New START Implementation On Track, if Slow

April 15, 2014 | Edited by Lauren Mladenka and Geoff Wilson

Creeping toward compliance - “The latest data on strategic weapons exchanged between Russia and the United States under terms of the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) shows movement by both countries toward the three key limits of the treaty,” writes Greg Thielmann in a piece for Arms Control Now. “In spite of bilateral tensions over events in Ukraine, these data from the beginning of March and the fact that subsequent on-site inspections continue suggest that treaty implementation is still on track.”

--“The overall downward trend to date on the Russian side of the equation is likely to continue through this decade, independent of perturbations in Moscow’s relations with the West… Based on current trends and projections, it is reasonable to assume that Russia’s deployed warhead totals will decline by 200-300 before the new, heavily-MIRVed ICBMs under development can be deployed in sizeable numbers toward the beginning of the next decade. Meanwhile, the pace of U.S. implementation of New START reductions is modest in the extreme. Current administration plans do not call for the United States to meet the 1550/800/700 central limits of New START for another four years – until the February 1, 2018 deadline established under the treaty.”

--“In spite of President Obama’s vision of a future world without nuclear weapons, which he articulated in his April 2009 Prague speech, there are no bold second acts in sight to follow his first-term achievement of negotiating and ratifying New START… But some sensible steps to reduce the role and burden of nuclear weapons are still available, even without Moscow’s active engagement. For example, he could, as commander-and-chief, at least accelerate U.S. nuclear weapons reductions down to the New START limits already approved by the Senate – and preferably further, to the lower levels now deployed by Russia… Unfortunately, the pre-nuclear notions of power and politics die hard. Until the disutility of nuclear weapons at the margins of the large U.S. and Russian arsenals is fully appreciated, rational steps toward a safer world will be small and halting.” Read the full piece here. http://bit.ly/Q9BfRu

Tweet - @StateDept: If a nuclear bomb were tested in some part of the world, how would we know? Find the answer here: http://1.usa.gov/1jHU7AY

Excess material - “After disposing of the material it has already declared excess to military requirements, the United States will still retain enough plutonium for around 10,000 nuclear weapons, and enough highly enriched uranium for 10,000 to 16,000 weapons,” writes Eryn MacDonald in All Things Nuclear. “Declaring additional weapons-usable fissile material excess and moving to dispose of it more quickly would benefit U.S. security by reducing the amount of this material that could fall into terrorist hands. It would have the added benefit of demonstrating that the Obama administration is still committed to its stated goal of reducing the number and role of U.S. nuclear weapons. In the case of fissile material, more is not better. Less—and quickly—would be.” Full piece here. http://bit.ly/1eKwrrh

Wasted resources - “April 15, Tax Day, our nation funds our national budget. On this day we fund the nation’s business and provide a proclamation to the world of the U.S. priorities for the next year. Ultimately, because they reveal our choices, budgets are moral documents and are supposed to represent the people’s priorities,” writes Robert Dodge in the Las Vegas Informer. “What are those priorities?” Dodge asks. “Unfortunately, in our current dysfunctional national body politic, there lacks the leadership and courage to address and answer” this question.

--“Nuclear weapons programs provide an obvious example of the misallocation of resources. This year the United States will spend roughly $57 billion on nuclear weapons programs. Weapons that must never be used, are militarily purposeless, and threaten our very survival every moment of their existence. These illegal, immoral weapons are an example of the disconnect between rhetoric and reality. The dollars diverted from communities to finance these programs literally rob communities of precious funds that could be spent on urgent needs… So ultimately this tax season as so often in the past, we will pay out of our pockets for something most of us abhor, financing our own instruments of national suicide. As a people, the choice is ours—or in the end there may be no choice. Will we stand on the right side of history or will we continue down our present course?” Read the full article here. http://bit.ly/1t4WjaO

Tweet - @NNSANews: NNSA's @SandiaLabs successfully completed the first full-scale wind tunnel test of the B61‑12 Extension Program http://1.usa.gov/1iTbDir

Russia tests new ICBM - “A new inter-continental ballistic missile (ICBM), RS-24 (Yars), fitted with multiple warheads, has been test-launched from a mobile missile launcher at Plesetsk Cosmodrome by Russia's Strategic Missile and Aerospace Defense Troops,” reports The Voice of Russia. “The entry in service of the RS-24 missile with multiple warheads has increased the Strategic Missile Troops (RVSN) strike group's ability to overcome counter-missile defense systems, thus boosting the nuclear deterrence potential of the Russian strategic nuclear forces.” Full report here. http://bit.ly/1p6Ivgu

Easing conditions - “The United States is reportedly easing its conditions for returning to nuclear talks with Pyongyang amid concerns that a fourth atomic test is in the works,” Global Security Newswire reports. “Washington, along with allies Seoul and Tokyo, now wants North Korea to accept a moratorium on its nuclear weapons development in order for the frozen six-nation, aid-for-denuclearization negotiations to be resumed… The negotiations involving China, Japan, the two Koreas, Russia and the United States were last held in December 2008. They propose to reward Pyongyang's gradual and irreversible denuclearization with timed infusions of economic assistance and international treaties.” Get the full story here. http://bit.ly/1qYgHGL

Disarmament meeting - “The United States became the first nuclear power to dispatch a delegate to a multilateral group pushing for atomic-arms curbs,” Global Security Newswire reports. “A Saturday gathering of the 12-nation Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative in Hiroshima, Japan, included an appearance by Rose Gottemoeller, U.S. under secretary of State for arms control and international security. Gottemoeller took part as an onlooker, and she told the 4-year-old bloc that Washington would continue to pursue a world free of nuclear arms in line with President Obama's 2009 Prague policy address.”

--“The non-nuclear weapons states, for their part, called for the international community to immediately start negotiating a ban on producing new nuclear-bomb fuel, and to rapidly implement an existing treaty prohibiting nuclear tests.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/1hRgvni

Tweet - @aaronstein1: My latest - Turkey's Airplane-less Nuclear Weapons: A Classic Crisis Stability Problem? #Turkey #NATO http://bit.ly/1t57BvN

Special meeting - “Iran requested on Monday a special meeting of a U.N. committee on the United States' refusal to grant a visa to Tehran's new U.N. ambassador appointee, describing the decision as a dangerous precedent that could harm international diplomacy,” writes Michelle Nichols in Reuters. Read the full story here. http://reut.rs/1eE5o6w

Incorporating Iran - “If hawks could crow, that would be the baleful sound from exultant hardliners on both sides of the stand-off over Iran’s nuclear programme,” writes David Gardner in the Financial Times. “The third round of negotiations over the Islamic Republic’s ambiguous nuclear ambitions ended this weekend in the shadow of a spectre from the past – the crisis triggered when radical students took hostage 52 Americans at the US embassy in Tehran after the 1979 Islamist revolution.”

--“The potential rewards of securing a rapprochement with Iran are so great that none of this is enough to derail it. But even after the euphoria of late November’s interim agreement, a nuclear deal is no foregone conclusion. Unless everyone – including Israel and Saudi Arabia – is persuaded that Iran’s ambitions can be contained and that it is not pursuing an atomic bomb, saboteurs lie in ambush down the road. But politicians and diplomats who have dealt with Iranian leaders in recent months are convinced they want a deal. ‘It is quite striking how they are moving,’ says a senior European diplomat with direct knowledge of the talks. ‘They are the ones giving this momentum [because] for them it’s a game-changer.’ A prominent Iranian ally in the region says: ‘They are entirely focused on this’, and that there will be much else to discuss if a nuclear deal becomes, as both sides cautiously anticipate, the catalyst for wider understanding over regional conflicts such as Syria and Iraq.” Read the full piece here. http://on.ft.com/1gyvKlx

Report - “The Future of Arms Control” from the Heinrich Boell Foundation (pdf). http://bit.ly/1jHTzv0

Quick-hits:

--“Military Chiefs Warn Scotland Over Evicting Nuclear Weapons” from Reuters. http://bit.ly/1hHKcNw

--“After Ukraine, Countries That Border Russia Start Thinking About Nuclear Deterrents” by Elisabeth Braw in Newsweek. http://bit.ly/1hRiyI2

Events:

--“Crisis in Ukraine, the Budapest Memorandum and Extended Deterrence.” Discussion with Steven Pifer. April 22 from 12:30 to 2:00 at National Defense University, 408 Fourth Ave., Fort McNair, Washington. RSVP by email to Nima.Gerami@ndu.edu

--“Garwin: Witness to History.” Film screening and panel discussion with Richard Garwin, Richard Breyer, Anand Kamalakar, and Charles Ferguson. April 22 from 5:00-8:00 at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, auditorium, 1200 New York Ave. NW. RSVP by email to rsvp@fas.org.

--“Making a Difference: Faith Communities Speak to the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons.” Discussion with Andrew Kanter, Daryl Kimball, and eight other speakers. April 24 from 9:30-4:00 at the U.S. Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington. http://conta.cc/1ssfg70

--“The United States and Iran: Can Diplomacy Prevent an Iranian Bomb?” Discussion with former Amb. Thomas Pickering and Shaul Bakhash. April 28 from 6:00-7:15 at American University, Abramson Family Founders Room, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington. RSVP here. http://conta.cc/1eEMAyC

Dessert:

And you thought Connecticut Ave. was bad - “A two-inch pothole will give most family cars a bad jolt. Imagine what a 200-foot atomic bomb crater might do. That’s not a problem most of us encounter on our morning commutes. But it is something that the U.S. military had no choice but to ponder. During the Cold War, America placed Atomic Demolition Munitions—nuclear land mines—on the West German and Italian borders and also along the Korean Demilitarized Zone. The bombs were buried along key invasion routes and transportation bottlenecks, such as bridges and mountain passes. If the Soviets or North Koreans had attacked, the Americans would have detonated the ADMs, creating obstacles of rocks, downed trees, radiation—and whopping big craters.”

--“While plotting this atomic destruction, someone finally asked the hundred-kiloton question. Would these giant potholes actually be big enough to block Soviet tanks? Or could an armored vehicle just clank down, through and up the other side? The Army decided to find out. In 1969 the ground combat branch conducted Project Tank Trap, an unimaginatively named program that drove tanks into giant craters. The tests took place at the then-Atomic Energy Agency’s nuclear bomb test range in Nevada. The test range was the site of more than a thousand nuclear explosions during the Cold War, so the government had no problem finding suitable craters.

--The Results? “In some cases, the heavier armored vehicles had to be winched down and up the steep crater walls by a recovery vehicle. However, it turned out that the best way to stop tanks was a nuclear explosion on hard rock. Not so much because of the crater itself, but rather due to the large number of rocks strewn around, which blocked vehicle movement. Of course, one wonders whether the real obstacle would have been a Soviet tank commander having second thoughts about driving into a big hole that glowed in the dark.” Read the full piece from Michael Peck for War is Boring. http://bit.ly/1p6NptU