IAEA Report Shows Expanding Capacity, Slight Stockpile Increases

On the radar: Capacity up, operations the same; Kissinger says bring Iran negotiations to point of decision; Weakening NNSA accountability; Triad isn’t trinity; Easy cuts; and Cold War assumptions don’t fit Pakistan.

November 19th, 2012 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Marianne Nari Fisher

Incremental expansion - The latest IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program found that Iran installed more centrifuges at its Fordow facility, did not increase the number operating there, and added to its total production of 20% enriched uranium.

--”The IAEA report findings provide further troubling evidence that Iran is continuing to pursue sensitive nuclear fuel-cycle activities in violation of UN Security Council resolutions and is slowly enhancing its nuclear weapons breakout potential. However, Iran remains years, not months away from having a workable nuclear arsenal if it were to choose to pursue that capability,” write Kelsey Davenport, Daryl Kimball and Greg Thielmann at Arms Control Now.

--By the numbers: stockpile of 20% enriched increased to 134.9 kg, with 96 kg set aside for fuel conversion; stockpile of 3.5% enriched virtually unchanged at 5,309 kg; 644 centrifuges added at Fordow, total number of operating centrifuges unchanged. http://bit.ly/ZYL6tI

Full IAEA Report - “Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” November 16, 2012. (pdf) http://bit.ly/QTbL9U

How it played - “Iran’s Fordo Nuclear Complex Reaches Capacity” by David Sanger of The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/S5YMQL

--”Iran ready to double nuclear work in bunker - IAEA” by Reuters. http://reut.rs/UCKkg0 “UN nuclear agency: Iran poised to expand nuke work” by George Jahn at AP. http://bit.ly/10ftBEK

Kissinger on Iran - The diplomatic process with Iran must “be brought to a point of decision. The P5+1 or the United States unilaterally must put forward a precise program to curtail Iranian enrichment with specific time limits,” writes Henry Kissinger in The Washington Post.

--”To the extent that Iran shows willingness to conduct itself as a nation-state, rather than a revolutionary religious cause, and accepts enforceable verification, elements of Iranian security concerns should be taken seriously, including gradual easing of sanctions as strict limits on enrichment are implemented and enforced. But time will be urgent. Tehran must be made to understand that the alternative to an agreement is not simply a further period of negotiation and that using negotiations to gain time will have grave consequences.” http://wapo.st/UP8UdW

Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email or follow us on twitter.

--Have a tip? Email earlywarning@ploughshares.org. Want to support this work? Click here.

Weakening NNSA accountability - A controversial NNSA reform proposal from the House version of the Defense Authorization Bill would, if enacted into law, “decrease the accountability to the President, through the Secretary of Energy, for the safety, security and management of the nuclear weapons complex, and would reduce essential oversight of these facilities,” write Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in a letter to leadership on the House and Senate Armed Service Committees.

--Full letter here, including the authors’ section-by-section breakdown of how the proposal would weaken NNSA accountability. (pdf) http://1.usa.gov/ROBfSQ

Questioning the triad - A recent op-ed by Gen. William Chambers, Air Force Assistant Chief of Staff, “exaggerates the benefits of the nuclear triad and downplays the significant financial resources that will be required to sustain it,” writes Kingston Reif for AOL Defense.

--Reif checks Gen. Chambers’ assumptions about the value of ICBMs and the affordability of replacing the triad before reminding, ”Every dollar spent to modernize and replace aging nuclear weapons systems is a dollar that cannot be spent on defense priorities that are far more relevant to the 21st century security environment, such as upgrading conventional air and naval power projection capabilities.” http://aol.it/WgrVa8

Quote - “With the cold war over, we can afford to slash nuclear arsenals without diminishing our deterrent,” writes Bill Keller for The New York Times on sequestration and slashing the defense budget. http://nyti.ms/UQgNW8

Cutting the Pentagon budget - A new report from Stimson recommends reducing the nuclear arsenal as a way to find savings from defense budgets. When drafting the report, Barry Blechman said “he was surprised how easily the group agreed to the recommendation to reduce nuclear weapons. Some members of the group, like Gen. James Cartwright, argued for even steeper cuts,” writes Kate Brannen for Politico Pro.

--The Stimson report was part of a series of reports on defense spending, including Ploughshares Fund’s recent report that the U.S. is on track to spend $640 billion on nuclear weapons and related programs over the next ten years. Full story behind the paywall. http://politico.pro/Wpsm6T

Tweet - @MattWaldNYT: A Rough Road from Swords to Ploughshares: Problems in Disposal of #Plutonium from #Nuclear weapons. http://nyti.ms/WgloMF

Xi and Kim - “North Korean ruler Kim Jong Un is anticipated possibly by January to travel to China for talks with Xi Jinping, new Chinese Communist Party general secretary and soon to be the nation's next president.” Global Security Newswire has the story. http://bit.ly/U8GhtD

Tweet - @Cirincione: Looking forward to speaking @WorldBoston tomorrow night. Please come if you're in town. http://bit.ly/XsQ7wl

Myanmar safeguards - “Myanmar said on Sunday it would agree to new atomic safeguards that allow inspections of suspected clandestine nuclear sites, ahead of a milestone visit by US President Barack Obama.” AFP has the story. http://bit.ly/U91cga

Tweet - @StanleyFound : "Nuclear treaties need @ChuckGrassley help" by Greg Thielmann of @Armscontrolnow http://dmreg.co/WphRAw

Deterring the unstable - Deterrence between the U.S. and the Soviet Union assumed that “Life-or-death decisions in deep crises would be made by leaders driven by rational calculations of national interest and executed by coherent chains of command.” Such heroic assumptions cannot be extended to the situation between India and Pakistan, due to Pakistan’s large civil-military and opaque, fractured government, writes Michael Krepon at Arms Control Wonk. http://bit.ly/Wgrblx