AFTER NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL: WHAT HAPPENS?

Literature on strategic studies consulted include: Allison Graham et al., Cooperative Denuclearization. From Pledges to Deeds, Harvard Univ., Jan. 1993, “Overview”, pp. 1–25, Chapter 7, Appendix I-C, pp. 62–70; Baneijee Jyotirmoy , Strategic Studies, Allied, Calcutta, 1998, p. 141, pp. 192–227, Chapter IX, pp. 139–149.

This chapter deals with details of nuclear arms control agreements and includes those on chemical and biological weapons. Besides Russia, three other states, viz.. Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, had nukes deployed on their territories which they pledged to renounce. The four Former Soviet Union (FSU) states, along with the USA, committed themselves to ratify and implement the START Treaty at Lisbon in May 1992; Karforma Kaushik , Preventing the Armageddon: Environmental and Nuclear Risk Management in the Former Soviet Union, 1991-1998, Jadavpur Univ., Calcutta, 10 March 2002, pp. 16–17 (unpublished M.A. Term Paper); “Issue Paper. Preventing the Proliferation of Tactical Nuclear Weapons: An Agenda for Enhanced Transparency and Data Sharing”, Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign (NTRC), Washington DC, 13 March 2002 (courtesy NTRC Research Director Jason W. Forrester).

US-Soviet arms control data in US Department of State publications as follows: Security and Arms Control: The Search for a More Stable Peace (Henceforth SAC), Sept. 1984, pp. 26–35, 51–57; A Short Guide to U.S. Arms Control Policy (henceforth Guide), Oct. 1984, pp. 1–8, 20–30; A Chronology of United States Arms Control and Security Initiatives 1946-1990 (henceforth Chronology), May 1990, pp. 24–33, 45–53, 67–81, 100–116.

The figure agreed upon at Reykjavik was 1,600 SNDVs for each side, with the ceiling of 6000 warheads on these. Chronology, op. cit., p. 107; the sublimits were 4900 ballistic missile warheads and 1540 on 154 heavy missiles, ibid., p. 111. These figures should be seen in relation with the overall US-Soviet nuclear strategic balance of the mid-1980s as follows:

Russia proposed the reduced ceiling of 1500 missiles for each side as against the START III-envisaged figures of 2000-2500. President Bush also favours deeper cuts in offensive nuclear forces but under his controversial plan for National Missile Defence (NMD).

Allison, op. cit. , p. 5; Chapter 2, pp. 87–88.

Feveison Harold A. (ed.), The Nuclear’ Turning Point. A Blueprint for Deep Cuts and De-Alerting of Nuclear Weapons, Brookings, Washington DC, 1999, Chapter 6, p. 104; Falkenrath A. Richard , “The Soviet Union’s Deadly Nuclear Legacy”, Encarta 2001, CD 2.

Feveison , ibid., Chapter 2, pp. 89–106. The preceding discussion on US nuclear wastes in “Black holes in nuclear plant security?” MSNBC. com.

Feveison , ibid. , p. 91. An IAEA agreement, signed in 1980 but entering force 7 years later, fixes responsibility of nuclear transportation on states while the material is within their territory or aboard its ships and aircraft, www.iaea.org , “Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material”; The Times of India, Calcutta, 19 April 2002, p. 18 (henceforth TOI).

Feveison , ibid. , note 2, p. 102.

Ibid ., Chapter 3, pp. 117–118; Falkenrath, op. cit .

Feveison , ibid ., Chapter 4, pp. 138–145.

Banerjee , Strategic Studies, op. cit., pp. 115–116.

Allison , op. cit., Chapter 6, pp. 177–178; Karforma, op. cit., p. 12. ‘Broken Arrow’ is US code for a nuclear weapons-related mishap. Details in text of the present article. A thriller by that title with Jeff Rovin as author (Boulevard Books, N. York, Feb. 1996) is available as also the movie.

Allison , ibid ., pp. 178–179; Feveison, op. cit., p. 104.

Allison , op. cit., pp. 201–202.

Ibid. , p. 203. On the special DOD jargon, CNN.com interactive: Kennedy Bruce , “Cold War. The Bomb”; texts of Senator Ms. Landrieu’s bill dt. 27 June 2001, 107th, Cong., 1st. sess., S. 1117, http://justice.policy.net. and Representative Spratt & Ms. Tauscher’s bill dt. 27 June 2001, 107 H. Cong., 1st. sess., H.R. 2351, 18761 pdf. However, US Congress scaled back funds for nuclear initiative programme, though these were reportedly modest. Begun in 1998 the programme aimed at providing nonmilitary employment to Russia’s scientists. Congress was annoyed that Moscow did not allow the West full access to Russia’s nuclear cities; Miller Judith Gordon Michael R. , “U.S. Review on Russia Urges Keeping Most Arms Control”, The New York Times (henceforthnyt.com), 16 July 2001; “Issue paper. Increasing Funding and Enhancing Implementation of U.S.-Russian Non-Proliferation Cooperation”, NTRC online, op. cit., 13 March 2002; “Issue Paper. A Working Legislative Agenda for 2002: The Nuclear Terrorism Threat Reduction Act of 2002”, NTRC online, 9 April 2002, p. 1; Falkenrath, op. cit .

Karforma , op. cit., p. 16. On the Chechen question, Irena Koudryashova, Moscow State Instt. of International Relations, “Terrorism in Chechnya—Its Components and Ideology”, abstract of speech delivered at seminar on International Terrorism held at Jadavpur University, Calcutta, during 6–8 March 2002.

Feveison , op. cit., p. 104; US Dept, of Energy, A Report Card on the Department of Energy’s Nonproliferation Programs with Russia, (draft), 10 Jan. 2001, pdf. 19143 (henceforth DOE Report); Interest Alert, UPI, 2002, “New Urgency to Russian Nuclear Security”, http://app.quotemedia.com .

Feveison , ibid ., pp. 110–111.

Kumar Sumita , “Pakistan’s Jehadi Apparatus: Goals and Methods”, Strategic Analysis, N. Delhi, vol. XXIV, No. 12, March 2001, pp. 2179–2198.

Allison lays down a detailed proposal for an International Plutonium Depository, op. cit., Chapter, 3, pp. 125–127. According to the plan suggested, the Pu need not be moved out of the country willing to surrender it since such movement could be dangerous and expensive. Instead, an international safeguards system will swing into action, upgrade the in-country storage as per international standards, and provide monetary compensation to the donor state.

On Pakistan’s close ties with the radicals in Afghanistan, Sreedhar, “Pakistan-Taliban-Al Qaida: New Trends in Terrorism and Violence”, Strategic Analysis, N. Delhi, vol. XXV, No. 9, Dec. 2001, pp. 1021–1028; Dawn.com , “Law soon on nuclear threat reduction steps: US”, 11 March 2002; Miller & Gordon, op. cit.

Strategic Digest, N. Delhi, vol. XXX, No. 11, Nov. 2000, pp. 1599–1603. The Pu can be irradiated into reactor fuel or immobilised with high-level radioactive waste suitable for geological disposal. The US, and even more so Russia, prefer to convert to reactor fuel. Germany, no doubt with the Greens sharing power, prefers burial rather than recycling. The US Govt, study of Russia’s nuclear abundance in DOE Report, op. cit.; data on US funds, p. 22.

Bunn Mathew et al., “Retooling Russia’s nuclear cities”, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, June/July 1998, pp. 44–50, quoted in Karforma, op. cit., p. 23.

Allison , op. cit., “Conclusion”, p. 285.

Feveison , op. cit., p. 3.

Wald Mathew L. , “U.S. Balks on Plan to Take Plutonium out of Warheads” nyt.com.

Aug. 2001; Aftergood Steven , Secrecy News, fas.org, 27 June 2001; The Moscow Times.com , 23 May 2001; Pincus Walter , “U.S. Studies Developing New Nuclear Bomb”, The Washington Post.com , 15 April 2001; Djaz Mansoor Woolsey R. James , “How secure is Pakistan’s plutonium?” The News International (online, Pakistani site), 29 Nov. 2001.

Feveison , op. cit., Chapter 6, p. 101; DontBlowIt.com.

Feveison , ibid., note 22, p. 113.

Ibid., Chapter 11, p. 216; alert@stratfor.com. 10 April 2002.

Ibid ., p. 217.

US Dept, of Energy, Plutonium: The First 50 years, DOE/DP-0137 (Feb. 1996), ibid., pp. 216–217.

Feveison , op. cit., p. 224; Chronology, op. cit., p. 114.

Feveison , ibid ., p. 227.

For a Russian view of the US edge in ‘breakout’s of START Treaties, Arbatov Alexei , “Deep Cuts and De-alerting: A Russian Perspective”, ibid ., pp. 311–312.

Karforma , op. cit., pp. 18–19. See also Encarta 2002, CD 3; Nunn in “Issue paper: Increasing Funding and Enhancing Implementation of U.S.-Russian Non-Prliferation Cooperation”, NTRC online, 13 March 2002.

IAEA , ibid., pp. 91, 116. The CEG consists of 10 states (Belgium, Holland, Finland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, France, the UK, the USA and Russia) and three international organisations including The European Commission. CEG has established a database for about 200 projects. On the poor financial condition of Russia’s huge navy, Bivens Matt , “Troubled Waters”, Moscow Times.com , 23 March 1996; Katz Rachel , “End of Naval Ambition Spells Doom for Yards”, Moscow Times.com , 26 March 1996.

Strategic Digest, op. cit., p. 1603; Pravda.ru (online English ed.), 22 Nov. 2001.

MSNBC.com, op. cit.; Shankar Thom , “Military Scuttles Strategy Requiring ‘2-war’s Capability”, nyt.com , 13 July 2001; threat status: 1. Green: low, 2. blue: guarded, 3. Yellow: elevated, 4. Orange: high, 5. Red: severe. The system works like severe weather advisories. At red alert, e.g., airports and subways could be shut down. The new alert system will take its place besides other alert systems already installed for specific functions like transport, weather, etc. The new system is, of course, open to discussion and further modification. As of April 2002 the US was on ‘yellow’s alert, explained Tom Ridge. To prevent future ‘shoe bombers’s special x-ray machines and other highly sensitive radiation detectors are being installed at US airports. MSNBC.com , 12 March 2002, nyt.com and CNN.com Quick News, 1 March 2002. On the Pentagon’s latest review, nyt.com , 2 Oct. 2001; Giacomo Carl , “U.S. See Increased Potential for nuclear Attack”, nyt.com , 31 Oct. 2001; “U.S. steps up nuclear security”, BBC.co.uk , 31 Oct. 2001. Al Qaeda leaflets reported in TOI, 9 April 2002, p. 1. Other related reports in Reuters online, 2 March 2002, indiatimes.com , 28 March 2002, CNN.com/World , 23 March 2002.

Nunn Sam Co-Chairman , Nuclear Threat Reduction Initiative, “Toward a New Security Framework”, Woodrow Wilson Center, 3 Oct. 2001 (file 19180).