The Economist: Urgent Need to Revive Nuclear Diplomacy

Nuclear diplomacy, nuclear security - “Although the world continues to comfort itself with the thought that mutually assured destruction is unlikely, the risk that somebody somewhere will use a nuclear weapon is growing apace,” writes The Economist. “What to do? The most urgent need is to revitalise nuclear diplomacy.”

--“One priority is to defend the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty… The danger is that, like Iran, signatories will see enrichment and reprocessing as preparation for a bomb of their own—leading their neighbours to enrich in turn. That calls for a collective effort to discourage enrichment and reprocessing, and for America to shore up its allies’ confidence.”

--“You don’t have to like the other side to get things done. Arms control became a vital part of Soviet-American relations. So it could between China and America, and between America and Putin’s Russia. Foes such as India and Pakistan can foster stability simply by talking. The worst time to get to know your adversary is during a stand-off.” Full story here. http://econ.st/1NkHBqn

Happy birthday, NPT! - The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty entered into force 45 years ago today.

--From the White House press statement: “At the time that the treaty was signed, it was widely predicted that dozens of countries would develop nuclear weapons, a prospect that threatened to disrupt global stability and security. Instead, thanks to worldwide collective efforts and commitment, the NPT has become the cornerstone of the nuclear nonproliferation regime, reinforcing international peace and security, and preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons while promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.” http://1.usa.gov/1A0Ui0n

Partisan politics - Angered by the Senate Majority Leader’s decision to bring the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act directly to the floor, bypassing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, ten co-sponsors of the bill have pledged to withhold their support until after the March 24th deadline for a framework deal. Their decision means the procedural vote set for Tuesday will likely fail and the bill won’t move forward till later this month.

--The letter to the Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) from Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and eight other Democrats, plus Sen. Angus King (I-ME), reads: “We are disappointed that you have proceeded outside of regular order which suggests that the goal of this maneuver is to score partisan political points, rather than pursue a substantive strategy to counter Iran’s nuclear ambitions.” http://1.usa.gov/1NkUyAo

--The partisan divide may have slowed the review bill for now, but “there is a growing bipartisan coalition of lawmakers in Congress who believe they must have a say over any final agreement… and they are moving aggressively to lay out tough requirements for Mr. Obama that could shape any deal.” Julie Hirschfeld Davis has the story for the New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1Eq42pS

Rhodes - In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes discussed the details of a final deal and alternatives to diplomacy.

--A key quote: “Iran would be accepting inspections and transparency that go beyond any other country in the world. You’ll have more eyes into the Iranian nuclear program than you have into any other similar program around the world. Without a deal, you don’t have those inspections. You don’t have that transparency. You have a much greater risk of a covert path.” Full transcript is available here. http://theatln.tc/1EiYYoQ

Zarif - In an exclusive interview yesterday Iran’s Foreign Minister Muhammad Zarif told NBC’s Ann Curry that a recent flurry of meetings were “a sign that we are very serious. And we want to reach a conclusion.”

--Zarif reiterated that the talks were focused on verification, not trust. “We're not asking anybody to trust us… We know that there is huge level of mutual mistrust between Iran and the United States... I believe anybody in their right mind should be actually encouraging, welcoming, such an agreement that would have a verification mechanism to insure that Iran will always live up by its commitments.” Full transcript available here. http://nbcnews.to/1EmK2EJ

Tweet - @stephenWalt: Gary Sick has a terrific analysis of the #NetanyahuSpeech right here: https://t.co/UjOrtGOWfu

More is more - Former Pentagon comptroller Robert Hale said he “believes lawmakers could strike a short-term budget deal that would trim below Obama’s request but still come in higher than the $500 billion defense spending cap,” reports Marcus Weisberger for Defense One. The Pentagon has requested a $535 billion budget for 2016, $35 billion more that permitted by law, in order to account for “global threats and improvements needed to the military’s nuclear forces.” Full story here. http://bit.ly/1M99Vs8

Reassuring - “Even as we engage in these discussions with Iran around its nuclear program, we will not take our eye off of Iran's other destabilizing actions in places like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula, Yemen particularly," Secretary of State John Kerry said during recent travels to the Gulf states.

--"Let me underscore: we are not seeking a grand bargain. Nothing will be different the day after this agreement, if we were to reach one, with respect to all of the other issues that challenge us in this region."Reuters reports. http://reut.rs/1CBIV4O

Quick Hits:

--“Bibi Is Right: North Korea Is More Dangerous Than Ever,” by Bruce Einhorn in Bloomberg News http://bit.ly/1M99Vs8

-- “U.S. Strategy in Iraq Increasingly Relies on Iran,” by Helene Cooper for the New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1CBDBi3

Events:

--Senate Armed Services Committee, hearing on “Postures of the Department of the Army and the Department of the Air Force.” With Gen. Raymond Odierno, Chief of Staff, U.S. Army; Mark Welsh, Chief of Staff, Air Force; Deborah Lee James, Air Force Secretary; and John McHugh, Army Secretary. POSTPONED: Original time March 5 at 9:30 AM, new time TBD. Located at G-50 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/1aJjDWT

--Senate Armed Services Committee, hearing on "Posture of the Department of the Navy." With Raymond Mabus, Navy Secretary; Adm. John Greenert, Chief of Naval Operations; and Gen. Joseph Dunford, Marine Corps. Commandant. March 10 at 9:30 AM. Located at G50 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington DC. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/1EgDadv

--Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, hearing on the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) budget. With Frank Klotz, Administrator, NNSA. March 11, Time TBA, Room TBA, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Webcast on the committee website. http://1.usa.gov/1itSTpx

--“A Nuclear Deal, Iran’s Regional Role and U.S. Relations with the Persian Gulf.” Featuring Richard LeBaron, former Ambassador to Kuwait; Alireza Nader, RAND; and Ilan Goldenberg, Center for a New American Security. March 16 at 2:00 PM. Located at the Atlantic Council, 12th Floor, 1030 15th St. NW, Washington, DC. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1MFH1mO

--“Managing and Reducing 21st Century Nuclear Security Threats.” Featuring Duyeon Kim, Carnegie Endowment; former Sen. Sam Nunn (GA), Nuclear Security Initiative; former Sen. Richard Lugar (IN), Lugar Center; Desmond Browne, former U.K. Defense Minister; and Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (NE). March 16 from 6:00-8:30 PM. Located at Georgetown University, Bunn Intercultural Center, 37th St. NW, Washington, DC. RSVP by March 12 online. http://bit.ly/1wJFnM8

Dessert:

Fun fact - The BMP armored personnel carrier is a unique vehicle. It’s essentially part tank part taxi. It’s quick, nimble and packs a serious punch. The Soviets first introduced the BMP in 1969, and it has become a well recognized battlefield vehicle ever since. One of the lesser known facts about the BMP however, is that it was specifically designed to fight in a nuclear war. S.K. Au-Yeong has the full story for War is Boring. http://bit.ly/1GZY9PW