On the radar: RAND analyst on if Iran got the bomb; Minuteman test; Cartwright and Yadlin; Nuclear security; PSI after 10 years; the Dark heart of the USS Enterprise; and the unfortunately named “U-crap.”
May 29, 2013 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Alyssa Demus
Check your assumptions - “Although a nuclear-armed Iran would be a dangerous development, a closer look demonstrates that it could well be a containable challenge for the United States and its allies,” writes Alireza Nader of RAND. Nader bursts several common myths about Iran policy, including assertions that Iran cannot be deterred, would be emboldened by the bomb, and cannot be contained.
--”A nuclear-armed Iran is a dangerous possibility. But that should not distract American decision-makers from seriously thinking about containment. Containing Iran will be costly, but a policy of pure prevention [with the possibility of a bloody war with Iran] could be even costlier,” writes Nader. Full post at Foreign Policy. http://atfp.co/ZeeL2E [1]
Just another test - Minuteman ICBM test launches typically receive scant press attention. The launch last week - previously postponed during the latest war of words with North Korea - is an exception, because the Pentagon’s public linkage of the postponement to tensions with North Korea.
--Andrea Berger argues the U.S. should have just tested its missile and not hyped it, because now the North Korean press is paying attention to that missile - perhaps incentivizing the North to attempt to demonstrate a long-range ballistic missile capability of its own. Full post at Foreign Policy. http://atfp.co/11ykzqk [2]
Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email [3] or follow us on twitter [4].
--Have a tip or feedback for the editor? Email earlywarning@ploughshares.org earlywarning@ploughshares.org [5]. Want to support this work? Click here [6].
Questions on the military option - In a thought exercise, Gen. James Cartwright (USMC, Ret.) and Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin (IDF, Ret.) lay out a series of questions the U.S. president and Israeli prime minister would need answered if the U.S. and Israel were to agree on preparing military options against Iran’s nuclear site.
--Included questions: Which country could better carry out a focused military campaign with the least potential for escalation? If escalation leads to war, which country is best positioned to end the conflict? How would the politics play out - domestically and abroad? Full post at The Atlantic. http://bit.ly/16p5N8f [7]
Spoiler tweet - @ColinKahl [8]: Cartwright & Yadlin compare costs/bens of US vs Isr strike against #Iran w/out coming 2 a clear conclusion. http://bit.ly/16p5N8f [7]
State of play on nuclear security - “US budget cuts threaten nuclear safety” by David Culp in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. http://bit.ly/1az0NdP [9]
Conventions & wisdom - Recent security failures at U.S. nuclear facilities highlight the need for more stringent nuclear security practices. Implementing two international accords - The International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism and the 2005 Amendment to the Convention on Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials - are critical elements of enhanced U.S. and global nuclear security. Last week, the House passed both, now its time for the Senate to do the same, writes Joan Rohlfing in The Hill. Full post here. http://owl.li/lvgey [10]
PSI, 10 years on - Ten years ago, the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) went into effect - creating a mechanism to enforce existing laws which govern the interdiction of vessels carrying WMDs, WMD technology, and components used to build WMDs. Ian Williams at Arms Control Now offers recommendations for how to turn PSI into a stronger institution and improve its efficacy. http://owl.li/lvlmP [11]
Tweet - @armscontrolnow [12]: Brits argue over nukes they don't need, can't afford. Tidbits from Westminster Blog. http://bit.ly/1ayPLoT [13]
Iran’s nuclear politics - Responding to accusations that he “halted Iran’s nuclear development,” Iranian presidential candidate and former nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani, argued “the Islamic Republic expanded uranium enrichment during his tenure,” in an interview Monday. “Its good if you study history...We mastered the (nuclear) technology...We didn’t allow Iran to be attacked,” Rohani said.
--While Iranians will likely cast their votes according to candidates’ economic platforms, the nuclear issue which has been “used to discredit rivals before,” will still likely play a role in voter’s decisions. Yeganeh Torbati at Reuters has the story. http://owl.li/lvd68 [14]
Tweet - @ColinKahl [15]: Jalili's emerging frontrunner status bodes ill for #Iran nuke compromise. http://t.co/WtASQnqVpV [16]
Events:
--"Nuclear Terrorism: What’s at Stake?" Jay Cohen, David Waller, Stephen Flynn, Stanton Sloane. May 29 8:00-9:30 am. American Security Project. 1100 New York Ave, NW, Seventh Floor, West Tower. Details here. http://owl.li/lcEuT [17]
--”The Kaleidoscope Turns Again in a Crisis-Challenged Iran,” Yasmin Alem and Suzanne Maloney, moderated by Barbara Slavin. May 30, 12:00-1:30 pm @ The Atlantic Council. Details here. http://owl.li/l8cYq [18]
--”Ballistic Missile Defense- Technical, Strategic and Arms Control Challenges.” Discussion with Phil Coyle, George Lewis and Bruce MacDonald, Pierce Corden and Charles Ferguson to moderate. June 6th from 4:45-7:00pm at AAAS, reception to follow. Details here. http://bit.ly/188gZ90 [19]
--House Armed Services Committee, markup of the defense authorization bill, H.R. 1960, which includes the nuclear weapons and nuclear nonproliferation programs of NNSA. June 5, 10:00 am. Webcast here. http://owl.li/lsGRO [20]
--Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, hearing on the Missile Defense Agency budget, with Vice Adm. James Syring, Director, Missile Defense Agency. June 5, 10:00 am. Webcast here. http://owl.li/lsHgp [21]
--"Missiles in South Asia: Deterrence Stability on the Subcontinent.” Rob Williams and Dinshaw Mistry. June 5 12:30-2:30 pm @ Stimson Center. Details here. http://owl.li/lsHBz [22]
Dessert:
Nerd alert - “The Starship Enterprise’s Dark Nuclear Past” by Paul Carroll and your humble Early Warning editor at the Ploughshares Fund blog. http://bit.ly/Zrqkpu [23]
The U-crap - The struggling, multi-billion dollar Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) recently was renamed the “Uranium Capabilities Replacement Project” or UCRP. The National Nuclear Security Administration is reluctant to use the name, perhaps because of the acronym UCRP - pronounced U-crap. Frank Munger questions the rebranding at The Knoxville News Sentinel. http://bit.ly/112rFxn [24]