The release of a Pakistan nuclear smuggler from house arrest could raise new proliferation dangers despite government assurances that he would be closely monitored, a nuclear security expert said this week (see GSN, Feb. 10).
(Feb. 12) -
Abdul Qadeer Khan meets journalists last week after his release from house arrest (Aamir Qureshi/Getty Images).
A Pakistani court ruled last week that former scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan -- who once confessed to running an illicit international network that supplied nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea -- must be released after five years of house arrest. Officials in Islamabad promised that his communications would be monitored and his contacts and travel would be limited, but U.S. officials and others have expressed continuing concern.
"If Khan is feeling vindicative or feeling there is more money to be made, then he could actually try to activate some of the old relationships," said David Albright, head of the Institute for Science and International Security. It is unlikely that Khan could restore the full extent of his former operations, Albright said, but he might still have access to limited stocks of equipment, not to mention his extensive expertise (Jackie Northam, National Public Radio, Feb. 12).
U.S. State Department spokesman Robert Wood expressed similar concern about Pakistani monitoring efforts.
"We have to take them at their word. But, of course, we'll have to see what comes out ... see how things play out with regard to these assurances" (Lalit Jha, Press Trust of India, Feb. 10).
Another nuclear expert, however, said Khan's release represented more of a bad message than a proliferation threat.
"To me, the more damaging outcome was the symbolism," said Leonard Spector of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, "the fact that Pakistan did not stand by a tough nonproliferation commitment" (Northam, National Public Radio).
"I don't think it's a positive signal," agreed EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana. "In the moments we are living, with the problems of proliferation, it's not a good signal" (Reuters, Feb. 11).