NNSA Budget Projections Jump $19 Billion

December 12, 2013 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Lauren Mladenka

Nuclear budget surge - The long-term cost of NNSA programs to upgrade the nuclear arsenal jumped by roughly $19 billion since 2012, according to a new report from GAO. The report said that stockpile refurbishment and maintenance budget projections increased by $27 billion, while cost projections for infrastructure projects fell somewhat. These projections do not account for big ticket projects like the Uranium Processing Facility ($10-$19 billion) or upgrades to Los Alamos’ plutonium capabilities.

--”Full report: Modernizing the Nuclear Security Enterprise: NNSA’s Budget Estimates Do Not Fully Align with Plans.” GAO, December 11, 2013. (pdf) http://1.usa.gov/1f9KS9y

--In one chart: http://bit.ly/1cDDDqA

Defer on sanctions - “Negotiating with Iran on a permanent agreement to ensure that it doesn't develop nuclear weapons is challenging enough. But the Obama administration simultaneously must deal with members of Congress who are determined to impose new economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic that could jeopardize not only the final agreement but also the interim deal reached in Geneva last month, in which Iran agreed to suspend progress on its nuclear program,” writes the Los Angeles Times editorial board.

--”It is Kerry (along with diplomats from other nations) who has been negotiating with the Iranians and has a superior reading of Iranian intentions. Congress should defer to his conclusion that the approval of new sanctions now, even if they were timed to take effect after the six-month period covered by the interim agreement, would derail the talks.” Read the full article here. http://lat.ms/19Ezi2l

Honesty - “Sometimes Congress attempts to act as if they’ve done something relative to a particular issue, and to try to show that they’re being strong and make a statement...At the end of the day, sometimes those things are only messaging and have no real substance behind them,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) about recent efforts by some in the Senate to increase sanctions on Iran. Laura Litvan and Indira Lakshmanan of Bloomberg have the quote. http://bloom.bg/1cDxPgZ

Rockefeller - “The question is how -- not whether -- we prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. For the first time in years, there is a real opportunity to verifiably eliminate Iran's nuclear weapons capability through tough negotiations rather than by acts of war,” remarked Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) in a recent Senate floor speech.

--“The initial interim agreement between the P5+1 and Iran is an encouraging first step, and I urge my colleagues not to put it at risk by passing new sanctions right now. Instead, we should simply state the obvious: If Iran reneges or plays games, we will quickly pass new sanctions the very moment the need arises.” Huffington Posthas the full transcript. http://huff.to/19EB4Ay

Pollster problems - “New Right-Wing Poll Misrepresents Americans’ Views On Iran Sanctions” by Ben Armbruster of Think Progress. http://bit.ly/18WVJW6

How to cut budgets - “Throwing an extra $20 billion at the Pentagon now may just postpone a necessary rethinking of how we structure our armed forces and what we expect of them in a world where traditional approaches no longer work. Congress should reconsider this part of the Ryan/Murray deal and keep the Pentagon under the caps set out in current law,” writes Bill Hartung in Breaking Defense. Hartung shows that cutting Pentagon staff, reducing troop levels, slowing F-35 purchases and buying fewer nuclear-armed subs would save $25 billion annually. http://bit.ly/18FNPh7

Hawks on the Iran deal - “When John Bolton, the most enthusiastic armchair warrior of the George W. Bush brigade, and Mohammad Reza Naqdi, the head of Iran’s brutal Basij paramilitary, are both unhappy, you’ve probably done something right,” writes Bill Keller on American and Iranian hardliners over the recent Iran deal.

--“But it is worth dwelling a bit on the hawks in both countries, because the trick in the months to come will be to keep the extremists unhappy without letting them sabotage the whole project.” Full article in The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/1gsmCn0

What’s ahead - What’s the future for U.S. nuclear policy? Joe Cirincione talks with Bloomberg TV’s “Money Moves” on the nuclear arsenal, its costs and why there’s room to cut both. Video here. http://bloom.bg/1h3fUkK

Response - Russia’s always colorful Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said yesterday that Russia would consider a nuclear response to any attacks on Russia with hypothetical conventional strike weapons. Global Security Newswire has the story. http://bit.ly/1e7ULYU

Tweet - @james_acton32: Rogozin's threat to counter conventional weapons with nukes isn't new. See 2010 military doctrine p. 6. http://t.co/Deko1z6Lqh

More than numbers - “Deterrence conservatives often accuse those in the pro-arms control community of focusing too narrowly on numbers of nuclear weapons. But those who argue that any further reductions in U.S. nuclear force levels will undermine deterrence are often guilty of the same charge,” writes Steven Pifer in a rebuttal to a recent article in The National Interest. Pifer explains that the U.S. has more nuclear weapons that necessary and that it has the ability to carefully manage reductions and preserve deterrence.

--”There are strong arguments for further reductions in nuclear weapons below current levels and the limits of New START. The United States can pursue those cuts and still deter threats against itself and its allies, while also reassuring those allies.” Full response here. http://bit.ly/1jSs7uU

Tweet - @ErnestMoniz: Final Megatons to Megawatts shipment headed to Paducah, KY yesterday. Incredible achievement. Many thanks to Russia. http://t.co/B5RlviNBDy

Quick Hits

--”Passed in House, Manhattan Project Park amendment falls short in Senate” by John Huotari of Oak Ridge Today. http://bit.ly/1kCTVkq

--”Nuclear Cleanup Gains Steam: Contaminated New York Site Slated for a Makeover After Pace of Efforts Faulted” by John Emshwiller and Dionne Searcey of The Wall Street Journal. http://on.wsj.com/19EzXRk

Events:

--”Key Policy Issues for U.S. Nuclear Cooperation.” Discussion with Rose Gottemoeller, Daniel Poneman, Thomas Moore, Mary Beth Nikitin, Miles Pomper (possible), Leonard Spector (possible), and Steve Rademaker at the Atlantic Council. Dec. 12 from 3:00-5:30pm. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1cUX6kw

--”New Nuclear Suppliers.” Discussion with Chris Gadomski and Gretchen Hund at Center for Strategic and International Studies, room 212-A/B, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW. Dec. 13 from 9:00 to 11:30. RSVP details here. link

--Deterrence Stability and Escalation Control in South Asia.” Discussion with Rose Gottemoeller, Robert Einhorn, Mansoor Ahmed, and Silakanta Mishra at Stimson. Dec. 13 from 11:30-2:00. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1dLltq3