Chapter 1. Introduction

As far as we know, weapons appeared to be an integral part of human society. Many historians believed that not a single year of recorded history of mankind has been free of armed conflict. People have always recognized the folly and inhumanity of warfare. They have continually attempted to limits its proliferation.

Proliferation includes “increases in the number of nuclear weapons, or the means of making them (whether the state already has weapons or not); public transfer of weapons to another state; utilizing equipment for ostensibly peaceful purposes to facilitate weapons development (India, Israel, North Korea); transferring weapons material from NWS to NNWS with the aid of a government or dissident officials, or by theft (the former Soviet Union and Pakistan); transfer of technology by states, private companies or individuals; purchase of theft of a weapon or fissile material by subnational groups or individual terrorists.” [11]

Now we can see the account of nuclear weapons is extremely large, and the use of only one warhead could cause many hundreds of thousands of deaths and destroy many cities. Large-scale nuclear war with the use of hundreds of thermonuclear weapons is able to destroy many countries or nations, and permanently affect the global environment. Nearly all governments understand that spread of nuclear weapons to additional states will increase the likelihood of nuclear war.

The Centre for Defense Information (Washington, DC) issued the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists which contains up-to-date facts (February, 2002) about world’s nuclear weapons and facilities. According this information we can observe the amount of warfare of eight nations. [1]

Country	Suspected Strategic Nuclear Weapons	Suspected Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons	Suspected Total Nuclear Weapons
United States	8,646	2,010	10,656
Russia	nearly 6,000	nearly 4,000	nearly 10,000
United Kingdom	180	5	185
France	350	0	350
China	250	120	400
India	60	?	60+?
Israel	100-200	?	200+?
Pakistan	24-48	?	24-48

[4]

The reduction of nuclear weapons in NWSs:

[Made by students, data from 11]

Four states had nuclear weapons and then relinquished them: South Africa had six nuclear weapons by the 1980s and then, just prior to the transfer of power to the post-apartheid government, dismantled them. The Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus together had more than 4,000 nuclear weapons on their territories when the Soviet Union dissolved, and they each agreed in 1994 to return them to Russia. The Natural Resources Defense Council (USA) estimates that “as of 2002, there were around 22,000 nuclear weapons in the world.” [12]

Many of the nations which possess nuclear arsenal or have sought to develop it had political disagreement or regional conflicts with each other. As well-known facts there were problems between India and Pakistan over Kashmir; China and India had a brief border question; Israel has fought several wars with neighboring nations in the Middle East; Iran and Iraq fought an eight-year-long war. North and South Korea led the Korean War (1950-1953) against each other. Secondly, nuclear weapons also permit aggressor nations to dominate in their regions. Iraq under the former president Saddam Hussein is believed to have sought nuclear weapons for this aim before the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Thirdly, these weapons could be used as a threat by a non-governmental organization seeking global ideological cause like radical Islamic fundamentalism (nuclear terrorism).

So, regional wars and other potential conflicts provide the main reason for the international community to stop the nuclear proliferation. Arms control attempts led to some treaties, proclamations, convention and agreements to limit the destructiveness of war by controlling the development, testing and use of weapons and military technologies.

In Benchmark II we are going to study important current unilateral treaties and agreements, especially bilateral Russian- American documents; international organizations and agencies dealing with nuclear non-proliferation. So, we will study how nuclear weapons are protected and controlled through visual inspections, detection, remote sensing and other methods.

Chapter 2. Ways of Nonproliferation

The question of nuclear nonproliferation is very urgent nowadays. Detailed information on nuclear technology is now held by many countries, commercial enterprises and individual scientists, and the industrial capability to manufacture specialized components is widespread. Some additional countries and subnational groups may seek to obtain weapons. Nuclear proliferation may appear in unexpected places and forms. Governmental and non-official organizations try to have an impact on nuclear disarmament policy and regulate it.

Different sources of information made it possible for us to determine the following aims of this work:

[Made by the group of students]

In the next chapters we are going to study some of these objects.

Сhapter 3. Disarmament Propaganda

As the first alternative to military conflicts and arms race we can remember the United Nation Charter (1945) which was designed to permit a supranational agency to enforce peace. Thus, Article 11 of this Charter stated that “the General Assembly could consider the general principle of disarmament and the regulation of armaments”. Article 26 required the Security Council to submit plans for a system of armament regulation. Article 47 established a military staff committee to assist the Security Council in this task. [5]

In June 1946, American representative Bernard Baruch presented a plan to the UN Atomic Energy Commission, calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons, international control over the processing atomic energy, and safeguards to ensure that it would be used only for civilian purposes. The government of the Soviet Union vetoed the Baruch Plan in the Security Council, objecting to the UN’s authority over disarmament and citing the domination of that body by the USA and Western Europe.

Nonproliferation effort was made again in 1953 when the USA launched the Atoms for Peace program fearing that growing interest in nuclear industry would lead nuclear technology to spread uncontrollably. Under this program the United States offered to share nuclear technology for peaceful purposes with friendly states. US inspections would ensure that transferred items were not diverted for nuclear weapons program. By this time, the USSR had initiated a similar program, also relying on inspections. This overall goal of promoting civilian use of nuclear energy in other countries, while also preventing weapons dissemination, has been labeled by many critics as contradictory and having led to lax standards for a number of decades which allowed a number of other nations, such as India, to profit from dual-use technology. [24]

During the period of the Cold War the possibility of all-out war was real, that’s why many progressive people all over the world called for non-proliferation.

The now-familiar peace symbol was developed (in the United Kingdom) as the logo for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and was taken up enthusiastically by anti-nuclear protesters in the U.S. during the 1960s.

Early in the 20^th century there developed the philosophy of pacifism, opposition to war and other violence, expressed either in an organized political movement or as an individual ideology. Pacifism varies from a form that is absolute to a more practical form. Most absolute pacifists stress the immorality of the taking of one person's life by another person. The philosophy of pacifism has been propounded throughout history on grounds of morality, divine will, or economic and social utility.

In 1961 the UN General Assembly passed the Joint Statement of Agreed Principles for Disarmament Negotiations. After that NWSs signed some treaties (See Chapter 5).

Disarmament propaganda includes not only a struggle against nuclear weapons, but also prohibiting development, production and stockpiling of biological and chemical weapons, booby traps and land mines. The International Committee of the Red Cross estimates that “nearly 2 million land mines around the world kill or maim nearly 15,000 civilians every year.” [5]

Global sentiment against a new kind of weapons developed in the USA - a mininuke (for destroying underground facilities) and cluster bombs (manufactured mostly in China, India, Pakistan, Russia and the USA) leads to some progress in arms control.

The new-elected President of the USA Barak Obama shared some important ideas during his presidential campaign. He pledged to rid the world of nuclear weapons altogether during his first term in office. But he also subtly asserted a radically new thought regarding non-proliferation generally: “We cannot stand before the world and say there’s one set of rules for America and another for everyone else.” [17]

In our opinion, as the mankind entered the 21^st century, great attention should be paid to non-proliferation campaign.

Chapter 4. International and National Agencies for Nuclear Nonproliferation

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established to oversee the development and spread of nuclear technology and materials. The IAEA is the world´s center of cooperation in the nuclear field. It was set up as the world´s "Atoms for Peace" organization in 1957 within the United Nations family. The Agency works with its Member States and multiple partners worldwide to promote safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies. Now it has more than 140 member countries. According to its mission statement, “the IAEA works for safe, secure, and peaceful use of nuclear technology”. This agency is led by a director general, who is elected to a four-year period that can be renewed. The agency shared the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize with its director Mohamed ElBaradei, for his efforts combating nuclear weapons proliferation. He was re-appointed in June 2005.

The IAEA Secretariat is headquartered at the Vienna International Centre in Vienna, Austria. Operational liaison and regional offices are located in Geneva, Switzerland; New York, USA; Toronto, Canada; and Tokyo, Japan. The IAEA runs or supports research centers and scientific laboratories in Vienna and Seibersdorf, Austria; Monaco; and Trieste; Italy. The annual general conference of all members is held to review the agency’s budgets, its programs and other issues. [6]

[6] [6]

Spectrum of the IAEA’s work:

Training in nuclear science and technologies;

Experts’ services and the supply of essential items of equipment;

The supply of nuclear materials and reactors;

Financial support in research programs of energy sources that could replace conventional fuel systems;

Establishing of safety standards for radioactive wastes;

The diffusion of information on peaceful use of nuclear energy, etc.

The Nobel Prize Committee while giving an award announced: “At a time when disarmament efforts appear deadlocked, when there is danger that nuclear arms will spread both to states and to terrorist groups, and when nuclear power again appears to be playing an increasingly significant role, IAEA’s work is of incalculable importance”. [6]

The EURATOM Supply Agency (ESA), operative since 1960, has 27 member states of the European Union. Its mission is to ensure a regular and equitable supply of nuclear fuels for Community users. The European Atomic Energy Community Treaty covers all civil nuclear activities in the EU, is designed to provide a common market in nuclear materials to guarantee a supply of nuclear fuels and to ensure that these materials are not diverted from their intended purpose. The IAEA carries out inspections in close cooperation with inspection teams from EURATOM. [19]

Among the other international agencies controlling the disarmament we can name the United Nations Organization (UN), Non-Proliferation Conference.

The UNO made a great contribution in the disarmament process. For example, in April 2004 the Security Council adopted resolution 1540, which requires UN members “to implement effective measures to secure within their borders the know-how, equipment and materials that could be used to make weapons of mass destruction and to adopt effective export controls”. [22]

[22]

It’s an international organization established immediately after World War II. It replaced the League of Nations, former international organization, established by the peace treaties that ended World War I. Like its successor, the United Nations, its purpose was the promotion of international peace and security. In 1945, when the UN was founded, there were 51 members; 192 nations are now members of the organization. The principles of the UN are: the maintenance of international peace and security; the development of friendly relations among states; and the achievement of cooperation in solving international economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems. It expresses a strong hope for the equality of all people and the expansion of basic freedoms.

The Security Council of the UN: The Security Council was established as an organ with primary responsibility for preserving peace. Unlike the General Assembly, it was given power to enforce measures and was organized as a compact executive organ. The council has 15 members. Five—China, France, Great Britain, the United States, and Russia (until 1991 the USSR)—are permanent. The 10 (originally six) nonpermanent members are elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly; equitable geographic distribution is required. Customarily there are five nonpermanent members from African and Asian states, one from Eastern Europe, two from Latin America, and two from Western Europe and elsewhere. Under the charter the council may take measures on any danger to world peace. In the case of serious matters, such as "threats to the peace," "breaches of the peace," and "acts of aggression," the council may take enforcement measures. These may range from full or partial rupture of economic or diplomatic relations to military operations of any scope deemed necessary. [22]

Many other measures have helped slow proliferation. Under some military blocks, such as the NATO, NWS promise to extend protection to NNWS, making their development of nuclear arsenal unnecessary. Concerned nations can also use diplomatic and economic pressure, including public criticism, breaking off relations, trade embargoes, to stop countries seeking nuclear weapons. Such efforts have led some countries to abandon these programs.

In each nuclear country there are state and non-governmental institutions which control and regulate nuclear weapons. We would like to tell about the most important of them in the US and in Russia.

[24]

The United States Atomic Energy Commission (1946-1974) managed the U.S. nuclear program after the Manhattan Project. The initial American nuclear program was run by the National Bureau of Standards starting in 1939 under the edict of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Its primary purpose was to delegate research and dispense of funds. In its early years the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was a civilian agency being in charge of the production of nuclear weapons and research facilities, funded through Congress, with oversight provided by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. The AEC was given vast powers of control over secrecy, research, and money, and could seize lands with suspected uranium deposits. Along with its duties towards the production and regulation of nuclear weapons, it additionally was in charge of stimulating development in civilian nuclear power while also regulating its safety uses. The full transference of its activities was finalized in January 1947. [24]

[24]

The Department of Energy is currently responsible for weapons development and maintenance since 1977. This agency is mainly served to coordinate research and build sites. It generally operates through contractors, however, both private and public (for example, Union Carbide, a private company, ran Oak Ridge National Laboratory for many decades; the University of California, a public educational institution, has run the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore laboratories since their inception). [24]

In our country the main institution of nuclear industry is Russia’s Atomic Energy Agency (Minatom), recently transferred into Rosatom. It oversees nuclear safety, research and design, the modernization of the industry, and the conversion of military facilities to civilian purposes. The fields of its activities are the following:

*Fundamental research *Applied research and development

*Nuclear weapons and disarmament (Development, testing and quantity production of nuclear warheads; scrapping and disposal of warheads on expiry of their service life and under the nuclear weapons reduction programs, full-scale tests of prototype weapons in the nuclear testing grounds.)

*Mining and processing industry

*Nuclear fuel and reactor materials (Uranium enrichment, nuclear fuel fabrication and reprocessing; production of zirconium, beryllium and other structural materials for reactor cores; production of stable and radioactive isotopes.)

*Reactor engineering *Instrument making *Microelectronics

*Ecology (Development of environmental friendly production facilities; decommissioning of nuclear facilities; disposal of waste and contaminated equipment; development of practical techniques for the restoration of the environment and the handling of waste from former and present nuclear fuel cycle operations.)

*International cooperation (Bilateral and multilateral international cooperation in nuclear industry, foreign trade and control of nuclear exports; fulfillment of the obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.) [15]

There are some other governmental organizations involving in nuclear weapons policy, f.e., Gosatomnadzor (GAN) [the State Committee for Nuclear and Radiation Safety] is responsible for regulatory oversight of Russia's civilian nuclear power plants. The Ministry of Defense is responsible for all military nuclear facilities. GAN licenses all civilian facilities that use radioactive materials, develops rules and standards governing the safe use of these materials, and inspects all facilities that use these materials, including nuclear power plants. Rosenergoatom, a part of Minatom, is responsible for operating all of Russia's nuclear power plants, except the Leningrad (Sosnovyy Bor) plant which has the status of a separate operating utility. These responsibilities include plant maintenance and repair, technical support, operations planning, and emergency planning.

All international and national agencies have the aim to regulate nuclear weapons nonproliferation and to develop programs that cover safety of nuclear installations, radiation protection, human health, radioactive waste management and the nuclear fuel cycle.

Chapter 5. Treaties and Agreements Limiting Nuclear Weapons

Shortly after nuclear bombs on Japan in 1945, discussion began about the need for international agreement on new form of warfare. The timeline of nonproliferation work started with Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” Program in 1953. The first successful international agreement led to the creation of the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1957. Then numerous treaties have been proposed, negotiated, and entered into. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was the first, going into force in 1970. It was proposed by Ireland, and Finland was the first to sign. The signing parties decided by consensus to extend the NPT indefinitely and without conditions upon meeting in New York City on May 11, 1995. The treaty has a preamble and eleven articles though sometimes it is interpreted as having three pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peacefully use of nuclear technology.

The treaty established two categories of states: nuclear weapon states (which had conducted nuclear tests before January, 1 1967) and non-nuclear weapon states. Under the treaty:

Nuclear weapon states party to Non- nuclear weapon states (187 members)

the agreement (5 state members) pledge: party to the agreement pledge:

-not to transfer nuclear weapons or -not to manufacture or receive nuclear weapons or

any other nuclear explosive device any other nuclear device (under IAEA inspections).

to any recipient;

-not to assist, encourage, or include any

NNWS to manufacture nuclear weapons

or any other nuclear device.

The treaty reaffirms the “inalienable right” of all parties to pursue the peaceful use of nuclear energy consistent with the prohibition on the development of explosives and calls on all parties to facilitate the fullest sharing of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. [9]

This document also states that all countries shall undertake negotiations in good faith on complete and general nuclear disarmament. To persuade the NNWS to sign the treaty, the NWS indicated that they would not use nuclear weapons in an attack on a non-nuclear state unless the state was allied with a nuclear power. However, this pledge is informal and not a part of the treaty itself.

India, Pakistan, and Israel never joined the treaty, thereby reserving the legal right to develop nuclear weapons. North Korea became a party of the treaty in 1985 but renounced it in 2003. There is a concern that Iran, a non-nuclear party of the NPT, is constructing a uranium enrichment plant with the new strategy in mind. [9]

Every five years, there is a Review Conference on the treaty. At the seventh conference in May 2005, there were stark differences between the United States, which wanted to focus on proliferation, especially on its allegations against Iran and other countries which stress the lack of serious nuclear disarmament by NWS. The non-aligned states showed that NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangement violates the treaty.

*On 11 May 1995, in accordance with article X, paragraph 2, the Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons decided that the Treaty should continue in force indefinitely. [10]

 But we see that the treaty needs enforcement because it can be easily undermined. At the next conference in 2010 the further prolongation of the NPT is under a big question. There are two variants, to our minds: 1) the refusal from the treaty and the irreversible proliferation of nuclear weapons; 2) the further extension of the NPT with a series of additional agreements which can stabilize nuclear safety in the world. The second variant is much advantageous, but for the further prolongation of the treaty it’s necessary to provide:

- Increased guarantees for NNWS from the side of NWS;

- The limited integration of the NPT parties with the nuclear powers within the treaty in order to involve the last to NPT parties;

- The regulation of non-nuclear local conflicts with the help of the treaty with the aim of common nuclear safety. [9]

Among the other important treaties and agreements on nuclear non-proliferation we can name the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), adopted by the UNO in 1996. The main purpose of CTBT is to put an end to nuclear explosions which seek to test weapons technology. Signatories to the treaty cannot conduct any nuclear explosions.

The key features

The treaty bans only explosions, The treaty comes into force only if all 44

allowing sub-critical weapons countries having nuclear capabilities sign the

tests as well as detailed computer treaty. (This has meant that unless India, China and

simulation which makes explosions Pakistan sign CTBT, the treaty will not come

unnecessary. Into force at all.)

By the end of 2003, it was signed by all the NWSs and 170 out of 193 states, and ratified by 108.

For the nuclear weapons states this document would restrict the ability to design new types of weapons though it will not completely eliminate it. But testing is helpful to make sure that these weapons are safe and reliable. [8]

The Fissile Materials Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) is currently being negotiated. It will put an end to the production of fissile materials (enriched uranium and plutonium) which could be used for nuclear weapons production. Such plants can be checked only by physically entering of the inspectors. So, the main idea of FMCT is “the verification regime” which will bring in “full scope safeguards”. [8]

If we compare CTBT and FMCT, we can see that constraint would only be on non-weapons states. NWS have large stockpiles of fissile materials and don’t need further production of such material. Further, FMCT will not restrict the production of pure fusion weapons, if it becomes feasible. That’s why some countries have opposite points of view on these treaties. India has not been party to FNCT negotiation so far.

The United States and the USSR/Russia initiated negotiations to regulate bilateral weapons arsenal many times since the late 1960s. The timeline of the main treaties:

The SALT I (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks) meetings produced two important agreements in 1972: the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty), which limited the establishment of defensive installations for shooting down ballistic missiles, and the Interim Agreement on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. In the same year both countries also signed a treaty barring the testing of nuclear weapons on the ocean floor.

The SALT II negotiations (which began in 1972) produced another treaty in 1979 that would limit the total number of the USSR and American missile launchers. After the invasion of the Soviet army in Afghanistan in 1979, the US Senate never ratified this treaty.

Ronald Reagan introduced the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in 1983. This research program for developing a defense against ballistic missiles had some new assumptions of nuclear strategy since the beginning of the arms race.

American-Soviet meetings on high level resumed in 1985. At a summit in Washington, DC, in December 1987, the President Reagan and Soviet leader Michael Gorbachev signed the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), a 13-year program which eliminated many nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles (with the range of 500- 5,500 km) that had been deployed throughout Europe and the western Soviet Union. The Senate and the Soviet Presidium ratified the INF treaty in May 1988. [5]

In May 1990 Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush approved a treaty to end production and reduce stockpiles of chemical weapons.

In 1991 the USA and the USSR signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), according to which both countries reduce their strategic nuclear arsenal by about 25 per cent. Both sides also planned to reduce conventional weapons and withdrew forces from Europe.

In 1993 Presidents Bush and Yeltsin signed the START II treaty, but it never went into effect because of Russian Parliament veto. This treaty called for the elimination of almost 2/3 of the nuclear warheads and all the multiple-warhead land-based missiles held by the USA and the former Soviet Republics. In 2002 it was replaced by a new strategic arms reduction agreement (better known as the Treaty of Moscow).

Moscow Treaty 2002 (signed by President Bush and President Putin). It requires that the two sides reduce their nuclear arsenals to between 1,700 and 2,200 warheads by the end of 2012. The treaty itself doesn't specify the composition of these arsenals. However, the Center for Defense information has developed an estimate of Likely Nuclear Arsenals under the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (Moscow Treaty). This includes estimates for both the United States and Russia. [27]

The world community has welcomed the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty as a step in the right direction. Supporters of nuclear disarmament have expressed concern about the lack of a reduction schedule in the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, the retention of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles, and the absence of verification measures.

[27]

The President of the USA Obama strives for an agreement with Russia on nuclear disarmament. He hasn’t made any certain decision on the American strategic defense system in eastern Europe, but putting off the warheads in Poland and the radiolocation station in Czech (which would cost 4 billion dollars in a year) for some period of time, the US could avoid obstacles with our country. Barak Obama is going to lead serious negotiations with Russia, the aim of which is the 80 per cent elimination of arms. “The Times” emphasizes that such radical treaty could reduce the nuclear arsenal of both sides to 1,000 warheads. Bilateral elimination of nuclear weapons is of great importance for attempts to convince Iran and other states to refuse nuclear bomb developing. Obama plans to organize in the White House the non-proliferation department. His first step in the disarmament work will be negotiations with Moscow on the replacement of the START I, which term will be over in December 2009.

The American administration headed by Hillary Clinton decided to renew proper relations with the Russian Federation. She came on visit to Moscow at the beginning of March 2009, and both sides announced the willingness to reach a new agreement on strategic missiles. The Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov recognized that there are some disagreements between Russia and the USA on questions concerning Afghanistan, Russian scientific assistance to Iran, the problems of Kosovo and Georgia. Both states are highly interested in practical cooperation on Afghanistan. And Washington is ready to see Russia’s suggestions on Iran’s nuclear problem. Russia and the USA want to sign the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty up to the end of the year. [21]

[21]

Chapter 6. Ban on Nuclear Testing. Control of Production and Storage of Nuclear Weapons

One of the most important parts of nonproliferation work is monitoring and visual/ remote control of nuclear industry objects.

Nuclear Testing

‘The period of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons by the United States, the United Kingdom, France and the U.S.S.R is a sad page in the history of civilized man. Without question, it was the cause of hundreds of thousands of cancer deaths. Yet there was complete silence on the part of the ICRP’.

Karl Morgan, member of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1950-71), which set radiation exposure standards

There have been made 115 peaceful nuclear tests for natural resources probes, oil and gas intensification, making underground containers for gas and condensate, etc.

Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, nuclear weapons have been detonated on over two thousand occasions for testing purposes and demonstration purposes. The only countries known to have detonated nuclear weapons and acknowledged possessing such weapons – are (chronologically) the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, the People's Republic of China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Israel is also widely believed to possess nuclear weapons, though it does not acknowledge having them. [24]Testing of nuclear weapons has many consequences: political, moral and environmental ones. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (1996) bans military tests and is a good alternative to proliferation process.

Inspections on nuclear weapons production plants and stockpiles

There are no secure and simple means against nuclear proliferation. A single state can’t solve this problem. That’s why the mankind should perfect control for nuclear disarming. As far as we know, controlling actions are provided by IAEA. The main goals of such work are: studying the documentation about production and transporting of nuclear and fission materials for peaceful use, visual and remote inspections, radiation measurement. Now IAEA controls 95 per cent of fission materials, produced in the world. But outside these actions are non-NPT countries which have nuclear plants, secret productions and reactors of double function. All this system needs a new complex of methodology and technical means being able to detect nuclear weapons production.

Perhaps the greatest challenge facing nuclear energy production- is disposal of the highly radioactive wastes. It could take at least 10,000 years for these materials to fully break down into harmless elements so the challenge is to store them safely for at least that length of time. It is possible, but where and how are still troubling issues. In the US alone, the nation's 103 nuclear power plants each generate an average of around 20 tons of radioactive spent fuel a year. Spent fuel now sits in cooling pools and temporary storage areas waiting for somebody to figure out what to do with it. [26]

There are currently about 31,000 nuclear warheads deployed or in reserve in the stockpiles of eight countries: China, France, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Of these about 13,000 are deployed and 4,600 of these are on high alert, i.e. ready to be launched within minutes notice. The combined explosive yield of these weapons is approximately 5,000 megatons, which is about 200,000 times the explosive yield of the bomb used on Hiroshima. Note: There are sometimes variances in numbers cited for stockpiles due to uncertainties of the status of some weapons (whether they are deployed, in non-active reserve, or dismantled). In addition to the active stockpile, the U.S. maintains a large inactive stockpile as a "hedge" in case arms control expectations fail to materialize. [25]

The problem of nuclear materials security in Russia is very urgent nowadays. The main priority of this sphere is liquidation (or quick processing to safe condition) of all excess nuclear materials.

In our country (as in the USA) there are the main reserves of highly enriched uranium (HEU). The exact amounts are not declared, but after the latest international valuation the reserves of HEU are up to 1500 tons, which is enough for 60-80 thousands of nuclear devices. Outside the weapons complex nuclear materials in Russia are situated in nearly 53 stockpiles and in 300 storage and other rooms. Some of these stockpiles have 1,000 and more kg of HEU. [23]

The second problem is that unlike plutonium, which is difficult for use in “self-made” nuclear devices, HEU can be easily used by small terrorist groups without some financial and technical expenditure. [23]

Thirdly, for Russia the disposal of nuclear submarines and nuclear waste has been a problematic issue. Although a number of nuclear submarines were decommissioned, many remained docked at ports as a result of a lack of money and facilities for storing nuclear wastes. [26]

The law base for the state nuclear materials control and registration is the Concept of the Russian government (from 14 October, 1996 No.1205). It determines the list of nuclear materials which must be registrated and controlled, the aims and principles of their processing. [23] At the federal level Minatom of Russia looks after the peaceful use of nuclear materials. The monitoring body is Gosatomnadzor. The transfer through the boarders controls the national Customs Committee.

To our mind, measures on the processing of highly enriched uranium to low enriched one, and the standard acts for nuclear materials security, make it possible to say that the Russian Federation pays much attention to nuclear weapons problem.

Chapter 7. Nuclear Terrorism: Between Physics, Politics and Psychology

Оne of the most serious contradiction of modern world is a great and increasing gap between the development of technology and cultural, moral level of mankind. Technological terrorism has developed lately on this base. There are national boarders and interests, strict economic and trade competition on world raw materials markets. One of the most dangerous types of technological terrorism is the nuclear one. It can be realized by “young” members of the “Nuclear Club”, countries which leaders are under the influence of extremist political and religious organizations. Using a great intellectual potential, having prepared nuclear material, the information from the Internet, investing a large amount of money, makes it possible to create nuclear explosive devices. This theme became very acute after New York disasters in September 2001.

There are different points of view. We disagree with this statement. Making process is rather difficult. To our mind nuclear terrorism is impossible. Here are the reasons.

Firstly, technological process of nuclear explosive devices is lengthy and complex. To get ready-made Plutonium-239 (bomb material) is very difficult because security of stockpiles, arsenals and transportation is strict. The action principles of nuclear weapons are well-known now, but without details and technology it is impossible. Today nuclear weapons inspectors with the IAEA assume that 25 kg of highly enriched uranium or 8 kg of plutonium would be sufficient to manufacture a weapon. However, depending on the design, considerably less could be used. So, it’s theoretically possible to develop a warhead less than 8 kg of plutonium. Imagine if prepared plutonium is present, there are difficulties in the field of chemistry: we can’t make pressure with the help of chemical implosion substances after energy reasoning. [3] But there were some attempts. For example, according to the Justice Department, “from at least as early as 1992, Al-Qaeda made efforts to obtain the components of nuclear weapons." [13] A Japanese cult, the Aum Shinrikyo, began an effort to develop the nuclear weapons in the late 1980s, but was unsuccessful.

Secondly, for creation of a small nuclear implosive device we need at least a lorry with laser machines plus a moveable electric station. Uranium-made implosive device is easier, more compact but terrorists need 4,045 kg of Uranium-235 (purely). There are also many technological details what makes this idea insolvent. [3]

Thirdly, specialists (physicians, chemists, electronic engineers, metallurgists, designers, technology brigade, etc.) won’t cooperate with terrorists not only after moral reasons, but because they understand the tragic end of such operation. And the scientists of such sphere don’t work alone; usually it’s a united collective. There is no documented case of a state selling a nuclear weapon to a terrorist, although the potential for such a sale exists. But terrorists are trying to steal or built a nuclear weapon. In 1998, Osama bin Laden issued a statement titled The Nuclear Bomb of Islam, declaring, "It is the duty of Muslims to prepare as much force as possible to terrorize the enemies of God." [14]

So you see that the barrier for nuclear terrorism is higher now than their potential. We must remember these facts when we hear or read about great students who made a nuclear implosive device just in their room or in a garage. Nowadays it’s simply impossible (fortunately). On the other hand, the height of this barrier must not be lower though it’s very expensive.

Chapter 8. China and Nuclear Nonproliferation

After observing the whole scheme of disarmament means, we decided to study one country (a member of NWS-club), and see if there is a change in its nuclear weapons policy. The most interesting state for us was China because it’s our neighbor, and the country has lately achieved much progress in scientific and technological fields. We visited the local branch of Moscow State Engineering University and met the Associate Professor Yuri Kabasov. He specializes in nuclear physics and has strong opinion about the theme of our investigation.

Here is the interview with him.

Student: We are very thankful that you are ready to clear up some questions on China’s disarmament position. You have visited this country several times and are competent in this field.

Yuri Kabasov: You are welcome. The thesis I’d like to introduce are the following:

- China as an active international actor should react on the new challenges of modern era, and it makes efforts for own safety guarantee and that of the whole world.

- The political position of the Chinese Republic has changed qualitatively.

- This state made a big gap towards cooperation with international community.

Student: We studied that with the years China changed its approach to nuclear cooperation, making it nearer to the policy of other NWSs and norms of international law.

Yuri Kabasov: You’re right. In 1984 the Chinese People’s Republic became a member of IAEA. Since that time Chinese leaders obliged to fulfill all commitments in accordance with the basic principles of IAEA, including the commitment of nuclear materials and technologies export within the bounds of guarantees of this agency. In 1985 China declared that it’s ready to give a list of civilian nuclear objects under guarantees of IAEA.

Student: Has this state joined the Nonproliferation Treaty?

Yuri Kabasov: Before 1992 China refused to join it, calling this treaty “discriminatory” for interests of developing countries. But on the 9^th of March, 1992 China joined the NPT, and moreover in 1995 it supported its unlimited term.

Student: What other positions have been changed lately?

Yuri Kabasov: After joining the NPT China also changed its position on rocket delivery systems control regime. In 1994 this state confirmed the own promise not to export rockets of type “earth- earth” with the range more than 300 km and not to deliver useful cargo over 500 kg. In 1996 China signed the CTBT and declared moratorium on nuclear tests in the country, but hasn’t ratified it yet.

Student: In mass media there are some articles that Chinese Republic violates its commitments after the CTBT and the rocket control regime.

Yuri Kabasov: On the other hand, we can’t deny that China as the power centre of Asia takes part in all non-proliferation and disarmament campaigns. That is very important for safety and stability in the region where the non-proliferation regime was subjected to serious testing, and where there is great potential for a new twist of arms race.

Student: Thank you for the interview.

(Trekhgorny, March 10^th 2009)

Chapter 9. Problems in Nonproliferation Efforts

Nuclear disarmament efforts face a series of challenges nowadays.

First, it’s nuclear smuggling. The example with a senior Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who had sold uranium enrichment equipment to Iran, Libya and North Korea, and a nuclear weapon design to Libya and possibly the other states, demonstrates that proliferation can be actively assisted not only by national governments, as in the past, but also by private persons and organizations that have access to key knowledge and equipment. These nonstate actors are invisible and can be far more difficult to influence than nations to change their behavior. UN Security Council Resolution 1540 will encourage states like Pakistan or Malaysia to improve activities related to WMD within their borders and to prevent improper exports. But the effectiveness of this suggestion is uncertain. The IAEA is also encouraging NPT NNWS to give the agency the possibility of broader inspections under an additional protocol. It wants to have access to any site in a country, where the IAEA believes activities related to nuclear weapons development may take place. This agency could significantly restrict future nuclear smuggling networks. [20]

The second challenge is the growing number of cases in which countries have pursued secret activities that violated the nuclear technologies and were not detected by the IAEA. The reason is the following: some states believe that nuclear weapons will protect themselves against bullying or military intervention by more powerful states, or they emphasize that their nuclear programs are only for peaceful purposes. Remember North Korea which developed its nuclear arms as a “deterrent” against US aggression. Like Iraq, Iran may be developing weapons manufacturing out of concern that, without them, it would be vulnerable to American intervention. The United States has attempted to address such concerns.

For example, in 2002 the international community first became aware that Iran was pursuing a major gas centrifuge uranium enrichment program, including a pilot enrichment facility, a gas centrifuge manufacturing plant, and early construction of a large-scale enrichment plant. In 2004 Libya’s secret of the similar gas centrifuge facility was also revealed. In 2004 South Korea’s primary experiments with laser isotope enrichment came to light. [20]

These countries had signed the NPT and were obligated to place all nuclear materials and facilities using such materials under IAEA inspection. None of them complied with these requirements. The IAEA was unaware of this situation, and so apparently were foreign intelligence services. Such episodes showed the low effectiveness of key parts of the international nonproliferation system.

The third problem of international nonproliferation activity is nuclear lobbies. Individual scientists, businessmen and nuclear-related non-governmental organizations in some NWS make pressure on nuclear policy of the state. It is supposed, that such influence have led India to a series of nuclear tests in 1998, changing the “no-nuclear-test policy” of 24 years. And the wish to sustain budgets and influence on the world arena can explain Russia’s decision to help Iran build a nuclear power plant at Bushehr. In most states, however, people believe it’s wiser for the country to renounce weapons of mass destruction and become accepted as a valued member of the international community. [20]

To conclude, we’d like to say that nuclear disarmament seems a very distant and, possibly, unachievable goal.

Nevertheless, such countries as South Africa, Libya have chosen to end their programs on weapons of mass destruction. Negotiations with Iran and North Korea may result in the elimination of their nuclear arms. Despite current problems, international nonproliferation efforts have achieved much, even if the record is far from perfect. [20]

Bibliography:

1. Timerbaev R. M. Russia and nuclear nonproliferation. 1945- 1968. – M.: Science, 1999.

2. Nuclear nonproliferation/ Under edition of Orlov V. A. – M.: PIR-Centre, 2002. V.1.

3. Koldovsky A.B. Nuclear and radiation terrorism: between physics, politics and psychology. Physics # 17. - M.: 2002.

4. “World’s Current Nuclear Arsenal”. Zero-nukes.org. 2009. Zero-nukes.org. 10 Feb 2009. <http://www.zero-nukes.org/arsenalsandtreaties.html>

5. “Control of the means for mass destruction”. Encarta.msn.com. 2009. Encarta.msn.com. 13 Feb 2009. <http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia/Arms_Control>

6. “International Atomic Energy Agency”. Encarta.msn.com. 2009. Encarta.msn.com. 13 Feb 2009. <http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_701702692_4/Nuclear_Weapons_Proliferation.html>

7. “Treaties and agreements”. Armscontrol.org. 2009. Armscontrol.org. 13 Feb 2009. <http://www.armscontrol.org/treaties>

8. “Treaties”. Isanw.org. 2009. Isanw.org. 13 Feb 2009. <http://www.isanw.org/facts/treaties.html>

9. “Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”. Wikipedia.org. 2009. Wikipedia.org. 10 Feb 2009. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty>

10. “Participation in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”. Wikipedia.org. 2009. Wikipedia.org. 10 Feb 2009. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NPT_Participation.svg map>

11. “Nuclear Proliferation-International Treaties”. Pathsoflight.us. 2009. Pathsoflight.us.13 Feb 2009. <http://pathsoflight.us/musing/?p=200>

12. “Table of Global Nuclear Weapons Stockpiles, 1945-2002.” Nrdc.org.2009. Nrdc.org. 20 Feb 2009. < http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab19.asp>

13. <http://www.nti.org/e_research/cnwm/overview/cnwm_home.asp>

14. <http://www.nuclearterror.org/index.html>

15. “Russia's Atomic Energy Agency (Minatom)”. Fas.org. 2009. Fas.org. 28 Feb 2009. <http://

www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/agency/minatom.htm>

16. < http://www.x-atom.ru/minatom/fields.html>

17. “Nuclear proliferation may breed world peace”. Monitor.co.ug. 2009. Monitor.com.ug. 28 Feb 2009. <http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/opinions/Nuclear_proliferation_may_breed_world_peace_76189.shtml>

18. “Nuclear Power. No solution to Global Climate Change”. Nukewatch.com. 2009. Nukewatch.com. 28 Feb 2009. <http://www.nukewatch.com/quarterly/f02/arjunf02.html>

19. “Mission statement”. Ec.europa.eu. 2009. Ec.europa.eu. 2 Mar 2009. <http://ec.europa.eu/euratom/mission en.html>

20.”Problems and issues in nonproliferation efforts”. Encarta.mns.com. 2009. Encarta.mns.com. 28 Feb 2009. <http://encarta.mns.com/encyclopedia_701702692_4/Nuclear_Weapons_Proliferation.html>

21. < http://news.yandex.ru/yandsearch?cl4url.html&country=Russia>

22. “United Nations”. Thefreedictionary.com. Thefreedictionary.com. 9 March 2009. <http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/_/related.aspx?w=Disarmament%20Conference>

23. Nuclear future: technologies, security and ecology. The catalogue of XI International conference “Polar Shine 2008”. - Saint-Petersburg, 2008.

24. “Nuclear weapons and the United States.” Wikipedia.org.2009. Wikipedia.org. 28 Jan 2009. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States>

25. “Nuclear stockpiles”. Nuclearfiles.org. 2009. Nuclearfiles.org. 13 Mar 2009. <http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/basics/nuclear-stockpiles.htm>

26. “Additional challenges”. Ecology.com. 2009. Ecology.com. 13 Mar 2009. <http://ecology.com/features/nuclearrenewable/nuclearchallenge.html>

27. “Nuclear arms treaties”. Zero-nukes.org. 2009. Zero-nukes.org. 10 Feb 2009. <http://www.zero-nukes.org/arsenalsandtreaties.html>