• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

  • Policy Issues
    • 25 Years Since September 11
    • Fact Sheets
    • Biological & Chemical Weapons
    • Countries
    • Pentagon and Weapons Spending
    • No First Use
    • Non-Proliferation
    • Nuclear Security
    • Nuclear Testing
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Missile Defense
  • Nukes of Hazard
    • Podcast
    • Blog
      • Next Up In Arms Control
    • Videos
  • Join Us
  • Press
  • About
    • Staff
    • Boards & Experts
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Financials and Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Search
You are here: Home / Archives for Nuclear Weapons

November 12, 2009

Nuclear Testing is a Toxic Relic

Kirk and I have an op-ed in the Register Citizen today on the CTBT. But, judging by our names in size 20 font and in all caps, it could just be about us. Here are a few highlights:

Nuclear weapons tests are a toxic relic of a past characterized by arms races and fallout shelters. Except for outlaw nations like North Korea, the world today has quit the business of testing nuclear weapons.

And adding a touch of bipartisan flavor…

Republicans in favor of the Test Ban Treaty include former Secretaries of State George P. Shultz and Henry Kissinger, and Colin Powell and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. These aren’t naïve idealists. They’re men who have devoted their lives to protecting the United States.

And finally, because it can’t be avoided in any CTBT discussion…

Due to technological advances, the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile no longer requires nuclear tests…The United States knows more about maintaining its nuclear weapons today than ever before, and its stockpile is more advanced, safer, and stronger than any other country’s in the world.

And there we have an easily digestible and nicely packaged op-ed. Enjoy!

Posted in: Center in the News, Nuclear Testing, Nukes of Hazard blog

September 14, 2009

2009-2010 College Debate Topic on Nuclear Weapons: A Guide to Background Materials, Publications, &Organizations

by Travis Sharp and Kingston Reif Updated December 3, 2009 DEBATE TOPIC Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal, and/or substantially reduce and restrict the role and/or missions of its nuclear weapons arsenal. BACKGROUND MATERIALS BY TOPIC 1. Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) START Resource Center (Center […]

Posted in: Nuclear Weapons, Nukes of Hazard blog

July 15, 2009

Factsheet on the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)

By Kingston Reif and Madeleine Foley PURPOSE OF FISSILE MATERIAL CUTOFF TREATY   A fissile material cutoff treaty would ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons purposes. Fissile materials, principally highly enriched uranium (HEU) and plutonium, are the essential ingredients for building nuclear weapons and powering nuclear reactors. The effective control and elimination […]

Posted in: Asia, China, Israel, Issue Center, Middle East, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, Russia, United States

July 6, 2009

Decrease Stockpiles, Increase Security

by Robert G. Gard and Travis Sharp Published on The Huffington Post on July 6, 2009 This week in Moscow, Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev are holding a summit meeting that will heavily influence the next decade of U.S.-Russian relations. If the two leaders strike up a personal and political rapport, it could unfreeze a […]

Posted in: Issue Center, Nuclear Weapons, Press & In the News on Nuclear Weapons

March 17, 2009

Are They? Or Are They Not?

The U.S. government should be more cautious in its statements about Iran’s nuclear intentions. If we want the Iranians to sit at the negotiating table, we need to stop faulting them for things we are not sure about. As our executive director John Isaacs said last month, “Negotiations with Iran are more likely to bear fruit if Iranians don’t feel like the United States is officially accusing them of being dead-set on going nuclear.”

The recent testimony by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair is a step in the right direction.  Blair told Congress this month that Iran has not yet made an executive decision to convert its low-enriched uranium stocks into highly-enriched fuel that could be used for nuclear weapons. Neither has Iran decided to develop the technology needed to load an atomic bomb onto a ballistic missile, according to Blair.

Whether or not the Islamic Republic has made up its mind to develop a nuclear weapon makes an enormous difference to U.S. strategy. “If we definitely know what Iran wants to do, that they are planning to build a nuclear weapon, then it is indeed a very dangerous situation,” Isaacs noted on NPR’s Morning Edition in February. “If they’re only moving in that direction and haven’t made a final decision, not only does that take some time urgency off, but it also means there’s an opportunity for the Obama administration to try to launch some negotiations with the Iranian leadership.”

Iran can move toward a nuclear bomb “if it chooses to do so,” said Blair (emphasis mine.)  Added Blair: “Although we do not know whether Iran currently intends to develop nuclear weapons, we assess Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop one.” This leaves the window open for U.S.-Iranian diplomacy.

With his carefully picked words, Blair walked a fine line and aimed to strike a cautionary but not overhyped note about available intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program. Blair set a useful example for officials to follow when discussing delicate questions regarding Iran.

Blair’s statements, however, seem to have created quite a bit of confusion. Blair appeared to contradict earlier statements by CIA director Leon Panetta, who told Congress that, based on the information he’d seen, “there is no question” that Iran is seeking a nuclear capability. Something similar happened earlier this month when Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen told journalists that Iran had enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon on the same day that Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared that Iran “was not close to a weapon.”

If administration officials can’t get their message straight, how can we expect the Iranians to know where we stand? The Obama administration should stay away from the microphones when debating what is inside the minds of Iranian leaders. Blair’s nuanced language is welcome and should be the standard throughout the executive branch.

Posted in: Iran Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Nukes of Hazard blog

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 141
  • Page 142
  • Page 143
  • Page 144
  • Page 145
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • A Costly Silence: The Choice Is Ours October 29, 2026
  • A Costly Silence: Eisenhower’s Warning October 29, 2026
  • Why aren’t your policymakers talking about the trillion-dollar Pentagon budget? October 29, 2026
  • You can destroy a facility. What about knowledge? October 20, 2026
  • BONUS Episode: The True Costs of War – Moderated Question and Answer Session October 16, 2026

Footer

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.546.0795

Issues

  • 25 Years Since September 11
  • Fact Sheets
  • Biological and Chemical Weapons
  • Countries
  • Pentagon and Weapons Spending
  • No First Use
  • Non-Proliferation
  • Nuclear Security
  • Nuclear Testing
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Missile Defense

Countries

  • China
  • France
  • India and Pakistan
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • North Korea
  • Russia
  • United Kingdom

Explore

  • Nukes of Hazard blog
  • Nukes of Hazard podcast
  • Nukes of Hazard videos
  • Front and Center
  • Fact Sheets

About

  • About
  • Meet the Staff
  • Boards & Experts
  • Press
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Financials and Annual Reports
  • Contact Us
  • Council for a Livable World
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

© 2026 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Privacy Policy

Charity Navigator GuideStar Seal of Transparency