Defense budget “cuts” may be deceiving

FY17 defense budget discontent - “Budget historians, remember Nov. 2, 2015: the day that disciplined defense budgeting died in Washington. On that day, President Barack Obama signed a deal to fund the government through FY 2017, a deal that threw the Pentagon another $33 billion more for defense than it received in FY 2015,” writes Gordon Adams for Foreign Policy.

--“The one major program that might have appeared to suffer a real funding cut was for a new Air Force aircraft called the Long-Range Strike Bomber, or LRS-B. Peel off the sticker that claims savings of $250 million on the LRS-B, however, and you’ll find that the Pentagon’s delay in awarding the contract — which went to Northrop Grumman — meant the program was moving slower than planned, saving some upfront money, but inflicting no long-term harm to the contractors.” Read the full opinion here. http://atfp.co/1lg1N33

Tweet - @masspeaceaction: Mary Popeo: Shift Spending from #Nuclear Weapons to Human Needs @mawiepo @gzboston. Testimony of hearing bit.ly/1OzDUzY

The dirty bomb scare is real - “I have dedicated most of my professional life to reducing and eliminating the nuclear threats to our country and our planet. They are horrifying enough without any exaggeration. The Islamic State has repeatedly demonstrated its barbarity, including its willingness to use chemical weapons against civilian targets. There should be no question that if given the means and opportunity, they would do the same with nuclear or radiological weapons. That is nothing to scoff at. And the threat is only growing worse,” write Joe Cirincione and Geoff Wilson for War on the Rocks.

--“Simply because something terrible has not happened does not mean that it cannot or will not happen. This is the fallacy of using past performance to predict future behavior; every stockbroker warns you about doing this. A space shuttle had never blown up, before one did. A tsunami had never struck a nuclear power plant, until one did. A terrorist group had never flown planes into office towers, until one did.” Get the full story here. http://bit.ly/1MxVBNW

British row over nuclear deterrent - “Jeremy Corbyn has hit back hard at Britain’s most senior armed forces chief after he warned that the Labour leader's refusal to use nuclear weapons would be a ‘worry’ if he became Prime Minister… [In] response to Mr Corbyn’s vow never to press the nuclear button, [Chief of Defence Staff] General [Sir Nick] Houghton replied: ‘It would worry me if that thought was translated into power,’” writes Paul Waugh for the Huffington Post.

--“‘It is a matter of serious concern that the chief of the defence staff has today intervened directly in issues of political dispute. It is essential in a democracy that the military remains political[ly] neutral at all times,’ Mr Corbyn said... Sir Nick made clear that he felt that Mr Corbyn would have to change his views if he got into power and to realise that nuclear deterrence relied on a credible threat that a Prime Minister would use it.” Read the full story here. http://huff.to/1kCHFYj

Tweet - @nytopinion: India, China and the US all have a role in averting nuclear crisis with Pakistan nyti.ms/1PhrRXS

The nuclear deterrence and taboo paradox - “Current approaches to preventing nuclear warfare entail high risk, are prone to human and mechanical error, and are unlikely to succeed over the next several decades,” writes James Doyle for Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. “In the paradoxical, counterfactual world of nuclear strategy, the concepts of nuclear deterrence and the nuclear taboo also contradict and undermine one another.”

--“Potentially lethal tension exists between nuclear deterrence and the nuclear taboo because the effectiveness of a nation’s nuclear deterrent depends on the credibility of its threat to use those weapons. If one state believes its rival will refrain from nuclear retaliation due to a desire to preserve the nuclear taboo, that state may be less deterred to initiate a nuclear attack. In other words, leaders of nuclear-armed countries must project their capability and willingness to break the nuclear taboo in order to deter potential rivals.” Read the full piece here. http://bit.ly/1Y2tjPB

Tweet - @ukworldnews: Discovery News: Test Tube News: Meet the World's #Nuclear #Weapons Inspectorsj.mp/1MxLbOc

War games could have led to real war - “Last month, the American government finally declassified a presidential analysis of Able Archer and the Russian response that definitively dramatized how the two superpowers came closer to a nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis two decades earlier — and, this time, by accident... The fact that the Warsaw Pact’s military response… was ‘unparalleled in scale… strongly suggests to us that Soviet military leaders may have been seriously concerned that the U.S. would use Able Archer 83 as a cover for launching a real attack.”

--“‘This situation could have been extremely dangerous if during the exercise — perhaps through a series of ill-timed coincidences or because of faulty intelligence — the Soviets had misperceived U.S. actions as preparations for a real attack,’ the report said. ‘Soviet intelligence clearly had tipoffs’ to the Able Archer exercise… and some scenarios suggested a nuclear first strike. Read the full story by Sam Roberts for the New York Times here.http://nyti.ms/20J4Cd6

Tweet - @BulletinAtomic: On #hacking into nuclear weapons verification #technology: ow.ly/UmHb0

Russia’s next-gen nuclear subs - “Russia is developing two new types of nuclear submarines to replace its Project 949A Oscar-class and Project 945 Sierra-class vessels,” reports Dave Majumdar for The National Interest... The Sierra-class replacement is being designed as an ‘interceptor’ that would protect the Russian nuclear ballistic missile submarine fleet while the Oscar-class replacement would be a guided-missile submarine (SSGN) that would hunt U.S. carrier strike groups like their forbearers.”

--“The most interesting aspect of the new Russian designs is not that fact that they are designing a new generation of submarines, but rather the strategy that is driving the requirements for those boats. ‘I think what is more interesting is the missions they plan to use the new designs for,’ Clark said. ‘If they believe they need a SSN [nuclear attack submarine] to protect their SSGNs, then the U.S. can force the Russians into a losing game of adding subs to protect other subs. That was part of the Cold War ASW [anti-submarine warfare] strategy.’” Read the full story here. http://bit.ly/1Qsc0VR

Nuclear debate sidelined as threats grow - “As part of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 70th anniversary issue, author and investigative journalist Eric Schlosser surveys a nuclear landscape full of dangers, from worldwide nuclear weapons modernization programs and heightened nuclear rhetoric to burgeoning stockpiles of fissile material and shortsighted changes in nuclear doctrine.”

--“These dangers are not front-and-center in the public consciousness, as they were in the immediate aftermath of World War II when the Bulletin warned that ‘all we can gain in wealth, economic security,or improved health will be useless if our nation is to live in continuous dread of sudden annihilation.’ But even though the widespread fear of nuclear weapons has diminished, Schlosser writes, ‘the danger is far greater now than when those words were written. And the choice between one world or none is even more urgent.’” Read the full feature here. http://bit.ly/1RLEB72

Quick Hits:

--“A new national park, including Hanford site, recognizes America’s first nuclear weapons,” by Joel Connelly for Seattle Pi.http://bit.ly/1WPbkJN

--“U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues,” by Amy F. Woolf for Congressional Research Service.http://bit.ly/1SFIA5R

--“Tiny Lichens Contain Unique Traces of Decades-Old Nuclear Weapons Tests,” by John Wenz for Popular Mechanics.http://bit.ly/1HurarC

-- “Op-ed: Keeping nuclear weapons from proliferating takes more than a hard line,” by Eric Hyer for The Salt Lake Tribune.http://bit.ly/1NpcLJZ

--“Eliminating v. Prohibiting Nuclear Weapons? Debunking a False Dilemma,” Nobuo Hayashi for Huffington Post. http://huff.to/1Qs6ZfY

Events:

--“Nuclear Detonation Effects in an Urban Area,” featuring John Mercier. Tuesday, November 10th from 12:00 - 1:30 PM at Department of Science and Technology in Society at Virginia Tech, Virginia Tech Research Center, 900 N. Glebe Road, Arlington, VA. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1KXP39b

--“Bridging the Military Nuclear Materials Gap,” featuring Joan Rohlfing and Andrew Bieniawski of the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Tuesday, November 10th from 4:00 - 6:00 PM at House of Sweden, 2900 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20007. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1KUhgdz

--“Stimson Debate: Nuclear Weapons and International Stability,” featuring Ward Wilson and Elbridge Colby. Thursday, November 12th from 12:30 - 1:30 PM at the Stimson Center, 8th Floor, 1211 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1GGdWaM

--“Boldness and Opportunity: The N Square Exhibit” celebrating the 70th Anniversary of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. Monday, November 16th - 19th from 10:00 AM - 4:00 PM at The William Eckhardt Research Center, 5640 South Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL. For more information visit http://bit.ly/1OBEhtB