U.S. CLASH LOOMS ON AID TO PAKISTAN

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00965R000705970005-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 12, 2011
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: March 15, 1987
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/12 : CIA-RDP90-00965R000705970005-2
01`7 PAGE
NEW YORK TIMES
15 March 1987
U.S. Clash Looms on Aid to Pakistan
?i By ELAINE SCIOLINO
Spwiw to TM New York Times
WASHINGTON, March 14 - The
Reagan Administration and Congress
are poised for a fight over aid to Paki-
stan because of its work on developing
a nuclear bomb, Administration and
Congressional sources said today.
The battle lines are being drawn fol-
lowing the Administration's formal re-
quest last week to give Pakistan a six-
year exemption from a provision that
bans American aid to any country that
does not allow international inspection
of Its nuclear installations. The provi-
sion also requires the President to cer-
tify that he has received "reliable as-
surances that the country in question
will not acquire or develop nuclear
weapons."
The subject is particularly sensitive
because negotiations between Pakistan
and Afghanistan on a solution for the
Afghan war are at a delicate point. In
the recent round of United Nations-
sponsored talks in Geneva, the two
sides moved closer on a timetable for a
withdrawal of the 115,000 Soviet troops,
with the Soviet-backed Afghan Govern-
ment offering a faster withdrawal, to
be completed within 18 months, and
Pakistan offering to accept a with-
drawal over six or seven months in-
stead of four, according to sources
familiar with the talks.
Aid Cutoff Had No Effect
There is also a fear in Washington
that because of increasing public pres-
sure in Pakistan to help end the Afghan
war, Pakistan might tire of its commit-
ment to aiding the Islamic guerrillas
and move to make peace with Moscow.
Aid to Pakistan was cut off by the
Carter Administration in 1979 because
of Pakistan's refusal to permit interna-
tional inspection of its nuclear installa-
tions. The American offer to send small
amounts of aid after Soviet troops
moved into Afghanistan in December
of that year was rejected by Pakistan's
President, Mohammed Zia ul-Haq, as
"peanuts." Aid resumed when Presi-
dent Reagan in 1981 waived the Amer-
ican law barring such aid.
Because Administration officials and
independent nuclear experts believe
that Pakistan manufactured weapons-
grade uranium for the first time last
year, this year's aid request forces the
Administration and Congress to choose i
between American policy against the
spread of nculear weapons and the
most popular aspect of the Reagan doc-
trine - support for the anti-Commu-
nist Afghan rebels, in which Pakistani
cooperation is crucial.
The request to renew the waiver is
contained in the draft foreign aid bill
presented to Congress for the fiscal
year 1988, which asks for $4 billion in
economic and military aid for Pakistan
over the next six years. A State Depart-
ment analysis of the bill states that it is
"in the national interests of the United
States to continue assistance to Paki-
stan, now confronted with Soviet mili-
tary pressures."
Nowhere does the analysis mention
the problem of Pakistan's nuclear abil-
ity.
Tired of Lies, Senator Says
In testimony before the House For-
eign Affairs subcommittee on Asia last
week, Leonard S. Spector, a nuclear
proliferation expert at the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace,
said that in six years, "Pakistan could
possess a de facto nuclear arsenal of
nearly 20 devices."
Senator Alan Cranston, Democrat of
California and a frequent critic of Paki-
stan, is planning to introduce legisla-
tion in the Senate this month that would
call for a 50 percent cut in military
assistance to Pakistan and limit waiv-
ing assurances against building nu-
clear weapons to two years. A parallel
amendment is expected to be intro-
duced in the House.
"Quite frankly, we're tired of the Pa-
kistani leadership looking us in the eye
and lying to us repeatedly," Mr. Cran-
ston said.
Pakistan has consistently denied
that its nuclear program is designed
for military purposes. But Administra-
tion intelligence analysts say they be
lieve that Pakistan now has virtually
the same ability as Israel to assemble
a nuclear device within- weeks.
se analysts say the remarks re-
cently attributed to the head of Paki-
stan's nuclear research program,
Abdul Qadeer Khan, asserting that
Pakistan already had developed a nu-
clear device, conform to what they be-
lieve is true. Mr. Khan later denied
making the remarks.
The analysts also note that last year
a number of Administration officials
asserted to Congress that Pakistan
was not on the brink of developing a nu-
clear weapon; this year, no one is say-
ing that is the case.
Indeed, in testimony before the
House Foreign Affairs subcommittee
on Asia last week, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State Robert Peck ac-
knowledged that the United States
could no longer obtain "reliable assur-
ances" from Pakistan that it has
stopped producing nuclear explosive
materials.
But many members of Congress say
they are reluctant to punish the Paki-
stanis too harshly because of their un-
wavering cooperation in tunneling
American aid to guerrillas in Afghani-
stan and their acceptance of three mil-
lion Afghan refugees.
Few in Congress support a proposal
by Senator John Glenn, an Ohio Demo-
crat and a leading opponent of the
spread of nuclear weapons, that would
suspend all military aid to Pakistan un-
less it offered convincing proof that it
was not seeking to make nuclear weap-
ons.
They also fear that such a suspension
would provoke Pakistan to test a nu-
clear device. "Pakistan would test a
nuclear device, which would lead to
India testing an even larger nuclear de-
vice, which would lead to an overt nu-
clear arms race on the subcontinent,"
said Stephen J. Solarz, Democrat of
Brooklyn and chairman of the House
Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Asia.
Administration officials insist that
they will press for a six-year commit-
ment. "We're standing firm on the six-
year waiver," said one official.
"There's going to be a struggle."
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/12/12 : CIA-RDP90-00965R000705970005-2