Nuclear Security Summit: Realistic Expectations
Tomorrow's Nuclear Security Summit in Washington is a "big deal," to paraphrase Vice President Biden. With 47 countries represented, it is the largest gathering of nations on U.S. soil since the founding conference of the United Nations met in San Francisco in 1945. But what has been missing in some press accounts of the summit is a realistic sense of what can be expected from the meeting. In today's New York Times, David Sanger and William Broad state that "for all its symbollism and ceremony, this meeting has quite limited goals." In my view, while the summit has a clear focus, it is centered on a crucial and ambitious set of tasks. There are other pressing nuclear issues, but taking measures to keep existing bomb-making materials out of the hands of terrorists -- the focus of the summit -- is probably the most important.
In his Global Security Blog in today's UK Guardian, Julian Borger suggests that "The copies of the summit's final communique and workplan that I've seen inevitably read like the lowest common denominator documents that they are." But Borger goes on to note that the statements that come out of the summit are not likely to be its most important outcome. Of equal or greater importance will be specific actions taken by participating countries regarding bomb-making materials within their own borders. In this regard, there are already a number of concrete steps in the works, including a decision by Chile to get rid of its highly-enriched uranium (HEU) and an announcement by the United States and Russia that they will each make 34 metric tons of plutonium unusable for weapons-making purposes. Also, Canada and the Ukraine have suggested that they will convert nuclear reactors using HEU-fueled (materials usable for bombs) to reactors to low-enriched uranium (LEU, not usable for bombs). If all of the 47 nations present at the summit make some commitment, even if modest, it will have been a rousing success.
One key element in the effort to keep the world's deadliest weapons out of terrorist hands is financing -- money to pay for consolidating nuclear weapons-making materials in fewer sites and better guarding the sites that remain, among other tasks. The Obama administration fell far short in its first budget, allocating slightly less than the Bush administration had done in its final year in office. But in this year's budget, funds devoted to these purposes have been increased by a healthy 31%.
This issue is as complicated as it is urgent, but unlike other complex issues one could cite there are prospects for real progress over the next few years. In the U.S. context, one key benefit is that unlike treaties, action in this arena does not require a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Further easing the way towards substantive action is the longstanding support of Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), who played a lead role -- along with former Senate Armed Services Committee chair Sam Nunn -- in creating the first programs to secure nuclear materials and destroy excess nuclear delivery vehicles in the former Soviet Union.
Given that this is an issue where you can't tell the players without a scorecard, there are numerous resources emerging that will keep track of what is going on. An umbrella group is the Fissile Materials Working Group (fissile materials are those that can be used in or adapted for the making of a nuclear weapon), whose web site will be a repository for analysis of governmental actions in implementing pledges made during the Nuclear Security Summit.
And a good report on how to "keep the lid" on bomb-making materials has been produced by the British American Security Council (BASIC).
The bottom line is that in an era in which cynicism is often the default reaction to any effort to bring about change, President Obama's push for the international community to take much stronger measures to protect or eliminate bomb-making materials has a real chance of success, and shouldn't be counted out at the outset.
The long term goal has been, and is, to attack Iran. The selling point right now is that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb. Never mind that the evidence that Iran is about to have a nuke bomb is sketchy or fictional.
Selling points of the past (the hostages of 1979, rogue state supports terrorism, Iran is about to vaporize our Dearest Ally, etc) did not quite make the sale.
The sales campaign is making progress, but slowly, as the American public has vague recollections of having been bamboozled some time in the last decade about WMDs in Iraq.
The Americans' true goal : military control of The Gulf. The oil and gas of The Gulf are absolutely essential to the USA. But for some reason we cannot have an adult conversation about this fact. However no president wants to tell the American public that gasoline is going to be rationed. Can you imagine ? He would be hated.
An adult conversation about our need to seize military control of the oil in The Gulf is not possible. Americans prefer fake discussions nowadays. Every serious issue in our country has to be debated in a faked-up way. We have to pretend we care about 'Democracy' in Iran or some such horse manure.
Are you, colleagues, afraid of 'terrorists' ? I am not. Sorry, the whole scam of scaring the public with 'terrorists' is way past the sell-by date.
April 12, 2010 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is the smartest man in the world. All must get on there knees and honor him at this summit. This is a realist expectation, and if you do not do this you are a moron.
April 12, 2010 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
But if you are unable to write and spell English, then fall in line and repeat the mantras of the flat earth society tea partyers who believe -if they believe in anything other than rudely shouting crude stock lies- that Saddam attacked the World Trade Center and that Obama was born in Kenya as the son of Osama.
April 13, 2010 3:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
A view on the NPR from Iran:
"This document will definitely hurt Obama's image in the world because it shows an uncivilized superpower that bullies other nations with its nuclear bombs," a Tehran University political scientist told the author. "From Iran's point of view, the US government has made a serious error by going public with its aggressive nuclear intentions that defy the UN charter and international law," the Tehran professor said.
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LD10Ak02.html
That is also the widespread view here in northern New Mexico, where we can see for what the "modernization" dollars are earmarked - a $5 billion dollar facility at Los Alamos that only make sense ONLY if NEW nuclear weapons are contemplated.
As Jonathan Schell, less than thrilled by the new START, wrote in the Nation: “If this trend continues, it is entirely possible that the ultimate mockery will occur: nuclear arsenals will march forward into the future under a banner that reads Ban the Bomb.”
What are your thoughts as to whether all this "ban the bomb" talk is merely clever PR cover to continue along the path of the US as sole arbiter of hard power? Shouldn't we be paying more attention to the Nuclear Weapons facilities the U.S. is constructing, rather than political posturing?
For a US law professor's view re the US defying "the UN charter and international law", try:
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2009/08/20_boyle_criminality_deterrence.php?print
April 12, 2010 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Inokeah states, "Obama is the smartest man in the world. All must get on "there" knees and honor him at this summit."
I can hardly wait to see them on "there" knees, bowing to the new messiah. --> China. Which is not here, but over "there".
April 12, 2010 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is a continuation of the same vulgar Bush doctrine: "You are either with us or against us, and if you are against us, we will blow up to pieces."
It is easier this way. Mrs. Clinton does not have to negotiate with Israel and requested it to destroy its nuclear arsenal and with Iran to requested it to stop its crazy longing for a nuclear weapon.
It is a good exercise in propaganda to confusion the American public.
"If you can not convince them, bamboozle them" once said Benjamin Disraeli
One would have expected better from a President who was elected on the mantra of change.
Vulgarity is deeply rooted in Washington.
Shame on you Obama!
Another disappointed fan!
April 12, 2010 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, William Hartung, for this timely, well-informed and informative column.
April 13, 2010 3:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I am one of the bamboozled. I distinctly remember the legislation Obama and Lugar wrote early in his Senate term that was praised to the hilt by international specialists in weapons control as being thorough, as up to date as possible and generally about all they could wish for.
I had the distinct impression that history - a specific action on his long held and articulated views - and probably the preparations for this summit and START, are what earned him the Peace Prize. (Nor does that seem to have hurt this process.) Along with the promise not to immediately retaliate with nukes, the ground work laid in DC can continue to expand with further contacts and the international networking going on.
Personally I do have concerns about the middle east oil issues, and some with both terrorists and international crime (which has the money to buy ready made weapons, not to mention scientists and the means to move anything). What galls me is the refusal to recognize how much warfare and damage have been done with conventional weapons*. The destruction has been massive - especially when we account for the genocidal effects of the DU tipped bombs.
Does anyone remember Al Qaqa? The huge storage repository that BushCo was warned about by the International agency doing weapons checks in Iraq. They were reminded again to secure it after we invaded. A large battalion of infantry went by it on the way to Bhagdad but were told by CentCom to keep going. By the time anyone got back, 600,000+ pounds of explosives had been looted. Whenever you see or hear about IEDs, amputees, etc. remember Al Qaqa.
Then there are the nanotechnology weapons. Nukes are frankly obsolete. Like bio and chemo weapons, using them cannot be contained - the shtuff will be in the air and water with no way to control where it ultimately ends up. Much like DU particles.
*Case from the news: the video of soldiers blowing away a bunch of innocent civilians and a Reuters journalist. It all adds up to hundreds of thousands dead, millions displaced, incredible numbers of orphans, and rising numbers of cancer and genetically deformed babies.
This may be a small start, but it is a start. Those of us who know the other issues need to be in touch with those who are making this start so they know the low information loophole has limits.
April 13, 2010 5:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is this a reminder that, "there is no their there"?!
Realistic Expectations in the New York Times is only doable if you are a liberal democrate. In the Obama World, where the president can disapear into the getto drug world without the press corpse, we all know what "Great Expectations" are.
April 14, 2010 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nuclear security will be a point of rumors for all the times probably. While many countries have their hidden red buttons which can be pressed some time - we are all living in danger in our apartments. Btw, no missle security can hold a serious nuclear strike((((
April 16, 2010 5:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks a lot for enjoying this beauty article with me. I am appreciating it very much! Looking forward to another great article. Good luck to the author! all the best!
birthday wishes sms
February 18, 2011 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for making such a cool project. I've been checking the site for the Windows version, but I never left a comment about it. I know you are working hard and doing it for free so you shouldn't feel rushed or anything.
Suicide Poems
February 20, 2011 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very nicely written post it contains useful information for me. I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thank you for the post.
Online Dating Sites
February 26, 2011 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post is nicely written and it contains many good things for me. I am glad to find your impressive way of writing the post. Now it become easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thanks for sharing the post.
Love Poems
March 9, 2011 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent read, I just passed this onto a colleague who was doing a little research on that. And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that: Thanks for lunch!
Medical Transportation
March 10, 2011 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its not the case that reader must be completely agreed with author's views about article. So this is what happened with me, anyways its a good effort, I appreciate it. Thanks
Birthday Wishes
March 23, 2011 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting post and thanks for sharing. Some things in here I have not thought about before.Thanks for making such a cool post which is really very well written.will be referring a lot of friends about this.Keep blogging loans to payday
March 29, 2011 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very good points you wrote here..Great stuff...I think you've made some truly interesting points.Keep up the good work. loans to payday
March 29, 2011 1:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for sharing. i really appreciate it that you shared with us such a informative post..
Dissertation Writing Essay Writing
March 30, 2011 6:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
The difference between the right word and the almost right word is really a large matter — it's the difference between a lightning bug and the lightning.
Research Paper Writing Term Paper Writing
March 30, 2011 6:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I will forward this article to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read. Thanks for sharing!
Thesis Writing
March 30, 2011 6:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.
historic ship models
April 2, 2011 1:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
The post is written in very a good manner and it entails many useful information for me. I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thank you for the post.
kitchen cabinets orange county
April 2, 2011 4:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another great example of innovation, I am glad to find it. There are so many developers working on this segment but this is one of the best innovative idea ever. Thanks for sharing it here.
Sales Tax
April 3, 2011 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I enjoyed reading your posts. thanks for sharing. impressive page indeed.mothers day flowers delivery Algiers
April 25, 2011 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
motorcycle transport, motorcycle shipper, motorcycle transportation, motorcycle shipping, motorcycle transporters, motorcycle transport.
April 29, 2011 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.
April 29, 2011 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
auto transport, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, auto transport.
April 29, 2011 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink