 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
2/6/12 |
 |
||||||||
|
 |
Home / Projects & Publications / News |
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
RANSAC Nuclear News, April 10, 2003 Compiled by Lauren Arestie A. Cooperative Threat Reduction
 A. Cooperative Threat Reduction 1. Weldon to Introduce New Threat Reduction Measures WASHINGTON - A Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives with a reputation for opposing certain U.S. WMD threat reduction spending in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere is planning to propose legislation to create new programs for that purpose potentially worth $330 million. Representative Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) is planning to announce the new legislation at an event tomorrow featuring speakers from the Heritage Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Nuclear Threat Reduction Campaign. Among other measures, the legislation - which Weldon's spokesman Bud DeFlaviis said has not yet been finalized - would provide money to expand U.S. efforts to retrieve vulnerable nuclear materials from research reactors outside the former Soviet Union. The Senate has already approved those measures, with White House support, but House Republicans, reportedly led by Weldon, last year blocked them. Weldon's proposal is different than previous proposals, however, in that it would provide the authority to the Energy Department to help secure at-risk materials, not the Defense Department's Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which has received Republican criticism. A New York Times editorial last year identified Weldon and Representative Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) as leaders of House opposition to allowing Cooperative Threat Reduction activity to operate outside the former Soviet Union and to funding other threat reduction activities. President Bush "ought to summon Mr. Weldon and Mr. Hunter and tell them to stop undermining programs that protect American security," the Times editorial said last December. DeFlaviis said today the congressman's position had been mischaracterized. "Congressman Weldon's record was grossly mischaracterized by the L.A. Times and the New York Times and they gave us very little opportunity to respond and defend ourselves. He has always held these programs in the highest regard and believes there is an immediate need to bolster these programs," he said. The issues, DeFlaviis said, are "something Curt's been working on for some time and reflect a realization that a need exists." Weldon's proposed bill would include 18 initiatives, most of them related to securing weapons of mass destruction in Russia and other former Soviet states. They include: * $35 million to hasten closure of Russian nuclear warhead production and maintenance activities at two of four plants; * $60 million for securing materials in the Russia and the former Soviet Union that could be used to make radiological bombs; * $40 million to accelerate Russian efforts to blend down highly enriched uranium; * $60 million to further Energy Department efforts to help Russia and the former Soviet Union combat illicit transfers of WMD material; * $60 million for providing commercial jobs to Russian and other former Soviet scientists, engineers and technicians; * $30 million for a "Silk Road Initiative" to aid former Soviet countries participating in antiterrorism efforts; and * Promotion of U.S.-NATO cooperation on theater ballistic missile defenses. When criticizing Cooperative Threat Reduction programs in the past, House Republicans have cited problems obtaining full cooperation from Russian authorities and in spending the money effectively. Weldon's bill would authorize the Energy Department to conduct an analysis of obstacles to effective implementation of threat reduction and nonproliferation programs in the former Soviet Union. The bill also would require a "comprehensive" eight-year plan for securing, destroying and preventing the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons in Russia and other former Soviet states. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) has charged both the Bush and Clinton administrations with failing to assign sufficient priority to fighting WMD proliferation and has urged creating a high-level government position for overseeing and coordinating the numerous efforts. Weldon's bill would require the president to designate a senior executive branch official to coordinate the chemical and biological nonproliferation programs, and would require that official to be equipped with "sufficient authority and staffing to do the job effectively." return to menu 2. U.S. House of Representatives Shoots Down Expansion Plans for CTR (excerpted) WASHINGTON DC - The Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee last week rejected a $50 million measure that would have allowed for an expansion of US-sponsored threat reduction programs to countries other than Russia. But Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar and former Senator Sam Nunn, who jointly sponsored the so-called Nunn-Lugar act of 1991, remained hopeful in an interview with Bellona Web Friday that the initiative will be passed in legislation this year. Despite the set-back in the House of Representatives, Lugar noted, a modified version of the provision, which gives the Defense Department $50m for expansion activities, was approved in the Senate, and has the backing of the Republican Bush Administration. Lugar said this measure has a good change of passing during the regular appropriations cycle that will come later this year. "In the Senate, I am promoting legislation to permit the President to use Nunn-Lugar expertise and resources to address proliferation threats around the world," Lugar told a gathering of international non-proliferation experts in Washington, DC on Friday. "The precise replication of the Nunn-Lugar program will not be possible everywhere, but the experience of Nunn-Lugar in Russia shows that the threat of weapons of mass destruction can lead to unprecedented outcomes based on mutual interest," he said. The $50m Nunn-Lugar expansion item - which was contained a $75bn appropriation request submitted last week by the Bush Administration largely to fund the war in Iraq - was left out of the marked-up, or revised, version of the bill that was approved by the Republican-controlled House Appropriations committee. The requested authority would allow the Nunn-Lugar program - officially known as the Defense Department's Cooperative Threat Reduction, or CTR, program - to spend $50m over the next two years to secure weapons of mass destruction stockpiles that are located outside the former Soviet Union, including those weapons said to be in Iraq. This added authority would enable the Bush Administration to carry out plans for securing - perhaps by outright purchase of - poorly guarded highly enriched uranium, or HEU, and plutonium, the chief components of nuclear bombs, at an estimated 24 sites around the world. The Senate Appropriations Committee last week approved the expanded authority, with some modification. It would limit the authority of the measure to fiscal year 2003, which ends Sept. 30, and adds a 15-day requirement for congressional notification prior to expenditure of funds. The Senate bill also includes $55m for Department of Energy, or DOE, non-proliferation programs outside the former Soviet Union. [...] return to menu B. Russia-U.S. 1. Alexander Rumyantsev And Spencer Abraham Discuss Nuclear Safety And Security Bilateral Cooperation Minister of RF of Atomic Energy Alexander Rumyantsev and US Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham discuss in Washington DC the issues of the US-Russia cooperation in nuclear safety and security. As ITAR-TASS reported April 8, the top officials held consultations as soon as Alexander Rumyantsev arrived at the US capital. According to Mr. Rumyantsev, this meeting was arranged for in March during the International Conference on Safety of Handling Radioactive Sources held in Vienna, Austria by initiative of Russia, the United States and IAEA. That time the sides agreed to set up within a month the topical working groups to move to deeds from words. This meeting, the high-ranking officials analyzed the preliminary work done by experts and considered it well done. They also discussed the issue of surplus weapons plutonium disposition under the 2000 intergovernmental agreement. As Minister Rumyantsev said, they discussed some ideas, which could speed up the process in future. Besides the top officials exchanged opinions of creating a nuclear fuel cycle enterprises in Iran including a centrifuge technology possible for use in uranium enrichment. "In fact, centrifuge machines may be used to produce highly enriched uranium," A. Rumyantsev noted. "However, the Minatom's information leads to a conclusion that "this is an initial stage in the process development and it will take years to obtain highly enriched uranium". At the same time, the Minister expressed his concern about the Iranian nuclear program "in terms of economics". He reminded that Moscow had concluded an agreement on construction of Bushehr nuclear plant and relevant fuel supplies, "while they start working on creating a fuel cycle of their own". "This brings the successful strategic partnership into challenge," the Minister said. April 9 the Minatom of Russia and the US DOE delegations will continue consultations. The working visit of the Russian minister to Washington DC will end on April 10. return to menu 2. Analysis: Russia And U.S. Restore Strategic Partnership MOSCOW - In December 1989, George Bush Sr. led by hand to Mikhail Gorbachev a young woman from the National Security Council. "She is Condoleezza Rice," the president introduced her, "all I know about the Soviet Union I owe to her." On Monday, Rice, the national security adviser to George Bush Jr., made a lightning visit to Moscow and had a series of meetings with the Russian leadership, including a conversation with Vladimir Putin. Her impressions from these negotiations she took to Belfast, the venue of another summit between the American president and the British prime minister, dealing mainly with a post-war Iraq. No doubt, the coalition leaders would like to know what the Kremlin thinks on this score. Although Russia still considers the war a big mistake, it is not inclined to elevate what happened to a kind of fundamental obstacle to cooperation with the US, including the Iraqi knot. It looks such a view also meets Washington's interests. It realises that Moscow still keeps serious leverage on the situation with Iraq. Sooner or later, the United States will need legitimization of any Iraqi regime it'll set up on the UN part, and an official lifting of the sanctions on Iraq, and here Russia's good will is indispensable. Not to mention that Moscow's persistent calls to get the Iraqi problem back "to the UN platform" largely coincide with the feelings of the US combative coalition ally - Britain. On balance, it seems that both the Kremlin and the White House have come to the conclusion that differences over Iraq have driven Russian-American relations into too steep a nosedive, which should be ended as soon as possible. Indeed, on the eve of the military campaign and especially in its first days mutual recriminations looked like well-forgotten Cold War days. The inertia of that rift is making itself felt to these days. By allocating the administration 8 billion for Iraq's rehabilitation, the US House of Representatives with a vengeful satisfaction voted for an amendment which says that not a single cent of this sum may be used to pay for goods and services by any supplier from Russia. France, Germany and Syria were likewise blacklisted. Fortunately for Russian-American economic relations the sobering spirit is already prevailing in the Senate, which threw out the amendment in its present form. "This is a highly destructive idea," Senator Dianne Feinstein expressed the predominant sentiment. "If America had wanted to turn into a wilful country, this could have been a good beginning". It appears that for refusing to back Washington on Iraq Russia had all but paid with the lives of its co-citizens. During her Moscow conversations Condoleezza Rice had to listen to many stern words about a convoy of Russian diplomats out of Baghdad being fired at. Five diplomats, including ambassador Vladimir Titorenko, received wounds, and one of them a serious injury. The shooting came mainly from US troop positions, the ambassador is confident. Titorenko actually described the shooting as "deliberate." He is echoed by many Russian military analysts who think that the US did not like the time Russian diplomats were taking to depart from Baghdad, suspecting them of eavesdropping on the air waves and examining samples of American military vehicles knocked out by Iraqis. Be that as it may, it is hard not to come round to thinking that had Russian-American relations not been so cooled by disputes at the UN Security Council around Iraq, GI's would hardly have taken in their M-16 sights a diplomatic car flying a tricolour flag. But Iraq, for all the history-making developments there, is not the whole world. And few will deny that special responsibility for maintaining this fragile peace rests with two major nuclear powers destined to cooperate in any critical situation both today and in the future. This was what President Putin meant when he made a statement in Tambov on Wednesday, which had wide-ranging international repercussions: for political and economic considerations. Russia is not interested in a defeat of the United States. It was a sign that the Iraqi hiccup in the American-Russian partnership should remain in the past. A clash of views on Iraq is not an occasion for backsliding from the new level of mutual understanding reached between Moscow and Washington following the September 11 tragedy, the Russian president intimated. Putin could have been motivated either by foreign policy or purely internal circumstances. Some of the Russian politicians, in particular Yevgeny Primakov, a former premier and head of foreign intelligence, are not sure that the US has finally opted for what they neatly describe as "independent decisions." That is ignoring the will of the international community in the person of the UN. Russian political scientists have hopes that a small group of advocates of "the new American century" in the US administration will make public opinion only until a presidential election campaign kicks off. Competition with the more sober-minded foreign policy priorities of the Democratic Party will make the Republican elite tone down what is called "power presumption." Perhaps in its desire to establish a bipolar world Moscow would also like to preserve and even cement the independence of the Old Europe from the Atlantic ally, which emerged on the back of anti-war sentiments. Yet, by making sharply anti-American slogans, Russia would on the contrary have pushed this Europe back into the US embrace, not towards Paris, Bonn, Brussels and their kith and kin continuing to occupy relatively independent positions. Putin also saw a threat in an outburst of anti-Americanism inside Russia. Emotions evoked by a strike on Iraq were seized upon by all shades of political speculators. By anathemizing America, parties of a chauvinist brand were agilely recruiting an electorate ahead of State Duma elections. Domestic Islamic radicals declared a jihad on America, testing the strength of mutual religious tolerance. It is strange indeed that the image of America in Russian eyes has suffered but little. According to the latest poll conducted by the All-Russian Centre for Public Opinion Studies, three-quarters of the population in Russia, where the percentage of Muslims is very high, still have a "good or a very good attitude" to the American nation. The Kremlin's signal pointing to the desirability of taking Russian-American relations out of the period of hardening induced by the Iraqi war was balanced with no less energetic signals from the other side. "We are committed to our long-term strategic relations with Russia," said Taylor Cross, a White House spokesman, before Condoleezza Rice left by air for Moscow. "And we are looking to an exchange of views with Russians on how best to move forward." First such exchanges have already taken place. Rice passed to Putin a letter from Bush, containing wishes to develop the Russian-American partnership. She rated her discussion with Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov as "very good." Also good will probably be the news from Russia which the national security adviser has brought to Bush in Belfast. return to menu C. Strategic Arms Reduction 1. Duma Expected To Ratify US Arms Treaty MOSCOW - Responding to a call from President Vladimir Putin, senior Russian lawmakers said Tuesday that the parliament would soon consider ratification of a pivotal nuclear arms reduction with the United States that had been delayed over the war in Iraq. On Saturday, Putin urged lawmakers to ratify the treaty, despite the "unfavorable background" created by the war in Iraq. The statement came as the latest signal of Moscow softening its criticism of the war in Iraq in an apparent effort to avoid further damage to its relations with Washington. The lower house of parliament, the State Duma, had been expected to take up debate on the Treaty of Moscow last month, but it indefinitely postponed a ratification vote over the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. The treaty, signed in May by Putin and U.S. President George W. Bush, calls on both nations to cut their strategic nuclear arsenals by about two-thirds, to 1,700 to 2,200 deployed warheads, by 2012. The treaty symbolized the newly warm U.S.-Russian ties, which were bolstered by Putin's support for the U.S. war in Afghanistan - and severely strained by differences over Iraq. In a change of heart, senior lawmakers pledged Tuesday to put the treaty back on the agenda this spring, saying it corresponds to Russia's national interests. Retired Gen. Andrei Nikolayev, the head of the Duma's defense affairs committee, said the "ratification must not be dragged out" despite the war, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported. It quoted Konstantin Kosachev, deputy chief of the Duma's international affairs committee, as saying that the house should vote on the treaty "without any delays or links with the progress and timeframe of the U.S. operation in Iraq." Sergei Mironov, the speaker of the upper house of parliament, also said the treaty must be ratified "as quickly as possible." However, the chief of the Duma's international affairs' committee, Dmitry Rogozin, appeared to link the ratification with Russia's efforts to carve a niche in the postwar rebuilding of Iraq. The Duma will take up ratification "as soon as the situation regarding the post-conflict settlement in Iraq is normalized," the ITAR-Tass quoted him as saying. Rogozin and other Russian lawmakers and officials have expressed annoyance over the U.S. House of Representatives' move to prevent U.S. funding for companies from Russia, France, Germany and Syria that seek to participate in reconstruction. All four countries had vigorously opposed giving a U.N. stamp of approval to the war. "This is a big mistake," Rogozin said. U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow told Echo of Moscow radio that the Bush administration did not support the legislation "and we would like to find ways to cooperate with Russia in the post-war phase." "I think if our governments can begin to work together that will also create some opportunities for the private sector," he said. return to menu 2. Top Russian MPs Urge Early Ratification Of US Arms Cuts Treaty MOSCOW - There is no point in delaying ratification of the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty [SORT], also known as the Moscow Treaty between Russia and the United States, regardless of what is happening in Iraq, according to prominent members of the State Duma, or the lower house of Russian parliament. Deputy Speaker Vladimir Lukin, for one, thinks that ratification of SORT should not be put off for a long time. He is confident that the treaty will be ratified before the end of the current spring session. "This treaty is no less beneficial for Russia than for the United States as it implies themaintenance of a balance in the strategic field between our two countries," Lukin said. It is in Russia's interest to see prompt ratification by the State Duma of SORT, according to the house defence committee chairman, Andrey Nikolayev. "An unfavourable backdrop for the move is still there in connection with the situation around Iraq, but there is no point in delaying the ratification," Nikolayev stressed. Deputy chairman of the Duma committee for international affairs Konstantin Kosachev, for his part, stressed that it is necessary to put ratification of the treaty to a vote in the lower house "without any delays or tying it down to the speed or timeframe of the US operation in Iraq." According to Kosachev, the Duma international affairs committee has a well-considered opinion that there is no, and there will be no, artificial procrastination over ratification in the State Duma. return to menu D. Russia-North Korea 1. Russia Says North Korea May Ignore UN on Nuclear Crisis SEOUL - Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said on Thursday North Korea could well ignore any decision reached by the United Nations on its suspected nuclear weapons program. Speaking to reporters after talks with South Korean Defense Minister Cho Young-kil, Ivanov said Seoul and Moscow agreed North Korea and the United States should refrain from using harsh language during the crisis, which began last October when Washington said Pyongyang had admitted having an atomic plan. "I do not rule out that if any decision whatsoever is taken by the United Nations on this question it will be ignored by Pyongyang, which will refer to other precedents," Ivanov said. The minister, who was also meeting President Roh Moo-hyun, said bilateral or multilateral talks should be held so that North Korea would re-enter the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it left on January 10 and allow U.N. nuclear inspectors back in. "Of course, that would occur after having received full and absolute guarantees on its territorial integrity and independence and guarantees against any kind of hostile intentions toward that state," Ivanov said, referring to North Korea's demand for a non-aggression pact with Washington. He said Russia was prepared to offer such a guarantee of its own to North Korea but, clearly, Pyongyang's main concern is Washington -- North Korea says the United States will attack it after Iraq, something U.S. officials deny. U.S. officials reiterated on Wednesday that they wanted a peaceful solution to the nuclear standoff and that diplomatic efforts could follow several tracks. The officials spoke after the U.N. Security Council had failed to issue a statement on North Korea because of resistance from China and Russia. Ivanov said Pyongyang's logic in deciding to acquire a deterrent -- he did not specifically refer to nuclear weapons -- was based on the U.S. strategy toward Iraq, which went from failed diplomatic efforts to a U.S.-led war that has ended Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's 24-year reign. "If one talks frankly about a link between the crisis in Iraq and on the Korean peninsula, then in my view there clearly is one," he said. return to menu 2. Russia Willing To Play Role In Solving DPRK Nuclear Issue SEOUL - Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said here Thursday that Russia is willing to guarantee the security of Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) along with other relative countries to defuse the DPRK nuclear crisis. "Russia is ready to provide guarantees of non-aggression treaty toward the DPRK together with the Unites States and China," the visiting Russian official told a press conference in central Seoul. The nuclear issue broke out last October when the US government announced the DPRK had a secret nuclear program. Later on, the DPRK declared it will reactivate its frozen nuclear facilities to make up its shortage of electricity since the United States halted fuel oil shipment to it last November. And the DPRK expelled the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and announced its pull-out from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in January this year. To resolve the crisis, Pyongyang has preferred holding bilateral talks with Washington and signing a non-aggression treaty with the United States, thus guaranteeing its security and sovereignty. However, the US administration insisted on dealing with the DPRK nuclear issue within a multilateral framework, in which the DPRK, United States, South Korea, Russia, China and Japan could hold dialogues. At Thursday's press conference, Ivanov also said a gas pipeline to South Korea will be laid underground in future, and Russia is considering to connect the Trans-Siberian Railroad to the Inter-Korean Railway. Previously, local media reported that South Korean government has mapped out a so-called "oil for peace" plan, under which pipe lines will be laid from Russia to the DPRK in exchange of the latter's reverse from its alleged nuclear program. But Seoul has categorically denied such reports. Ivanov arrived here late Wednesday and held talks with his South Korean counterpart Cho Young-kil earlier Thursday. During their talks, Cho Young-kil expressed the hope that Russia could play an aggressive role in facilitating dialogue between the DPRK and the United States in a multilateral framework, reported Yonhap News. The two defense ministers also concurred that both countries have to maintain close cooperation for the peaceful resolution of the DPRK nuclear standoff, it said. Ivanov also asked South Korea's participation in a naval exercise of the Russian Pacific Fleet slated for this August, and Cho said his ministry would consider the proposal, according to Yonhap. Ivanov will return to Moscow on Friday. return to menu 3. South Korea Fastens Its Hopes In Settling North Korean Nuclear Issue On Russia MOSCOW - South Korea fastens its hopes to settle the North Korean nuclear issue on Russia, South Korean Ambassador to Russia Chung Tae Ik said at the opening ceremony of a Moscow Centre for Studies of Modern Korea. According to the South Korean Ambassador, Russia "unequivocally stands for the non-nuclear status of the Korean Peninsula and is contributing to the peaceful settlement of the North Korean nuclear issue." The South Korean Ambassador also said that South Korean President No Mu-hyon believed that the issues had to be settled on the basis of three principles. Firstly, North Korea must be prohibited from developing nuclear weapons, secondly, the issue should be settled in a peaceful way and thirdly, Seoul must play an important role in the settlement of the issue. return to menu 4. Russia Urges Settlement On Korean Peninsula MOSCOW - The situation on the Korean peninsula is "exclusively dangerous and is clearly developing not in the direction of detente but in the opposite direction," Russian deputy foreign minister Alexander Losyukov said in an exclusive interview with ITAR-TASS on Tuesday. Mr. Losyukov, who is in charge of relations with the Asian countries, said that in the present situation "urgent measures are needed to ease the tension." "It is necessary first and foremost to clear up relations between the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in order to remove all apprehensions," he said. The move can be facilitated the forthcoming meeting of the U.N. Security Council. "Otherwise, the April 9 discussion in the United Nations Security Council can impart an impulse to negative processes," said Losyukov. "If this comes to be, the situation can lead to a complete collapse," the Russian deputy foreign minister warned. return to menu 5. Russia, China Warn UN Against Inciting North Korea Russia and China have warned against any move by the United Nations that could escalate the standoff over North Korea's nuclear development program. The warning was issued separately in Beijing and Moscow Tuesday, on the eve of a U.N. Security Council meeting called to discuss North Korea's nuclear program. Pyongyang has warned the Council to stay out of its affairs. Beijing and Moscow issued a similar warning. Even though both apparently have agreed to allow the Security Council meeting on Wednesday, government spokesmen in both capitals said it could worsen the already dangerous situation on the Korean peninsula. Pyongyang Tuesday denounced the planned meeting as a prelude to war, while South Korea urged the North to accept multilateral talks on resolving the issue. In Seoul, South Korean and U.S. officials began talks on their military alliance Tuesday. U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense for East Asia Richard Lawless and South Korea's assistant defense minister for policy, Cha Young-ku, are chairing the talks. They are expected to discuss the possible redeployment of 37,000 U.S. troops stationed across South Korea. These talks are the first of their kind since President Roh Moo-hyun took office in February, vowing to seek a more equal partnership with Washington. return to menu E. Russia-Iran 1. Ambassador: Iran Does Not Aim To Possess Nuke Weapons MOSCOW - The Iranian ambassador to Russia said on Wednesday that his country 'does not aim to possess nuclear weapons'. "Our equipment, including centrifuges developed on the basis of Iranian technology, are capable of producing only four-percent uranium for ordinary nuclear fuel," the ambassador, Gholamreza Shafei told Itar-Tass. However, 'other technologies are needed for creating weapons component', he stressed. The diplomat also emphasized that 'Iran is going to continue the implementation of an atomic program in line with its earlier plans'. "That program is transparent. It is aimed only at peaceful targets, connected with the development of power industry and economy," the ambassador added. "Iran meets all commitments as IAEA member, and conceals nothing from the world community," Shafei stressed. According to him, 'fears voiced in the USA about an alleged military orientation of the Iranian nuclear sector have no grounds and lack argument'. He said Tehran appreciated Russia's assistance in the development of its 'peaceful atomic power engineering. Construction of the first unit of a nuclear power plant in Bushehr with Russia's assistance will be completed in 2004 as scheduled', the top diplomat added. Earlier on Wednesday Russia's atomic energy minister said Iran's plans to create fuel and energy complex on the basis of its own uranium concerned Moscow for economic reasons rather than from the point of view of nuclear safety. The visiting minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, discussed the issue here on Tuesday with his US counterpart Spencer Abraham. "Indeed, centrifuges can be used to produce highly enriched uranium," Rumyantsev told Itar-Tass. However, according to information by the Atomic Energy Ministry, 'this is so far an initial stage in the development of production' and 'years will pass before enriched uranium can be produced'. The minister stressed, however, that Iran's nuclear program concerned him 'from the economic point of view'. Moscow and Tehran signed an agreement on the construction of a nuclear power plant in Bushehr and supplies of Russian nuclear fuel for it. Now, however, Iran has launched work to create its own fuel. 'That calls in question successful strategic partnership' between the two countries, he stressed. return to menu F. Nuclear Submarine Dismantlement 1. Nuclear Submarines Decommissioning Lacks Funds "This year, according to the current Russian program, we will decommission only two strategic submarines", Nikolay Kalistratov, general director of the military Zvezdochka shipyard, said in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk county, at an international seminar on decommissioning of nuclear submarines in the end of March. Mr Kalistratov said, funds for decommissioning of other strategic submarines were allocated mostly by the US. Today, tens of submarines are laid off, but funds for decommissioning are scarce. Russia's international agreements stipulate, that 122 Russian submarines should be decommissioned by 2010. Today Russia has 110 submarines, taken out of service and waiting for decommissioning. 62 of them are located in the North, eight in Severodvinsk, the rest in Murmansk. In Arkhangelsk county the Zvezdochka and Sevmash military shipyards carry out decommissioning. All the facilities there are built mostly for funds, granted by Norway and the US. The Severny Raid shipyard, which decommissioned nuclear submarines in the middle of 1990s, stopped its activities. "Even Zvezdochka alone could decommission all the submarines, if it had money. Just dismantling requires $900m, while the whole program's cost is over $4bn," Deputy Minister for Nuclear Energy Sergey Antipov said. "Health of people living in Severodvinsk becomes worse", mayor of Severodvinsk, Alexander Belyaev, said and suggested holding a special seminar on this issue. return to menu 2. U.S.-Sponsored Defueling Site Approved For Operation In Severodvinsk Zvezdochka shipyard defuelled the first Typhoon class submarine. The new facility received final approval by Moscow. The site has passed its final tests and is now ready for full-scale operation on defueling the laid-up nuclear submarines. A special interdepartmental commission took part in comprehensive tests, and then monitored spent nuclear fuel unloading from Typhoon class submarine - TK-202 - which has been laid up in Severodvinsk since July 1999. It was the first defueling operation carried out by Zvezdochka personnel. It took almost three months to unload the submarine reactor core using the new technologies. Before defueling operations in Severodvinsk were carried out at the military site coded "09". The fuel casks were first loaded onboard Malina class ship PM-124, which has been in operation for 20 years without overhaul repairs. Then an old crane - DPK-125 - in a very bad state of repair took empty TK-18 transport containers and placed them into compartment four onboard PM-124 - one at a time. TK-18 was then loaded with fuel and, with the use of crane DPK-124, was transferred into railway car. The site had no pad for intermediate storage of TK-18 containers and hardly met requirements for safe management of spent nuclear fuel. Zvezdochka has a pad for intermediate storage of the spent nuclear fuel containers and therefore does not depend on the schedule of the special trains, which take away the spent nuclear fuel. February 13th, the Interdepartmental Commission concluded in Moscow that defueling complex at Zvezdochka "is allowed for permanent operation." Starting in 1992 and until 1997, CTR has been delivering equipment for scrapping ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to Zvezdochka in Severodvinsk, Nerpa at the Kola Peninsula and Zvezda shipyard in the Russian Far East. The equipment was used to dismantle five SSBNs. After 1997, CTR started to contract directly with the shipyards themselves and funded the dismantlement of submarines, as the scarce Russia's budget would not let the work to proceed. In 1998, due to the lack of defueling capabilities and storage space for spent nuclear fuel, US officials granted CTR a waiver of the non-reprocessing policy. It was agreed that CTR would fund shipment of spent nuclear fuel to the Mayak reprocessing plant from 15 SSBNs dismantled on CTR's money. But funding of shipment to the Mayak plant was still not enough. New infrastructure was to be created to ensure that defuelling SSBNs, including Typhoons, could be carried out. The USA via Cooperative Threat Reduction program, or CTR, funded the construction of the unloading site in consent with a contract signed on May 29th 1998. The brand new $15 million defueling site sponsored by the USA is located at Zvezdochka shipyard. It is equipped with an 80-tonne crane, an intermediate storage pad for 12 fuel transport casks, a parking area for railway transport cars, and a building where the fuel is transferred to casks. The annual capacity of the site is four Delta class or two Typhoon class SSBNs. The site, however, cannot deal with damaged reactor cores, thus the condition of fuel in laid up submarines should be verified before they are placed for defueling there. return to menu G. Nuclear Industry 1. Russia To Deliver Fuel For Indian NPP The Russian Corporation TVEL will deliver nuclear fuel to India for $400m in the period until 2010, ITAR-TASS reported. TVEL and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) have already signed a contract. The nuclear fuel shipment will be carried out in the frames of the intergovernmental agreement on nuclear plant construction in India. Russia was providing the total design of the project as well as technical supervision during execution. The loan provided by Russia covered design, technical supervision, supply of equipment and machinery. Kudankulam NPP will use Russian nuclear fuel during its operation. The president of TVEL Alexander Nyago stated in connection with the contract's signing: "The IAEA specialists will control shipment, storage and loading of the nuclear fuel. The IAEA and Indian Government are considering the details of the control mechanism now." Russia is constructing two reactor installations at Kudankulam. The Russian specialists have recently finished mounting of the heavy machinery equipment on one of them. return to menu H. Announcements 1. Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs on the North Korean Problem Question: What do you think should be undertaken to normalize the situation on the Korean peninsula, which has become exacerbated recently? Answer: Indeed, the situation on the Korean peninsula is exceptionally dangerous and is developing clearly not towards the easing of tensions, but in the opposite direction. In the conditions when there are no reciprocal steps by the United States and the DPRK, mutual distrust keeps growing. The situation is now approaching a point where ill-considered actions threaten a landslide conflict. Tough new statements might soon follow on the part of Pyongyang. Thus, the atmosphere of disputes around the DPRK nuclear program will grow even more tense. In both sides' interests the situation ought to be frozen in its present forms, for a start - while avoiding strong-worded statements and threatening actions. Thus, urgent measures are necessary for defusing the tensions. Taking this opportunity, we call upon the US and the DPRK to move towards each other so as to remove mutual distrust. I consider that in approach to this complicated problem it appears only natural to take into account the concerns of Pyongyang about security guarantees and the well-known difficulties in the energy sector. Question: How justified is the submission of the North Korean problem for the consideration of the Security Council? Answer: I would like to at once note that the possibilities for considering the North Korean problem outside the UN framework are far from being exhausted. The upcoming (April 9) consultations in the UN Security Council on the Korean issue should assist the settlement of the crisis, not a new spiral of contradictions. In this case discussions in the Security Council could be useful. In the first place it is necessary to clarify relations between the US and the DPRK with a view to removing any fears. That is precisely what the UN Security Council meeting should assist. Otherwise the debate in the Security Council may on the contrary give impetus to some negative processes. If that happens, the situation could assume a dangerous character. Question: To what extent are the US proposals for settling the DPRK nuclear problem acceptable to Russia and how are they compatible with the Russian initiatives on that score? Answer: First of all I think it necessary to repeat that Russia is against the appearance of nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula. We've got a package of proposals for stabilizing the situation and beginning the negotiating process. At a point in the past, we put forward the proposal for six-way talks (Pyongyang, Seoul, Russia, China, Japan and the US) on Korean problems, and this proposal remains in force. At the same time we, with due attention, treat other proposals, including those on the part of Seoul. Moscow positively assesses also the United States' readiness to consider the DPRK nuclear problem in a multilateral format. So that Russia is ready for discussing this problem in a constructive vein in any format. return to menu I. Links of Interest 1. Nuclear Safety in Northwestern Russia: Next Steps to Realizing the G-8 Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction return to menu 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.