Nuclear Weapons
|
1. Deterrence Theory
Avery Goldstein delivered a talk at FPRI based on his recent book, “Deterrence and Security in the 21st Century: China, Britain, France and the Enduring Legacy of the Nuclear Revolution.” In his talk, Goldstein argues that the meaning and requirements of nuclear deterrence were based on the unusual and atypical experience of the Cold War. Goldstein argues that the PRC, Britain, and France each developed a nuclear force that could potentially survive, in part, a nuclear first strike and thereby convince a potential adversary that they could still inflict unacceptable losses in a counterattack. Goldstein concludes by arguing that with nuclear weapons, economic issues are a double-edged sword, and that a less-than-perfect national missile defense can serve local war-fighting needs, but will not promise significant benefits to the overall strategic nuclear calculus.
“WHY NUKES STILL TRUMP: DETERRENCE AND SECURITY IN THE 21ST CENTURY “ |
2. Precision Guided Weapons
In November 2000, the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology published a new report that studies counterforce capabilities of conventional precision guided weapons (PGW). The report argues that development of US precision guided weapons advanced to a new qualitative level in the last decade and new types of PGWs can present a real threat to Russian nuclear forces. The report is in Russian, but has a summary in English.
“Precision Guided Weapons and Strategic Balance” |
3. Pakistani Nuclear Weapons
During the 55th session of the UN General Assembly, Pakistani Ambassador Shamshad Ahmed stated, “Pakistan remains committed to the goals of non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.” Ahmed outlined Pakistan’s efforts, which include a unilateral moratorium on further testing, emphasis on the need to prevent a nuclear arms race, a proposal to India to the establish a Strategic Restraint Regime in South Asia, as well as strengthening domestic regulations against export of nuclear equipment or materials.
The article “Pakistan UN Envoy Statement on Nuclear Arms” is available fromWorld News Connection |
4. Indian Nuclear Submarine Program
The Indian government’s appointment of Vice-Admiral R.N. Ganesh as director general of a highly classified and much delayed nuclear-powered submarine program, known as the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV). Ganesh commanded the Soviet Charlie I class cruise missile submarine that the Indian Navy leased in 1988 for three years. Unnamed Indian defense officials said that the ATV was crucial for the Navy’s ambition to have a role in India’s nuclear posture, which is currently dominated by the Army and the Air Force.
The article “New Director Expected to Revive Indian Nuclear Submarine” is available from World News Connection |
5. UK Submarine Accident
During a four-hour visit to the crippled British nuclear submarine HMS Tireless in Gibraltar, Spanish Nuclear Safety Council experts were denied access to the area containing the damaged nuclear reactor and its control panel “because of military restrictions.” As a result, the team was unable to assess the damage and risk posed to the submarine, which has been moored at Gibraltar since May when a crack in its reactor cooling system forced it to seek emergency repairs.
The article “Spanish Officials Barred From Inspecting British Nuclear Submarine” is available from World News Connection |
Proliferation
|
1. Iraqi WMD Inspections
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, the second Russian foreign minister to visit Iraq since the 1991 Gulf War, urged Iraq to permit the return of UN weapons inspectors as part of a deal to lift sanctions. He said, “The time has come to take tangible steps to relieve the suffering of the Iraqi people and annul the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq in return for Iraq’s restoring international (weapons’) monitoring.”
“Ivanov urges Iraq to allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return” |
2. Biological Weapons Report
The European Disarmament Forum covered the proliferation of biological weapons in its fourth issue for 2000. This issue contains six articles on this issue, including a threat assessment, opportunities for the fifth review of international protocol on biological weapons, and recent developments in the field. These is also a brief bibliography for further research into biological weapons proliferation issues compiled by Joshua Margolin.
“The Proliferation of Biological Weapons: A Threat Assessment”
“Fighting the Proliferation of Biological Weapons: Beyond the BWC Protocol”
“New Technology and Future Developments in Biological Warfare”
“Biological Weapons Resource List” |
Arms Control
|
1. Putin Arms Control Proposal
Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Russia would consider limiting itself to even fewer than the 1,500 nuclear warheads on each side that Russia is currently proposing to the US. Putin also reiterated Russia’s opposition to a US national missile defense system. Russian General Vladimir Yakovlev, commander of the Strategic Rocket Forces, suggested that Russia is resigned to a US missile shield, but floated that idea that offensive and defensive missiles be considered together, with cuts of one offset by a buildup of another. For budgetary reasons, Russia has favored deeper cuts in long-range missiles than the US, which has tentatively agreed to a limit of 2,000 to 2,500 warheads. Russia spends only about US$5.1 billion on defense, compared with annual US defense spending of around US$290 billion, and is under pressure from the Russian government to further reduce its budget.
“Putin Suggests Deeper Bilateral Weapons Cuts”
“Putin Proposes Deeper Nuclear Cuts”
“Full Text of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Statement”
The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Department for Security and Disarmament Yuri Kapralov said that Russia’s proposal to “radically reduce” nuclear weapons also requires negotiations on an elimination of the remaining U.S. non-strategic nuclear bombs in Europe.
The article “Russia Call For US Nuclear Pull-Out Europe” is available fromWorld News Connection
The deputy head of the Russian Duma house committee for security, Georgy Maitakov, said that Russia could not maintain a big nuclear arsenal and that “our planet is too small to use nuclear arms.”
The article “Russian Duma Official Supports Putin Calls For Nuclear Cuts” is available from World News Connection |
2. Proposed Nuke-NMD Trade-Off
The commander of Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces, General Vladimir Yakolev, warned Monday that Russia would find it “very difficult” to stop the political momentum in the US for building a national missile shield. Yakolev suggested that Russia might be ready to negotiate amendments to the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty if cuts in offensive weapons are deep enough. Ivo H. Daalder, an arms control expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said that both US presidential candidates held out the promise of supporting much deeper cuts in the nuclear arsenals. Yakovlev, however, told journalists that “regardless of who heads the new US administration, there are considerable doubts as to whether America’s senators will ratify the START-2 treaty, given that the USA’s withdrawal from the ABM treaty is now clearly being predicted.”
“Eyeing U.S. Missile Defense, Russia Wants Less Offense”
“Text Only”
“Russian Missile Chief Pessimistic about Future of Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty”
See also the articles “Russian Nuclear Commander Talks About START 3” and “Russian Missile Troops Chief Doubts Future US Arms Control” available fromWorld News Connection
Yuri Kapralov, a senior Russian Foreign Ministry official covering North America, denied Russia was backtracking on its hard-line opposition to a National Missile Defense (NMD) system. Speaking in reference to the recent offer proposed by Russian General Vladimir Yakovlev that the US counterbalance any increase in missile defense with cuts in offensive nuclear capability, Kapralov said, “There is no softening of the Russian position on ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) treaty.” Kapralov said a US NMD system would force Russia to develop a counterforce or countermeasures to ensure its own security, and that Russia would rather work cooperatively to reduce international threats.
“Denial On U.S. Plan Indicates Policy Split”
US State Department spokesman Philip Reeker said that the US has some interest in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal for the two countries to slash their nuclear arsenals, and an indication that Moscow would be willing to discuss changes to a key anti-missile defense treaty. Reeker said, “Certainly we share Russia’s interest in lower levels of strategic nuclear arms and we want to proceed in a manner that allows us to address new threats, something we’ve discussed for some time.” An article in Russia Today quoted an unnamed senior US official who stated that while further research must be undertaken to determine if this is an official position, [Strategic Rocket Forces General Vladimir] Yakovlev’s comments sound like a whole reworking of the ABM treaty and we haven’t seen much from Putin that would suggest that he is to this date eager to redraft the ABM treaty.”
“U.S. Offers Cautious Welcome to Putin Nuclear Proposals”
“U.S. Skeptical on Russian Missile Chief Comments” |
3. Russian Views of US Election
Ekaterina Larina writing in the Russian Russia Journal reports on Russian analysts’ perspectives on the future of US-Russian relations if GOP candidate George W Bush becomes the next US president. Many analysts believe that the results will be positive for US-Russian relations. Vyacheslav Nikonov, the president of Fond Politika, said, “Detente began when Nixon was in power; the Cold War ended while Reagan was president; and START-2 was signed while George Bush Sr. was president. But it was under Truman that the Cold War began; the Cuban missile crisis took place during Kennedy’s time; and the Clinton presidency saw an eight-year long worsening in Russian-American relations.” Officials in the Russian government, Larina states, have made every attempt to appear neutral in their statements about the US election.
“Russia Prepares for a Bush Presidency” |
4. US-PRC Arms Talks
The Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute for International Studies released a report on the Third US-China Conference on Arms Control, Disarmament and Nonproliferation, which CNS jointly organized with the China Institute of International Studies. The conference participants agreed that while US and PRC were narrowing their differences on arms control and nonproliferation efforts, there were growing concerns about the overall US-PRC strategic relationship. The conference agenda included discussion of international and US-PRC bilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts, regional issues, current challenges, and the role of missile defense programs.
“US-China Arms Control and Nonproliferation Cooperation: Progress and Prospects” |
Missile Defense
|
1. US Missile Defense Program
Defense Week reported that the US Defense Department has informed Congress that the PAC-3 anti-missile system is expected to cost 77 percent more than originally projected, and therefore the Defense Department plans to buy fewer than half the missiles the Army says it requires to meet the national defense strategy. Congress plans to pass a legislative mandate, an unusual response, ordering the Defense Department to buy what it said it would buy for the US$400 million it requested. The PAC-3 program manager has been put on leave. Army Major General Peter Franklin, deputy director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), reported that the current budget would purchase only 32 of 40 Patriot PAC-3 missiles, six of 22 launchers, and four of six radar upgrades.
“Patriot Program Draws Fire For Budget Irregularities”
Chester Decesaris, program manager for targets within the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization’s test resources directorate, said that the liquid-fueled missile system the agency plans to use in tests of the theater missile defense system could be designed as a threat-representative TMD target for use in developmental flight tests, and in a lower-fidelity version as a training target for live-fire training exercises. BMDO is pursuing a liquid-fueled target system to meet the emerging target needs of TMD systems like the Air Force’s Airborne Laser and Navy’s Theater Wide programs, which will require targets that are threat-representative over most of their trajectory, from ascent through descent. Current TMD developmental tests of the PAC-3 and THAAD systems have required target systems that are representative of real-world threats only in the tail end of the target missile’s trajectory.
“BMDO Eyes New Target Missile’s Potential For Training Exercises” |
2. Israeli Missile Defense Program
The Clinton Administration is seeking congressional approval of a supplemental US$750 million Middle East aid package that includes US$200 million for Israeli missile defenses “to address long-range strategic threats that Israel faces from unfriendly countries in the region.” According to the bill, the funding “could be used for such items as theater missile defense and could be available for a number of weapons systems,” including the Arrow II anti-tactical missile system, a boost-phase intercept system, and radar aircraft.
“Extra Aid For Israeli Missile Defense In Limbo” |
3. Russian Response to NMD
Yury Kapralov, head of the Foreign Ministry’s security and disarmament department, stated that Russia has the means to “respond” if the US deploys its planned NMD. He said, “We are capable of responding to the deployment of NMD (national missile defense system) and we have the necessary technological means for this.” Kapralov further said, “We do not want to use our position on NMD to relaunch confrontation…. It is not in Russia’s interests to spend money on this. We have other objectives…. Do not force us to choose another path than a peaceful one.”
“Moscow Warns it Can ‘Respond’ to Deployment of U.S. Nuclear Missile Shield” |
Security
|
1. Russian Nuclear Policy
The Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Strategic Rocket Force, Vladimir Yakovlev, said that “despite the radical changes in the world in the past decade, the planning of the use of nuclear weapons, unfortunately, has not changed fundamentally compared to the Cold War period.” Yakovlev explained that planning is still based on the notion that “nuclear arms are the armed forces’ supreme instrument.” Yet he added that the range of future force structures being considered span from “preserving the current arsenal to developing a fully non-nuclear strategic force.
The article “Russian Commander Talks About Nuclear Strategy” is available from World News Connection |
2. NATO Expansion
Paul Starobin argues in Business Week that the US is in danger of provoking a heated response from Russia in the upcoming decision of whether to expand NATO to extend membership to states in the Baltics, former Soviet republics. NATO expansion plans are strengthening the position of hawkish Russian defense officials who are resisting efforts to pare Russia’s strategic nuclear forces to free up resources for the conventional military. Russian defense analyst Sergei Karaganov said, “NATO expansion pushes Russia toward more reliance on [strategic] nuclear forces.” In response, Russia is strengthening an alliance with Belarus, which also has a border with Lithuania, by sending Russian bombers and nuclear-missile carriers to Belarus on training missions for the first time in six years.
“Is NATO About To Make A Bad Move In The Baltics?” |
3. US WMD Policy
A letter by US President Bill Clinton to the US Congress extended the declaration of a national emergency first declared in 1994, as a result of the “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States” posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and delivery capabilities.
“Clinton Letter on Weapons of Mass Destruction”
“Text Only” |
4. US 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
The Institute for National Strategic Studies at National Defense University published the results of their working group on the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The report proposes four strategies, of which some focus on the increased need for homeland defense, and therefore, to some degree, a need for a national missile defense. The report makes little reference to the problem of overall US nuclear strategy or nonproliferation and counter-proliferation efforts, leaving such issues more to the larger and more general national security policy debate.
“Report of the National Defense University Quadrennial Defense Review 2001 Working Group ”
US Defense Department Transportation Command chief General Charles Robertson said that a panel of commanders-in-chief suggested this week that military planners must take modern assumptions into account when suggesting changes to the shape of the military’s force structure and infrastructure, including terrorist threats and funding restrictions. The CINCs were also supportive of US efforts to develop NMD and TMD systems, and believed that the Unified Command Plan should allocate responsibilities in these areas.
“CINCs Say Modern Assumptions Must Dictate Future Military Strategy”
Rear Admiral Joseph Sestak, director of the Navy’s Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) office, said the four force structure proposals put forth by the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO), proposed because the CBO said the Navy is unlikely to receive the additional US$17 billion annually over the next 20 years needed to modernize its fleet for current strategic missions, would each entail risk. These four alternatives include reducing the total number of ships in carrier battle groups, purchasing a dedicated coastal patrol fleet, purchasing a land-attack submarine force, or emphasizing the expeditionary missions of the Marine Corps. Sestak said that the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review should approach the problem from a strategic perspective, rather than as a budgetary problem, and then prioritize budget needs according to strategic decisions. Sestak noted the continuing role of US Navy platforms in current missions and their role in future TMD systems.
“CBO’s Navy Force Structure Options Risky, Admiral Says” |
5. Australian Defense Review
A debate of defense priorities is underway in Australia as it is set to release an important defense white paper. Admiral Dennis Blair, US Commander-in-Chief for the Pacific, published an edited version of his speech to the Melbourne chapter of the Asia Society in The Australian. Blair reported that the US government expected more from Australia after last year’s East Timor campaign and urged Australia to maintain forces capable of operating with the US both nearby and far from Australia. Blair argues that while capable US military forces in the Asia-Pacific have been a foundation of regional security, including the US nuclear umbrella, in the future “gains will result from diplomacy, financial incentives and market forces, rather than armed conflict.” He argues that leaders in the PRC, India and Russia, and elsewhere instead refer to the world system as multipolar and as responding best to “balance of power” politics.
“Fight With Us, U.S. Admiral Tells Defence Chiefs”
“US Backs Forward Defence Stance”
“Menaced By Asian Mind-Sets”
(return to top) |
