U.S.-China Nuclear Dialogues: Vulnerability and Facts of Life

On the radar: Why the US and China don't talk nukes; DoD’s Iran timeline; Mousavian on Iran diplomacy; a Less integrated missile defense strategy; and the Complex security environment.

September 20, 2012 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke

Stability and vulnerability - Every recent presidential administration has made a point to open a nuclear dialogue with China, but most efforts faltered as U.S. policymakers have not come to consensus about if the U.S. and China are mutually vulnerable to each others arsenals or if the U.S. would ever use its arsenal to coerce China through a threatened first strike. This is lack of clarity in the US position hinders productive dialogues with China, argues Jeffrey Lewis at Foreign Policy.

--”Our refusal to recognize [mutual] vulnerability is simply a fact of life essentially blocks a productive dialogue with Chinese leaders. Among the many reasons it would behoove us to reassure Beijing that we don't intend to use our nuclear weapons to coerce or humiliate them is that we don't intend to use our nuclear weapons to coerce or humiliate them. It isn't in our interest for them to be confused about that,” writes Lewis.

--Lewis’ article provides context and support for the recent recommendation from the Secretary of State’s International Security Advisory Board that “mutual nuclear vulnerability should be considered as a fact of life for both sides.” http://bit.ly/QoI7UP

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.

Quote - "The timeline [for Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb, given the decision to do so], from our perspective, includes the question of how long it takes to enrich, and then how long it would take to go from a certain level of enrichment to weapons grade, and other steps in that process...And so, as we look at that potential timeline we certainly believe, as I said, that we have time," said Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Jim Miller in an interview with Foreign Policy’s National Security Channel. http://bit.ly/PsFW3G

Tweet - @Gottemoeller: 32 years ago today, a Titan II ICBM exploded in its silo, one of the worst nuclear weapons accidents in U.S. history.

Direct talks - “The United States and Iran should aim for the kind of [direct] sustained and comprehensive talks that have not been seen for the last three decades,” writes Seyed Hossein Mousavian in The National Interest.

--”Washington must put far-reaching proposals of its own on the table. The United States must be ready to recognize Iran’s right to civil nuclear power, including peaceful enrichment, in return for assurances that Iran would remain a non-nuclear state forever. Furthermore, the United States should begin practical cooperation on areas of common interest such as Afghanistan,” writes Mousavian. http://bit.ly/PXm4HS

Tweet - @NTI_GSN: Israel Rules Out Participation in WMD-Free Middle East Meeting http://t.co/vKsrBLUV

Bears - Russia is going to modernize the avionics on its Tu-95MS “Bear” bombers in an effort to keep the aircraft in service through 2025 or 2035, according to press reports. Pavel Podvig has the story. http://bit.ly/VgA1Bd

Report - “Follow-up Audit of the Stockpile Surveillance Progam” by the DOE Inspector General. http://1.usa.gov/OetibH

Re-reading the NAS report - The recent National Academy of Sciences report on missile defenses was inaccurately summarized in the press as a repudiation of the Obama administration’s missile defense plans. In fact, the report represents a rejection of the integrated national and theater missile defense approach pursued by both the Bush and Obama administrations, argues George Lewis at Mostly Missile Defense.

--Ultimately, argues Lewis, the report’s recommendations more closely resemble the plan proposed late in the Clinton administration - deployment of separate national defense interceptors and theater systems with sensor systems comprised mostly of X-band radars. http://bit.ly/S762at

Complex security - “For the past four years, many nations have focused their attention on securing nuclear material around the world. While this is an important goal, it draws attention away from the inherent security challenges associated with maintaining a large nuclear weapons infrastructure,” noted Nick Roth in a talk on the security challenges facing the US nuclear weapons complex. Click for PDF of Roth’s remarks at a recent UNIDIR conference on “Securing Civilian and Military Nuclear Materials”. http://bit.ly/QF3dyR