CTBT:  Top U.S. Science Panel Defends Treaty

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty can be verified effectively and would not harm the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, says a study released today by the National Academy of Sciences.  Although the United States signed the pact in 1996, the Bush administration has said it will not seek to ratify the agreement, largely due to concerns over the issues addressed in the study.

The report, Technical Issues Related to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, indicates that the “main technical concerns raised about the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty when the Senate refused to ratify it in 1999 are all manageable,” an academy press release said today.

Prepared by an 11-member panel of top scientists, arms control experts, and former national laboratory and industry executives, the report addresses purely technical questions and refutes concerns that undermined the treaty when the Senate voted it down in 1999.

The analysis also serves to address Bush administration opposition to the pact.  President George W. Bush said he opposed the treaty during his presidential election campaign, saying it was unverifiable and could undermine U.S. nuclear deterrence.

Today, the Bush administration has no intention of ratifying the treaty and has withdrawn some financial support for the treaty’s verification mechanism.  There have also been reports some Bush administration officials may push for the United States to withdraw its signature.

The study also challenges an assertion in the Bush administration’s Nuclear Posture Review released in January that the United States might need to resume testing at some point in the future to maintain the nuclear stockpile.

“Increasingly, objective judgments about capability in a nontesting environment will become far more difficult,” the Nuclear Posture Review said.  It also called for spending money to shorten the preparation time for resuming testing (see GSN, Jan. 8).

“Remanufacture to original specifications is the preferred remedy for the age-related defects that materialize in the stockpile,” the report said.  It called for enhancing manufacturing and remanufacturing capabilities and improving surveillance for defects.

The administration also has requested funding for the Energy Department to study options for developing a new low-yield nuclear warhead for striking deeply buried and hardened targets (see GSN, Feb. 20).  The United States has adhered to a self-imposed moratorium on testing since 1992, but has conducted at least 17 subcritical tests since then (see GSN, June 10).

The report “concludes that verification capabilities for the treaty are better than generally supposed, U.S. adversaries could not significantly advance their nuclear weapons capabilities through tests below the threshold of detection, and the United States has the technical capabilities to maintain confidence in the safety and reliability of its existing weapons stockpile without periodic tests,” according to the release.

Possible Withdrawal

Recent reports have suggested that some officials are seeking U.S. withdrawal of its signature.  Such a move would amount to a major reversal of U.S. policy regarding the treaty.

During the 1990s, the United States spearheaded efforts to ban nuclear weapons testing through the treaty and President Bill Clinton signed the treaty on the day it was opened for signature in 1996.

The treaty’s signature created the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization in Vienna, which, among other things, has been building an International Monitoring System, a network of several hundred facilities spanning the globe using various technologies to detect possible nuclear explosions. 

The organization provides funds to countries to create seismological, hydroacoustic, infrasound, and radionuclide stations, which when completed transmit data back to Vienna for processing, archiving and distribution to member states. 

The Bush administration has continued to provide funding for these activities, making the overall largest contribution to the organization in 2002, $16.5 million (see GSN, March 19).  The administration has, however, withheld funds for some CTBTO activities, specifically on-site inspections.

Arms control advocates have said they believe that U.S. support for the treaty remains in jeopardy.

“In light of other administration positions with respect to the ABM Treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention protocol and so many other issues, we still have a major fight on our hands, not so much that this treaty will be ratified, but whether it will withdraw the U.S. signature from the treaty,” said John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World, an arms control lobbying organization.

“The one positive note is that the Secretary of State [Colin Powell, then the retired chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,] was one of those who endorsed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty when it was before the Senate,” Isaacs said.  In his confirmation hearing in early 2001, Powell referred to “flaws” in the treaty, but did not specify them.

In 1999, top U.S. military leaders said they supported ratification of the treaty, viewing the network of capabilities it offered a valuable addition to the U.S. global nuclear test detection system.

“This treaty provides one means of dealing with a very serious security challenge, and that is, as Secretary [of Defense William] Cohen has outlined, nuclear proliferation,” said Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Henry Shelton in congressional testimony in February 1999.  “The CTBT will help limit the development of more advanced and destructive weapons and inhibit the ability of more countries to acquire nuclear weapons.”

His predecessor, Gen. John Shalikashvili, then in retirement, published a report of findings and recommendations on the treaty in January 2001, in which he concluded, “It is very much in our national interest to secure (certain) benefits through entry into force of the Test Ban Treaty.  If this opportunity is lost, the United States’ ability to lead an effective global campaign against nuclear proliferation will be severely damaged.”

Supplement to U.S. Capabilities Seen

The National Academy of Sciences report suggests the system could be an important improvement over current U.S. capabilities for monitoring any clandestine Russian testing.

On October 3, 1999, the Washington Post reported, “The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded it cannot monitor low-level tests by Russia precisely enough to ensure compliance with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,” writing the agency could not distinguish very low-level nuclear explosions from conventional tests or seismic activity.  The story cited a series of Russian tests at the site U.S. officials suspected were conducted to develop new low-yield nuclear warheads.

The CTBT system, combined with some intelligence collection, should allow for detection of nuclear weapons explosions with yields as small as 1 kiloton “with high confidence in all environments,” the NAS report said.  In some locations of interest, such as Russia’s Novaya Zemlya test site, the capability would extend down to very low levels of .01 kilotons or 10 tons, the report said.

Back to top

North Korea:  Powell Meets Pyongyang Counterpart

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell met with North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun today in Brunei in the highest-level contact between the two countries since then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited North Korea in 2000 (see GSN, July 29).

During the “15-minute informal chat” on the sidelines of a meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Powell reaffirmed the Bush administration’s interest in dialogue and its insistence that any talks “emphasize a variety of matters, including proliferation, mutual commitment made under the [1994] Agreed Framework and conventional forces,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

U.S.-North Korean dialogue has been mostly frozen since Bush took office, but Boucher said statements by North Korean officials have prompted the administration to consider a U.S. visit to North Korea.

In addition, South Korea yesterday said it would hold talks with the North this coming weekend in an attempt to restart reconciliation efforts.  The weekend’s talks are intended to set an agenda for new negotiations to begin in mid-August.

Yesterday’s events followed North Korean statements expressing regret last week for a June naval clash with South Korea that killed five of the South’s sailors (see GSN, July 3; Purdum/Kirk, New York Times, July 31).

Powell is scheduled to meet today with South Korean Foreign Minister Choi Sung Hong and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov.

Meanwhile, the 10 ASEAN members have developed framework agreements to increase intelligence sharing and cooperation to fight terrorism (Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, July 31).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Iran:  U.S. Officials to Urge Russia to End Nuclear Aid

The Bush administration yesterday directed a high-level delegation to Moscow to persuade Russia to end nuclear assistance to Iran that could aid that country militarily (see GSN, July 30).

The officials had planned the visit previously, but Russia’s release last week of a draft document outlining plans to provide Iran with five additional nuclear reactors surprised and angered the White House, according to an administration official.

“It’s fair to say the White House was infuriated by that and extremely surprised,” the official said.

The officials are expected to present Moscow with a list of measures to reduce cooperation with Iran, according to the Washington Post.  The list includes ending exchanges of weapons scientists, blocking sales of dual-use items and strengthening export controls, a senior Bush administration official said (Peter Baker, Washington Post, July 30).

Weapons vs. Energy

The Bush administration has told Russia the reason Iran wants additional nuclear reactors is to develop nuclear weapons, according to Bloomberg.com.  Iran might be able to build an operational nuclear weapon within five years if Russia refuses to end aid, U.S. Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Marshall Billingslea told a Senate Governmental Affairs subcommittee yesterday.

“This is a pressing matter that has very much got the administration’s attention,” Billingslea said in testimony before the International Security, Proliferation and Federal Services Subcommittee.

Billingslea criticized Iranian claims that the nuclear reactors are needed for energy, according to Bloomberg.com.  Iran has such large quantities of natural gas that it is burning without using six times the amount of any other country, he said, adding that the burned-off natural gas would provide three times the energy of the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

“If Tehran’s agenda were truly to improve its energy reserves, it would just spend a fraction of the money it is spending on Bushehr and generate three times as much power by simply capturing the natural gas it is wasting,” Billingslea said (Paul Basken, Bloomberg.com, July 29).

Back to top

South Asia:  U.S. Plans Active Engagement With India and Pakistan

Six senior U.S. officials plan to visit India and Pakistan during the next five months, U.S. officials said yesterday.

The United States wants to remain engaged in the region to help prevent tensions from escalating and possibly leading to war, analysts said (see GSN, July 29).  Secretary of State Colin Powell concluded a two-day visit to the region Sunday.

“Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage will return to the region in August, and other senior U.S. officials will also continue engagement in coming months,” State Department spokesman Phil Reeker said.  Armitage was a leader in the U.S. campaign to persuade India and Pakistan to de-escalate tensions last month, according to United Press International (see GSN, June 24).

The United States is not trying to act as a mediator but is “prepared to provide facilitative assistance if the parties agree,” Reeker said.  “Our role is that of a friend … trying to help both countries address their differences … through a productive dialogue,” he said (see GSN, July 2).  To resolve the conflict, India and Pakistan must enter into dialogue on the disputed Kashmir territory in a way that “takes into account the wishes of the people of Kashmir,” he added (Anwar Iqbal, United Press International, July 29).

For further information, see:

Stimson Center Background on Kashmir

Pakistani Government

Indian Government

Back to top

Iran:  Russia to Build Five More Nuclear Reactors for Tehran

Russia announced plans Saturday to build five nuclear reactors in Iran over the next 10 years in addition to the nuclear power plant that Russia is currently constructing at the Bushehr site (see GSN, July 24).

The plans to build the five additional reactors are contained in a document on enhancing Russian economic, political and scientific connections with Iran over the next decade, which Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov recently approved, according to the Washington Post.  While Russia and Iran have discussed building additional reactors since 1996, the agreement advances those discussions by putting the idea into writing, the Post reported.  Russia plans to present the document to Iran in September, according to the Post.

No new contracts have been signed for the additional reactors, according to the Post.  Russia’s record of slow construction on the Bushehr plant suggests that the additional reactors would not be built soon, the Post reported.  Three additional reactors might be installed at the Bushehr plant, which is expected to become operational by early 2004, according to the Russian plan.  A second, two-reactor nuclear power plant might also be built at Ahvaz, the document says (Peter Baker, Washington Post, July 27).

Russia’s construction of a second nuclear power plant for Iran “would play into the hands of the far right in the Bush administration who are already skeptical that Russia can be a partner in the war on terrorism” and other foreign policy issues, said John Tedstrom, a National Security Council aide in the Clinton administration (see related GSN story, today; Robyn Dixon, Los Angeles Times, July 27).

Russia’s increased nuclear assistance to Iran, however, could mean billions of dollars for the Russian nuclear power industry, according to experts.

“To a large extent, this is about money,” said Dmitri Trenin, an analyst at the Moscow Center of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.  “No one here wants to establish Iran as a nuclear power, but there are many people here who believe Iran is likely to become one with Russia’s help or without.  It’s useful to have a finger in the pie.”

While U.S. President George W. Bush has charged that Iran forms part of an “axis of evil,” Russia sees Iran as “a good citizen of the region, or not much worse than the others,” Trenin said.  Russia’s nuclear assistance to Iran has not violated any international agreements, Russian officials said.

“I don’t think we’re doing anything illegitimate,” said Sergei Rogov, director of the Institute for USA and Canada Studies in Moscow.  “Whether it is politically correct is another question” (Baker, Washington Post).

Officials plan to conduct high-level U.S.-Russian talks on Russia’s nuclear assistance to Iran within the next few months, according to a Bush administration official (see GSN, July 12).  The current White House strategy is to increase criticism of Russia and to warn Russia that its failure to cooperate might damage U.S.-Russian relations, according to the Washington Post.

“We continue to have concerns that technology and know-how for nuclear weapons are flowing to Iran,” the U.S. ambassador to Russia, Alexander Vershbow, said in remarks outside Moscow Monday.  “Russia has to avoid letting its desire for commercial gain end up hastening the day that these countries can pose a threat that could not only destabilize their own region, but undermine the security of the entire world.”

Proposal to Destroy Bushehr

Some U.S. defense officials have said that the Bushehr plant should be destroyed before it receives its first shipment of Russian nuclear fuel, according to the Post.

“There is some support for preemption within the administration,” said Middle East expert Anthony Cordesman.

If Iran agrees to abide by international safeguards, then the Bushehr plant is probably not a threat, according to others in the Bush administration.  While destroying the plant probably would not stop Iran’s nuclear program, it might increase the country’s hostility toward the United States at a time the Bush administration is trying to improve relations, they said.

Even though the United States might not choose to use military action against the Bushehr nuclear plant, Israel might do so, the Post reported.  While only a few Israeli officials support attacking the plant, Israel has indicated it will not allow Bushehr to become operational, according to the Post.

“Does Israel have a military option?” asked a Washington official.  “The answer is yes.”

Israel destroyed the Iraqi Osirak nuclear power plant in a pre-emptive attack in 1981, according to the Post.  Recently, Israel has warned Iran that it considers the Bushehr plant to be a security threat (see GSN, June 27).  There is some indication that Iran has begun installing anti-aircraft missiles near the plant and a nuclear research facility near Tehran, according to analysts who have examined satellite photographs of the sites.

“Within the next year, either the U.S. or Israel is going to either attack Iran’s (nuclear sites) or acquiesce to Iran being a nuclear state,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a nonpartisan military and intelligence research center (Dana Priest, Washington Post, July 29).

Back to top

India-Pakistan:  Powell Calls for Fair Elections, End to Infiltration

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell called on India and Pakistan yesterday to take steps to avert war and increase stability, specifically by ensuring that elections in the disputed Kashmir territory in the fall are free and fair and that militant infiltration into India’s side of Kashmir ends (see GSN, July 26).

After meeting with both Indian and Pakistani officials, Powell said he was encouraged.

“Everyone is focused on the need to get tensions down and ensure that it doesn’t start over again,” he said, referring to recent high tensions on the subcontinent that decreased only after U.S. officials shuttled between the two countries.

Free and fair elections in India’s side of Kashmir might “be a first step in a broader process that begins to address Kashmiri grievances and leads India and Pakistan back to dialogue.  Only a productive and sustained bilateral dialogue on all issues, including Kashmir, will prevent future crises and will finally bring peace to the region,” Powell said yesterday in New Delhi (see GSN, July 10).

Powell asked India to free political prisoners and to allow international observers to monitor the Kashmir elections.  U.S. officials said India has jailed two dozen politicians who do not advocate violence.  India has also refused to allow any organized monitoring mission, and Pakistanis and Kashmiris have said past elections were not fair.

Powell also said he had “forceful” discussions with Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.  Musharraf agreed to take steps to end remaining infiltration, Powell said.  India has said militant infiltration continues, but Musharraf said it has ended (Robin Wright, Los Angeles Times, July 29).

Powell said infiltration has decreased but has not ended completely.

“I am not, independently through my own sources, able to substantiate everything the Pakistanis are saying to us,” he said.  “There is still a long way to go before negotiations can begin.”

Several U.S. officials plan to visit the region in the next few months in efforts to decrease tensions and build stronger U.S. ties with both Pakistan and India, Powell said.  He added, however, that the United States could not mediate the situation.

“If you try to internationalize it at this point, it will not move forward because of Indian resistance,” he said (Todd Purdum, New York Times, July 29).

The next 10 weeks will be essential to decide whether both countries are truly serious about taking steps for peace, Powell said, adding that a decrease in infiltration and a de-escalatory response from India would be key (Wright, Los Angeles Times).

For further information, see:

Stimson Center Background on Kashmir

Pakistani Government

Indian Government

Back to top

United States:  Belgium Hopes to Decide on MOX in August

A member of the Belgian Parliament has said officials will probably decide by the end of August whether to agree to a U.S. request to convert a small amount of plutonium to mixed-oxide fuel, the Greenville News in South Carolina reported Friday (see GSN, July 18).

The United States has asked Belgium to convert a small amount of plutonium into MOX fuel to assist a project to build conversion facilities in the United States.  Belgium is divided on the issue, with conservatives supporting the U.S. request and Social Democrats and Greens opposed, according to Eloi Glorieux, a Parliament member who opposes the U.S. request.

“Right now, it’s absolutely open,” Glorieux said.  “It will depend on how the game is played.  It will be the one who gives in first.  It’s not an economic issue.  It’s not really a social or an employment issue.  It’s an ethical question, so to say.”

Since Belgium plans to eventually cease production and use of MOX fuel, it makes little sense to assist another country’s production, Glorieux said.  The United States also has other options besides Belgium, he said.

“If Belgium doesn’t do it, France will,” Glorieux said.  “And if Belgium and France won’t do it, then the United States has enough experience and technology that it will only take one or two more years for them to make their own MOX facilities.  But I think it is a very bad message to give to the world, that the use of MOX is a good thing.”

Converting plutonium into MOX test fuel is essential for the success of the U.S. MOX program, said Lisa Cutler, spokeswoman for the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration (see GSN, June 21).

“We need to know how the material is going to perform in the reactor,” Cutler said.  “And we need to perform tests so that the facility that is going to be built is done to the right specifications” (Tim Smith, Greenville News, July 28).

Back to top

North Korea:  U.S. Resumes Efforts to Restart Dialogue

Efforts to resume U.S.-North Korean dialogue might be back on track after a June 29 naval clash between North Korea and South Korea, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Friday (see GSN, July 8).

Powell indicated that he might meet with North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun this week at an Association of Southeast Asian Nations conference in Brunei.  Such a meeting would be the highest level of contact between the two countries since U.S. President George W. Bush took office.  Regarding the opportunity to meet with Paek, Powell said, “I’m not ruling anything in or out.”

Speculation that U.S. and North Korean officials might meet at the conference increased after North Korean Cabinet official Kim Ryong Song expressed regret Thursday to South Korea for the naval clash, calling it “accidental.”  North Korea also said Thursday that it is ready to receive a U.S. envoy (see GSN, July 3).

“In the last couple of days, they’ve made what I consider some very positive statements that we have welcomed — acknowledging responsibility for the naval incident that took place a few weeks back, also once again indicating receptivity to a dialogue with the United States.  We welcome that.  We’ll be following on it,” Powell said Friday.

The Bush administration has said it wants talks with North Korea to focus on concerns about weapons of mass destruction and redeployment of North Korean conventional forces from the demilitarized zone with South Korea (Robin Wright, Los Angeles Times, July 27).

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov reaffirmed North Korea’s interest in U.S. dialogue after meeting with Paek and leader Kim Jong Il yesterday in North Korea.

“Pyongyang is ready for a constructive dialogue with the U.S. and Japan without preconditions,” Ivanov said.

Ivanov added that he had “the impression that North Korean officials are ready for contacts with officials from the United States and Japan as early as the ASEAN summit in Brunei.”  Japan said its foreign minister plans to meet with Paek during the conference (Paul Eckert, Reuters, July 29).

Unlikely to Agree to Inspections

North Korea is still unlikely to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect potential nuclear weapon sites unless the country’s relationship with the United States improves, said Charles Kartman, executive director of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization.  KEDO is a U.S.-led consortium responsible for building a nuclear power plant in North Korea (see GSN, June 25).

The Bush administration has said North Korea must agree to allow IAEA officials to begin inspections immediately, saying that a 1994 U.S.-North Korea agreement requires the inspections to begin.  The Agreed Framework, however, also calls for efforts to improve U.S.-North Korean relations, and those relations have deteriorated over the past two years, Kartman said, according to Saturday’s Washington Post.

North Korea “is not going to give up its hypothetical nuclear capability unless it gets something of equal value to them, and what they agreed to was improved relations with the United States,” he said.

Kartman said he expects U.S. Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly to lead a U.S. team to North Korea, but he expressed concern that North Korea would want higher-level contacts.

Meanwhile, KEDO’s project to build two nuclear reactors in North Korea is continuing, and the organization plans to hold a ceremony Aug. 7 to pour concrete for the reactors, Kartman said (see GSN, May 13; Doug Struck, Washington Post, July 27).

A delegation of 25 North Korean officials returned to their country Saturday after completing 26 days of safety training in South Korea in preparation for the completion of the nuclear plant (see GSN, July 2; Korea Herald, July 27).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

International Atomic Energy Agency

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP