Getting to Zero Update
29 January 2008
|
BASIC is embarking on an ambitious new program to help
leaders take the necessary steps to eventually rid the
world of nuclear weapons. To mark this occasion, BASIC
will be replacing its Washington Nuclear Update with
a new Getting to Zero update. The Getting to Zero Update
will continue to follow developments that are relevant
to nuclear nonproliferation and the reduction of existing
nuclear stockpiles, as well as reporting on proposals
and political initiatives.
|
Please note, BASIC and Crisis Action have a bi-weekly update
devoted solely to diplomatic developments related to Iran's
nuclear program, which may be found at the following Web address:
http://www.basicint.org/update/iran.htm.
Previous editions of the Washington Nuclear Update are available
at: http://www.basicint.org/update/wnu.htm.
In this issue:
Commitments to Disarmament and Arms Control
The Hoover Group Call to Action 2
The 'Hoover Group' - George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, Sam
Nunn and William Perry - published a renewed call
to action in the Wall Street Journal on January
15, sparking off another flurry of debate. This came a year
after their original letter in the Journal triggered
a series of responses from governments and civil society around
the vision of a nuclear-weapon free world. The growing and
impressive list
of elite US supporters include seven secretaries of state,
seven national security advisors and five former secretaries
of defense. All have in their time played key roles in developing
the US nuclear arsenal. Their call is for a clear vision and
for clear steps to get there, including a test ban, a fissile
material cut-off treaty, renewed bilateral treaties with Russia
leading to deeper and verified cuts, taking warheads off hair-trigger
alert and scrapping operational plans for massive nuclear
attack, the development of cooperative ballistic missile defense
and early warning systems and strengthened security. Also
of note, Henry Kissinger and the rest of the Hoover Group
may discuss these issues when they meet with Yevgeny Primakov
in Oslo, Norway next month.
On January 10, former high-level military leaders from the
United States and Europe, including General (ret.) John Shalikashvili
(United States) and General (ret.) Dr. Klaus Naumann, KBE
(Germany), released
a report in which they argue that leaders of nuclear countries
in NATO should not drop the option of using nuclear weapons
first and that nuclear weapons are 'indispensable' because
there is 'no realistic prospect' for a world free of nuclear
weapons, contradicting the Wall Street Journal call
to action. The full report
may be found here.
US Government Commitment
On December 20, the US Special Representative for Nuclear
Nonproliferation, Christopher Ford, spoke at the UK Foreign
Office Wilton
Park conference about the goal of zero nuclear weapons:
So this is where we are today, with the United
States engaged in broad diplomatic outreach efforts and ongoing
dialogue not just about numbers, doctrine, and treaty interpretation,
but also about our vision for the future - and about how
one might actually hope to achieve nuclear disarmament. The
United States has reaffirmed its commitment to disarmament,
offered a vision of a zero-weapons future, and engaged
in unprecedented discussion of how actually to achieve this.
[emphasis added]
The full text of Ford's
presentation may be found here. He also delivered a presentation
on "Nuclear
Disarmament and the 'Legalization' of Policy Discourse in
the NPT Regime," at an event hosted by The Nonproliferation
Review on November 29 in Washington, DC.
US Presidential Candidates' Statements and Positions on
Nuclear Weapons
The
Democratic Presidential Candidates on Nuclear Weapons Elimination,
Joseph Cirincione and Alexandra Bell, Center for American
Progress, via the Huffington Post, January 17, 2008, (Includes
a chart that lists the former cabinet members who now support
the elimination of nuclear weapons.)
Issue
Tracker: The Candidates and Nuclear Nonproliferation,
Council on Foreign Relations, Updated January 16, 2008.
Where the presidential candidates stand on nuclear issues,
Lawrence Krauss, The
Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, January 9, 2008.
The
Union of Concerned Scientists commissioned a poll that reveals
the attitudes of likely Republican and Democratic primary
voters in South Carolina toward US nuclear weapons policies.
UCS explained in its press release on December 13 that
it wanted to conduct the poll in a "conservative" and "pro-military"
state that is also influential in the Presidential primaries.
Sixty-eight percent of Democrats said they agreed that "the
next president should make reducing the nuclear weapons arsenals
of the United States and other countries a major priority."
For the same question, 46% of Republicans agreed. For more
results and details on how the poll was conducted, see the
following documents for the
Democratic voters and the Republican
voters.
Russian Perspective on START Replacement
News agencies reported at the end of November that Russian
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
is calling for START I to be replaced by a legally-binding
agreement between not only the United States and Russia, but
by a treaty that would include other countries. Lavrov criticized
the Moscow agreement (SORT) that pertained to deployed nuclear
warheads (and not ones stored in reserve) and disagrees with
the Bush Administration's position that a new agreement will
not need to be legally-binding. Echoing these sentiments,
former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev
said that a strong binding agreement should follow START I,
which he had signed on behalf of the Soviet Union, and said
that verification and inspections are still crucial after
the end of the Cold War, but lamented that he did not see
any talks forthcoming. Gorbachev made his remarks at the beginning
of a conference
on nuclear disarmament at Harvard University on December
4. START I will expire in 2009.
Other recent developments could influence prospects for a
follow-up treaty. Russia officially suspended
its involvement in the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE)
Treaty on December 12, which sets limits on troops and weaponry
across Europe, in response to NATO expansion and the planned
deployment of missile defense bases in Eastern Europe (see
more in the section on Missile Defense below).
UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown, in a speech
to the Chamber of Commerce in Delhi, India on January 21,
renewed the UK government's commitment to move toward a nuclear-weapon
free world. He said: "I pledge that in the run-up to the Non
Proliferation Treaty review conference in 2010 we will be
at the forefront of the international campaign to accelerate
disarmament amongst possessor states, to prevent proliferation
to new states, and to ultimately achieve a world that is freer
from nuclear weapons." The theme will be developed by Defence
Secretary, Des Browne later in the week.
General Assembly Resolutions
On December 5, the UN General Assembly adopted numerous resolutions
related to nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. One resolution
called for the Conference on Disarmament to begin negotiations
toward a ban on the production of military fissile materials
and also called on members to make deep cuts to nuclear weapons
arsenals, with the overall goal of elimination. Another resolution
called on members to decrease
the operational readiness of their nuclear weapons.
United States
Elimination of funding for the 'RRW'
In mid-December, the US House of Representatives and Senate
eliminated funding earmarked for the development of a new
nuclear weapon, called the "Reliable Replacement Warhead"
(RRW). In the same bill (fiscal
year 2008 omnibus spending), they also instructed the
President to submit to Congress in 2008 a plan to secure nuclear
weapons and nuclear weapons-usable material by 2012, and a
new nuclear weapons strategy, to be developed in consultation
with other governmental and non-governmental organizations.
The bill also increased funding for nonproliferation programs.
The President signed the bill into law on December 26.
See also: Appropriations
FY 2008 - Nuclear Non-Proliferation Highlights, Leonor
Tomero, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, December
21, 2007.
US nuclear reductions in warheads and facilities
President Bush announced on December 19 a reduction by 15
percent in the active US nuclear weapons arsenal, which
is scheduled to be completed by 2012. For a useful
analysis of what the announcement means, see the December
19th blog entry by Jeffrey Lewis at ArmsControlWonk.com.
The US Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) also announced the same week that more
than 7000 jobs would be cut from the weapons program and
600 buildings that currently serve the nuclear weapons complex
will be closed or abandoned. On January 11, the NNSA released
the plan
to 'streamline' the US nuclear weapons program. The plan is
set forth in a draft
Supplemental Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (SPEIS).
The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a
report
in November (dated October 2007) which called on the NNSA
to improve
the safety of the three US national nuclear weapons labs.
The GAO reports that "nearly 60 serious accidents and near
misses" occurred between 2000 and 2007, many "causing serious
damage to workers or facilities." The incidents included worker
"exposure to radiation, inhalation of toxic vapors and electrical
shocks."
GAO calls for review of program funding former-Soviet scientists
A GAO Report
released in December is skeptical
about the continued necessity of the US Department of
Energy's 'Initiatives
for Proliferation Prevention' program that provides economic
aid to scientists from the former-Soviet Union with the aim
of dissuading them from selling their knowledge to terrorists.
It claims that many of the scientists were too young to have
been part of the Soviet-era nuclear establishment and that
some had no background in nuclear, chemical or biological
sciences, and also queries whether there remains an economic
need for the program.
Guards caught sleeping at weapons plant
The NNSA announced on January 16 that seven guards have been
caught
sleeping at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant since 2000.
The Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee dismantles old weapons,
makes uranium parts for warheads, and serves as the main storage
site for highly enriched uranium in the United States. The
announcement comes after a video showed guards sleeping at
a Pennsylvania
nuclear power plant. The revelation of the problems at
the Pennsylvania plant led to the dismissal
of the contractor responsible for managing the guards,
which was Wackenhut Corporation. Wackenhut Services, Inc.,
which has been responsible for managing the Y-12 guards, was
a subsidiary
of Wackenhut Corporation until 2002. The House Energy
and Commerce Committee had announced on January 7 that it
was launching
an investigation into the Pennsylvania incident as well
as a comprehensive review of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
operations.
In January, the Air Force released an updated manual on Nuclear
Weapons Maintenance Procedures (posted by the Federation
of American Scientists). The revised version comes six months
after crew at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota mistakenly
uploaded nuclear cruise missiles to a B-52. Armed with
these nuclear weapons, the B-52 eventually flew
1,500 miles over the middle of the country until it landed
in Louisiana.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has picked Paul
Wolfowitz, former Deputy Defense Secretary and most recently
President of the World Bank, to chair the International Security
Advisory Board. In this capacity, Wolfowitz will offer guidance
on arms
control and nonproliferation, and on other foreign policy
issues for the State Department.
Iran
Since the last GTZ Update, the United States released a summary
of its National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which stated
that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in the fall
of 2003:
We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003,
Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; we also assess
with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum
is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons. We
judge with high confidence that the halt, and Tehran's announcement
of its decision to suspend its declared uranium enrichment
program and sign an Additional Protocol to its Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty Safeguards Agreement, was directed primarily in response
to increasing international scrutiny and pressure resulting
from exposure of Iran's previously undeclared nuclear work.
However, Shervin Boloorian explains in a BASIC Note
that factors other than
international pressure may have played a significant role
in Iran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program.
On January 13, the IAEA announced that Iran
agreed to wrap up any remaining questions about its nuclear
program within four weeks. However, the United States continues
to push
for a third round of sanctions at the United Nations,
pointing to Iran's failure to abide by previous resolutions.
The P5+1 states agreed a draft text of a resolution to be
discussed over the next few weeks before voting at the Security
Council. Reports are mixed (see RT
video), but it would appear the emphasis is on support
for the IAEA negotiations and no
additional sanctions other than naming
of two more Iranian banks.
For more information and frequent postings on Iran, please
visit BASIC and Crisis Action's Iran Updates
page.
Further Reading
Prospects
for an Iranian Nuclear Deal, Gary Samore, Council on Foreign
Relations, discussion at the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars in Washington, DC, January 11, 2008.
Iran
and the US: Key Issues from an American Perspective, Anthony
H. Cordesman, CSIS, January 3, 2008.
Understanding
the NIE, Sharon Squassoni, Proliferation Analysis,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, December 13, 2007.
Understanding
the Key Judgments in the New NIE on Iranian Nuclear Weapons,
Anthony H. Cordesman, CSIS, Revised December 6, 2007.
Assessing
the NIE, George Perkovich, Proliferation Analysis,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, December 4, 2007.
Iran's
Nuclear Program and Diplomatic Options to Contain It,
David Albright, Dr. Hans-Peter Hinrichsen, Joseph Cirincione,
and Daryl Kimball, transcript of press conference sponsored
by the Arms Control Association; held at the Henry L. Stimson
Center, Washington, DC, December 4, 2007.
Iran's
Nuclear Program: UN and IAEA Reporting and Developments,
Anthony Cordesman, CSIS, November 27, 2007.
Pakistan
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan on December
27 caused analysts and politicians to speculate about the
stability of the government and the security of the country's
nuclear arsenal. On January 8, the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Hayat
quoted IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei as having
said that he was concerned about the security of the nuclear
arsenal in Pakistan. Pakistani officials expressed surprise
and rejected the remarks. The IAEA
later said that ElBaradei's remarks had been taken out
of context and were not intended to focus only on Pakistan
but on nuclear security in the region in general.
During a US Presidential debate in New Hampshire on January
5, the Democratic candidates commented on how they would approach
Pakistan and expressed
skepticism about the security
of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.
Further Reading
Politics
More Dangerous than Nukes, Analyst Says, George Perkovich
of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on NPR's Day
to Day (audio of interview), December 28, 2007.
How Not to Handle
Nuclear Security, Zia Mian, Foreign Policy in Focus,
December 14, 2007.
(Discusses why the US track record on securing its own nuclear
arsenal has not necessarily been an ideal model for Pakistan
to follow.)
Building
Confidence in Pakistan's Nuclear Security, Kenneth N.
Luongo and Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Naeem Salik, Arms Control
Today, December 2007.
Inside
Pakistan's Drive to Guard Its A-Bombs, Peter Wonacott,
Wall Street Journal, November 29, 2007.
India
India
plans to resume talks with the IAEA soon. The discussions
are to address the safeguards that are required as part of
an agreement with the United States to open trade in civilian
nuclear technology. Meanwhile, on January 15, the new Australian
government suggested that it would negate
the deal that the previous Liberal-National Party coalition
government of John Howard made with India last August, which
would have allowed the sale of uranium to India for its energy
program. Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said that the Australian
Labour Party has made a commitment not to sell uranium to
countries that are not members of the NPT. His remarks came
after a general meeting with a special envoy from India. However,
a government spokesman later said that Australia would
not necessarily block the sale of uranium to India from
other countries. France
expressed an interest in cooperating with India on its
civil nuclear program and further discussions are expected
on January 25 when French President Nicolas Sarkozy visits
the country.
See also: 'Experts
and Organizations from 23 Countries Call on States to "Fix
the Proposal for Nuclear Cooperation with India," Arms
Control Association Press Release, January 9, 2008.
North Korea
According to the Bush Administration, the North Korean government
failed to meet an end-of-the-year
deadline to disable and dismantle its main Yongbyon reactor
and to present a complete list of its nuclear programs. North
Korean officials claimed they had already met conditions by
the end of December and that the other members of the Six-Party
Talks had failed to deliver their side of the October bargain,
including the delivery of one million tonnes of fuel and removing
North Korea from the US list of states that sponsor terrorism.
On January 8, US negotiator Christopher Hill returned to South
Korea to resume discussions.
On January 13, South Korea's foreign ministry gave President-elect
Lee Myung-Bak a report outlining a plan for the 'complete'
dismantlement
of North Korea's nuclear program by 2010 and for separate
talks for a peace agreement to formally end the 1950-1953
Korean War.
On January 17, Jay Lefkowitz, President Bush's envoy on North
Korean human rights, caused a political storm when he said
before an audience at the American Enterprise Institute that
North Korea would
probably not give up its nuclear program under the Six
Party Talks before President Bush leaves office and that human
rights conditions should be linked to security issues. The
White House made a point of disavowing his remarks and reaffirming
its support for the Six-Party Talks a day later.
The New York Times reported on January 19 that the
administration was demanding North Korea explain
its purchase of aluminum tubes appropriate for the conversion
of uranium gas into nuclear fuel.
See also: North
Korea's Plutonium Declaration: A Starting Point for an Initial
Verification Process, David Albright, Paul Brennan, and
Jacqueline Shire, The Institute for Science and International
Security, January 10, 2008.
Syria
DigitalGlobe of Longmont, Colorado released satellite
images on January 11 showing that Syria
is rebuilding on the same site that was the target of
an Israeli air attack back in September, said by some without
public evidence to have been a nuclear reactor under construction.
Norway
Norwegian Finance Minister Kristen Halvorsen announced on
January 11 that Norway would be dropping three companies from
its global pension fund because they have been involved
in the production of nuclear weapons or cluster munitions.
The three companies are: Hanwha Corporation, from South Korea;
Serco Group PLC, from Britain; and GenCorp Inc. from the United
States.
United Kingdom
The Sunday Times reported on January 13 that a four-year
old UK
government investigation into the activities of Peter
Griffin has apparently been dropped, though no reason has
been given. Griffin, a British businessman and engineer, was
accused of supplying to Libya equipment that could help produce
nuclear weapons, and of being a member of the AQ Khan network.
Missile Defence
The United States continues to push for a missile defense
system for Eastern Europe, arguing that the system is needed
to defend Europe against missiles that could contain nuclear
warheads. The proposal, which includes plans to place ten
missile interceptors in Poland and a radar base in the Czech
Republic, has caused anxiety in European capitals, and especially
in Moscow. Russians have argued that the US missile defense
proposal is contributing to current tensions
in arms control and led to Russia's decision to suspend
the CFE Treaty.
Poland's new Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, says that he wants
more time
to consult with other countries affected by the plan,
including Russia. Since taking office in November, Tusk has
expressed
doubts over the project and has asked the United States
for extra
security measures around the proposed missile sites, such
as bolstering short and mid-range air defenses, in return
for cooperation.
Polish
opposition is growing, with fears for its impact on relations
with Russia and its attraction to terrorist attack. Some Europeans
are also questioning
the necessity of a missile shield ostensibly to defend
against a future Iran after the release of the US National
Intelligence Estimate suggested Iran had stopped its nuclear
weapons program in 2003.
The Director of the US Missile Defense Agency, Lt. General
Henry Obering III visited
the Czech Republic in mid January hoping to garner support,
keen to begin construction by the end of the year. Czech Prime
Minister Mirek Topolanek has indicated his intention to seek
Parliamentary approval for the plan after
the NATO Summit in Bucharest in April, but Czech
leaders have not set a firm deadline for concluding any
missile defense deal. More
talks were scheduled for this week.
NATO
has invited Russia to attend the Bucharest Summit. Disagreement
over the installation of a missile defense system in Eastern
Europe would likely be high on the agenda. Russia has assigned
a new Ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, and the appointment
is expected to make
NATO-Russia Council discussions tougher. NATO's Secretary
General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, recently commented that Russia's
appointment of Rogozin, "...is, sadly, not
going to change the differences of opinion between Russia
and NATO on issues like Kosovo or missile defense."
Further Reading
Missile
Defense Update #1, Center for Defense Information, January
24, 2008.
DOT&E's
2007 Assessment of Missile Defense: Wobbling Along, Victoria
Samson, Center for Defense Information, January 18, 2008.
NATO
and Missile Defence: Implications for Germany before the Bucharest
Summit, Alexander Bitter, SWP Research Paper, December
2007.
Missile
Defence and European Security, Stephen Pullinger (ISIS-Europe),
study for European Parliament, Policy Department External
Policies, November 2007.
Publications
Ban
the Bomb. Really. Michael Krepon, Henry L. Stimson Center.
Article appears in The American Interest, Winter (January/February)
2008.
Off
Target: While the White House talked about WMD, it quietly
gutted efforts to stop their spread, Kurt Pitzer, Mother
Jones, January/February 2008.
A
Look Back Reveals Forward Thinking, Walter Pincus, The
Washington Post, January 14, 2008. (Covers highlights
from the recently released [in declassified form] Special
National Intelligence Estimate called "Prospects for Further
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons" from 1974.)
Atomic
body set for US control, Sylvia Pfeifer, Financial
Times, January 10, 2008.
Following
START: Risk Acceptance and the 1991-92 Presidential Nuclear
Initiatives, Matthew Fuhrmann and Bryan R. Early, Foreign
Policy Analysis, January 2008. (Detailed abstract. Full
article available online for a fee.)
WMD Insights, December
2007 - January 2008.
Abolishing Nuclear Armouries: Policy or Pipedream? Michael
Quinlan, Survival, International Institute for Strategic
Studies, Volume 49, Winter 2007-08. (Article
available for purchase online.)
Know
nukes: Why is our worst national nightmare so misunderstood?
Mike Miliard, The Phoenix, December 31, 2007. (Interview
with Michael Levi about the threat of nuclear terrorism.)
Nuclear
Non-Proliferation News from the Acronym Institute (monthly
digest of UK news focusing on Trident and Missile Defense),
December 20, 2007.
Nuclear
safeguards for a new nuclear age, Charles D. Ferguson,
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, December 19, 2007.
COMMENTARY
- ARE WE SAFE? Preventing a nuclear terrorist attack on the
US, Graham Allison, Patriot Ledger, December 19,
2007.
The Nuclear
Jihadist: The True Story of the Man Who Sold the World's Most
Dangerous Secrets...And How We Could Have Stopped Him,
Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins, Twelve (Publisher),
December 2007.
Is
There Any Fizz Left in the Fissban? Prospects for a Fissile
Material Cutoff Treaty, Ambassador Paul Meyer, Arms Control
Today, December 2007.
Nuclear
Weapons: Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty, Jonathan Medalia,
Congressional Research Service Report for US Congress, Updated
November 30, 2007.
Beyond
War: How Engaged Are We? Steve Andreasen and Steven N.
Simon, Star Tribune, November 26, 2007.
The
Seventh Decade: The New Shape of Nuclear Danger, Jonathan
Schell, Henry Holt and Co. Metropolitan Books, November 2007.
On
Nuclear Terrorism, Michael Levi, Harvard University Press,
November 2007.
BASIC's work is made possible by the generous support of
our donors: the Ploughshares
Fund, the Ford Foundation,
the Joseph Rowntree Charitable
Trust, the Marmott Trust, Polden-Puckham
Charitable Foundation, Rockefeller Family Associates,
and individual contributors to BASIC. We are grateful to all
of them for their support.
|
