Home: Index
About Us
• web: www.gcdd.net
• email: gc.dd@gcdd.net
• last additions:

    21 October 2015
Hiroshima Dome The Global Collaborative on
Denuclearization Design
to achieve and sustain Zero Nuclear Weapons
1st H-Bomb Test [1952]
Chron 2001-2003   Cite as    •  http://www.gcdd.net/GC.DD=ChronFile.2001-2003.html



MAY 2001

2001.05.01 Tuesday
Bush sketches a missile-defense plan in speech at the National Defense University.
[Full text.]
• New York Times reportage 2001.05.01
• New York Times military analysis 2001.05.02
• New York Times reportage 2001.05.02
• Richard Butler op-ed 2001.05.02
• Indian Government pre-speech alert 2001.05.02
• Guardian [UK] editorial 2001.05.02

2001.05.03 Thursday
EU delegation in North Korea. Kim Jong Il extends missile test moratorium to 2003, but refuses to abandon missile exports.
• New York Times reportage 2001.05.03
• New York Times reportage 2001.05.05

2001.05.08 Tuesday
Rumsfeld calls for combining many US military space programs but “stops short of advocating putting weapons in outer space.” [The New York Times]
• New York Times reportage 2001.05.09
• Associated Press reportage 2001.05.10, citing Lt. Gen. Robert Foglesong, Deputy Chief of Staff for Air and Space Operations: “If the policy decision is made to take our guns into space that will be decided by our civilian leadership.”

2001.05.09 Wednesday
Michael R. Gordon cites the ABM Treaty arguments as first signs of a “far-reaching debate over whether the United States should simply abandon the business of negotiating strategic arms treaties.”
• New York Times, Michael R. Gordon analysis 2001.05.09

2001.05.20 Sunday
Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller report leak of confidential US interagency review that US should not sign proposed Bacteriological Warfare Convention enforcement Protocol.
• New York Times, Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller 2001.05.20
• Arms Control Today May 2001: articles on the Chair's draft of the BWC Protocol

2001.05.24 Thursday
Senator Jeffords leaves Republicans and gives Democrats an organizational majority in the US Senate, with implications for NMD, arms control, and US global policy.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JUNE 2001

Bush undertakes 5-day trip to Spain, NATO [Brussels], EU [Goteberg], Poland, and Slovenia. In Slovenia, he holds his first talks with Russian President Putin.
• New York Times “Bush Runs Into Skepticism at NATO Over Missile Shield” 2001.06.13
• New York Times “Putin Urges Bush Not to Act Alone on Missile Shield” 2001.06.17
New York Times “Putin Says Russia Would Counter US Shield” 2001.06.19
• Le Monde “Première rencontre Bush-Poutine : derrière les sourires, les désaccords” 2001.06.19

2001.06.24 Sunday
Colin Powell doubts Putin’s missile-defense warning.
• New York Times “Powell Dismisses Putin Warning on Missiles” 2001.06.24

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JULY 2001

2001.07.06 Friday
Putin, through the Russian foreign ministry, proposes that N5/P5 begin a permanent consultation process on nuclear arms cuts and the ABM Treaty.

• Associated Press 2001.07.06.

2001.07.07 Saturday
The New York Times reports that GW Bush “has resolved to let the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty languish in the Senate” .

• Thom Shanker and David E. Sanger, “White House Wants to Bury Pact Banning Tests of Nuclear Arms”,
The New York Times 2001.07.07.

2001.07.07 Saturday
François Heisbourg, in an op-ed piece, comments on the ‘possibility’ that the United States will join China and Iran in obstructing the proposed verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention.
• François Heisbourg, , “Biological Warfare: The Next U.S.-Europe Split?”, The International Herald Tribune 2001.07.07.

2001.07.12 Thursday
Pentagon announces plan to create missile ‘test’ installations in Alaska forthwith, promising prompt challenge to ABM Treaty.
• US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Testimony on NMD before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 12 July 2001. And in pdf format.

• Lieutenant General Ronald T. Kadish, USAF, Director, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, Testimony on NMD before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 12 July 2001 [in pdf format].

2001.07.28 Saturday
Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, Chief of the UK Defence Staff, commenting on NMD, says that “I have seen nothing yet to give me a technical description of what has been proposed.”
• Interviewer Richard Norton-Taylor writes that: “Britain's most senior military officer has expressed serious doubts about America’s missile defence project, saying he has seen no evidence the technology will work and warning it could have a potentially devastating impact on Britain’s own military capabilities.” The Guardian 28 July 2001.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2001.08.21 Tuesday
John Bolton, US Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, told Echo of Moscow Radio that if the United States was unable to reach agreement with Russia on the ABM Treaty “that at some point in the not too distant future we would exercise our express right under the treaty to give notice of withdrawal." Bush and Putin are scheduled to meet in Texas in November 2001, but their meeting is not “an artificial deadline” for reaching an agreement.
US Department of State, International Information Programs, 2001.08.22. Includes transcript of Bolton interview with Echo of Moscow Radio.

2001.08.23 Thursday
GW Bush said that the United States would withdraw from the 1972 ABM Treaty “at a time convenient to America” but said the US had “no specific timetable in mind.”
• The New York Times, 2001.08.24.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2001.09.11 Tuesday
The World Trade Center and Pentagon are attacked. Many commentators observe how much more horrendous the carnage would have been had a nuclear weapon been used.
• All newspapers. 2001.09.12.

2001.09.11 Tuesday
Dimitri Rogozin, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Russian Duma, said about US-Russian talks on the ABM Treaty and NMD: “I don’t think the talks have failed. It’s simply that as yet there is nothing to discuss. At each session of the talks, the Americans tell us about rogue states and how intelligence reports indicate that by a certain year these states will have three- or four-stage missiles and be capable of posing a threat. We explain how absurd their apprehensions are; they make a show of not understanding, and go on with what they’re doing.”
• The New York Times, 2001.09.11.
2001.09.17 Monday
An unidentified “senior administration official” told The Washington Post that as a result of the 9.11 attacks “if anything, the likelihood of unilateral withdrawal has increased.” And he said: “Missile defense will not fade as a priority of the administration. These incidents prove that there are people in the world for whom the concept of deterrence doesn’t mean a thing.”
Washington Post, 2001.09.18.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2001.10.28 Sunday
Donald Rumsfeld, in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, asked about TNW use in Afghanistan, repeated the usual US position that “The United States has historically refused to rule out the use of weapons like that.”
Excerpts from press conference, 2001.10.28.
• Full text of interview, 2001.10.28.

2001.10.25 Thursday
Donald Rumsfeld spoke to the press about the ABM Treaty. The United States had foregone, or would forego, three planned tests lest carrying them out appeared to violate the ABM Treaty. This is described as ‘bumping up against’ the ABM Treaty. [He did not say whether the tests had originally been designed to ‘bump up against’ the Treaty.]
• Text of press conference, 2001.10.25.
• The New York Times, 2001.10.26.

2001.10.21 Sunday
GW Bush and Putin talk in Shanghai. Putin declares amendment of ABM Treaty possible. Condaleeza Rice says no ABM withdrawal timetable was delivered, but unnamed “officials” are cited saying US will withdraw from the ABM Treaty if issues not resolved by end of 2001.
• The New York Times, 2001.10.21.

2001.10.19 Friday
Congressman Steven Buyers (R-Indiana) “supports” using tactical nuclear weapons against cave complexes in Afghanistan if Al Qaeda is behind anthrax attacks in US and if it is hiding BW or CW stocks in those caves.
• Lafayette [Indiana] Journal and Courier, 2001.10.19.

2001.10.11 Thursday
GW Bush, in a press conference, indirectly warned Iraq to admit UN arms inspectors. He also evaded a direct question whether he would withdraw from the ABM Treaty if Russia declined to agree to acceptable changes.
• Transcript of press conference. Or consult a GC.DD-marked-up version, highlighting nuclear matters. 2001.10.11.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2001.11.13 Tuesday
In Vladimir Putin and GW Bush press conference, Bush undertakes to “reduce our operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to a level between 1,700 and 2,200 over the next decade.”
Excerpts from press conference [with markup], 2001.11.13.
• Full text of interview, 2001.10.28.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2001.12.13  Thursday
GW Bush declares US intention to withdraw from the ABM Treaty.
GW Bush’s announcement on the White House site, and as a document addendum to a GC.DD paper on treaty abrogation.
• The New York Times, 2001.12.13.

2001.12.12  Wednesday
The New York Times anticipates a Bush announcement on 13 December that the United States will withdraw from the ABM Treaty.
• The New York Times, 2001.12.12.

2001.12.11  Tuesday
Reuters reports indications that GW Bush will announce in January 2002 intent to withdraw from the ABM Treaty, beginning a six-month clock.
• Reuters despatch, 2001.12.11.

2001.12.10   Monday
Some twenty Nobel Peace Laureates, on the occasion of the Centennial of the Nobel Prizes, “commit ourselves to work for the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction ... ”
• Nobel Peace Laureates Centennial Appeal, 2001.12.10. 1st H-Bomb Test [1952]




2002.01.09  Wednesday
The US CIA released an unclassified summary of its December 2001 National Intelligence Estimate “Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat Through 2015.”
Summary, 2002.01.09.

2002.01.09  Wednesday
A Department of Defense briefing made public selected features of the administration’s Nuclear Policy Review, first such review since 1994.
• Department of Defense NPR briefing transcript, 2002.01.09.
• Department of Defense NPR briefing slides, 2002.01.09.
• Patrick E. Tyler, The New York Times, “Russia Rejects U.S. Plans to Store Warheads”, 2002.01.11. 1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2002.02.26  Tuesday
US has no evidence that Al Qaida obtained nuclear material. But it also has recently expressed concern that “Weapons-grade and weapons-usable nuclear materials have been stolen from some Russian institutes.”
The New York Times, 2002.02.26. 1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

MARCH 2002

2002.03.01  Friday
Newspapers reported a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “feasibility study” showing that it was possible to conduct an analysis of the radiation effects of atmospheric nuclear tests. [Note that since 1955 the
UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation has also undertaken studies on this and related subjects.]

• James Glantz, “Almost All in U.S. Have Been Exposed to Fallout, Study Finds”, The New York Times, 2002.03.01. A graphic is especially clear [although miscaptioned, corrected later], and did not note that the original report is dated August 2001. [The correct title is shown in the next entry.]
• A FEASIBILITY STUDY OF THE HEALTH CONSEQUENCES TO THE AMERICAN POPULATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTS CONDUCTED BY THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER NATIONS, 2001.08. A map, reproduced in the Times’ account, shows “Preliminary estimates of the total dose (milliGray [mGy]) to the red bone marrow of children born 1 January 1951 from NTS and global fallout for all radionuclides.” “The draft Technical Report will be peer reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Assessment of CDC Radiation Studies. . . .In addition, the Technical Report will be available in draft for public review on the Internet at http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/default.htm.” As of 1 March 2002 the Technical Report was not yet posted.
• UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation, v I, Sources and v II, Effects.

2002.03.09-.11  Saturday
William Arkin reveals details of leaked sections of the 8 January 2002 Nuclear Posture Review. By his account, they include planning for use against Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and North Korea, and development of nuclear weapons and capabilities suited to initiating nuclear war. The New York Times states that it has a copy of the 56-page Review, but only brief passages are quoted verbatim in the Michael Gordon despatch.
• William M. Arkin, “Commentary: Secret Plan Outlines the Unthinkable,” Los Angeles Times, 2002.03.10. [This despatch is now archived and the Los Angeles Times charges a fee for access. Search for ‘Arkin’ on 10 March 2002.]
• Paul Richter, “US Works Up Plan for Using Nuclear Arms,” Los Angeles Times, 2002.03.09..
• Bradley Graham and Walter Pincus, “Nuclear Targeting Draft Shifts Focus From Russia: More Emphasis Given to China, N. Korea, Mideast,” Washington Post, 2002.03.10..
• Michael R. Gordon, “U.S. Nuclear Plan Sees New Weapons and New Targets” The New York Times, 2002.03.10..
• John H. Cushman, Jr., “News Analysis: Rattling New Sabers” The New York Times, 2002.03.10..
• Colin Brown, “US Prepares Contingency Plans for Nucler Strikes” The Independent [London], 2002.03.10..
• Michael R. Gordon, “Nuclear Arms: For Deterrence or Fighting?” The New York Times, 2002.03.11..
• William J. Broad, “Call for New Breed of Nuclear Arms Faces Hurdles” The New York Times, 2002.03.11..
• Eric Schmitt, “U.S. Tries to Dampen Fear Abroad on Policy” The New York Times, 2002.03.11..
• Graphic: Next Generation of Nuclear Bombs, The New York Times, 2002.03.11..
• “ Le Pentagone préconise une révision de la doctrine nucléaire”, Le Monde, 2002.03.11..
• At the web site of GlobalSecurity.org, what appear to be a covering letter and substantial excerpts from the leaked Nuclear Posture Review.

2002.03.12  Tuesday
US Secretary of State Colin Powell, testifying before the Senate Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary, was reported by NPR to have said the following:
   “With respect to reports that somehow we are thinking of preemptively going after somebody or that, in one editorial I read this morning, we have lowered the nuclear threshold, we have done no such thing.”
[Reporter Don Gonyea: “But Powell also had this to say regarding what this report means to countries trying to acquire or develop weapons of mass destruction.”]
   “It does not seem to us to be a bad thing for them to look out from their little countries and their little capitals, and see a United States that has a full range of options, an American president that has a full range of options available to him, to deter in the first instance, and to defend the United States of America, and the American people, our way of life, and our friends and allies.”
• Powell’s recorded voice is reproduced on the NPR site, in a segment on the NPR during the program Morning Edition. http://www.npr.org/ ramfiles/me/20020313.me.04.ram , 2002.03.13.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

APRIL 2002

2002.04.14  Sunday
Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish, head of the US Missile Defense Agency, said that the Defense Science Board was evaluating nuclear-armed anti-missiles as one missile defense option.
• The New York Times, 2002.04.15.

2002.04.29  Mon
UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw presented to Parliament a Green Paper on strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention.
• United Kingdom. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
“Strengthening the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention: Countering the Threat from Biological Weapons,”. 2002.04.29. [pdf document].

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

MAY 2002

2002.05.13  Tuesday
GW Bush announced that US and Russia would sign a nuclear weapon treaty next week. The text of the treaty was not released, but articles on the 14th carried more details.
GW Bush comments at the White House, 2002.05.13.
• Michael R. Gordon, The New York Times, 2002.05.14, “Treaty Offers Pentagon New Flexibility.”.

2002.05.25  Friday
The text of the proposed US-Russian nuclear weapons treaty is made public.
• Treaty text..

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JUNE 2002

2002.06.03  Monday
Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Fukuda Yasuo said that “there is a chance the government could take another look at the three non-nuclear principles in the future,” while stressing that “there is absolutely no chance that this cabinet will discuss revising these principles.” A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Quan Kong, said “it is shocking to hear remarks like this.”
The New York Times, 2002.06.04..

2002.06.06  Thursday
Randall Forsberg and others launch the Urgent Call to End the Nuclear Danger, urging a panel of steps to reduce nuclear weapon risks and move toward abolition, and seeking signers to the Call.
• Urgent Call site.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JULY 2002

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


span style="font-size:14pt;font-style:italic;text-align:left;">2002.08.20  Tuesday
General Nikolai Solovtsov, commander of Russian nuclear forces, announced that Russia had decided to modernize 144 strategic missiles, three-fourths SS-18s and one-fourth SS-24s. Most of these carry 10 warheads. Under START II these were to be dismantled no later than 2007, but the US has abandoned START II. Modernization will enable keeping them in the inventory until 2014.
• “La Russie va moderniser 144 missiles stratégiques,” Le Monde, 23 August 2002.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace issued a report of workshops on the question of Iraqi ‘weapons of mass destruction’. Jessica Mathews sets out the case for ‘coercive inspections’.
“Iraq: A New Approach”.. August 2002. 1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2002.09.09  Monday
The International Institute for Strategic Studies issued a ‘dossier’ summarising from public sources the state of Iraqi programs in biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and offered a considered judgment. The report, they write, “does not attempt to make a case, either way, as to whether Saddam Hussein’s arsenal is a cases belli per se.”
• The report is not available on the Web. However, it can be purchased in hard copy:
“IraqA’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Net Assessment”, 2002.09.20.

2002.09.20  Friday
The United States issued a broad-ranging but rather imprecise statement of its security strategy, including some discussion of WMD as a threat.
• “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America.”. 20 September 2002.

2002.09.24  Tuesday
Released on the morning of a debate on the question of Iraq and war in the British House of Commons, this report embodies claims and judgments of Britain’s intelligence services, but does not offer citations to sources other than those in the public realm.
• “Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government.”. 24 September 2002.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


1st H-Bomb Test [1952]



2003.01.27  Monday
UNMOVIC head Hans Blix and IAEA head Dr. Mohammed ElBaradei delivered reports on arms inspections of Iraq to the United Nations Security Council.

• Blix Remarks, 2003.01.27.
• ElBaradei Remarks, 2003.01.27.

2003.01.27  Monday
IAEA Update Report to the UN Security Council.

• IAEA Update Report, 2003.01.27.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

2003.02.28  Friday
Nicholas L. Kristof, New York Times columnist, writes that the Pentagon is seriously preparing contingency plans which envision using nuclear weapons against North Korea.
• The New York Times, 2003.02.28,
“Secret, Scary Plans.”.

2003.02.28  Friday
New Scientist reports that Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) authorisation includes requirement that US National Academy of Sciences assess effects of its use.
• New Scientist, “Nuclear Bunker Busters Come Under Scrutiny,” 2003.02.28..

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

MARCH 2003
Arms Control Today [March 2003] publishes an assessment of the nuclear items in the US Department of Energy’s fiscal year 2004 budget request. It includes monies for work on the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and for a plant to maufacture and certify plutonium nuclear weapon pits.

• Christine Kucia,
“Nuclear Weapons Activity Surges in Energy Department Budget,” 2003.03.

2003.03.19  Wednesday
Judith Miller cites senior Bush administration officials that the U.S. has deployed “mobile labs and new specialized teams of intelligence officials and disarmament experts to Kuwait to help the military search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as soon as war begins.”

They also say that the Pentagon is seeking to use former arms inspectors to aid this effort.

Ms. Miller adds: “The Pentagon has deployed several new tactical units called mobile exploitation teams or MET’s, with state-of-the-art equipment and novel tactics to lodcate an survey at least 130 and as many as 1,400 possible weapons sites.”
The scheme was approved two months earlier. Two mobile labs
“that can analyze chemical and biological samples in less than 24 hours with 90 percent confidence were recently sent to Kuwait.” The article contains many additional details.
• Judith Miller, “Teams of Experts to Hunt Iraq Arms,” The New York Times,2003.03.19..

2003.03.20  Thursday
Barton Gellman reports US efforts to glean data on Iraqi weapons programs. He notes that “UN sources said the IAEA believes it has ongoing legal authority over former Iraqi nuclear facilities, regardless of a change in government.” The United States is reportedly recruiting former UNSCOM inspectors for a US effort to find new facts about any chemical, biological, and nuclear weapon programs.

Former DTRA head Jay Davis is quoted as saying that “A very important political component is if you find these things, how do you establish the proof of that to the satisfaction of 35 foreign ministries and those of you in the media? A large number of conspiracy theorists all over the world will say the U.S. government has planted all that stuff.” Although the US had approached UNMOVIC and IAEA as recently as late February to assist in the search for weapons, Gellman states, “the White House has decided, for now, to assign no role in the disarmament hunt to the key U.N. agencies that were charged by the Security Council with carrying out the search for banned weapons.”
• Barton Gellman, “US Reaps New Data on Weapons,” The Washington Post, 2003.03.20..

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

APRIL 2003
2003.04.25  Friday
A propos North Korea, the National Security Archive at George Washington University announced it had “posted on the Web the declassified record of CIA reports and analyses of the North Korean nuclear program since 1982, together with important documents from the State Department, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the Congressional Research Service on the issue. . . . The documents show CIA tracking of the Korean nuclear program as early as 1982, and repeated assessments that debated whether the detected nuclear reactors were meant for fulfilling energy needs or producing fissile material for nuclear weapons.”
Documents, 2003.04.25.

2003.04.26  Saturday
US-North Korean talks on the nucler question, with China’s participation, concluded in Beijing Friday. The New York Times reported that even China’s foreign minister, Li Zhaoxing, “did not seek to disguise the fact that the talks had broken down after [North Korean interlocutor] Li Gun asserted, apparently during a lunch break on Thursday, that North Korea already had nuclear weapons and that the only issue at stake was whether it would begin testing or exporting them.”
• The New York Times, 2003.04.26..

2003.04.27  Sunday
The New York Times reports that the Pentagon plans to add 1000 new “military and scientific personnel” to the hunt for forbidden weapon systems and programs. They add that “some officials are even saying that they are losing hope of finding actual weapons.” The dispatch continues:
Some officials say they think the United States should react more positively to the demand by France that United Nations inspectors certify that Iraq is free of unconventional weapons before economic penalties against the country are permanently lifted. Many United Nations members favor a return to Iraq by Hans Blix as an inspection leader as soon as the country is secure. Others say that a couple of hundred more experts, with or without Mr. Blix, cannot hurt and could actually help.

But theirs is a decidedly minority view. Even the State Department, which advocated trying to find the weapons using United Nations inspectors last fall, has no tolerance for asking those inspectors to return.

“Forget it,” one official said. “On principle, we don’t want the United Nations running around Iraq.”

One official, discussing the American plans, said that . . . White House officials are pressing the United States Central Command to step up the search for them because of worldwide skepticism that the main American rationale for the war was not proving to be true. “There's just a lot of pressure coming from the White House on this,” an administration official said. ...

• Steven R. Weisman, “Weapons Search Team May Triple in Size,” The New York Times, 2003.04.27..

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

MAY 2003
1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JUNE 2003
1st H-Bomb Test [1952]

JULY 2003

2003.07.15  Tuesday
The American Physical Society’s Study Group on Boost-Phase Intercept Systems for National Missile Defense issued its long-awaited report. In a nutshell, the Study Group concludes there are profound difficulties for both kinetic-kill and air-borne-laser BPI systems against solid-fuel ICBMs. Against slower-moving liquid-fueled systems some problems may be tractable ... but would those be the systems to be defended against when a BPI was ready? The key variables for kinetic-kill--even if one assumes sensing, target discrimination, and kill-vehicle ‘agility’ meet design specifications--are time, the speed of target and kill-vehicle, and countermeasures. Speed comes at a price, countermeasures cannot be predicted, and the tolerance is in seconds: all possible sources of failure.
• American Physical Society,
Boost-Phase Intercept Systems for National Missile Defense: Scientific and Technical Issues, 2003.07.15. [pdf].

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


1st H-Bomb Test [1952] SEPTEMBER 2003

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2003.10.02  Thursday

The US CIA released an unclassified version of the text “Statement by David Kay on the Interim Progress Report of Activities of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) Before the House Perman3ent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence,” 2 October 2003. The Iraq Survey Group is the 1500-member US-UK unit seeking evidence of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq.
• David Kay,
Interim Report of ISG. 2003.10.02.

2003.10.12  Sunday

The Los Angeles Times reported that Israel had “modified American-supplied cruise missiles to carry nuclear warheads on submarines.” [Douglas Frantz states that two Bush administration officials described the modifications, and an Israeli official confirmed them.] The disclosure was deliberate, “to caution Israel’s enemies ... .” The report does not say whether the new systems are deployed. Some analysts disputed the report, saying that it was “technically impossible.”
• Douglas Frantz “Israeli Subs Can Carry Nukes”, The Toronto Star, 2003.10.12. See this Associated Press despatch for dismissive comments.
2003.10.21  Tuesday

In an interview with Arms Control Today, IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei declared “we need to delegitimize the nuclear weapon, and by de-legitimizing ... meaning trying to develop a different system of security that does not depend on nuclear deterrence.” ElBaradei also identified improved safeguards measures: “more comprehensive safeguards, more intrusive verifications, possibly multilateralizing the sensitive aspects of the fuel cycle.”
• 2003.10.21. Interview, in Arms Control Today, November 2003. “Curbing Nuclear Proliferation.” http://www.armscontrol.org/ &c.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2003.11.02  Monday

IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei addressed the UN General Assembly, noting that “Regrettably, 46 States have yet to fulfil their legal obligations under the NPT to bring safeguards agreements with the Agency into force, and more than six years after the IAEA Board's approval of the Model Additional Protocol, over 150 countries still do not have an additional protocol in force.”

He also said more about multilateral supervision of fissile material: “In light of the increasing threat of proliferation, both by States and by terrorists, one idea that may now be worth serious consideration is the advisability of limiting the processing of weapon-usable material (separated plutonium and high enriched uranium) in civilian nuclear programmes - as well as the production of new material through reprocessing and enrichment - by agreeing to restrict these operations exclusively to facilities under multinational control. These limitations would naturally need to be accompanied by appropriate rules of assurance of supply for would-be users. We should equally consider multinational approaches to the management and disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste. ”
• Speech to UNGA, 2003.11.02
. http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/ 2003/ebsp2003n023.shtml

2003.11.18  Tuesday

In the energy bill passed by the US House of Representatives and Senate on 18 November are funds for the Robust Earth Penetrator and enhanced test site readiness. The White House asked $15 million for the ‘bunker buster’, but only $7.5 million was granted. The Nevada Test Site could today be ready to resume testing 36 months from “go”; with the $24.9 million granted, it would be ready in 24 months; the White House originally asked for an 18-month readiness package. According to AFP, “Congress allocated 6.3 billion dollars for nuclear weapon activities in fiscal 2004 -- 303 million dollars more than last year, but 94 million below Bush’s request.” For additional details, see analysis prepared by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
• Agence France Presse, at http://www.spacewar.com/2003/ 031119083219.5yckcfta.html. 2003.11.19.
• Union of Concerned Scientists, Security Net. 2003.11.19.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]


2003.12.18  Thursday

Iran signed the ‘additional protocol’ embodying an enlarged IAEA nuclear safeguards regime. [Cf.
IAEA INFCIRC/540]. For the events leading up to Iran’s adherence to the additional protocol, see the IAEA Iran timeline.
• IAEA “Iran Signs Additional Protocol on Nuclear Safeguards,” 2003.12.18..

2003.12.19  Friday

Britain and the United States announced that a nine months’ negotiation had led to Libyan agreement to end programs to obtain ‘weapons of mass destruction’ and missiles with range exceeding 300 km. Blair said that “The Libyan government has undertaken that this process will be transparent and verifiable.  Libya will immediately adhere to the Chemical Weapons convention and conclude with the International Atomic Energy Agency an Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement.  We have offered our support to Libya in presenting its programmes to these international bodies and are prepared to offer assistance with dismantlement.”
• Office of the Prime Minister, United Kingdom, 2003.12.19.

2003.12.20  Saturday

Libyan representatives meet with IAEA. UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, BBC reported, said that teams of experts had visited Libya in October and December of this year and found that

• Libya had not acquired a nuclear weapons capability, but was close to developing one.

• It had significant quantities of chemical agent and bombs designed to be filled with chemical agent.

• There were research centres with the potential to support biological weapons-related work.

• Facilities existed where missile research development work had been conducted.
• BBC report, 2003.12.20.

1st H-Bomb Test [1952]