|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This weeks Nuclear Weapons stories for Friday, June 7, 2002.
India-Pakistan: India Prepares for War Amidst Diplomatic EffortsIndia prepared for war as international diplomats today continued to pressure both India and Pakistan to take steps toward peace, according to reports (see GSN, June 6). The Indian military is seeking final authorization to invade Pakistan’s side of the disputed Kashmir territory in mid-June to destroy Islamic militants’ camps, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. The attack would begin with air strikes and followed with assaults by troops flown in via helicopter, military sources said. India plans to seize and hold parts of Pakistan’s portion of Kashmir, and most Indian officers expected the conflict to last about a week before international pressure would lead to a ceasefire, according to the Herald. The military believes it has the political backing for an invasion, the Herald reported. There is only the “slimmest chance” of a conflict leading to nuclear war, one Indian officer said, adding that Pakistan can no longer use the nuclear option to deter India (Rahul Bedi, Sydney Morning Herald, June 7). Although Indian officials said nuclear war is unlikely, the country has taken steps to prepare for a war involving weapons of mass destruction, including drafting contingency plans for responding to a WMD attack, according to the Financial Times. Plans include treating victims, stockpiling fuel and food, closing air space and evacuating civilians. “The contingency plan for war is in place,” a senior government official said. “It will be activated as soon as the troops are mobilized.” If a nuclear strike against India occurs, there is little the government can do to evacuate or save civilians, officials said. “Instead, priority would be given to the political leadership, the military commanders and key personnel needed to keep the country fighting,” a senior official said. The Indian Defense Ministry has told private companies to mass-produce portable nuclear shelters — currently available only to the military — for civilians (see GSN, May 28). India is also preparing for a biological or chemical weapons attack. Authorities have designated hospitals in big cities to respond to certain illnesses, and some doctors have received training to deal with chemical or biological attacks. India has also ordered three mobile units for dealing with chemical attacks from Germany (Edna Fernandes, Financial Times, June 7). Worries Over Pakistan’s Command and Control System Meanwhile, critics of Pakistan’s nuclear program and some senior British officials expressed concern that Pakistani army officers could launch nuclear missiles without orders from the country’s leadership. Although Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf officially has control of the arsenal, Pakistan’s command and control system has “uncertainties” and communication problems that could increase the risk of a nuclear launch without central orders, a senior British source said. “Should a nuclear war occur, it may well be that the order is not given by the chief executive or the prime minister or whoever. That decision may be taken by a brigadier, who will decide whether you and I live or die,” said Pervez Hoodbhoy of Islamabad’s Quaid-e-Azam University (David Blair, London Telegraph, June 7). Most Pakistanis and Indian Do Not Fear Nuclear War Despite continuing warnings of nuclear conflict from diplomats and analysts worldwide, most Pakistanis and Indians are not living in constant fear of a nuclear strike, according to Knight Ridder News Service (see GSN, Jan. 28). The two countries have fought wars before, and the conflict was usually restricted to border areas and did not target civilians, Indian military expert Bharat Karnad said. During the wars, daily life for most people in the region continued as normal. “People here are inured to such wars because it doesn’t cost them anything,” Karnad said. “Here we are, sitting in a very peaceful atmosphere,” said Gul Siddiq, a chauffeur in Islamabad. “There is no danger of war, because everyone knows that both Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons. When both sides have nuclear weapons, neither side can use them.” “It’s not Pakistan and India that have created the threat of nuclear war,” said Shireen Mazari of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Pakistan. “It’s all the commentators in America who have gotten on to calculating how many war dead there will be” (Moritsugu/Dorgan, Knight Ridder News Service/Philadelphia Inquirer, June 7). Countries Disagree on Monitors in Kashmir While most South Asians might not worry about nuclear war, international leaders have expressed concern, and the United States and United Kingdom have discussed the possibility of a joint U.S.-British team to monitor the Line of Control dividing Kashmir. British Defense Secretary Geoffrey Hoon and U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have discussed sending a military monitoring team to the region, the London Times reported today. Rumsfeld will discuss the proposal with Pakistani and Indian officials when he visits the region next week, according the Times. The team would watch for militants infiltrating across the Line of Control into India’s side of Kashmir (Michael Evans, London Times, June 7). India, however, has rejected outside monitoring forces. The border along the Line of Control is “very complicated” with rugged terrain, Indian Ambassador to the United States Lalit Mansingh said Wednesday on the Jim Lehrer NewsHour. “And it’s only the troops of India and Pakistan which can jointly and effectively check any kind of infiltration,” he said. “If the Indian army and the Pakistani army who are there on the border are not able to check it, how to you expect an international group of monitors to check this?” he added. Mansingh also repeated India’s position that the two countries must solve the dispute over Kashmir bilaterally. India has seen no signs that infiltration across the Line of Control has decreased, despite promises from Musharraf, he added. (see GSN, June 3). Pakistan must take visible steps to end terrorism before the two countries can even discuss de-escalation, Mansingh said (Margaret Warner, PBS’s Jim Lehrer NewsHour, June 5). Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Maleeha Lodhi said Pakistan is willing to discuss proposals for monitoring the border while repeating Pakistan’s position that a third party should be involved. Referring to India’s proposal that the two countries form a joint monitoring force, Lodhi said, “If this is a serious proposal, it should be made to us.” “We’d like to discuss this, as indeed our own proposal, which is we have called for a neutral, impartial monitoring force along the Line of Control — because if tomorrow if India says one thing, which indeed is happening right now, and we say another, who is to decide which claim is correct?” Lodhi said. Pakistan is taking steps to crack down on militants and has made a commitment not to allow terrorists to use its territory, Lodhi said, adding, “we’ve got to have time.” Indian threats of war only detract from Pakistan’s efforts to stop terrorism, she said, adding that Pakistan has seen no evidence that India “is prepared to shed war as an option” (Gwen Ifill, PBS’s Jim Lehrer NewsHour, June 5). U.S. Diplomat Tries to Find Resolution U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage flew to India today to begin talks with officials there after meeting with Musharraf in Pakistan yesterday. Armitage said his discussion with Musharraf provided a “very good basis” for averting war (Reuters/Globe and Mail, June 7). “We are discussing all sorts of monitoring mechanisms, without any prejudices one way or the other,” Armitage said. “Armitage laid out specific tasks for Pakistan, which would help the United States verify Pakistani action against militant infiltration into Indian-held Kashmir,” a senior Pakistani official said. Armitage gave Pakistani officials information listing border areas where the United States believes Pakistan continues to assist militants, the official said (Seth Mydans, New York Times, June 7). The long-term U.S. goal is to permanently stop infiltration across the Line of Control, and the United States expects India to reciprocate as it becomes clear Pakistan has taken the necessary actions, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday. “The situation does remain very tense,” he said (State Department transcript, June 6). For further information, see: Stimson Center Background on Kashmir Pakistani Embassy to the United States Indian Embassy to the United States
Threat Assessment: South Asian Nuclear War Could Lead to Arms RaceA nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India might encourage other countries to develop nuclear arsenals, said Robert Einhorn, former U.S. assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation. Einhorn’s comment came as tensions remained high in South Asia (see related GSN story, today). “If it looked as if the world had lived through a nuclear exchange and it wasn't as horrific as people thought, I think that could have very dangerous consequences because people could figure: ‘Well, these are weapons like other weapons, and we can use them as instruments of war,’” Einhorn said. On the other hand, the potentially horrific consequences of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan could shock other countries into taking action to prevent WMD and missile proliferation, he said. Many Asian and Western officials are concerned that an Indian-Pakistani nuclear war would lead to an arms race in Asia, according to the International Herald Tribune (see GSN, June 5). At a regional security conference in Singapore that ended Sunday, participants said Asia is hovering between improving arms control and accelerating efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction (Michael Richardson, International Herald Tribune, June 6).
U.S.-Russia: State Duma to Begin Debate on Arms Reduction TreatyThe lower house of the Russian Parliament is scheduled to begin debate on the new U.S.-Russian nuclear arms reduction treaty next week, a Russian legislator said yesterday (see GSN, June 6). The State Duma is scheduled to consider a draft of a document that outlines the legislators’ general view of the treaty on June 14, said Dmitry Rogozin, head of the State Duma international affairs committee, according to Interfax (see GSN, May 29). Debate on the treaty would focus on the potential benefits to Russia, he added. Russian President Vladimir Putin has yet to present the treaty formally to the Russian Parliament for ratification, Rogozin said. Russian legislators have said the treaty is likely to be approved in a final ratification vote expected in the fall (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, June 6).
United States: Air Force Test Fires Minuteman III ICBMAn unarmed Minuteman III ICBM was successfully launched today from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, according to the U.S. Air Force (see GSN, June 3). The Minuteman III was launched toward the Kwajalein Missile Range in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean and delivered three re-entry vehicles to targets there, according to the Associated Press. The test was part of the Force Development Evaluation Program, which tests U.S. missile launch systems (Associated Press, June 7).
Russia: Topol-M ICBM Tests SuccessfullyRussia successfully test-launched a Topol-M ICBM yesterday (see GSN, March 28). The Topol-M is slated to replace Russia’s stockpile of SS-18 ballistic missiles (Agence France-Presse/SpaceDaily, June 7). The missile hit a target on the Kura test range on the Kamchatka Peninsula after being launched from a mobile launch installation at the Plesetsk space center, according to ITAR-Tass (ITAR-Tass, June 6 in FBIS-SOV, June 6).
U.S. Testing: Subcritical Test Planned for TomorrowBy David Ruppe The test will take place at the Nevada Test Site, 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas and 960 feet below the Earth’s surface. It will be the 17th such test at the site, the first having occurred in 1997 (see GSN, Feb. 15). The experiment, which involves using high explosives that apply high pressures to fissile materials, is intended to answer questions about the material properties of plutonium, according to a Department of Energy statement (see GSN, June 5). The data produced will be used in the Energy Department’s Stockpile Stewardship program, which is designed to maintain the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. Anti-nuclear groups and some governments have criticized the United States for conducting such tests, saying that they are unnecessary, that they can undermine support for international arms control and that they can be difficult for other countries to monitor to ensure they do not go critical and violate the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The CTBT prohibits carrying out “any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.” It is widely understood that the treaty does not bar subcritical experiments, since while they do use fissile material, critical mass is not reached. “Therefore, no self-sustaining, or critical, nuclear chain reaction occurs. Without this “chain reaction,” there is no nuclear explosion,” according to the Energy statement. Former U.S. President Bill Clinton signed the CTBT but the Senate has not approved it for ratification and President George W. Bush has said he will not ratify. China, India, Iran, Libya, Pakistan, and Norway have stated opposition to subcritical testing, and the European Parliament in 1998 called on the United States and all other countries to refrain from such testing. The United Kingdom is involved in testing at the Nevada site, and Russia is believed to conduct subcritical experiments as well (see GSN, May 28).
India-Pakistan: U.S. to Propose New Kashmir Monitoring ForceThe United States plans to propose a joint U.S.-British military monitoring force to patrol the Line of Control in the disputed Kashmir territory as tensions between India and Pakistan remain high, the London Independent reported today (see GSN, June 5). U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld plans to offer the proposal when he visits South Asia next week, defense and diplomatic sources said. A mission to verify that militants are not crossing from Pakistan’s portion of Kashmir into India’s side would require about 500 troops, sources said, adding the mission would work with Indian and Pakistani security forces. Pakistan has called for more monitors in the region, but India has refused such proposals. India might accept a U.S.-British force, however, according to the Independent. Pakistan yesterday rejected an Indian proposal for joint Indian-Pakistani patrols (Kim Sengupta, London Independent, June 6). Indian officials said the proposal would only apply if India were convinced Pakistan had stopped supporting militants. Two senior Bush administration officials said the United States had not made any formal proposals for monitoring in Kashmir, the New York Times reported yesterday. U.S. Strategy: Keep Them Talking The current U.S. strategy is to keep India and Pakistan talking to outside interlocutors, one official said. “The betting is that as along as we keep a steady parade of dignitaries coming through to talk peace, neither side will launch something,” the official said. “But it’s only a bet” (Sanger/Dugger, New York Times, June 6). Lewis Dunn, senior vice president of Science Applications International Corp., also said today at a meeting at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace that the international strategy seems to be to send senior officials to the region with the hope that neither India nor Pakistan would start a war while officials are there (Kerry Boyd, GSN, June 6). Meanwhile, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage met today with Pakistani leaders, including President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Musharraf “made it clear to me he wants to do everything he can to avoid war, and I think that’s a very good basis on which to proceed,” Armitage said. Armitage is scheduled to fly to India tomorrow to meet with officials there and said he hoped to hear a commitment to pursue peace from Indian officials as well (Associated Press/New York Times, June 6). Additionally, U.S. President George W. Bush telephoned Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee yesterday and urged them to make efforts to reduce tensions. Bush called on Pakistan to follow through on its promises to end all support for terrorism and urged India to respond with steps designed to de-escalate the situation (White House statement, June 5). Foreigners Told to Leave Region Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department yesterday issued its strongest warning yet to U.S. citizens in India and Pakistan, urging them to leave the region due to heightened tensions (see GSN, June 3). The department statement said it “strongly urges that American citizens in India depart” and “warned” U.S. citizens against traveling to India — stronger wording than the last advisory, which advised citizens against going to the region (Anwar Iqbal, United Press International, June 6). The United Kingdom went further and ordered its citizens to leave Pakistan and India immediately, official sources said yesterday, according to the Pakistani paper Dawn. “There was an advisory previously asking citizens to leave the region; now there is an order,” a source said (Dawn, June 6). Some Indians Afraid Many wealthy Indians have started leaving the country for Western destinations, and some other Indians have moved to the hill regions in the hope such areas would protect them from radioactive fallout, the Daily Telegraph reported (see GSN, Jan. 28). The Indian government has not worked to educate citizens on how to respond to a nuclear strike, according to the Telegraph. Indian media has displayed graphic accounts of the consequences of a nuclear strike, and India citizens are beginning to express fear, the Telegraph reported (Rahul Bedi, Daily Telegraph/Vancouver Sun, June 6). Dunn suggested today that the international media work to educate Indians on what would happen if nuclear war broke out in the hope that they would urge their leaders against nuclear war. David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, said there have been such educational efforts in India in the past, but the message never sank in, and people often did not take the threat seriously (Boyd, GSN).
U.S.-Russia: Bush Urges Senators to Ratify Arms Reduction TreatyIn an effort to persuade senators to approve ratification of the recently signed U.S.-Russian nuclear arms reduction treaty, U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday met with leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (see GSN, May 31). Bush met with committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-Del.) and ranking member Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) to urge them to move the treaty toward full Senate approval before the Senate adjourns in early October, according to White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. After meeting with Bush, Biden said he expects six Senate hearings on the treaty, which will probably go before the full Senate for a ratification vote in the fall. Russian plans for storing nuclear materials removed from decommissioned warheads remain a prime concern, both senators said (Associated Press/Salon.com, June 5). They expressed support for the treaty but stressed that Russia would need more funds to destroy and secure warheads, Agence France-Presse reported. “Both of us, in a practical way, pledged to help the president and the vice president with this treaty,” Lugar said (Olivier Knox, Agence France-Presse, June 5). Secretary of State Colin Powell also met with members of Congress yesterday to gain support for the treaty, according to Voice of America News (VOANews.com, June 5). For further information, see:
Threat Assessment: Recent Events Will Not Sway Doomsday ClockBy Mike Nartker Those events were already factored into the last repositioning, said Bulletin Publisher Stephen Schwartz. When the hands of the clock were last moved in February to seven minutes to midnight, aspects of the U.S-Russian arms reduction treaty were already known even though the treaty itself had not been signed, he said. Similarly, the tensions between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region were already in evidence, with both sides’ military forces positioned on the border, he said. The only change now is an elevation in rhetoric, Schwartz added. “We felt we’ve already had our say,” he said. “We’ve already fired our warning shot. Like we said in February, ‘The clock [is] ticking.’” The Doomsday Clock’s current position is identical to its position when it was created in 1947 as a way to graphically illustrate the current worldwide threat of nuclear war — represented by midnight. Before being adjusted in February, the clock was set at nine minutes to midnight, which represented tensions resulting from Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapon tests. It would take a real commitment to arms reduction by both the United States and Russia, in addition to the new treaty, to help move the clock farther away from midnight, Schwartz said (see GSN, May 30). In a February press release, the Bulletin said it would take a move by both the United States and Russia to reduce their nuclear weapons arsenals down to less than 1,000 warheads each by the end of the decade. Even though hostile rhetoric between India and Pakistan has led many observers to become concerned that tensions might flare into an all-out nuclear war, a mere ratcheting down of the tensions would also not move the hands away from midnight, Schwartz said (see related GSN story, today). Only a serious attempt to restart dialogue between the two states and a demilitarization of the border would be a factor, he said. Kashmir Invasion If India or Pakistan were to invade the other, however, that too by itself would not lead to a change in the clock’s hands, Schwartz said, adding that such an attack alone would not be enough to fundamentally change global security. The Bulletin would instead take a wait-and-see approach, as it did with the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, which occurred too quickly to become a factor, he said. “The clock reacts to events,” Schwartz said. “It does not anticipate them.” Single events and factors rarely result in a change to the hands of the Doomsday Clock, Schwartz said, noting that the only single event to lead to such a change was the detonation of the Soviet atomic bomb in 1949. If a nuclear strike resulted in the destruction of a major Indian or Pakistani city, such as New Delhi or Islamabad, and other major nations were drawn into the conflict, however, that scenario could move the hands rapidly toward midnight — doomsday, he said. Schwartz noted several other potential factors in the next repositioning of the clock’s hands, such as growing concerns of proliferation of Russian nuclear materials and fears that terrorists could acquire weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, June 4). If the Bush administration were to take an even more hard-line and unilateralist approach to international agreements, such as scrapping the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, that too could become a factor, Schwartz said. Another factor that could lead to the clock moving closer to midnight would be a re-formation of the Soviet Union, Schwartz said, adding, “That’s about as likely to happen as the Cubs winning the World Series, so I don’t worry about it.” For further information, see: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
NPT: Kazakh President Criticizes TreatyKazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev Tuesday criticized the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, saying such agreements are ineffective because they still allow nuclear weapons to be stockpiled (see GSN, June 4). “The existing treaties on nonproliferation and the ban on nuclear arms are flawed,” Nazarbayev said. “The whole world and the United Nations” should revise nonproliferation treaties to make sure “everybody, including major nuclear powers, reduce nuclear arsenals and other countries do not create them” (Interfax, June 4 in FBIS-SOV, June 4). For further information, see:
India-Pakistan I: Pakistan Rejects Indian Proposal for Joint PatrolsDespite some signs of decreasing tensions, Pakistani and Indian leaders Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Atal Behari Vajpayee continued to blame each other for the current South Asian crisis yesterday. During a regional security conference in Almaty, Kazakhstan, Vajpayee repeated Indian demands that Pakistan crack down on Islamic militants. “Nuclear powers should not use nuclear blackmail,” he added. When asked why Pakistan refuses to declare a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, Musharraf said, “The possession of nuclear weapons by any state obviously implies they will be used under some circumstances.” Musharraf added, however, that it would be irresponsible to actually discuss such issues and said Pakistan’s “deeper policy” is denuclearization in the region (Judith Ingram, Washington Post, June 5). Juggling Patrols Pakistan today rejected an Indian proposal to form joint Pakistani-Indian patrols to monitor the Line of Control dividing disputed Kashmir territory. Earlier today during at the conference, Prime Minister Vajpayee said he would consider joint monitoring of the Line of Control to verify that Islamic militants were not crossing from Pakistan’s side of Kashmir into India’s side of the territory, he said. “Given the state of Pakistan-India relations, mechanisms for joint patrolling are unlikely to work,” Pakistan’s Foreign Affairs Ministry said, adding that the proposal is not new. The two countries’ militaries are currently patrolling their sides of the Line of Control, Pakistan said. Pakistan continued to express interest in having independent observers monitor the Line of Control. President Musharraf called on a third party to act as the judge regarding militant infiltration, saying that India can not be a judge since it is the accuser. India, however, has rejected allowing another party to monitor the area. “The region is mountainous, terrain inaccessible and for a third country to come to verify (the situation) is neither practical nor necessary,” Vajpayee said (Washington Post, June 5). In the recent tensions between India and Pakistan — with 1 million troops on the border shelling and shooting at each other — India has cited militant infiltration across the Line of Control as its primary reason for preparing for war (see GSN, June 4). “There can be joint verification, but there is no need for third-party verification,” Vajpayee said regarding the possibility of joint monitoring. “Pakistan claims that infiltration has stopped. We want to test the Pakistani claim.” Optimism As leaders from Russia, China, India, Pakistan and other regional countries have been meeting at the Almaty conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin has attempted to persuade India and Pakistan to negotiate a way to de-escalate tensions. Efforts to convince the two leaders to meet face-to-face at the conference failed yesterday, but Putin and other leaders expressed some optimism (see GSN, June 4). “In any case, both leaders expressed their interest in direct contacts even though they still see the conditions for organizing such meetings differently, but both sides have the desire for such contacts,” Putin said after meeting separately with Vajpayee and Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. “No less important, both leaders of both states underlined that they do not intend to use force to solve their problems,” he added. Putin said the South Asian crisis is similar to the 1961 Cuban missile crisis between the United States and Soviet Union. In both cases, the international community has had a duty to stop the threat of nuclear war, he said. Musharraf said he accepted Putin’s invitation to possibly attend talks in Moscow, and the Kremlin press service said Vajpayee would probably not visit Moscow because Putin is scheduled to visit India in December. Officials said the situation in South Asia has calmed a bit, but they continued to express concern. “There is a little softening, but it is premature,” Indian Defense Ministry spokesman P.K. Bandopadhyay said. “We are on the diplomatic path.” U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell also said yesterday that he has noticed “a little bit of improvement” in the situation but added that tensions remain “very high” (Ingram, Washington Post). Annan Warns Against Conflict Also yesterday, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said that conflict could threaten hope for prosperity “and the advancement of universal human values.” In a speech delivered to the conference in Almaty by Assistant Secretary General Danilo Turk, Annan specifically cited tensions between Pakistan and India. Annan said preventing conflict requires building “the foundations of sustainable peace” with a comprehensive strategy that includes political, diplomatic, humanitarian and developmental tools. Combating terrorism also requires addressing all the causes of extremism, he added (U.N. transcript, June 4). For further information, see: Stimson Center Background on Kashmir Carnegie Endowment Nuclear Status Map
India-Pakistan II: NRDC Estimates South Asian Nuclear CasualtiesA nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan — involving two dozen nuclear weapons and creating fallout — would kill millions of people but leave a majority of both populations alive, an independent report estimates, as the two countries face off and world leaders express concern that the crisis might escalate (see GSN, May 28). India and Pakistan have the ability to “produce unimaginable loss of life and destruction,” says the report, produced by the Natural Resources Defense Council. It adds, however, that “they do not reach the level of ‘mutual assured destruction’ that stood as the ultimate deterrent during the Cold War.” If India and Pakistan both launched a dozen 25-kiloton nuclear warheads against each other — targeting cities and impacting the ground to create more fallout than an explosion in the air — 99 percent of the Indian population and 93 percent of the Pakistani population would probably survive, according to the report. Each country’s military forces would remain intact and be able to continue and even escalate the war, the report said. According to the council’s estimates, 22 million people in South Asia would be exposed to lethal radiation doses in the first two days following the attack. Another 8 million people would suffer severe radiation sickness, potentially causing death. The blast, fire and fallout would also cause serious destruction within one and one-half miles of each bomb crater, encompassing 8.1 million people. In a smaller scenario, if the two countries each launched five 15-kiloton bombs — similar to the bomb the United States dropped on Hiroshima — in the air over each other’s cities, slightly fewer than 2.9 million people would die within five kilometers of ground zero. People suffering severe injuries would number 1.5 million while 3.4 million would suffer slight injuries, according to the report. The Arsenals The NRDC estimated that India has 30 to 35 nuclear warheads and Pakistan has up to 48. The warheads have explosive yields of five to 25 kilotons, similar to the two nuclear bombs that the United States dropped on Japan, according to the report’s estimates. Used in South Asia, however, the bombs would kill three to four times more people due to the population densities in the cities (Natural Resources Defense Council release, June 4). For further information, see: Carnegie Endowment Nuclear Status Map Carnegie Endowment World Missile Chart Natural Resources Defense Council
Japan: Fukuda Expresses Regret Over Remarks on Nuclear PrinciplesJapan does not intend to abandon its non-nuclear weapons principles, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said yesterday after having remarked last week that changes to the principles were “likely” (see GSN, June 3). “The government’s continuing position to maintain three non-nuclear principles remain unchanged. It is also my conviction,” he said at a meeting of the Committee on Health, Labor and Welfare in the Japanese House of Representatives. The committee responds to problems related to World War II nuclear bomb victims. Fukuda said that he had only meant to convey the current diversity of opinions regarding national security policy. “It is very regrettable that I have troubled many quarters by various news reports,” he said (Kyodo News Service/BBC Monitoring International Reports, June 5).
United States: Energy Plans to Move Atlas to Nevada Test SiteThe U.S. Energy Department is planning to move to the Nevada Test Site a major piece of equipment that recreates effects of a nuclear blast, the Albuquerque Journal reported yesterday (see GSN, June 4). Energy spent $49 million to build Atlas, a machine that recreates the pressures of an exploding nuclear weapon, at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Although the department’s environmental impact statement on the Atlas project said Los Alamos was the only suitable site, officials now want to spend up to $30 million to move it to the Nevada Test Site, according to the Journal. Because actual nuclear blast tests are no longer performed at the Nevada Test Site, Atlas is being moved to provide research opportunities for the scientists located there, according to an aide to Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.). “The test site was running out of things to do,” said Domenici aide Clay Sell. “The question was, ‘What can we do with NTS to make sure we maintain the cadre of professionals out there that we can call on in the future if we ever return to testing?’ One piece of the puzzle was Atlas” (Jennifer McKee, Albuquerque Journal, June 4). Supporters, Critics Debate Need Supporters and critics are debating the need for equipment like Atlas in Energy’s stockpile stewardship program, which maintains the U.S. nuclear arsenal, according to the Albuquerque Journal. Supporters of Atlas have said the machine is necessary to improve information on what happens inside a nuclear explosion. Critics, however, have said that kind of knowledge is not necessary for the purpose of stockpile maintenance. Atlas is used to study how the plutonium core of a nuclear weapon moves immediately after detonation, said Atlas program manager Bob Reinovsky. The machine arranges a series of capacitors in a circle around a target, usually a small piece of thin metal pipe, known as a “liner,” he said. The capacitors focus and fire a blast of energy into the target to simulate forces that crush the plutonium trigger, or “pit,” when a nuclear weapon is detonated. Researchers need Atlas because such high pressures, which are rarely observable on the Earth’s surface, are never seen in a way that they can study or repeat, Reinovsky said. The information on how the target moves under the pressure can be used to simulate how plutonium would move once the high explosives that surround the pit are detonated, crushing the pit into itself, he said. That information then can be used to supplement older “codes,” or descriptions of nuclear explosions that are still incomplete, Reinovsky said. Critics, however, have said Atlas is just a fancy machine that helped Energy convince national laboratory directors to participate in the stockpile stewardship program. It is not necessary to maintain the U.S. nuclear arsenal, they have said. “It’s desirable if you’re going to have a deep, deep understanding of how nuclear weapons work,” said Dick Garwin, who is credited with designing the first hydrogen bomb, according to the Journal. Instead, maintenance engineers need to construct replacements for pits and other age-affected parts of nuclear weapons, Garwin said. U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories are not expected to be able to build replacement pits and other parts any sooner than 2007, the Journal reported (Jennifer McKee, Albuquerque Journal II, June 4).
India-Pakistan I: Rivals Sign WMD and Terrorism AgreementsIndia and Pakistan joined Russia, China and 12 other countries at a conference today in Almaty, Kazakhstan to sign the Almaty Act and a declaration on terrorism (see GSN, June 3). Indian and Pakistani leaders did not formally talk, however, during the Almaty Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (Rajesh Ramachandran, Times of India, June 4). The Almaty Act, which calls for regional security and a peaceful resolution to conflicts, says weapons of mass destruction pose a threat to humanity. Signatories pledge to support efforts to destroy nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and to cooperate to prevent proliferation of such weapons. They also declare support for an international conference to define ways to prevent the spread of a nuclear threat. The Almaty Act calls on more countries to sign international agreements on WMD disarmament and declares support for establishing voluntary nuclear weapon-free zones in Central Asia and the Middle East (Interfax news agency/BBC Monitoring, June 4). The countries at the conference, including India and Pakistan, also signed a declaration on eliminating terrorism, the Times of India reported. According to the declaration, “terrorism cannot be attributed to religion, nationality or civilization.” The declaration also condemns using the war on terrorism as a justification for interfering “in the internal affairs of sovereign states” and opposes applying “double standards” to combating terrorism (Ramachandran, Times of India). For further information, see: Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (Kazakhstan Embassy)
India-Pakistan II: U.N. Observer Discounts Threat of WarThe leaders of India and Pakistan sat across from each other at an Asian security summit in Almaty, Kazakhstan today (see related GSN story, today), blaming each other for more than five decades of conflict over the disputed region of Kashmir. The tone of their remarks indicated dialogue between the two countries was increasingly remote, Associated Press reported today. On the 1,800-mile Kashmir frontier, where about 1 million troops have been deployed, more shelling yesterday left eight civilians dead (Associated Press/New York Times, June 4). Despite the posturing in Almaty, Major General Hermann Loidolt, head of the U.N. Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, said he “absolutely” does not believe there will be an outbreak of war between the nuclear rivals. Speaking with BBC World Update today, Loidolt said aggressive language between the two countries has been reduced in the last couple of days. “We assess on a daily basis the situation here and at no moment [have] we had the feeling that there will be an outbreak of war,” he said, adding that the situation nevertheless remains “very tense. But we believe and we assess that both parties are responsible for the situation, so that there will be no outbreak of the war.” Loidolt said the tension between the two counties “is not a new development.” The current “situation [has] existed now for almost four months,” he said. “Since the deployment of forces along the Line of Control in January, the danger of an outbreak of an all-out war has existed.” “Shelling has increased in numbers and in calibers,” he said, “but so far there has been no attempt from either side to cross the Line of Control.” He added, however, that his mandate to observe cease-fire violations in the region does not include reporting on Indian claims that Pakistan is supporting cross-border terrorism (BBC World Update, June 4).
United States: Critics Question Effectiveness of Stockpile StewardshipSupporters and critics of the U.S. stockpile stewardship program, which is responsible for maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal, are in the midst of a debate over the effectiveness of the program, the Albuquerque Journal reported Sunday (see GSN, May 10). Supporters of the program have said it successfully verifies the reliability of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and maintains the expertise and knowledge of U.S. nuclear weapons scientists, according to the Journal. Program critics, however, have said the program is too costly and neglects fundamental maintenance issues, the Journal reported. The program is responsible for determining the effects of aging on nuclear weapons, countering age-related problems and overseeing the supercomputers used to simulate nuclear explosions, which are used in the place of actual testing, according to the Journal (see GSN, April 9). Currently, with 5,000-6,000 nuclear warheads in the U.S. stockpile, the program costs an average $1 million per warhead per year. When the recently signed U.S.-Russian arms agreement goes into effect, that cost will increase to $2.5 million, the Journal reported (see GSN, May 16). The costs are justified, however, because there are many ways that something can go wrong with a nuclear weapon, said Mike Burns, head of one of the stockpile stewardship facilities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. For example, high explosives used with the plutonium trigger, or “pit,” can decay over time. Another factor is the breakdown of the pit itself, which can create trace amounts of other elements as the plutonium decays. Because scientists still do not fully know just how a nuclear weapon works, they still do not know how those tiny amounts of other elements can affect the performance of a nuclear weapon, said Ray Juzaitis, associate laboratory director for weapons physics at Los Alamos. There are still several nuclear physics questions that scientists have not been able to solve in three years, according to John Immele, Los Alamos deputy director for national security. Those unknowns could later turn out to be enough to cast doubt on the reliability of the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal, he said. “These are stressful findings,” Immele said. Fancy Physics The U.S. Energy Department needs to focus less on nuclear physics issues and more on rebuilding nuclear weapons components that have been damaged by age, said Richard Garwin, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Affairs and a former nuclear weapons designer. While it is admirable for weapons scientists to try to understand every aspect of a nuclear explosion, such information is not needed for simple maintenance, Garwin said. Instead, the focus of the program should be shifted to rebuilding parts susceptible to aging, such as the pits, he said (see GSN, June 3). The stockpile stewardship program, however, currently has no means to replace pits, according to the Journal. Los Alamos is still five years away from being able to install a new pit in an existing warhead. “It’s an almost total neglect of the production component,” Garwin said. “Production isn’t interesting.” Garwin said he disagrees with the idea that nuclear weapons scientists need to be able to understand every aspect of the way a nuclear explosion works to maintain nuclear weapons. Nuclear warheads are like gravity, he said. You do not need to understand how gravity works to know that when you drop something, it falls. Not for New Weapons Another potential problem with the stockpile stewardship program is that it was only meant for the current U.S. nuclear stockpile, the Journal reported (see GSN, May 9). Now, however, Energy wants the program to be able to design and certify new types of weapons, according to the department’s budget. Many scientists have said, however, that it would be almost impossible to use the program to test new nuclear weapons. “I would think we would never certify something which we had no experience in testing,” Immele said. It might be possible, however, to base a new design on older tests, he added. It has been a goal of the Stockpile Stewardship program to eventually be able to certify new nuclear warhead designs, said Lisa Cutler, spokeswoman for the National Nuclear Security Administration. “It’s a long-term goal,” she said, adding that it would not be possible to do now (Jennifer McKee, Albuquerque Journal, June 2). For further information, see: Los Alamos National Laboratory
North Korea: KEDO Head Visits Country; U.S. Lawmakers Do NotKorean Peninsula Development Organization Executive Director Charles Kartman began a two-day visit to North Korea today (see GSN, May 29). Kartman departed South Korea by boat today with 10 other KEDO officials, according to South Korea’s Unification Ministry. Kartman was expected to attend a ceremony in Sinpo, North Korea, marking the beginning of a program to train North Korea technicians and safety officials to operate the reactors, ministry spokesman Kim Hong-jae said. Before traveling to North Korea, Kartman met with South Korean Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun and Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Tae-sik to discuss the construction of the two reactors. KEDO is building the reactors as part of the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea, under which North Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear program in exchange for the reactors (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, June 4). Visas Denied Meanwhile, a delegation of 12 U.S. legislators flew back to Washington from Seoul yesterday after North Korea refused to grant them visas for a visit. “Here was a chance to open the door and they slammed it in our face,” said Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), who led the delegation. The delegates visited several countries including China and South Korea, but their main goal was to visit North Korea, according to the Los Angeles Times. The representatives did not have visas when they began their trip, but they believed they had an “understanding of an entry” into North Korea, Weldon said. The delegation also asked U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and Chinese President Jiang Zemin to persuade North Korea to allow a visit, but their efforts failed. “I think you have to have a magical code to punch the numbers in” to gain entry into the country, Weldon said. “The real truth is that it is [North Korean leader] Kim Jong Il’s loss. This gentleman does not want his people to interface with others,” Representative Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) said (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, June 4). Weldon had said he wanted to discuss with North Korean officials ways to accelerate educational exchanges and establish cooperative ties between U.S. and North Korean research institutes. North Korea said the proposed visit’s timing was not appropriate and that the delegation was too large, according to Weldon. “The North also expressed willingness to consider our visit at a later date despite the recent refusal,” he said, adding he would continue efforts to visit the country. Some sources said North Korea might have denied the visas partly due to dissatisfaction with Weldon’s support for certain Bush administration policies, including missile defense, according to the Korea Times. Weldon has supported the statement, which U.S. President George W. Bush made earlier this year, that North Korea is part of an “axis of evil” (see GSN, Jan. 30). “But I don’t regard the North as enemy and a hostile force. My visit had been planned with goodwill purposes,” he said. North Korea might also have denied the visas due to the possibility that Jack Pritchard, U.S. envoy for North Korea, might visit the country soon. “The North appears hesitant to receive U.S. congressmen as it is set to hold official talks with the U.S. State Department’s special envoy,” a South Korean Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry official said (Korea Times, June 4). Scott Snyder of the Asia Foundation also said that North Korea might be waiting for Pritchard’s visit. “The North Koreans don’t really appreciate what Congress’s role is,” he said (Demick, Los Angeles Times). Timing the Envoy For the moment, the Bush administration is still considering when to send Pritchard, the U.S. State Department said yesterday (see GSN, June 3). North Korea offered in April to accept a U.S. envoy, but the United States has not announced when Pritchard would go (Agence France-Presse, June 3). For further information, see:
Kazakhstan: President Signs U.S. Threat Reduction AgreementKazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev signed into law yesterday an extension of the U.S.-Kazakh agreement on preventing nuclear proliferation and destroying former Soviet ballistic missile silos, Interfax reported yesterday (see GSN, May 15). The United States is expected to provide $6 million this year to destroy six former Soviet ICBM silos inside Kazakhstan. U.S. officials have also agreed to provide specialists and equipment and to train Kazakh workers for the project, according to Interfax. In exchange, Kazakhstan has agreed to provide tax and custom privileges to contractors involved in destroying the silos, Interfax reported (Interfax/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, June 3). According to information exchanged under the START I agreement, Kazakhstan has destroyed all silos that once held SS-18 and SS-19 ICBMs, but six silos used for testing remained at the end of January (Greg Webb, GSN, June 4).
India-Pakistan: India Refuses Talks as Putin Offers to MediateAs Russian President Vladimir Putin flew to Kazakhstan today to meet with Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Vajpayee said he will not talk with Pakistan until he is satisfied that Pakistan is stopping militant infiltration into Indian-controlled Kashmir territory (see GSN, May 31). Musharraf, Vajpayee and Putin flew to Almaty, Kazakhstan, for a summit of Central Asian leaders beginning today. Putin planned to meet with the two leaders separately, and it appears that Vajpayee and Musharraf will not meet, according to the Los Angeles Times. “There is no such plan” for a meeting, Vajpayee said, adding that there would be no talks until Musharraf ends “cross-border terrorism” into Kashmir. India says Pakistan supports militants who attack targets in India’s side of the territory (Paul Watson, Los Angeles Times, June 3). “We said there can be no talk between them until they put an end to terrorism. The responsibility lies with Pakistan to stop terrorism,” said Sanjiv Kohli, counselor at the Indian Embassy in Moscow. Pakistan, however, welcomed Putin’s mediation attempts. “We are prepared to meet the Indians in any format, trilateral or bilateral, and at any level,” said Mohammad Akhtar Tufail, the deputy head of mission at the Pakistani Embassy in Moscow. “The best case is a trilateral meeting” (Peter Baker, Washington Post, June 2). “I think that President Putin can persuade India to join a dialogue,” Musharraf said, adding that he has cracked down on militants (Watson, Los Angeles Times). Despite his refusal to hold talks with Musharraf, Vajpayee extended his stay in Kazakhstan an extra day to discuss the crisis with Russian and Chinese leaders, Indian officials said Saturday (Tehran Times, June 2). Putin’s Role Putin, who will be the first head of state to directly intervene in the current South Asian crisis, plans to go between Vajpayee and Musharraf to try to find a compromise, according to the Post. “The task for Russia today, and not only Russia but the entire world community, is to not let the present tension between the two countries grow into an armed conflict and to get the process of settling this difficult problem back to a political path,” Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said. International support for Putin’s mediation attempt is “very important,” he added. “It will be a good attempt to calm down the emerging risks of nuclear war, but of course it would be naive to think that Putin could go to Almaty and solve everything,” said Vitaly Fedchenko, an analyst with the PIR Center, a Moscow-based research group. Putin’s initiative is not the first time Russia has worked to de-escalate tensions in South Asia. In 1966, the Soviet Union called Indian and Pakistani leaders together, and both countries pulled their troops back from the Kashmir divide. Kohli, however, said the 1966 situation is different from today. “There’s no parallel now,” he said. “It’s now a question of terrorism and the resolve of the international community. It’s just not an Indo-Pakistani issue.” Support for Efforts U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said yesterday that he hopes the summit in Almaty will provide an opportunity to convince India and Pakistan not to escalate. Annan said he is “confident” that Putin and Chinese President Jiang Zemin — who is also attending the summit — “will be able to dissuade” India and Pakistan from increasing tensions (Agence France-Presse/Dawn, June 3). Annan is scheduled to begin a three-day visit in Moscow Tuesday, where he will discuss several issues, including South Asia, with Russian officials (Tehran Times). If Putin’s efforts fail to bring about a compromise, his initiative might ease the way for U.S. officials who plan to visit the region, including U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, according to the Post (Baker, Washington Post). Meanwhile, the Group of Eight countries, including the United States and Russia, has issued a public declaration calling on Pakistan to “take concrete actions immediately” and make the first effort to de-escalate, according to Globe and Mail (Sallott/Koring, Globe and Mail, June 1). Evacuations In Pakistan, the United Nations has begun evacuating 300 dependents of U.N. staff, who were expected to leave Islamabad today. The order also applies to dependents in India, but evacuation was not yet underway there, a U.N. official yesterday. U.N. workers in both countries will remain at their jobs, U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said (Channel NewsAsia, June 3). The evacuation decision “should be seen as a precautionary measure and not as an indication that war is imminent,” Annan said (Agence France-Presse/Dawn, June 3). More than 50 U.S. citizens, including embassy staff and family, left India over the weekend in response to a State Department warning, a U.S. Embassy official said. The British Embassy said 180 Britons have left (see GSN, May 23; Mannika Chopra, USA Today, June 3). The United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand have advised nonessential personnel and all dependents to leave India and Pakistan (Sallott/Koring, Globe and Mail). In addition, France, Japan, Australia and Germany have advised their citizens to leave India (Popham/Dillon, London Independent, June 2). Israel and South Korea also have called for evacuation (Michael Dorgan, Miami Herald, June 2). Nuclear Odds Amid growing tensions, India has alerted its nuclear command and control system to be ready, Indian official Yogendra Narain said in an interview with India’s Outlook magazine. “Everything is finalized … We don’t expect delay in issuing orders” from the civilian government to retaliate if Pakistan launches a nuclear strike, Narain said. “Pakistan is not a democratic country, and we don’t know their nuclear threshold,” Narain said (see GSN, May 22). “We will retaliate and must be prepared for mutual destruction on both sides” (United Press International, June 3). Indian Defense minister George Fernandes said Sunday, however, that “India will not be impulsive.” “Neither will we waver in our determination,” he added (Watson, Los Angeles Times). Musharraf told CNN Saturday that neither side is “irresponsible” enough to go to nuclear war. “Any sane individual cannot even think of going into this unconventional war, whatever the pressures,” he said (Paul Alexander, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 2).
Japan: Country Could Build Arsenal, Official SaysRevisions to Japan’s constitution, now under debate, could open the door to Japan possessing nuclear weapons, a high-ranking Japanese official said Friday (see GSN, April 9). Proposed constitutional changes might cause Japan to drop its three non-nuclear principles, the official said. According to the principles, the country will not build or possess nuclear weapons and will not allow them to enter the country, the Asahi Shimbun reported (Asahi Shimbun, June 3). “The principles are just like the constitution. But in the face of calls to amend the constitution, amendment of the principles is also likely,” the official said (Geoffrey York, Globe and Mail, June 3). Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said today he made the comments (Reuters/New York Times, June 3). Fukuda also said Friday that he does not believe the Japanese Constitution prohibits the country from possessing either nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles (see GSN, May 23). Japan may acquire nuclear weapons but should never use them, he said (Asahi Shimbun). Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said Friday that he stands by Japan’s principles. “My Cabinet will maintain its position on the three non-nuclear principles,” Koizumi said (Asahi Shimbun). Recent comments made by some officials, however, illustrate that the government has lost restraint on the issue of nuclear weapons, said a senior member of the opposition Japanese Communist Party. “The fact that a top government official of the only nation to be victim of atomic bombs has made such comments that we can possess nuclear weapons is tantamount to confessing we have no international sense,” said Communist Party official Hideyo Fudesaka (York, Globe and Mail). Many members of Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party and other political parties seem to share the idea of re-examining the nuclear weapons ban, said analysts. “Every once in a while, someone in the LDP says what they really think — that Japan should rearm and have nuclear weapons,” said Steven Reid, a political science professor at Chuo University. “It is not a new departure.” The comments made by some Japanese officials violated promises made to the international community, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said today, according to the Xinhua news agency. “At the present time when peace and development have become the main themes of the times and continued progress is being made in international nuclear disarmament, it is shocking to hear remarks like this from a senior Japanese official, Kong said. (Reuters/New York Times).
United States I: Bush Administration Plans New Trigger PlantThe Bush administration has ordered design work to begin on a new plant to build plutonium triggers, or “pits,” for nuclear weapons, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, May 13). “We need to have the capacity to manufacture certified pits to maintain the safety, security and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent into the future,” Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said Friday. The new facility, expected to cost between $2 billion and $4 billion to build, would begin operations in 2020, according to the National Nuclear Security Administration. Officials plan to begin a site evaluation process for the plant in September, the Post reported. U.S. pit production, which was formerly conducted at the Rocky Flats facility in Colorado, ended in 1989 (see GSN, May 16). The U.S. nuclear arsenal will need new pits because the plutonium used in triggers on current U.S. nuclear warheads is expected to decay, according to the Post. The United States is expected to store 4,000 nuclear warheads as part of a recently signed strategic arms agreement with Russia (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, June 3).
Russia: Energy Ministry to Destroy Last Submarine With CTR FundsRussia plans this month to dispose of the last nuclear submarine scheduled to be scrapped under the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, Interfax reported Thursday (see GSN, May 20). The Russian Atomic Energy Ministry is responsible for the nuclear submarine disposal program, said Murmansk regional Governor Yuri Yevdokimov (Interfax, May 30, in FBIS-SOV, May 30).
North Korea: Bush Administration Officials Debate North Korea PolicyU.S. officials are debating the best way to engage North Korea when U.S. diplomats travel to Pyongyang in response to an invitation from North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, May 24). “Fundamental questions still have not been answered,” as to the best way to respond to Kim’s invitation, said one U.S. official. “The problem is, people are operating from different assumptions. Some people think North Korea is sincere. Some don’t. The way forward is not clear.” A North Korean official extended Kim’s invitation to the U.S. State Department in April, according to the Post. Since then, U.S. diplomats have held discussions among themselves and with officials in the the Defense Department and the National Security Council. Agency officials are expected to meet again this week to discuss the issue, according to the Post. The United States plans to offer North Korea economic and other assistance in return for pledges by North Korea to limit activities such as ballistic missile development and weapons proliferation, Bush administration officials said. U.S. officials are still debating what incentives to offer North Korea, including food or energy assistance or credits, according to the Post. Officials are also considering reducing U.S. forces in South Korea, the Post reported. Without concrete action on U.S. demands by North Korea, however, Pyongyang will not receive any extra aid, the administration officials said. “We envision a series of reciprocal steps, across a range of issues, that are verifiable. It’s not clear they are ready to go that far,” said a U.S. official, referring to North Korea. “We’ll seek verification from them, and we’ll know it when we see it.” “The approach comes from years of being burned,” the official added. There could be a danger in demanding so much from North Korea and offering so little in return, said critics of the Bush administration’s North Korea policy. To be able to negotiate with Kim, U.S. President George W. Bush must be able to show a spirit of accommodation while reducing fears of U.S. military action, one analyst said. The Bush administration “wants the North Koreans to move back from the demilitarized zone before we give them anything based on our promises,” said the analyst. “But that’s unilateral surrender, as far as the North Koreans are concerned. They aren’t willing to do that without further inducements” (Peter Slevin, Washington Post, June 3).
United States II: Air Force Test-Fires Peacekeeper ICBMThe U.S. Air Force today launched an unarmed Peacekeeper ICBM in a test to determine the reliability of the U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal (see GSN, May 24). Testers launched the Peacekeeper from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California around 1 a.m., according to the Associated Press. The ICBM was set to fire nine unarmed reentry vehicles at targets on the Kwajalein test range in the Marshall Islands (see GSN, May 29). The Vandenberg base only confirmed that the Peacekeeper had been launched, AP reported. The Air Force randomly selected the Peacekeeper from missiles at F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, according to a press release. The launch was part of the Force Development Evaluation Program, which is used to test the accuracy and reliability of the U.S. ICBM stockpile, the release said (Associated Press, June 3).
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines
HOME | CONTACT US | GET INVOLVED | SITE MAP |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back to top