[Peace-discuss] Fwd: Panel Finds No Major Flaws in Nuclear Treaty

[Margaret E. Kosal]

The US National Academy of Sciences released a report Wednesday refuting 
the US Congress's assertions against ratification of the Comprehensive 
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) on technical grounds.

Perhaps if we accept Munson's response to the NAS report as true: "This 
doesn't dramatically change the debate," it may be a more revealing 
statement than the NY Times piece suggests.  Rather than a play off Biden's 
remarks, Munson asserts underlying policy - that technical testing issues 
are not at the core of objection to the CTBT, If the specter of non-US 
states obtaining (or allegations of attempts to obtain nuclear weapons) 
remains, that leaves open the option for the US to selectively invoke those 
real or alleged activities as a rationale for military intervention against 
those states.

For others obsessed with primary data, the NAS report is available online 
at http://www.nap.edu/books/0309085063/html/ (open book form rather than 
downloadable.)

Namaste,
Margaret
nerdgirl at s.scs.uiuc.edu

>Panel Finds No Major Flaws in Nuclear Treaty
>
>August 1, 2002
>By JAMES GLANZ
>
>None of the major technical issues raised by opponents of
>the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty posed a serious
>problem, a panel of experts reported yesterday. The treaty
>was defeated in the Senate in 1999.
>
>The panel was convened by the National Academy of Sciences
>to assess objections to the treaty. The 19-member panel,
>including three former directors of national laboratories,
>former nuclear weapons designers, several physicists and
>military experts, completed the report after a yearlong
>study.
>
>Opponents of the treaty had argued that some countries
>might undertake clandestine tests to develop nuclear
>weaponry or improve an existing stockpile and that the
>United States' stockpile of nuclear weapons could
>deteriorate and become unreliable without testing.
>
>Those objections, in particular the stockpile issue, have
>no solid technical basis, says the panel, which was led by
>Dr. John P. Holdren, a physicist who is chairman of the
>program in science, technology and public policy at the
>John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.
>
>"We judge that the United States has the technical
>capabilities to maintain confidence in the safety and
>reliability of its existing nuclear weapon stockpile under
>the C.T.B.T., provided that adequate resources are made
>available," the report concluded.
>
>Even in the testing era, which for the United States ended
>in 1992, explosions were used more for creating and
>building new weapons - which the nation is no longer doing
>- than for testing the existing stockpile for reliability,
>the report says.
>
>Scientists also use computer simulations and other
>techniques to assess stockpile components without nuclear
>explosions.
>
>Most of a nuclear weapon's 6,000 parts are nonnuclear
>components that are not only the elements most likely to
>deteriorate and fail but also those that can be tested
>separately for problems, Dr. Holdren said.
>
>"You can test the hell out of the electronics," he said.
>"You can test the hell out of the high explosives. You can
>test the hell out of the fusing.
>
>"The only thing you can't test" under the treaty, is the
>nuclear subsystem itself."
>
>Inspections, technical assessments and repairs of existing
>warheads in the nation's "stockpile stewardship" program
>should be adequate for those other tests, the report said -
>if the work is adequately financed and rigorously
>performed.
>
>Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Delaware Democrat who is
>chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a
>strong supporter of the test ban treaty, said the report
>"should be read by every official who cares about the
>future of our nuclear deterrent."
>
>"We especially need to heed its recommendations regarding
>stockpile stewardship," Mr. Biden said.
>
>Others said the panel's findings were hardly surprising.
>"This doesn't dramatically change the debate," said Lester
>Munson, the Republican spokesman for the Foreign Relations
>Committee, whose ranking minority member, Jesse Helms of
>North Carolina, opposed the treaty.
>
>After its defeat in the Senate, the treaty returned to the
>Foreign Relations Committee, where it remains. Since the
>Bush administration has signaled its opposition to the
>treaty, reintroducing it is unlikely for the moment. But a
>Senate Democratic staff member pointed out that some of the
>report's recommendations, like those on stockpile
>stewardship, could be put into practice now.
>
>The report concluded that major nuclear tests were so
>difficult to hide from worldwide seismic monitors that
>nations that tried to cheat on the test ban treaty would
>almost certainly be caught.
>
>A scheme often discussed for masking underground nuclear
>tests is to carry out the explosions in a large cavern that
>would reduce the intensity of seismic waves that radiate
>outward and can be detected. But even with such measures,
>explosions larger than about a kiloton - equivalent to
>1,000 pounds of conventional explosive - could be detected,
>the academy panel found.
>
>Because even the earliest nuclear weapons had yields of 10
>to 20 kilotons and modern weapons have yields of more than
>100 kilotons, undetectable tests would provide little help
>in developing or refining nuclear weapons.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/01/politics/01NUKE.html?ex=1029277430&ei=1&en=4c45b42a825a0ae7
>
>
>HOW TO ADVERTISE
>---------------------------------
>For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
>or other creative advertising opportunities with The
>New York Times on the Web, please contact
>onlinesales at nytimes.com or visit our online media
>kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo
>
>For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
>help at nytimes.com.
>
>Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company