The Center for Defense Information
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20036
(202)332-0600 * Fax (202)462-4559 * www.cdi.org
| February 11, 1999 |
| February 11, 1999 |
Administration Proposes Funding Boost for Nunn-Lugar
Chris Hellman, Senior Research Analyst, Center for Defense Information
chellman@cdi.org
The Clinton Administration's budget request for Fiscal Year 2000, released on February 1, among other provisions included an increase in funding for U.S. programs that assist Russia and the former Soviet republics dismantle and dispose of their nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and protect their stockpiles of these weapons and fissile materials. In all, the Administration plans to spend $4.2 billion on these programs from FY 2000 through 2005.
Commonly referred to as the "Nunn-Lugar" program after its Congressional sponsors -- former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA) and Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) -- the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program (CRT) was initiated in 1991 to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction from Russia and the former Soviet republics.
While Nunn-Lugar was initially funded almost entirely though the Defense Department, it now receives some money through the State Department and substantial funding through the Department of Energy. These changes reflect in part an expansion of the support activities being funded in Russia and the former Soviet republics. Approximately $3.1 billion has been budgeted to date for the program.
Programs funded through DoD's CTR focus on the elimination of strategic delivery systems such as bombers and ballistic missiles, halting the production of nuclear materials and the transportation and storage of nuclear materials and weapons. The Fiscal Year 2000 request for CTR is $476 million, up $36 million for last year's levels. Under the Administration's plan, the CTR program will receive $2.9 billion over the next six years.
The Department of Energy's International Materials Protection Control and Accounting (MPC&A) program funds the monitoring and safeguarding of fissile materials at civilian and military sites. The FY'00 request for the MPC&A program is $145 million, up $45 million from last year. In all, $265 million for Nunn-Lugar is included in DoE's FY'00 budget request.
State Department funding represents the U.S. contribution to a multilateral program, the Multinational Science Centers. This program, along with DoE's Industrial Partnering Program, seeks to partner Russian weapons scientists and technicians with American firms to do basic research and commercial projects, thereby reducing the likelihood that these highly talented and knowledgeable individuals will be recruited by other countries or terrorist groups. The United States' annual contribution is $17 million, which funds one-third of the program's projects.
Initially there was significant Congressional opposition to the Nunn-Lugar program, particularly in the House of Representatives. Opponents included members who generally do not support foreign assistance programs and those who felt that U.S. funds spent on assisting Russia dismantle portions of its arsenal would free up funds for other Russian military programs. Over CTR's lifetime, however, opposition has faded as Congress has come to realize that the Nunn-Lugar program is not foreign aid but money that promotes U.S. security by reducing the risk of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
South Africa Takes Action on Small Arms Problem
Rachel Stohl, Research Analyst, Center for Defense Information
rstohl@cdi.org
Last month, the African continent's most lucrative arms producing state, South Africa, wrote a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan describing its commitment to combat the flow of small arms to civil wars and ethnic conflicts around the world.
The significance of this letter is immeasurable. For many years South Africa has been a contributor to the global small arms problem. During the apartheid era, South Africa was the world's 10th largest arms manufacturer. South Africa's neighbors have endured some of the bloodiest civil wars in history, and South African weapons played a large role in allowing those conflicts to continue long after they would otherwise have run their destructive courses.
In the letter to Annan, the South African government wrote that it has "adopted a policy of destroying all its obsolete and redundant surplus small arms so that they do not find their way into battle zones." Perhaps more importantly, South Africa also said it was "further committed to stopping the flow of illegal small arms across its borders."
The destructive force of small arms and light weapons is often felt most heavily in post-conflict societies. South Africa, which delicately negotiated a peaceful end of apartheid in 1994, is virtually awash in weapons. As a result, in the past few years, it has taken steps to rid itself of weapons. The South African Police Service reportedly destroyed or melted down 70 tons of small arms and ammunition last year alone, including 4,504 pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns and home-made firearms.
South Africa has conducted several weapons seizure programs -- codenamed Operation Rachel I, II, and III -- with the Mozambican government to locate and destroy surplus light weapons. More than 100 tons of small arms and ammunition have been destroyed in these efforts. But there have been scandals arising from leaks to arms traffickers that a seizure was about to occur and from allegations of cooperation between traffickers and enforcement officials.
Regardless of the problems, South Africa's commitment to reining in small arms availability and trafficking is real. Media reports indicate that in 1997 South Africa's arms industry exported approximately $265 million worth of military equipment to 63 countries.
Furthermore, in the letter to Secretary-General Annan, South Africa wrote that it "is committed to a policy of responsibility and accountability in the trade and transfer of all arms." To make good on this commitment, South African created a ministerial body to "ensure the responsible transfer and trade in, among others, small arms and light weapons." Pending legislation in South Africa also includes licensing of civilian small arms, and requirements for the safe storage of small arms and light weapons.
South Africa's decision to make public, through the U.N., its commitment to ridding the world of small arms is not surprising. The U.N. has been a key player in the small arms issue and has repeatedly noted the growing problems caused by small arms on the African continent. At a speech to the U.N. Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters on January 19, Secretary-General Annan said that "the scourge of small arms continues to devastate civilian populations, creating humanitarian crises the world over. These weapons of personal destruction impair economic and social progress and impede our best development efforts."
The recognition that small arms impede development was echoed on February 4 by James Gustave Speth, the Administrator of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). In his remarks to a meeting of UNDP's Africa-based representatives, Speth said, "The world cannot ask Africa to develop and then blight its development efforts through the sale of arms and ammunition that fuel Africa's civil conflicts....The culture of war is a stark denial of the right to development, to life itself. We must say 'no' to the trade in death. Nowhere have small arms wrought as much havoc as that found in Africa where national conflicts have turned millions of people into refugees and internally-displaced persons."
The U.N. is not simply paying lip service to the small arms issue. Last fall the U.N. worked with the countries of West Africa to impose a moratorium on the import, export, and manufacture of light weapons (see "West African Small Arms Moratorium Adopted," Weekly Defense Monitor, November 12, 1998). And the U.N.'s involvement goes far beyond Africa. Most recently, the U.N. and UNDP have established a pilot program in Albania to collect and destroy surplus small arms throughout the country (see "Weapons Collection Program in Albania to Begin With U.N. Support," Weekly Defense Monitor, January 21, 1999).
The steps taken by South Africa and the United Nations are essential for dealing with the small arms problem. The next step is for other major arms producing countries to outline their commitment to eradicating surplus small arms stocks, developing legislation for responsible civilian possession of small arms, improving transparency measures, and redefining the criteria required for arms transfers. When the major arms producing countries address small arms as a global problem, real progress will be made.
Flaws in the System -- Part II
Colonel Dan Smith, U.S. Army (Ret.), Chief of Research, Center for
Defense Information
dsmith@cdi.org
"Look Who's Sharing" (CDI Weekly Monitor February 4, 1999) described problems the Russians are having in maintaining a full array of operational anti-ballistic missile early warning ground radars.
On February 10, the Washington Post carried a front page story captioned "Russia's Missile Defense Eroding" with a sub-caption, "Gaps in Early-Warning Satellite Coverage Raise Risk of Launch Error." In fact, the story is neither new nor about Russia's missile defense system which, in accordance with the amended 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that limits deployment of these systems to one site, is confined to protecting Moscow.
An accompanying article describes how, in September 1983, a Soviet early warning infrared sensing satellite mistook reflected sunlight from clouds for the exhaust plume of incoming ballistic missiles. Only the "gut instinct" of the Soviet watch officer prevented a retaliatory launch of Soviet nuclear tipped missiles at the U.S. But what may be most significant about the retelling of this 1983 incident is the observation by the Soviet officer that "he knew the [satellite] system had flaws. It had been rushed into service...and was 'raw'."
Why is this significant? Because the U.S. seems intent on launching a multi-billion dollar array of 24 infrared-based early warning satellites as part of the National Missile Defense program -- without properly testing it to make sure it works.
In the last week three different defense-oriented publications reported that the Pentagon has decided to cancel the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) -Low demonstration projects being developed by defense contractors Boeing and TRW-Raytheon. The reasons given are the usual ones: very over budget -- Boeing almost double and TRW-Raytheon a third over its original program estimate -- and behind schedule -- the first satellites were originally to be in place in 2004 but will not go up before 2006 because the Pentagon determined that a 2004 launch "involved too much technical risk."
The reports note that the whole point of putting demonstration satellites into orbit was to reduce risks by actually testing the on-board infrared systems for a year. This common sense endeavor would ensure that the satellites could detect and track ballistic missiles and then pass data to other systems that would be tied to interceptor missile launch sites in the U.S. But with a possible 2005 deployment date for the National Missile Defense interceptors, the Pentagon does not want to risk delaying the launch of the first SBIRS-Low satellites beyond 2006.
The upshot? The U.S. is heading down the path of launching and relying on a system of untested, "raw" early-warning satellites that are supposed to perform a critical role in the even more expensive and so far equally unproven and technologically troubled National Missile Defense program.
This isn't defense; it's a disaster waiting to happen.
CDI Factsheet: U.S. Participation in International Missions in
the Balkans
The planned peacekeeping force for Kosovo -- if it is approved and if it involves U.S. forces -- would be the fourth international mission in the Balkan conflicts with American presence. While U.S. initiative has been essential in brokering the Dayton peace agreement for Bosnia, U.S. personnel contribution to peacekeeping and monitoring missions there remains relatively modest. The United States supplies 14 percent of the international personnel -- military and civilian -- deployed in Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, and Kosovo.
For a listing of international missions assisting in resolution of the
Balkan conflicts, see CDI's latest factsheet at:
http://www.cdi.org/issues/europe/ushare.html
This week on America's Defense Monitor -- "$67 Billion Under the Sea"
Synopsis: The Pentagon plans to spend at least $67 Billion to buy 30 new attack submarines to replace its current Los Angeles class attack submarines. Is replacing the world's finest attack sub really justified, or will a boatload of tax dollars end up 20,000 leagues under the sea?
Interviewees:
John Donnelly, Reporter, "Defense Week"
Ivan Eland, Director, Defense Policy Studies, CATO Institute
Norman Polmar, Columnist, "Proceedings," US Naval Institute, and author
of "The Ships and Aircraft of the US Fleet."
Kay Van Der Horst, Submarine Issues Analyst
Retired U.S. Senator Dale Bumpers, (D-AR), from an interview
by "AMERICA'S DEFENSE MONITOR"
Length: 30 minutes
Air Date in Washington DC: 10:30 Sunday February 14, Channel 32
Air Date in New York: 8:30p.m. February 19 Channel 25
7:00 a.m. February 20, Channel 13
For air dates in other cities, check your local listings.
Cost: $39, low income groups $25
To Order, send check or money order to:
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
By phone, with Visa or Mastercard: (800) CDI-3334
For a transcript:
http://www.cdi.org/adm/Transcripts/1106/index.html
ALSO AVAILABLE from America's Defense Monitor:
"Military Nuclear Mess: Out of Site, Out of Mind" The military's plan to dispose of nuclear waste material is an environmental time bomb. Any American who uses interstate highways will be shocked by the transportation and storage methods. Furthermore, scientists are developing new nuclear weapons even as we cope with the toxic legacy of our nuclear arsenal.
This Video Features Comments From:
Mike McFadden: Acting Manager, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
George Dials: Manager (1993-1998), Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Lokesh Chaturvedi: Deputy Director, Environmental Evaluation Group
Congressman Tom Udall: (D-NM)
Dallas Gudgell: Board Member, Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
Sasha Pyle: Board Member, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety
Arjun Makhijani: President, Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research
Length: 30 min.
Cost: $39, low income groups $25
To Order, send check or money order to:
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
By phone, with Visa or Mastercard: (800) CDI-3334
For more informtaion, or to view a transcript:
http://www.cdi.org/adm/WIPP/index.html