New Nations in the Nuclear Family

An alarming trend over the last twenty years is the number of nations professing to or being suspected of developing their own arsenal of nuclear weapons, despite the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty terms. The stalemate between Western allied nuclear powers such as France, U.K., and the U.S. and the Warsaw Pact and China governments, made for a tense world sitation since the early fifites.

We now have lots of smaller countries vieing to be or defaulting into the nuclear club. With the breakup of the former Soveit Union, and the poor financial state of the new nations, it is quite conceivable that not only raw nuclear material will find its way into the hands of less responsible nations, perhaps fully functional and "ready-to-go" nuclear weapons may be on the secret auction blocks of the former Warsaw Pact nations. We also track the latest developments in this topic area.

ANALYSIS OF TESTIMONY OF PANEL - U.S. FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE , 3/13/93

According to a panel testifying before the U.S. Foreign Affairs Committee in March, 1993, Nuclear threat outweighs chemical, biological, or conventional threats by three to one. The panel agreed that the following are the current known nuclear powers:

United States
Soviet Union (Some former states of the Soviet Union such as Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine)
United Kingdom
France
China
India
Pakistan
North Korea

Nations thought able to assemble and use nuclear weapons quickly:

Israel
South Africa
Argentina
Brazil

Nations thought to be capable but have renounced their weapons programmes are:

South Africa
Argentina
Brazil

Nations currently thought to be actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program:

Iran

In terms of which country posed the most threat in terms of nuclear proliferation the panelists pretty much agreed that the former Soviet Union states which previously had their hands on nuclear weapons are the most severe threats. This is thought to be true do to the need for real and high amounts of cash needed by many of those holding nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union. Unless they act responsibly, those countries with cash and the desire will undoubtedly be able to acquire such weapons prior to their own research programs putting the pieces in place.

(Note: Another opinion is there is dual danger here since not only do small world countries purchasing "ready-to-go" nuclear weapons get the weapons "early", but they may get the delivery vehicle too, something not always part of the nuclear weapons development process.)

In terms of new countries, some members of the panel thought that Iran and North Korea were the worst threats.

Here is a partial list of those posing threats of development and proliferration of nuclear weapons and when that threat is considered to most real:

Argentina Now *: Renounced their nuclear weapons program, but are still capable of fielding weapons.
Brazil Now *: Renounced their nuclear weapons program, but are still capable of fielding weapons.
Israel Now *: Michael Krepon, scholar at Henry Stimson Centre, D.C. Krepon believes that countries Like India and Pakistan feel they must match Israel's developments and technology, in order to keep parity in world power. Of course, the Arab countries feel the same need but more in terms of survival and retalitory strength to any supposed Israeli aggression. The report states that Israel has amassed over 200 nuclear weapons in their arsenal. No figures were given for other countries. As Israel has never publicly admitted to having weapons, no sanctions have ever been levied against them.
India Now *: Committee consensus
Pakistan Now *: Committee consensus
South Africa Now *: Renounced their nuclear weapons program, but are still capable of restarting and fielding weapons.
Iran 2001 - 2002: Leonard Spector, Senior Fellow at Carnegie Institute (upon later evidence following the gulf war, that he underestimated the Iraqi nuclear program by about 3 years). In October of 2006, Iran was cliamed they were in the highly enriched phase of such a program, which many analysts say means that they are actually assembling a weapon for testing.
Iraq 1997: According to Israeli army chief of staff, General Ehud Barak , Iraq could achieve nuclear status if unchecked. Iraq continues to defy U.N. resolutions requiring U.N. inspection teams from confirming the dismantling of nuclear weapons and other "weapons of mass destruction" facilities.
North Korea, October 9, 2006: The panel did their analysis prior to No. Korea's announcement on 3/12 that they would not conform to the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a move usually followed by full scale development or test of nuclear weapons. It is thought that the North Korean weapons program is a direct result of purchases and knowledge from Pakistan's A.Q. Khan.

Libya Stopped

In a surprise to analysts (publicly anyway), Libya in an effort to normalize relations with the West, announced they had stopped their nuclear program. The program was reportedly well along using technology purchased from Pakistan and knowledge provided by the Pakistani "Father of nuclear weapons", A.Q. Khan.

* = Based upon public sources such as the Center For Strategic Studies, which often are quoted in print and on television as seeing evidence of these countries already possessing the capability to deploy nuclear weapons, if not already having such weapons and if not already deployed. In the case of India and Pakistan, they have actually conducted underground tests and the U.S. DoD Non-Proliferation experts state publicy that they believe both countries have nuclear weapons capability.

Another note: Iraq was only a few years away from their own nuclear program. See New Developments to view reports on Iraqi nuclear program and their continued resistance to allow U.N. inspections of their "weapons of mass destruction" manufacturing facilities

milnet@milnet.com