December 10, 2013 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Lauren Mladenka

Nuclear famine - A limited nuclear war between India and Pakistan would cause famine on a global scale by harming agricultural production. “The number of people threatened by nuclear-war induced famine would be well over two billion,” according to a new study from Physicians for Social Responsibility.

--Recent studies have shown that a nuclear war involving 100 Hiroshima-sized bombs - less than 0.5% of the world’s nuclear weapons - would kick up enough soot into the atmosphere to block sunlight, disrupt global climates and cause crop failures for years after such a war. The decline in agricultural production in the U.S. and China would be enough to cause global food shortages and price increases, potentially pulling billions of people into famine.

--Full report: “Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk: Global Impacts of Limited Nuclear War on Agriculture, Food Supplies, and Human Nutrition” by Ira Helfand of Physicians for Social Responsibility. (pdf) http://bit.ly/1cmA44w [1]

Prevention - “The international community should continue to take practical steps to prevent additional countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. But this effort to prevent proliferation must be matched by real progress to eliminate the far greater danger posed by the vast arsenals that already exist. Simply put, the only way to eliminate the threat of nuclear war or risk of an accidental launch or mishap is to eliminate nuclear weapons,” writes Ira Helfand on his recent study. Full article at CNN. http://cnn.it/1jIh1bR [2]

--See also: ”Nuclear War Would 'End Civilization' With Famine: Study” by Shaun Tandon for AFP. http://bit.ly/1e2XAKI [3]

Agreement at risk - “While not perfect, the six-month hiatus is unquestionably a good deal and would put the first meaningful curbs on Iran’s program in a decade,” writes the New York Times editorial board on the Iran nuclear deal. However, any new sanctions from Congress - as some Democrats and Republicans in both the House and Senate seem intent to inflict - could kill agreement.

--”The outcome of these [sanctions] efforts is unclear. What is clear is that they are not only unproductive but unnecessary because Congress could, at any point in the future, order tougher sanctions if any deal falls apart. Equally clear is that they will almost certainly enrage the Iranians. The interim deal stated that no further sanctions should be imposed while it was in force. New penalties would betray that agreement, feed Iranians’ deep mistrust of Americans, deny Mr. Obama negotiating flexibility and, most likely, crush any hope that a diplomatic solution is possible.” Full article here. http://nyti.ms/18RIfL1 [4]

Space for negotiations - “Though this agreement has faced opposition from some in Washington, we and other leading military and national security experts support this first-step agreement with Iran,” write Lt. Gen. Robert Gard Jr. (USA, ret.), Lt. Gen. Norman Seip (USAF, ret.) and Brig. Gen. Stephen Cheney (USMC, ret.) on the recent Iran deal.

--“Strong international sanctions have succeeded in bringing Iran to the negotiating table. Now is the time to allow the diplomats to do their work. Now is not the time to enact a new round of sanctions that would push the Iranians away and sabotage the diplomatic effort.” Full article in Stars and Stripes. http://1.usa.gov/18iIq1u [5]

Sanctions watch - Sens. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) “are preparing legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran in six months if an interim deal on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program goes nowhere, penalties that Iran's foreign minister has said would kill the agreement,” writes Timothy Gardner. “The legislation, which faces an uphill battle amid opposition from the White House, would seek to limit the ability of President Barack Obama’s administration to waive sanctions on Iran. It would also reimpose sanctions if Tehran reneges on an interim deal struck last month.” Reuters has the story. http://reut.rs/18yYoPO [6]

Family matters Kim Jong Un’s sacking of his uncle, Jang Song Thaek, “is the most significant political event in the history of post-Kim Jong Il North Korea,” writes Alexandre Mansourov in a special report for 38 North.

--”Jang’s sacking contributes to the cumulative evidence that the maturing leader continues to dismiss his elder guardians appointed by his father in order to clear the path for his own absolute rule. Obviously, Kim Jong Un has already become powerful enough to exercise full control as his father had planned.” Full analysis here. http://bit.ly/1gVYCWD [7]

Missile defense spending - The compromise National Defense Authorization bill would hike missile defense spending to $9.5 billion. The bill would add $80 to compensate for recent failures of the GMD system, $30 million for new enhanced GMD kill vehicle, and $173 million to Israeli missile defense programs. Andrea Shalal-Esa of Reuters has the story. http://reut.rs/19yY0Ry [8]

Working the details - “Iran and six world powers began expert-level talks on Monday to work out nitty gritty details in implementing a landmark accord for Tehran to curb its disputed nuclear program in return for a limited easing of sanctions,” reports Fredrik Dahl for Reuters. http://reut.rs/1buwqIg [9]

Libyan yellowcake - An IAEA inspection team plans to assess the security of 6,400 barrels of yellowcake - a milled, concentrated form of uranium ore - stored at a non-functional military base in the south of Libya. Louis Charbonneau of Reuters has the story. http://reut.rs/INw5WY [10]

Iran missile advances - Iranian officials claim that the state “has dramatically improved the accuracy of its ballistic missiles by using laser systems,” and “can now strike within two meters (yards) of their targets, compared to 200 meters (yards) previously,” reports Ali Akbar Dareini. “Iran frequently announces breakthroughs in military technology that are impossible to independently verify. But the Pentagon released a rare public report last June noting significant advances in Iranian missile technology, acknowledging that the Islamic Republic has improved the accuracy and firing capabilities of its missiles.” AP reports. http://abcn.ws/1aRyird [11]

Apply now - Tweets @armscontrolnow [12]: Apply to .@ScovillePF by Jan. 6 to work w/ACA and more than two dozen NGOs in DC on intl. peace & security issues. http://www.scoville.org [13]

Quick hits:

--”The CAPE report: what’s the impact on UPF?” by Frank Munger of The Knoxville News Sentinel. http://bit.ly/18yZdrX [14]

--“Expect Kerry, Congress to Clash Over Fragile Iran Nuclear Deal” by Sara Sorcher and Stacy Kaper for the National Journal. http://bit.ly/19eC0PF [15]

--”Stumbling Block for Turkey’s Missile Deal With China” by Gerry Doyle of The New York Times. http://bit.ly/INvQLp [16]

--”The Turkish (Nuclear) Model?” by Aaron Stein at Arms Control Wonk. http://bit.ly/JaEtRn [17]

Events:

--”The Iran Nuclear Deal: Does It Further U.S. National Security?” Hearing with Sec. John Kerry before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Dec. 10 @ 1:00pm. http://1.usa.gov/189IhgI [18]

--”Making Sense of Nuclear Negotiations with Iran: A Good Deal or a Bad Deal?” Discussion with Alireza Nader, Daryl Kimball, and Paul Pillar at 2168 Rayburn House Office Building. Dec. 10 from 2:00-3:00. RSVP details here. http://bit.ly/18hj5jc [19]

--”Avoiding Future Irans: A New Course for U.S. Nonproliferation Policy.” Discussion with Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Rep. Brad Sherman, Sen. Ed Markey (invited), Mark Wallace, Daryl Kimball, Kingston Reif, Christopher Paine, and Robert Zarate at B338 Rayburn House Office Building. Dec. 11 from 11:45-1:30. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1cUWprv [20]

--”Understanding the Iran Nuclear Deal.” Online webinar with Reza Marashi. Dec. 11 from 3:30 to 4:30. RSVP online. http://bit.ly/1bs2g8L [21]

--”Critical Mass: Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East.” Discussion with Rep. Jim Cooper, Rep. Mac Thornberry, and Andrew Krepinevich at 2218 Rayburn House Office Building. Dec. 12 at 10:00. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1863IPJ [22]

--”Key Policy Issues for U.S. Nuclear Cooperation.” Discussion with Rose Gottemoeller, Daniel Poneman, Thomas Moore, Mary Beth Nikitin, Miles Pomper (possible), Leonard Spector (possible), and Steve Rademaker at the Atlantic Council. Dec. 12 from 3:00-5:30pm. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1cUX6kw [23]

--”New Nuclear Suppliers.” Discussion with Chris Gadomski and Gretchen Hund at Center for Strategic and International Studies, room 212-A/B, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW. Dec. 13 from 9:00 to 11:30. RSVP details here. link [24]

--Deterrence Stability and Escalation Control in South Asia.” Discussion with Rose Gottemoeller, Robert Einhorn, Mansoor Ahmed, and Silakanta Mishra at Stimson. Dec. 13 from 11:30-2:00. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1dLltq3 [25]