Taking Lessons From Iran To North Korea

Use the Iran model for North Korea - “North Korea is still defying the international community with its nuclear weapons program, and it now may have enough fissile material for 20 bombs. Its nuclear-related activity has surged this year, part of an effort by its leader, Kim Jong-un, to enhance his influence ahead of a rare congress of his ruling Workers’ Party. The congress is set to open on May 6,” writes the editorial board of The New York Times.

--“At some point, the United States, along with China, South Korea, Japan and Russia, will have to find a way to revive negotiations aimed at curbing North Korea’s nuclear program… So far, though, President Obama has shown little interest in applying the approach that he pursued successfully with Iran — a combination of sanctions and negotiations — to North Korea.” Full piece here. http://nyti.ms/1SWfX5n

See also - “Update on North Korea’s Nuclear Test Site,” by Jack Liu and Joseph S. Bermudez, Jr., for 38 North. http://bit.ly/1QHgNhS

Iran-South Korea Partnership- “Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani on Monday pushed for a Korean peninsula free of nuclear weapons, the official IRNA news agency reported. Rouhani met with visiting South Korean President Park Geun-hye and said Iran seeks a world free of weapons of mass destruction, ‘especially nuclear’ weapons. ‘Our demand is a world free of weapons of mass destruction, especially freeing the Korean peninsula and the Middle East from destructive weapons,’ he said.” Full story from the AP here. http://wapo.st/1Uvzw6U

Heavy Water 101 - Last week, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) added an amendment to the Energy and Water spending bill to keep the U.S. from buying heavy water from Iran. What is heavy water? Devin Henry explains in The Hill. “Heavy water is simply form of water, made of up different, heavier molecules than normal H2O...and it has a handful of practical applications. The most troubling of those — especially when it comes to Iran — is its potential for combining with uranium to produce weapons-grade plutonium.”

--Iran’s heavy water is capped at 130 tons under the nuclear agreement. To advance implementation of the agreement, the U.S. will purchase 32 tons of heavy water from Iran, officials announced last week. “‘This heavy water purchase will help meet market demand in the United States... while also contributing to the Administration’s nuclear nonproliferation efforts,’ a Department of Energy spokesperson said.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/24u4fUQ

See also - “U.S. Torpedoing the Nuclear Deal Will Reaffirm Iran’s Distrust,” by Seyed Hossein Mousavian and Sina Toossi for The World Post. http://huff.to/1Tcsajq

Political obstructionism vs. reality - “Republican lawmakers in the House of Representatives have lined up to quietly kill a cost estimate of the Pentagon’s three-decade nuclear modernization program, which experts predict will exceed $1 trillion… In the mid-2020s, those expenses are scheduled to overlap with major purchases of aircraft carriers and of the F-35 joint strike fighter, leading to a surge in spending that experts have called ‘unsustainable,’ ‘unaffordable,’ and ‘a fantasy,’” writes Alex Emmons for The Intercept.

--“Brian McKeon, principal deputy under secretary of defense for policy, told reporters in October the Pentagon was ‘wondering how the heck we’re going to pay for it,’ and that current leadership is ‘thanking [their] stars we won’t be here to have to answer the question.’ In November, the Pentagon Comptroller called the cost of nuclear modernization ‘the biggest problem we don’t know how to solve yet.’” Full story here. http://bit.ly/1SGLI3H

Tweet - @SecDef19: Nuclear weapons are one of the greatest real threats to humanity in the 21st century #educate

Russia’s Bad Behavior - “Putin’s nuclear belligerence is a sign of weakness, a desperate attempt to remain relevant in a unipolar world. During the Cold War, the United States invested heavily in nuclear weapons to compensate for NATO’s conventional inferiority in Europe. Today the tables have turned: America’s conventional strength far outstrips that of Russia, and the Russians have little prospect of changing the status quo,” write Will Saetren and Noah Williams for The Hill.

--“A report by the RAND Corporation found that NATO’s nuclear forces have almost no credibility in deterring Russian aggression… Investing additional billions in nuclear weapons systems that we will never use detracts much needed funding from conventional capabilities that are otherwise lacking in the European theater.” Full piece here. http://bit.ly/1pOKAPN

Candidates’ nuclear track records - “Issues like nuclear war and nuclear proliferation are too important to ignore until a new commander in chief assumes office next January. And although the topic has hardly gotten the attention it deserves in the election so far, most of the leading candidates have said enough about nuclear weapons that we can examine their positions in some detail,” writes Rachel Whitlark for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

--“While Trump may have been thinking about nuclear matters the longest (at least according to available records), he has not yet come out in support of a world without nuclear weapons. While Clinton advocated repeatedly for the use of force as a counter-proliferation strategy, she has most recently backed the use of force as a signal of credibility and strength… Regardless of how one feels about the deal, it is likely that only a Clinton or Sanders presidency would keep it firmly in place; the Republicans have all voiced some opposition.” Full article here. http://bit.ly/1Z7J9rF

See also ---“If You Hate Trump’s Foreign Policy, Wait Until You See Ted Cruz’s,” by William Hartung for The Huffington Post. http://huff.to/1X6Aibh

More problems with MOX - “Documents obtained by Savannah River Site Watch are providing even more evidence than is already out there that it is time for Congress to follow the Department of Energy’s recommendation and cancel the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) for good,” writes Lydia Dennett for the Project on Government Oversight.

--“Overall performance is below the level needed for successful project completion, as culminated in cost overruns and schedule delays,” the National Nuclear Security Administration wrote in its analysis of AREVA. The MOX contractor AREVA’s award fee was docked 51 percent due to concerning findings regarding its management of the project, including the fact that it failed to adequately perform random drug testing of its employees. Full story here. http://bit.ly/1SKVBKb

New tools for nonproliferation - The Nuclear Threat Initiative released a report on how “new tools” — social media, commercial satellite imagery, computer-aided modeling and metadata — affect the field of nonproliferation. “We explore the versatility of the new tools by focusing on one particular nuclear detective story — a 2014 allegation that Iran had built a secret underground centrifuge facility — that was disproven by the open source community using new tools,” Jeffrey Lewis writes. http://bit.ly/24jFjmo

Tweet - @nukes_of_hazard: Why is radiological security important? To prevent a #nuke material terror attack. Read our factsheet to learn more. http://bit.ly/1W6w6tg

Quick Hits:

--“Iran's atomic chief visits Prague to talk nuclear business,” by Karel Janicek for the AP. http://apne.ws/23lUF3L

--“Lobbying for peace,” by Timothy Cama for The Hill. http://bit.ly/1UvvxHw

--“Bikini tests: Secret WWII documents shed light on dawn of nuclear era,” by Léa Surugue for International Business Times. http://bit.ly/1NONHCz

--“Intelligence Chief: We Don’t Know If North Korea Has a ‘Boosted Bomb’,” by Patrick Tucker for Defense One. http://bit.ly/1SKRnSJ

--“The Charts That Help Explain the Kim Jong Un Doctrine,” by Sam Kim for Bloomberg. http://bloom.bg/1Nj8RZR

--“Iran Nuclear Deal: One-time Event or Breakthrough?” by John Limbert for LobeLog. http://bit.ly/1W4Glxv

--“Japan doesn't want the U.S. to apologize for bombing Hiroshima. Here's why,” by Jake Adelstein for The Los Angeles Times. http://lat.ms/26OYhQu

Events:

--“Forever Nuclear Weapons?” with Daryl Kimball, Arms Control Association, and Erica Fein, Women's Action for New Directions. Webinar sponsored by Women's Action for New Directions and Women Legislators' Lobby. May 4 from 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1VEO59u

--“U.S. Nuclear Policy Post-2016 Conference,” with 12 speakers. May 5 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1S8a4Tz

--“Chinese Nuclear Thinking: U.S. Perspectives,” with William Burns, Carnegie Endowment; Li Bin, Carnegie Endowment; Rose Gottemoeller, under secretary of state for Arms Control and International Security; Linton Brooks, CSIS; and Evan Medeiros, Carnegie Endowment. May 5 from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the Carnegie Endowment, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington. RSVP here. http://ceip.org/1SJl8c3

--“Dealing With — and Dissuading — Russia: Missile Defense and Arms Control in NATO and Eastern Europe,” with Rebeccah Heinrichs, Hudson Institute and Marshall Institute, and Steve Pifer, Brookings Institution. Part of the Huessy Congressional Breakfast Seminar Series. May 10 from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. at the Capitol Hill Club, 300 First St. SE, Washington. Register online. http://conta.cc/25ULZFH