An article by David Sanger and William Broad, "Officials Fear Bomb Design Went to Others," published in The New York Times on 16 June 2008 has reopened the debate on the threats posed by the AQ Khan nuclear proliferation network.

What does the recent article reveal that is new?

The authors state that there is a possibility that the nuclear technology has been transferred to more parties by AQ Khan and his network than it was earlier believed. The article also claims that Khan's proliferation network is still working and the scientist may very well be just one part of a bigger network. The threat of nuclear terrorism may have just become real for countries like India, the U.S. and Israel.

The Sanger-Broad article has claimed that AQ Khan's blueprints for a compact nuclear weapon have been digitized and have been reproduced to facilitate the building of compact nuclear weapons. Furthermore, the authors have also claimed that Khan's nuclear proliferation network has not been dismantled and that it is still up and running. Digitizing the blueprints has possibly made it easier for them to be copied and proliferated. The article has also revealed that the electronic copy of AQ Khan's blueprints have been found with his associates like the Swiss family, the Tinners. The same design has also been reported to have been found in three other locations according to the article.

Are small and compact nuclear weapons possible?

While many other newspapers like The Guardian and The Telegraph have also printed a similar story and have captured the imagination of the public, whether building such a compact nuclear device is technically possible or not needs to be examined.

One factor to consider is that David Sanger who is one of the authors of the article, "Officials Fear Bomb Design Went to Others," is an ex-UN arms inspector and therefore can be expected to possess the technical expertise on the this subject. Therefore, believing in his claims on the technical aspects on the possibility of building a compact weapon can be justified. Furthermore, many other news agencies like the BBC and The Guardian seem to be finding his theories credible enough to be publishing it. The article makes an alternative argument in that Pakistan in 1998 had tested a miniature version of a design that the Chinese had tested in 1966. Therefore, it can be argued on the same lines that a miniature of Pakistan's designs could be produced to suit the needs of the terrorists or other prospective nuclear weapon countries like Iran. An earlier (15 June 2008) NYT article by Sanger, "Nuclear Ring Reportedly Had Advanced Design" also claims that the blueprints that were found in Switzerland and other places show a design that is "half the size and twice the power of the Chinese design." Nevertheless, whether it is possible to build such a weapon does not seem to be very clear as yet.

However, suitcase bombs which are compact in size are possible to build using a little more than a single critical mass of plutonium which weighs about 10kg and is compact.. This cannot cause a fission explosion, but can cause a significant explosion equivalent to 10-20 tons (of TNT). While this may not seem like a big explosion, when the radiation caused is factored in the consequences can be quite serious.

To whom could this technology have been sold?

Iran and North Korea emerge as the countries suspected to have benefited the most from this technology. Sanger argues that the missile best suited to carry a warhead designed based on the blueprints found is Iran's Shabah III, which is a North Korean design. Osama bin Laden had also contacted AQ Khan in the past for his assistance in procuring a nuclear device. Therefore, terrorist groups like al Qaeda may be among the organizations that would benefit from the technology of building a compact nuclear device. Organizations like the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Toiba could also potentially benefit from this technology.

Does the network still survive?

The Sanger-Broad article suggests that the proliferation network has been functioning in spite of AQ Khan's detention. However, the structure and the functioning pattern of the network may have changed, which seems to have been discovered now. Furthermore, AQ Khan could still be a part of the network and contributing to it in spite of being under house arrest. Perhaps this is the reason why Pakistani officials have refused the US access to interrogate AQ Khan.

The Sanger-Broad article has revived the debate over the threats of nuclear terrorism. Their findings are disturbing and have added a new dimension to the nature of proliferation in the form of digitized blueprints and the introduction of sophisticated electronics in building nuclear devices. This will force the governments of countries like India and the US to reconsider their security measures and anti-terror strategies. If the article is to be believed, nuclear terrorism poses a 'clear and present danger' to the world.