Trinity Test Remembered

Sixty-two years ago today, the power and destruction of the atom was first released during the Trinity test at the Alamogordo Test Range in New Mexico. The test was of an implosion-design plutonium bomb, the same type dropped on Nagasaki Japan a few weeks later that yielded a 20 kiloton explosion and killed approximately 74,000 people. After watching the Trinity test, a stunned Los Alamos director J. Robert Oppenheimer quoted the Bhagavad Gita: I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

For more information on the Trinity test, click here to watch a clip from the movie "Trinity and Beyond" which includes footage of the explosion itself. Note the plug by Edward Teller of Leo Szilard, Manhattan Project scientist and founder of Council for a Livable World, the sister organization of the Center. The success of the Trinity test led Szilard to draft a petition the very next day urging President Harry Truman to consider his moral responsibilities, and not merely expediency, in deciding whether to use the atomic bomb. The petition was signed by 68 other Manhattan Project scientists.

Leonor Tomero Rebukes John Bolton on North Korea

In case you missed it, earlier this month the always bombastic John Bolton wrote an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal discussing the North Korea nuclear negotiations. A former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton is now a senior fellow at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, where he joins the ranks of other defamed former Bush administration officials, including the infamous ex-World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz.

On Thursday, Leonor Tomero, Director of Nuclear Non-Proliferation at the Center, published a letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal refuting Bolton’s combative argument.

In his July 3 editorial-page commentary "Pyongyang Pussyfooting," John Bolton lambastes the negotiation process with North Korea as a return to the "Clinton-era... flawed conceptual framework," but offers no viable solution to the North Korean problem. His recommendation to concentrate on the "true solution" of "peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula" and to repudiate the Feb. 13 deal at the first sign of trouble is the same ill-advised approach that allowed North Korea to pursue its nuclear weapon program unchecked since 2002. Mr. Bolton fails to mention the costs of this tried and failed approach: From 2002 to 2006, it is estimated North Korea produced enough material for about 10 nuclear weapons and became the eighth country in the world to test a nuclear weapon.

He also fails to mention the report by International Atomic Energy Agency Deputy director after his visit to North Korea that North Korea has been upgrading its nuclear weapon material-producing facilities since 2002.

Attempting to negotiate in good faith with a country that is hostile to the U.S., as distasteful as this may be to Mr. Bolton, is a process inherent to effective diplomacy; it was used successfully by the Reagan administration with the "Evil Empire" and helped usher an end to the Cold War, and it remains the most effective way to stop Kim Jong Il's nuclear weapons program. Failing to do so will result in significant cost to national security. Negotiating with North Korea and making progress on this difficult issue as the Bush administration is doing does not make North Korea a trustworthy partner; it does, however, provide the opportunity to build the foundation for necessary agreement and verification on stopping and rolling back North Korea's nuclear weapons program that remains a clear and present threat to its neighbors and to the United States.

National Security Legislative Wrap-up, July 9-13 2007

The Senate began consideration of the Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Authorization bill last week and continues the debate through this week. The bill provides a vehicle for a number of votes on the Iraq war and other national security issues. The key vote this week will be on a Levin (D-MI) - Reed (D-RI) amendment requiring most American troops to leave Iraq by April 30, 2008. The House approved a similar measure last week. In addition, the House Defense Appropriations Committee approved the Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Appropriations Bill, but details are not yet available.

KEY NATIONAL SECURITY BILLS IN 2007

- DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL:

The full Senate began debating the bill the week of July 9, and will continue the week of July 16. In an important vote last week, the Senate voted 56 - 41 for the Webb (D-VA) & Hagel (R-NE) amendment that would have mandated minimum periods for soldiers between deployments to Iraq, but the measure failed because 60 votes were needed for passage. A similar Hagel (R-NE) amendment No. 2032 barring Army soldiers from serving for more than 12 consecutive months in Iraq and Marines from serving for more than seven months garnered a 52 – 45 majority, but was turned back as 60 votes were required for adoption.

- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL:

On July 12, the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee approved its Fiscal Year 2008 bill. While no details are yet available, the funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will be considered in a separate bill. Nonetheless, the bill is expected to be a vehicle for more House votes on national security issues. In full committee now scheduled for June 23, amendments are likely to mandate withdrawing troops from Iraq, closing the Guanatanmo Bay detention center and barring permanent bases in Iraq.

Analysis of U.S.-Russian Statements on Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Energy

The Center’s Leonor Tomero released her Analysis of US-Russian Statements on Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Energy on Friday.

Tomero begins:

Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin visited President George W. Bush at Kennebunkport, Maine, to emphasize areas of agreement and cooperation between the United States and Russia. Presidents Bush and Putin indicated their intent to move toward signing a US-Russian bilateral agreement for cooperation on nuclear energy, and to cooperate on a new framework to provide nuclear energy assistance to other countries. During Putin’s visit, the United States and Russia also stated their intent to continue discussing nuclear weapons reductions.

Included below are her summaries of the areas of agreement between the two countries. Tomero’s full analysis also includes sections on timing, nonproliferation, and Congressional issues.

Nuclear Weapons Reductions

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her counterpart Minister for Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov issued a brief joint statement on July 3, 2007 indicating that both sides would continue to discuss how to address the expiration of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), but their joint statement lacked any new information and reflected persistent disagreements between the two countries on the specifics of a follow-on or extension to START. The statement merely indicated that both sides were discussing the issue, but differences between both sides remain.

US-Russian Bilateral Agreement on Nuclear Energy (123 Agreement)

The United States and Russia are moving toward signing a 123 agreement (implementation agreement) to codify and facilitate US-Russia bilateral cooperation on nuclear energy.

Nuclear energy initiative to provide nuclear fuel services to other countries

Presidents Bush and Putin also stated their intent to cooperate on facilitating the expansion of nuclear energy “in particular to developing countries, provided the common goal of prevention of nuclear weapons is achieved” by creating “a viable alternative [for these countries] to the acquisition of sensitive fuel cycle technologies.” These efforts “build on, reinforce, and complement a range of existing activities,” such as the US Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) and the Russian international fuel center. They include a wide range of assistance including: providing reactors; providing infrastructure, and facilitating regulatory support and contract negotiations; developing measures related to the management of spent fuel and radioactive waste; supporting the International Atomic Energy Agency; and providing reliable nuclear fuel supply.

Cooperative Threat Reduction Program

The discussion during the Summit mentioned briefly, but did not focus on, threat reduction issues.

The complete analysis of the US-Russian statements by Tomero can be found here.

Sessions Amendment No. 2024: How the Sausage Gets Made

As previously noted, the Senate voted 90 - 5 yesterday to pass a modified version of Sen. Sessions’ (R-AL) amendment No. 2024 to the FY08 Defense Authorization bill, with only Sens. Feinstein (D-CA), Leahy (D-VT), Sanders (I-VT), Tester (D-MT), and Webb (D-VA) dissenting.

The amendment states that it is the policy of the United States “to develop and deploy, as soon as technologically possible, in conjunction with its allies and other nations whenever possible, an effective defense against the threat from Iran” and that “any missile defenses field by the United States in Europe are integrated with or complementary to missile defense capabilities that might be fielded by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Europe.”

I’m posting an interesting behind-the-scenes look at the amendment with hand-written changes to the text made by either staffers or the Senators themselves in order to make the amendment more palatable. Take a look.

Updated List of Key Senate Amendments to FY08 Defense Authorization Bill

The Senate adopted a number of amendments by voice vote yesterday and two amendments by recorded votes, although only one related to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues. New information is bolded.

AMENDMENTS FILED

Missile defense

Sens. Vitter (R-LA) & Kyl (R-AZ) filed amendment No. 2010 to authorize an additional $87 million for Aegis missile defense for destroyers. Sens. Kyl (R-AZ), Vitter, Inhofe, Lieberman, and Lott filed amendment No. 2178 for the same purpose.

National Guard equipment from missile defense funds

Sen. Dodd (D-CT) filed amendment No. 2033 to provide $500 million for the Army National Guard to repair and replace war-battered equipment to address critical shortfalls identified by the National Guard Bureau, with the funds to be cut from the European Missile Defense system ($225 million) and Airborne Laser ($275 million).

Chemical weapons destruction

Sens. McConnell (R-KY), Salazar, Allard and Bunning filed amendment No. 2061 to increase funding for chemical weapons demilitarization at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky, and Pueblo Chemical Activity, Colorado, by $49 million.

Nuclear terrorism

Sens. Clinton (D-NY) & Whitehouse (D-RI) filed amendment No. 2109, a version of her bill S. 1705, the Nuclear Terrorism Prevention Act, to establish the position of “Senior Advisor to the President for the Prevention of Nuclear Terrorism” and urging the President to make the prevention of a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States of the highest priority and to accelerate programs, requesting additional funding as appropriate, to prevent nuclear terrorism.

Cost of replacing nuclear warheads

Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) filed amendment No. 2118 which would add to the nuclear posture review included in the Defense Authorization bill requirements that any plan for replacing or modifying the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile include an assessment of the estimated cost and anticipated schedule for replacing warheads.

Nuclear workers

Sen. Reid (D-NV) filed amendment No. 2170 to include nuclear program workers in the occupational illness compensation program.

POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Sens. Sessions (R-AL) or Kyl (R-AZ) may offer an amendment to modify or delete a portion of Section 3122 in the bill endorsing ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

AMENDMENTS ALREADY CONSIDERED

Protection against Iranian ballistic missiles

Sen. Sessions (R-AL) modified amendment No. 2024 stating that it should be the policy of the United States to develop and deploy, as soon as technologically possible, an effective defense against “the threat from Iran” was adopted 90 – 5 (July 12).

Key Senate Amendments to FY08 Defense Authorization Bill

The Center’s Executive Director, John Isaacs, released today a list of major Senate amendments to the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 1585 -- previously S. 1547). Included below are amendments relating to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues that either have been filed or may be filed.

Although the Senate took its first votes on the Defense Authorization bill yesterday, it is unclear when or whether these amendments may be considered (or filed).

AMENDMENTS FILED

Missile defense

Sens. Vitter (R-LA) & Kyl (R-AZ) filed amendment No. 2010 to authorize an additional $87 million for Aegis missile defense for destroyers.

Protection against Iranian ballistic missiles

Sen. Sessions (R-AL) filed amendment No. 2024 stating that it should be the policy of the United States to develop and deploy, as soon as technologically possible, an effective defense against “the threat from Iran,” and that any U.S. missile defense system in Europe should be complementary to any missile defense system fielded by NATO.

National Guard equipment from missile defense funds

Sen. Dodd (D-CT) filed amendment No. 2033 to provide $500 million for the Army National Guard to repair and replace war-battered equipment to address critical shortfalls identified by the National Guard Bureau, with the funds to be cut from the European Missile Defense system ($225 million) and Airborne Laser ($275 million).

Chemical weapons destruction

Sens. McConnell (R-KY), Salazar, Allard and Bunning filed amendment No. 2061 to increase funding for chemical weapons demilitarization at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky, and Pueblo Chemical Activity, Colorado, by $49 million.

Nuclear terrorism

Sens. Clinton (D-NY) & Whitehouse (D-RI) filed amendment No. 2109, a version of her bill S. 1705, the Nuclear Terrorism Prevention Act, to establish the position of “Senior Advisor to the President for the Prevention of Nuclear Terrorism” and urging the President to make the prevention of a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States of the highest priority and to accelerate programs, requesting additional funding as appropriate, to prevent nuclear terrorism.

[Note: Click here for an earlier explanation and analysis of the Nuclear Terrorism Prevention Act.]

Cost of replacing nuclear warheads

Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) filed amendment No. 2118 which would add to the nuclear posture review included in the Defense Authorization bill requirements that any plan for replacing or modifying the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile include an assessment of the estimated cost and anticipated schedule for replacing warheads.

POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Sens. Sessions (R-AL) or Kyl (R-AZ) may offer an amendment to modify or delete a portion of Section 3122 in the bill endorsing ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Cutting the military budget

Sen. Sanders (I-VT) may offer an amendment to cut the military budget.

Bush Administration Responds to Senate Defense Authorization Bill

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget released on Tuesday its “Statement of Administration Policy” on the Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 (S. 1547). The Statement details what the administration finds objectionable in the bill (or potential amendments to the bill) and then offers a few suggestions on what should be included instead.

The Statement politely begins, “The Administration appreciates the Senate Armed Services Committee’s continued strong support of our national defense. However, the Administration has a number of significant concerns with S. 1547, which the Administration looks forward to addressing with Congress as the bill moves through the legislative process.”

(For highlights of Senate Armed Services Committee Action on the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill relating to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues, see my previous post.)

While veto threats abound on a number of topics, including potential amendments on U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, Iran, and Guantanamo, the Statement also hits upon three areas relevant to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues:

Reductions and Requirements for Weapons Systems: A number of provisions negatively impact weapons systems and are objectionable, such as:

W76 Life Extension Program Cut: The $60 million cut to the $236 million request would significantly delay warhead production and, in turn, delivery schedules to the U.S. Navy. These funds are needed to maintain an adequate sea-based nuclear strategic deterrent consistent with national security.

Missile Defense: The Administration strongly opposes the reductions of $85 million for the U.S. missile defense site in Europe and the limitations on the availability of funds for procurement, construction, and deployment of missile defense assets in Europe, which would delay the fielding of missile defense assets to protect the U.S. and Europe against the emerging missile threat from Iran. The Administration is also strongly opposed to the $200 million cut for the Airborne Laser program, which would delay DoD’s most promising program to counter missile threats in their boost phase.

Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT): While supporting the continued voluntary moratorium on testing, the Administration strongly opposes a provision of section 3122 that calls for the ratification of the CTBT. It would be imprudent to tie the hands of a future administration that may have to conduct a test of an element of an aging, unmodernized stockpile in order to assure the reliability of the nuclear deterrent force. Absent such a test, the United States may not be able to diagnose or remedy a problem in a warhead critical to the Nation’s deterrent strategy.

None of these were considered deal-breakers worthy of a veto, however, and there were no complaints for adding funds to either the DoD’s Cooperative Threat Reduction program (“Nunn-Lugar”) or the DoE’s nonproliferation programs.

It is also very interesting to note that while the Statement criticizes cuts to the W76 Life Extension program (and mentions warhead production), it does not include a specific objection to cuts in the Reliable Replacement Warhead program. It will be interesting to see if the same holds true for the administration’s Statement on the House’s version of the Defense Authorization bill, where deeper cuts are likely. Could be a story here…