CthulhuFhtagn
Banned
With a PoD any time after 1990, create a plausible scenario in which the Pakistani government gives a nuclear bomb to a terrorist organization. "Losing" the bomb would also fit the challenge.
AHC: Pakistani Government Gives a Nuke to Terrorists
- Thread starter CthulhuFhtagn
- Start date
Realpolitik
Banned
If the USA finds out about this, screwed doesn't even begin to describe Pakistan.
Of course, remember, it's not like the President fully controls the ISI or anything. Not that this would save them.
Of course, remember, it's not like the President fully controls the ISI or anything. Not that this would save them.
Well, if they "lost" the warhead(s) and can show clearly this was not deliberate, I don't see what the US could or should do beyond demanding complete Pakistani support and assistance in tracking down the lost weapons as the price of any further US military or economic aid. After that the US should rethink its strategic relationship with Pakistan, and with India as well for that matter since we now know who we absolutely should align with in the Subcontinent and what our common threat is.
To put this in perspective, what would the US do if a former Soviet Warhead or two got "lost" during the collapse of the USSR, invade or bomb Russia? Hardly. The fact is, you just don't go attacking or invading people who have nuclear weapons. The US knows this, Israel knows this, Russia knows this, China knows this, and Ukraine wishes they knew this in 1992. That's why it is critical, from the US perspective, that Iran or any other hostile power absolutely not be permitted to get them, that North Korea should never have been permitted to get them, and Taiwan find a way to get them ASAP.
To put this in perspective, what would the US do if a former Soviet Warhead or two got "lost" during the collapse of the USSR, invade or bomb Russia? Hardly. The fact is, you just don't go attacking or invading people who have nuclear weapons. The US knows this, Israel knows this, Russia knows this, China knows this, and Ukraine wishes they knew this in 1992. That's why it is critical, from the US perspective, that Iran or any other hostile power absolutely not be permitted to get them, that North Korea should never have been permitted to get them, and Taiwan find a way to get them ASAP.
Define "Pakistani Government". There are certainly officials within the Pakistani government who have more sympathy for the Jihadis than for us. The right people and the right place could allow a device to be "lost" or "stolen" without orders from higher up the chain. (Not long ago there actually was an attack on a nuclear convoy in Pakistan, although the attack was repulsed, IIRC the Pakistanis never did find out how the insurgents had located the device)
Well, since they wore that sign iOTL (protecting Al Qaeda, and harbouring Osama bin Laden), and nothing happened, I'm not sure whether even this would be enough.
North Korea in all likelyhood got them irrespective of anything the US did to counter that, and to be fair, it does not look that the US did much of import about it (publicly at least). Again, it's not like North Korea is a place where the US have a lot of leverage, I mean, it borders China and Russia.
To my knowledge, the US has no particular willingness to see a nuclear Taiwan. The sort of permanent nuclear standoff we see in the Indian Subcontinent and we could potentially see in the Middle East if Iran ever goes nuclear isn't something that any sane US government wants to see replicated in East Asia. Admittedly, there's no guarantee that the US government is always sane.
Iran is hostile, and it is understandable that the US has no appetite for seeing it going nuclear, but it is also a rational actor which could be trusted (far more than Pakistan ever could) not to let any device loose.
That said, Pakistan accidentally losing a nuke would not mean necessarily US invasion, but it would most likely mean US supported regime change (a tricky affair in Pakistan) and an extremely strong American pressure onto Pakistan to dismantly any arsenal.
Ironically, this does not mean necessarily realignment toward India. The best (and cheapest) way to have Pakistan disarm would be a wholesale US guarantee to Pakistan, up to full nuclear umbrella, about NATO level. That would do miracles to heighten tensions in the regions, by the way, but the US might be tempted to do just that is they think that helps overall security. And yeah, that's security dilemma for you, in a nasty form. India has probably the theoretical ability to match the US in a nuke arms race if need be, although at a very imposing cost. Sino-Indian rapprochement might be in order.
However, if the US have even minimal evidence (assuming the US administration isn't into the fabricated evidence business big time, which we know happened IOTL) that the Pak government had a hand in the "loss" of the device, well, Islamabad is in for a world of hurt.
It would be a nasty affair in every way.
In the context of the OP, that could actually prove a very serious challenge.
To be fair, to a point they had begun to protect al-Qa'ida because the US wanted them to.
Harboring Osama has not been, AFAIK, proven something that the Pak governments ever sanctioned in any way, shape or form, although as noted there's plenty of officials who were very happy to do that irrispective of any order from the above.
"Above" which, by the way, has been consistently very messy and complicated for a fair while.
Actually it would say
"Thank you for invading rather than responding with disproportionate force."
CthulhuFhtagn
Banned
I was thinking something along the lines of "high-ranking official with Al Qaeda sympathies leaves the door open at a silo" rather than "President Musharraf/Hussain hands over a nuke in a public ceremony".
Yes, because yours and all other posts here thus far rely on one likely, but by no means 100% assured assumption: That the Terrorists will use it to attack the US or try and fail to do so. However that nuke might just as well make it's way into Russia instead.
In that case, things will probably go very very ugly very very quckly.
Ukraine had one third of the former USSR's arsenal until 1994, where they gave them up for the promise that Russia USA and Britain would guarantee their territorial sovereignty.
As you're probably aware, that hasn't really worked out.