Sound the Alarm

How to stop Burma from getting nukes.

BY CATHERINE COLLINS | JULY 24, 2009

When senior Chinese officials arrive in Washington on Monday for bilateral talks on strategy and the economy, they will find a new item near the top of the agenda: U.S. concerns that North Korea is supplying nuclear weapons technology to Burma. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned of this possibility speaking at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations forum this week in Thailand -- a threat she said the United States takes "very seriously." So seriously, in fact, that Clinton will raise the topic when she meets with her Chinese counterpart, State Councilor Dai Bingguo, on Monday, according to officials at the State Department and in Congress. As one official involved in preparations told me, "Burma is very much on the agenda."

The evidence of malfeasance so far is slight: a North Korean ship bound for Burma that turned back when shadowed by the U.S. Navy, photos of tunnels being excavated near the new Burmese capital, and a handful of suspicious export cases. But the motive is there, a government official who monitors the country told me. "Burma's leaders are paranoid and it makes sense that they might look for security in a nuclear weapon," he said. And if the history of proliferation teaches us anything, it is that the best way to stop a covert nuclear program is by ringing the alarm bells early and often.

Indeed, the early stages of what might be Burmese nuclear attempts look eerily familiar. The first leaks about Israel's nuclear program in the late 1950s, which involved several dubious explanations for a suspicious construction site in the desert, were ignored -- and Israel eventually developed the bomb. The same story held true for both India and Pakistan, where results might have been different had the international community reacted to suspicious procurement activities. Then, of course, there is Iran, where the desire for a nuclear weapon dates back to the mid-70s and now it may be too late to stop them. Signs that the present rulers of Iran were buying nuclear technology on the black market in the late 1980s were dismissed because U.S. intelligence thought a bomb was beyond Iran's capabilities.

Related

China's Black Cat, White Cat Diplomacy
Why Beijing is losing patience with its dysfunctional allies.
By Wen Liao

Today in Burma, some of the basic elements for a nuclear program are, in fact, already in place. After several years of discussions, Russia signed a deal in 2007 to provide Burma with a light-water nuclear reactor, facilities for processing and storing nuclear waste, and training for 300 to 350 Burmese scientists set to work there. While the proposed reactor is not suitable for a weapons program, the deal is still a foot in the nuclear door for one of the world's most repressive and reclusive regimes. Rosatom, Russia atomic agency, told the Associated Press recently that there has been no progress on the deal.

But it's Burma's relationship with North Korea that is causing heartburn now. North Korea has been selling conventional weapons like artillery and small arms to Burma for years; the Burmese tend to pay in badly needed rice. But worries that the relationship moved into the nuclear arena surfaced two years ago after North Koreans were spotted unloading large crates and heavy construction equipment near the site for the planned Russian reactor. Concerns increased in June when photographs and videos appeared in the press showing that North Korean helped dig hundreds of vast tunnels in Burma between 2003 and 2006, in an operation codenamed "Tortoise Shells." The purpose of the tunnels, which were built outside the new Burmese capital of Nay Pyi Taw, remains unknown.

It all might seem like thin gruel for accusing the two countries of embarking on a nuclear weapons program, no matter how obliquely Clinton leveled the charge. And there is very little chance that Burma is anywhere near having the bomb. But if these tiny clues add up to nuclear ambitions, there is indeed cause for alarm -- not least because the world is simply not well-organized to contain nuclear weapons. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty provides no punishment for signatories who are caught, and U.N. resolutions do not carry sufficient force to deter would-be proliferators. Iran is Exhibit A for the failure of the NPT and U.N. sanctions. The International Atomic Energy Agency? It's hardly equipped to deal with smuggling activities and procurement networks. Smuggling by Pakistan's rogue scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, eluded the IAEA for nearly three decades, during which time he helped his own country, North Korea, Iran, and Libya all obtain nuclear material.

LAW EH SOE/AFP/Getty Images

 

Cathy Collins is coauthor of The Man from Pakistan: The True Story of the World's Most Dangerous Nuclear Smuggler (forthcoming in paperback).

Facebook|Twitter|Digg

SALAI

6:08 AM ET

July 25, 2009

Isolating Burma is not good

the more the West isolates Burma, my motherland, the more counterproductive the West will encounter. U.S sanctions have forced hundreds and thousands of Burmese girls into prostitution. it will continue. and the U.S did not succeed anyway. we innocent suffer too much. Engaging with the Burmese regime unconditionally is a must Obama administration should carry out. Now is the right time U.S should stop punishing Burmese people, esp young ones, instead U.S should invite young people to pursue education in U.S schools, also investment be encouraged without conditions. this way you can influence Burmese generals.

 

WARKILLSCHILDREN

10:06 AM ET

July 28, 2009

Isolating Burma

Isolation does not work. Look what happened in Iraq. Thousands of children died from inhumane sanctions and later the Gulf War began the destruction of a once beautiful country, with an incredible museum that finally was looted when Bush, Jr., attacked in another mistake like the one on Vietnam that killed over 60,000 of our own and thousands more Vietnamese. A war that Robert McNamara initiated and supported and later said was a "mistake." So far the Iraq war has cost Americans 3 trillion dollars, thousands of Iraqi lives and ours, thousands more horribly injured. For some reason that fact is not mentioned in the economic meltdown we experienced last year. How could it not effect all of us? Our guys are still suffering from the use of the chemical weapon, Agent Orange!

Inhumane sanctions only punish the innocent people, mainly the women, elderly and the children. Obama's idea when campaigning was diplomacy over bombs. He was right. The cowboy rhetoric and bombing by the former ARMCHAIR WARRIORS sending other to die was not the policy of Obama. Let's hope he sticks with that with regard to Burma as well as Iran.

 

ADAM ONGE

11:23 PM ET

August 1, 2009

String of Pearls

I don't believe that the burmese military junta already is capable of producing bomb-grade plutonium yet, but I believe they are getting help from both the russians and the north koreans to achieve that goal within the next 5 years or so. They still have to make a bomb after that, but that's the simpler task. Burma does possess uranium ore (in Shan State for example). We all know by now that the north koreans were helping the junta dig a lot of huge tunnel complexes. Now we know why! To avoid detection by US military satellites. (they might build a smaller reactor above ground as a decoy)
I believe it is ironic that the policy of the West (USA, UK and EU) to isolate Burma and impose sanctions is one of the reasons that Burma has turned to countries like China, Russia and North Korea for "help". The major problem is actually China. Burma is becoming a Chinese "protectorate". and the junta is countering that with Russia and North Korea. The Chinese economy needs natural resources. They are building a gas pipeline across Burma and port facilities on the West coast of Burma. (Maung Aye, the 2nd in command, just came back from China). The Chinese have a strategic military interest in controlling access to the Bay of Bengal. They have a strategy called the "string of pearls". To achieve these goals they use their veto power in the UN security council and supply most of the weapons that the Burmese military needs. Without the support of China, the military junta could never have survived this long. It is also obvious, to anyone who would do some simple research, that Singapore (where the Burmese Generals have their bank accounts) and Thailand are also heavily involved in doing "business" with the junta. Whatever the US tries to do with "the axis of evil" (Burma, Iran, North Korea etc.), it doesn't carry full credibility because of it's totally hypocritical policy towards China (money talks!) It doesn't dare to really "annoy" China, whose human rights record in the last 50 years is not much better than in Burma.

 
January/February 2010