On the radar: North Korea’s rocket record worsens to 0-4; Using leverage in Istanbul; Salehi on principles for talks; Signs of progress; Rocket science is hard; How to undercut our diplomats; After Chicago; the Missile defense debate; Defining suspension; the Anti-arms control message; and Schmidt & Nunn on zero.

Failure on stage one - North Korea’s attempted rocket launch failed less than two minutes into flight. The rocket flew approximately 250 km before the first stage likely failed, with the rest of the rocket and its satellite falling into the Yellow Sea. David Wright at All Things Nuclear has the early analysis.

--”Because the launch ended so early, North Korea would have gotten relatively little information from the launch that would be useful for advancing its development program.” http://owl.li/agt2L [1]

Using our leverage with Iran - “The United States and its partners are going into talks with Iran this weekend in a position of strength that would have been hard to imagine four short years ago. This is in large part thanks to the Obama administration's hard diplomatic work rebuilding alliances and, importantly, its demonstrated willingness to engage in good faith with the Iranian regime,” writes Matt Duss for Foreign Policy.

-”The near-term goal should be to continue to lengthen Iran's nuclear timeline while trying to build a combination of carrot and sticks to achieve the more comprehensive deal in the future. This isn't "squandering" leverage; it's making sure the United States and its partners preserve the significant leverage they now have to secure immediate and long-term objectives.” http://owl.li/agt41 [2]

Quote - “In the upcoming talks, we hope that all sides will return to the negotiating table as equals with mutual respect; that all sides will be committed to comprehensive, long-term dialogue aimed at resolving all parties’ outstanding concerns; and, most important, that all sides make genuine efforts to reestablish confidence and trust,” writes Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi in The Washington Post.

--Op-ed title: “We do not Want Nuclear Weapons.” http://owl.li/agt5x [3]

Benchmarks for Iran talks - It won’t be easy to assess the progress of the upcoming talks with Iran. Mark Hibbs, Ariel Levite and George Perkovich in the NYT provide some possible benchmarks.

--Things to watch for: A drop in oil prices would reflect optimism about the course of diplomacy. Iran granting IAEA access to its nuclear program would show Iran’s willingness to cooperate. Sustained bilateral talks between the U.S. and Iran would also be a good sign. So too would be more frequent and prolonged negotiating rounds. Also look for visible progress by June. http://owl.li/agt6P [4]

Happy Friday the 13th & Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email [5] or follow us on twitter [6].

--Have a tip? Email earlywarning@ploughshares.org [7]. Want to support this work? Click here [8].

Rocket science is hard - “To successfully launch a rocket into space...you need expertise in lots of things. Lots of physics. Lots of safe handling of dangerous chemicals. And lots of experience,” writes Spencer Ackerman for Danger Room. North Korea, in short, lacks the experience and the practice - as evident by their repeated missile failures.

--Read more on “Why North Korea Sucks at Rocket Technology.” http://owl.li/agt8u [9]

Spoof Tweet - @KimJongNumberUn [10]: “Still confused about what went wrong. Thought Diet Coke and Mentos was foolproof.”

Diplomacy and the deliberative body - Hawks in Congress routinely push sanctions that have a history of undercutting efforts to resolve the situation with Iran diplomatically, writes Jamal Abdi in Huffington Post. This is bound to happen again as the U.S. and Iran enter the upcoming talks.

--Progress with Iran or not, ”Either way, Congress is pushing its sanctions. And if a new Congressional sanctions push is successful, the president may be blocked -- either politically or perhaps even legally -- from leveraging sanctions in exchange for Iranian concessions, killing any deal.” http://owl.li/agt9N [11]

Report - “Looking Beyond the Chicago Summit: Nuclear Weapons in Europe and the Future of NATO” by George Perkovich, Malcolm Chalmers, Steven Pifer, Paul Schulte and Jaclyn Tandler. (pdf) http://owl.li/agtaV [12]

Missile defense debate - 60 years and many billions of dollars later, the U.S. does not have an effective missile defense system. The U.S. does, however, have a loud political debate about the utility of spending money (~$9 billion per year) on missile defense projects with dismal testing records, reports Politico.

--“You hear some of them say that it’s the only defense of the United States against ballistic missiles we’ve got. But the problem is, it doesn’t work,” said Lt. Gen. Robert Gard Jr..

”Missile defense is the longest running scam in the Department of Defense...We do not have a system that is remotely capable of defending the United States against a long range missile. It’s mainly kept alive by politics,” said Joe Cirincione. http://owl.li/agtc4 [13]

Effective suspension - The international community lacks an adequate model of uranium enrichment suspension. This opens up unnecessary diversion risks, argues David Nusbaum in The Bulletin.

--”The only way to ensure compliance with suspension is [for the IAEA] to insist on the dismantlement and sealing of all equipment in those parts of the facility that are most sensitive. In particular, the feed supply system, the product recovery system, and the electric supply should be verifiably dismantled as standard procedure during the suspension of an enrichment facility. It is crucial for inspectors to be constantly present during the suspension period.” http://owl.li/agtdb [14]

Leverage with Iran, Benchmarks for Talks

On the radar: North Korea’s rocket record worsens to 0-4; Using leverage in Istanbul; Salehi on principles for talks; Signs of progress; Rocket science is hard; How to undercut our diplomats; After Chicago; the Missile defense debate; Defining suspension; the Anti-arms control message; and Schmidt & Nunn on zero.

Recurring Payne - For politicians and pundits who oppose arms control, Keith Payne’s arguments are a reliable source for talking points. To preview this year’s talking points, read Payne’s latest in The Weekly Standard: “Nuclear Utopianism: The Wishful Thinking of U.S. Arms Control.” http://owl.li/agthP [15]

--Rebuttal: The National Interest accused Payne of “Nuking a Straw Man.” http://owl.li/agteH [16]

Schmidt and Nunn - “We believe the United States and Germany, NATO and all of Europe, including Russia, have a special leadership role to play in support of global efforts to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons, to prevent their spread into dangerous hands, and ultimately to end them as a threat to the world,” write Helmut Schmidt and Sam Nunn in The New York Times. http://nyti.ms/HFXxES [17]