Managing the bombWhat are the differences? We have seen how proposals to “internationalize” the control of atomic weapons within the UN foundered Initiatives took the following formsU.S. Strategic Forces, 1990 & 2008There’s still a long way to go…In 1998, Charles Glaser presented one argument against disarmamentCan we get to Zero? Must nuclear weapons be “uninvented” first?The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) required that 5 “nuclear weapons states” (NWS) engage in meaningful efforts to reduAs we shall see1Managing the bombIf we must live with nuclear weapons, how can we survive them?2Historically, there have been two approaches to this questionA program of nuclear weapons abolition: DisarmamentA program of nuclear weapons management: Arms Control3What are the differences? Disarmament• Reduce and eliminate existing arsenals and stockpiles• Ensure that countries do not cheat or fail to disarm• Control diffusion of nuclear technology and applications• Monitor all nuclear activities to prevent weaponization• Monitor production & trade in nuclear materials• Punish violationsArms Control• Establish limits on arsenals and stockpiles or warheads• Establish limits on delivery platforms (missiles, bombers)• Develop & implement program of reductions• Develop system of monitoring and inspection• Limit diffusion of weapons technologies & materials4Some problems with disarmament “Nuclear weapons cannot be uninvented”It is almost impossible to control nuclear materials flowsStates will object to intrusive monitoringStates will be inclined to hide weapons and “break out” in a crisis5Some problems with arms controlIt is difficult to monitor numbers of weapons & their specificationsIt legitimizes nuclear arsenals & deterrence policiesIt is very difficult to manage or slow down technological changeIt is difficult to compare apples and oranges: different platforms and systems6Arms control and disarmament have a history: a number of agreements and treaties during the 20thcentury tried to restrict weapons systems and abolish warThe Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 outlawed warThe London Naval Conference of 1930 put limits on warshipsThe 1899 Hague Convention with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land declared that it is “especially prohibited...to employ poison or poisoned arms.”The 1925 Geneva Protocol to the Hague Conventions was entitled the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare.7We have seen how proposals to “internationalize” the control of atomic weapons within the UN foundered • U.S. refusal to give up nukes until architecture was in place• Soviet desire to acquire atomic weapons to match U.S.• British wish to continue to play an international role• Various disarmament talks proceeded during 1950s• But no one was willing to take the first step8Initiatives took the following forms• 1952-57: UN Disarmament Commission• 1952: U.S. plan for disclosure & verification of all armed forces & armaments (inc. atomic)• 1953: Atoms for Peace• 1955: Eisenhower announced that disarmament no longer feasible• 1955: USSR agreed to Western proposal to prohibit use & manufacture of nukes, leading to eventual destruction of all nukes• West refused to proceed, proposed “Open Skies” for inspection9•to stop all nuclear testing •halt production of nuclear weapons materials •start a reduction in nuclear weapons stockpiles •reduce the danger of surprise attack through warning systems•begin reductions in armed forces and armaments. •This came to naughtIn 1957, NATO presented a set of "Proposals for Partial Measures of Disarmament" to the UN10In 1958, a Conference of Experts from East and West met in Geneva to discuss verification of a nuclear test ban—at the end of the year, a one year moratorium on nuclear testing was in placeBut in September 1961, due to French nuclear testing and the Berlin Crisis, the USSR announced it would resume testing, and the U.S. followed suit in April 196211Although the UN continued disarmament discussions until the present day, by 1961, nuclear disarmament by the superpowers was off the table—replaced by arms controlIn 1963, the Limited Test Ban Treaty, barring nuclear testing in the atmosphere, oceans and outer space, was signed by the United States, Britain and the USSR12The NNPT was opened for accession in 1968 and today has 190 signatories. In was extended indefinitely in 1995. Non-members include: Israel, India, Pakistan, while North Korea has withdrawn. But it has been a relative success.13The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) between the US and USSR began in Helsinki in 1969. An ABM Treaty and the SALT I agreement were signed in 197214This was eventually followed by the SALT II agreement, signed in1979 but never ratified as a result of charges that the Soviets gained an advantage and would cheat, anyway.15The SALT agreements did little to halt the arms race: they limited the number of “platforms” from which warheads could be launched, but nothing to limit the numbers of warheadsU.S. strategic nuclear warheads, 1970-1975SALT did institutionalize “National Means of Verification,”i.e. satellite reconnaissance over opponent’s territory to monitor weapons-related activities16SALT came under severe attack from the right and, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the negotiations stopped. In 1982, Reagan proposed, instead, “Strategic Arms Reduction Talks” (START)The START I agreement was signed in 1991; START II in 199317Under START, weapons systems are being systematically dismantled—how far has this gotten?18A number of other agreements were signed during the 1980s and 1990sThe Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in 1987 eliminated the EuromissilesConventional Forces in Europe Treaty in 1990 imposed limits on both NATO & WTO•20,000 tanks•20,000 artillery pieces•30,000 armored combat vehicles•6,800 combat aircraft •2,000 attack helicopters The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was opened for signing in 1996, and now has 177 members, 138 who have ratified (but not the U.S.)19Strategic Nuclear Delivery VehiclesStrategic Nuclear WarheadsSeptember 1990 July 2008 September 1990July 2008 ICBMsSS-11 326 0 326 0SS-13 40 0 40 0SS-17 47 0 188 0SS-18 308 104 3,080 1,040SS-19 300 122 1,800 732SS-24 (Silo) 56 0 560 0SS-24 (Rail) 33 0 330 0SS-25 288 192 288 192SS-27 (Silo) 0 48 0