“From reduced defense spending to developing an exit strategy in Afghanistan and a global community concerned with terrorism, the Pentagon faces many challenges in the 21st century. Hagel will effectively lead the institution in addressing these concerns,” said Amb. Graham. “As the U.S. and other nuclear arms countries consider further reductions in nuclear stockpiles to ensure greater national and global security, it is imperative that someone with Senator Hagel’s experience and keen insights lead the Department of Defense.”
Nuclear Black Market: Alive and Well
In a previous post, I detailed the important role that the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, spearheaded by former Senators Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar, has played in securing loose nuclear material in the former Soviet Union.
Despite Russia’s refusal to extend the program past 2013, there is still a large amount of material that needs to be protected from theft and ultimately, use. In his first foreign policy speech since his reelection at the National Defense University on December 3, President Obama praised this work and emphasized the need for it to continue. In his words, “there are still terrorists and criminal gangs doing everything they can to get their hands on [WMD materials].”
He was absolutely correct. On December 10, Desmond Butler released a chilling account of two Turkish men arrested for attempting to buy highly radioactive materials in Batumi, Georgia. From what the Georgian authorities could ascertain, there is a black market for nuclear materials being run out of Abkhazia, an unrecognized state of the former Soviet Union. Although it is clear the material is originating from one place, Georgian anti-smuggling chief Archil Pavlenishvili has no idea where exactly that place is.
Though the details are somewhat murky, the Georgian government has successfully apprehended nuclear smugglers in possession of a range of radiological materials, including, in some cases, highly-enriched uranium, one two possible ingredients for a nuclear bomb. However without US-led programs and investment in material security and protection as well as anti-smuggling, criminals would have an easier time successfully stealing, transporting, and selling dangerous material. Potential buyers could include rogue states pursuing a clandestine nuclear program. Even more concerning are terrorist groups seeking nuclear material either for a dirty bomb or for an actual nuclear weapon.
The US has led a global effort to ensure nuclear material remains secure, epitomized by the 2010 and 2012 Nuclear Security Summits, which encouraged states to take meaningful steps to protect their own nuclear materials. At the 2012 Summit, nineteen nations signed a Statement to Counter Nuclear Smuggling. The United States in particular has led the Megaports Initiative under the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) as well as Homeland Security’s Container Security Initiative to strengthen anti-smuggling efforts worldwide. Departing from the model of the Nunn-Lugar program which minimizes opportunity for smugglers to obtain nuclear and radiological materials, these programs work to detect and prevent those materials from crossing national borders.
The Megaports Intiative specifically works to transfer responsibility of anti-smuggling efforts to the host country after three years. However, due to lack of funding, the NNSA has completed less than half of its planned projects. While there is ample room for cuts in the defense budget, it is important to remember how essential anti-smuggling programs are.
Relative to other defense expenditures, the return on investment of these programs is enormous. The consequences of not investing in them are catastrophic. Nuclear terrorism, as Obama noted on December 3, remains one of the major threats to American national security. If we do not continue to assist other countries in creating counter nuclear smuggling frameworks, we risk endangering the security of both the United States and the world.
Nukes, the Shaheen Amendment, Afghanistan and Spending Money on Unneeded Programs
Key arms control and national security policy differences remain to be resolved by the House-Senate conference committee including the East Coast missile defense system, withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, strategic arms reductions under the New START Treaty, the Shaheen amendment to protect military victims of sexual violence and funding for the next generation of Ohio-class strategic nuclear submarines, long-range bombers and the plutonium research facility at Los Alamos.
President Obama honors Nunn and Lugar at the National Defense University
Today (December 3) President Obama spoke at the National Defense University (NDU) as part of a day-long symposium to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program and honor the two men most responsible fo…
Reducing Cooperative Threat Reduction: The End of Nunn-Lugar?
On October 10, Russia announced that it will not be renewing the Nunn-Lugar Act in June 2013. Russian withdrawal from the 1991 Nunn-Lugar agreement does not necessarily signify an end to the agreement, nor to US-Russian cooperation; it does, however, complicate diplomatic processes.
Nunn-Lugar, otherwise known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction(CTR) program, is an innovative, bi-partisan solution to the problem of “loose nukes” that was widespread following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s. The original agreement absolved the US of any liability while conducting work in Russia. If any accident were to occur in the process of dismantling Russian weapons, the US and its contractors would not, under any circumstances, be held responsible. In lieu of this and a strengthened Russian economy, a Russian insider now claims “the agreement is thoroughly discriminating. It fails to take into account the changes that took place in the world after its signing in the 1990s.”
At the Act’s inception, the former Soviet states were in disarray – financially and politically. They did not have the resources nor the organizational capacity to dismantle and safeguard weapons of mass destruction, especially for compliance with the July 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). Cooperative Threat Reduction has been essential in ensuring that Russia holds up its end of the treaty. It was created to make sure dangerous materials, or weapons themselves, do not end up in the hands of terrorists. To date, CTR has deactivated 7,610 warheads and has removed all nuclear weapons from Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus (among other successes).
Despite Russia’s withdrawal, the Cooperative Threat Reduction program will still have opportunities to improve the security of nuclear, chemical and biological materials in other nations. In 2003, Congress passed the Nunn-Lugar Expansion Act; this gave the program the freedom to address proliferation problems outside of the former Soviet Union. The US can still utilize the program’s bureaucratic know-how to be an effective world steward and stop terrorist acquisition of weapons of mass destruction. Whether Congress will see the importance of this program when it does not include Russia, the nation with the “largest WMD repository in the world”, remains to be seen.
Russia’s rejection of the American proposal comes amidst its recent expulsion of US-led humanitarian aid group, USAID. This trend reflects the tense current relations between the US and Russia, due largely to conflicts about how to deal with Iran and Syria. However despite any diplomatic conflicts, nuclear security remains a large concern for the United States’ national security. We can only hope that for our sake, and for the world’s, that Russia will follow through with its claims to independently continue the programs associated with Nunn-Lugar and allocate the necessary funding.
“It is now impossible to overlook the “new” realities that look a lot like the old ones from the Cold War,” writes Jeffrey Lewis in his Foreign Policy article “Bar Nunn.” Relations between Russia and the US are certainly more strained than they have been in recent years; luckily, however, Nunn-Lugar has, for 21 years, made the world safer than it was during the Cold War. Though some outdated views from decades ago remain, a reinvigorated Cold War is extremely unlikely.
Our cooperation with Russia has taken a hit, but as William Tobey, of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center, notes, there are still many ways the US and Russia can partner to reduce the dangers of weapons of mass destruction in the world. We cannot stop fighting for a safer world, no matter how challenging it is. Russia will never align with American world views 100%, but it is clear the security of weapons of mass destruction is in all of our best interests.
