NAPSNET Weekly FLASH Update 2 June, 2000

Hello! The below report is written in English. To translate the full report, please use the translator in the top right corner of the page. Do not show me this notice in the future.

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNET Weekly FLASH Update 2 June, 2000", NAPSNet Weekly Report, June 02, 2000, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-weekly/napsnet-weekly-flash-update-2-june-2000/

Arms Control and Disarmament


1. Implementation of START II

George C. Wilson called on US President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin to accelerate the timetable for scrapping their multi-warhead missiles, the US MX missiles and the Russian SS-18s.

“Start By Scrapping The Blockbuster Missiles”


2. Nuclear De-Alerting

David Krieger discusses the Appeal to World Leaders to End the Nuclear Weapons Threat to Humanity, which among other things calls for de-alerting nuclear weapons. “Just this step alone would make the world and all of us much safer from the threat of an accidental nuclear war while we pursue a world free of nuclear weapons.”

“It’s Time to End the Nuclear Weapons Threat”


3. US Nuclear Reductions

US military leaders told the Senate Armed Forces Committee that they are uncomfortable with reducing strategic nuclear weapons below the START III limit approved in 1997 by Clinton and then-president Boris Yeltsin in Helsinki. “If we wanted to depart from that … then we need to pause and do the necessary analysis” to assure that US security and deterrence would still be just as strong or stronger, said Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Henry R. Shelton.

“Pentagon Rejects Russia’s Nuke Idea”

Texas Governor George W. Bush proposed slashing the US nuclear arsenal even if Russia does not agree to identical cuts, but he added that he would depend on military planners to say how low it is safe to cut. Bush also said that he would build a missile defense system and hinted that it would be far more expansive than the system proposed by the Clinton administration. The governor was accompanied by several former Nixon, Reagan, and Bush administration officials. The transcript of their presentations and questions and answers are provided by CNN.
“Bush proposes unilateral cuts in nuclear arms”
“Bush Says U.S. Should Reduce Nuclear Arms”
“Prepared Speech”
“Press release and prepared speech (text-only version)”
“Governor Bush Proposes New Leadership On National Security”
“Transcript of Bush National Security Press Conference”

While analysts welcomed the pledge to cut, they were worried about the risks in Mr. Bush’s seemingly open-ended view of missile defenses, warning that it could undercut the benefits of his proposal to reduce nuclear weapons.
“Bush’s Missile Defenses Could Limit Warhead Cuts, Experts Warn”

US Defense Secretary William S. Cohen said that the US Defense Department can afford to reduce the US nuclear arsenal significantly further, as Texas Governor George W. Bush has proposed. In an interview earlier on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Mr. Cohen had said he did not believe the United States should go below 2,000 nuclear warheads “at this time.”
“Cohen Says U.S. Can Cut Nukes As Bush Proposes”


Missile Defense


4. US Missile Defense

US Vice President Gore defended a limited national missile defense system, telling West Point graduates that the more expansive approach advocated by George W. Bush would “create instability, and thus undermine our security.” Gore stated, “The administration has been working on the technology for a National Missile Defense System designed to protect all 50 states from a limited attack at the hands of a rogue state. We believe, however, that it is essential to do this in a way that does not destroy the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.”

“Gore Warns Of Perils In Bush Arms Plan”


5. Naval Missile Defense

Senior US defense officials said that a classified US Defense Department Ballistic Missile Defense Organization report concludes that sea-based national missile defenses could be built with existing technology and would add both flexibility and firepower to the land-based system proposed by President Clinton. Missions would range from providing early warning of missile attack to a dedicated fleet of ships that could strike enemy missiles shortly after launch, said one official.

“Navy Developing Plan For Sea-Based Missile Defense”
“Sea-Based Missile Defenses Supported”


6. Effects of US Missile Defense

An editorial in the Los Angeles Times said that the debate over National Missile Defense (NMD) is missing context. “That includes the formidable strategic and political costs of deploying such a system. This supposed security enhancement could well leave the United States far less secure than it is now.” Gaurav Kampani writes that the discussion has focused on the strategic response from Russia and the PRC, but the potential impact of on South Asia should not be neglected. Kampani argues, “any US decision that affects global nuclear arms control and provokes strong negative reactions from the Russian Federation and China, will echo strongly in South Asia.”

“How a US National Missile Defense will Affect South Asia”
“Missile Insecurity”


Chemical and Biological Weapons


7. CBW Terrorism

The Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute for International Studies published “Toxic Terror” a study on the use of chemical and biological weapons (CBW) by terrorists. Toxic Terror provides in-depth case studies of twelve terrorist groups and individuals who, from 1946 to 1998, allegedly acquired or employed CBW agents. Among its conclusions are that at least three alleged cases of CBW terrorism are apocryphal; CBW terrorists are often motivated by religious fanaticism, supremacist ideology, or apocalyptic prophecy; and the groups most likely to use CBW are isolated groups or individuals exhibiting a strong sense of paranoia and grandiosity.

“Toxic Terror: Assessing Terrorist Use of Chemical and Biological Weapons”


Military


8. US Military Planning

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry H. Shelton released “Joint Vision 2020” (JV2020), a document that extends, refines, and builds on “Joint Vision 2010” (JV2010) in projecting how military planners believe the US military must be developed and transformed in the new millennium. “The overarching focus of JV2020 remains a joint force capable of full spectrum dominance, persuasive in peace, decisive in war, and preeminent in any form of conflict.”

“Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chairman Releases “”Joint Vision 2020”


9. US-Japan Military Relationship

Riichi Furugaki argues that in the security environment surrounding Japan, collective self-defense is becoming increasingly vital. “It seems, however, that the need for collective self-defense has not been well explained, and therefore, it is not well understood by the Japanese public. The goal of this article is to describe the necessity for Japan to have the right of collective self-defense not only with the United States but also with other key countries.” David J. Richardson provides an overview of the revised Guidelines for US-Japan Defense Cooperation as an expression of US and Japanese security strategy in the context of the symbols, realities, and possibilities for the bilateral security partnership.

“Collective Self-Defense for Japan”
“US-Japan Defense Cooperation: Possibilities for Regional Stability”


10. PLA Reaction to Kosovo Campaign

June Teufel Dreyer of the Strategic Studies Institute, United States Army War College, writes that the PRC’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has analyzed the NATO campaign in Kosovo and drawn its own conclusions. “In fact, rather than reach a single set of conclusions, different groups within the Chinese military drew different judgments. These differences of opinion reflect the considerable diversity of thinking about defense modernization and future war that exists within the PLA today.”

“The PLA and the Kosovo Conflict”


Diplomacy


11. US-Russia Summit

The US State Department has a webpage on US President Bill Clinton’s trip to Europe, including itinerary, fact sheets, speeches, briefings, and links to related sites.

“U.S. State Dept.’s Page on the President’s trip to Europe”

Carnegie Institute Senior Associates Michael McFaul, Joseph Cirincione, Martha Olcott, and Anatol Lieven shared their expectations for the upcoming summit between US President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Brookings Institution held a press briefing providing background on President Clinton’s trip to Europe and to Russia.
“The Clinton-Putin Agenda: Briefing on Prospects for President Clinton’s Trip to Russia”
“President Clinton’s Trip to Europe and Russia”


12. US-PRC Relations

Greg Mastel argues that the debate leading up to the vote on Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with the PRC “has created expectations on the part of the public and Congress that are certain to shattered by the reality that even with a ‘yes’ vote on PNTR, China is certain to continue to pose a challenge to U.S. interests on many fronts.” Mackubin Thomas Owens argues that the similarities between the cases of Wilhelmine Germany and Great Britain at the turn of the century and the PRC and the United States today are “so compelling that they cannot be ignored…. While the scope of Chinese naval modernization is nothing like Tirpitz’s attempt to challenge the Royal Navy before the Great War, it is impossible to ignore the possibility that China’s course will bring it into conflict with the United States some time in the near future.”

“Are Our China Troubles Over?”
“China, Russia and the New Geopolitics”

(return to top)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.