Pakistan Suspected of Building 4th Plutonium Reactor

Today's top nuclear policy stories, with excerpts in bullet form.

Stories we're following today: Thursday February 10, 2011

Nuclear Experts Say Pakistan May be Building 4th Plutonium Reactor - Joby Warrick for The Washington Post [link]

• Pakistan has begun work on what independent experts say appears to be a fourth plutonium-producing reactor at the country's Khushab nuclear complex, a move that could signal a further escalation in Pakistan's arms race with arch-rival India.
• Commercial satellite photographs taken last month show major new construction at Khushab, a key nuclear installation southwest of Islamabad that generates plutonium for Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.  The new structure is roughly the same size and shape as two plutonium-producing heavy-water reactors located a few hundreds yards away in the heavily guarded compound, according to an analysis by the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington organization that studies nuclear proliferation.
• The building "appears to be a fourth reactor" for producing weapons-grade plutonium, according to the ISIS analysis, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post. ISIS said the facility would substantially expand Islamabad's nuclear capacity by allowing it to produce "more plutonium for nuclear bombs."
• The rapid growth of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal has fueled fears of an escalating arms race in one of the world's most troubled regions. India and Pakistan, which have fought three wars in 60 years, have launched initiatives in recent years to modernize their nuclear warheads and delivery systems.
• Olli Heinonen, former director of safeguards at the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the new reactor was "worrying, given the unstable situation there."

UK Defence Minister: Case for Trident is 'Thin' - Julian Borger for The Guardian [link]

• A new independent commission on Trident was launched tonight with the aim of re-examining the decision to replace Britain's submarine-launched deterrent. The members came from the three major parties all chosen on the grounds that they were open to persuasion by the evidence.
• The commission has been set up on the premise that the UK has not had a proper debate about its role as a nuclear state, and the postponement of the final decision on Trident replacement until after the next election (which will be in May 2015 at the latest) provides an opportunity to have that debate. The commission, set up by the British American Security Information Council (Basic), includes a former Labour defence secretary, Lord Browne, one of his Conservative predecessors, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, as well as a former chief of the defence staff, Lord Guthrie.
• The most striking moment of the Westminster launch event, however, was supplied by the current armed forces minister, Nick Harvey, who came along to give his blessing to the endeavour.
• Harvey said that looking back through government papers at how key decisions were made, he could find very little detailed argument from government officials justifying UK's doctrine of continuous at-sea deterrence. "When you looking for the paper trail, it is thin," Harvey said. Coming from a Liberal Democrat, that might not be a surprising observation. Coming from a minister in a coalition pledged to replace Trident, it is off-message to say the least.
• The commission is due to report a year from now. Meanwhile it will hear the testimony of expert witnesses from inside and outside government, in public and in private. As this does appear to be a rare case of a commission that has not made up its mind in advance, it should be an interesting year.

Letter From the Fissile Material Working Group to Congress - [link]

• There is an overwhelming bipartisan consensus that the U.S. needs to lead the world to prevent nuclear terrorism, but the Continuing Resolution (CR) passed in December limits funding for this objective. Recognizing that the mood in Congress is to trim federal spending, we urge you, in the interest of U.S. national security, to support funding for threat reduction and nonproliferation programs at the FY 2011 requested levels in the next continuing resolution (CR) or omnibus appropriations bill.
• In April 2010, the President convened an unprecedented Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C. during which the leaders of 47 nations pledged their support to secure vulnerable nuclear materials on their soil and to work in tandem to decrease threat levels. Numerous bipartisan reports have outlined the urgency of the danger and warned that more needs to be done to ensure that terrorists and non-state actors never obtain a nuclear weapon or materials usable for a nuclear device.
• However, the final CR passed at the end of December 2010 funded most government programs at FY 2010 levels through March 4, 2011, including the programs to secure and safeguard nuclear weapons and materials. This is a significant setback in efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism because the overall funding request and congressional appropriations for threat reduction in FY 2010 are actually less than the amount Congress appropriated in FY 2009.
• The fight against nuclear terrorism is a fight that can and must be won. At the close of 2010, NNSA announced that 111 pounds of bomb-making highly enriched uranium were removed from three sites in Ukraine. Since April 2009, six countries have given up all their highly enriched uranium and a total of 120 bombs’ worth of nuclear material was secured. But the United States will not be able to sustain this progress if Congress does not adequately fund the programs that made these successes possible.
• We urge you to ensure that threat reduction and nonproliferation programs at NNSA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State are funded at the FY 2011 requested level for the remainder of the fiscal year. No less than America’s national security is at stake.

North Korea Refuses More Military Talks with South Korea - The Associated Press 

• North Korea's abandonment of military talks with South Korea is merely the latest feint in a long standoff between the two rivals, according to analysts who see further provocative actions from Pyongyang coming next.
• Talks this week had raised hopes in some quarters for improved inter-Korean ties and eventual discussion about North Korea's nuclear program.
• But after opening on an optimistic note on Tuesday, the meetings inside the Demilitarized Zone ended abruptly Wednesday afternoon, with both sides accusing the other of walking out. At the heart of the impasse: the sinking of the Cheonan warship, which Seoul wants Pyongyang to acknowledge and which Pyongyang denies attacking.
• Analysts in Seoul characterized Pyongyang's dismissal as a tactic designed to put pressure on South Korea to gain more concessions. They said the communist country would eventually return to dialogue with the richer South — after perhaps gaining more leverage with another provocation.
• In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley called the talks a "missed opportunity" for North Korea to demonstrate its sincerity on dialogue and reducing tensions on the Korean peninsula.

Sandia Team Helps Kazakhstan With Nukes - The Associated Press

• A team from Sandia National Laboratories helped the country of Kazakhstan move nuclear materials - enough to build an estimated 775 nuclear weapons - to safety.
• Shipping containers holding casks of nuclear materials were loaded onto special trains for an 1,800-mile journey to long-term storage in the Central Asian country's interior.
• According to a news release, Sandia provided security and expertise to complete the transfer of spent fuel containing 11 tons of highly enriched uranium and 3.3 tons of weapons-grade plutonium from a reactor in the Caspian Sea port of Aktau.
• Officials with Sandia's global security program say they have made things safer in the world. They say before Sandia became involved, the materials were vulnerable to theft by those who might steal them to build nuclear weapons.