Disarmament Diplomacy

Issue No. 56, April 2001

Bush Administration Details Nuclear Weapons, Non-Proliferation Spending Plans

On April 9, the US Department of Energy announced details of its Fiscal Year (FY) 2002 budget submission to Congress. In broad terms, the budget sets out increased funding for the Department's nuclear weapons programmes, and decreases in funding for non-proliferation programmes.

Under the budget, the Department's nuclear weapons activities, managed by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and collectively known as the 'Stockpile Stewardship Program', would be allocated total funding of $5.3 million, a 4.6% ($230.7 million) increase on the current year. In an April 9 statement, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham noted that $2 billion of these funding was intended for allocation to "several campaigns to develop new capabilities to assess weapon status, extend weapon life, and certify that the stockpile remains safe. ... The Department's Advanced Strategic Computing Initiative [ASCI] and the construction of the world's largest scientific laser, the National Ignition Facility, are two examples of the significant scale and sophistication required in this effort."

Just over $1 billion of the nuclear-weapons funding is requested for Directed Stockpile Work (DSW), including $305 million for 'stockpile research and development'. DSW programme objectives were spelled out as follows in the Department's full budget submission:

"Directed Stockpile Work maintains confidence in the safety, reliability and performance of the nuclear weapons...through maintenance...and planned refurbishments. ... We will continue full-scale refurbishment work on the W87 [warhead], including structural retrofits and a new gas transfer system. Beginning in GY 2001, Directed Stockpile Work accelerated sharply as we prepared to undertake life extension activities for up to three additional systems. DOE is working with the Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) to reach agreement on the timing, pace, scope and technical aspects of this work. For the B61-3/4/10, the NWC has approved commencement of development engineering to change the fin cant on the bombs. The NWC also approved feasibility study and design definition and cost studies on the B61-7/11 to focus on canned subassembly ageing issues, and a development engineering study to extend life, add advanced reservoir technology and enhance surety for the W80. The W76 is currently undergoing development engineering to extend warhead life, refurbish the primary and secondary, add new arming, fusing and firing system, and add the next generation of advanced reservoir technology. In FY 2002, much of this work is focussed on Stockpile R&D, supporting the laboratory efforts needed in the pre-production stages, pending the outcome of the strategic review of national security-related programmes directed by the President."

The Department's budget for Defense Nuclear Non-Proliferation specifies an overall reduction in funding of $100 million, down to $773.7 million, a cut of 11.5% from the FY2001 figure of $873.8 million. Under the proposals, one non-proliferation programme - providing assistance to Kazakhstan, North Korea in Russia in the development secure, long-term storage for spent fuel containing weapons-grade fissile materials - would be eliminated entirely; the Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI), designed to provide non-military employment for former Soviet weapons scientists, would have its funding reduced by 75% (from $26.6 million to $6.6 million); and the Materials, Protection, Control and Accounting (MPC&A) programme to help secure surplus Russian nuclear-weapons materials, would see an 18% drop in support (from $169.7 million to $138.8 million).

Earlier, on March 29, President Bush confirmed press reports from the previous day that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice had requested a review into all administration spending on all US-Russia non-proliferation programmes. According to the President: "It's in our nation's best interest to work with Russia to dismantle its nuclear arsenal... [W]e fully intend to continue to cooperate with the Russians. And we will continue to do so... We want to make sure that any money is being spent in an effective way. ..." While such a review meets with little domestic objection, a number of prominent Republicans, as well as many Democrats, have expressed disappointment or disapproval of its juxtaposition with the proposed budget cuts, first reported in the US media in mid-March (see last issue). Also on March 29, Republican Representative Curt Weldon argued: "Some of the dollars have not completely gone to the stated purpose, so reforms and additional oversight are necessary. But a unilateral call for cutbacks is wrong, and I would oppose that..." On March 28, former Republican Majority Leader Howard Baker stated simply: "I don't think there's any issue, really, that's more important than making sure we don't annihilate ourselves through an accident or something... The only thing we can't do is nothing... If we don't do it, no one will." In January, a task force into the issue, commissioned by the Department of Energy and co-chaired by Baker and a senior Democrat, former White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler, recommended an additional $30 billion of funding for US non-proliferation activities in the former Soviet Union over the next 8-10 years (see Disarmament Diplomacy No. 53).

On April 4, a number of senior House Democrats, including Minority Leader Richard Gephardt and Armed Services Committee member John Spratt, wrote to President Bush urging him not to proceed with the reported cuts to programmes which constituted "critical components of our efforts to protect against the dangers of nuclear and other WMD proliferation." Furthermore, the letter argued, a "cut in our support for these programmes would be a mistake, and would send the wrong signals to Russia and our allies about our commitment to reducing the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction at a time when we should be reaffirming that commitment. We urge you to fund these programmes aggressively." On April 10, following confirmation of the budget plans, former Democratic Senator Sam Nunn, co-chair and Chief Executive Officer of the recently-formed Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), noted in a statement carrying strong echoes of the Baker-Cutler task force study:

"I support a top-down review of all threat reduction programmes to ensure efficiency, strengthening and better coordination. However, I am disappointed that the administration has proposed reductions in many of these essential programmes - apparently before that review is completed. President Bush's support for threat reduction during the campaign indicated his willingness to make these programmes a priority, but this budget proposal, unless corrected by Congress, would take a dangerous step backward. We face a broad spectrum of threats from weapons of mass destruction... The threat of these weapons constitutes a clear and present danger to the security of the US and the world. This is America's greatest unmet security threat. I believe that once these programmes are evaluated, the Bush administration will determine that no defence-related expenditure can produce a return of higher value. Until that time, this budget proposal puts these programmes in question, which is counterproductive to both the timing and momentum needed."

Addressing the Second Annual Forum of Nuclear Security Decision-makers in Albuquerque on March 26, Republican Senator Pete Domenici (New Mexico) shared Nunn's surprise at the administration's early approach to the threat reduction issue: "These non-proliferation programmes seemed initially to have strong support from the Bush administration. For example, the new National Security Adviser recently noted that: 'American security is threatened less by Russia's strength than by its weakness and incoherence. This suggests immediate attention to the safety and security of Moscow's nuclear forces and stockpile.' I remain hopeful that the President's future budget submissions will fully support this policy..."

In the view of Democratic Senator Joseph Biden, the cuts are meant to exert pressure on Moscow on a range of non-proliferation policies, particularly with regard to military and peaceful nuclear assistance to Iran (see below for details of the latest US-Russia exchanges on this issue). In Biden's estimation: "They think they're going to get tough with the Russians, and part of getting tough with the Russians is cutting back on these programmes, which is absolutely foolhardy."

Russia reacted diplomatically to the proposed cuts. Answering questions on March 30, Alexander Yakovenko, Director of the Foreign Ministry's Information and Press Department, observed: "The question of the scale of American cooperation in the destruction and reduction of WMD is matter...[for] American legislators. As to particular aspects of the implementation of these programmes, possibly an appraisal of their effectiveness is at issue. As is known, the Russian side has repeatedly pointed to the need to optimise this reciprocally useful, many-year cooperation." However, in mid-April it was reported that the Russian government had instituted its own review of non-proliferation cooperation with Washington, and, apparently as part of the review process, ordered a three-month moratorium on US-Russian exchanges involving weapons scientists and other experts and officials. According to media speculation, the suspension may also be due to recent espionage tensions between the two sides, and to Russian unease about journalistic access to former Soviet nuclear-weapons facilities.

Reports: Baker says US must help Russian nuclear storage, Reuters, March 28; Baker wants money for Russia plan, Associated Press, March 29; Excerpts - Domenici says Russian nuclear stockpile serious threat, US State Department (Washington File), March 29; US reviewing aid meant to contain Russia's arsenal, New York Times, March 29; Transcript - Bush press conference at White House, March 29, 2001, US State Department (Washington File), March 29; US reviews Russia weapons program, Associated Press, March 29; US is reviewing aid for Russia's nuclear programs, Washington Post, March 30; Answer by Alexander Yakovenko, Director, Information and Press Department, Russian MFA, Russian Foreign Ministry text, March 30; Rep. Spratt urges President to fund non-proliferation programs, Representative John Spratt Press Release, April 6; US Department of Energy releases GY 2002 Budget, US Department of Energy Press Release R-01-049, April 9; Nuclear weapons funding up, non-proliferation, clean-up down, Energy Daily, April 10; Bush budget would slice efforts to limit Russian nuclear threat, Bloomberg, April 10; Nuclear Threat Initiative Releases Statement Regarding President Bush's Budget, Cuts in Non-Proliferation Programs, NTI Press Release, April 10; US-Russian nuclear programs on edge, Washington Post, April 14; FY 2002 Department of Energy Congressional Budget Request, April 2001, DOE website, http://www.cfo.doe.gov.budget/02budget/index.htm.