Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small Nuclear Arms

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Max Ibel <maxi () google com>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 22:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Fwd: NYTimes.com Article: Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small
Nuclear Arms

Hi Dave,

this might be of interest to you. Sorry if not.
Best,

Max
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small Nuclear Arms

May 10, 2003
By JAMES C. DAO

WASHINGTON, May 9 - A sharply divided Senate Armed Services
Committee voted today to repeal a 10-year-old ban on the
development of small nuclear weapons, asserting that the
United States must begin looking at new ways of deterring
terrorist groups and so-called rogue nuclear powers like
North Korea.

The Bush administration, which requested the repeal, said
it had no plans to develop a new low-yield nuclear weapon.
But it contends that the existing prohibition has had a
chilling effect on weapons research at a time when the
United States is trying to reconfigure its military to
address post-Soviet threats.

The measure goes before the full Senate in two weeks, where
opponents, mainly Democrats, have vowed to fight it. The
House Armed Services Committee is scheduled to take up the
proposal on Tuesday.

"We have tried for 50-plus years to make these weapons
unthinkable," said Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode
Island. "And now we're talking about giving them a tactical
application. It's a dangerous departure."

Proponents, mainly Republicans, argue that low-yield
warheads could be used to incinerate chemical or biological
weapons installations without scattering deadly agents into
the atmosphere.

"Without committing to deployment, research on low-yield
nuclear weapons is a prudent step to safeguard America from
emerging threats and enemies who go deeper and deeper
underground," said Senator John Warner, a Republican from
Virginia who is chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

But senior administration officials have also argued that
new nuclear weapons may be needed to deter emerging nuclear
powers like North Korea and Iran. They contend that large
warheads may have lost their deterrent value for the
paradoxical reason that they are so destructive that world
leaders no longer believe the United States would use them
against small countries.

Low-yield weapons might prove more effective in containing
smaller nuclear powers precisely because they are less
devastating - and therefore theoretically more usable, the
officials argue.

"We need to make sure our weapons will in fact be seen by
other counties as a deterrent," Linton Brooks, the acting
administrator for the National Nuclear Security
Administration, said in an interview. "One element of that
is usability. If nobody believes there is any circumstance
where you will use the weapon, it is not a deterrent."

Arms control advocates and many Democrats contend
improvements in laser and satellite guidance systems have
made conventional weapons nearly as destructive as small
nuclear weapons. They argue that lifting the ban on
low-yield nuclear weapons will only undermine America's
ability to prevent the spread of such weapons to other
countries.

"This just undermines our whole argument," said Senator
Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Armed
Services Committee. "Were driving recklessly down a road
that we're telling other people not to walk down."

Democrats agreed their fight will be uphill, given the
Republicans' two-seat advantage in the Senate and the fact
that two Democrats on the Armed Services Committee - Ben
Nelson of Nebraska and Evan Bayh of Indiana - voted for the
repeal.

The repeal of the 1993 ban was approved as part of the
national defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2004
that the committee sent to the full Senate today.

The bill calls for spending $400.5 billion on military
programs, including a 3.7 percent across-the-board raise
raise for all servicemen, $6.6 billion for new warships and
$4.4 billion for development of the Joint Strike Fighter.

The 1993 ban was known as the Spratt-Furse Amendment after
its original Democratic sponsors - Representative John
Spratt of South Carolina and former Representative
Elizabeth Furse of Oregon. It prohibited any research and
development that could lead to the production a low-yield
nuclear weapon.

The law defined a low-yield weapon as having the explosive
force of less than five kilotons of TNT. The atomic bomb
dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 was about 15 kilotons.

The defense authorization bill included two other measures
opposed by arms control advocates: $15 million to continue
a feasibility study of a nuclear weapon capable of
penetrating deep into the earth, and $25 million to cut in
half the time needed to prepare for an underground nuclear
test, from 36 months to 18 months.

Senior administration officials said the earth-penetrating
weapon would involve developing a hardened casing for
existing nuclear weapons to enable them to crash through
thick rock and concrete. Democrats have said they would
support developing the casing for conventional weapons, but
do not want it used for nuclear warheads.

The administration says it has no plans to restart
underground nuclear testing, but wants to speed up the time
needed to conduct a test in case of a national emergency.

Underlying the willingness of many Republicans to repeal
the ban on developing low-yield weapons is the belief that
existing arms control measures, consisting of treaties and
inspection programs, are failing.

"Experience has shown that nonproliferation treaties really
don't have any affect on countries like North Korea, India
and Pakistan," said Senator Wayne Allard, a Republican from
Colorado.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/10/international/worldspecial2/10NUKE.html?ex
=1053599302&ei=1&en=4580afd3e20bd61c
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/