Amid Ukraine Discord, U.S. Resumes Nuclear-Security Work in Russia

None

Protesters on Wednesday hold "an angry Matryoshka" doll with a weapon and placard reading "Boycott Russia!" during an action in central Kiev, calling for a boycott of Russian goods. Despite disagreements over Ukraine, the United States is resuming nuclear-security work in Russia, a U.S. official says.
National Journal
Douglas P. Guarino
See more stories about...
Douglas P. Guarino
April 9, 2014, 10:42 a.m.

The United States is re­sum­ing nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity work in Rus­sia des­pite on­go­ing dis­agree­ments over Mo­scow’s an­nex­a­tion of the Crimea re­gion of Ukraine, a Wash­ing­ton of­fi­cial says.

Anne Har­ring­ton, deputy ad­min­is­trat­or for de­fense nuc­le­ar non­pro­lif­er­a­tion at the Na­tion­al Nuc­le­ar Se­cur­ity Ad­min­is­tra­tion, told Glob­al Se­cur­ity News­wire on Tues­day that pre­vi­ously stalled ne­go­ti­ations over how to im­ple­ment an agree­ment that Wash­ing­ton signed with Mo­scow last year have now con­cluded and work has re­sumed.

“They’re done — we’re work­ing,” Har­ring­ton told GSN. She said the im­ple­ment­ing lan­guage for last year’s agree­ment had been hammered out in re­cent weeks.

The 2013 pact was meant to re­place the now-ex­pired Co­oper­at­ive Threat Re­duc­tion um­brella agree­ment that had been in place between the two na­tions since the end of the Cold War.

Har­ring­ton had earli­er told GSN last month that work had stalled with the im­ple­ment­a­tion lan­guage not yet fi­nal­ized — prompt­ing her agency to re­quest less fund­ing for fisc­al 2015 non­pro­lif­er­a­tion activ­it­ies. At the time, she said the Ukraine crisis could cre­ate fur­ther delays.

On Tues­day, Har­ring­ton did not say ex­actly what type of work the United States had re­sumed in Rus­sia. Pre­vi­ously, she said up­grades to the phys­ic­al se­cur­ity of build­ings where sens­it­ive nuc­le­ar ma­ter­i­als are stored had been sus­pen­ded. At the time, she said “any­where between 40 and 70 per­cent of the up­grades at all of the build­ings were com­pleted.”

Har­ring­ton this week also did not spe­cify wheth­er her agency would now look to re­vise its fisc­al 2015 budget re­quest, giv­en that work in Rus­sia had now re­sumed. NNSA of­fi­cials did not re­spond to a re­quest for more in­form­a­tion by press time.

Har­vard Uni­versity’s Mat­thew Bunn, a former aide to Pres­id­ent Clin­ton, warned last month that an end to the U.S. work in Rus­sia — which is aimed at pre­vent­ing ter­ror­ists from ob­tain­ing weapons-us­able nuc­le­ar ma­ter­i­al — could in­tro­duce high­er risks.

“There’s a huge prob­lem of sus­tain­ab­il­ity, there are prob­lems of se­cur­ity cul­ture, there’s still weak­ness in in­sider pro­tec­tion and we still need to be work­ing to­geth­er,” Bunn said.

Some House Re­pub­lic­ans are sug­gest­ing the United States should not provide any aid to Rus­sia, however, par­tic­u­larly amid the Ukraine crisis and con­cerns that Mo­scow may be run­ning afoul of the In­ter­me­di­ate-Range Nuc­le­ar Forces Treaty, or “INF” agree­ment.

“Your agency is still re­quest­ing $100 mil­lion for non­pro­lif­er­a­tion pro­grams in Rus­sia and, from my per­spect­ive, giv­ing Mo­scow non­pro­lif­er­a­tion money, by do­ing that, we in­ad­vert­ently sub­sid­ize Rus­sia’s nuc­le­ar force mod­ern­iz­a­tion,” Rep­res­ent­at­ive Jim Briden­stine (R-Okla.), told Act­ing NNSA Ad­min­is­trat­or Bruce Held dur­ing a hear­ing Tues­day. “Doesn’t this $100 mil­lion that you’re still re­quest­ing dir­ectly con­tra­dict and un­der­mine the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s stated policy of sus­pend­ing mil­it­ary-to-mil­it­ary en­gage­ment with Rus­sia?”

Held will soon be re­placed by re­tired Lt. Gen. Frank Klotz, who the Sen­ate on Tues­day con­firmed as the nuc­le­ar agency’s new lead­er.

The act­ing ad­min­is­trat­or said both dur­ing and after the hear­ing that the United States spends money on nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity pro­jects in Rus­sia not be­cause they are good for Mo­scow, but be­cause they are im­port­ant for U.S. na­tion­al se­cur­ity.

His agency is “very care­ful in re­view­ing all of these pro­grams to en­sure that any money we are spend­ing over there is driv­en by U.S. na­tion­al se­cur­ity in­terests, not Rus­si­an,” Held told law­makers.

In ad­di­tion, Har­ring­ton — who at­ten­ded but did not testi­fy dur­ing the hear­ing of the House Armed Ser­vices Sub­com­mit­tee on Stra­tegic Forces — noted that the Na­tion­al Nuc­le­ar Se­cur­ity Ad­min­is­tra­tion, a semi­autonom­ous di­vi­sion of the En­ergy De­part­ment, does not deal with the Rus­si­an mil­it­ary. Rather, the U.S. agency co­ordin­ates with Rus­si­an cus­toms and bor­der se­cur­ity of­fi­cials and Ros­atom, the Rus­si­an nuc­le­ar en­ergy agency.

Rep­res­ent­at­ive Mi­chael Turn­er (R-Ohio) was ex­pec­ted to in­tro­duce a bill on Wed­nes­day that would pro­hib­it “the con­tact, co­oper­a­tion or trans­fer of tech­no­logy” between the U.S. nuc­le­ar agency and Rus­sia, “un­til the sec­ret­ary of En­ergy cer­ti­fies that the Rus­si­an mil­it­ary is no longer il­leg­ally oc­cupy­ing Crimea, no longer vi­ol­at­ing the INF treaty and in com­pli­ance with the [Con­ven­tion­al Armed Forces in Europe] treaty,” ac­cord­ing to a Tues­day press re­lease.

On March 24, Turn­er and Briden­stine ar­gued in a let­ter to the nuc­le­ar agency that it would spe­cific­ally be a “mis­take” to con­tin­ue provid­ing Rus­sia with what they de­scribed as “mil­it­ary-grade” laser tech­no­logy. The tech­no­logy was to have been used by Rus­si­an forces to prac­tice re­sponses to pos­sible at­tacks against nuc­le­ar-ma­ter­i­al trans­ports or sites hous­ing these sens­it­ive items.

Held on Tues­day re­it­er­ated that the ad­min­is­tra­tion agreed with the GOP law­makers on this spe­cif­ic laser is­sue. But he ad­ded that, so far, his agency did not plan on cur­tail­ing any of its oth­er pro­grams in Rus­sia.

“We’re not there yet,” Held said. “We’re study­ing the situ­ation.”

While ad­min­is­tra­tion of­fi­cials say the Ukraine crisis is hav­ing lim­ited im­pact on nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity ef­forts, they are now cit­ing the an­nex­a­tion in an ef­fort to de­flect per­sist­ent Re­pub­lic­an con­cerns that the Obama team might pur­sue fur­ther re­duc­tions to the U.S. nuc­le­ar ar­sen­al.

“The Rus­si­ans have shown no in­terest in fur­ther re­duc­tions and, I think, giv­en where we are with Ukraine, we don’t have “¦ con­tact on these kinds of is­sues now,” M. Elaine Bunn, the deputy as­sist­ant sec­ret­ary of De­fense for nuc­le­ar and mis­sile de­fense policy, said in re­sponse to Re­pub­lic­an in­quir­ies at the same Tues­day hear­ing. She said she did not ex­pect “ne­go­ti­ations on that any­time soon.”

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×