OVERCOMING IMPEDIMENTS TO U.S.-RUSSIAN COOPERATION ON NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
REPORT OF A JOINT WORKSHOP
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington D.C.
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
Support for this project was provided by the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
International Standard Book Number 0-309-09177-2 (Book)
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 0-309-53113-6 (PDF)
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council
Committee on U.S.-Russian Cooperation on Nuclear Nonproliferation
John P. Holdren, Chair,
John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Wolfgang K.H. Panofsky, Vice-chair,
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University
John Ahearne,
Sigma Xi
William F. Burns, Major General (U.S. Army, ret.)
Richard L. Garwin,
Thomas J. Watson Research Center, IBM Corporation
Rose Gottemoeller,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Siegfried S. Hecker,
Los Alamos National Laboratory
William C. Potter,
Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies
Frank von Hippel,
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
Committee Staff
Jo L. Husbands, Director,
Committee on International Security and Arms Control
Christopher Eldridge, Program Officer
Micah D. Lowenthal, Senior Program Officer
La’Faye Lewis-Oliver, Financial Associate
Amy Giamis, Program Assistant
Russian Academy of Sciences Committee on U.S.-Russian Cooperation on Nuclear Nonproliferation
Nikolai P. Laverov, Chair,
Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS)
Eugene N. Avrorin,
Russian Federal Nuclear Center “All-Russian Scientific & Research Institute of Technical Physics” (VNIITF)
Leonid A. Bolshov,
Nuclear Safety Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IBRAE RAS)
Vladimir Z. Dvorkin, Lieutenant General (R.F. Strategic Rocket Forces, ret.),
RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations
Andrey A. Kokoshin,
RAS Institute of Strategic Studies
Boris F. Miasoyedov,
RAS Presidium
Nikolai N. Ponomarev-Stepnoi,
Russian Scientific Center “Kurchatov Institute”
Ashot A. Sarkisov, Vice-Admiral (R.F. Navy, ret.),
Nuclear Safety Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IBRAE RAS)
Vladimir V. Volk,
State Research Center “Bochvar All-Russian Scientific & Research Institute of Non-Organic Materials” (VNIINM)
Committee Staff
Sergey V. Ruchkin,
Nuclear Safety Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IBRAE RAS)
Yuri K. Shiyan,
Russian Academy of Sciences
PREFACE
Even during the Cold War, Russians and Americans recognized their shared interest in preventing the spread of nuclear-weapons capabilities. In the last decade, the United States and the Russian Federation have pursued cooperative nuclear nonproliferation programs, which focus primarily on securing nuclear materials and containing weapons and dual-use expertise and technology. This mission may be more important now than ever before.
People across the world realize that more and smaller groups, including terrorist organizations and non-state actors, can overcome the hurdles to obtaining nuclear weapons. The so-called “nuclear club,” comprising nations that have nuclear weapons, has expanded, and weapons programs in other nations have threatened to expand the club further. The awesome destructive power of nuclear weapons makes this situation one of special concern.
For these reasons, the National Academies of the United States and the Russian Academy of Sciences are working together to improve U.S.-Russian cooperative efforts on nuclear nonproliferation. With funding from the Nuclear Threat Initiative, the Russian and U.S. committees listed in this report are developing and pursuing a variety of projects. The committees entrusted us with planning and guiding a workshop on overcoming impediments to U.S.-Russian cooperation on nuclear nonproliferation, and this report constitutes a record of that workshop. Despite the obvious importance of this topic, this report is actually one of the first attempts at a joint, systematic examination of problems and strategies to address those problems. We want to thank the Nuclear Threat Initiative for supporting the academies’ work on this critical topic.
It is especially gratifying to work on important issues with people whom we like and respect. The Russian and U.S. government participants were thoughtful, candid, and generous with their time. Such constructive participation was essential to the workshop’s success. Colleagues from our committees who participated in the workshop, Prof. Leonid Bolshov, Acad. Evgeny Avrorin, Prof. Frank von Hippel, and Prof. William Potter, contributed their insights, probing questions, and perspectives during and after the meeting, and the other members of the committees helped guide the project from its inception to the publication of this report. In addition, the dedication, efforts, and contributions of Dr. Chris Eldridge, Dr. Sergey Ruchkin, Dr. Micah D. Lowenthal, and Dr. Jo Husbands made the project possible. We are also grateful to Dr. Tariq Rauf, Ms. Elena Bergo, and their colleagues on the IAEA staff who helped us to arrange the Vienna workshop in a highly professional and collegial manner.
VADM Ashot Sarkisov (Soviet Navy, ret.)
MGen William F. Burns (U.S. Army, ret.)
Rose Gottemoeller
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity and evidence. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Sidney Drell, Stanford University; Doris Ellis, Sandia National Laboratories; Igor Khripunov, University of Georgia; Tariq Rauf, International Atomic Energy Agency; Vladimir Rybachenkov, Embassy of the Russian Federation; Clifford Singer, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; and Yuri Volodin, Russian Federal Inspectorate for Nuclear and Radiation Safety (Gosatomnadzor).
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by R. Stephen Berry, University of Chicago, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.