Comments on: Touting “Youth” and “Vitality,” McCain Suggests Nuclear Position of Treaties, Existing Policies, and Elimination of Nuclear Weapons http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/ News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security today. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:32:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Jonah Czerwinski http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106233 Jonah Czerwinski Thu, 29 May 2008 22:19:11 +0000 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106233 Arnold -- Thanks for your comment. I was being a bit sarcastic by using Senator McCain's criticism of Obama's engagement policy against him. It was hard to resist when McCain suggested the same kind of engagement in order to motivate Iran toward the end of his speech. As for the DNDO, I agree that efforts at securing the source are paramount, but I don't subscribe the notion that a dollar spent on detection is one less dollar spent on nonproliferation. So the holy grail of passive detection of shielded HEU is still distant, this doesn't mean that it should be downgraded as a pursuit, as you rightly suggested ("Research into advanced detection technologies should proceed....). The important goal, I think you’ll agree, is to make sure that the next president's counter nuclear proliferation strategy includes detection capabilities because such science serves a dual role of helping to secure the sources and roll back proliferation (inspections), as well as combat the threat of smuggled nuclear weapons. Arnold –

Thanks for your comment. I was being a bit sarcastic by using Senator McCain’s criticism of Obama’s engagement policy against him. It was hard to resist when McCain suggested the same kind of engagement in order to motivate Iran toward the end of his speech.

As for the DNDO, I agree that efforts at securing the source are paramount, but I don’t subscribe the notion that a dollar spent on detection is one less dollar spent on nonproliferation. So the holy grail of passive detection of shielded HEU is still distant, this doesn’t mean that it should be downgraded as a pursuit, as you rightly suggested (”Research into advanced detection technologies should proceed….).

The important goal, I think you’ll agree, is to make sure that the next president’s counter nuclear proliferation strategy includes detection capabilities because such science serves a dual role of helping to secure the sources and roll back proliferation (inspections), as well as combat the threat of smuggled nuclear weapons.

]]> By: Arnold http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106231 Arnold Thu, 29 May 2008 21:59:58 +0000 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106231 Not sure if you meant this sarcastically or not: "As if we haven’t tried talking to these governments repeatedly over the past two decades" but truth be told we haven't. Not trying to bring up the current popular political arguments about "diplomacy without preconditions" and whatnot, but the U.S. hasn't had an embassy in Tehran since the hostage crisis. There have only been limited attempts at talks over the past two decades, limited to narrow topics. The lack of general engagement probably has contributed to a lack of understanding, influence, etc. Though I don't mean to be the blog foil, I personally don't think "It is hard to discern why McCain would have left out the effort to detect smuggled nuclear weapons, an initiative this country has supported since the Manhattan Project." The leader of the Manhattan Project, Oppenheimer, said it himself in describing the technology required to prevent the smuggling of a nuclear weapon into the U.S.: a screwdriver to open every container. Despite all the recent focus, there are still no technologies on the horizon that can passively detect shielded HEU. This is a point conceded by DNDO. While I think defense in depth is an important concept, and the specter of detection could push wannabe nuclear terrorists to take riskier routes that could lead to their discovery, an emphasis on detection is more likely to lead to a de-emphasis (domestically) on the hard diplomatic work required to lock down HEU and Pu and improve non and counter-proliferation efforts. Research into advanced detection technologies should proceed, as well as improving intelligence and related police work that can break up nuclear smuggling rings, but the prospects for this approach do not justify bringing it to the level of securing nuclear material and efforts at improving non-proliferation. In my humble opinion anyway... Not sure if you meant this sarcastically or not: “As if we haven’t tried talking to these governments repeatedly over the past two decades” but truth be told we haven’t. Not trying to bring up the current popular political arguments about “diplomacy without preconditions” and whatnot, but the U.S. hasn’t had an embassy in Tehran since the hostage crisis. There have only been limited attempts at talks over the past two decades, limited to narrow topics. The lack of general engagement probably has contributed to a lack of understanding, influence, etc.

Though I don’t mean to be the blog foil, I personally don’t think “It is hard to discern why McCain would have left out the effort to detect smuggled nuclear weapons, an initiative this country has supported since the Manhattan Project.” The leader of the Manhattan Project, Oppenheimer, said it himself in describing the technology required to prevent the smuggling of a nuclear weapon into the U.S.: a screwdriver to open every container.

Despite all the recent focus, there are still no technologies on the horizon that can passively detect shielded HEU. This is a point conceded by DNDO. While I think defense in depth is an important concept, and the specter of detection could push wannabe nuclear terrorists to take riskier routes that could lead to their discovery, an emphasis on detection is more likely to lead to a de-emphasis (domestically) on the hard diplomatic work required to lock down HEU and Pu and improve non and counter-proliferation efforts.

Research into advanced detection technologies should proceed, as well as improving intelligence and related police work that can break up nuclear smuggling rings, but the prospects for this approach do not justify bringing it to the level of securing nuclear material and efforts at improving non-proliferation.

In my humble opinion anyway…

]]> By: William R. Cumming http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106096 William R. Cumming Wed, 28 May 2008 21:16:06 +0000 http://www.hlswatch.com/2008/05/28/touting-%e2%80%9cyouth%e2%80%9d-and-%e2%80%9cvitality%e2%80%9d-mccain-suggests-nuclear-position-of-treaties-existing-policies-and-elimination-of-nuclear-weapons/#comment-106096 At the very dawn of the nuclear/atomic age few recognized that the dream of peaceful uses of atomic energy also would lead inevitably to proliferation of weapons. The first 50 years was prologue. As Churchill said after Al Alamain, a desert battle in N. Africa, something like not the end but the end of the beginning. Between now and the 2028 Presidential election proliferation issues will require not just part-time interests by elected officials and appointees but be a major effort rising to the scale of the Manhattan Project itself. Otherwise the world will be dealing with at least 30 nations with nuclear capable ballistic missiles and no real control system but common sense, decency, and regard for our fellow members of the human race. Personally, I think that the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency should be re-established and reinvigorated and have two main divisions, one for conventional arms and one for nuclear arms. Both aspects of arms control must be faced and there is no doubt that the US has been a proliferator of both as have the other 10-12 announced or unannounced nuclear powers. I fully expect the controls safeguards to fail somewhere betwenn now and 2028 leaving a changed world and not for the better. At the very dawn of the nuclear/atomic age few recognized that the dream of peaceful uses of atomic energy also would lead inevitably to proliferation of weapons. The first 50 years was prologue. As Churchill said after Al Alamain, a desert battle in N. Africa, something like not the end but the end of the beginning. Between now and the 2028 Presidential election proliferation issues will require not just part-time interests by elected officials and appointees but be a major effort rising to the scale of the Manhattan Project itself. Otherwise the world will be dealing with at least 30 nations with nuclear capable ballistic missiles and no real control system but common sense, decency, and regard for our fellow members of the human race. Personally, I think that the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency should be re-established and reinvigorated and have two main divisions, one for conventional arms and one for nuclear arms. Both aspects of arms control must be faced and there is no doubt that the US has been a proliferator of both as have the other 10-12 announced or unannounced nuclear powers. I fully expect the controls safeguards to fail somewhere betwenn now and 2028 leaving a changed world and not for the better.

]]>