Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at the CTBT Article XIV Conference at the UN 2009

Happy International Day Against Nuclear Tests!  For a brilliant reminder of why a permanent legal ban on nuclear testing is vital, check out Daryl Kimball’s moving take over at Armscontrolnow.  

Looking for another nuclear testing-related item to put on your calendar?  
The “2011 Article XIV Conference” on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) will be held September 23 in New York.

Hosted by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization, this will be seventh conference on the ratification and implementation of the CTBT (for background information our  site is chock full of CTBT resources, including a fact sheet here).  

The CTBT calls for an indefinite ban on all nuclear test explosions in all environments, to inhibit the research and development of new nuclear weapons. Since opening for signature in 1996, 182 states have signed the treaty and 154 have ratified it. However, before the treaty can “enter into force” (i.e. be made into international law) the 44 countries that possessed nuclear power reactors or research reactors at the time the treaty was negotiated have to sign and ratify the pact.  Nine of these countries still need to deposit their articles of ratification: China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, the United States of America, India and Pakistan.

Representatives from all countries are invited to participate in the conference – whether they have signed or ratified the treaty or not.  Those states that have already ratified the treaty use the conference to promote the treaty’s goals and urge states that have not done so to sign and ratify the treaty so as soon as possible.  They will also propose concrete measures to hasten entry into force, such as by urging countries with nuclear weapons research programs to refrain from developing new nuclear devices.

Read more

Nukes on a Blog, CTBT, UN, Arms Control (all tags)

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test- Ban Treaty (CTBT) opened for signature 14 years ago today on 24 September 1996. Signed by 182 of the UN’s 192 Member States, the Treaty is designed to constrain the research and development of nuclear weapons by banning all nuclear test explosions in all environments, indefinitely. Given the undeniable security and non-proliferation benefits of the CTBT, it should come as no surprise that state parties to the NPT reaffirmed the vital importance of the treaty’s entry into force at the recent May 2010 NPT Review Conference in New York. But after fourteen years, how much longer will the world have to wait?

Read more

CTBT, Nukes on a Blog, UN, nuclear weapons testing (all tags)

Oh, and Ahmadinejad is really mad.

After setting the stage at the UN last week, the US and EU have followed through on their pledge to implement strong unilateral sanctions on Iran.  While decades of US sanctions have eliminated Iran’s reliance on the US market and rendered US sanctions essentially worthless, the implementation of stronger European sanctions is a significant step.

According to an official statement, the European measures include sanctions on “key sectors of the gas and oil industry with prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies” and related equipment and services.  In addition, Iran's shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran's Revolutionary Guard.  Officials say the new sanctions could come into force within weeks.

Prior to this move, the EU has not placed significant trade restrictions on Iran beyond existing UN sanctions.  As a result, the EU is one of Iran’s largest trading partners, along with China, and provides for more than 20 percent of Iran’s trade.  H/T to Max Bergmann here, who makes some great points on the Obama Administration’s containment strategy over at the Wonk Room. Bergmann points out that...

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, Russia, China, EU, UN (all tags)

I tried to work a good baseball reference into the title (but failed miserably) since at the water cooler this morning, most of DC was focused on new Washington National Stephen Strasburg’s impressive major league debut, rather than the impending UN Security Council sanctions vote.

In fact, maybe that’s the real reason why the vote was delayed?

After over an hour delay, said to be due to indecision on the part of Lebanon, twelve nations of the 15-member body voted for the resolution.  Turkey and Brazil voted against, as was expected, while Lebanon chose to abstain.

Ambassador Susan Rice spoke out strongly against Iran’s actions and addressed ongoing negotiations on the TRR Deal in her remarks following the vote:

Turkey and Brazil have worked hard to make progress on the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—efforts that reflect their leaders’ good intentions to address the Iranian people’s humanitarian needs while building more international confidence about the nature of Iran’s nuclear program. My government will continue to discuss the Iranian-revised proposal and our concerns about it, as appropriate. But the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—then and now—does not respond to the fundamental, well-founded, and unanswered concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. This resolution does.

Later in the day, President Obama said that the new Iran sanctions resolution “demonstrates the growing costs that will come with Iranian intransigence,” but also repeatedly emphasized that the UN sanctions vote does “not close the door on diplomacy.”

Unfortunately, necessary posturing on the part of Iran is likely to make diplomacy difficult in the near future, and Congress is already gearing up to ensure that another round of sanctions is passed by the end of the June.

Rep. Howard Berman praised the passage of this morning’s resolution and confirmed that Congress would be moving forward on gasoline sanctions legislation:

We now look to the European Union and other key nations that share our deep concern about Iran's nuclear intentions to build on the Security Council resolution by imposing tougher national measures that will deepen Iran's isolation and, hopefully, bring the Iranian leadership to its senses. The US Congress will do its part by passing sanctions legislation later this month.

Read more

Iran Watch, UN, Congress, Berman, Rice, Strasburg (all tags)

After a recent delay, the White House has expressed confidence that the UN Security Council will back Iran sanctions in the next week, despite controversy over Israel's Gaza flotilla raid.

While some have all but condemned UN sanctions to a slow and painful death, Robert Gibbs stated yesterday that, “I think the president and the team here remain confident that ... within the next week, we'll have a number that will pass that resolution.”

If a vote does not take place by June 21, as the White House expects, you can bet that Congress will be waiting in the wings to pass its own set of sanctions.

Just prior to the Memorial Day recess, Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Howard Berman announced their intention to hold off on Congressional Iran sanctions until the end of June:

With the progress in negotiations at the Security Council, we believe that our overriding goal of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability is best served by providing a limited amount of time for those efforts – and expected follow-on action by the EU at its mid-June summit – to reach a successful conclusion before we send our bill to the President.

Slowed progress will, no doubt, light a fire under those who disagreed with a delay in the first place.

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, Congress, Flotilla, Israel, China, Russia, UN (all tags)

Let's make a deal.

Building on the very useful analysis of CAP and IISS, here are some of the key differences between the October 2009 and May 2010 fuel swap proposals:

1)    Iran’s uranium supply is larger now: 1,500kg in 2009 vs. 2,300kg in 2010.  As initially laid out, the swap would have removed nearly 80 percent of Iran’s stockpile of LEU.  As it stands now, the proposal would remove only about 50 percent, leaving behind enough to, theoretically, build one bomb.

2)    In the original proposal, Iran’s fuel would be shipped to Russia, enriched to 19.75 percent, and then sent to France to be converted into fuel rods.  In the new proposal, Iran would send its fuel to Turkey for storage.  

3)    The 2010 plan does not outline what will happen to the 1,200 kg of LEU being stored in Turkey once the deal concludes.  Should another country offer up its own stockpile of LEU for enrichment, which is far from guaranteed, then send that enriched fuel to France for conversion, no provisions exist to state where Iran’s original LEU will go at the end of the process.  One would assume back to the country that offered its LEU for conversion.  For this scenario to work, however, the US or Russia must first agree to provide 1,200kg of LEU.

4)    Paragraph 8 of the 2010 proposal states that: “In case the provisions of this Declaration are not respected Turkey, upon the request of Iran, will return swiftly and unconditionally Iran’s LEU to Iran.”  The terms “not respected” are broad and give Iran the right to request the return of its LEU with no specification as to what constitutes a violation.

5)    The 2009 proposal would have granted the IAEA full-access to Iran’s nuclear program – 2010 does not include any statements regarding inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

6)    The 2010 plan requires that the fuel be delivered to Iran within in one year.  France’s fuel fabricator AREVA EURODIF S.A. has indicated, however, that it will require at least two years to produce the required amount of fuel.

7)    The 2010 proposal states the “right of all State Parties [to the NPT], including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities) for peaceful purposes without discrimination.”  This statement could be taken to assert Iran’s right to continued enrichment in contradiction of current UN Security Council Resolutions, but its intent is not clear.

Read more

Iran Watch, Brazil, Turkey, TRR Deal, Nuclear Fuel Swap, UN (all tags)

Surprise, surprise!  According to Reuters, Iran “could cancel its agreement with Turkey and Brazil to transfer some of its uranium abroad if the UN Security Council approves a new round of sanctions against it.”

Turkey, Brazil and Iran have urged a halt to talk of further sanctions because of the deal, but the UN Security Council looks poised to move forward regardless.

In Congress, lawmakers seem as ready as ever to ignore the administration’s request to hold off on sanctions legislation until after a UN deal is concluded.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday he wants Congress to complete action on the new sanctions legislation before leaving for the Memorial Day recess:

“We hope it will move out of conference this week and be on the floor next week.”

Read more

Iran Watch, Congress, Brazil, Turkey, Sanctions, TRR Deal, Nuclear Fuel Swap, UN (all tags)

The other side of the ‘time’ coin I mentioned yesterday (a far less optimistic side) is Iran’s potential use of the fuel swap to stall sanctions.  In the past, this technique has worked out well.  If one assumes that, once again, Iran is not sincere in its offer and is simply “playing Lucy and the football with the LEU,” negotiations could be over before they even begin.

Enter Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at this morning’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on New START.  

“We have reached agreement on a strong draft with the cooperation of both Russia and China,” she says, at the most inopportune and, frankly odd, time possible:

We plan to circulate that draft resolution to the entire Security Council today. And let me say, Mr. Chairman, I think this announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken in Tehran over the last few days as any we could provide.

Hmm – wasn’t expecting that.  I am reminded, though, of the reason I decided to support now-President Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries.

If the council adopts the resolution, it would represent the fourth round of sanctions against Iran.  Unfortunately for sanctions, many have already accepted their inevitable failure…

Read more

Iran Watch, Congress, Brazil, Turkey, Sanctions, TRR Deal, Nuclear Fuel Swap, UN, Clinton (all tags)

In April, Sen. John McCain commented that the US keeps pointing a loaded gun at Iran but failing to "pull the trigger."

This week saw more confident language surrounding ongoing UN sanctions talks:

"I am very confident that unless Iran does something significant that demonstrates that it is taking confidence building measures, I am very confident we will get a Security Council resolution that is supported by the majority of the UN Security Council."

In his comments this past Tuesday, White House WMD czar Gary Samore confirmed his belief that both Russia and China are likely to support an eventual resolution.

Unfortunately, Samore is not so confident about the zombie fuel swap, noting that that current Brazilian and Turkish efforts are unlikely to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough and, as such, the US is holding out little hope for the deal.

“The Iranians have frankly not been prepared to accept that offer, it’s pretty clear to anybody,” Samore said, “and Turkey will soon satisfy themselves of that.”

He also added that Iran’s “nuclear clock is not moving as quickly as some feared, because of problems the Iranians have had in terms of their centrifuges,” but declined to say whether the centrifuge problems were a result of alleged Western attempts to thwart work by the machines.

Meanwhile, Congress is hard at work making the case against exemptions for cooperating countries from corporate sanctions, such as those requested by the administration…

Read more

Iran Watch, Congress, Lieberman, Samore, Sanctions, UN (all tags)