* the power of warheads on a single American MX or Russian SS-18 totals the power of all ordnance exploded in World War Two.
[Source: Vladimir Belous (director, Center of International and Strategic Surveys, Russia)]
* There are five legally defined nuclear weapons states within the Non-proliferation treaty (NPT): the United States, United Kingdom, France, China and Russia and there were three states outside the treaty, two of which have exploded nuclear weapons that's India and Pakistan, and one country that is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons but has never admitted it, and that's Israel.
* Under the NPT, which came into force in March 1970, signatory states renounce the option of ever acquiring such weapons and agree to an international safeguard regime.
In return, nuclear weapons powers have agreed to pursue negotiations on nuclear disarmament and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
See more recent nuclear weapons news
Sept 3, 2007
Iran's risky path
The Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1200 targets in Iran to annihilate the Iranians' military capability in three days, according to Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Centre. At a meeting organised by the foreign policy journal The National Interest, he said "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military." The Times of London reported that Mr. Debat voiced opinion that the Pentagon's plans for military action involve the use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq. Your humble nuclear.com editor disagrees. A three-day campaign such as described could be accomplished by air power. The US is not interested in a ground invasion of Iran -- we mainly want Iran to stop waging its war-by-proxy in Iraq and to stop pursuing nuclear weapons capability. Both of these involve vital US national security interests, and surely there are many in Iran who understand this. The question at this point is whether the smart fellows in Iran can change their nation's course before it's too late.
[Ref: Sarah Baxter (The Sunday Times of London), "Plan to annihilate Iran's military", The Australian, September 3, 2007, p. 11]
August 31, 2007
N-sub: India's stealthy agreement with Russia
On June 15, 2008, the Indian Navy will commission the INS Chakra, a 12,000-tonne Akula-II class nuclear-powered attack submarine, from the far eastern Russian port of Vladivostok. The submarine, which is being built at a shipyard in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, marks the fruition of a $650-million (Rs 2,600 crore) secret deal signed by the NDA government three-and-a-half years ago, which said that India would finance the construction of an unfinished Russian nuclear submarine hull and then lease it for 10 years. The impending acquisition of the Chakra gives India the long-awaited third leg of the nuclear triadÑthe others being air and land-based nuclear delivery platforms ... The lease of the Akula-II submarine -- originally slated for the cash-strapped Russian Navy and on which construction had ceased at the Amur shipyard in the 1990s -- will make India the worldÕs sixth power to operate a nuclear submarine. It has only one precedentÑthe three-year transfer of a Charlie-I class nuclear attack submarine (also named Chakra) from the Soviet Union in January 1988, which took advantage of a loophole in international treaties. The treaties prohibit the sale of nuclear submarines but do not object to a lease, provided the submarines are not equipped with nuclear weapons or missiles with a range of over 300 km. The Chakra will be stripped of its inventory of strategic cruise missiles with a range of 3,000 km, as these violate the Missile Technology Control Regime, but India will not be prevented from equipping the submarine with its own missiles, such as the indigenously built nuclear-tipped cruise missiles with a range of over 1,000 km. The 10-year lease -- which may be extended later -- differs from that of the Charlie-I class submarine in some important aspects. While the latterÕs reactor controls and missile launch area were manned by Soviet naval personnel, the new Chakra will be manned entirely by an Indian crew, which is to leave for Vladivostok in December. Nearly 300 Indian naval personnel, or three sets of crews, have already been trained to man the submarine at a specially constructed facility in Sosnovy Bor, a small town near St Petersburg in Russia.
[Source: Sandeep Unnithan, "The Secret Nuke Sub Deal | How a stealthy agreement with Russia gives India an undersea platform to launch nuclear weapons", India Today, September 3, 2007 cover date (subscription required)]
BLIX CRITICIZES HYPOCRITICAL PREACHING OF NONPROLIFERATION BY NATIONS, LIKE USA, THAT WON'T DISARM
Hans Blix told a Red Cross international humanitarian law conference in Wellington yesterday about frustration that nuclear-armed states were not living up to their end of the bargain and moving to disarm, a commitment made when they signed up to the non-proliferation treaty.
"It is not a recipe for success to preach to the rest of the world that they must stay away from nuclear weapons. Disarmament and non- proliferation are two sides of the same coin."
He also criticised the deployment of weapons in space, where some scientists were developing technology to benefit mankind while others were bent on destroying it.
Mr Blix said that despite the "rather pugnacious profile" of the Bush administration, there were signs of movement within the US on the issue of nuclear disarmament and international arms control. "So the question I think for the moment is whether the US is ready to re-occupy the driver's seat in international efforts for arms control and disarmament . . . whether it was going to be the lead wolf or the lone wolf."
[Source: Hank Schouten, "'Faith' drove US to war, says Blix", The Dominion Post (New Zealand), Aug 31, 2007]
March 23, 2007
March 10, 2007
* 
Where Those Reactors and Centrifuges Came From | The provenance of the North Korean centrifuge program is a useful lesson in nuclear proliferation.
Jeremy Bernstein, New York Times
"The North Koreans have reluctantly admitted that they have a centrifuge program but have not let any foreign observers see it. Such a program, if limited, would have been allowed by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. But the North Koreans would have had to declare it to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which then would have had the right to inspect it. This they did not do. Perhaps they enjoy the ambiguity. My own guess is that if they have an active program it is relatively small... The route that led from Soviet prisoners of war to the centrifuges in North Korea is so implausible that if one put it in a novel, no one would believe it." The route goes from Germany to Russia, back to Germany, and then, via A.Q. Khan, on to Pakistan and to North Korea.
March 2, 2007
*
CIA blunder 'prompted Korean nuclear race'
Andrew Gumbel, The Independent (UK)
A November 2002 CIA report to Congress included the assessment that North Korea was pursuing a uranium enrichment programme capable of providing the raw material for two or more nuclear weapons a year, starting "mid-decade". That prompted the US to cut off oil supplies to Pyongyang, to which North Korea responded by throwing out international weapons inspectors and ratcheting up its plutonium bomb programme. But now many intelligence officials doubt whether the North Koreans have a viable uranium enrichment programme, and administration officials have begun wondering if they could not have handled the North Korean crisis much more smartly if they had been in less of a hurry to get confrontational. On Tuesday, a veteran intelligence official called Joseph DeTrani told a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing that the government's certainty about the programme's existence was only at "the mid-confidence level", agency-speak meaning the information is not fully corroborated and some officials hold other views. On Wednesday, the Director of National Intelligence declassified a report on North Korea which stated: "The degree of progress towards producing enriched uranium remains unknown." Non-government weapons experts including David Kay and David Albright - both veterans of the Iraq intelligence fiasco - see such statements as the beginning of a full retraction and an admission that the CIA and other agencies jumped to conclusions based on insufficient evidence.
"The evidence doesn't support the extrapolation," Mr Albright, now president of the private Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, told The New York Times. "The extrapolation went too far." The extrapolation was based, principally, on seemingly solid evidence that North Korea obtained about 20 centrifuges for the production of enriched uranium from Abdul Qadeer Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's atom bomb, in 2000. When it transpired that North Korea was also buying aluminium tubes - not unlike the aluminium tubes so widely mentioned in connection with Iraq's (non-existent) nuclear programme - the CIA and the Bush administration saw a "smoking gun" that convinced them the enriched uranium programme was up and running. Mr Albright said the aluminium tubes were relatively weak and were not suitable for mass-producing centrifuges for a bomb programme as the US government suspected. The tubes the North Koreans bought were "very easy to get and not controlled" by global export agencies because they were regarded as largely harmless.
So the best assessment now seems to be that the North Koreans were stalled in their ambitions for lack of raw materials. "The administration appears to have made a very costly decision that has resulted in a fourfold increase in the nuclear weapons of North Korea," Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a members of the Armed Services Committee, said. "If that was based in part on mixing up North Korea's ambitions with their accomplishments, it's important." The Independent cites intelligence and Bush administration officials as saying that the apparent major intelligence blunder may have exacerbated tensions with Pyongyang over the past four years and goaded Kim Jong-Il into pressing ahead with last October's live nuclear test.
*
Latest Reports on Iran and North Korea Show a Newfound Caution Among Analysts
Mark Mazzetti, New York Times (NY)
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee this week, Mike McConnell, the new director of national intelligence, said that it was possible Iran could produce a nuclear weapon by the beginning of the next decade, but that it was also possible Iran would not develop a weapon until 2015. At the same hearing, another top official acknowledged publicly that the American intelligence agencies were less certain today than they were five years ago about whether North Korea was pursuing a clandestine uranium enrichment program... The more calibrated intelligence assessments that have come to light in recent weeks, particularly on Iran and North Korea, appear to show a new willingness by American spy agencies to concede the limits of their knowledge.
* South Africa - prosecutors seek news blackout on proceedings in AQ Khan smuggling network case
February 27, 2007
Netherlands - Petten High Flux Reactor has completed conversion from HEU to LEU fuel
HFR Petten is now fully operational with a complete low-enriched uranium core, and has obtained regulatory approval to continue such operation. The first LEU assembly was inserted into the reactor in November 2005, and conversion was planned to be completed through regular refueling outages by May 2006. The final increment of LEU fuel was inserted on May 6, 2006. The sixth and final annual report on the status of converting the reactor from high-enriched to low-enriched fuel, from US State Department to NRC, dated February 13, 2007, is available as ADAMS ACN ML070510448.
February 24, 2007
North Korea deal may have been last straw for former Rice-booster Robert Joseph, who has resigned as under secretary of state for arms control and disarmament
Although the White House claimed ignorance about the resignation last month of Robert Joseph as under secretary of state for arms control and disarmament, associates say he was upset generally with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's policies. The recent nuclear arms accord with North Korea was the last straw.
When asked last Tuesday whether Joseph disagreed with the Korean policy and resigned in protest over it, White House spokesman Tony Snow replied: "Not that I'm aware of. In fact, I don't have any idea." That evoked laughter from the assembled reporters.
Joseph had left the government after four years as a key aide to National Security Adviser Rice during President Bush's first term. But Rice pleaded with Joseph, saying she badly needed him at the State Department, and he agreed to take the job. His first experience at State did not prove a happy one, as he felt cut out of the action.
[Source: Robert D. Novak (syndicated columnist), ... DIPLOMATIC PROTEST, item in column titled 'Bill's Displeasure', townhall.com, Feb 24, 2007]
December 14, 2006
*
Skepticism over China nuclear capability
David Isenberg, Malaysia Sun
Does the US exaggerate China's nuclear weapons capability and threat? This author says yes, sort of. He also argues that the scare stories actually end up creating advances by China which the author presents as scary in itself. Call it a scare story jumble.
*
Developer, activist appeal bomb testing permit
John Upton, Tracy Press
*
Where the Bombs are, 2006
Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
*
Embracing junk science
Lawrence M. Krauss, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Review of Imaginary Weapons: A Journey Through the Pentagon's Scientific Underworld, by Sharon Weinberger
*
Atomic Mole Vanunu Breaks Ban on Interviews
Arutz Sheva
October 25, 2006
*
France to Order Nuclear-Powered Attack Submarines (Update2)
Bloomberg
The French government expects to award a contract for six Barracuda-class, nuclear-powered attack submarines to shipbuilder DCN and Areva SA ...
*
New strategic nuclear subs to join Russian fleet soon - Putin
Interfax-AVN (Russia)
MOSCOW. Oct 25 - New strategic nuclear submarines will join the Russian fleet in the near future, Russian President Vladimir Putin said during ...
*
AQ Khan had tried to leak Pak nuke details through letters
Zee News (India)
Islamabad, Oct 25: Pakistan's disgraced nuclear scientist AQ Khan 'collapsed and sought clemency' from President Pervez Musharraf after it was found that he ...
*
Special report on the Khan Network: Where is the justice?
EurekAlert (press release) (DC)
... Although Slebos was found guilty in late 2005 on five counts of illegally exporting dual-use nuclear parts, he received a reduced sentence and is appealing the ...
*
Rice: World events support 'axis of evil' claim
Evening Echo (Ireland)
The US Secretary of State made the claim yesterday after radio discussions on the North Korean nuclear test and the anti-Semitic remarks of Iranian President ...
*
What to do before Tehran gets the bomb
San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
The threat to American and global security posed by nuclear weapons in the hands of North Korea's dictator Kim Jong Il has dominated international headlines ...
*
Analysis: Cold War policies could return
Amber Corrin, UPI
*
Israel experts uphold nuclear vagueness
United Press International
TEL AVIV, Israel, Oct. 24 (UPI) -- Security experts are upholding the government's policy of 'vagueness' on Israeli nuclear capability. ...
*
Judge orders nuns to pay
Jackson Hole Star-Tribune (WY)
... They were convicted in 2003 of obstructing national defense and damaging government property when they protested US nuclear policies at the silo northeast of ...
July 4, 2006
Missile defense update - US, Japan and South Korea
The United States and its allies South Korea and Japan have taken quick steps over the past week to strengthen their missile defenses. Washington and Tokyo are working on a joint missile-defense shield, and South Korea is considering the purchase of American SM-2 defensive missiles for its destroyers.
[Source: Joseph Coleman (Associated Press), "N. Korea warns of nuke retaliation; U.S. urges Pyongyang to avoid missile launch and return to talks", Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, July 4, 2006, p. 6A]
June 28, 2006
Megatons to Megawatts has already produced fuel equivalent of 5.7-billion barrels of oil
The US-Russian HEU Agreement - the Megatons to Megawatts program - has eliminated 275 tonnes of highly enriched uranium (HEU), equivalent to 11 000 nuclear warheads, USEC Inc announced. Upon the program's completion in 2013, 500 tonnes of HEU from Russian nuclear warheads will have been downblended into low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel for use in commercial nuclear power plants. The 275 tonnes converted to date could generate enough electricity to meet the USA's demand for more than a year and contains the energy equivalent of 5.7 billion barrels of oil. (USEC, 28 June; see also News Briefing 05.38-4)
[Source: World Nuclear Association, WNA
May 5, 2006
N-weapons as deterrent to recurrence of trans-Atlantic slave trade
A pan-African politician who aspires to become president of Ghana has voiced stuff that we've never considered before. See more in today's entry on nuclear.com's Ghana news page.
April 6, 2006
* Uranium sales to proliferators free up other uranium for weapons programs
* India has not passed nuclear technology to others
* China - nuclear proliferation record poor despite signing NPT and missile treaty
* NPT is on its last gasp, if not actually defunct
* Nuclear weapons - "rollback" proposal by Sandy Gordon
April 3, 2006
* North Korea had 3-6 nuclear bombs by 1994, and may be making more now, sez Gen. LaPorte
April 2, 2006
* India deal - working on the nuances of IAEA safeguards
* Japan - reprocessing plant is part of energy policy, not quest for weapons
* [2006-03-30] Nukes for a Profit--Privatizing the Apocalypse
Frida Berrigan, CounterPunch
* [2006-03-28] Silent witness to nuke fallout; Newly released intelligence documents reveal the United States was present at French nuclear testing on Mururoa ...
The Dominion Post (Wellington, New Zealand), p. 6
American forces were secret guests at French nuclear tests at Mururoa, and CIA spies were actively monitoring the South Pacific just months before the Rainbow Warrior bombing, declassified files reveal. A US Central Intelligence Agency document dated May 1985 -- two months before Greenpeace's Rainbow Warrior was bombed by French agents -- noted anti-nuclear sentiment in the Pacific was very high. "The nuclear-testing issue has now become a very emotional one and probably can no longer be dealt with on a purely scientific basis," the CIA said... The CIA blamed the anti-nuclear sentiment on "sensational press reports that Mururoa Atoll is breaking apart and leaking large amounts of radioactive debris to the environment". A sentence next to this statement is blanked out.
The documents, some of which have remained secret for 60 years, show that as early as 1946 the US feared the French would sell nuclear secrets and almost from D-Day, 1944, the Americans worked to prevent France acquiring nuclear expertise. The documents noted intensive French efforts to obtain uranium around the world.
France conducted 41 atmospheric nuclear tests over Mururoa and Fangataufa between 1966 and 1974. It followed up with 134 underground nuclear tests at the same sites between 1975 and 1991. Eight more tests took place in 1995 and 1996.
* [2006-03-28] Arab Nations Urged to Enter Nuclear Club
Tanalee Smith, Guardian
* [2006-03-26] Bombing civilians is not only immoral, it's ineffective
AC Grayling, The Guardian
* [2006-03-23] 1983: Reagan launches Cold War into space
BBC News
* [2006-03-22] National Nuclear Security Administration: No nukes is good nukes--U.S. official says no plans for more tests
Keith Rogers, Las Vegas Review-Journal
* [2006-03-16] US backs first-strike attack plan
BBC News
* [2006-03-16] Bush Reaffirms Pre-Emptive Use of Force
Deb Riechmann, Guardian
* [2006-03-16] Bush clings to pre-emptive force
Steve Holland, Reuters
* [2006-03-10] Marshall Islands Nuke Test Victims to File Lawsuits
Yokwe
* [2006-03-03] Bush Promotes New Nuclear Plan
Wade Boese, Arms Control Today
* [2006-03-01] 1954: US tests hydrogen bomb in Bikini
BBC News
March 3, 2006
February 11, 2006
Iran - enrichment has begun using P2 centrifuges
October 17, 2005
* Venezuela - Chavez wants it all ("power, power")
October 16, 2005
October 5, 2005
* US ICBM policy proposed in Warner-Levin amendment to FY2006 Defense appropriations bill
* Sen. Byrd: Senate debate on nuclear weapons issues is stifled by deletion of provisions
May 28, 2005
[Source: International Herald Tribune (Paris, France), front page, May 28, 2005]
April 19, 2005
*
At the unholy altar of nuclear weapons; Canada has a key role to play in preventing erosion of non-proliferation pact ...
Douglas Roche, The Toronto Star, p. A21
The author of this article is former Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament. He emphasizes the implications of USA's ongoing (and in some ways advancing) nuclear weapons-related programs, given the disarmament provision in the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). He notes the delight with which Europe received news that Canada would not join US missile defense program, and urges Canada to take major role in helping USA understand the need to stop, uh, worshipping at the unholy altar of nuclear weapons.
A debate over the future of nuclear weapons will take place at the NPT Review conference May 2-27 at the United Nations. A high-level U.N. panel recently warned: "We are approaching a point at which the erosion of the Non-Proliferation regime could become irreversible and result in a cascade of proliferation." It is truly shocking that the public seems oblivious to the 34,000 nuclear weapons still in existence, most of them with an explosive power several times greater than the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Compounding the nuclear risk is the threat of nuclear terrorism, which is growing day by day. It is estimated that 40 countries have the knowledge to produce nuclear weapons and the existence of an extensive illicit market for nuclear items shows the inadequacy of the present export control system.
The task awaiting the 2005 review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is to convince the nuclear-weapons states that the only hope of stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons is to address nuclear disarmament sincerely. This is precisely the stance taken by foreign ministers of the New Agenda Coalition (Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden), who recently wrote: "Nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament are two sides of the same coin and both must be energetically pursued." Brazil has put the issue in a nutshell: "One cannot worship at the altar of nuclear weapons and raise heresy charges against those who want to join the sect." In the present political climate, no "grand solution" is possible. Rather, a set of incremental steps could be achieved if the moderate middle states use their influence to convince the U.S. that it is in American interests to protect the NPT's ability to curb would-be nuclear proliferators. These steps include: the start of negotiations for a ban on the production of fissile materials; the striking of a new committee at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to deal with nuclear disarmament questions; the U.S. and Russia taking their strategic nuclear weapons off "alert" status, and beefing up the ability of the International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure that nuclear fuels for civilian purposes are not diverted to nuclear weapons.
April 18, 2005
* 
Bin Laden's Nuclear Connection: If America had agreed to a nuclear-free world, we wouldnt face threats today
Kai Bird and Martin J Sherwin, The Nation, April 25 cover date, p. 18
This essay is adapted from the authors' book "American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer" (Knopf). Over the past decade, Osama bin Laden has repeatedly talked and written about America's atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He says he is planning an atomic attack on America that will shock us into retreating from the Middle East, as the Japanese imperial government was shocked into an early surrender. Decades ago, Oppenheimer realized that the bomb was a Trojan horse that would soon threaten our own security as much as it threatened the security of others. He developed a plan for a nuclear-free world and did his best to promote this alternative path. His efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons at the beginning of the atomic age are as applicable today as they were then. Oppenheimer believed that in the long run, "without world government there could be no permanent peace, [and] that without peace there would be atomic warfare." Since world government was not a prospect, Oppenheimer argued that in the field of atomic energy all countries should agree to a "partial renunciation" of sovereignty. Under his plan, the proposed Atomic Development Authority would have sovereign ownership of all uranium mines, atomic power plants and laboratories. No nation would be permitted to build bombs-but scientists everywhere would still be allowed to exploit the atom for peaceful purposes. Complete and total transparency would make it impossible for any nation to marshal the enormous industrial, technical and material resources necessary to build an atomic weapon in secrecy. Oppenheimer understood that one couldn't un-invent the weapon; the secret was out. But one could construct a system so transparent that it would at least provide ample warning if a rogue regime set about to make an atomic weapon. Soon afterward, Oppenheimer's draft plan, which became known as the Acheson-Lilienthal Report, was optimistically submitted to the White House. But optimism was misplaced. While Secretary of State James Byrnes made a pretense of saying that he was "favorably impressed," he was in fact shocked by the sweeping scope of the report's recommendations. A day later he persuaded Truman to appoint his business partner, Wall Street financier Bernard Baruch, "to translate" the Administration's proposals to the United Nations. When Oppenheimer read the news, he told his Los Alamos friend Willy Higinbotham, by then president of the newly created Federation of Atomic Scientists, "We're lost." In 1946, he was asked in a closed Senate hearing room "whether three or four men couldn't smuggle units of an [atomic] bomb into New York and blow up the whole city." Oppenheimer responded, "Of course it could be done, and people could destroy New York." When a startled senator then followed by asking, "What instrument would you use to detect an atomic bomb hidden somewhere in a city?" Oppenheimer quipped, "A screwdriver [to open each and every crate or suitcase]." There was no defense against nuclear terrorism-and he felt there never would be. International control of the bomb, he later told an audience of Foreign Service and military officers, was "the only way in which this country can have security comparable to that which it had in the years before the war. It is the only way in which we will be able to live with bad governments, with new discoveries, with irresponsible governments such as are likely to arise in the next hundred years, without living in fairly constant fear of the surprise use of these weapons."
January 4, 2005
* UK - 1974 - govt envisioned, in event of war, nuking entrance to Channel tunnel
November 19, 2004
* N. Korea: cash-strapped, might sell Pu to terrorists, sez USA Gen. LaPorte
November 18, 2004
* Conventional expert wisdom: Dozens of terrorist groups are seeking WMD
November 14, 2004
Unsophisticated n-weapon design suitable for terrorists, so need to keep HEU away from them, sez Monterrey's Wm Potter
Governments have failed to appreciate the changed nature of the nuclear threat; they continue to focus primarily on rogue nations. "One of the most damaging failures has been the tendency of the United States and Russian decision-makers to exaggerate the difficulty of fabricating crude nuclear weapons. Contributing to this tendency is the mistaken assumption that terrorists will design a nuclear weapon to meet the same rigorous military specifications required by national governments." ... Terrorists would almost certainly choose simple weapon designs in which two spheres of highly enriched uranium (HEU) were united. "A terrorist organization could probably build such a weapon if it had access to less than 50 kg of HEU. A sophisticated delivery vehicle would not be required - a truck or cargo ship would suffice - and the weapon might even be assembled at the target site." A new world nonproliferation strategy is needed. Most urgent is an international agreement that lets "fewer countries retain HEU, fewer facilities within countries possess HEU, and fewer locations within facilities have HEU."
[Source: William Potter (Monterey Institute for International Affairs) at the "Asia-Pacific Nuclear Safeguards and Security" conference in Sydney, quoted and paraphrased in Alan Goodall (former Tokyo bureau chief for The Australian), "'Dirty bomb' threat rising", The Japan Times, November 14, 2004]
ElBaradei sees terrorist groups as more immediate n-threat than rogue nations
"We are racing against time," warned the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Mohamed ElBaradei. "We need to take preventive measures before a nuclear or radiological emergency. We should not wait for a situation like 9/11 or Chernobyl. The danger is real. We have to cross our fingers that nothing will happen." ElBaradei noted the relative ease with which a multinational black market in nuclear technology had been set up by Pakistan's former chief nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. That ring was uncovered this year, but ElBardei said the number of confirmed incidents of nuclear trafficking would continue to rise. "Sixty incidents were reported in 2003," he said. "It is clear the total this year will be higher." The immediate threat comes less from a pariah state, such as North Korea, than from rogue elements like al-Qaeda.
[Source: Alan Goodall (former Tokyo bureau chief for The Australian), "'Dirty bomb' threat rising", The Japan Times, November 14, 2004]
November 7, 2004
* Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah seek n-weapons, sez Aussie FM Downer
October 29, 2004
Key W76 warhead design is inadequate, should be replaced with W88s, sez retired Los Alamos physicist
The W76 submarine missile warhead, a key U.S. weapon, was intended to enable destroying fortified enemy missile silos. Los Alamos nuclear weapon designers cut corners in the design of the weapon, leaving it unreliable today, Retired weapons physicist Richard Morse said. The W76 was designed to have a yield equivalent to 100,000 tons of TNT, but actual performance is likely to be far less, he said. The 69-year-old Morse, a fellow in the American Physical Society, has raised the issue in classified discussions within the nuclear weapons community for more than a year. He said in an interview this week that he decided to go public because he believes the government's unwillingness to address the issue threatens national security. Everet Beckner, deputy chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear weapons program, acknowledged in a letter to Morse last fall that, if the problem is real, it has "national security implications for the United States." The number of W76s in the U.S. nuclear stockpile is classified, but estimates by members of the arms control community suggest it is more than 2,000, more than any other nuclear weapon in the arsenal. "We're vulnerable as hell," Morse said.
However, after Beckner met with Morse and other concerned scientists in March, he concluded that the W76 is sound. Officials at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as independent nuclear weapons experts with access to classified nuclear test data, deny there is a problem with the W76. They say testing of the final W76 design, in some cases conducted after Morse left Los Alamos to serve on the faculty of the University of Arizona, show the design is sound. Anson Franklin, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, noted that the weapon's reliability has also been certified by Lawrence Livermore scientists. "It works," said retired Sandia National Laboratories vice president Bob Peurifoy, who served on a panel in the mid-'90s that reviewed test data on the W76 and other weapons in the U.S. nuclear stockpile. "The U.S. nuclear stockpile is healthy."
Morse said the problem originated in a competition between Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory nuclear design teams to win the contract to design a new warhead for the U.S. Navy. The Navy in the mid-1970s needed a new warhead that was to be extremely light, so more of them could be carried aboard a single missile. Competition between the two labs in the past is legendary. Massachusetts Institute of Technology anthropologist Hugh Gusterson, who has studied lab culture, said a Livermore scientist once told him, "Remember the Russians are the competition, but Los Alamos is the enemy." To meet the goal, according to Morse, Los Alamos designers beat the Livermore team by making the weapon's radiation case extremely thin. Morse said the underperformance problem first showed up in underground nuclear test blasts as early as 1969. There were "many developmental tests" done to see if the type of lightweight design could be made to work, and "many if not most of these were not successful," Morse said in a written account of the issue provided to the Journal. Morse contends that uncertainty about the W76 continued among weapons scientists well after the weapon was last tested in 1981. The scientists planned to conduct an additional underground test blast to resolve questions about thin case performance, but the test was canceled when the United States imposed a testing moratorium in 1992, according to Morse.
Morse said the only way to fix the problem is to remove the W76 from the U.S. nuclear stockpile and replace it on submarine missiles with a smaller number of W88 warheads, a more recent design that he said does not exhibit the same problem.
[Source: John Fleck (staff writer, Albuquerque Journal), "Scientist Says Nuke Warhead Isn't Reliable; LANL-Livermore Rivalry Blamed", Albuquerque Journal, October 29, 2004, p. A1 (subscription required)]
August 7, 2004
* Taiwan considering reviving nuclear weapons program
* China discusses use of tactical nukes in Taiwan conflict
* Taiwan - proposed US arms sale, including anti-missile technology, protested by China
June 13, 2004
Reagan embarrassed the "nuclear freeze" crowd by proving them, decisively, wrong
In the early '80s, the West experienced a nuclear hysteria Ñ a sudden panic about imminent nuclear destruction and a mindless demand to "freeze" nuclear weapons. What had changed to bring this on? Reagan had become President. Like George W. Bush today, the U.S. President was seen as a greater threat to peace than was the enemy he was confronting.
The nuclear freeze and the accompanying hysteria are an embarrassment that liberals prefer to forget today. ReaganÕs critics completely misunderstood the logic and the power of his nuclear posture. He took a very hard line on the Soviets who had broken the nuclear status quo by placing missiles in Europe. Backed by Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl, Reagan faced the Soviets down Ñ despite enormous "peace" demonstrations throughout the West, including the largest demonstration to date in American history (New York City, 1982) Ñ and ultimately forced the Soviets to dismantle the missiles and begin their overall retreat.
Rarely has a President been so quickly and completely vindicated by history. The Berlin Wall came down 10 months after Reagan left office. His policies of unrelenting toughness won the Cold War and brought a new peace.
That is because Reagan understood that the key to peace was never arms control. Security had nothing to do with the number of weapons, it had everything to do with the intention and power of those who possessed them. Accordingly, Reagan put relentless pressure on the possessors of that power, the Soviet commissars, through his nuclear hard line, military buildup, Strategic Defense Initiative and the Reagan Doctrine of supporting anti-communist guerrillas everywhere (and especially Nicaragua).
Ultimately, that pressure brought about the collapse of the overextended Soviet empire. The result was the most profound peace the world had experienced in 60 years Ñ since the very beginning of the totalitarian era in the early 1930s.
[Source: Charles Krauthammer (columnist for The Washington Post), "ReaganÕs greatness puts critics in a quandary", The Union Leader (Manchester, New Hampshire), June 13, 2004]
* Iran initially rejects new restrictions in UK-France-Germany draft resolution for IAEA Board
May 19, 2004
* N-weapons issues in London mayoral race (press release from CND)
May 16, 2004
ElBaradei suggests ban or multinational control on Pu, HEU development
On Friday, IAEA director general ElBaradei told diplomats and business leaders at the Council on Foreign Relations think tank in New York that he believed the UN Security Council system for dealing with nuclear materials had not been adjusted to the post-Cold War era. He suggested a moratorium or ban on the right of every country to develop plutonium and highly enriched uranium. He said he plans to appoint experts to examine how to develop better security around enrichment and processing. "At least if we don't have a ban right now let us have these facilities under multinational control," ElBaradei said.
[Source: Iran Daily, "IAEA Not Ready For Iranian Clearance", May 16, 2004, p. 1]
April 15, 2004
* The what-ifs of nuclear terrorism
* Nuclear terrorism - vulnerability to hackers
* Nuclear terrorism - "greedy insider" factor quadruples risk
* Nuclear terrorism - how many sites could withstand assault by 41 like took Moscow theater?
* Nuclear terrorism - could terrorists use an n-weapon if they seized one?
April 13, 2004
* N. Korea - AQ Khan sez he saw three Pu bombs, 5 years ago
* N. Korea - Bush administration losing patience, may seek sanctions
* N. Korea - AQ Khan sez major enrichment shipments began after Pu program frozen in late 1990s
* Pakistan may be withholding evidence re Khan except for sales to Korea, Iran, Libya
* N. Korea - next Yongbyon refueling will provide another bomb's worth of Pu
* N. Korea - each new weapon adds risk of transfer to terrorists
April 1, 2004
Nordion seeks easing of US HEU export restriction to keep reliable supply of medical isotopes
MDS Nordion is the world's biggest producer of medical isotopes used to diagnose and treat disease -- it sells more more than $300 million worth annually. The Canadian company has long been working to convert it's isotope production facilities from high-enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) targets. In 1992, the US enacted an antiproliferation law which requires the operator of an HEU-fueled reactor must be working toward conversion in order to be eligible to receive U.S. HEU.
Nordion has decided that their conversion plan is too expensive and will disrupt operations for too long a period. The company asked in vain for U.S. financial assistance, and is currently reassesing their approach rather than working on implementing an particular conversion plan. The Nuclear Control Institute has urged NRC to reject further export of HEU to Nordion, noting that "Recent information indicates that at least since September 2003, Nordion has ceased all cooperation, work and intention towards converting the Maple facilities from HEU targets to LEU targets." The controversy may be resolved by the U.S. Congress -- the "Burr amendment" to the energy bill which is supported by the Council on Radiopharmaceuticals & Radionuclides.
Refs: Daniel Horner (Platts-Washington), "Nordion headed for 'showdown' with U.S.?", Nuclear Fuel, v29 n6, March 15, 2004, p. 1; and Bert Hill (The Ottawa Citizen), "MDS Nordion caught in war of words: U.S. lobby seeks halt of uranium shipments to Kanata firm", Ottawa Citizen, April 1, 2004, p. D1]
March 31, 2004
March 27, 2004
Americans don't want new generation of n-weapons, sez Sen. Feinstein
Republicans and Democrats are signaling even tougher scrutiny than last year of administration plans for a powerful nuclear weapon to threaten foreign adversaries hiding in underground bunkers with a single, regime-toppling strike.
The administration's $6.6 billion spending proposal for nuclear weapons research and maintenance is coming under unusually rigorous attack early in an election year, and not from the rambunctious House but a less expected quarter, the ordinarily staid Senate. "Your problem is going to be holding on to what you already have," Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid warned the nation's top nuclear-weapons executive, Linton Brooks. Brooks' deputy was at a loss to explain the bipartisan resistance. "There's definitely more intensity, more controversy -- no question," said deputy National Nuclear Security administrator Ev Beckner.
In recent months, Brooks and Beckner have shuttled around Capitol Hill to stave off attacks on multiple Bush initiatives -- $27 million for the new bunker buster, $9 million for "advanced" weapons designing teams, $30 million to shorten the time to a nuclear test, plans for a plutonium bomb-component factory and a delay in hydrogen fusion experiments on Livermore's $4 billion National Ignition Facility until 2014.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein suggested creating "weapons systems that are so bizarre and so catastrophic goes beyond the moral code." "I'm going to oppose it at every step of the road because I do not believe the American people want to support a new generation of nuclear weapons," she said.
[Source: Ian Hoffman (staff writer, ANG Newspapers), "Bush's laser, bunker buster under attack from Senate; Feinstein vows to oppose 'bizarre' weapons at 'every step of the road'", Oakland Tribune, March 27, 2004]
March 26, 2004
US to retire all Peacemaker ICBMs, leaving Minuteman IIIs as only land-based ICBM
In 1986, the US deployed a 10-warhead ICBM called the Peacekeper. There are about 50 Peacekeepers today, and all will be decommissioned as part of the Moscow Treaty brokered between the United States and Russia in May 2002. The Minuteman III will become America's sole land-based nuclear-warhead carrying ICBM system after the Peacemaker is retired. The Minuteman III, first deployed in 1970, was designed to carry three nuclear warheads, but a 1992 arms treaty reduced its payload to one warhead. There are about 500 Minuteman IIIs.
[Source: Gerry J. Gilmore (American Forces Press Service), "Minuteman ICBMs Soldier on As Peacekeepers Get Mothballed", American Forces Information Service, March 26, 2004]
March 24, 2004
* Iraq invasion - Libya wouldn't have disarmed if Saddam were still around
March 23, 2004
* N. Korea has drawn wrong lesson from invasion of Iraq, sez Triplett
March 21, 2004
* N-proliferation - fundamental cause is US unilateralism, sez N. Korea
March 20, 2004
al-Qaeda's 'brains' boasted of buying black market nuclear bombs
Osama bin Laden's deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri boasted of buying black market nuclear bombs, according to Pakistani journalist and bin Laden biographer, Hamid Mir. Mr Mir described al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian doctor, as the brains behind al-Qaeda.
[Source: Australian Associated Press (AAP), "Osama deputy's visit 'unlikely'", The Daily Telegraph (Sydney, Australia), March 21, 2004]
Inevitable: al-Qaeda will use WMD on a Western city, sez UK intelligence chief
Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5 [British intelligence], said on Friday that it was "only a matter of time" before al-Qa'ida unleashed a weapon of mass destruction upon a Western city.
[Source: Geoffrey Lean, Paul Lashmar and Sophie Goodchild, "Official: UK would fail to cope with major terror attack", The Independent (London, UK), March 21, 2004]
March 18, 2004
* Cleanup of n-legacy sites - Bush has cut 35 years from schedule and saved $50-billion in costs
* NNSA challenges - restoring defense nuclear capabilities, certifying stockpile, security
* N-weapons expected to remain cornerstone of US national security posture
* N-weapon stockpile - verifying safety and effectiveness is more important than ever as #s go down
Feb 27, 2004
Feb 22, 2004
Estimated stockpiles of nuclear warheads that are deployed or in storage
U.S. - 10,400+
Russia - 8,240+
China - 410+
France - 340+
Britain - 200+
Israel - 100+
India - 30+
Pakistan - 30+
N. Korea - ?
Sources: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, National Resources Defense Council, Institute for Science and International Security, Janes, Federation of American Scientists
[Source: The San Francisco Chronicle, "The dangerous world of nuclear weapons", February 22, 2004, p. A21]
January 25, 2004
* Pakistan - religious leader supports government's investigation of n-scientists
January 8, 2004
* New US approach -- exposure -- to Pakistan, the most dangerous place on earth
December 9, 2003
* Bush administration proposes implementing legislation for US-IAEA "Additional Protocol"
October 30, 2003
* NPT ineffective because no punishment mechanisms
October 23, 2003
Did Saudi Arabia buy an n-weapon this week from Pakistan?
Rumors of Saudi desire to obtain nuclear capability have circulated for at least a decade, and recent news of Iran's apparent nuclear weapons program have done nothing but stir the rumor pot. The senior intelligence officer in Israel's Defense Force, Gen. Aharon Zeevi, was cited in press reports this week as noting that Iran (with a a Shi'ite Muslim majority) is Saudi Arabia's (predominantly Sunni Muslim) strategic and religious rival in the region Gen. Zeevi reportedly told a committee in Parliament Tuesday that Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz had gone to Islamabad this weekend with the intention of buying Pakistani nuclear warheads, to be placed on Saudi land-based missiles. The Washington Times cited a Pakistani source as reporting that a deal had been concluded, with some kind of nuclear deterrent exchanged for discounted Saudi oil.
Some suspect that Saudis helped finance Pakistan's nuclear weapons program over the years, enabling purchase of equipment from China and other sources. Others note that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have both viewed growing military ties between India and Israel with grave concern. Last summer, Saudi defense officials reportedly disclosed a high-level strategic document which included nuclear weapon capability as an option to be considered.
Conventional public wisdom amongst the various international relations communities appears to be that it is unlikely that Saudi Arabia or Pakistan would find it in their national interest to engage in the type of proliferation being suggested. David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, puts it like this: "We know that senior Saudi officials are studying their options and sending signals, but to actually go through with this will bring down the wrath of the Americans on the Pakistanis and have huge negative implications for Saudi security as well."
[Ref: David R. Sands (Washington Times), "Israeli general says Saudis seek to buy Pakistani nukes", The Washington Times, October 23, 2003, p. A1 -- Copyright 2003 News World Communications, Inc.]
October 17, 2003
Iran - emboldened, can dash any hopes of modernizing Arab world, sez Sen. Biden
Mr. BIDEN (p. S12785)
... there are bookends around a little country called Iran, with 40 million people, which is seeking a nuclear weapon. It is now run by an oligarchy made up of ayatollahs who control the military and all the security apparatus. You have a failed state on your east and a failed state on your west. You have an incredibly emboldened Iran. Kiss goodbye modernity--the fancy word we like to use for modernizing the Arab world. Kiss goodbye democracy. We cannot afford to let Afghanistan fail.
- excerpted from Senate floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - prewar WMD intelligence was exactly as described by Clinton, Albright and Berger in 1998, sez Sen. Bond
Mr. BOND (p. S12778)
... the distinguished Senator from New Jersey [(Mr. Corzine) said] that the [prewar WMD] intelligence was faith based. He insinuated that intelligence had been changed somehow perhaps by the administration. Let me first point out that this intelligence has been acted upon by previous administrations.
I quote from President Clinton, 1998: 'If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.'
Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, February 18, 1998: 'Iraq is a long way from here, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.'
Sandy Berger, National Security Adviser, same day: 'He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983.'
- excerpted from Senate floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - US deception undermines future ability to sound alarm based on intelligence, sez van Hollen
Mr. VAN HOLLEN (p. H9669)
... The Administration's misleading statements about the nature and magnitude of the Iraqi threat have undermined our credibility around the world. Secretary of State Powell's report to the United Nations prior to the war relied on forged documents and information we later admitted to be unreliable. The nuclear specter that Administration officials pointed to has been discredited. Even more recently, Administration Inspector David Kay has been forced to back down from post-war claims that two mobile trailers found in Iraq were used for making biological weapons. The huge credibility gap that now exists for the Administration undermines our future ability to sound the alarm based on sensitive intelligence matters. Future claims about Iran, North Korea and others will be viewed with deep suspicion by a more skeptical public and an international community that, as the Economist described, sees the Bush Administration as having its own arsenal of WMD -- 'Wielders of Mass Deception.'
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - bring in UN inspectors, for credibility, sez Rep. van Hollen
Mr. VAN HOLLEN (pp. H9632-3)
... The President should immediately invite the existing team of United Nations' inspectors--known as UNMOVIC--to participate in the search for WMD in Iraq. The U.N. has a pool of inspectors who have 12 years of experience investigating Iraq's programs and many of whom speak Arabic. According to its most recent report, UNMOVIC has a roster of 354 trained experts available to serve in Iraq at short notice. This important resource should be put to use, allowing us to reduce the size and costs of our team of inspectors.
What would it cost us to engage these trained experts? Nothing. The costs of UNMOVIC are borne by the United Nations and paid for through the dues of the member nations.
Engaging the U.N. weapons inspectors in the search for WMD would also get us something that money can't buy--credibility. With respect to the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Bush Administration has lost its credibility with the American people and has undermined American credibility in the international community. Before the war, our Secretary of State told the United Nations that the Iraqis were attempting to import nuclear weapons material from Africa. The U.N. inspectors reviewed the evidence and determined the claims were based on forged documents. The U.S. conceded the point and, worse, it turns out that agencies within the U.S. government had already questioned the veracity of the documents. Our Secretary of Defense told the world that we knew the location of the weapons of mass destruction. We now know that was untrue. In the aftermath of the war, the President claimed that two mobile trailers found in Iraq were evidence of a biological weapons program. Our inspection team has recently had to retreat from that claim. Again and again, Administration officials from the President on down have made false claims about Iraqi WMD. Even the Economist magazine, which had been a booster of the war, has stated that the Bush Administration is seen around the world as having its own arsenal of WMD--Wielders of Mass Deception.
The only way to restore confidence in the search for WMD is to bring in an impartial team of international inspectors. David Kay, the leader of our team, is stuck in a fundamental contradiction. He wears two hats, serving as both fact finder and salesman for the Administration. No matter how high his personal integrity, this dual role undermines the credibility of any findings his team may make.
It is critical to the integrity of the process that independent U.N. weapons inspectors be invited to participate in the search and given the opportunity to independently evaluate any claims made by David Kay and the Iraq Survey Group. The American people should not be asked to spend an additional $600 million to fund a search that is widely perceived to be an effort to provide cover for an Administration that has lost its credibility on this issue at home and abroad.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
Iraq - search for WMD is now obsession to save face, sez Rep. Paul
Mr. PAUL (p. H9684)
... what if you do find something? What does it prove? Does it prove that he was a threat to our national security? No way. Does it prove that it was a relationship to Iraq and 9/11? No way. So this obsession is for saving face and nothing more. If there was a major nuclear or chemical weapon available that was about to be unleashed against us, it would have surely been found by now, but that was not debated, but I am sure that search will go on, and "when something is found," and I put that in quotes, there will be a lot of questions asked. More questions will be asked than answers given.
- excerpted from special order speech titled "Misguided Policy of Nation Building in Iraq", Congressional Record, October 17, 2003
October 16, 2003
Preemption doctrine has accellerated proliferation, such as by Korea, sez Rep. Gephardt
Mr. GEPHARDT (p. H9546)
... the President's continued articulation of the so-called 'preemption doctrine' and his lack of a coherent diplomatic strategy has inspired other nations not to stop their pursuit of dangerous materials, but to accelerate their efforts in order to avoid being 'preempted.' North Korea -- which today appears to be ramping up for full-scale production of nuclear weapons -- is a very troubling case in point.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
Unilateralism, including failure to ratify Nuclear Test Ban treaty, is destructive, sez Rep. Baldwin
Ms. BALDWIN (p. H9550)
... Many around the world are shocked and dismayed by the unilateral, confrontational approach that the Bush Administration has taken in the world arena. I share their concern. We must recognize the consequences in the world community of our rejection of Kyoto, of the International Criminal Court, of the treaty to ban land mines, our failure to ratify the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the Convention to End All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and our own withdrawal from the ABM treaty. We must be mindful about how our criticism of the UN and NATO are heard throughout the world community. Calling longtime allies "Old Europe" is terribly counterproductive. The war in Iraq is seen against this larger backdrop. I stand here today to urge this President and this Congress to return to our tradition of constructiveness rather than destructiveness. We should be builders rather than destroyers.
- excerpted from House floor debate on "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004", Congressional Record, October 16, 2003, p.
October 15, 2003
Data processing systems risk fortuitous nuclear weapons launch
Models of combat situations indicate that whenever a signal on the first nuclear strike (even a false signal) is received, political leaders of the country under attack will have three to four minutes to appraise the situation and make the decision to retaliate. Under the circumstances, the risk of an erroneous decision mounts.
... Practice shows that a considerable potential threat of a fortuitous nuclear exchange stems from informational systems processing initial data on the situation. Early warning systems are particularly sensitive in this respect. In Russia and the United States these systems are based on complicated ground and space IR complexes, automatic and computerized. It is these systems that generate the initial signal that may be taken for a valid reason to launch the retaliatory strike.
History knows of a lot of episodes when early warning systems generated false alarms.
The Soviet Union had nine radars of the long-range early warning system. When it disintegrated, Russia ended up with only three. The remaining nine were left in other CIS countries.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that orbital group of the Strategic Missile Forces is weakened by economic difficulties encountered by the country and therefore comprises fewer satellites than is required for proper functioning.
... Technical glitches and malfunctions are the more possible the more complicated a system is. According to the data compiled by Greenpeace, there were 117 incidents with nuclear weapons in the United States alone between 1950 and 1990.
It should be added here in the last several years Russia encountered serious problems with technical reliability of strategic systems and weapons on combat duty. First and foremost, this state of affairs is ascribed to the fact that a great deal of these weapons and systems are past their guaranteed-performance terms and should have been replaced long ago. According to ex-commander of the Strategic Missile Forces Vladimir Yakovlev 62% of missile complexes and 71% of fire control means were past their guaranteed-performance terms in 1998.
[Source: Vladimir Belous (director, Center of International and Strategic Surveys), "Fortuitous nuclear war not ruled out", Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, No 36, October 10 - 16, 2003, pp. 1+4 Translated by A. Ignatkin, What The Papers Say, October 15, 2003]
Longer arming times would reduce one risk
Missiles in silos need one minute to launch, missiles carried by submarines up to fifteen minutes, and strategic bombers on combat duty need about five minutes to takeoff.
One of the partial solutions to the problem [of prevention of fortuitous nuclear conflicts] is offered by reduction of the level of readiness of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons which should take the form of longer time needed to arm them. Russia (the USSR) and the United States have been discussing the problem on all levels for almost three decades, but just a few first steps in this direction have been made so far.
[Source: Vladimir Belous (director, Center of International and Strategic Surveys), "Fortuitous nuclear war not ruled out", Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie, No 36, October 10 - 16, 2003]
October 14, 2003
Iran - more secret facilities outed by opposition, on eve of ElBaradai trip
The opposition group that blew the public whistle on Iran's enrichment and heavy water activities announced more info today at a press conference in Vienna, Austria. Firouz Mahvi, spokesperson for The National Council of Resistance in Iran, said informers inside Iran confirmed the existence of a "new secret nuclear site" about 10 miles east of Isfahan. The 580-square-mile site allegedly houses clandestine research and uranium enrichment facilities where, among other activities, centrifuges were tested. The group also claims that Iran has not declared nuclear sites near Karaj, west of Tehran. Mahvi said the new information proves "Tehran is continuing its nuclear weapons program full force... The only way to prevent the world from having to deal with the nightmare of a nuclear equipped fundamentalist regime is for the U.N. Security Council to dismiss the regime's ploys and impose binding and comprehensive sanctions against this medieval regime," he said.
The AP reports that IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei will fly to Iran's capital Wednesday to appeal for more cooperation. IAEA officials said in recent weeks that ElBaradei had not planned to visit Tehran ahead of the Oct. 31 deadline, but the agency spoke Monday of "important questions that are still outstanding" about Iran's nuclear activities. "Time is indeed running out," ElBaradei was quoted as saying on the agency Web site.
[Ref: George Jahn (AP writer), "Iranian opposition says Tehran has secret sites for nuclear weapons program", The Associated Press, October 14, 2003]
September 28, 2003
Iran won't give up on enriching is own uranium
In a Persian language interview, Hamid Reza Asefi, spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, commented on IAEA's asking Iran to stop the uranium enrichment process. Mr. Asefi's response: "The enrichment of uranium and the peaceful use of nuclear technology are not issues over which we will compromise."
[Source: Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), "Iran: Foreign Ministry criticizes Bush, Putin over nuclear programme", September 28, 2003 (translated from Persian by BBC Monitoring)]
August 31, 2003
Iran, DPRK giving world "the run-around", sez ElBaradei
Iran and North Korea "have been giving the international community the run-around" when it comes to its nuclear programs and possible weapons ambitions, ElBaradei said in an interview with the British Broadcasting Corp.'s "HARDtalk" program. "That's why I have been kicking and screaming to say, 'Give me more authority,"' he said. "If you really need me to do a good job, I need additional authority." [Source: The Associated Press, "The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency says he needs more power, cooperation to deal with Iran and North Korea", August 30, 2003]
August 29, 2003
N. Korea - practice to deceive (practice, practice, practice)
Last fall, the US confronted North Korea with information showing that North Korea had launched a uranium-based nuclear weapons program. The Bush administration reported that North Korea confirmed that such a program existed to assistant secretary of state James Kelly, also last fall. Yesterday at the six-party talks in Beijing, however, North Korea deputy foreign minister Kim Yong Il said his nation has no such program. He reiterated his country's claim to have nuclear weapons, and said they would prove it to the world by conducting a nuclear test. He also asserted that North Korea has the means to deliver nuclear weapons. Many diplomats and technical experts are surely parsing Kim's various statements to try to get a handle on the truth of the matter. Your humble nuclear.com editor doubts that North Korea has even a single nuclear weapon, because they seem like the kind of folks who would've parlayed any such weapon into a much more credible blackmail threat by showing it off. The US hardline approach tends to suggest that the US government doesn't really think Korea yet has the bomb either, despite the repeated news reports that one or two big and crude weapons have been built.
[Ref: Associated Press, "Official: N. Korea vows to test nukes", August 29, 2003]
August 27, 2003
More news from leaked IAEA Iran report
Iran told the IAEA in recent days that it had obtained technology for enriching uranium from unidentified foreign sources in the late 1980s, the report said. Iran had previously told the agency that it had developed the technology on its own, beginning in 1997.
Iran has previously told IAEA that it never used nuclear material in its research. But Iran acknowledged last week in a letter to the agency that it had undertaken uranium conversion experiments in the early 1990s.
An unnamed senior Bush administration official was reported by the LA Times as saying: "We are disappointed that the IAEA did not come right out and say that the Iranians have been lying to them and have not been cooperating. I wish the IAEA could be more blunt about this, but the facts are in the report."
An unnamed European diplomat was reported as telling the LA Times: "What seems clear is that Iran has got caught up in some lies and is giving ground grudgingly and slowly."
The Washington Post also quoted an unnamed European diplomatic source: "In the past, Iran had claimed that the technology was indigenous, and they were quite proud of that. Now they're saying they did get a lot of help. This was a major change in the story."
[Sources: Douglas Frantz (LA Times staff writer), "Evidence May Indicate Iran Closing In on Nuclear Arms", Los Angeles Times, August 27, 2003, p. 1; Joby Warrick (Washington Post staff writer), "Iran Admits Foreign Help on Nuclear Facility; U.N. Agency's Data Point To Pakistan as the Source", The Washington Post, August 27, 2003, p. A17]
Other highlights:
* Iran has been systematically sanitizing Kalaye site, apparently to hide enrichment activities
* Iran - excerpts from confidential IAEA report leaked to LA Times
August 26, 2003
Highly-enriched traces found on Iran centrifuges, sez ElBaradei
The Associated Press and Agence France Presse are reporting that IAEA Director ElBaradei, in an interview to be published Thursday in Stern, the German news magazine, reports that U.N. inspectors found traces of highly enriched weapons-grade uranium on centrifuges at Natanz. "This worries us greatly", ElBaradei is quoted as saying. The Iranian government apparently acknowledges that the material was found on their equipment. The AP article quotes Iran's ambassador to the IAEA as saying that the equipment was contaminated when they bought it, many years ago. Iran purchased the centrifuges from intermediaries, he said, so it's impossible to name any country as the source of the weapons grade product. In a related article, Reuters claims that IAEA has produced a confidential report on the matter of the weapons-grade particles discovered by its inspectors. The report says that IAEA is still working on its assessment of Iran's explanation. [Sources: Agence France Presse, "IAEA chief says traces of enriched uranium at Iranian plant", August 26, 2003; Louis Charbonneau, "U.N. Agency Still Probing Iran's Arms-Grade Uranium", Reuters, August 26, 2003 2:31 pm ET;and George Jahn (AP writer), "U.N. Finds Uranium at Iran Nuclear Plant", Associated Press, August 26, 2003 3:28 pm EDT]
August 21, 2003
*Iran's changing story about Kalaye Electric
August 19, 2003
German jailed for illegal shipment of aluminum tubes to Korea seized in April
Der Spiegel, published yesterday, reports that German officials intercepted a 22-ton shipment of 214 aluminum tubes that were likely intended for North Korea's uranium enrichment program. The shipment, destined for the North Korean Nam Chon Gang company, was seized in Hamburg. The director of a company called Optronic, based in southern Koenigsbronn, was jailed in April on suspicion of violating laws on arms control and export. Prosecutors have also accused two Hamburg businessmen of participating in the crime. [Source: AFX News, "Three Germans accused of selling nuclear materiel to NKorea - report", AFX European Focus, August 17, 2003 (subscription required) Copyright 2003 AFX News Limited]
August 8, 2003
*
Tehran has N-delivery system: CIA
Dawn (Pakistan) -- US intelligence leaked word yesterday that Iran's newest missile
can deliver a nuclear payload over a range from
Cairo to Mumbai. The missile was designed in North Korea. The CIA says that two weeks ago, Iranian officials held a ceremony in Tehran to welcome the missile to their arsenal.
* Iran - 2-4 years away from n-weapons, sez George Perkovich
* Iran - within a few years of obtaining enough fissionable materials for n-weapon
* Iran - trying to buy equipment, from Europe, to conduct n-tests, French sources say
* Iran's big n-breakthrough was Pakistani centrifuge technology - thanx to Dr A.Q. Khan?
July 12, 2003
* Australia would get off-the-shelf tactical nukes from US in vent of a crisis, sez Newcastle U prof
* Lucas Heights - main purpose is to maintain n-weapons option, sez ex-science adviser to Howard govt
July 11, 2003
North Korea - turns for the worse: Reprocessing signature found in air sample; bomb designs include one small enough to smuggle across any border
US has detected krypton-85 gas in air samples obtained near the Yongbyon facility. This is the first physical evidence of Korean reprocessing. NBC news also suggests that North Korea has a variety of a-bomb designs, including one provided by Pakistan which is small enough to fit into an easily-smuggled footlocker.
[Source: Jim Miklaszewski (NBC - chief Pentagon correspondent), "US intelligence suggests North Korea reprocessing spent nuclear fuel rods", NBC Nightly News, July 11, 2003]
July 9, 2003
North Korea's 70 pre-nuclear tests of explosives
North Korea has conducted 70 high-explosive tests linked to nuclear weapons development, according to Ko Young-Koo, director of South Korea's National Intelligence Service. Gusong City, northwest of Pyongyang, is where at least some of the tests have been detected, the spy chief reportedly told parliament.
[Source: Mark Riley and Tom Allard (Sydney Morning Herald), "Pre-nuclear blasts in North Korea", Sydney Morning Herald, July 10 2003]
Proliferation Security Initiative - 11 nations join in disrupting global WMDtrade
A new international organization called the "Proliferation Security Initiative" is dedicated to disrupting global trade in weapons of mass destruction. It is holding its first meeting, starting today, in Brisbane Australia.
[Source: Australian Associated Press (AAP), "New coalition targets terror weapons", The Courier Mail (Brisbane, Australia), July 9, 2003]
July 6, 2003
A New Nuclear Age: Planners design technology to withstand the apocalypse
Los Angeles Times op-ed by their regular peacenik military contributor William M. Arkin describes
a lot of recent and planned military communications system upgrades. As nuclear.com has come to expect from anybody who uses an igc.org email address,
the author couldn't resist including a bit of moralizing: he closes with "The new technologies will enable greater mobility
and faster decision making. Let's hope that in doing so, they don't also increase the
likelihood that the U.S. will initiate a nuclear war." Your humble editor never ceases to be amazed at
how such intelligent folks can consistently go back to their moronic roots. Just once it would be nice to hear an IGCer hope that we won't get blown up by others rather than
dwelling exclusively on the converse.
July 1, 2003
* Iran invites ElBaradei to discuss additional protocol
* Iran - UK warns that EU trade deal is at risk due to lack of additional n-protocol
* Iran wants more western n-tech in exchange for additional protocol
* North Korea - New test site indicates work on miniaturizing n-weapons to fit on missiles
* North Korea - US trying to convince China, South Korea, of urgency of n-weapons threat
* North Korea - could be less than a year away from missile-ready n-weapons
* North Korea - no sign of krypton gas signature of reprocessing
* North Korea - several years ahead of Iran in n-weapons program; much more advanced than Iraq
June 29, 2003
June 20, 2003
Iran rejects IAEA request to take environmental samples at suspected enrichment site
Last week, Iran denied The Wall Street Journal's report that an IAEA inspection team had curtailed a four-day visit to Iran after authorities had refused to allow visit to a Kalaye Electric Company site in west Tehran, which the newspaper described as a nuclear site. The Associated Press puts it like this: "The Iranians have allegedly tested centrifuges at the Kalaye site." Iranian atomic energy authority spokesman Seyed Khalil Moussavi was quoted by AFP as saying "IAEA inspectors were able to visit all the sites requested by the agency whose list was contained in a letter delivered to us, and they left Iran after the agreed programme."
Despite the denial, the head of Iran's atomic energy authority, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, told Iranian TV "We've had no problem concerning environmental samples, but we've been telling the IAEA that this location is not a nuclear location, so that if you want to take environmental samples, this is outside the framework of the protocol. If we accept to operate outside the framework of the protocol, it will have no ending ... and tomorrow ten other locations may be named." Aghazadeh did not refer to the Kalaye site by name.
The Kalaye case illustrates why IAEA and others have urged Iran to sign on to the so-called Additional Protocol. A diplomat put it like this: "To put the pieces of a nuclear puzzle of a country together, it is not enough to go to declared nuclear sites." Reuters reports that "The IAEA on Thursday urged Iran to remain 'transparent' and accept without delay or conditions more intrusive, short-notice inspections. The Kelaye facility was cited by the IAEA."
The AP reports that judging by Aghazadeh's reaction, Iran is turning a cold shoulder to the request by the IAEA Board that Iran adopt the additional protocol. The AFP puts it thusly: "senior Iranian officials immediately rejected the IAEA call for wider inspections". Channel NewsAsia out of Singapore quoted Aghazadeh's TV comments as including: "We will not allow it. This request is illegal and unacceptable. These installations are completely non-nuclear and are not affected by IAEA inspections." India's PTI ran report contrasting Iran's varying statements about the additional protocol provision this week: "The refusal announced by Iran's nuclear chief on state television indicated a sudden hardening of attitude toward the International Atomic Energy Agency. Yesterday the country said it welcomed the comments of the IAEA board meeting in Vienna and earlier this week it said it was 'studying positively' an IAEA report on Iran."
[Refs: Agence France Presse, "Iran refuses sample from nuclear power plant: official", June 20, 2003; Ali Akbar Dareini (Associated Press Writer), "Iran says it will not permit IAEA to take environmental samples", The Associated Press, June 20, 2003; Channel NewsAsia (Singapore), "Iran refuses to let IAEA take samples from power plant", June 21, 2003; Paul Hughes and Jeremy Lovell (Reuters), "Iran Defies International Pressure on Nuclear Aims", June 20, 2003; and PTI (India), "Iran will not permit IAEA to take environmental samples", June 20, 2003.
Iran assures Russia it has no nuclear weapons ambitions, and is ready to fully meet IAEA demands
In his annual Kremlin news conference, Russian President Mr Vladimir Putin today said that Iranian President Md Khatami had assured him in a telephone call two days ago that his country does not strive for nuclear weapons and it was prepared to sign any protocols required by the International Atomic Energy Agency. "The Iranian leadership is ready to fully meet all the IAEA demands regarding control over its nuclear program." Under US pressure, Russia has urged Iran to open itself up to broader nuclear inspections, but it has not made fulfillment of the $800-million Russia-Iran nuclear power plant contract contingent on Tehran's signing of an additional IAEA protocol.
[Ref: Associated Press, "Putin Backs Teheran On Nukes", The Statesman (India), June 21, 2003]
June 19, 2003
* Iran - IAEA Board is rather acquiescent in addressing ElBaradei's findings
June 18, 2003
* Iran calls USA charges, urgings "politically motivated"
June 14, 2003
Bush's mini nukes stance promotes deterrance and dissuasion
The Bush administration's successes on the nuclear weapons front, which include deep cuts agreement with Russia and pursuit of common sense missile defense, have flown in the face of the naysayers of the left, who appear to be stuck in, absurdly, their cold war orientation. The left is again scaremongering on the mini nukes research issue.
[Source: Keith B. Payne (Prof - nat'l security studies, Georgetown U), "The Nuclear Jitters: Fear not research, and a wise deterrence", National Review, June 30, 2003]
May 30, 2003
India sees n-threats from governments of China & Pakistan, plus from radicals in Pakistan who might gain acess to that nation's nukes
The "ever-present possibility of hostile radical fundamentalist elements gaining access to
weapons of mass destruction in Pakistan" was one of the major security challenges faced by
India, according to the defence ministry of India's annual report for 2002-03, released Friday.
Amongst the other security challenges listed was the fact that India was surrounded by two
neighbours with nuclear weapons, missiles and a history of past aggression. Other challenges
identified were drug trafficking and the proliferation of small arms.
[Ref: Kerala Kaumudi, "Militants may get access to Pak nukes: India", May 31, 2003
May 28, 2003
Russia shifts: Iran told 'No NPT+, no Bushehr fuel'
Russia has apparently told Iran that the only way they'll get fuel for the Bushehr plant is if Iran agrees to the additional protocol with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The timing of the leaked information is speculated to be related to next Sunday's St. Petersburg summit between presidents Putin and Bush. The fuel was scheduled to be delivered this year. Russia's foreign ministry issued a more polite statement saying it had asked Iran to provide guarantees that it was not using the nuclear program as a cover to develop weapons.
[Source: Guy Dinmore (FT Washington correspondent), "Russia presses Iran over nuclear inspections", Financial Times, May 28, 2003, p. 1 (subscription required)]
June 3, 2003
* WMD - the pre-eminent threat to international security, sez G-8
* N. Korea - G8 supports Bush administration position re emphasizing regional efforts
* N. Korea - Japan Is As Concerned About Abductions As Nukes
May 26, 2003
USA, Japan and South Korea's coordinated expression of zero tolerance for a nuclear-armed North Korea
Kyodo article reports on what it considers a softening of North Korea's demands (North Korea said it would accept Japan and South Korea joining the mulilateral talks, IF and AFTER bilateral talks are held between North Korea and USA). Partly responsible for the softening, the wire service says, is the coordination amongst the USA, Japan, and South Korea in expressing their refusal to tolerate Korea's posession of nuclear weapons.
[Source: Kyodo, "North Korea not facing sanctions soon: Koizumi", The Japan Times, May 26, 2003]
May 19, 2003
Mini-nukes might restore deterrant value, which is pretty nil for current arsenal in many cases
"The current nuclear arsenal is no longer an effective deterrent. Washington's enemies, Pentagon officials say, calculate that the U.S. won't use its existing nuclear weapons because of the widespread carnage they would cause." House and Senate Armed Services Committees have voted to rescind the ban on mini-nuke R&D, and full chambers may vote as early as next week. Lots of arguments on this Bush administration-backed project. [Source: Mark Thompson, Bush's New Nuclear Push, TIME, May 26, 2003]
* Atmospheric N-tests - then-adolescent girls have since had high breast cancer rates
May 12, 2003
N. Korea nullifies last remaining n-agreement
A January 1992 agreement with South Korea to keep the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons was said today to be nullified by North Korea, citing a "sinister" U.S. agenda. The accord was the last remaining legal obligation under which North Korea was banned from developing atomic arms. "The joint (inter-Korean) agreement to keep the Korean Peninsula nuclear free was nullified because of a sinister and hostile U.S. policy against North Korea," the North's official news agency KCNA said. The statement was monitored by South Korean news agency Yonhap. [Source: Sang-Hun Choe (Associated Press Writer), "North Korea nullifies accord to keep peninsula nuclear-weapons free", Associated Press, May 12, 2003 12:31 PM Eastern Time]
Iran faces US pressure on IAEA
Bush administration officials are trying to build support among governments that sit on the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency to condemn what the U.S. contends is Iran's secret nuclear-weapons program. Iran says its nuclear activities are for peaceful purposes. U.S. officials acknowledge Iran is still years away from producing such weapons, but they say inspections of several facilities and other recently obtained intelligence have convinced the U.S. that Iran is working faster than previously known.
The U.S. has supplied Russia and other countries on the IAEA board with some of its intelligence, although a senior U.S. official says it remains unclear what findings the IAEA board will make when it meets next month. Imposing sanctions on Tehran through the United Nations Security Council for its nuclear activities will be difficult. Unlike Iraq and even North Korea, Iran has relations with many European countries and Russia, and their governments appear reluctant to jeopardize these ties by joining a campaign to isolate Tehran.
[Source: David S. Cloud, "U.S., Iran Stall on Road to Rapprochement --- Bush Administration Divided on How to Resolve Renewed Tensions Over Iraq, Nuclear Plans", Wall Street Journal, May 12, 2003, p. A4]
N-states criticized for not leading by example
A number of industrialized and developing countries also criticized the Bush administration and the other NPT nuclear-weapons states Britain, China, France, and Russia for not doing enough on the disarmament front.
New Zealand's minister of disarmament, Marian Hobbs, speaking on behalf of "the new agenda group" Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, South Africa and Sweden said: "We believe that the responsibility of the NWS [nuclear-weapons states] to lead by example is greater than ever."
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
Korea's n-blackmail must not become standard bargaining tool
With regard to North Korea, Mr. Wolf of the State Department said: "If NPT withdrawal and threats to acquire nuclear weapons become the currency of international bargaining, our world will be in chaos."
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
Iran's path of n-denial and deception
... John S. Wolf, assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation, told the U.N.-sponsored NPT forum [an international meeting in Geneva aimed at strengthening the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] that Iran provides perhaps the most fundamental challenge ever faced by the 188-member NPT accord... "Iran has been conducting an alarming clandestine program to acquire sensitive nuclear capabilities that we believe only make sense as part of a nuclear-weapons program," Mr. Wolf told the forum in Geneva. "Iran is going down the same path of denial and deception that handicapped international inspections in North Korea and Iraq."
But on Friday, Amir Zamninia, director-general for international political affairs in Iran's Foreign Ministry, told delegates that "Iran has renounced the nuclear option for many reasons." And, he added, "we consider the use of nuclear weapon to be inhuman, immoral, illegal."
"We do not have anything to hide," Mr. Zamninia said, and argued that the American charges regarding Iran illustrate a double standard on the nuclear issue.
"Compare the U.S. approach to Israel as a proven and established proliferator with its approach to Iran as a country that the U.S. suspects may have not fully complied with its NPT obligations," he said.
Besides North Korea, which withdrew from the NPT on April 10, other nonsignatories include India, Pakistan and Israel all countries known or believed to have nuclear weapons.
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
Middle East needs to be a WMD-free zone, many nations agree
Malaysia, speaking on behalf of Non-Aligned Movement member states that are parties to the NPT, and other countries including China, renewed calls for the creation in the Middle East of a zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.
The Non-Aligned Movement also said Israel should accede to the NPT, promptly put "all its nuclear facilities" under International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] safeguards, permit international inspections and agree to the need to establish a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
North Korea - China's view
Beijing's ambassador, Hu Xiaodi, said: "China holds that the nuclear-weapon-free status of the Korean Peninsula should be maintained, [and] that the legitimate security concerns of [North Korea] should be addressed."
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
NPT - major review planned for 2005
A major review of the NPT is planned in 2005.
[Source: John Zarocostas (Geneva), "Iran seen ready to develop nuclear arms; Middle East, Korea are danger zones", The Washington Times, May 12, 2003, p. A16]
May 9, 2003
Senate committee votes to repeal ban on low-yield n-weapon R&D
A Senate committee said it has voted to lift a decade-old ban on the research and development of low-yield nuclear weapons... The Armed Services Committee agreed to lift the ban as part of a bill authorizing $400.5 billion in 2004 defense activities. The measure was approved in closed session on Thursday, and details were released yesterday... Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the committee, said: "Without committing to deployment, research on low-yield nuclear weapons is a prudent step to safeguard America from emerging threats and enemies." The bill now goes to the full Senate. The House Armed Services Committee is expected to complete its version of the bill next week. The committee's strategic forces panel on Wednesday backed the lifting of the ban on low-yield nuclear weapons research.
Low-yield nuclear weapons have warheads of less than five kilotons -- about a third of the explosive force of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in World War II. Combined with precision missiles, such weapons could be used to hit a target without causing as much damage to surrounding areas as other nuclear weapons would.
Senate Democrats argued that a repeal would damage U.S. efforts to stop the spread of nuclear arms. "This is a major shift in American policy," said Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), the panel's top Democrat. "It just sort of makes a mockery of our argument around the world that other countries -- India, Pakistan -- should not test and North Korea and Iran should not obtain." Warner said the committee was assured by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell that lifting the research and development ban would not affect nuclear proliferation. "America has had a ban on this research since 1993, yet that has done nothing to stop other countries from seeking to acquire nuclear weapons," Warner said.
Opponents of the repeal also question whether these weapons are needed, given the force of the U.S. conventional arsenal. Some fear that the availability of these weapons would make presidents less reluctant to use nuclear weapons in war.
[Source: Associated Press, "Ending Research Ban On Low-Yield Nuclear Arms Backed by Panel", Washington Post, May 10, 2003, p. A2]
Update (added May 12): ... the non-nuclear bunker-buster used in Iraq was more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and was more than adequate in destroying subterranean weapons vaults. [Source: Rock Hill Herald (South Carolina), editorial, "Don't reignite arms race", May 12, 2003, p. 7A]
May 9, 2003
Army war games' designers say they fear some nations will conclude from Iraq war that they should get nuclear arms to ward off U.S. attack. Among chilling scenarios: One enemy "red team" smuggles a weapon into Paris, to blow it up if U.S. doesn't back off, and another takes aim at a neighbor state harboring U.S. troops. In both cases, U.S. forces invaded anyway, but didn't fire nukes. Red teams used nukes after conflict began; one destroyed oil fields to push up oil prices. After a briefing, Pentagon deputy Wolfowitz says U.S. should think more about fighting nuclear-armed rogue states. [Source: Jackie Calmes (columnist), "Washington Wire", Wall Street Journal, May 9, 2003, p. A4]
April 25, 2003
Screening could check all containers entering ports, not just the current < 3%
"... [P]erhaps the greatest danger we face from terrorism [is] a nuclear weapon ... being smuggled through one of our ports and detonated in one of our cities.
"Despite recent administrative improvements in container tracking, less than 3 percent of shipping containers entering the country are inspected each year. This means that approximately 770,000 containers that enter the Port of New York annually are unchecked.
"Scientists at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island indicate that nuclear screening devices capable of checking all containers can be developed relatively cheaply, yet the Bush administration refuses to spend the money to purchase them. The president here is being penny wise and pound foolish."
[Source: Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York), April 21, 2003 Letter to editor, "Security at Our Ports", New York Times, April 25, 2003]
The anti-proliferation appeal of "black box reactors"
One approach to minimizing proliferation risk while allowing use of nuclear power plants is construction and use of so-called "black box reactors". Here's how a purposefully anonymous industry veteran reportedly described the black box concept to Nuclear News reporter: "These are brought by the vendor to the country that buys the energy. They are operated by the vendor, for an extended period of, say, 30 years, and taken back by the vendor for refueling and maintenance. There is no fresh nor spent fuel in the country. No fuel, no proliferation. One of several advantages is the recipient country need not set up the usual nuclear infrastructure." The floating reactor being designed in Russia for an island in northern Siberia is an example of such a black box. Other black box designs could be made transportable by road, rail, or sea. A big question, he said, is "whether countries would be willing to accept them. There are many questions -- transportability, licensing, public acceptance, legal questions like what happens if there is an accident in terms of liability, etc. They will be addressing a completely new field." [Source: Nuclear News, "'Innovation' project to find future paths for nuclear", January 2001, p. 63]
Archives
* IAEA - limited non-proliferation usefulness, with much member resistance to expansion of authority
* UN Security Council - limited usefulness against N-proliferation
* USA - policing capability may be applied to international N-proliferation
* Sokolski's vision for happy ending involves US, China, N. Korea, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Egypt and UN
* Garvin's vision for solution: make it unpleasant for folks who want n-weapons
* N-weapon debate today is between "nonproliferationist" and "counterproliferationist" schools
* N-weapons - 2002 "Moscow Treaty" is pretty limp: no timetable, no enforcement, no dismantlement
* NPT - 30 successful years - 40 countries actively chose not to develop n-weapons
* There is no new burst of proliferation
* US should strive to create an "agreed nuclear world", instead of undermining the n-taboo