Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  HEU Deal Eliminates Equivalent of 7,000 Warheads

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S.-Russian “Megatons to Megawatts” program has so far eliminated about 175 metric tons of Russian highly enriched uranium — the equivalent of 7,000 nuclear warheads, the U.S. Enrichment Corporation announced Sunday (see GSN, Oct. 4, 2002).

Under the program, USEC purchases uranium taken from Russian nuclear warheads for later use as fuel for nuclear power plants.  On average, one in 10 U.S. homes and businesses receive electricity generated from fuel purchased through the program, the USEC release said.  To date, USEC and its Russian partner Techsnabexport (TENEX) have completed more than one-third of the 20-year agreement to eliminate the equivalent of 20,000 nuclear warheads.

“We are extremely proud of the ongoing success of the Megatons to Megawatts program,” USEC President and Chief Executive Officer William Timbers said in a press statement.  “Over the past nine years, USEC and TENEX have been continuously engaged in establishing and maintaining a strong, flexible and cooperative working relationship.  The Megatons to Megawatts program has significantly enhanced world security by steadily reducing stockpiles of nuclear bomb-grade materials, while creating a clean, valuable resource — nuclear fuel,” he said.

Nonproliferation experts have praised the Megatons to Megawatts program for its role in reducing nuclear weapon stockpiles.

The program is “one of the few demonstrable successes, so far, in nuclear weapon disposition,” Nuclear Control Institute President Edwin Lyman told Global Security Newswire today.  “There is little doubt that the goals of the program are worthwhile,” he added.

There have been some concerns, however, with how the program has been implemented, Lyman said.  For example, there has been too much emphasis placed on making the program profitable for USEC, which has led to negotiation problems with the program’s Russian agents, he said.  Last year, USEC and Russia were engaged in a pricing dispute that led to a halt in Russian uranium shipments (see GSN, May 10, 2002).  The dispute was ultimately resolved after the two parties agreed to implement a market-based pricing mechanism for the uranium shipments (see GSN, June 20, 2002).

Back to top

CTBT:  Philippines Signs CTBTO Facility Agreement

The Philippines yesterday signed an agreement with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization, allowing treaty officials to work on nuclear-test detection facilities in the country.

Treaty verification plans call for the Philippines to host two auxiliary seismic stations in Mindanao and Luzon as well as a radionuclide air-sampling station at Quezon City, according to an organization release.

The facilities are part of the International Monitoring System, which consists of more than 300 worldwide stations designed to detect nuclear explosions.

The organization has now signed facility agreements with 25 countries that host treaty verification equipment (CTBTO release, April 14).

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Softens Stance on Dialogue

North Korea Saturday said it is prepared to drop its insistence that it would only talk with the United States in a bilateral meeting, according to a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman (see GSN, April 11).

“If the U.S. is ready to make a bold switchover in its Korea policy for a settlement of the nuclear issue, the D.P.R.K. will not stick to any particular dialogue format,” the spokesman said.

The spokesman said, however, that the issue is one that must be settled between the United States and North Korea.

“The outcome of the meeting of the [U.N. Security Council] held on April 9 clearly indicated that the nuclear issue is a matter to be settled between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S.,” according to the spokesman.  “The U.S. asserts a ‘multilateral framework’ to be participated in by countries around the D.P.R.K. but their Korea policy and stand of desiring a peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue are clear by and large.  What matters is the U.S.,” he added.

While the spokesman said that Pyongyang would not insist on a specific format for dialogue, he still called for “direct talks” with Washington (Korean Central News Agency, April 12).

North Korea’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper, however, yesterday criticized the United States and said the Iraq war “launched by the U.S. imperialists” had “put the world peace and stability in a great peril.”

 “The U.S. is now keen to ignite another Korean war after concluding the Iraqi war,” the newspaper said (Korean Central News Agency, April 13).

The conflict in Iraq, however, may have been the impetus for Pyongyang to ease its stance on bilateral negotiations, the Associated Press reported.

“North Korea’s softening position seems to have mainly come because it wasn’t in an advantageous position internationally,” said Ra Jong-il, South Korea’s top security adviser.

“This war on Iraq seems to have become a significant opportunity in deciding the landscape of international politics,” Ra added (Soo-Jeong Lee, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, April 14).

U.S. President George W. Bush said yesterday that U.S. success in the Iraq conflict led to the North Korean shift.

“I think that people have got to know that we are serious about stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction and that each situation requires a different response,” Bush said.  “But we are making good progress in North Korea,” he added (Mike Allen, Washington Post, April 14).

After U.S. successes in Iraq, North Korea could choose to hasten efforts to develop nuclear weapons or it could seek a peaceful solution to the Korean crisis, the Financial Times reported.

“Hopefully, this statement means they have chosen the sensible option,” a diplomat said (Andrew Ward, Financial Times, April 13).

The U.S. State Department acknowledged the North Korean statement.

“We noted the statement with interest,” State Department spokeswoman Amanda Batt said Saturday, adding that “we expect to follow up through appropriate diplomatic channels” (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, April 13).

Bush administration officials were more forthright with their excitement over the latest development in the nuclear crisis.

“It looks like President Bush was smarter than everyone said he was,” a senior administration official said (Doug Struck, Washington Post, April 13).

The new development represents “something of a vindication for the administration,” according to Robert Gallucci, the chief negotiator of the 1994 Agreed Framework to freeze North Korean nuclear development.  North Korea’s decision, however, might have come after Chinese and Russian pressure on Pyongyang, Gallucci said (Allen, Washington Post).

Back to top

United States:  Los Alamos Produces High-Purity Plutonium Sources

U.S. researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory have produced 1,200 highly pure plutonium sources, some of which will be used to maintain the laboratory’s nuclear weapons program, Science Letter reported today.

This is the first time since 1987 that the New Mexico laboratory has produced the highly pure plutonium sources, which are used as primary analytical chemistry standards.

“This was a major challenge,” said Gerald Coriz, of the Laboratory’s Nuclear Materials Technology Division.

The sources weigh 1 gram each and are about the size of a hearing aid, according to Science Letter.

Scientists used a new extrusion, or pressing, method to produce the sources.  The old method, which involved “nibbling” away at a plutonium plate, might have contaminated the plutonium with wear from the nibbling tool, Coriz said (Science Letter, April 14).

Back to top

North Korea:  South Korean Leader Says Nuclear Evidence Lacking

South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said yesterday that “there is no clear evidence” to support U.S. allegations that Pyongyang has developed nuclear weapons (see related GSN story, today).

Roh said that he agrees with the United States that North Korea must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons but he questioned U.S. reports that North Korea already had such devices at their disposal, the Washington Post reported.

“I don’t think it is well-grounded information,” he said.

Roh, who took office in February, nevertheless stressed his desire to maintain close relations with the United States. 

“There will be no change in the fact that the United States will remain our closest and most important ally,” Roh said.

While he claimed that Washington and Seoul share a common approach to the North Korean nuclear crisis, he said that he could not agree with the White House refusal to rule out the use of force.

Pyongyang is “petrified” by the recent U.S. success in Iraq but the North Korean situation can be resolved peacefully, according to Roh.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Il must choose between two paths in the future, Roh said.

“Both roads are dangerous and tough for him.  But one is dead-ended and one is open-ended,” he said.  The open-ended road involves Pyongyang abandoning “nuclear and missile ambitions” in exchange for “security guarantees and aid from the United States, South Korea and neighboring countries,” according to Roh.

While North Korea has previously made moves that are “beyond our common-sense understanding,” Kim is “wise enough to choose the open-ended road,” Roh added (Doug Struck, Washington Post, April 11).

Meanwhile, Japan has refused to recognize North Korea’s withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the Japan Times reported today (see GSN, April 10).

“We do not think there is an international consensus that (North Korea) left the treaty,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said.

The treaty calls for withdrawing nations to notify other signatory nations three months in advance.  North Korea announced Jan. 10 that it was withdrawing from the NPT, effective immediately, but it is unclear whether it notified the proper parties using the appropriate diplomatic channels.

“Japan has doubts over the validity of North Korea’s withdrawal,” Senior Vice Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi said yesterday (Kanako Takahara, Japan Times, April 11).

Back to top

CTBT:  Gambia Signs Treaty

Gambia signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Wednesday (see GSN, Sept. 18, 2002).  To date, 167 nations have signed the treaty and 98 have ratified it, including 31 of the 44 nations whose ratifications are necessary for the treaty to enter into force (see GSN, March 18; CTBT Organization release, April 11).

For further information, see:

CTBT Text

States Parties to the CTBT (Federation of American Scientists)

CTBT Organization

Back to top

North Korea:  IAEA Recognizes North Korean NPT Withdrawal Today

In the eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea’s withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty becomes official today, USA Today reported (see GSN, April 9).

North Korea 90 days ago said it was withdrawing immediately from the treaty, but the IAEA considers the withdrawal effective three months after its announcement (see GSN, Jan. 10).  By withdrawing, North Korea becomes the first country to quit the 33-year-old pact (Barbara Slavin, USA Today, April 10).

Pyongyang yesterday restated its view that the conflict in Iraq proved the need for a strong military deterrence against the United States (see GSN, April 7).

“The Iraqi war launched by the U.S. pre-emptive attack clearly proves that a war can be prevented and the security of the country and the nation can be ensured only when one has physical deterrent force,” according to the Korea Central News Agency, the state-run media outlet.

North Korea also repeated its assertion that U.N. debate on the nuclear crisis is a hostile act.

“The U.N. Security Council discussion of the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula itself is a prelude to war,” said North Korea’s Pyongyang Radio (Christopher Torchia, Associated Press/Wilmington (N.C.) Star, April 10).

U.S. Army HQ Will Leave Seoul

After negotiations with South Korean officials, the United States agreed yesterday to move its Army headquarters out of Seoul, the New York Times reported (see GSN, April 8).

The headquarters will be relocated to the south of the country, potentially to another U.S. military base.

Officials suggested that a 16,000-soldier U.S. division could also be shifted south, possibly after a second round of talks next month.

“There is going to be a realignment,” Richard Lawless, deputy assistant defense secretary for Asian-Pacific affairs, said yesterday.

Military realignment is also on the agenda for talks between U.S. President George W. Bush and South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun, when Roh visits Washington in May (James Brooke, New York Times, April 10).

Back to top

North Korea:  Security Council Makes No Progress; Envoy Says Talks Possible

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. Security Council this morning held its first meeting in almost two months on North Korea without making any progress on how to deal with the possibility of Pyongyang’s development of nuclear weapons, and no new council consultations are scheduled (see GSN, April 8).

In January, Pyongyang announced that it was withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (see GSN, Jan. 10) after expelling International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors in December (see GSN, Dec. 30, 2002).  That withdrawal becomes effective tomorrow, 90 days after North Korea’s announcement, although North Korea has asserted its withdrawal took effect immediately after its January declaration. 

The IAEA Board of Governors adopted a resolution declaring North Korea “in noncompliance” with its safeguard agreement under the NPT that ensures nuclear material is not used in military programs and referred the issue to the council (see GSN, Feb. 12).  On Feb. 20, the council turned the issue over to national experts to explore further.  Those experts have not yet reported back.  This is the first council meeting on North Korea since then. 

Speaking after today’s closed-door session, U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said, “The United States attaches great importance to close consultations with Security Council members and with countries in the region.”  He added, “We haven’t taken any option off the table.”  

Mexican Ambassador Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, the council president for April, said, “Members of the council expressed their concerns and the council will continue to follow-up developments.  There is nothing more to add.” 

No council delegate referred to the question of sanctions in connection with today’s meeting.  British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said yesterday, “We’re taking it quite slowly and steadily at the moment. … We’re in no rush, there is still some diplomacy on the ground.” 

Russian Ambassador Sergei Lavrov said this morning going into the meeting that he would “like to see the members of the council strongly reiterating their position in favor of a political solution.  Condemnations would not help.  Whatever multilateral formats might be used, they would not produce a result without a direct dialogue between the United States and North Korea.”

North Korea’s position is that the matter should be addressed bilaterally between itself and the United States.  Washington wants multilateral discussions, either through a regional meeting or through the Security Council.

Secretary General Kofi Annan’s adviser on North Korea, Maurice Strong, said at a news conference yesterday, “The positions of both [North Korea and the United States] could be accommodated … to permit them to meet in settings both multilaterally and bilaterally.”  The gap between them is narrowing “so that it should no longer be a real reason for delaying.” 

“It is something of a paradox in that both sides seem to be willing to move in the direction that the other is primarily requiring and yet they still have not been able to agree on the modalities of a meeting,” said Strong.  

Strong said the council “cannot substitute for direct negotiations, perhaps it can facilitate them.”  If the council imposes sanctions, “that will escalate the confrontational nature of this” but it would help “if the movement is in the direction of trying to create a settlement on the two main issues, which are security guarantees for the North Koreans and at the same time [commitments] that they will not move towards the development of nuclear weapons,” he said.

Annan was less specific about the makeup of any negotiations.  “The next step really is to get the parties talking and to find a format that will be acceptable to both parties and bring them to the table to talk,” he said this morning.

Strong said North Korea’s “primary concern” is what it sees as the threat to its security from the United States.  If that threat can be addressed bilaterally, he said he believed Pyongyang would be willing to discuss multilateral issues, including halting its nuclear program and rejoining the NPT.

In answer to a question about his earlier comments that war was possible as a result of the North Korea standoff, Strong said, “I simply said there is a risk of war. … The risks are there. I certainly don’t think war is inevitable or even likely, but certainly possible.”

Negroponte said the United States “has proposed a multilateral forum to discuss paths to verifiable elimination of the North Korean nuclear weapons program.”  He added, “Diplomatic contacts are taking place in the region [are] multifaceted. ... This is an issue of active diplomacy between ourselves and countries in the region.”

Negroponte said North Korea’s actions “threaten the stability of Northeast Asia.  It is not just a matter of getting the North to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions.  North Korea must also accept a reliable verification regime.”

Back to top

United States:  U.S. Seeks Shortened Nuclear Test Readiness, Modified Nuclear Weapons

A top U.S. nuclear official said that a nuclear readiness study completed last year has concluded “the right posture is to be ready for a test within approximately 18 months” (see GSN, Jan. 10, 2002).

U.S. nuclear agencies currently operate under a 1993 order by then-President Bill Clinton to be able to resume nuclear testing in 24 to 36 months, Agence France-Presse reported.

The transition to 18-month readiness will take about three years, according to Linton Brooks, acting head of the National Nuclear Security Administration (Maxim Kniazkov, Agence France-Presse/The Australian, April 9).

Earth Penetrating Weapons

Officials last month delivered a study on the potential for modifying existing U.S. nuclear weapons to strike at deeply buried targets, according to Brooks.  The delivery of the paper allows the nuclear agency to use $15 million to conduct cost and feasibility studies this month, the Washington Post reported.

Scientists at two nuclear weapons laboratories would research the possibility of hardening existing nuclear weapons and attaching delayed fuses so the weapons can burrow deeper into the ground before detonating, according to the Post.

Brooks told Congress that $6 million would be used to examine future nuclear weapons concepts “which someday may be needed.”

Scientists plan to research a weapon to be used “against a particular set of biological agents where a large burst of radiation could be used to kill such bugs,” Brooks said.

He also told Congress that the existing 9-year-old ban on developing a low-yield nuclear warhead has had “a chilling effect” on nuclear research and is “an artificial intellectual restraint” (see GSN, March 7).

Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) objected to Brooks’ desire to repeal that ban, the Post reported.  Reed said that developing new nuclear weapons would undermine U.S. nonproliferation efforts (Walter Pincus, Washington Post, April 9).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Duma to Resume Moscow Treaty Ratification This Spring

The Russian legislature plans to resume its consideration of the U.S.-Russian Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty soon, senior Russian lawmakers said yesterday (see GSN, April 4).

Russian President Vladimir Putin called on lawmakers over the weekend to approve the treaty, despite the “unfavorable background” created by the U.S.-led war in Iraq.  Senior Russian legislators said yesterday that they would resume their treaty deliberations this spring, saying the pact corresponds with Russia’s national interests.

“Ratification must not be dragged out,” despite the war, said retired Gen. Andrei Nikolayev, head of the defense affairs committee in the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian Parliament.  Sergei Mironov, the speaker of the upper house of the Russian Parliament, agreed that the treaty must be ratified “as quickly as possible.”

Some Russian lawmakers, however, appear to link the treaty’s ratification prospects with Russia’s potential involvement in the reconstruction of Iraq once the war is over, according to the Associated Press.

The Duma will take up ratification “as soon as the situation regarding the post-conflict settlement in Iraq is normalized,” said Dmitry Rogozin, head of the Duma’s international affairs committee (Associated Press/Russia Journal, April 8).

For further information, see:

U.S.-Russia Nuclear Reduction Treaty Text (U.S. State Department)

Bush Announces Moscow Treaty

U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Moscow Treaty

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP