Lessons from Hiroshima

Learning from Hiroshima - “When I was a naval flight officer on active duty in the 1960s…our crew practiced loading a dummy nuclear weapon on our aircraft several times a year so that we would know what to do if we ever had to load a real one… When our squadron deployed to Japan in late 1964, I decided to visit Hiroshima to view the damage that a single nuclear weapon could actually cause... After my visit, I was no longer nonchalant about the power of a nuclear weapon,” writes Larry Korb for The National Interest.

--“Today, I am glad that President Obama is going to visit Hiroshima, and about many of the things the president has said about the dangers that nuclear weapons pose to the world. Visiting places like Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) cannot but help reinforce his convictions about the dangers of nuclear weapons, and why the U.S, the only nation to ever have used them, should take the lead in reducing the risk of even more powerful weapons being used again.” Read the full piece here. http://bit.ly/1Vi05wY

Video - “Scientists still track health fallout of nuclear bombing of Japan,” from PBS. http://to.pbs.org/1scwOYX

See also - “Experience Hiroshima — What if the atomic bomb hit your hometown?” by Kuang Keng Kuek Ser for PRI. http://bit.ly/1U9fURm

Advice from a former Secretary of Defense - In Hiroshima, Obama “could argue that we must take immediate steps to reduce the danger from nuclear weapons, and ultimately to eliminate them as a threat to our civilization. There is no better place than Hiroshima, still bearing the scars and suffering of the world’s first use of these weapons, to make the point that nuclear weapons are an existential threat to mankind,” writes former Secretary of Defense William Perry for the William H Perry Project. http://bit.ly/1Z2MatB

Tweet - @BulletinAtomic: .@POTUS in Hiroshima--We're re-posting our best #Hiroshima coverage this week. Check it out at http://thebulletin.org/

The nuclear football goes to Hiroshima - “When President Barack Obama goes to Hiroshima May 27, it will also mark the first visit by the nuclear football. The ‘football’... is the briefcase carried by military aides who follow U.S. presidents wherever they go. It contains the codes and commands for launching nearly 1,000 nuclear weapons within minutes… At Hiroshima this week, Obama will have at his fingertips the ability to launch the equivalent of 22,000 Hiroshimas in about 30 minutes,” writes Ploughshares Fund President Joe Cirincione for Defense One.

--“The president’s visit is one more chance for him to restore some sanity to America’s nuclear posture. But he may pass up the opportunity… At a minimum, Obama should reaffirm his vision of the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. There are many in Washington who do not agree with this goal, including his appointees at the Pentagon. It will be important to assert, as he did in Prague, the catastrophic risks nuclear weapons present.” Full piece here. http://bit.ly/1Ufv2j0

Tweet - @PeaceAction: .@POTUS: Don't got to #Hiroshima empty handed. Support Hibakusha & abolish nuclear weapons. http://bit.ly/1WPEKvI

Reminder: Look for a special edition of Early Warning tomorrow with news and analysis on President Obama’s remarks in Hiroshima.

Nuclear stockpile declassified - “The Pentagon has declassified and published updated numbers for the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile and warhead dismantlements. Those numbers show that the Obama administration has reduced the U.S. stockpile less than any other post-Cold War administration, and that the number of warheads dismantled in 2015 was lowest since President Obama took office,” writes Hans Kristensen for the Federation of American Scientists.

--Interestingly enough though, “there seems to have been less resistance to stockpile reductions from the U.S. military. The Pentagon’s Defense Strategic Guidance from 2012, for example, concluded: ‘It is possible that our deterrence goals can be achieved with a smaller nuclear force, which would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in our inventory as well as their role in U.S. national security strategy.’” Full piece here. http://bit.ly/249fhwG

Debunking nuclear fantasies - “Should the United States conduct a ‘limited’ nuclear strike to coerce the enemy to back down? Or, in Cold War nukespeak, should the United States ‘escalate to deescalate’ the situation? Believe it or not, that is a real question that is being debated in the Pentagon today. And the answer is no. Thinking we can use nuclear weapons in a ‘limited’ way without inviting nuclear catastrophe is a dangerous fantasy,” write Geoff Wilson and Will Saetren for War is Boring.

--“The Air Force already has plans to field a new, low-yield, air-launched nuclear cruise missile that it refers to as the Long Range Standoff Weapon, which critics argue is tailored for limited nuclear war fighting… [but] the belief that we can control a nuclear exchange is unrealistic. To tell the president that we can put the brakes on a conventional war by using a nuclear weapon is to make a promise that no-one can keep… It just takes one nuclear weapon to start Armageddon. We maintain an arsenal of nearly 7,000. Let’s make sure we avoid building the more ‘usable’ ones.” Full story here. http://bit.ly/1RttEVs

The President’s nuclear legacy - “One of the most significant promises the president made in his Prague speech was to ‘put an end to Cold War thinking’ by reducing the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security strategy… But changing the deeply entrenched status quo and overcoming the inertia in the U.S. security community requires more than a vision – it requires leadership from a president committed to moving forward with that vision. That leadership has so far been lacking,” write David Wright and Lisbeth Gronlund for U.S. News and World Report.

--“The administration envisions a U.S. nuclear arsenal in 30 years that is essentially identical to the current arsenal. It has announced a $1 trillion plan to rebuild and upgrade the U.S. nuclear arsenal over the next several decades… Laying out this ambitious plan – the biggest nuclear expenditures since the Reagan buildup in the early 1980s – makes it clear to other countries that the United States remains committed to a status quo nuclear force, and to spending large amounts of money on its nuclear forces.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/1NPEN8j

See also - “The trillion dollar question nobody is asking the presidential candidates,” by Frank Wilczek and Max Tegmark for The Conversation. http://bit.ly/1sRziN0

The DoD’s floppy disks - “It might give you pause to learn that the Pentagon — that epitome of cutting-edge technology and the inventor of the Internet — still uses gargantuan 8-inch floppy disks, fossils from the 1970s, to help operate the nation’s nuclear weapons. ‘Legacy IT investments across the federal government are becoming increasingly obsolete,’ the Government Accounting Office said in a report released Wednesday,’” writes Mark Thompson for Time.

--STRATCOM chief Admiral Cecil Haney claimed that tight budgets prevented the Pentagon from updating its systems. “‘The Pentagon needs to get its priorities straight,’ counters Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a disarmament group that has questioned the need for the military’s plan to replace its nuclear triad of bombers, missile-firing submarines and land-based missiles. ‘It might be a good idea to bring our command-and-control into the modern era before spending $1 trillion on a suite of new weapons.’” Full story here. http://ti.me/1TAeK7q

--Read the full report from the Government Accounting Office here. http://1.usa.gov/1sAF0Cr

Nuclear escalation in the Pacific - “The Chinese military is poised to send submarines armed with nuclear missiles into the Pacific Ocean for the first time, arguing that new US weapons systems have so undermined Beijing’s existing deterrent force that it has been left with no alternative. Chinese military officials are not commenting on the timing of a maiden patrol, but insist the move is inevitable,” writes Julian Borger for The Guardian.

--“Deploying nuclear-armed submarines would have far-reaching implications. Warheads and missiles would be put together and handed over to the navy, allowing a nuclear weapon to be launched much faster if such a decision was taken. The start of Chinese missile patrols could further destabilise the already tense strategic standoff with the US in the South China Sea. The primary reason Chinese military officials give for the move towards a sea-based deterrent is the expansion of US missile defence, which Moscow also claims is disturbing the global strategic balance and potentially stoking a new arms race.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/22pTmSx

Administration will defend Iran deal - “Obama administration officials told U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday they would oppose new sanctions on Iran if they interfere with last year's international nuclear agreement, laying the groundwork for a potential fight over any legislation. ‘If legislation were to undermine the deal, by taking off the table commitments that we had put on the table, that would be a problem,’ Adam Szubin, the acting Treasury Department undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, told a House of Representatives hearing.” Full article by Patricia Zengerle for Reuters here. http://reut.rs/1TC6UKl

See also - “House votes to bar purchases of heavy water from Iran,” by Andrew Taylor for the AP. http://apne.ws/1U9fomk

Quick Hits:

--“Let Hiroshima guide us back to nuclear basics,” by Kennette Benedict for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. http://bit.ly/25jH142

--“In Hiroshima President Obama Can Help Save History,” by Jonathan Granoff for Huffington Post. http://huff.to/245SEt7

--“The Ghosts of Soviets Past: Crawling Through the Decayed Nuclear Missile Bases of the USSR,” by Adam Maisel and Will Duval for War on the Rocks. http://bit.ly/1TL1A5v

--“The NRA’s new ad campaign threatens Iran with “real” Americans, like gator-wrestling swamp people,” by Corinne Purtill for Quartz. http://bit.ly/1WWn56h

--“The tower in the woods: preparing for nuclear war,” by Dawn Stover for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. http://bit.ly/1sRwzTZ

--“The Pentagon’s War on Accountability,” by William Hartung for The Huffington Post. http://huff.to/20GkATE

--“When Hiroshima speaks, President must listen,” by Setsuko Thurlow and Ira Helfand for CNN. http://cnn.it/25nNwGK

--“What Should Obama Say on His Visit to Hiroshima?” from The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1sAIF2T

--“Presidential stakes are high for nuclear arsenal,” by the editorial board of The Boston Globe. http://bit.ly/1UfweCY

--“Why Donald Trump's plan for Japan would be a nightmare for Asia,” by Sheila Smith for VOX. http://bit.ly/1VgEhl6

--“In Obama’s Visit to Hiroshima, a Complex Calculus of Asian Politics,” by Gardiner Harris for The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1Xzv9sj

Events:

--“From Politics to Diplomacy: The Unexpected Life of America's Lead Negotiator with Iran,” featuring Ambassador Wendy Sherman. May 26 from 5:30 to 6:30 p.m. at the Center for International and Strategic Studies, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1Ubt8Qf

--“Global Nuclear Challenges and Solutions for the Next U.S. President,” with Benjamin Rhodes, deputy national security advisor to the President; Setsuko Thurlow, Hiroshima atomic bomb survivor; and seven other speakers. Presented by the Arms Control Association. June 6 from 9:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. at the Carnegie Endowment, Root Room, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/23rIEK8

--“The Evolution of the Nuclear Order: A Global Perspective,” featuring Toby Dalton and five other speakers. June 6 from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. at the Carnegie Endowment, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP online. http://ceip.org/1Z2TzsO

Edited by