WASHINGTON NUCLEAR UPDATE

22 November 2006

In this issue:

• Arms Control
• India
• Iran
• North Korea
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Publications

Previous editions of Washington Nuclear Update are available at: http://www.basicint.org/update/wnu.htm.

Arms Control

The Nation magazine asked four leading figures of the nuclear disarmament movement to reflect on what went wrong and to consider how to put nuclear disarmament back on the political agenda.

Joe Cirincione wrote in the Los Angeles Times (October 15) that if the Bush administration will not abide by time-tested nuclear treaties, why should anyone else?

William Langewiesche, the author of the forthcoming book Atomic Bazaar: The Rise of the Nuclear-Armed Poor, wrote in the Los Angeles Times on why North Korea might just be the tip of the proliferation iceberg. See also this Los Angeles Times article and this New York Times article (October 15). A predictable Wall Street Journal op-ed condemning arms control is here. For a first hand account of the benefits of the 1994 United States-North Korean nuclear agreement known as the Agreed Framework see this op-ed by Jon B. Wolfsthal

Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned that as many as 30 countries could soon have technology that would let them produce atomic weapons "in a very short time."

In this discussion with the Huffington Post Hans Blix, the former director of the IAEA and UN chief arms inspector, asks how the US and China can demand that North Korea not conduct nuclear tests when they themselves will not ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)?

India

Here is the transcript of a November 14 Arms Control Association panel, 'The Senate and the U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal: Issues and Alternatives'.

ArmsControlWonk has this on India's efforts to negotiate a safeguards agreement with the IAEA. He notes that India will not negotiate a safeguards agreement based on INFCIRC/66/Rev.2, which does not allow a state "to unilaterally suspend or terminate a safeguards agreement."

The Arms Control Association claimed that India has failed to address all the concerns and questions raised by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) members on the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal.

The Washington Post reported November 15 that U.S. Congressional leaders requested a secret intelligence assessment of India's nuclear program and its government's ties to Iran in January amid concerns about a White House effort to provide nuclear technology to New Delhi. Ten months later, as the Senate prepared to vote on nuclear trade with India, the intelligence assessment has yet to be seen on Capitol Hill.

On November 16 the U.S. Senate voted to approve the US-India Civilian Nuclear Agreement. The vote was 85-12.

Iran

Iran is determined to develop full nuclear fuel cycle technology, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said October 11. "They [the West] must know that possession of the full nuclear fuel cycle technology is the desire of the whole Iranian people," he said at a public meeting.

Kaveh L Afrasiabi wrote in Asia Times (October 14) on the need to engage Iran in bilateral talks.

This Antiwar.com article asserts that a U.S. military strike against Iran is still being considered

On Democracy Now former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter talks about White House plans for regime change in Iran.

This October 23 Weekly Standard article discusses the things the U.S. can do to limit Iranian nuclear options.

On October 24 the IAEA said Iran had begun testing new uranium enrichment equipment that could double the capacity of its small research-and-development facilities. The action appears to be a signal to the United Nations Security Council that Iran would respond to sanctions by speeding ahead with its nuclear program.

Moscow Times reported that to dissuade Moscow from blocking UN action against Iran, Russia would be permitted to work on the Bushehr light-water nuclear reactor in Iran even if the UN Security Council imposes sanctions on Tehran for its nuclear program.

On October 18 Iran's chief nuclear negotiator threatened retaliation, possibly by suspending international atomic inspections -- if the UN imposed sanctions on Tehran over its nuclear program. Ali Larijani's comments came a day after the European Union backed limited UN Security Council sanctions against Iran for not halting uranium enrichment, a condition for starting talks on an atomic incentives package.

Asia Times reported November 4 that a draft United Nations resolution calling for sanctions on Iran has been dealt a severe blow by China and Russia and, given the absence of any evidence of nuclear-weapons proliferation by Iran, the momentum for UN action against Iran has begun to fizzle.

Reportedly the proposed sanctions text says that UN member states "take necessary measures to prevent the supply, sale or transfer directly or indirectly from their territories or by their nationals ... of all items, materials, equipment, goods and technology which could contribute to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs."

Tyler Drumheller, the man who ran the CIA's covert activities in Europe during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq says U.S. intelligence needs to be better insulated from political influence if the nation is to avoid another disaster in Iran.

North Korea

The geopolitical shockwaves unleashed by North Korea's nuclear test last month continue to spread throughout the world. The UN Security Council has been debating what to do since it adopted Resolution 1718. The UN sanctions resolution proposed by the United States would direct all members "to undertake and facilitate inspection of cargo to or from" North Korea.

Those debating sanctions have asked would the collapse of Kim Jong Il's government prove more dangerous than leaving him in charge of a nuclear-armed state? And, questions over the effectiveness of the Security Council's punitive sanctions on North Korea for its test grew, as both South Korea and China ­ the North's two most important trading partners ­ indicated that business and economic relations would be largely unaffected. Analysts debate sanctions effectiveness here. See this for detail on China's role.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter wrote in the New York Times that the U.S. should still make an effort to put into effect the 1994 denuclearization agreement he helped negotiate, which the North Koreans still maintain is feasible. See this for detail.

The New York Times reported October 13 that making good on President Bush's vow this week to hold North Korea "fully accountable" if it shares nuclear material would pose a major challenge to American intelligence and diplomacy, requiring new equipment and a high level of international cooperation. See also this AP article.

Given the test this article from the October issue of Arms Control Today on using international forensics to detect and deter nuclear terrorism is particularly apropos.

This Asia Times article explains the significance of the fact that the North Korean test was powered by plutonium.

This October 11 episode of the Newshour with Jim Lehrer analyzes U.S. policy towards North Korea after President Bush ruled out military attacks. William Arkin explains why the U.S. could not attack North Korea even if it wanted to.

In this Council on Foreign Relations interview Alan D. Romberg, a leading expert on Asia, says that in the aftermath of North Korea's announced nuclear test, and with China and North Korea "angry" at each other, it falls to the United States to try to get six-party negotiations resumed.

In this CFR interview Gary Samore, a former National Security Council staffer and nonproliferation expert, says the most important asset the United States has is to work with China to defuse the crisis and Pyongyang considers Beijing and Seoul the bigger players in negotiations because their aid sustains an increasingly isolated North Korea.

The Washington Times reported October 12 that recent U.S. intelligence analyses of North Korea's nuclear and missile programs were flawed and the lack of clarity on the issue hampered U.S. diplomatic efforts to avert the test. The analyses in question included a National Intelligence Estimate a consensus report of all U.S. spy agencies produced several months ago and at least two other classified reports on North Korea produced by senior officials within the office of the Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte.

Newsweek ran this story on how North Korea went nuclear and how the United States failed to stop it. See also this piece by Tony Karon.

The Korea Times reported that at the Security Consultative Meeting in Washington, D.C. on October 21 South Korea and the United States discussed the U.S. military's provision of nuclear weapons in case of war on the Korean Peninsula. The U.S. government has reaffirmed its commitment to a nuclear umbrella for South Korea in case of a nuclear war on the peninsula at meetings every year since 1978. Tactical nuclear weapons expected to be offered to South Korea include the Tomahawk cruise missile capable of carrying 200 kilotons in a nuclear warhead, the AGM-69 short-range attack missile, the AGM-86B air-launched cruise missile for B-52 bombers and the BGM-109G grounded-launched cruise missile, according to defense experts.

The Los Angeles Times reported October 11 that sanctions demanded by U.S. officials in response to North Korea's test would focus on closing pathways to proliferation of weapons technology. But U.S. officials say any such effort would have to focus on the air and land routes through China and Russia that the government in Pyongyang has used in response to American monitoring on the high seas.

One of the consequences of the test was to bring about a debate in Japan as to whether it should develop its own nuclear weapons. Thus far Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said that North Korea's test will not affect his country's constitutional ban on developing nuclear weapons, but all of the North's neighbors face fundamental military and foreign policy questions in the wake of the test. For detail see these Asia Times October 13, October 14, October 17, October 18 and October 24 articles.

Still, Shoichi Nakagawa, policy chief of Japan's ruling party called for an active debate on developing atomic weapons due to the nuclear threat from North Korea.

North Korea's decision to re-enter six-party negotiations regarding its nuclear program, three weeks after a nuclear test and nearly a year after shunning the talks is discussed on the October 31 NewsHour. See here for detail.

United Kingdom

The Independent reported October 20 that fresh evidence that work on testing a nuclear warhead is being planned at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston has been uncovered by anti-nuclear campaigners. The disclosure could leave the Prime Minister open to allegations of deceiving Parliament. Tony Blair promised MPs that they would have a parliamentary debate before the Government gives the go-ahead for a replacement for Britain's Trident nuclear weapon system.

For all the latest news on the Trident Replacement debate in the UK see the BASIC Website.

United States

On October 19 the United States took another step toward building a new stockpile of up to 2,200 deployed nuclear weapons that would last well into the 21st century, announcing the start of a multiyear process to repair and replace facilities where they would be developed and assembled and where older warheads could be more rapidly dismantled.

The Washington Post reported that "Significant backlogs" in surveillance testing of several types of nuclear warheads in the aging U.S. stockpile have created gaps in information needed to ensure that the weapons remain reliable, a report released November 2 by the Energy Department's inspector general said.

Publications

Joseph Cirincione, Bomb Scare: The History, Theory and the Future of Nuclear Weapons, Columbia University Press, February 2007.

Robert, D. Kaplan, When North Korea Falls, The Atlantic Monthly, October 2006.

Christopher de Bellaigue, Defiant Iran, New York Review of Books, November 2, 2006.

Michael Goldfarb, The Dear Leader's Little Nuke, The Daily Standard, October 12, 2006.

Steve Coll, Nuke Rebuke, The New Yorker, October 23, 2006.

The North Korean Nuclear Test: Regional and International Implications, Report on Panel Discussion, Center for Nonproliferation Studies, October 16, 2006.

North Korea's Nuclear Test: Motivations, Implications, and U.S. Options, Congressional Research Service, October 24, 2006.

David S. McDonough, Nuclear Superiority, International Institute for Strategic Studies, Adelphi Paper 383.

North Korea: What Next?, Prepared Remarks by Daryl G. Kimball to the ICAS 2006 Fall Symposium on Korean Peninsula Issues, October 11, 2006.

Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, Congressional Research Service, October 11, 2006.

By Peter D. Zimmerman, Jeffrey G. Lewis, The Bomb in the Backyard, Foreign Policy, November/December 2006.

Noah Feldman, Nuclear holocaust: A risk too big even for martyrs?, The New York Times Magazine, October 27, 2006.

U.S. Policy toward Iran, Remarks by R. Nicholas Burns, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, U.S. Department of State Council on Foreign Relations October 11, 2006

INDIA REACTS TO DPRK NUCLEAR TEST: DEFENDING THE U.S. INDIA DEAL, POINTING FINGER AT PAKISTAN, WMD, Insights, November 2006.

ROLE OF IRAN'S NEW FOREIGN POLICY COUNCIL IN NUCLEAR DEBATE STILL IN FLUX, WMD Insights, November 2006.

Oliver Meier, The Growing Nuclear Fuel-Cycle Debate, Arms Control Today, November 2006.

Current History, November 2006

The End of the Nonproliferation Regime?
George Perkovich

The Lessons of North Korea's Test
Leon V. Sigal

Bringing Iran to the Bargaining Table
Kenneth M. Pollack

The US-India Nuclear Pact: Bad for Security
Gary Milhollin

The US-India Nuclear Pact: A Good Deal
Dinshaw Mistry and Sumit Ganguly

What If a Nuclear-Armed State Collapses?
Michael O'Hanlon

The New Threats: Nuclear Amnesia, Nuclear Legitimacy
Jack Mendelsohn

Deterrence or Preemption?
Jeffrey W. Knopf

North Koreas Nuclear Test: The Fallout, International Crisis Group, 13 November 2006

David Albright and Jacqueline Shire, Latest IAEA Report on Iran: Continued Progress on Cascade Operations, No New Cooperation with IAEA, The Institute for Science and International Security, November 14, 2006.

Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran, The Institute for Science and International Security, November 14, 2006.

New Blog, Total Wonkerr.

Click here for a Printer-Friendly Version.