NUCLEAR.WIRE
NKorea says China's top nuclear envoy arrives
Softly, Japan turns down volume on NKorea
Russia starts nuclear deliveries to Iran
Bush seeks more pressure on Iran after Russia moves
Bush: Russian offer means Iran should freeze nuclear efforts
Major powers to consult over Iran sanctions on Tuesday: US
US: Russian deliveries show need for Iran nuclear freeze
Russian supplies prove Iran seeks bomb: Israeli minister
US: Russian deliveries another reason to freeze Iran nukes
Russian general says missiles could target US shield: report
Full Version: Nuclear Wire
Pakistan learns the US nuclear way
The United States has spent US$100 million helping Pakistan secure its nuclear weapons and the materials used to make them. Yet the US - which for years had the launch codes for its nuclear missiles cunningly set at 00000000 - suffers serious problems with securing its own nuclear weapons, nuclear materials and weapons-related information. (Dec 18, '07)
The United States has spent US$100 million helping Pakistan secure its nuclear weapons and the materials used to make them. Yet the US - which for years had the launch codes for its nuclear missiles cunningly set at 00000000 - suffers serious problems with securing its own nuclear weapons, nuclear materials and weapons-related information. (Dec 18, '07)
Bush has a little secret on Iran
A senior Iranian military defector is believed to have played a key part in convincing the US intelligence community to radically change its mind on Iran's nuclear program. And despite White House obfuscation, it appears President George W Bush knew all about the reversal at the beginning this year. - Gareth Porter (Dec 18, '07)
A senior Iranian military defector is believed to have played a key part in convincing the US intelligence community to radically change its mind on Iran's nuclear program. And despite White House obfuscation, it appears President George W Bush knew all about the reversal at the beginning this year. - Gareth Porter (Dec 18, '07)
NUCLEAR.WIRE
Major powers postpone consultations over Iran sanctions: US
China's top nuclear envoy inspects NKorea nuke disablement process
Iran sees Bushehr plant at full capacity in one year: official
China's top nuclear envoy arrives in NKorea: foreign ministry
Iran sees Bushehr plant working fully in one year: official
NKorea says China's top nuclear envoy arrives
Softly, Japan turns down volume on NKorea
Russia starts nuclear deliveries to Iran
Bush seeks more pressure on Iran after Russia moves
Bush: Russian offer means Iran should freeze nuclear efforts
Major powers postpone consultations over Iran sanctions: US
China's top nuclear envoy inspects NKorea nuke disablement process
Iran sees Bushehr plant at full capacity in one year: official
China's top nuclear envoy arrives in NKorea: foreign ministry
Iran sees Bushehr plant working fully in one year: official
NKorea says China's top nuclear envoy arrives
Softly, Japan turns down volume on NKorea
Russia starts nuclear deliveries to Iran
Bush seeks more pressure on Iran after Russia moves
Bush: Russian offer means Iran should freeze nuclear efforts
Outside View: The future of INF
Moscow (UPI) Dec 18, 2007 - Twenty years ago, on Dec. 8, 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in Washington. It was the first-ever treaty on reducing available arsenals. It brought the elimination of an entire type of nuclear missiles and set a practical example of openness by introducing mutual in situ checks for 13 years. Today, the United States ... more
Moscow (UPI) Dec 18, 2007 - Twenty years ago, on Dec. 8, 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in Washington. It was the first-ever treaty on reducing available arsenals. It brought the elimination of an entire type of nuclear missiles and set a practical example of openness by introducing mutual in situ checks for 13 years. Today, the United States ... more
India speeding up nuclear missile production
New Delhi (AFP) Dec 14, 2007 - Nuclear-armed India said on Friday it was ready to jump-start production of long-range nuclear missiles which can hit targets deep in China or Pakistan. V. K. Sarswat, the chief of India's missile development project, said the assembly lines were in place to speed up the production of the precision rockets. Military insiders told AFP the announcement was a response to reports of growing ... more
New Delhi (AFP) Dec 14, 2007 - Nuclear-armed India said on Friday it was ready to jump-start production of long-range nuclear missiles which can hit targets deep in China or Pakistan. V. K. Sarswat, the chief of India's missile development project, said the assembly lines were in place to speed up the production of the precision rockets. Military insiders told AFP the announcement was a response to reports of growing ... more
Bush seeks more pressure on Iran after Russia moves
Fredericksburg, Virginia (AFP) Dec 17, 2007 - US President George W. Bush said Monday that Russian deliveries of nuclear fuel to Iran only fed the need for the world to clamp down more firmly on Tehran's home-grown atomic work. And the US State Department announced consultations Tuesday with five other powers on a draft UN Security Council resolution imposing tougher sanctions on the Islamic republic for refusing to freeze uranium enric ... more
Fredericksburg, Virginia (AFP) Dec 17, 2007 - US President George W. Bush said Monday that Russian deliveries of nuclear fuel to Iran only fed the need for the world to clamp down more firmly on Tehran's home-grown atomic work. And the US State Department announced consultations Tuesday with five other powers on a draft UN Security Council resolution imposing tougher sanctions on the Islamic republic for refusing to freeze uranium enric ... more
<h3 class="entry-header">White House Announces (Secret) Nuclear Weapons Cuts</h3> 
By Hans M. Kristensen The While House announced earlier today that the President had "approved a significant reduction in the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile to take effect by the end of 2007." The decision reaffirmed an earlier decision from June 2004 to cut the stockpile "nearly 50 percent," but moved the timeline up five years from 2012 to 2007.
Not included in the White House statement, but added by other government officials, is an additional decision to cut the remaining stockpile by another 15% percent, although not until 2012.
The announcement of these important initiatives unfortunately was hampered by Cold War secrecy which meant that government officials were not allowed to reveal how many nuclear weapons will be cut or what the size of the stockpile is. As a result, news media accounts were full of errors, and one can only imagine the misperceptions this misplaced secrecy creates in other nuclear weapon states.
Estimates of the Secret Cuts
Before the latest announcements, I and my colleague Robert Norris estimated that the stockpile consisted of approximately 9,900 warheads of which roughly 4,600 were operational. With the new announcements, we predict the following development:
The White House announcement reaffirms the 2004 decision to reduce the size of the Defense Department's nuclear weapons stockpile "by nearly 50 percent from the 2001 level." This objective was reaffirmed by the naitonal Nuclear Security Administration in a press release earlier today. The DOD stockpile included roughly 10,500 warheads in 2001, which means that the 2004 stockpile plan probably envisioned a stockpile of some 5,400 warheads by 2012. It is this cut that the White House reaffirmed today, but implemented by the end of 2007 instead of 2012.
The additional 15 percent reduction announced today and confirmed by the White House would cut approximately 800 warheads more from the 5,400, resulting in an estimated stockpile of roughly 4,600 warheads by 2012.
At that time the SORT agreement signed with Russian in 2002 is scheduled to enter into effect, setting an upper limit of no more than 2,200 operationally deployed strategic warheads. The remaining 2,400 warheads will likely include 2,000 reserve warheads to "hedge" against unforseen political developments and 400 non-strategic bombs.
What Doesn't Change
The White House's announcement to implement the 2004 stockpile plan in 2007 does not mean that the "cut" warheads will have been dismantled by then - far from it. In fact, the decision to reduct the stockpile does not in itself result in the destruction of a single warhead. "Reducing" the stockpile by nearly half is a form of nuclear book keeping that means that ownership of the "cut" warheads will shift from DOD to DOE.
But DOE doesn't have storage capacity for all of these weapons at its facility at Pantex. That factory is busy rebuilding the warheads slated to remain in the "enduring stockpile" beyond 2012. As a result, dismantlement of the backlog of warheads from the current reductions is not scheduled to be completed until 2023, more than a decade-and-a-half after today's White House announcement to speed things up. Indeed, the current administration has demonstrated the lowest warhead dismantlement rate of any U.S. government since the Eisenhower administration.
So for now, most of the "cut" warheads will likely remain at the bases where they are and only gradually be moved to the central warhead storage locations such as Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. The only known timeline for this move is 2012, by which time no more than 2,200 strategic warheads can remain at bases for operational delivery platforms according to the SORT agreement.
Observations
The While House statement highlights that "the U.S. nuclear stockpile will be less than one-quarter its size at the end of the Cold War" [1991, ed.]. But the stockpile the administration plans for 2012 is large by post-Cold War standards:
* Four times the combined number of nuclear weapons of all the world’s nuclear weapons states, excluding Russia.
* Almost half of the stockpile – a maximum of 2,200 warheads – will be operational, and a third of those (more than 850) will be on alert.
* More than 10 times bigger than in 1950, when the United States decided to contain the Soviet Union.
Although the White House says the planned reductions seek to "reduce U.S. reliance on nuclear weapons," the statement not only reaffirms that "a credible deterrent remains an essential part of U.S. national security," but also declares that "nuclear forces remain key to meeting emerging security challenges."
In the weeks ahead, we will fine-tune this estimate further.
The W62 is the only nuclear warhead that has been publicly identified for elimination under the Bush administration's secret nuclear stockpile reduction plan.
Not included in the White House statement, but added by other government officials, is an additional decision to cut the remaining stockpile by another 15% percent, although not until 2012.
The announcement of these important initiatives unfortunately was hampered by Cold War secrecy which meant that government officials were not allowed to reveal how many nuclear weapons will be cut or what the size of the stockpile is. As a result, news media accounts were full of errors, and one can only imagine the misperceptions this misplaced secrecy creates in other nuclear weapon states.
Estimates of the Secret Cuts
Before the latest announcements, I and my colleague Robert Norris estimated that the stockpile consisted of approximately 9,900 warheads of which roughly 4,600 were operational. With the new announcements, we predict the following development:
The White House announcement reaffirms the 2004 decision to reduce the size of the Defense Department's nuclear weapons stockpile "by nearly 50 percent from the 2001 level." This objective was reaffirmed by the naitonal Nuclear Security Administration in a press release earlier today. The DOD stockpile included roughly 10,500 warheads in 2001, which means that the 2004 stockpile plan probably envisioned a stockpile of some 5,400 warheads by 2012. It is this cut that the White House reaffirmed today, but implemented by the end of 2007 instead of 2012.
The additional 15 percent reduction announced today and confirmed by the White House would cut approximately 800 warheads more from the 5,400, resulting in an estimated stockpile of roughly 4,600 warheads by 2012.
At that time the SORT agreement signed with Russian in 2002 is scheduled to enter into effect, setting an upper limit of no more than 2,200 operationally deployed strategic warheads. The remaining 2,400 warheads will likely include 2,000 reserve warheads to "hedge" against unforseen political developments and 400 non-strategic bombs.
Estimated U.S. Nuclear Weapons Stockpile 1945-2012
The Bush administration's planned reduction of the nuclear stockpile is significant but modest compared to the cuts in the 1990s, and will leave a stockpile that is four times larger than the combined arsenals of all other nuclear weapon states (excluding Russia).
The White House's announcement to implement the 2004 stockpile plan in 2007 does not mean that the "cut" warheads will have been dismantled by then - far from it. In fact, the decision to reduct the stockpile does not in itself result in the destruction of a single warhead. "Reducing" the stockpile by nearly half is a form of nuclear book keeping that means that ownership of the "cut" warheads will shift from DOD to DOE.
But DOE doesn't have storage capacity for all of these weapons at its facility at Pantex. That factory is busy rebuilding the warheads slated to remain in the "enduring stockpile" beyond 2012. As a result, dismantlement of the backlog of warheads from the current reductions is not scheduled to be completed until 2023, more than a decade-and-a-half after today's White House announcement to speed things up. Indeed, the current administration has demonstrated the lowest warhead dismantlement rate of any U.S. government since the Eisenhower administration.
So for now, most of the "cut" warheads will likely remain at the bases where they are and only gradually be moved to the central warhead storage locations such as Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. The only known timeline for this move is 2012, by which time no more than 2,200 strategic warheads can remain at bases for operational delivery platforms according to the SORT agreement.
Observations
The While House statement highlights that "the U.S. nuclear stockpile will be less than one-quarter its size at the end of the Cold War" [1991, ed.]. But the stockpile the administration plans for 2012 is large by post-Cold War standards:
* Four times the combined number of nuclear weapons of all the world’s nuclear weapons states, excluding Russia.
* Almost half of the stockpile – a maximum of 2,200 warheads – will be operational, and a third of those (more than 850) will be on alert.
* More than 10 times bigger than in 1950, when the United States decided to contain the Soviet Union.
Although the White House says the planned reductions seek to "reduce U.S. reliance on nuclear weapons," the statement not only reaffirms that "a credible deterrent remains an essential part of U.S. national security," but also declares that "nuclear forces remain key to meeting emerging security challenges."
In the weeks ahead, we will fine-tune this estimate further.
Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century 
Major US cities are hit after Russia launches some its 5,000 nuclear warheads in error due to its decaying warning system. This graphic opened Doomsday Machine I on History Channel‘s Modern Marvels in which FAS experts discussed the dangers. Image: History Channel Dec. 28, 2004.Nuclear weapons have been a focus of FAS work since its founding in 1945 by scientists concerned about control of the awesome new technology they had helped create.
Today we are often asked to speak on the dangers of radiological weapons known as dirty bombs. We inform on the dangers of nuclear weapons proliferation by individuals, non-state terrorists, or states. We follow next generation nuclear weapons development including proposed “bunker busters.”
We stay on top of the debate over resuming nuclear weapons testing. We track Administration policy and hard-to-find reports for Congress.
In January 2005 FAS released a study that asked: What missions remain for US nuclear weapons now, 15 years after the end of the Cold War? What rationales justify our keeping 6,000 deployed warheads, plus missiles, bombers and other support, at a cost of <$8 billion taxpayer dollars per year? Why does Russia try to keep <5,000 warheads officially deployed, though they are daily more prone to accidental launch against?
In Missions for Nuclear Weapons after the Cold War FAS Strategic Studies Project Director Ivan Oelrich finds that, of 15 missions claimed for US nuclear forces, only one justifies their present size and structure: a first strike against Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal. Our contined ability to execute such an attack, makes Russia keep its large force to deter us. The two nations stay locked in Cold War military postures, even though no stakes between us justify such holocaust.
“The US and Russian arsenals are the elephant in the living room that no one wants to talk about,” Oelrich says. “Yet millions of Americans could be killed after the launch of even part of the Russian force. By comparison, a dirty bomb attack most likely would kill hundreds of thousands.”
--
Try our NEW Bomb-A-City Calculator. Pick an American city. Pick the size of the bomb you wish to detonate virtually (1 kt to 4 MT). Choose your method of delivery (aircraft or automobile/suitcase). Then see the radius within which most buildings would be destroyed.
What can we do?
“November 2005 will mark the 15th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. This is the year to downsize and restructure both sides’ nuclear forces more drastically than is required by 2012 by the Moscow Treaty,” Oelrich said in releasing his report. How low should we go? Oelrich did the numbers in a paper published by the Institute for Defense Analyses in 2001.--
FAS urges individuals and groups to contact members of Congress to stop work on next generation nuclear weapons including “bunker busters.” FAS urges cool-headed, technically accurate tracking of proliferation issues concerning North Korea, Iran, Pakistan and others. FAS urges citizens to inform themselves about Administration policy and Congressional reports by visting our new Documents page.
Major US cities are hit after Russia launches some its 5,000 nuclear warheads in error due to its decaying warning system. This graphic opened Doomsday Machine I on History Channel‘s Modern Marvels in which FAS experts discussed the dangers. Image: History Channel Dec. 28, 2004.Nuclear weapons have been a focus of FAS work since its founding in 1945 by scientists concerned about control of the awesome new technology they had helped create.Today we are often asked to speak on the dangers of radiological weapons known as dirty bombs. We inform on the dangers of nuclear weapons proliferation by individuals, non-state terrorists, or states. We follow next generation nuclear weapons development including proposed “bunker busters.”
We stay on top of the debate over resuming nuclear weapons testing. We track Administration policy and hard-to-find reports for Congress.
In January 2005 FAS released a study that asked: What missions remain for US nuclear weapons now, 15 years after the end of the Cold War? What rationales justify our keeping 6,000 deployed warheads, plus missiles, bombers and other support, at a cost of <$8 billion taxpayer dollars per year? Why does Russia try to keep <5,000 warheads officially deployed, though they are daily more prone to accidental launch against?
In Missions for Nuclear Weapons after the Cold War FAS Strategic Studies Project Director Ivan Oelrich finds that, of 15 missions claimed for US nuclear forces, only one justifies their present size and structure: a first strike against Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal. Our contined ability to execute such an attack, makes Russia keep its large force to deter us. The two nations stay locked in Cold War military postures, even though no stakes between us justify such holocaust.
“The US and Russian arsenals are the elephant in the living room that no one wants to talk about,” Oelrich says. “Yet millions of Americans could be killed after the launch of even part of the Russian force. By comparison, a dirty bomb attack most likely would kill hundreds of thousands.”
--
Try our NEW Bomb-A-City Calculator. Pick an American city. Pick the size of the bomb you wish to detonate virtually (1 kt to 4 MT). Choose your method of delivery (aircraft or automobile/suitcase). Then see the radius within which most buildings would be destroyed.
What can we do?
“November 2005 will mark the 15th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. This is the year to downsize and restructure both sides’ nuclear forces more drastically than is required by 2012 by the Moscow Treaty,” Oelrich said in releasing his report. How low should we go? Oelrich did the numbers in a paper published by the Institute for Defense Analyses in 2001.--
FAS urges individuals and groups to contact members of Congress to stop work on next generation nuclear weapons including “bunker busters.” FAS urges cool-headed, technically accurate tracking of proliferation issues concerning North Korea, Iran, Pakistan and others. FAS urges citizens to inform themselves about Administration policy and Congressional reports by visting our new Documents page.
Ways of Knowing About Weapons: The Cold War's End at the Los Alamos National Laboratory This is a Ph.D. dissertation by Dr. Laura McNamara, completed at the University of New Mexico Department of Anthropology in 2001. This dissertation is a cultural anthropology of the nuclear weapons program at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
This is a Ph.D. dissertation by Dr. Laura McNamara, completed at the University of New Mexico Department of Anthropology in 2001. This dissertation is a cultural anthropology of the nuclear weapons program at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
India adds oomph to its space race
India's development of a cryogenic engine places it in the ranks of China, the US, Japan, Russia and Europe when it comes to rocket power. The engines are used for communications satellites and will allow India to compete for the commercial satellite market. For less peaceful purposes, the engine will ramp up India's ballistic missile capabilities. - Siddharth Srivastava (Dec 19, '07)
India's development of a cryogenic engine places it in the ranks of China, the US, Japan, Russia and Europe when it comes to rocket power. The engines are used for communications satellites and will allow India to compete for the commercial satellite market. For less peaceful purposes, the engine will ramp up India's ballistic missile capabilities. - Siddharth Srivastava (Dec 19, '07)
Nonproliferation
Understanding the NIE
In a new proliferation analysis, Carnegie Senior Associate Sharon Squassoni discusses the implications of the unclassified summary of the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran. She explores why the NIE has become controversial and what it really says—and does not say—about Iran's intentions and capabilities.
Assessing the National Intelligence Estimate
While the NIE technically removes the “nuclear weapon program” label from Iranian uranium enrichment and plutonium production activities, Iran continues to pose a potential real threat, argues Carnegie's George Perkovich in a new analysis. Perkovich updates his 2005 Report, Changing Iran’s Nuclear Interests, which suggested the possibility that Iran decided in 2003 to cease clandestine activities in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Weighing the Impact of Iran's Uranium Program
Carnegie's Pierre Goldschmidt recently appeared on NPR's Morning Edition to discuss the impact of Iran's uranium enrichment program in the context of the December 3 release of the unclassified NIE on Iran. Even if Iran has, as reported, stopped its efforts to build a nuclear weapon, it continues to pursue uranium enrichment and other technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons. According to Goldschmidt, the NIE did not draw a clear distinction between the intention to develop nuclear weapons and the intention to develop nuclear weapons capability.
What Will Happen to Diplomatic Efforts with Iran?
In a recent Weekend Edition Sunday on NPR, Carnegie's Karim Sadjadpour spoke with Michele Kelemen on Iranian–U.S. negotiating positions in light of the release of the latest NIE. U.S. intelligence services say that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program; Russia and China are likely to continue to resist the tough diplomatic approach favored by the U.S. If Washington drops those conditions, it could look weak in the face of Iranian hardliners.
Time to Talk to Iran
In the Washington Post, Carnegie Senior Associate Robert Kagan suggests a new course of action for the Bush Administration following the release of the NIE on Iran: opening direct talks between the United States and Iran. "With its policy tools broken, the Bush administration can sit around isolated for the next year," writes Kagan. "Or it can seize the initiative, and do the next administration a favor, by opening direct talks with Tehran."
Risks and Realities: The "New Nuclear Energy Revival"
In Arms Control Today, Carnegie's Sharon Squassoni writes about the "new nuclear energy revival." "Concern about greenhouse gas emissions and energy security combined with forecasts of strong growth in electricity demand has awakened dormant interest in nuclear energy," she writes. "Yet, the industry has not yet fully addressed the issues that have kept global nuclear energy capacity roughly the same for the last two decades."
Understanding the NIEIn a new proliferation analysis, Carnegie Senior Associate Sharon Squassoni discusses the implications of the unclassified summary of the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran. She explores why the NIE has become controversial and what it really says—and does not say—about Iran's intentions and capabilities.
Assessing the National Intelligence EstimateWhile the NIE technically removes the “nuclear weapon program” label from Iranian uranium enrichment and plutonium production activities, Iran continues to pose a potential real threat, argues Carnegie's George Perkovich in a new analysis. Perkovich updates his 2005 Report, Changing Iran’s Nuclear Interests, which suggested the possibility that Iran decided in 2003 to cease clandestine activities in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Weighing the Impact of Iran's Uranium ProgramCarnegie's Pierre Goldschmidt recently appeared on NPR's Morning Edition to discuss the impact of Iran's uranium enrichment program in the context of the December 3 release of the unclassified NIE on Iran. Even if Iran has, as reported, stopped its efforts to build a nuclear weapon, it continues to pursue uranium enrichment and other technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons. According to Goldschmidt, the NIE did not draw a clear distinction between the intention to develop nuclear weapons and the intention to develop nuclear weapons capability.
What Will Happen to Diplomatic Efforts with Iran? In a recent Weekend Edition Sunday on NPR, Carnegie's Karim Sadjadpour spoke with Michele Kelemen on Iranian–U.S. negotiating positions in light of the release of the latest NIE. U.S. intelligence services say that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program; Russia and China are likely to continue to resist the tough diplomatic approach favored by the U.S. If Washington drops those conditions, it could look weak in the face of Iranian hardliners.
Time to Talk to IranIn the Washington Post, Carnegie Senior Associate Robert Kagan suggests a new course of action for the Bush Administration following the release of the NIE on Iran: opening direct talks between the United States and Iran. "With its policy tools broken, the Bush administration can sit around isolated for the next year," writes Kagan. "Or it can seize the initiative, and do the next administration a favor, by opening direct talks with Tehran."
Risks and Realities: The "New Nuclear Energy Revival"In Arms Control Today, Carnegie's Sharon Squassoni writes about the "new nuclear energy revival." "Concern about greenhouse gas emissions and energy security combined with forecasts of strong growth in electricity demand has awakened dormant interest in nuclear energy," she writes. "Yet, the industry has not yet fully addressed the issues that have kept global nuclear energy capacity roughly the same for the last two decades."
Saving the Relationship, The Moscow Times
Iran Receives Nuclear Fuel in Blow to U.S., The New York Times
German Minister Opposes Nuclear Aid to Middle East, Deutsche Welle
Gulf Arms: Complex Motives, ISN Security Watch
Nuclear Warhead Cut From Spending Bill, The Washington Post
China's Top Nuclear Envoy Inspects NKorea Nuke Disablement Process, Associated Press
Japan Shoots Down Test Missile in Space: Defence Minister, Associated Press
Iran Receives Nuclear Fuel in Blow to U.S., The New York Times German Minister Opposes Nuclear Aid to Middle East, Deutsche Welle Gulf Arms: Complex Motives, ISN Security Watch Nuclear Warhead Cut From Spending Bill, The Washington Post China's Top Nuclear Envoy Inspects NKorea Nuke Disablement Process, Associated Press Japan Shoots Down Test Missile in Space: Defence Minister, Associated Press
French nuclear group targets third of new reactors
Paris (AFP) Dec 19, 2007 - Areva, the world's largest nuclear power group, wants to account for a third of all new nuclear reactors built worldwide between now and 2030, company chief executive Anne Lauvergeon said Wednesday. "Between now and 2030 we believe there could be 100 to 300 (nuclear reactors built around the world)," she told the French National Assembly's economic affairs committee. "We want a third of ... more
+ Outside View: Russia settles Bushehr row
Moscow (UPI) Dec 19, 2007 - Russia and Iran may set up a joint venture to run the Bushehr nuclear power plant and ensure its safety. "We have agreed a time-frame with the Iranian customer for completing the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Difficulties with the Iranian customer have been settled. We'll be able to give an exact time-frame for completing the plant's construction and its commissionin ... more
+ Russia offers to help Libya in pursuit of nuclear energy
Moscow (AFP) Dec 19, 2007 - Russia offered Wednesday to help Libya in its pursuit of nuclear energy and announced a visit to the former pariah state this weekend by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, a report said. "We are ready to help Libya realise its enduring right to attain civilian nuclear (energy)," foreign ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said, according to the Ria Novosti news agency. Kamynin said Lavrov wo ... more
+ Iran sees Bushehr plant at full capacity in one year: official
Tehran (AFP) Dec 18, 2007 - Iran expects its first nuclear power plant will produce electricity at full capacity in around a year after passing a "critical stage" with the delivery of fuel from Russia, a top official said on Tuesday. The 1,000 megawatt plant in the southern city of Bushehr could come on line within three months at up to 200 megawatts before being cranked up to full capacity nine months later, said Moha ... more
+ Italy begins shipments of uranium to France: report
Rome (AFP) Dec 16, 2007 - A first shipment of uranium bars left a disused nuclear plant in northern Italy on Sunday bound for France, where they will be reprocessed in Le Hague, Normandy, the ANSA news agency reported. The 34 uranium bars -- the first 7.5 tonnes of 235 tonnes of waste to be sent to France for disposal -- were first loaded in two casks onto a truck under heavy guard, then placed on a special train for ... more
Paris (AFP) Dec 19, 2007 - Areva, the world's largest nuclear power group, wants to account for a third of all new nuclear reactors built worldwide between now and 2030, company chief executive Anne Lauvergeon said Wednesday. "Between now and 2030 we believe there could be 100 to 300 (nuclear reactors built around the world)," she told the French National Assembly's economic affairs committee. "We want a third of ... more+ Outside View: Russia settles Bushehr row
Moscow (UPI) Dec 19, 2007 - Russia and Iran may set up a joint venture to run the Bushehr nuclear power plant and ensure its safety. "We have agreed a time-frame with the Iranian customer for completing the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Difficulties with the Iranian customer have been settled. We'll be able to give an exact time-frame for completing the plant's construction and its commissionin ... more+ Russia offers to help Libya in pursuit of nuclear energy
Moscow (AFP) Dec 19, 2007 - Russia offered Wednesday to help Libya in its pursuit of nuclear energy and announced a visit to the former pariah state this weekend by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, a report said. "We are ready to help Libya realise its enduring right to attain civilian nuclear (energy)," foreign ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said, according to the Ria Novosti news agency. Kamynin said Lavrov wo ... more+ Iran sees Bushehr plant at full capacity in one year: official
Tehran (AFP) Dec 18, 2007 - Iran expects its first nuclear power plant will produce electricity at full capacity in around a year after passing a "critical stage" with the delivery of fuel from Russia, a top official said on Tuesday. The 1,000 megawatt plant in the southern city of Bushehr could come on line within three months at up to 200 megawatts before being cranked up to full capacity nine months later, said Moha ... more+ Italy begins shipments of uranium to France: report
Rome (AFP) Dec 16, 2007 - A first shipment of uranium bars left a disused nuclear plant in northern Italy on Sunday bound for France, where they will be reprocessed in Le Hague, Normandy, the ANSA news agency reported. The 34 uranium bars -- the first 7.5 tonnes of 235 tonnes of waste to be sent to France for disposal -- were first loaded in two casks onto a truck under heavy guard, then placed on a special train for ... more
We Need New Nukes by Caspar Weinberger, Jr. America must improve our warfare capabilities now, not weaken them.
NUCLEAR.WIRE
US expert on Korea returns from trip to NKorea: officials
Uranium traces found on NKorean tubing: US report
US envoy urges Iran to own up to nuclear weapons programme
Nuclear India moves closer to missile defence shield
France's Sarkozy to visit India Jan 24, nuclear deal on agenda
NKorea must scrap nukes for its own good, says SKorea's Lee
Rice does not rule out NKorea visit, speaks of 'normalization'
Powers fail to reach deal on Iran sanctions
Rice declines to rule out trip to NKorea
Rice urges North Korea to meet nuclear obligations
US expert on Korea returns from trip to NKorea: officials
Uranium traces found on NKorean tubing: US report
US envoy urges Iran to own up to nuclear weapons programme
Nuclear India moves closer to missile defence shield
France's Sarkozy to visit India Jan 24, nuclear deal on agenda
NKorea must scrap nukes for its own good, says SKorea's Lee
Rice does not rule out NKorea visit, speaks of 'normalization'
Powers fail to reach deal on Iran sanctions
Rice declines to rule out trip to NKorea
Rice urges North Korea to meet nuclear obligations
NUCLEAR.WIRE
Russia FM in Libya for nuclear talks
Koreas, China to meet on NKorea energy aid: officials
US expert on Korea returns from trip to NKorea: officials
Uranium traces found on NKorean tubing: US report
US envoy urges Iran to own up to nuclear weapons programme
Nuclear India moves closer to missile defence shield
France's Sarkozy to visit India Jan 24, nuclear deal on agenda
NKorea must scrap nukes for its own good, says SKorea's Lee
Rice does not rule out NKorea visit, speaks of 'normalization'
Powers fail to reach deal on Iran sanctions
Russia FM in Libya for nuclear talks
Koreas, China to meet on NKorea energy aid: officials
US expert on Korea returns from trip to NKorea: officials
Uranium traces found on NKorean tubing: US report
US envoy urges Iran to own up to nuclear weapons programme
Nuclear India moves closer to missile defence shield
France's Sarkozy to visit India Jan 24, nuclear deal on agenda
NKorea must scrap nukes for its own good, says SKorea's Lee
Rice does not rule out NKorea visit, speaks of 'normalization'
Powers fail to reach deal on Iran sanctions
NUCLEAR.WIRE
Pakistan's nuclear weapons safe, despite unrest: analysts
France could provide Egypt with nuclear help: Sarkozy
White House confident Pakistan nuclear arsenal is secure
Analysts disagree on threat to Pakistan nuclear arsenal
Analysts say Pakistan facing worst crisis in history
World media says Pakistan in 'nightmare scenario'
SKorean MPs vote to extend Iraq troop deployment: spokesman
World media says Pakistan now in 'nightmare scenario'
Russia delivers more nuclear fuel to Iran: official
Pakistan vote needs delay to avoid chaos: analysts
Pakistan's nuclear weapons safe, despite unrest: analysts
France could provide Egypt with nuclear help: Sarkozy
White House confident Pakistan nuclear arsenal is secure
Analysts disagree on threat to Pakistan nuclear arsenal
Analysts say Pakistan facing worst crisis in history
World media says Pakistan in 'nightmare scenario'
SKorean MPs vote to extend Iraq troop deployment: spokesman
World media says Pakistan now in 'nightmare scenario'
Russia delivers more nuclear fuel to Iran: official
Pakistan vote needs delay to avoid chaos: analysts
NUCLEAR.WIRE
NKorea fails to meet year-end nuclear deadline
US warning to North Korea as nuclear deadline lapses
US prepares new nuclear talks after NKorean deadline lapses
NKorea set to miss year-end nuclear deadline
Japan regrets NKorea missing nuclear deadline
No radioactive leak at Vietnam oil rig plant, say officials
US stuck with Musharraf: White House runners
US presses N Korea as nuclear deadline looms
US urges nuclear disclosure from N Korea before deadline
US urges nuclear disclosure from North Korea before deadline
NKorea fails to meet year-end nuclear deadline
US warning to North Korea as nuclear deadline lapses
US prepares new nuclear talks after NKorean deadline lapses
NKorea set to miss year-end nuclear deadline
Japan regrets NKorea missing nuclear deadline
No radioactive leak at Vietnam oil rig plant, say officials
US stuck with Musharraf: White House runners
US presses N Korea as nuclear deadline looms
US urges nuclear disclosure from N Korea before deadline
US urges nuclear disclosure from North Korea before deadline
NUCLEAR.WIRE
NKorean leader still undecided on giving up nukes: analyst
Iran envoy says ties with Egypt improving
Iran's top nuclear negotiator reshuffles team
Pakistan, India swap nuclear lists
NKorea calls for stronger military, economy in 2008
NKorea fails to meet year-end nuclear deadline
US warning to North Korea as nuclear deadline lapses
US prepares new nuclear talks after NKorean deadline lapses
NKorea set to miss year-end nuclear deadline
Japan regrets NKorea missing nuclear deadline
NKorean leader still undecided on giving up nukes: analyst
Iran envoy says ties with Egypt improving
Iran's top nuclear negotiator reshuffles team
Pakistan, India swap nuclear lists
NKorea calls for stronger military, economy in 2008
NKorea fails to meet year-end nuclear deadline
US warning to North Korea as nuclear deadline lapses
US prepares new nuclear talks after NKorean deadline lapses
NKorea set to miss year-end nuclear deadline
Japan regrets NKorea missing nuclear deadline
Top Five Nuclear Issues of 2007
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/200...r_top_five.html
By Joseph Cirincione, Alexandra Bell
December 28, 2007
The close of 2007 reveals it was a roller coaster year for nuclear issues, both positive and perilous. We picked the five most important issues of the past year that have had and will have the most impact on U.S. policy in 2008. We explore this top five list in reverse order of importance—to give U.S. policymakers a clear list of priorities for the coming year—but first, we would be remiss not to mention the close contenders that did not make our list, including:
Deal or No Deal with India. The Bush administration this year cut a nuclear trade deal with India, ending 33 years of restrictions after India cheated on pledges not to use civilian nuclear technology to make bombs. Proponents said it would cement a new strategic relationship; opponents said it blew a hole in the non-proliferation regime. Indian domestic politicians are close to killing the deal, as both the left and the right work to block government approval.
All I Wanted for Christmas Was a New Nuclear Bomb. Congress played the Grinch, delaying production funds for a new nuclear weapon sought by the Bush administration. The announcement in late December that the total U.S. arsenal will shrink to about 5,000 weapons by the end of the decade underscored congressional requirements for a comprehensive plan before it authorizes any new weapon.
Not in My Backyard. The Bush administration also wanted to start building anti-missile bases in Poland and the Czech Republic to counter Iran. The plan backfired, roiling U.S.-Russian relations, provoking opposition from the Polish and Czech people, publics, and causing Congress to deny construction funds until it gets studies verifying that the threat is real and the technology works.
The Mystery Box in the Desert. Israel bombed a square building in Syria anonymous officials claimed was a nuclear reactor built with North Korean aid. Four months after the strike, conflicting reports and fuzzy data mean we still do not know if this was a bold strike at a covert program, a mistaken attack based on faulty intelligence, or an Israeli message to Iran. International inspectors that could solve the puzzle have still not been called in to investigate.
All four of these nuclear developments in 2007 that could rise in prominence in 2008 were important, but we believe the top five issues of 2007 with more serious implications in 2008 are:
No. 5: Do You Know Where Your Nukes Are? The U.S. Air Force lost track of the equivalent of 60 Hiroshima bombs for 36 hours, as a B-52 bomber flew across the country with six nuclear missiles no one knew were tucked under its wings. The Air Force has not flown nuclear weapons on bombers for almost 40 years and has not even practiced loading these weapons on bombers for over 16 years. The live bombs were put on by accident. Most experts thought it impossible that any aircrew could get past the half-dozen security checks designed to prevent the unauthorized use of the most dangerous weapons on earth.
Yet, Washington Post reporter Joby Warrick disclosed that the loaded bomber "sat on the tarmac overnight without special guards, protected for 15 hours by only the base's exterior chain-link fence and roving security patrols." To its credit, the Air Force disciplined the officers and crews involved. But if the country with the most sophisticated nuclear security system in the world can lose six hydrogen bombs, what could happen in other countries? How secure are the estimated 15,000 weapons in Russia? Or those in Pakistan? Or the highly enriched uranium and plutonium—enough for hundreds of thousands of weapons—scattered in hundreds of buildings in over 40 countries?
No 4: Winding Down the North Korea Nuclear Program. What a difference a year makes. By the end of 2006, President Bush’s policy had forced the collapse of the deal that had frozen North Korea’s plutonium production, triggering new North Korean tests of a long-range missile—that exploded soon after launch—and then its first nuclear weapon that fizzled, but sent shock waves around the world and started debate in Japan about whether that nation needed its own nuclear weapons. After President Bush shifted to negotiations reminiscent of Clinton-era efforts, 2007 ended with a deal that shut down the plutonium reactor, began its disablement, and could conclude in 2008 with the full disclosure and dismantlement of the nuclear program and the normalization of U.S.-North Korean relations.
Suspicions still run high on both sides. Full North Korean compliance is not at all assured; and there are already delays to the most recent accord—par for the course when dealing with Pyongyang. But the overall progress is encouraging. Responding to a personal letter from President Bush, North Korean officials confirmed that they would stick to the deal if America did the same. Despite efforts by neoconservatives to use everything from the Israeli attack on Syria to the election of Lee Myung-bak as South Korea’s new president to derail the deal, all signs are that Bush is staying with what could be his one major foreign policy victory.
No. 3: An Iranian Puzzle Inside an Enigma Wrapped in Uranium. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s vitriolic attacks on the United States and Israel continued, as did the development of his nation’s 3,000 centrifuges. These machines are running at only 10 percent of their designed capabilities, but once perfected and multiplied to tens of thousands, these machines could eventually produce fuel for reactors or bombs. A new U.S. National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran ended any covert work on weapons in 2003 and has likely not resumed since. With the likelihood of an immediate Iranian nuclear breakout now considered remote, the new intelligence estimate derailed the belligerent Bush administration rhetoric and strategy of the past year that rested on military options now clearly off the table.
The failure of the U.S. strategy to compel Iranian compliance or collapse temporarily weakens our leverage. A third United Nations sanctions resolution against Iran will be weak, if it happens at all. Russia has delivered the first two—and long delayed—shipments of nuclear fuel for Iran’s reactor. And the Iranians are doing a touchdown dance in the end zone. But it does not mean the game is over.
The Iran challenge is still serious, but the new intelligence estimate could bring U.S. policy more in line with other countries that see this not as a nuclear- bomb crisis but as a nuclear- diplomacy crisis. A new strategy could contain and engage Iran. The United States is still the most powerful country in the world with global alliances that include most of Iran’s neighbors, while Iran is a relatively isolated nation with a stagnant economy the size of Thailand’s, whose major exports after oil and gas are dates, pistachios, and carpets. There are multiple levers to use, if U.S. leaders are smart enough to use them— and if Iranian pragmatists are smart enough to know when to make a deal.
No 2: A Nuclear-Armed Pakistan Teeters on the Edge. The assassination this week of former prime minister and top opposition leader Benazir Bhutto and the intensification of the political crisis in Pakistan at the end of the year brings into sharp relief our most immediate nuclear threat. It comes not from Iraq or Iran, but Pakistan. With an unstable military ruler, enough material for 50- to- 100 nuclear bombs, strong Islamic fundamentalist influences in the country and armed, Islamic fundamentalist groups—including Al Qaeda—operating within its territory, Pakistan is the most dangerous country on earth.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and material are believed secure for now, but increased instability could split the military or distract the units guarding the weapon materials, providing an opening for a raid by an organized radical group. For all the focus on Iraq and Iran over the past six years, it is in Pakistan that Osama bin Laden may have his best chance of getting the nuclear weapon we know he wants.
It did not have to be this way. The crisis underscores the serious consequences of the failed Bush doctrine that saw regime change as the cure for nuclear proliferation and the military as the major instrument of statecraft. Rather than focus on the actual threats from nuclear weapons and Al Qaeda, administration officials systematically inflated threats elsewhere to justify pre-existing plans to attack Iraq and apparently Iran.
If President Bush had stayed focused on pursuing Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora in Afghanistan back in 2001 instead of diverting troops to Iraq, Al Qaeda would not have had camps in Pakistan to train its assassins. If he had focused on promoting democracy rather that propping up a military dictator, Pakistan would have already had elections and a new government. If President Bush had worked on eliminating nuclear weapons where they actually existed instead of where they might, Pakistan would be reducing its arsenal, not expanding it. Bad policy has consequences; Pakistan is now suffering from years of wrong choices.
No. 1: Cold Warriors Prepare for Another Battle: Critical Nonproliferation. The greatest hope for reducing all these nuclear threats came from a policy plan developed completely outside the frame established by the Bush administration and largely followed by the press. The problem, said former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn in a January 4 Wall Street Journal op-ed, is not just nuclear weapons in the hands of rogue regimes, but nuclear weapons anywhere.
The answer, said these four veteran cold warriors, is for the United States to: recommit to the vision of eliminating nuclear weapons and marry that vision with an eight-point action plan, including steep reductions in U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals, ratification of the nuclear test ban treaty, eliminating as much nuclear weapon material as possible, and securing all weapons and material as well as we secure the gold in Fort Knox.
Their effort picked up momentum and new adherents throughout the year. They will soon announce the support of many other former secretaries of defense and state. In October, they got the endorsement of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who told the group: “You have a big vision, a vision as big as humanity—to free the world of nuclear weapons… Let me know how I can use my power and influence as governor to further your vision.” Schwarzenegger’s embrace of a new role as “The Eliminator,” signals the broad appeal of their plan.
Though the dream of a nuclear-free world has been advocated by many over the past six decades, for the first time since the Truman years the call comes not from the left, but from the moderate middle. This is the fusion of John F. Kennedy’s vision that “we must abolish the weapons of war before they abolish us,” with Ronald Reagan’s vision of making “nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.”
It also marks a rediscovery of Reagan as a nuclear abolitionist who came very close at his summit with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1986 to a deal eliminating all nuclear weapons within 10 years. As Schultz, Kissinger, Perry, and Nunn emphasized: “Reassertion of the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and practical measures toward achieving that goal would be, and would be perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with America's moral heritage.”
We will hear much more about all these nuclear stories in 2008, but it is this last issue that holds the greatest promise and hope for the future.
Joseph Cirincione is a senior fellow and Alexandra Bell is a research associate at the Center for American Progress in Washington, DC. To read more about the Center's foreign policy decision please see our National Security page.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/200...r_top_five.html
By Joseph Cirincione, Alexandra Bell
December 28, 2007
The close of 2007 reveals it was a roller coaster year for nuclear issues, both positive and perilous. We picked the five most important issues of the past year that have had and will have the most impact on U.S. policy in 2008. We explore this top five list in reverse order of importance—to give U.S. policymakers a clear list of priorities for the coming year—but first, we would be remiss not to mention the close contenders that did not make our list, including:
Deal or No Deal with India. The Bush administration this year cut a nuclear trade deal with India, ending 33 years of restrictions after India cheated on pledges not to use civilian nuclear technology to make bombs. Proponents said it would cement a new strategic relationship; opponents said it blew a hole in the non-proliferation regime. Indian domestic politicians are close to killing the deal, as both the left and the right work to block government approval.
All I Wanted for Christmas Was a New Nuclear Bomb. Congress played the Grinch, delaying production funds for a new nuclear weapon sought by the Bush administration. The announcement in late December that the total U.S. arsenal will shrink to about 5,000 weapons by the end of the decade underscored congressional requirements for a comprehensive plan before it authorizes any new weapon.
Not in My Backyard. The Bush administration also wanted to start building anti-missile bases in Poland and the Czech Republic to counter Iran. The plan backfired, roiling U.S.-Russian relations, provoking opposition from the Polish and Czech people, publics, and causing Congress to deny construction funds until it gets studies verifying that the threat is real and the technology works.
The Mystery Box in the Desert. Israel bombed a square building in Syria anonymous officials claimed was a nuclear reactor built with North Korean aid. Four months after the strike, conflicting reports and fuzzy data mean we still do not know if this was a bold strike at a covert program, a mistaken attack based on faulty intelligence, or an Israeli message to Iran. International inspectors that could solve the puzzle have still not been called in to investigate.
All four of these nuclear developments in 2007 that could rise in prominence in 2008 were important, but we believe the top five issues of 2007 with more serious implications in 2008 are:
No. 5: Do You Know Where Your Nukes Are? The U.S. Air Force lost track of the equivalent of 60 Hiroshima bombs for 36 hours, as a B-52 bomber flew across the country with six nuclear missiles no one knew were tucked under its wings. The Air Force has not flown nuclear weapons on bombers for almost 40 years and has not even practiced loading these weapons on bombers for over 16 years. The live bombs were put on by accident. Most experts thought it impossible that any aircrew could get past the half-dozen security checks designed to prevent the unauthorized use of the most dangerous weapons on earth.
Yet, Washington Post reporter Joby Warrick disclosed that the loaded bomber "sat on the tarmac overnight without special guards, protected for 15 hours by only the base's exterior chain-link fence and roving security patrols." To its credit, the Air Force disciplined the officers and crews involved. But if the country with the most sophisticated nuclear security system in the world can lose six hydrogen bombs, what could happen in other countries? How secure are the estimated 15,000 weapons in Russia? Or those in Pakistan? Or the highly enriched uranium and plutonium—enough for hundreds of thousands of weapons—scattered in hundreds of buildings in over 40 countries?
No 4: Winding Down the North Korea Nuclear Program. What a difference a year makes. By the end of 2006, President Bush’s policy had forced the collapse of the deal that had frozen North Korea’s plutonium production, triggering new North Korean tests of a long-range missile—that exploded soon after launch—and then its first nuclear weapon that fizzled, but sent shock waves around the world and started debate in Japan about whether that nation needed its own nuclear weapons. After President Bush shifted to negotiations reminiscent of Clinton-era efforts, 2007 ended with a deal that shut down the plutonium reactor, began its disablement, and could conclude in 2008 with the full disclosure and dismantlement of the nuclear program and the normalization of U.S.-North Korean relations.
Suspicions still run high on both sides. Full North Korean compliance is not at all assured; and there are already delays to the most recent accord—par for the course when dealing with Pyongyang. But the overall progress is encouraging. Responding to a personal letter from President Bush, North Korean officials confirmed that they would stick to the deal if America did the same. Despite efforts by neoconservatives to use everything from the Israeli attack on Syria to the election of Lee Myung-bak as South Korea’s new president to derail the deal, all signs are that Bush is staying with what could be his one major foreign policy victory.
No. 3: An Iranian Puzzle Inside an Enigma Wrapped in Uranium. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s vitriolic attacks on the United States and Israel continued, as did the development of his nation’s 3,000 centrifuges. These machines are running at only 10 percent of their designed capabilities, but once perfected and multiplied to tens of thousands, these machines could eventually produce fuel for reactors or bombs. A new U.S. National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran ended any covert work on weapons in 2003 and has likely not resumed since. With the likelihood of an immediate Iranian nuclear breakout now considered remote, the new intelligence estimate derailed the belligerent Bush administration rhetoric and strategy of the past year that rested on military options now clearly off the table.
The failure of the U.S. strategy to compel Iranian compliance or collapse temporarily weakens our leverage. A third United Nations sanctions resolution against Iran will be weak, if it happens at all. Russia has delivered the first two—and long delayed—shipments of nuclear fuel for Iran’s reactor. And the Iranians are doing a touchdown dance in the end zone. But it does not mean the game is over.
The Iran challenge is still serious, but the new intelligence estimate could bring U.S. policy more in line with other countries that see this not as a nuclear- bomb crisis but as a nuclear- diplomacy crisis. A new strategy could contain and engage Iran. The United States is still the most powerful country in the world with global alliances that include most of Iran’s neighbors, while Iran is a relatively isolated nation with a stagnant economy the size of Thailand’s, whose major exports after oil and gas are dates, pistachios, and carpets. There are multiple levers to use, if U.S. leaders are smart enough to use them— and if Iranian pragmatists are smart enough to know when to make a deal.
No 2: A Nuclear-Armed Pakistan Teeters on the Edge. The assassination this week of former prime minister and top opposition leader Benazir Bhutto and the intensification of the political crisis in Pakistan at the end of the year brings into sharp relief our most immediate nuclear threat. It comes not from Iraq or Iran, but Pakistan. With an unstable military ruler, enough material for 50- to- 100 nuclear bombs, strong Islamic fundamentalist influences in the country and armed, Islamic fundamentalist groups—including Al Qaeda—operating within its territory, Pakistan is the most dangerous country on earth.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and material are believed secure for now, but increased instability could split the military or distract the units guarding the weapon materials, providing an opening for a raid by an organized radical group. For all the focus on Iraq and Iran over the past six years, it is in Pakistan that Osama bin Laden may have his best chance of getting the nuclear weapon we know he wants.
It did not have to be this way. The crisis underscores the serious consequences of the failed Bush doctrine that saw regime change as the cure for nuclear proliferation and the military as the major instrument of statecraft. Rather than focus on the actual threats from nuclear weapons and Al Qaeda, administration officials systematically inflated threats elsewhere to justify pre-existing plans to attack Iraq and apparently Iran.
If President Bush had stayed focused on pursuing Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora in Afghanistan back in 2001 instead of diverting troops to Iraq, Al Qaeda would not have had camps in Pakistan to train its assassins. If he had focused on promoting democracy rather that propping up a military dictator, Pakistan would have already had elections and a new government. If President Bush had worked on eliminating nuclear weapons where they actually existed instead of where they might, Pakistan would be reducing its arsenal, not expanding it. Bad policy has consequences; Pakistan is now suffering from years of wrong choices.
No. 1: Cold Warriors Prepare for Another Battle: Critical Nonproliferation. The greatest hope for reducing all these nuclear threats came from a policy plan developed completely outside the frame established by the Bush administration and largely followed by the press. The problem, said former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn in a January 4 Wall Street Journal op-ed, is not just nuclear weapons in the hands of rogue regimes, but nuclear weapons anywhere.
The answer, said these four veteran cold warriors, is for the United States to: recommit to the vision of eliminating nuclear weapons and marry that vision with an eight-point action plan, including steep reductions in U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals, ratification of the nuclear test ban treaty, eliminating as much nuclear weapon material as possible, and securing all weapons and material as well as we secure the gold in Fort Knox.
Their effort picked up momentum and new adherents throughout the year. They will soon announce the support of many other former secretaries of defense and state. In October, they got the endorsement of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who told the group: “You have a big vision, a vision as big as humanity—to free the world of nuclear weapons… Let me know how I can use my power and influence as governor to further your vision.” Schwarzenegger’s embrace of a new role as “The Eliminator,” signals the broad appeal of their plan.
Though the dream of a nuclear-free world has been advocated by many over the past six decades, for the first time since the Truman years the call comes not from the left, but from the moderate middle. This is the fusion of John F. Kennedy’s vision that “we must abolish the weapons of war before they abolish us,” with Ronald Reagan’s vision of making “nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.”
It also marks a rediscovery of Reagan as a nuclear abolitionist who came very close at his summit with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1986 to a deal eliminating all nuclear weapons within 10 years. As Schultz, Kissinger, Perry, and Nunn emphasized: “Reassertion of the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and practical measures toward achieving that goal would be, and would be perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with America's moral heritage.”
We will hear much more about all these nuclear stories in 2008, but it is this last issue that holds the greatest promise and hope for the future.
Joseph Cirincione is a senior fellow and Alexandra Bell is a research associate at the Center for American Progress in Washington, DC. To read more about the Center's foreign policy decision please see our National Security page.
China planning to secure North Korea's nuclear arsenal: report
US envoy seeks '100 percent' truth from NKorea
IAEA chief to visit Tehran later this week
During Mideast tour, Bush to insist Iran remains a threat
US nuclear envoy to meet next SKorea president: official
US envoy on NKorea starts tour
Iran mocks US bid to break alliance with Syria
NKorea steps up anti-US propaganda amid stalled talks
Hillary Clinton proposes joint oversight of Pakistan nukes
Britain planning 'diplomatic surge' in Mideast, SAsia: minister
US envoy seeks '100 percent' truth from NKorea
IAEA chief to visit Tehran later this week
During Mideast tour, Bush to insist Iran remains a threat
US nuclear envoy to meet next SKorea president: official
US envoy on NKorea starts tour
Iran mocks US bid to break alliance with Syria
NKorea steps up anti-US propaganda amid stalled talks
Hillary Clinton proposes joint oversight of Pakistan nukes
Britain planning 'diplomatic surge' in Mideast, SAsia: minister
IAEA's Iran probe moves into final stage: diplomat
By Mark Heinrich
VIENNA (Reuters) - A U.N. inquiry into Iran's nuclear activity has entered its final phase with Tehran addressing U.S. intelligence about secret, past efforts to "weaponize" atomic material, a diplomat close to the process said on Tuesday.
The development coincides with International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei's decision to pay a rare visit to Tehran on Friday and Saturday for talks with Iranian leaders to speed efforts to clarify Iran's past and present nuclear work.
Tehran denies its program to generate electricity from enriching uranium is a facade for bomb-making. It long refused even to discuss intelligence obtained by U.N. inspectors pointing to military diversions, rejecting it as propaganda.
Therefore IAEA officials see Tehran's new readiness to examine and respond to the information as a potentially important step to rebuild confidence in its nuclear intentions.
Ahead of ElBaradei, IAEA officials flew into Tehran late on Monday to resume talks aimed at resolving lingering questions about the program. Iran hid it from the IAEA until 2003 and stonewalled inquiries until agreeing last August to come clean.
After broadly clarifying how work began with materials obtained from nuclear smugglers, Iran has begun substantive talks with IAEA officials on the intelligence about attempts to militarize the program, the diplomat said.
"The work plan (transparency process) is now looking at 'weaponization', so it's now in its final phase, or chapter, and this is very significant."
The issue involves alleged administrative and research links between processing of uranium ore, testing high explosives and designing a missile warhead. Iran has denied any such
By Mark Heinrich
VIENNA (Reuters) - A U.N. inquiry into Iran's nuclear activity has entered its final phase with Tehran addressing U.S. intelligence about secret, past efforts to "weaponize" atomic material, a diplomat close to the process said on Tuesday.
The development coincides with International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei's decision to pay a rare visit to Tehran on Friday and Saturday for talks with Iranian leaders to speed efforts to clarify Iran's past and present nuclear work.
Tehran denies its program to generate electricity from enriching uranium is a facade for bomb-making. It long refused even to discuss intelligence obtained by U.N. inspectors pointing to military diversions, rejecting it as propaganda.
Therefore IAEA officials see Tehran's new readiness to examine and respond to the information as a potentially important step to rebuild confidence in its nuclear intentions.
Ahead of ElBaradei, IAEA officials flew into Tehran late on Monday to resume talks aimed at resolving lingering questions about the program. Iran hid it from the IAEA until 2003 and stonewalled inquiries until agreeing last August to come clean.
After broadly clarifying how work began with materials obtained from nuclear smugglers, Iran has begun substantive talks with IAEA officials on the intelligence about attempts to militarize the program, the diplomat said.
"The work plan (transparency process) is now looking at 'weaponization', so it's now in its final phase, or chapter, and this is very significant."
The issue involves alleged administrative and research links between processing of uranium ore, testing high explosives and designing a missile warhead. Iran has denied any such