Obama Officials: U.S. Not Backing Away from Nuclear Security

Global Security Newswire Staff
Add to Briefcase
Global Security Newswire Staff
March 10, 2014, 7:12 a.m.

Seni­or Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion of­fi­cials are in­sist­ing the gov­ern­ment is not re­treat­ing from its fo­cus on nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity des­pite pro­posed fund­ing cuts.

The ad­min­is­tra­tion’s fisc­al 2015 budget pro­pos­al, an­nounced last week, would elim­in­ate in ex­cess of $220 mil­lion in fund­ing for nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity and non­pro­lif­er­a­tion ef­forts, USA Today re­por­ted on Sat­urday.

One of the largest re­ques­ted cuts in nuc­le­ar non­pro­lif­er­a­tion spend­ing would come from the In­ter­na­tion­al Ma­ter­i­al Pro­tec­tion and Co­oper­a­tion ini­ti­at­ive. The ad­min­is­tra­tion is seek­ing just $305.5 mil­lion for the pro­gram, com­pared to the $419.5 mil­lion ap­pro­pri­ated for the cur­rent fisc­al cycle. The ad­min­is­tra­tion is also re­quest­ing $108 mil­lion less than cur­rent ap­pro­pri­ated levels for the Glob­al Threat Re­duc­tion Ini­ti­at­ive.

En­ergy Sec­ret­ary Ern­est Mon­iz said the de­cline in re­ques­ted non­pro­lif­er­a­tion fund­ing is due to an ad­min­is­tra­tion de­term­in­a­tion to moth­ball a con­tro­ver­sial ef­fort to con­struct a mixed-ox­ide fuel fab­ric­a­tion fa­cil­ity that would con­vert ex­cess plutoni­um in­to nuc­le­ar-re­act­or fuel.

The de­cision to shelve the MOX fa­cil­ity in South Car­o­lina ex­plains 54 per­cent of the re­duc­tion in sought-after non­pro­lif­er­a­tion funds.

Eliza­beth Sher­wood-Ran­dall, the White House’s point per­son on weapons of mass de­struc­tion, in a re­cent talk at Har­vard Uni­versity’s Belfer Cen­ter, re­jec­ted any sug­ges­tion that the ad­min­is­tra­tion is less fo­cused on glob­al nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity.

“I don’t think there is a prob­lem with com­pla­cency,” she said. “We are seized with this chal­lenge — with pre­vent­ing sens­it­ive ma­ter­i­als from fall­ing in­to the hands of ter­ror­ists or oth­ers who could use it to do us harm.”

Still, some arms con­trol ad­voc­ates ques­tion the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s com­mit­ment to nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity.

“What I take away from this budget is that there was a lack of lead­er­ship in try­ing to main­tain the pri­or­it­iz­a­tion of the fund­ing of this is­sue,” said Part­ner­ship for Glob­al Se­cur­ity Pres­id­ent Ken­neth Luongo. “The sig­nal is we are in re­treat on this is­sue, and I think that is a huge mis­take.”

What We're Following See More »
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
27 minutes ago

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

Obama Compares Peres to ‘Giants of the 20th Century’
46 minutes ago

Speaking at the funeral of former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, President Obama "compared Peres to 'other giants of the 20th century' such as Nelson Mandela and Queen Elizabeth who 'find no need to posture or traffic in what's popular in the moment.'" Among the 6,000 mourners at the service was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Obama called Abbas's presence a sign of the "unfinished business of peace" in the region.

How Many New Voters Does the Clinton Campaign Aim to Register?
53 minutes ago

Three million—a number that lays "bare the significant gap between Donald Trump’s bare-bones operation and the field program that Clinton and her hundreds of aides have been building for some 17 months."

Chicago Tribune Endorses Johnson
1 hours ago

In a somewhat shocking move, the Chicago Tribune has endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson for president, saying a vote for him is one that voters "can be proud of." The editorial barely touches on Donald Trump, who the paper has time and again called "unfit to be president," before offering a variety of reasons for why it can't endorse Hillary Clinton. Johnson has been in the news this week for being unable to name a single world leader who he admires, after earlier this month being unable to identify "Aleppo," a major Syrian city in the middle of the country's ongoing war.

USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
14 hours ago

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."