 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
2/6/12 |
 |
||||||||
|
 |
Home / Projects & Publications / News |
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
RANSAC Nuclear News, April 2, 2003 Compiled by Lauren Arestie A. Nuclear Weapons Proliferation
 A. Nuclear Weapons Proliferation 1.Russia Warns Of Iraqi Fallout MOSCOW - Against a backdrop of raging war on Iraq, Moscow warns that the other "axis of evil" states, North Korea and Iran, might find the temptation of using weapons of mass destruction even more irresistible. In both cases, the Russians are well positioned to come up with such warnings. The war against Iraq is likely to entail faster development of nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea, warns Leonid Shebarshin, former head of Russia's foreign intelligence, and Iran may well become Washington's next target, he says. Furthermore, not only retired generals but also Russia's acting officials make similar warnings. For instance, on March 27, Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov told journalists in Moscow that the US policy of "regime change" may cause WMD proliferation. "Some nations may view themselves in relative safety only when possessing these weapons," he said. Even before the Iraqi war started, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov had warned that the danger in the nuclear crisis over North Korea could be much greater than the Iraq situation. In the wake of the US-led war on Iraq, Pyongyang has claimed that it could be next. On March 29, North Korea's Foreign Ministry accused the US of outrageous behavior and state terrorism. North Korea also declines to allow nuclear inspections, claiming that Iraq had made this mistake. Last February, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) passed a resolution declaring North Korea in noncompliance of its obligations under international accords. The IAEA's move is opening the way for economic sanctions or other punitive measures against the country, which Pyongyang has made clear it would regard as an act of war. The former Soviet Union was one of North Korea's main suppliers of nuclear know-how when the two were Cold War allies. Russia now says that its nuclear cooperation with the isolationist communist country ended nearly a decade ago. Pyongyang's nuclear program started with a small Soviet-supplied isotope-producing facility. The former Soviet Union and North Korea signed a nuclear cooperation treaty in 1956. In 1965, Soviet experts launched Yongbyon, a 5 megawatt reactor 100 kilometers north of Pyongyang. It has been speculated that North Korea could have some nuclear material from the former Soviet republics. According to some Russian estimates, theoretically Pyongyang could have enough plutonium for more than 60 nuclear bombs. However, Russian experts have argued that North Korea would be unable to develop operational nuclear bombs without live tests. Last February, North Korea threatened to strike US targets anywhere in the world. South Korea has already asked Moscow to mediate in the crisis on the Korean peninsula. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly promised Moscow's assistance in dealing with North Korea. No wonder that Seoul repeatedly sought Moscow's mediation. For instance, South Korea's national security advisor Ra Jong-yil traveled to Moscow to discuss the North Korean nuclear problem. The Korean peninsula must remain free of nuclear weapons, Russia's Security Council secretary Vladimir Rushailo told the Korean envoy on March 31. "The North Korean nuclear program should be peaceful and limited by a non-proliferation regime," Rushailo was quoted as saying by RIA. On the even of the war on Iraq, a flurry of diplomatic activities took place between Russia and another "rogue state", Iran. Notably, a meeting of the Iran-Russia Economic Commission was held in Tehran on March 17-19. The head of Russia's delegation and State Property Minister Farid Gazizulin met Iran's Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani. "Cooperation between Iran and Russia is to contribute to sustaining peace and prevent conflicts in the region," Shamkhani reportedly told Gazizulin. In a separate development, earlier in March, visiting Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov announced in Tehran that Moscow will continue its nuclear energy cooperation with Iran in the framework of the IAEA. "Iran has no plans to produce nuclear military projects, this is a fundamental truth," Ivanov reportedly stated in a joint news conference with Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi in Tehran. On March 14, the Russian Foreign Ministry once again said in a statement that Russia and Iran pledged to continue nuclear cooperation, which is "of completely peaceful character". Likewise, Russians are well informed about Iran's nuclear ambitions as Moscow makes no secret of its continuing nuclear flirting with Iran. For instance, some 100 Iranians are being trained at Novovoronezh nuclear facility in Central Russia as future personnel for the Bushehr nuclear plant. Over 700 Iranians are to be trained by the time the first reactor of the Bushehr power plant is due to be launched in 2004. However, on March 11, Russia's Nuclear Power Minister Alexander Rumyantsev said that although Moscow was helping Iran develop nuclear power, it could not say whether Tehran was secretly developing nuclear arms, as the US claims. Therefore, Rumyantsev backpedaled from his own February 21 statement that "Iran does not have the capacity to build nuclear weapons". Russia has long come under heavy criticism from the West for its help in building the Bushehr nuclear plant on Iran's Gulf coast. The US claims that the Russian technology could be used to develop nuclear weapons, but Moscow and Tehran argue that the plant can be used only for civilian purposes and will remain under international control. Moscow has brushed off repeated US demands that it cancel the US$800 million Bushehr 1,000 megawatt light-water nuclear reactor project. The Kremlin has repeatedly argued it abides by international agreements banning the proliferation of nuclear technologies. The Kremlin secured a number of deals when Iranian President Mohammad Khatami visited Russia in March 2001. Khatami and Putin signed a cooperation treaty, the first major accord between the two countries since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran. Moreover, in October 2001, Moscow and Tehran signed framework agreements for further supplies of Russian military equipment to Iran to be worth $300-400 million annually. The accord would reportedly involve supplies of spare parts for Russian-made weapons, new fighter jets and possibly air defense, ground-to-ground and anti-ship systems. Neither agreement makes Russia and Iran strategic partners, but they are aimed at further strengthening what was officially described as "partner-like, neighborly relations". It has been rumored in Moscow that a more formal alliance treaty with Iran could be one of Moscow's countermeasures against US-backed regime change in Iraq. return to menu B. Russia-U.S. 1. U.S.-Russian Ties: A Casualty of Combat? MOSCOW - As U.S. hopes for a quick triumph over Saddam Hussein vanish in the mud rains sweeping the Iraqi desert, there's mounting strain on relations between America and Russia. One point of dispute is the Kremlin's continuing opposition to the U.S.-led preemptive strike on Iraq -- which Russian President Vladimir V. Putin on Mar. 20 called "unjustified" and "a threat to international security." And now comes a fresh accusation from the White House that Russian companies are supplying Iraq with sensitive military equipment capable of being used against coalition forces. So far, relations have not been ruptured. But as the conflict gets bloodier, the potential grows for lasting harm to the partnership Putin and President George W. Bush have forged in the past two years -- a partnership that progressed despite resistance from their national security bureaucracies. "We may be in a spiral in which relations are undermined," warns Moscow political analyst Andrei A. Piontkovsky. There is much to be lost on both sides. For Washington, Russia's help is needed in the anti-terror war. For Moscow, the U.S. is a key source of investment and knowhow, and it can boost Putin aims such as Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization Putin's opposition to the U.S.-led war reflects a measure of post-superpower resentment. But the Kremlin also believes the U.S. action diminishes one of its few remaining sources of global influence -- its status as a U.N. Security Council permanent member. After all, Russia's veto in that forum is worth little if Bush makes war without its approval. Now Russia, along with France and China -- permanent Security Council members opposing the war -- are likely to call for the U.N. to resolve questions such as Iraq's postwar governance. The Kremlin may also seek the Security Council's legal recognition of Russia's economic interests in Iraq, including oil contracts and the $8 billion in Soviet-era debt owed to Russia. But Washington is reluctant to return to a forum it sees as having failed to disarm Saddam. Then there is the touchy dispute over weapon sales. In a Mar. 24 phone call, Bush confronted Putin with U.S. intelligence indicating the presence in Iraq, in violation of U.N. sanctions, of antitank missiles and electronic jamming devices. Moscow's Aviaconversiya, one alleged seller of the equipment, denies direct sales to Iraq. One possibility is that a third country such as Syria or Belarus sold Russian equipment to Saddam. Putin vowed to look into the matter. Washington could slap sanctions on Russian arms suppliers to Iraq. But even if the issue is resolved, more such quarrels can be expected. Russia views its arms exports, totaling $4.8 billion last year, as a crucial source of revenue. Russian officials are seeking weapons sales to Syria and Iran, both viewed by Washington as terrorism sponsors. Meanwhile, U.S. State Dept. officials worry that planned Russian shipments of enriched uranium to Iran's new Bushehr nuclear reactor could be converted to nuclear-arms materials. Yet another flash point is a recent offer by the former Soviet republic of Georgia for the U.S. to use Georgian bases for operations in Iraq. Moscow is unlikely to view that offer positively. As the conflict intensifies, Washington insiders hope Putin's antiwar rhetoric is partly intended to play to receptive audiences. A pragmatist, Putin has no relish for a confrontation -- and he's still planning to host Bush at a May summit. But Bush's decision to go to war without U.N. backing put the U.S.-Russia relationship on new, and frostier, terrain. Unless the two reconcile their differences, there's no apparent brake to this worrisome deterioration of ties. return to menu 2. War Shows Fragility of U.S.-Russia Links MOSCOW -- The rift between Russia and the U.S. over the war in Iraq has exposed the weak foundation underlying a much-ballyhooed friendship between George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin. And U.S.-Russian relations could come under greater strain if Washington pushes ahead to challenge its other "axis of evil" foes, Iran and North Korea, with whom Russia shares longstanding political and economic ties. If the U.S. attempts to deal with either Iran or North Korea in a way that angers the Kremlin, then "Russia will hardly exercise restraint, including in its supplies of technologies," says Sergei Rogov, head of the USA-Canada Institute in Moscow. "If America decides to repeat the Iraqi precedent, the fragile Russian-American partnership will fall apart for good." Before the war in Iraq, the Kremlin and Washington alike touted the "special relationship" between Presidents Bush and Putin that could pave over post-Cold War tensions, and the two heads of state appeared to hit it off on Mr. Bush's Texas ranch. Although they disagreed over the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the U.S. abandonment of the antiballistic-missile treaty, the two leaders agreed there was an overarching need for the nuclear powers to cooperate. The Russian president was the first world leader to offer his condolences to the White House after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and supported the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan. But this civility is starting to crack under the weight of old suspicions. Last week, as Washington protested alleged Russian arms sales to Baghdad, the rhetorical disharmony hit a peak. Moscow called the accusations unfounded "war propaganda" and protested spy-plane flights near Russia's southern border. The U.S. has been further irked by Mr. Putin's strong and public opposition to war. Last week, he called the conflict the most serious crisis since the end of the Cold War, warning that it threatened "the foundations of global stability and international law." Analysts see the public sparring as a sign that the U.S.-Russian friendship is shallower than advertised. "When countries say they have a partnership, it implies they can manage problems on the middle or high levels of government -- the head of the National Security Council calls his counterpart in Moscow and they discuss things," says Andrei Safranchuk, head of the Center for Defense Information in Moscow. "This past week we saw that this wonderful partnership does not work." Washington and Moscow say they are trying to contain the dispute, but if it continues to seethe, the rhetoric could complicate cooperation on issues that both sides care about, such as arms control and terrorism. Part of the problem, analysts say, is that the rank-and-file bureaucrats in Washington and Moscow haven't changed markedly since the days of the Cold War. Much of the Bush team dates back to the Reagan era, when Russia itself was called the center of an evil empire. Most of Mr. Putin's top advisers in the Foreign Ministry and the military are also holdovers from Soviet days, and are suspicious of U.S. intentions. Washington's accusations last week that Moscow had sold sensitive military equipment to Iraq were a clear sign of the breakdown in communication. The U.S. said it had tried since last summer to halt Russia's sales of antitank guided missiles, global-positioning-system jamming devices and night-vision goggles to Iraq, fearing they could pose a danger to U.S. troops. But warnings were ignored in Moscow, U.S. diplomats said. "They do not want this to be an irritant in our relationship. And they are hard at work on it. And I hope they will find out what we know to be the case, and deal with it," Secretary of State Colin Powell told a congressional committee last week. The White House was fairly confident it could win Moscow's tacit acceptance of war by promising that Russia's economic interests would be honored in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq. But economics didn't bother Mr. Putin nearly as much as the precedent of the U.S. unilaterally overthrowing a regime. There is tension on other fronts, too, including Iran and North Korea. Washington has protested Russia's sale of civil nuclear technologies to Tehran, saying the materials and know-how could be used to build bombs. Both presidents now face a choice: abandoning partnership in a huff or redoubling efforts to find common ground. Doing the latter in the current political climate will be tough. The American public is casting a suspicious eye on what it sees as fair-weather allies who oppose the war. Russians, meanwhile, have grown increasingly wary of American might. In an opinion poll of 1,600 Russians last week, 55% said they view the U.S. negatively, compared with 15% polled last summer. Even during the Cold War, when Moscow and Washington hated each other, "ordinary people really liked Americans," says Alexei Arbatov, a liberal legislator and deputy chairman of the defense committee in the lower house of Parliament. "Now, the sincere feeling on the street ... is taking on a bright anti-American character." return to menu C. Russia-North Korea 1. S. Korea, Russia Conclude Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program MOSCOW - The top security adviser to South Korea's president is wrapping up a two-day visit to Moscow aimed at reviving efforts to find a solution to the standoff over North Korea's nuclear program. Russian officials believe the answer to the dispute lies in direct negotiations. Russia's position on the North Korean nuclear dispute mirrors its views on the recent standoff over Iraqi disarmament, with officials in Moscow believing that only diplomacy will yield progress. Russia has been trying for months to mediate direct talks between communist North Korea and the United States since the impasse took a turn for the worse last October. That is when U.S. officials said North Korea had acknowledged having a nuclear program, in violation of a 1994 agreement. Pyongyang denies making such a claim and shortly after the U.S. announcement, officials in the north withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and expelled U.N. nuclear monitors. Russia has urged Washington to immediately start a dialogue with North Korea, warning that it is the only way to peacefully resolve the crisis. The same message was delivered during the past two days of talks in Moscow with visiting South Korean presidential envoy, Ra Jong-Yil. The envoy met with a series of Russian officials, all of whom urged him to push the United States toward the negotiating table. The United States has resisted such moves before, saying it favors a multi-lateral approach that would include all regional powers. Russia's Interfax news agency quotes Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov as saying Moscow is ready to step forward and offer solutions, but only after Washington and Pyongyang begin talking. Mr. Losyukov also warned that failure to do so could push North Korea to develop nuclear weapons as a defense, as he says officials in Pyongyang earlier threatened. He said Russia is maintaining contacts with North Korea, China, Japan, and South Korea, as well as with the United States. But according to Mr. Losyukov, contacts are a poor substitute for direct dialogue between Washington and Pyongyang. "There is no alternative to negotiations in achieving peace on the peninsula," he said. The South Korean envoy is due Wednesday to leave Moscow for Beijing, where he is scheduled to hold more talks on North Korea's nuclear program. His trip was scheduled after North Korea vowed to resist all international demands to allow nuclear inspections or to disarm. Officials in Pyongyang said Iraq had made this mistake and "was now paying the price." return to menu 2. Russia Says Iraq War Pushing North Korea To Get Nuclear Weapon MOSCOW - A senior Russian official warned the United States on Tuesday that the Iraq war was likely to push North Korea towards building a nuclear weapon and urged it to open talks with the isolated Stalinist state. Alexander Losyukov, a Russian deputy foreign minister involved in the international row over Pyongyang's nuclear program, told Interfax news agency the North Koreans felt themselves under threat from Washington and drew a parallel with the Iraq crisis. "The Iraq situation, unfortunately, is prompting the North Koreans to strengthen their defenses," he said. Asked if the Iraq war could push Pyongyang to build a nuclear weapon, he said: "Yes, obviously. And the lack of any negotiation process (with the United States) hugely increases that danger." Losyukov, repeating a call he made after meeting a high-level South Korean envoy in Moscow on Monday, said the only way out of the impasse was through negotiation, including direct talks between Pyongyang and Washington. "No contacts can replace direct dialogue between North Korea and the United States. There is a defined set of questions that only these two sides can solve," he said. North Korea has vowed to resist all international demands on it to allow nuclear inspections or to disarm, saying Iraq had made this mistake and was now paying the price. The North Korean state-run news agency said on Tuesday that overflights by U.S. spy planes and naval exercises off the Korean coast "clearly prove that the U.S. is going to invade the DPRK (North Korea) at the end of the Iraqi war." Pyongyang insists any nuclear program it may have would be purely defensive in face of what it perceives as an American military threat to its existence. It insists on direct bilateral negotiations with the United States with the aim of signing a non-aggression pact that would guarantee North Korea's survival as a state. But U.S. policy is to have the crisis discussed in a multilateral forum to include North Korea's Asian neighbors, including South Korea, China, Russia and Japan. Moscow, Pyongyang's key sponsor during the Cold War, has worked to rebuild ties with North Korea after a decade-long freeze that followed the break-up of the Soviet Union. It now has good relations with both countries on the Korean peninsula. return to menu 3. Russian Ambassador Talks Up Pipeline Russian Ambassador to Seoul Teymuraz O. Ramishvili commented Tuesday on the idea of building a gas pipeline from Siberia through North Korea to the South, saying that discussions have been held on posting Russian or South Korean troops in the North to protect such a pipeline. At a press conference at the Russian Embassy in Seoul, Ramishvili said that state-level protection would be necessary to prevent such a pipeline from exploding or being severed. The press conference suggested that there have been substantial discussions on the matter between Seoul and Moscow, as the Financial Times reported Monday. The British daily quoted National Security Adviser Ra Jong-yil as saying that "the thermal power stations fueled by Russian gas would provide a peaceful alternative to Pyongyang's nuclear program." Ramishvili stressed that since Moscow has experience in persuading Pyongyang to go forward in cooperative projects, such as connecting Inter-Korea railways, cooperation among Seoul, Pyongyang and Moscow would be critical for the gas pipeline project. While critics say the pipeline will not solve the current nuclear crisis because construction would take at least 10 years, Ramishvili said that Russia had technology to build one at a rate of 5 kilometers a day, and the project could be completed in three or four years if begun promptly from both ends. The Russian ambassador said that because the U.S. strike on Iraq has made Pyongyang nervous, peaceful resolution through dialogue has become less probable, so Washington should make efforts to normalize relations as soon as possible. The pipeline project has become a controversial subject since the president of Gazprom, Russia's largest gas company, attended President Roh Moo-hyun's inauguration and visited Cheong Wa Dae. However, Cheong Wa Dae denied the plan Tuesday, saying that it had never officially considered construction of a gas pipeline through or thermal power plants in the North. return to menu 4. Gov't Denies Report on Gas Provision to North Korea The government yesterday denied reports that Seoul proposed a plan to provide gas produced in Siberia or Sakhalin in Russia to North Korea as a means of resolving the standoff over the North's nuclear weapons program. The Financial Times quoted National Security Advisor Ra Jong-yil as saying Seoul submitted the proposal to the United States and Japan as part of a roadmap to the settlement of the nuclear issue. It said the plan was rebuffed by the U.S. and Japan. ``We have not considered that and made no such proposal to the U.S. and Japan,'' a senior official of the Foreign Affairs-Trade Ministry said. He said it is not appropriate to raise such an issue as relevant nations have not yet begun talks on the North Korea nuclear issue under the U.S.-initiated multilateral dialogue format. He indicated that Seoul's plan to resolve the nuclear issue is limited to maintaining the status quo while preventing the North from making further provocation and inducing it to the multilateral dialogue table. ``It may be his (Ra's) own idea,'' the foreign affairs official said. Despite the denial, sources foresaw the possibility the government would raise the issue in the process of negotiating a solution to the nuclear crisis. They said relevant parties might seek to offer Russian gas to the North by setting up a pipeline crossing the reclusive nation to replace the light water nuclear reactors under construction. return to menu 5. North Korea Could Scrap Nuclear Plan For Pipeline North Korea's nuclear weapons program could be halted by an international deal to ease its chronic energy shortage by laying a gas pipeline to the communist country from Russia, according to plans set to be revealed by the South Korean government. Ra Jong-yil, Seoul's national security adviser, said thermal power stations drawing from Russian gas would provide a peaceful alternative to Pyongyang's nuclear program, which could produce weapons - a capability that has alarmed the international community. He said: "Gas could be drawn from either Irkutsk [Siberia] or Sakhalin [east Russia]." Mr. Ra made the proposal in an interview with the Financial Times before his trip this week to Russia and China for talks about the nuclear crisis hanging over the Korean peninsula. This stems from North Korea's desperate need for a fresh source of electricity to prevent its economy from collapse. Pyongyang claims its nuclear program is for energy production but the US believes it has military purposes. Mr. Ra said the pipeline plans were at an early stage and had not been discussed in detail with its allies or North Korea. Analysts said the multi-billion-dollar scheme could be funded by the US, its allies and the private sector, in return for the verifiable scrapping of nuclear activities by North Korea. The pipeline would continue into South Korea, making the scheme more viable. A gas-for-peace deal would replace the failed 1994 Agreed Framework, under which the US and its allies supplied North Korea with oil and agreed to build two peaceful nuclear reactors. In return Pyongyang promised not to develop nuclear weapons. The pact failed last year when the US accused North Korea of continuing to develop nuclear arms in secret. Pyongyang blamed the collapse on delays to construction of the US-backed nuclear power station. President George W. Bush's administration never disguised its dislike of the Agreed Framework - agreed by former president Bill Clinton - as it amounted to the US, South Korea, Japan and the European Union transferring nuclear technology to a hostile country. A deal involving gas power would be more acceptable to the US, though Washington insists it will not submit to "nuclear blackmail". South Korea is pressing the US to pursue a diplomatic solution to its dispute with North Korea, named by Mr. Bush as part of an "axis of evil". Yoon Young-Kwan, South Korean foreign minister, says: "North Korea and Iraq require different approaches." return to menu D. Russia-Iran 1. Russia, Iran Reaffirm Commitment To NPT MOSCOW - Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Alexander Rumyantsev said on Saturday that Non-Proliferation Treaty provides for applying nuclear energy for peaceful use against international safeguards. In a meeting with Iranian Ambassador to Moscow Gholamreza Shafei, Rumyantsev said that Russia reaffirms Iran's commitment to the international safeguards in its nuclear activities. He said that Russia is keen on cooperation with Iran for peaceful use of nuclear energy and provide Iran with fuel for power plants. Rumyantsev said that Russia is rest assured that the gas centrifuges set up at nuclear power plants in Natanz and Arak have nothing to do with production of nuclear arms. "The important point is that Iranian nuclear activities are under supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)," Rumyantsev said. Rumyantsev and Shafei criticized the US double standard toward Iranian nuclear activities. The NPT requires the IAEA to provide assistance in the form of experts, training and equipment to technical cooperation as well as research on and practical application of atomic energy on radiation protection and safety-related activities. Reacting to the US propaganda campaign against Iranian nuclear activities, IAEA Director General Mohammad ElBaradei called on Iran to sign an Additional Protocol to the NPT which guarantees free inspection of Iranian nuclear sites without former notice. Iranian government complained that the IAEA has failed to extend expertise assistance to Iran as obliged by the NPT and said that Iran would consider signing the Additional Protocol on condition that the IAEA honors its technical assistance obligation envisaged in NPT Treaty. Iranian nuclear sites are open to the IAEA inspection, Shafei said. The NPT Treaty came into force in 1970. return to menu E. HEU Export Controls 1. Energy Legislation Would Ease Rules On Weapons-Grade Uranium Exports WASHINGTON - A provision in draft energy legislation would ease restrictions on the export of highly enriched uranium, raising concerns among nuclear nonproliferation groups that it might make it easier for terrorists to get the material. The language in the House bill would rescind strict conditions that were imposed by Congress in 1992 on the export of weapons-grade uranium for use as "targets" in the making of radioisotopes for medical purposes. The export restrictions were enacted to try to get manufacturers to shift away from using weapons-grade uranium for research reactors or for making medical isotopes - a goal, they say, that is even more critical today than it was a decade ago. An easing of the restrictions "needlessly undermines an important nonproliferation law and increases the risk of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons," said Edwin Layman, president of the Nuclear Control Institute, a private nonproliferation advocacy group. The language to change the uranium export requirements was put into a draft energy bill, being considered this week by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, by Rep. Richard Burr, R-N.C., according to Lyman. The committee on Wednesday cleared the nuclear section of the bill without making any changes to Burr's provision and committee members did not discuss the issue. A spokeswoman for Burr had no immediate comment. The congressman was not immediately available. The nuclear medical industry has been lobbying members of Congress to ease the 1992 requirements, put into the law by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. The lobbyists have argued that the restrictions jeopardize the future supply of important nuclear isotopes for use in U.S. hospitals and research facilities. Under the Schumer provision, medical isotope manufacturers must agree to move away from using highly enriched uranium - which can be used in a nuclear bomb - and commit to using low-enriched uranium, if they are to continue getting uranium shipments from the United States. In one letter sent to lawmakers, an official of the American College of Nuclear Physicians complained about the "unintended effect" the decade-old Schumer provision was having on "the reliable supply of medical radionuclides" and the need to revise it. The 1992 provision "does not recognize the substantial technical, regulatory and economic obstacles" in requiring isotope manufactures to shift from highly enriched to low-enriched uranium, Carol Marcus, president of the group's California chapter, recently wrote in a letter to Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Like the House, the Senate also is expected to consider the uranium export issue when it begins consideration of energy legislation in the coming weeks. Lyman disputed the claim that the availability of medical isotopes would be at risk. Despite the Schumer provisions, "no foreign isotope producer has been denied a request for U.S. exports of highly enriched uranium" as long as the company agrees to cooperate in the eventual conversion to low-enriched uranium, said Lyman. Allan Kuperman, an analyst at the Nuclear Control Institute, added that without the leverage provided by the Schumer provision, foreign isotope producers - in Canada, the Netherlands and Belgium - likely would abandon efforts to convert to the safer low-enriched "targets." A uranium target is a device in the reactor that is irradiated during the fission process to, in turn, produce the medical isotopes. There has been growing concern in recent years over the safeguarding of highly enriched uranium, not only at facilities producing medical isotopes, but also at research reactors in more than 50 countries. Matthew Bunn, a researcher at Harvard University, said that many of these research reactors have only minimum security. He and other nonproliferation advocates have argued that it is even more imperative today in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington to try to reduce the amount of highly enriched uranium being used around the world. "Congress should be working to facilitate conversion of all isotope producers that remain dependent on bomb-grade uranium, not enacting measures to discourage them" to convert, said Lyman. return to menu F. Redirection of Weapons Scientists 1. Washington Backs Venture to Employ Russian Nuclear Scientists The United States will provide up to $25 million in insurance for a California company that plans to hire former Russian nuclear weapons experts to build medical equipment, Energy Daily reported today. The U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation last week said it would provide risk insurance to Numotech for its business venture with Spektr Conversiya, which employs former Russian weapons technicians. The business initiative could create 433 jobs in Russia and provide a boost to U.S. Energy Department nonproliferation efforts, Energy Daily reported. The project is part of the Energy Department's Russian Transition Initiatives program. return to menu G. Chemical Weapons Destruction 1. Co-Operation With U.S. To Bring Russia 3 Years Closer To Dismantling Its Chemical Weapons MOSCOW - The U.S. approval of a new dismantling scheme proposed by Russia may bring the latter at least three years closer to dismantling its nuclear stockpiles, Director General of the Russian Agency for Ammunition Zinovy Pak said at a press conference on Tuesday. On March 14, 2003, Russia and the United States signed another amendment launching a new scheme to dismantle the remaining chemical weapons and their components in Russia, he reminded. In order to optimize the dismantling process, Russia proposed to stop transporting the remaining chemical components to the existing dismantling plants or those under construction and start detoxifying poisonous substances at current storage sites, Pak said. The Director General of the Russian Agency for Ammunition praised the agreement reached last June at the G-8 summit in Kananaskis within the framework of the Global Partnership Project. Under the agreement, the G-8 countries are to pay Russia $20 billion towards dismantling its ex-Soviet arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. Countries outside the Group of Eight will also have a chance to participate in dismantling Russia's chemical stockpiles, Zinovy Pak pointed out. Italy and Canada have already come up with projects, he added. return to menu 2. Great Britain Hands Over Water-Supply System For Russian Plant For Disposal Of Chemical Weapons MOSCOW - Great Britain has handed over to Russia a water-supply system for the plant for disposal of chemical weapons that is under construction in the Chelyabinsk Region in the Urals. The official ceremony of the transfer of the rights of ownership of this system took place at the Embassy of Great Britain in Moscow on Tuesday. Since 2000, Great Britain has been implementing a project aimed at supporting the construction of the main Russian plant for the disposal of chemical weapons. As Ambassador of Great Britain in Moscow Sir Roderick Lyne said at the ceremony, his country has allocated 12 million pounds for disposing of chemical weapons in Russia. Under the agreement with London, the Parsons company of the USA is the main contractor of the project that is being implemented in the Urals. In the British diplomat's opinion, the distinctions in the stands of Moscow and London on Iraq will not influence the implementation of the program for disposal of Russian chemical weapons. It is an example of "very fruitful co-operation" between Great Britain, Russia and the USA and an example of the three countries' ambition to reduce the danger of the proliferation of mass destruction weapons, the Ambassador of Great Britain to Russia stated. return to menu H. Nuclear Waste Disposal 1. Minister: Russia To Continue Importing Nuclear Waste MOSCOW - Russia's atomic energy minister said Wednesday that Russia would continue to import nuclear waste from other countries, despite criticism from environmentalists, a news report said. Alexander Rumyantsev made the announcement during an inspection of the Mayak plant in the Ural Mountains, one of two facilities that will store the waste, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported. He said new contracts were being prepared, and imports would resume by the end of the year, the report said. Russian lawmakers passed a controversial law in 2001 allowing the government to import spent nuclear fuel from abroad for reprocessing and storage, despite opinion polls showing most Russians opposed the idea. Officials said it could earn Russia US$20 billion over the next decade. Since the law was passed, Russia has imported spent nuclear fuel from Soviet-built nuclear power plants in Bulgaria and Ukraine. Environmental groups have warned the policy could turn Russia into the world's nuclear dumping ground and have urged the government to concentrate on strengthening existing waste facilities. Rumyantsev said imported nuclear waste would go to Mayak-site of a 1957 nuclear waste tank explosion that spread radioactive pollution-and another facility at Zheleznogorsk in Siberia. A Russian lawmaker and a Greenpeace activist penetrated Zheleznogorsk last year in a bid to draw attention to poor security at the plant. return to menu 2. GAN Official: There Are Some Problems With Radwaste Management At NPPs But On The Whole All Stands Well As regards free radioactive waste (radwaste) storage capacities at NPPs, all goes well more or less. Still there are some problems requiring plants to be more active, Nuclear.Ru was informed by Sergei Adamchik, the Head of Department for supervision over NPP nuclear and radiation safety of Gosatomnadzor of Russia (GAN). He was commenting on the GAN's Council meeting held last week. One of the issues addressed by the Council was safety at radwaste management at NPPs. According to Mr. Adamchik, it was the first time when this topic was discussed as a separate issue. At the meeting presentations were made, besides the Head of Department for supervision over NPP nuclear and radiation safety, by N. Davydenko, the Deputy Technical Director of Rosenergoatom Concern, V. Omelchuk, the Chief Engineer of Kola NPP, and V. Zhbannikov, the Chief Engineer of Novovoronezh NPP. "At these plants the radwaste management problem is rather pressing, because now they are settling the life extension issues", Adamchik explained. The radwaste storage facilities at these nuclear power plants were originally designed for 30-year service lives. Therefore, GAN's Council discussed whether the current system of radwaste storage and reprocessing allows for positive life extension decisions. While speaking about the regulatory basis for safety insurance during radwaste management at NPPs, Sergei Adamchik noted a large number of regulations existing in this area, however, there is a lack of internal and interagency level documents (regulatory hygiene authority, Gosatomnadzor). He also reminded that a radwaste management legislation had been developed 7 years ago, reviewed by the State Duma, and then kept in limbo. S. Adamchik thinks that this is due to a lot of problems which mainly associate with other areas, namely, defense complex and nuclear fuel cycle, rather than nuclear power. Another regulatory problem is that the system of storage at NPPs is the temporary storage. However, as S. Adamchik explained, the regulations do not define what the temporary storage facilities are and how long the "temporary" is - 50, 100 or 200 years. Thus, it is necessary to establish certain limits for radwaste storage as in terms of time as in terms of volumes. "Since nuclear power plants temporary store and accumulate waste, there should be a system for reprocessing of such waste and their disposal of or sending for long-term storage, S. Adamchik said. - But since there is no such system today, this creates certain difficulties both for operations and eventual decommissioning of the facilities." Sergei Adamchik also said that the Council addressed circumstances at each NPP, namely, amount of accumulated waste (solid (SRW) and liquid (LRW)), Rosenergoatom activities to condition and reduce volume of radwaste. At this, he noted that design volumes were being filled, free capacities exist, and NPPs had been active recently in reducing radwaste accumulation rate that being a positive development. For example, Beloyarsk NPP the storage facilities are 66% full; Balakovo NPP - 65 %; Kalinin NPP - 62 %. However, S. Adamchik commented, there were site-specific problems: Kalinin-1 has LRW storage 100% full and one has to decide what to do - mothball it or reprocess radwaste. Otherwise, Leningrad NPP has free capacities but needs to reprocess spent ion exchange resins. "In other words, the general numbers give a more or less favorable picture but there are aspects requiring NPPs be more active", stressed Gosatomnadzor of Russia representative. As regards radwaste reprocessing the original NPP designs did not provide for any comprehensive systems or facilities. Recently Rosenergoatom has started equipping NPPs with reprocessing systems for both solid and liquid radwaste. For example, Balakovo NPP has commissioned a LRW reprocessing complex. Similar activities are underway at Leningrad and Kola NPPs. Mr. Adamchik believes, however, that "these activities had to be started 10-15 years ago when the situation was much easier to deal with." He also informed that in terms of radwaste storage there had been no any violations like ingress into soil, etc. Nonetheless, the amount of liquid radwaste at NPPs, as S. Adamchik says, is highly incomparable with, for example, that of PA Mayak (LRW amount at NPPs is about 1% of that at PA Mayak). Mr. Adamchik believes that if a radwaste reprocessing system were created at NPPs it would increase storage volumes and ensure safer storage. Today NPPs reprocess radwaste with what they have and in fact each NPP creates facilities for more expedite and thorough radwaste reprocessing. "This will make the situation better but still we will be facing the problem where to store reprocessed radwaste", S. Adamchik stressed adding that the free capacities' problem was not so acute in the context of NPP operation. The Council meeting resulted in a draft Council decision, which refers, in particular, to improvement of existing regulations and introduction of new ones. As Mr. Adamchik explained, in 2000 a set of Gosatomnadzor of Russia regulations on collecting, reprocessing and safety ensuring during management of liquid and solid radioactive waste at NPPs. These documents became effective in 2001 and now a number organizational measures is required to apply them efficiently as within Gosatomnadzor complex as at nuclear power plants. Sergei Adamchik also said that one of the topics to addressed by future Council's meetings would be SNF handling, in particular, RBMK fuel assemblies. "Since today it is not economical to reprocess RBMK fuel, NPPs with RBMKs have arranged for storage facilities and now the issue is to create containers for long-term dry storage and transportation of this fuel off-site", S. Adamchik said. He thinks that this issue will be solved within 4 years. "This is a rather efficient option, however, not the cheapest", said the GAN official. return to menu I. Nuclear Industry 1. Russia to Deliver Nuke Fuel for India Plant MOSCOW - Russia's nuclear fuel corporation TVEL will soon begin the supply of nuclear fuel for India's nuclear power plant at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu. "The delivery of Russian nuclear fuel to India will be completed in accordance with an inter-governmental agreement on the construction of the nuclear power plant in the country," the press service of the TVEL told Itar-Tass news agency. The 400-million-dollar contract has already been signed between TVEL and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd for delivery of nuclear fuel up to 2010. TVEL's president Alexander Nyago however said IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) specialists will control the deliveries, storage and loading of nuclear fuel. "Currently, details of this control mechanism are being agreed directly by the IAEA and the Indian government," Nyago said. Russia is building two 1000-MW reactors at the Kudankulam plant and Russian specialists have finished "installation of heavy equipment" at one of them, said a spokesman for the Russian Nuclear Energy Ministry. return to menu J. Links of Interest 1. Strategic Offensive Forces and the Nuclear Posture Review's 'New Triad' return to menu 2. Weapons of Mass Destruction Reference Guide - Protecting America: Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapon Threat Reduction DISCLAIMER: Nuclear News is presented for informational purposes only. Views presented in any given article are those of the individual author or source and not of RANSAC. RANSAC takes no responsibility for the technical accuracy of information contained in any article presented in Nuclear News. RANSAC's Nuclear News is compiled two to three times weekly. If you would like to be removed from our mailing list or if you have questions/comments/concerns, please reply to news@216.119.87.134 |
|
|
|
© 2007 Partnership for Global Security. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement.