Search

Begin New Search Topic Nuclear Power

101. Alternative North Korean Nuclear Futures

Author:
Shane Smith
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
On February 12, 2013, North Korea’s state media announced that it had conducted a third nuclear test “of a smaller and light A-bomb unlike the previous ones, yet with great explosive power…demonstrating the good performance of the DPRK's nuclear deterrence that has become diversified.”[1] Since then, there has been renewed debate and speculation over the nature and direction of North Korea’s nuclear program. Can it develop weapons using both plutonium and uranium? How far away is it from having a deliverable warhead and how capable are its delivery systems? How many and what kind of weapons is it looking to build? These are not easy questions to answer. North Korea remains one of the most notoriously secret nations, and details about its nuclear program are undoubtedly some of its most valued secrets. Yet, the answers to these questions have far reaching implications for U.S. and regional security.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
North Korea

102. White House Narratives on the Iran Nuclear Deal

Author:
Michael Scott Doran
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Testimony before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, United States House of Representatives
Topic:
International Affairs and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Global Focus

103. Should We Let The Bomb Spread

Author:
Henry Sokolski (ed)
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
In 1966, Leonard Beaton, a journalist and strategic scholar, published a short book that asked must the bomb spread.1 Mr. Beaton’s query reflected the profound alarm with which proliferation was viewed shortly after the Cuban Missile Crisis. Today that alarm is all but absent: Now, not only is proliferation increasingly viewed as a given (more of a fact than a problem), but some security experts actually see advantages in nuclear weapons spreading or, at least, little harm. Cultivation of this latter view took time—nearly a half century— and considerable scholarship. In 1981, Kenneth Waltz popularized French and American finite deterrence thinking of the late 1950s by asking whether or not nuclear weapons in more hands might be better. His answer was yes. As nuclear weapons spread, he argued, adversaries would view war as being self-defeating and peace would become more certain.
Topic:
International Affairs and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Global Focus

104. The Nuclear Terrorism Threat: How Real Is It?

Author:
Michael Brian Jenkins and John Lauder
Publication Date:
08-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
NPEC Working Paper 1602, “The Nuclear Terrorism Threat: How Real Is It?” presents two opposed views on the threat of nuclear terrorism. Brian M. Jenkins, a Rand analyst and a leading expert on nuclear terrorism, argues that the threat is overblown. John Lauder, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Nonproliferation Center, argues the opposing case that the threat is growing and we need to be hedging against it now.
Topic:
Terrorism, International Affairs, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Global Focus

105. How Dark Might East Asia’s Nuclear Future Be?

Author:
Henry D. Sokolski
Publication Date:
08-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
NPEC Working Paper 1601, “How Dark Might East Asia’s Nuclear Future Be?” contains detailed projections of what the future holds for a more nuclear-armed China, Japan, North Korea and South Korea. None are predictions. The volume’s purpose is to encourage deeper debate about the security implications of nuclear proliferation in East Asia.
Topic:
International Affairs and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Global Focus

106. Alternative North Korean Nuclear Futures

Author:
Shane Smith
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
On February 12, 2013, North Korea’s state media announced that it had conducted a third nuclear test “of a smaller and light A-bomb unlike the previous ones, yet with great explosive power…demonstrating the good performance of the DPRK's nuclear deterrence that has become diversified.”[1] Since then, there has been renewed debate and speculation over the nature and direction of North Korea’s nuclear program. Can it develop weapons using both plutonium and uranium? How far away is it from having a deliverable warhead and how capable are its delivery systems? How many and what kind of weapons is it looking to build? These are not easy questions to answer. North Korea remains one of the most notoriously secret nations, and details about its nuclear program are undoubtedly some of its most valued secrets. Yet, the answers to these questions have far reaching implications for U.S. and regional security.
Topic:
International Affairs and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Global Focus

107. The Inflated Yet Unsolvable North Korean Nuclear Threat

Author:
Boyan Boyanov
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Security and International Studies (ISIS)
Abstract:
After Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test on the 5th of January 2016 and declared it a successful experiment with a hydrogen bomb, the international community resumed its appeals for finding a definitive solution to the issue with North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. What impresses is the routine of the international response following the North Korean habitual act of defying the nuclear nonproliferation system: diplomatic condemnation mostly coming from the United States, South Korea, Japan, and, in a far more restrained manner – from China. When Pyongyang launched a satellite in space two days later, Seoul responded by shutting down the Kaesong industrial complex – a mutually beneficial industrial zone where South Korean companies employ North Korean labor1 . Even this seemingly harsh action does not constitute a precedent. At that time it was not very demanding to foretell the execution of consequential U.S. – South Korea military drills to display the U.S. resolution to be constantly involved in whatever is happening on the Korean Peninsula and to dismay the latest great leader of the North.
Topic:
International Security, International Affairs, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
North Korea

108. Iran’s Resurgence as Power after International Sanctions Relief / El resurgimiento de Irán como potencia tras el levantamiento de las sanciones internacionales

Author:
José Ignacio Castro
Publication Date:
12-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
Nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 Group become a reality at the beginning of 2016, with the Iranian engagement on declaration and reduction of her nuclear capabilities, for a temporary period. Parallel to the agreement accomplishment, Iran has increased her power towards her geopolitical enlargement area in the Mesopotamia and Levant region. Iran´s resurgence has caused a conventional weapons´ proliferation, where ballistic missiles are the main stress´s source. At international level, Iran has achieved better business opportunities, although her economic evolution is still slow, mainly due internal power´s dynamics. At global order level, the agreement has brought main actors power´s redesign in Middle East and other global areas. Inside Iran, the agreement has reinforced institutional authority and at the same time it is opening up the way for hope and for a better future for the Iranian people.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

109. Strengthening the ROK-US Nuclear Partnership

Author:
Miles A. Pomper, Toby Dalton, Scott Snyder, and Ferenc Dalnkoki-Veress
Publication Date:
02-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Abstract:
Over the last forty years, South Korea (or the Republic of Korea, or ROK) and the United States have become essential partners on nuclear matters. The United States provided the technology and knowhow necessary for Korea to establish a nuclear sector. Koreans mastered that technology and have worked to improve on it, with the twin goals of expanding their country’s energy independence and becoming a leading exporter of nuclear power production facilities. The two states’ nuclear energy industries have become intertwined. They cooperate on multiple initiatives to strengthen international nuclear security and nonproliferation measures. Collaborative research ties amongst nuclear scientists from both countries run deep. Arguably, each state is the other’s most important nuclear partner. As with all maturing relationships, there remain differences of view and priority that must be managed. Though unlikely, a disruption in ROK-US nuclear relations would have wide-ranging, deleterious effects on both states. For this reason, the conclusion in June 2015 of a new bilateral treaty, the Agreement for Cooperation Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Korea Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (hereafter referred to as the 123 agreement after section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act, the relevant US statute) is a critical milestone. The new agreement establishes the terms for nuclear cooperation for the next twenty years. It is expansive and forward-looking, providing the basis for unusually broad and deep nuclear ties. The 123 agreement will bring predictability to the relationship at a time when the global nuclear energy outlook remains in flux. However, the new nuclear agreement only managed to partially resolve several deep-seated differences between the two sides that were illustrated by the fact that negotiations on a new agreement lasted more than four years and required an extension to complete. The agreement creates a new political framework for managing divergent views over how to cooperate most effectively, but differences may yet re-emerge and frustrate cooperation. The challenge before the two governments now is to implement the new agreement in ways that can either resolve or remove these differences and solidify existing ties. In other words, the two countries should seek to build a nuclear partnership in deed, not just in word. This report articulates a vision for ROK-US nuclear partnership for the next two decades, a period which aligns with the duration of the new agreement for cooperation. It highlights challenges and opportunities and provides recommendations intended to deepen and expand the range of existing cooperation in ways that will support a stable and sustainable nuclear partnership. The objective of the report is to describe a desirable and stable end-state for the relationship—an enduring partnership—and to identify steps along the path to achieve it. It discusses multiple areas of cooperation, assesses strengths and weaknesses of existing ties, and identifies practical activities both parties can pursue toward building the partnership.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

110. Replacing HEU in Naval Reactors

Author:
George M. Moore
Publication Date:
03-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Abstract:
Highly enriched uranium (HEU) is the simplest nuclear material to use for an improvised nuclear device, making it a target for terrorist groups seeking to inflict mass destruction. This paper examines the current status of HEU in naval propulsion programs worldwide, with a specific focus on the U.S. Navy’s program. It includes a technical assessment of less risky low-enriched uranium (LEU) alternatives and recommendations to enable conversion to such alternate technologies.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Nuclear Power, Navy, and Uranium
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America