The weapons could upgrade
India as a nuclear power — and deeply unsettle Pakistan and China.
By Adrian
Levy
HALLAKERE, India - When
laborers began excavating pastureland in India’s southern Karnataka state early
in 2012, members of the nomadic Lambani tribe were startled. For centuries, the
scarlet-robed herbalists and herders had freely crisscrossed the undulating
meadows there, known as kavals, and this uprooting of their landscape
came without warning or explanation. By autumn, Puttaranga Setty, a wiry
groundnut farmer from the village of Kallalli, encountered a barbed-wire fence
blocking off a well-used trail. His neighbor, a herder, discovered that the
road from this city to a nearby village had been diverted elsewhere. They rang
Doddaullarti Karianna, a weaver who sits on one of the village councils that
funnel India’s sprawling democracy of 1.25 billion down to the grassroots.
Karianna asked
officials with India’s state and central governments why the land inhabited by
farming and tribal communities was being walled off, but they refused to
answer. So Karianna sought legal help from the Environment Support Group, a combative ecological advocacy organization that
specializes in fighting illegal encroachment on greenbelt land. But the group also made little progress. Officials
warned its lawyers that the prime minister’s office was running the project.
“There is no point fighting this, we were told,” Leo Saldanha, a founding
member of the advocacy organization, recalled. “You cannot win.”
Only after construction
on the site began that year did it finally become clear to the tribesmen and
others that two secretive agencies were behind a project that experts say will
be the subcontinent’s largest military-run complex of nuclear centrifuges,
atomic-research laboratories, and weapons- and aircraft-testing facilities when
it’s completed, probably sometime in 2017. Among the project’s aims: to expand
the government’s nuclear research, to produce fuel for India’s nuclear
reactors, and to help power the country’s fleet of new submarines.
But another, more
controversial ambition, according to retired Indian government officials and
independent experts in London and Washington, is to give India an extra
stockpile of enriched uranium fuel that could be used in new hydrogen bombs,
also known as thermonuclear weapons, substantially increasing the explosive
force of those in its existing nuclear arsenal.
India’s close
neighbors, China and Pakistan, would see this move as a provocation: Experts
say they might respond by ratcheting up their own nuclear firepower. Pakistan,
in particular, considers itself a military rival, having engaged in four major
conflicts with India, as well as frequent border skirmishes.
New Delhi has never
published a detailed account of its nuclear arsenal, which it first developed
in 1974, and there has been little public notice outside India about the
construction at Challakere and its strategic implications. The government has
said little about it and made no public promises about how the highly enriched
uranium to be produced there will be used. As a military facility, it is not
open to international inspection.
But a lengthy
investigation by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI), including interviews
with local residents, senior and retired Indian scientists and military
officers connected to the nuclear program, and foreign experts and intelligence
analysts, has pierced some of the secrecy surrounding the new facility, parts
of which are slated to open in 2016. This new facility will give India a
nuclear capability — the ability to make many large-yield nuclear arms — that
most experts say it presently lacks.
A nuclear stockpile
in a dangerous neighborhood
The independent
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates that India already possesses between 90 and 110 nuclear
weapons, as compared to Pakistan’s estimated stockpile of up to 120. China,
which borders India to the north, has approximately 260 warheads.
China successfully
tested a thermonuclear weapon — involving a two-stage explosion, typically
producing a much larger force and far greater destruction than single-stage
atomic bombs — in 1967, while India’s scientists claimed to have detonated a
thermonuclear weapon in 1998. But the test site preparations director at the
time, K. Santhanam, said in 2009 it was a
“fizzle,” rendering the number, type, and capability of such weapons in India’s
arsenal uncertain to outsiders.
India, according to
former Australian nonproliferation chief John Carlson, is one of just
three countries that continue to produce fissile
materials for nuclear weapons — the others are Pakistan and North Korea. The
enlargement of India’s thermonuclear program would position the country
alongside the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, Israel, France, and
China, which already have significant stockpiles of such weapons.
Few authorities in
India are willing to discuss these matters publicly, partly because the
country’s Atomic Energy Act and the Official Secrets Act shroud everything
connected to the Indian nuclear program and in the past have been used to
bludgeon those who divulge details. Spokesmen for the two organizations
involved in the Challakere construction, the Defense Research and
Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Bhabha
Atomic Research Centre (BARC), which has played a
leading role in nuclear weapons design, declined to answer any of CPI’s
questions, including about the government’s ambitions for the new park. The
Indian Ministry of External Affairs also declined to comment.
The secret city emerges
Western analysts, speaking on
condition of anonymity, say, however, that preparation for this enrichment
effort has been underway for four years, at a second top-secret site known as
the Rare Materials Plant, 160 miles to the south of Challakere, near the city
of Mysore.
Satellite
photos of that facility from 2014 have revealed the existence of a new nuclear
enrichment complex that is already feeding India’s weapons program
Satellite photos of that facility from 2014 have revealed
the existence of a new nuclear enrichment complex that is already feeding
India’s weapons program and, some Western analysts maintain, laying the
groundwork for a more ambitious hydrogen bomb project. It is effectively a test
bed for Challakere, they say, a proving ground for technology and a place where
technicians can practice producing the highly enriched uranium the military
would need.
The Ministry of Environment,
Forest, and Climate Change approved the Mysore site’s construction in October
2012 as “a project of strategic importance” that would cost nearly $100
million, according to a letter marked “secret,” from the ministry to atomic
energy officials that month. Seen by CPI, this letter spells out the ambition
to feed new centrifuges with fuel derived from yellowcake — milled uranium ore
named after its color — shipped from mines in the village of Jadugoda in
India’s north, 1,200 miles away from the Rare Materials Plant, and to draw
water from the nearby Krishna Raja Sagar dam.
Finding authoritative
information about the scope and objectives of these two massive construction
projects is not easy. “Even for us, details of the Indian program are always
sketchy, and hard facts thin on the ground,” a circumstance that leaves room
for misunderstanding, a senior Obama administration official said in
Washington.
But Gary Samore, who served
from 2009 to 2013 as the White House coordinator for arms control and weapons of
mass destruction, said there was little misunderstanding. “I believe that India
intends to build thermonuclear weapons as part of its strategic deterrent
against China,” said Samore. It is unclear, he continued, when India will
realize this goal of a larger and more powerful arsenal, but “they will.”
A former senior British
official who worked on nuclear issues likewise said intelligence analysts on
both sides of the Atlantic are “increasingly concerned” about India’s pursuit
of thermonuclear weapons and are “actively monitoring” both sites. U.S.
officials in Washington said they shared this assessment. “Mysore is being
constantly monitored, and we are constantly monitoring progress in Challakere,”
a former White House official said.
Robert Kelley, who served as
the director of the Iraq Action Team at the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) from 1992-1993 and 2001-2005, is a former project leader for nuclear
intelligence at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. He told CPI that after
analyzing the available satellite imagery, as well as studying open source
material on both sites, he believes that India is pursuing a larger
thermonuclear arsenal. Its development, he warned, “will inevitably usher in a
new nuclear arms race” in a volatile region.
However,
Western knowledge about how India’s weapons are stored, transported, and
protected, and how the radiological and fissile material that fuels them is
guarded and warehoused — the chain of custody — remains rudimentary.
However, Western knowledge about how India’s weapons are
stored, transported, and protected, and how the radiological and fissile
material that fuels them is guarded and warehoused — the chain of custody —
remains rudimentary. After examining nuclear security practices in 25 countries
with “weapons-usable nuclear materials,” the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), a
nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, in January 2014 ranked India’s nuclear security practices 23rd, above only
Iran and North Korea. An NTI analyst who asked to remain unnamed told CPI that
India’s score stemmed in part from the country’s opacity and “obfuscation on
nuclear regulation and security issues.”
But the group also noted the
prevalence of corruption in India and the insecurity of the region: the rise of
Islamist jihad fronts in India and nearby
Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, as well as homegrown leftist
insurgencies. “Many other countries, including China, have worked with us to
understand the ratings system and better their positions.” But India did not,
the NTI analyst said.
A culture of quiet
Like the villagers in
Challakere, some key members of the Indian Parliament say they know little
about the project. One veteran lawmaker, who has twice been a cabinet minister,
and who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the topic, said his
colleagues are rarely briefed about nuclear weapons-related issues. “Frankly,
we in Parliament discover little,” he said, “and what we do find out is
normally from Western newspapers.” And in an interview with Indian reporters in
2003, Jayanthi Natarajan, a former lawmaker who later served as minister for
environment and forests, said that she and other members of Parliament had
“tried time and again to raise [nuclear-related] issues … and have achieved
precious little.”
Nonetheless, Environment
Support Group lawyers acting for the villagers living close to Challakere
eventually forced some important disclosures. The region’s parliamentary
representative heard about plans for the park from then-Indian Defense Minister
A.K. Antony as early as March 2007, according to a copy of personal
correspondence between the two that was obtained by
the group and seen by CPI. (Antony declined to comment.)
This was the very moment
India was also negotiating a deal with the United States to expand nuclear
cooperation. That deal ended nearly three decades of nuclear-related isolation
for India, imposed as a punishment for its first atom bomb test in 1974. U.S.
military assistance to India was barred for a portion of this period, and Washington
also withheld its support for loans by international financial institutions.
The agreement, which the two
sides signed in 2007, was highly controversial in Washington. While critics warned it would reward India for its secret pursuit of the bomb and
allow it to expand its nuclear weapons work, supporters emphasized that it
included language in which India agreed to identify its civilian nuclear sites
and open them to inspection by the IAEA.
India also said that it would
refrain from conducting new atomic weapons tests. And in return for waiving
restrictions on India’s civil nuclear program, the U.S. president was required to determine that India was “working actively with the
United States for the early conclusion of a multilateral treaty on the cessation
of the production of fissile materials for use in nuclear weapons.” In April
2006, then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the deal would
not trigger an arms race in the region or “enhance [India’s] military capacity
or add to its military stockpile.” Rice added: “Moreover, the nuclear balance
in the region is a function of the political and military situation in the
region. We are far more likely to be able to influence those regional dynamics
from a position of strong relations with India and indeed with Pakistan.”
Opponents of the deal
complained, however, that it did not compel India to allow inspections of nine
reactor sites known to be associated with the country’s military, including
several producing plutonium for nuclear arms. The deal also allowed 10 other
reactor sites subject to IAEA inspection to use imported uranium fuel, freeing
up an indigenously mined supply of uranium that was not tracked by the
international community — and could now be redirected to the country’s bomb
program.
By May 2009, seven months
after Congress ratified the U.S.-India nuclear cooperation deal, the Karnataka
state government had secretly leased 4,290 acres adjacent to the villages of
Varavu Kaval and Khudapura in the district of Chitradurga to the DRDO and
another 1,500 acres to the Indian Institute of Science, a research center that
has frequently worked with the DRDO and India’s nuclear industry, documents
obtained by lawyers showed.
In December 2010, the state government
leased a further 573 acres to the Indian Space Research Organisation and the
BARC bought 1,810 acres. Councilor Karianna said the villagers were not told at
the time about any of these transactions and that the documents, which the
advocacy group obtained two years later in 2012, “were stunning. We were being
fenced in behind our backs.”
Srikumar Banerjee,
then-chairman of India’s Atomic Energy Commission, first offered an official
glimpse of the project’s ambitions in 2011, when he told CNN’s India channel that the enrichment plant could be
used to produce nuclear fuel, or slightly enriched uranium, to power India’s
heavy- and light-water reactors. However, Banerjee added that the site would
also have a strategic use, a designation that would keep international
inspectors away. (India’s nuclear agreement with Washington and others provides
no access to military-related facilities.)
High security, zero
accountability
The sensitivity of the
Challakere project became clearer after the Environment Support Group legal
team filed a lawsuit in 2012 at the High Court of Karnataka, demanding a
complete accounting of pastureland being seized by the authorities — only to
learn from the state land registry that local authorities had granted the
Indian army 10,000 acres too, as the future home for a brigade of 2,500
soldiers. The State Reserve Police, an armed force, would receive 350 acres,
and 500 acres more had been set aside for a commando training center.
The
nuclear city would, in short, be ringed by a securityperimeter of thousands of
military and paramilitary guards.
The nuclear city would, in short, be ringed by a
security perimeter of thousands of military and paramilitary guards.
In July 2013, six years after
New Delhi greenlit the plans, an Indian environmental agency, the National
Green Tribunal, finally took up the villager’s complaints. It dispatched
investigators to the scene and demanded that each government agency disclose
its ambitions in detail. The DRDO responded that national security trumped the
tribunal and provided no more information; the other government entities simply
continued construction.
While the IAEA would be kept
out, villagers were being hemmed in. By 2013, a public notice was plastered
onto an important local shrine warning worshippers it would soon be
inaccessible. A popular altar for a local animist ceremony was already out of
bounds.
“Then the groundwater began
to vanish,” Karianna said. The district is semiarid, and local records, still
written in ink, show that between 2003 and 2007, droughts had caused the
suicides of 101 farmers whose crops failed. By 2013, construction had fenced
off a critical man-made reservoir adjacent to Ullarthi. Bore wells dug by the
nuclear and military contractors as the construction accelerated siphoned off
other water supplies from surrounding villages.
Seventeen miles of
15-foot-high walls began to snake around the villagers’ meadows, blocking
grazing routes and preventing them from gathering firewood or herbs for medicine.
Hundreds rallied to knock holes into the new ramparts. “They were rebuilt in
days,” Karianna said, “so we tried again, but this time teams of private
security guards had been hired by someone, and they viciously beat my neighbors
and friends.”
BARC and the DRDO still
provided no detailed explanations to anyone on the ground about the scope and
purpose of their work, Karianna added. “Our repeated requests, pleadings,
representations to all elected members at every level have yielded no hard
facts. It feels as if India has rejected us.” Highlighting local discontent,
almost all of the villagers ringing the kavals boycotted the impending general
election, a rare action since India’s birth as a democracy in 1947. The growing
local discontent, and the absence of public comment by the United States or
European governments about the massive project, eventually drew the attention
of independent nuclear analysts.
From centrifuges to
submarines
Serena Kelleher-Vergantini,
an analyst at the Institute for Science and International Security, a
Washington-based nonprofit, scoured all the available satellite imagery in the
summer of 2014. Eventually, she zeroed in
on the construction site in the kavals. The journal IHS Jane’s
Intelligence Review was separately doing the same in London,
commissioning Kelley, formerly of the IAEA, to analyze images from the
Mysore plant.
What struck both of them was
the enormous scale and ambition of the projects, as well as the secrecy
surrounding them. The military-nuclear park in the kavals, at nearly 20 square
miles, has a footprint comparable in size to the New York state capital,
Albany. After analyzing the images and conducting interviews with atomic
officials in India, Kelleher-Vergantini concluded that the footprint for
enrichment facilities planned in the new complex would enable scientists to
produce industrial quantities of uranium (though the institute would only know
how much when construction had progressed further). As Kelley examined photos
of the second site, he was astonished by the presence of two recently expanded
buildings that had been made lofty enough to accommodate a new generation of
tall, carbon-fiber centrifuges, capable of working far faster to enrich uranium
than any existing versions.
Nuclear experts express the
productiveness of the enrichment machines in Separative Work Units (SWUs).
Kelley concluded that at the second site, the government could install up to
1,050 of these new hyper-efficient machines, which, together with about 700
older centrifuges, could complete 42,000 SWUs a year — enough, he said, to make
roughly 403 pounds of weapons-grade uranium. A new hydrogen bomb, with an
explosive force exceeding 100,000 tons of TNT, requires only between roughly 9 and 15 pounds of enriched uranium,
according to the International Panel on Fissile Materials, a group of nuclear
experts from 16 countries that seek to reduce and secure uranium stocks.
Retired Indian nuclear
scientists and military officers said in interviews that India’s growing
nuclear submarine fleet would be the first beneficiary of the newly produced
enriched uranium.
India presently has just one
indigenous vessel, the INS Arihant, constructed in a program supervised
by the prime minister’s office. Powered by an 80-megawatt uranium reactor
developed by BARC that began operating in August 2013, it will formally enter
military service in 2016, having undergone sea trials in 2014. A second, INS Aridhaman,
is already under construction, with at least two more slated to be built, a
senior military officer said in an interview. Each would be loaded with up to
12 nuclear-tipped missiles. The officer, who was not authorized to be named,
said the fleet’s expansion gained a new sense of urgency after Chinese
submarines sailed across the Bay of Bengal to
Sri Lanka in September and October 2014, docking in a port facility in Colombo
that had been built by Chinese engineers.
Asked what else the additional
uranium would be used for, a senior scientist at the DRDO, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity, said it would mostly be used to fuel civilian
nuclear power reactors and contribute to what he called “benign medical and
scientific programs.” The government has not made such a promise publicly,
however, or provided details. India does not have to report what it does with
its indigenous uranium, “especially if it is not in the civilian domain,” said
Sunil Chirayath, a research assistant professor at Texas A&M University who
is an expert on India’s civilian nuclear program.
A senior Obama administration
official in Washington, who was not authorized to be quoted by name, expressed
skepticism about the government scientist’s private claim. The official said
that India’s civilian nuclear programs, including power stations and research
establishments, were actually benefiting from new access to imported nuclear
fuel after the embargo’s removal in 2007 and now require almost “no homemade
enriched uranium.”
India has already
received roughly 4,914 tons of uranium from France,
Russia, and Kazakhstan, for example, and it has agreements with Canada,
Mongolia, Argentina, and Namibia for additional shipments. In September 2014,
then-Prime Minister Tony Abbott signed an agreement to make Australia a
“long-term, reliable supplier of uranium to India” — a deal that has sparked
considerable controversy at home.
The International Panel on
Fissile Materials estimates that the Arihant-class submarine core requires only
about 143 pounds of uranium, enriched to 30 percent — a measure of how many of
its isotopes can be readily used in weaponry. Using this figure and the
estimated capacity of the centrifuges India is installing in Mysore alone — not
even including Challakere — Kelley concluded that even after fueling its entire
submarine fleet there would be 352 pounds of weapons-grade uranium left over
every year, or enough to fuel at least 22 H-bombs. (His calculation presumes
that the plant is run efficiently and that its excess capacity is purposeful
and not driven by bureaucratic inertia — two large uncertainties in India, a
senior U.S. official noted. But having a “rainy day” stockpile to deter the
Chinese might be the aim, the official added.)
Thermonuclear doctrine and
the China threat
A retired official who served
inside the nuclear cell at the Indian prime minister’s office, the apex
organization that supervises the military nuclear program, conceded that other
uses besides submarines had been anticipated “for many years.” He pointed to a
“thermonuclear bomb program” as “a beneficiary” and suggested India had had no
choice but to “develop a new generation of more powerful megaton weapons” if it
was to maintain “credible minimum deterrence.”
Previously, this meant the bare
minimum required to prevent an attack on India, but a new Indian
doctrine in 2003 — in response to Pakistan’s
increasingly aggressive nuclear posture — altered this notion: “Nuclear
retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict
unacceptable damage.” China, the retired official said, “has long had a
thermonuclear capability, and if India is to have a strategic defense worth its
salt, and become a credible power in the region, we need to develop a similar
weapon and in deployable numbers.” U.S. and British officials affirmed that
they have been aware of this discussion among Indian scientists and soldiers
for years.
In an interview, Gen. Balraj
Singh Nagal, who from 2008 to 2010 ran India’s Strategic Forces Command within
its Nuclear Command Authority, the group that manages India’s nuclear forces,
declined to discuss specific aspects of the nuclear city in Challakere or the
transformation of the Rare Materials Plant close to Mysore. But keeping pace
with China and developing a meaningful counter to its arsenal was “the most
pressing issue” facing India, he said.
“It’s not Pakistan we are
looking at most of the time, like most in the West presume,” Nagal said.
“Beijing has long managed a thermonuclear program, and so this is one of many
options India should push forward with, as well as reconsidering our nuclear
defense posture, which is outdated and ineffective. We have to follow the
technological curve. And where China took it, several decades before us, with
the hydrogen bomb, India has to follow.”
The impact of the U.S.-India
nuclear deal and India’s fissile production surge on the country’s neighbors
can already be seen. “Pakistan recently stepped up a gear,” the former senior
British official said. He pointed to an increase in Pakistan’s plutonium
production at four new military reactors in the city of Khushab; a reprocessing
plant known as Pinstech, near Islamabad; a refurbished civilian plutonium
reprocessing plant converted to military use in an area known as Chashma; and
“the ramping up of uranium production at a site in Dera Ghazi Khan.”
The retired British official
added: “India needs to constantly rethink what deterrence means, as it is not a
static notion, and everyone understands that. But the balance of power in the
region is so easily upset.” The official said that in choosing to remain
publicly silent, the United States was taking a risk, evidently to try and reap
financial and strategic rewards.
Does Washington know?
Officials at the Pentagon
argued privately before Washington reached its 2008 nuclear deal with India
that lifting sanctions would lead to billions of dollars’ worth of sales in
conventional weapons, according to a U.S. official privy to the discussions. That
prediction was accurate, with U.S. exports of major weapons to India reaching
$5 billion from 2011 to 2014 and edging out Russian sales to India for the
first time.
“But the U.S. is also looking
for something intangible: to create a new strategic partner capable of facing
down China,” and so India has taken advantage of the situation to overhaul its
military nuclear capability, the British official noted. Pushing back China,
said the official, who has worked for 30 years in counterterrorism, weapons of mass
destruction, and nonproliferation, especially in Southern Asia, is regarded as
being “in everyone’s interest.”
White House officials
declined to comment on this claim on the record. But Robert Einhorn, the State
Department’s former top nonproliferation official, told the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference in
March that some officials in the Bush administration had the ambition, in
making a nuclear deal with India, to “work together to counter China, to be a
counterweight to an emerging China.” He added that, in his view, that ambition
has not been realized, due to India’s historic insistence on pursuing an
independent foreign policy. He also said the nuclear deal had unfortunate
repercussions, because other nations concluded that Washington was playing
favorites with India.
In Challakere, construction
continues despite a ruling by the National Green Tribunal in August 2014
calling for a stay on all “excavation,
construction and operation of projects” until environmental clearances had been
secured. Justice M. Chockalingam and R. Nagendran of the tribunal ordered
blocked roads reopened with access given to all religious sites. But when
villagers attempted to pass over or through the fences and walls in the winter
of 2014, they were met by police officers who hand out photocopied notes in
English: “Environmental clearances has [sic] been awarded [to BARC]
dated 24 July 2014, which is a secret document and cannot be disclosed.”
Councilor Karianna said:
“Still, to this day, no one has come to talk to me, to explain to us, what they
are doing to our land.”
“Is this what ‘national
interest’ means?” he asked, looking out over the rolling pasture, enveloped in
the red dust kicked up by diggers. “We sit beneath our ancient trees and watch
them tear up the land, wondering what’s in store.”
This story was written by
the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news
organization in Washington, D.C., and was originally published on its website.
The Center for Public
Integrity’s national security managing editor R. Jeffrey Smith contributed to
this article from Washington, D.C.
No comments:
Post a Comment