By Walid Shoebat
From 2013, we have read headlines from the BBC that say “Saudi nuclear weapons ‘on order’ from Pakistan” and a couple days ago we read the same type of headlines that say “Saudi Arabia has taken the strategic decision to acquire off-the-shelf atomic weapons from Pakistan”.
So for a couple of years, this off the shelf nuke must still be sitting on the shelf. So how can anyone trust either the BBC or the Sunday Times? The latest reports say that the world is “risking a new arms race in the Middle East, according to senior American officials.” And who are these unnamed “U.S. senior American officials”? They use plural “officials” none of whom dare to expose their names, why? Then they tell us that the report by the Sunday Times quotes an “anonymous US defense official”. It is “one official”.
I am always uncomfortable when I read any report that says “sources say,” no matter how prominent a news agency is for it has been proven that they all lie through their teeth.
So the question is, will Saudi Arabia be able to acquire nukes from Pakistan? And which source can we trust the most when it comes to these nuke stories? There is one source that tells us the answers to these issues that has been trusted and was always correct (more on that later).
There has been a longstanding agreement in place with the Pakistanis over nuclear weapons and the House of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward. Also, it was Saudi Arabia that helped fund Pakistan’s nuclear programme, which began back in the 1970s. Pakistan tested its first nuclear device in 1998. The story of Pakistan’s relations with Saudi Arabia stems from when the current Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif was overthrown in a military coup and sent into exile in Saudi Arabia where he owes the Saudis much favor. In 1999, a year after Pakistan tested two nuclear weapons, then Saudi defense minister Prince Sultan visited the unsafeguarded uranium enrichment plant at Kahuta outside Islamabad — prompting a US diplomatic protest.
Such history tells us that the possibility of a nuclear transfer from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia is plausible. However, on the negative side for Saudi Arabia’s quest, it was Pakistani nuclear technology that helped Iran’s program, Saudi Arabia’s arch-enemy. So in reality Pakistan aided Iran and not Saudi Arabia.
Also, Pakistan’s nuclear program seems above any civilian-military partisanship to have Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of Pakistan be the decision maker on this issue. Last time Nawaz Sharif attempted to help Saudi Arabia was in this current war between Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s Houthis and that did not bode well for Saudi Arabia. Pakistan turned down Saudi’s request to intervene. Why? Because Pakistan feared a Shiites revolution within Pakistan’s 30,000,000 Shiites and that fear seem to have thwarted all efforts to have Pakistan intervene in the war to “send boots on the ground” to fight in Yemen.
Iran is a Shiite nation. Just to show the significance of the Shiite influence in Pakistan, consider that the founder of the state of Pakistan was a Shia and in Pakistan Shias have been elected to top offices and played an important part in the country’s independence, history and nation building. From Muhammad Ali Bogra, Khawaja Nazimuddin and their families to the Bhuttos, Asif Ali Zardari, Haidar Abbas Rizvi, Syeda Abida Hussain, Syed Fakhar Imam, Mushahid Hussain Syed, Faisal Saleh Hayat, Syed Mehdi Shah, Farzana Raja, Faisal Raza Abidi, Fahmida Mirza, Zulfiqar Mirza and several other top ranking Pakistani politicians and generals such as Mushaf Ali Mir, Tanveer Naqvi, Yahya Khan, Muhammad Musa and Iskander Mirza …all these were Shia.
And when it comes to the nukes, Pakistani nuclear project chief Abdul Qadeer Khan who aided North Korea, Iran and Libya, caused Pakistan’s reputation to suffer greatly. So Pakistan’s transferring of nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia would also incur huge diplomatic repercussion for Pakistan. This, of course assumes that Pakistan would care more about its reputation over Saudi money.
When it comes to Saudi Arabia, even Egypt also refused to come to their aid in this current war with the Shia in Yemen.
The era we will enter, and as we said it for years, is that Saudi Arabia, as it seems, will be betrayed by all of her lovers including the United States. This harlot that brought forth Islamic Wahhabism must be destroyed by her own lovers.
The U.S.-Iran agreement under Barrack Hussein Obama allowing Iran to keep 5,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges at Natanz, and another 1,000 centrifuges at its underground enrichment facility in Fordow has definitely escalated the tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia and set the Middle East at an arms race like no other in our history.
This ‘escalated tensions’ in the region strained relations between Saudi Arabia and her main lover, the United States, which was evident when Saudi Arabia’s King Salman skipped a major summit in Washington this week, along with the leaders of three other Gulf nations. The prostitutes of Arabia are hurt that their lover was romancing the Ayatollahs of Iran.
While many like to blame everything on Obama, the political shift by the United States to favor Iran has little to do with Obama. Iran wants to supersede Turkey and Azerbaijan so they are courting the United States (just as Turkey does). The U.S. wants to divorce the Middle East entirely and prefers to balance the power between all the players: Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey. The U.S. feels that a stronger Iran is in their best interest since the U.S. has no desire to re-occupy Iraq.
But any game in the Middle East has concerns, and so the U.S. believes in the impossibility that it can play this delicate balance in that it believes it can manage in preventing all players to join the nuclear club. Any nation in the Middle East that gains nuclear weapons will provoke Turkey and Egypt to follow suit.
So the answer to the question, “will Saudi Arabia gain nukes?” is that it does not matter. If Saudi Arabia gains nukes, all this will do is signal Iran to push the button first. Saudi gaining nukes will simply speed up the process of war between the two rival nations that have never had peace and never will.
We have maintained for over a decade that Iran will gain nukes and Saudi Arabia will be on the receiving end.
We have explained why we believe this, is that the Bible clearly shows it. Isaiah speaks of this event:
“For I will rise up against them, says the Lord of hosts, and cut off from Babylon its name and remnant, and offspring and prosperity, says the Lord … I will sweep it with the broom of destruction” (Isaiah 12:15).
“The broom of destruction”!
Anyone who has seen footage of a nuclear explosion has seen the fury and the power of the ominous cloud that sweeps up everything in its path and is why we have been correct that Iran will gain the nuke. No one can ignore the clear reference that Iran (biblical Elam) must destroy Arabia as recorded in Isaiah 21:9, which is the same prophetic oracle against Babylon using the same announcement in Revelation 18:1-2 and Revelation 14:8: “Babylon is fallen, is fallen”: “The burden against Dumah” (Isaiah 21:11) “The burden against Arabia” (Isaiah 21:13) “All the glory of Kedar will fail” (Isaiah 21:16)
Duma and Kedar are both in Arabia, which is also included “Arabia,” which is destroyed by Iran “Elam” (Isaiah 21:2).
So why do folks skip the name “Arabia” in Isaiah 21 when they read Scripture? To mythically superimpose an imaginative “Rome” or “The United States”?