Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Consequences of nuclear disarmament proposals Adam Mount, Ph.D. LLNL, 4 May, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A WORLDWIDE AND COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR TEST BAN THE ROLE OF NON-NUCLEAR-WEAPON STATES Randy Rydell Ph. D. UN Department for Disarmament Affairs Statement.
Advertisements

Palacky University Olomouc Faculty of Law Law of International Organisations -International Organizations and the Law of Treaties Support.
Security in a nuclear-weapon-free world Presentation by Alyn Ware 8 April 2015, Prague
The Future of Nuclear Weapons More proliferation or further reductions? Keith Hansen February 19, 2015.
Nuclear Disarmament and Arms Control SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks)
April 6, NPR in Context Third comprehensive review of U.S. nuclear policies and posture –Previous reviews in 1994 and 2001 Conducted by DoD.
Week of September 17, Obama: Renewing American Leadership Note significance of title: Renewal Leadership Foundations for rethinking renewal and.
The ICAN Campaign ICAN stands for International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear weapons.
Lesson – Disarmament.  Review goals of NPT treaty.  Compare different types of weapons.  Identify key treaties regulating nuclear arsenals.
Presidents and Foreign Policy and National Security By the Constitution: Has specific powers that make the office important for foreign policy and national.
Lesson 2 – Disarmament.  Review goals of NPT treaty.  Compare different types of weapons.  Identify key treaties regulating nuclear arsenals.  Describe.
 One person from a team up at once.  Touch only your team buzzer (you will lose 1 point)  Answer only if you are first to buzz in (buzzer will blink)
The Role of the President and the Executive Branch.
Security Council resolution 1325 Basic Overview
April 5, The President’s Nuclear Security Agenda First articulated in Prague in April 2009 –Reduce nuclear dangers and pursue the long-term goal.
Ministry for Foreign Affairs Sweden Government Offices of Sweden Sweden and the Nuclear Security Summit Process Jan A. Lodding Deputy Director Disarmament.
Steven Pifer Senior Fellow Center on the United States and Europe Foreign Policy Studies The Brookings Institution New START: Treaty.
Nuclear Weapons: At What Cost ? 1.little do we know 2.rough estimates: cost over time 3.recent estimates: cost at a given time 4.nuclear weapon states.
The Nonproliferation Treaty. Atoms for Peace December 8, 1953 President Eisenhower spoke to the UN suggesting that peaceful uses of the atom be promoted.
What’s a Topic? A brief introduction to how topics are written and chosen.
The Nuclear Club Who’s in? Who’s out? And where do we go from here?
Lesson 1– The NPT.  Students will differentiate between nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Students will explain the history and purpose of.
Lesson 1– The NPT.  Students will differentiate between nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Students will explain the history and purpose of.
US Dependence on Strategic Nuclear Weapons Does shifting to “zero” make sense? Keith Hansen June 15, 2012.
Steps to Safety: Reducing the Danger of Nuclear Weapons.
Arms Control & Disarmament. AC & D two different concepts: AC refers to curbs on acquiring new Weapons – or reduction in some existing weapon types Disarmament.
Outline for 10/3: Weapons of Mass Destruction Considerations in acquiring WMDs US nuclear force policy ABM Treaty Various WMD regimes with a focus on the.
Lesson 1– The NPT.  Students will differentiate between nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Students will explain the history and purpose of.
The Presidency and Foreign Policy 5 December 2011.
The Presidency and Foreign Policy 9 December 2010.
OSCE Experience in CSBMs Lessons Learnt
Towards Weapons of Mass Destruction-Free Zone in the Middle East Dr. Vladimir Orlov President, PIR Center April 19, 2013.
Objectives and Strategies for a Successful Middle East WMDFZ Conference, Finland Rebecca E. Johnson Ph.D, ICAN Vice-Chair The Peace Boat, 23 March.
Independent Task Force Report on U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy: Presentation to Oak Ridge National Laboratory Dr. Charles D. Ferguson Philip D. Reed Senior.
Nuclear Proliferation
Proliferation weapons of mass destruction © 2014 wheresjenny.com Proliferation weapons of mass destruction.
Foreign & Defense Policies. Discussion Questions:  Why do you think the Founders intentionally divided responsibility for foreign affairs between president.
Accounting for Inter-Organizational Relations: the EU, the UN and the Iranian Nuclear Program ( ) Spyros Blavoukos
NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN 2013 Steven Pifer Senior Fellow Director, Arms Control Initiative October 10, 2012.
CONCLUSION OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS 2010 PRESENTATION TO JOINT COMMITTEES MEETING 1.
Ratification of the Second Revision of the EU-ACP Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA) Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on International Relations.
Lesson 1– The NPT.  Students will differentiate between nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Students will explain the history and purpose of.
Lesson 2 – Disarmament.  Review goals of NPT treaty.  Compare different types of weapons.  Identify key treaties regulating nuclear arsenals.  Describe.
Can the Thought & Logic of NFU Be Diffused to All Nuclear Weapon States? Can the Thought & Logic of NFU Be Diffused to All Nuclear Weapon States? Liu,
Engaging parliamentarians in the process to achieve a Middle East Zone free from Nuclear Weapons and other Weapons of Mass Destruction Alyn Ware Parliamentarians.
NPT or CTR? Gains and Losses for Stockpile Security Lars van Dassen, SKI Morten Bremer Märli, NUPI.
Copyright © 2014 Cengage Learning FOREIGN POLICY AND NATIONAL SECURITY Chapter Seventeen.
IS ARMS CONTROL THE ANSWER? What makes WMDs different? Chem, bio, & nuke vs. conventional weapons They seem.
C5 Cell Step 4 - Decisive Points (DRAFT). DP 1 : Hostility Between Kuhistan and Sonora has Ceased Ending Conditions Key Components Critical to successful.
“A world free of nuclear weapons would be a global public good of the highest order” and ICAN is a means to this goal. Sec-Gen Ban Ki Moon (Oct 2008)‏
Summary of Scientific Studies The environmental consequences of a “regional” nuclear war would cause massive global famineThe environmental consequences.
DO WE REALLY NEED TO WORRY ABOUT WMDS? What is a “weapon of mass destruction”? Why are they “different”? Is the classification WMD an example of hegemony?
Day 8.  Review goals of NPT treaty.  Review current threats to global nuclear security.  Reflect on content & skill learning.
Technical Division Overview: Nonproliferation & Arms Control Mission To promote and advance the research, development and application of effective technologies.
The UK’s National Defence Needs and International Nuclear Disarmament Responsibilities Final report and recommendations #NET.
WHAT HAPPENS TO DETERRENCE AS NUCLEAR WEAPONS DECREASE TOWARD ZERO? INVITED TALK AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA SIDNEY DRELL STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
STOCKTAKING OF ARF COOPERATION ON NON-PROLIFERATION 1 st ARF Inter-Sessional Meeting on Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ISM on NPD) Beijing, 1-3 July.
What is required for nuclear disarmament?
The Future of US-Russia Nuclear Arms Control
Saturday Night Live youtube. com/watch
Modern world today There are a lot of internal and international conflicts all over the world. Force methods are often used and have high effectiveness.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AND NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONES
The Anti-Nuclear Movement and Efforts at Disarmament
Institutional changes The role of Bilateral Oversight Boards
Impact of Hypersonic Glide Technologies on Nuclear Deterrence
Missile Madness.
Disarmament and Peace Studies
About the IPNDV More than 25 countries with and without nuclear weapons which are: Identifying challenges of nuclear disarmament verification Developing.
Presentation transcript:

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Consequences of nuclear disarmament proposals Adam Mount, Ph.D. LLNL, 4 May, 2014

Mount: LLNL 6/4/ : NPT 1977: Carter, UN 1986: Reagan, Reykjavik 2009: Obama, Prague 2009: S/RES/ : Nuclear Posture Review Nuclear disarmament proposals 1945: Truman, November 1946: A/RES/1 1946: Baruch to UNAEC 1961: Kennedy, AU 1961: Kennedy, UN ( GCD ) 1961: McCloy-Zorin accords 1964: Johnson, State of the Union ( GCD ) The U. S. has periodically issued commitments to disarm, sometimes in response to transnational activism or multilateral initiatives. Less studied is the effects of different types of disarmament proposals. 1.Multilateral treaty 2.Nuclear weapons ban 3.Obsolescence 4.Unilateral disarmament

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Multilateral disarmament treaty D EFINE : A negotiated treaty containing provisions for verified dismantlement and continued inspections P ROCESS : Voluntary bilateral U. S.-Russia reductions lead to P-5 participation for further reductions. Progress on related agreements ( CTBT, FMCT, NPT ) build confidence. Once at low numbers, disarmament is verified simultaneously in all nations. S OURCES : Perkovich & Lewis (2009) Fetter & Oelirch (2010) Acton (2011), Holloway (2011) Modest steps could have major benefits for related agreements Exerts pressure on proliferants / pariahs Incentivizes interest in verification ( UKNI ), diplomatic sequencing Multilateral agreements are more popular Some types of stockpile funding could be supportive of disarmament commitments UKNI ( ) PREPCOM (5/14)

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Nuclear weapons ban D EFINE : A legal prohibition proposed by a international group with moral authority P ROCESS : A transnational activist group or multilateral movement gathers sufficient support for its weapons ban to have bearing on international law or public opinion and nuclear countries accede to the statement. The text could directly mandate disarmament or apply it indirectly (through moral criticism of deterrence, for example). S OURCES : HINW, Nayarit (2014) ICJ (1996) The U. S. is not part of the HINW initiative, or it might have prevented movement toward a ban Diplomatic/public opinion benefits from participation Movements interested in a ban can be productive on related issues Enthusiasm for a ban could affect the 2015 NPT REVCON or the discussions on a Middle-East Nuclear Weapons Free Zone – (and therefore on nonproliferation efforts in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and others)

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Disarmament through obsolescence D EFINE : Nuclear capability is eliminated when the U. S. can no longer certify its nuclear assets safe and reliable for deployment. P ROCESS : Intentionally or unintentionally, stockpile management decisions lead to decreased nuclear capability. A lack of knowledge or resources, brought on by a protracted test-ban or Congressional decisions, render the arsenal too unsafe or unreliable to deploy. S OURCES : National Research Council (2012) Unless made explicit, unlikely to have significant diplomatic benefits for nonproliferation, reciprocity Complex doctrinal questions Could weaken nuclear security efforts New surety funding thought contrary to disarmament commitments

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Unilateral disarmament D EFINE : The U. S. voluntarily eliminates its nuclear arsenal without reciprocity or inspection requirements P ROCESS : A Presidential decision abandons nuclear deterrence, demobilizes nuclear forces, and begins warhead dismantlement. S OURCES : Podvig, BAS (2013) Krauss, NYT (2013) Gaffney, WT (2012-3) Never a significant part of the U. S. debate, though some recent stirrings Significant proposals will affect domestic politics more than diplomatic outlook England has shown more interest English disarmament could have major effects on disarmament diplomacy and strategic stability—or none at all

Mount: LLNL 6/4/2014 Disarmament proposals differ in their effects The United States must involve itself in disarmament debates or risk being backed into a corner – Politics can be path dependent. Proposals can: support institutional arrangements direct funding direct research Modest steps may yield substantial benefits 1.Planning on diplomatic sequencing 2.Steps on stockpile management, weapons systems for credible commitment 3.(Implicitly) endorsing treaty could constrain discussion Historically, policy was more proactive Conclusions