Nuclear Policy After the Election

On the radar: Outlook for 2nd term Obama, Romney the Hawk, or Moderate Mitt; After the reset; Reengaging the North; Trouble with Islamabad; Too late for B-61; and Debating the IAEA’s legal standards on Iran.

November 6th, 2012 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Marianne Nari Fisher

The 3 possible presidents - Joe Cirincione outlines the scenarios for what the next president might do on nuclear weapons policy.

--If Obama: The President “has implemented only part of the comprehensive nuclear policies he detailed early in his term...[and] he will likely pick up where he left off if he wins reelection,” writes Cirincione. The next step for a re-elected President Obama: issue new nuclear guidance to reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons, start new negotiations with Moscow, advance the case for the CTBT, and seek a negotiated solution that keeps Iran from the bomb.

--If hawkish Romney enters the Oval Office: “You could kiss CTBT goodbye, expect U.S. and Russian nuclear buildups rather than reductions, forget about negotiations with Russia, and get ready for a rough ride with Iran.”

--If Moderate Mitt: “blocked by fiscal reality from ramping up the Pentagon budget, [Romney] could squeeze budget savings out of the nuclear weapons programs, bring more nations into reduction talks, cut a deal with Iran and not test any new weapons (even if he refrains from ratifying the test ban treaty). And he could do it with overwhelming congressional support.” Full post at Foreign Policy. http://bit.ly/U6zdvA

Happy Election Day and 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.

For the next president - The previous and the next three articles come from Foreign Policy’s special report on the top issues facing the president after the election, featuring advice from 14 top national security experts. See the full report here. http://bit.ly/YRhcGv

After the “reset” - The next US president should treat russia as an asset in US global strategy, not as a marginalized geopolitical nuisance, writes Dmitri Trenin. Russia has outsized influence over US interests on nuclear weapons issues. Russia also faces serious a domestic political struggle. “Can the next administration strike the right balance between American interests and values when it comes to Moscow,” asks Trenin.

--Recommendations for relations after the reset: achieve practical missile defense cooperation in Europe, promote economic cooperation in the North Pacific, and pursue joint economic development of the Arctic. http://bit.ly/Sx07gY

A resurgent North - “Unless the United States recalibrates its policy, not only will it be diplomatically isolated but it will also enable [North Korea] to achieve its own fantasy of becoming a small, intimidating nuclear power that is tacitly accepted by other countries,” write Joel Wit and Jenny Town.

--Recommendation: Push a new diplomatic offensive, coordinated with a new South Korean government, that seeks permanent peace on the peninsula and arrests and reverses Pyongyang’s WMD program. http://bit.ly/VQmGOo

Nukes + Terrorism + Ally - Pakistan will continue to be a security nightmare for the next U.S. President. “If the United States wants to curb terrorism and nuclear proliferation, it needs to fundamentally rethink its relationship with Pakistan,” writes Christine Fair.

--Recommendations: Drop any support for the validity for Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir, make clear Pakistan will be held responsible for proliferation of nuclear materials, scale back aid to Pakistan, and make drone program more transparent and accountable. http://bit.ly/RcYW72

Tweet - @RussianForces: Article says that Russian New START inspections show that some US Tridents carry a single warhead (in Russian). http://bit.ly/SRgbxi

Costly delay - NNSA’s estimated three year delay in producing the first refurbished B-61 could mean that, by 2021 or 2022, the existing warheads’ reliability could decline and NNSA might not be able to certify them. Stephen Young at All Things Nuclear looks at an internal Pentagon report on the B-61 LEP and explains the $10 billion price tag and the causes of the schedule delay.

--Young’s solutions for the B-61: Ease warhead security concerns by taking B-61s out of Europe and moving them to Kirkland AFB in New Mexico, where they would be effectively protected. Better yet, take the bombs out of service completely. A more modest option would be to save budgets by scaling back the scope of the B-61 program. http://bit.ly/RcTelF

--For official use only: “CAPE Independent Cost Assessment (ICA) B61 LEP” July 13, 2012. (pdf) http://bit.ly/THUyPU

Tweet - @ACapaccio: UAE is also requesting $1.13 billion for 48 addiitonal Thaad interceptors. That's over $7 billion in Thaads U.S. is offering to ME allies.

Roundtable - “What are the standards that the IAEA uses to investigate and assess Iran's compliance with its safeguards agreements, and are they the legally correct standards?” asks The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in a roundtable on Iran and the legal standards of the IAEA. Responses from Andreas Persbo, Christopher Ford, and Daniel Joyner. http://bit.ly/SKg6KQ