"The Bloated Nuclear Weapons Budget"

On the radar: NY Times on cutting the nuclear budget; Global nuclear budgets; Tactical insecurity; Russia’s critical roles; Envoys under the radar; Tritium production excess; Talking past China; and Reserves for Martian attack.

October 31, 2011 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Mary Kaszynski

Sound cuts for the nuclear budget - “The country does not need to maintain this large an arsenal. It should not be spending so much to do it, especially when Congress is considering deep cuts in vital domestic programs,” writes The New York Times editorial board.

--”spending on the arsenal must be rational and consistent with national security goals — not driven by inertia or politics.”

--Nuclear budget cuts are a win-win. “Reducing the number of weapons, scaling back unnecessary modernization programs, and delaying or scrapping plans to replace some delivery systems will save billions and help make the world safer.”

--Among the smart cuts recommended in the editorial: delay procurement of the new bomber, don’t modernize the B61 bomb, and halt construction of the new plutonium storage and MOX production facilities. http://owl.li/7e0Qr

Budget fact sheet - “The U.S. can guarantee its security and that of its allies in a more fiscally sustainable manner by pursuing further reductions in U.S. nuclear forces and scaling back plans for new and excessively large strategic nuclear weapons systems and warhead production facilities.” Key points on the nuclear weapons budget from The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. http://owl.li/7e0Rs

Early Warning Note - Early Warning will be taking a brief pause this week. We will return on Friday morning with a roundup of the best in nuclear news and return to our regular schedule next week.

--Subscribe to our morning email or follow us on twitter.

Budgets reveal priorities -“There is little sign in any of these nuclear armed states that a future without nuclear weapons is seriously being contemplated,” concludes a new report from the British American Security Information Council. The trend of increasing nuclear spending, particularly modernization efforts by all the major powers, contradicts disarmament rhetoric. http://owl.li/7e0SG

Tweet - @armscontrolnow: “A tacit admission of a problem: firm awarded $12m to improve security for U.S. nukes stored in Europe.” http://owl.li/7e2O9

”10 reasons why Russia still matters” - Top three are nuclear. 1) Russia’s massive nuclear arsenal, 2) Russia’s critical partnership in preventing nuclear terrorism, and 3) Russia’s role in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. By Graham Allison and Robert Blackwill in Politico. http://owl.li/7e0TI

Envoys under the radar - “The Obama administration has now met with the North Koreans twice and appointed two new top envoys for North Korea policy, but it has not yet consulted with Capitol Hill and has no plans to seek confirmation of the two new officials,” writes Josh Rogin. http://owl.li/7e0YM

Doubting the boost in tritium production - “The U.S. nuclear complex is expanding production of an exotic gas widely seen as essential for keeping nuclear weapons functioning, but some progressive issue experts cast doubt on just how much new fabrication is required.”

--Given "a significant amount of tritium on hand" today -- freed up by post-Cold War warhead retirements -- [former NNSA Administrator Linton] Brooks said he "would advocate matching production capability with probable upload schedules, since producing excess tritium has little value." http://owl.li/7e0V7

Quote - “If we'd begun with a nuclear dyad – bombers and sub-launched missiles, for example – we'd be doing just fine, thank you very much. We'd never have missed those land-based ICBMs. It's this forward-looking living-in-the-past that seems to hamper the U.S. military – and its think-tank-and-corporate enablers – from the fresh thinking U.S. national security demands,” writes Mark Thompson in his article “Triad and True” at Battleland. http://owl.li/7e10R

Miscommunication with China - “Poor communication and divergent goals are hampering efforts by China and the United States to improve their understanding of each other’s nuclear arms policy, issue experts [Gregory Kulacki and Li Bin] said on Wednesday.”

--In the October issue of Arms Control Today, Kulacki wrote, "it is difficult for Chinese analysts to appreciate why a country with overwhelming conventional military superiority is unable to make a basic confidence-building commitment [of a no first use policy] that a much weaker China finds acceptable." http://owl.li/7e2oQ

Quote - "I think it's totally unnecessary to retain active weapons in the hedge...Short of a Martian attack, there's nothing that would require us to suddenly upload 2,000 warheads onto the force. It's not going to happen," said Hans Kristensen. http://owl.li/7e0XT