich argued that U.S. efforts to assist Pakistan with nuclear security are perceived in Pakistan as disingenuous. He explained that this view is magnified by concern over close U.S.-India ties and a fear that greater U.S. assistance in Pakistan’s nuclear complex would give the United States access to sensitive details, which could then be exploited or shared with India.
Tensions with India remain at the forefront of Pakistan’s nuclear debates, Perkovich said. There is always the possibility that a crisis could escalate to nuclear exchange. The United States bent international nonproliferation rules to elevate India over the last five years, including selling New Delhi conventional weapons and passing the U.S.-India peaceful nuclear cooperation deal. Accordingly, many in Pakistan are skeptical of the United States and feel that Washington has strongly aligned itself with India.
U.S. humanitarian assistance to Pakistan following the earthquake and the flood were greatly beneficial in demonstrating Washington’s concern for Pakistan and easing bilateral relations. Official comments in support of Pakistan have helped ease tensions and demonstrated good will, Perkovich said.
While many in the United States are concerned that terrorists could acquire Pakistani fissile material, a far greater concern is actually the potential collapse of the Pakistani state, Perkovich said. Pakistan’s army is one of the country’s strongest institutions and it maintains control over the country’s arsenal. The army has a real incentive to prevent other parties from acquiring Pakistan’s weapons, nuclear knowledge, or fissile materials. As a result, the greater threat may be internal problems within Pakistan, Perkovich said. Pakistan is plagued by a number of considerable internal problems, including an army insurgency in Balochistan, Sunni-Shi’i tensions, government corruption, and economic woes.
About the Author
George Perkovich
Japan Chair for a World Without Nuclear Weapons, Senior Fellow
George Perkovich is the Japan Chair for a World Without Nuclear Weapons and a senior fellow in the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Nuclear Policy Program. He works primarily on nuclear deterrence, nonproliferation, and disarmament issues, and is leading a study on nuclear signaling in the 21st century.
- How to Assess Nuclear ‘Threats’ in the Twenty-First Century
- “A House of Dynamite” Shows Why No Leader Should Have a Nuclear TriggerCommentary
George Perkovich
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear DealCommentary
Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.
Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton
- Demystifying the Nuclear ThresholdPaper
The nuclear weapons threshold is increasingly important for proliferation strategy and policy. Policymakers should better understand the implications of the threshold phenomenon in the current international security environment and plausible strategies to deal with the growing challenge that it presents.
Ariel (Eli) Levite, Toby Dalton
- Nuclear Weapons and the Future of American PowerPaper
It seems likely that, no matter what, the power of the U.S. nuclear arsenal will face erosion, not least in the credibility of its commitments to defend allies and the political durability of those alliances.
James M. Acton, Ankit Panda
- President Lee Jae Myung: A Year in PowerCommentary
President Lee marked his first year in office after one of the most tumultuous periods in South Korean politics. Though Lee has enjoyed a high approval rating, a large majority in the National Assembly, and foreign policy victories, Lee and his party’s political fortunes depend on generating economic growth, learning the right lessons from the recent local elections, and managing contentious factional strife within his political base.
Chung Min Lee
- The Latest Iran Deal Ignores the Lessons of the PastCommentary
By burying disagreements in imprecision, the new deal risks same fate as its predecessors.
James M. Acton
