Latest news with #CenterforArmsControlandNon-Proliferation
The Hill
04-08-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Trump escalates nuclear tensions as Russia deadline nears
President Trump is rattling the U.S.'s formidable nuclear saber amid his growing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin's refusal to halt the war in Ukraine, just days ahead of Trump's deadline for a ceasefire. Trump last week said he was moving two 'nuclear' submarines closer to Russia in response to threatening rhetoric from a top Kremlin official. On Sunday, he confirmed the vessels were now 'in the region.' It's not clear if Trump is referring to nuclear-armed submarines or nuclear-powered attack submarines, but the confusion adds to the threat, which coincides with the president's Friday deadline for Russia to end the war or face further economic isolation. Experts say it's a risky tactic unlikely to sway Putin, who has stood in the way of the president's campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to the White House. 'I don't see a lot of the benefits or the advantages, given that the Russians know very well that we have, for decades, had nuclear-armed submarines that could target what matters to them,' said Erin Dumbacher, the Stanton Nuclear Security Senior Fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations. 'I see more risk than reward to using statements like this.' While experts don't see an imminent threat, they warn against careless and bombastic statements that could lead to risky miscalculation and confrontation. 'Does this mean that all of a sudden we should all be going to the cellar and locking ourselves in? No,' said former Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), who is the executive director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, in a call with The Hill. 'Of major concern is nuclear rhetoric that could all too easily lead to mistake or miscalculation resulting in catastrophe. Trump's verbal engagement with an essentially powerless Russian politician is inappropriate and unhelpful,' he said in an earlier statement. 'What is needed is a steady hand, not someone who allows his anger at a personal insult to risk escalating to a dangerous situation.' Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy for peace missions, is expected in Moscow later this week to push Putin to agree to a ceasefire. If that fails, Ukraine's supporters are hoping Trump will pull the trigger on 'secondary tariffs' on countries that import oil from Russia, in a bid to choke off the Kremlin's ability to finance its war. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov on Monday downplayed the movement of the U.S. submarines to its nearby waters, saying it does not want to be dragged into a tit-for-tat escalation. 'In general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' Peskov told reporters, according to Reuters. 'Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' Peskov added that Russia does not currently see the movement as an escalation. 'It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people,' he added. Trump announced the move after what he called 'highly provocative statements' from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the deputy chair of the country's security council. Medvedev had criticized Trump's foreign policy and threat of sanctions. Earlier this week, Trump reduced a 50-day timeline for Russia to reach a ceasefire, after repeatedly lashing out at Putin for continued attacks on Ukraine. Medvedev, a frequent anti-Western critic seen as having little decision-making power in the Russian government, said Trump is 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10,' and he warned about the risk of war between 'nuclear-armed adversaries.' He also referenced Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities — a Cold War relic that describes Moscow's ability to launch a nuclear strike even if the Russian leadership is taken out. 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences,' Trump responded in a Truth Social post. 'I hope this will not be one of those instances.' Trump has wielded America's nuclear arsenal in the past, particularly during his attempts to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions during his first term. Trump often raised the prospect of nuclear war with Pyongyang, boasting he would unleash 'fire and fury' on the country, and that he had a 'much bigger' and 'more powerful' nuclear arsenal. Trump's latest move to send two U.S. nuclear submarines to circle near Russia is unlikely to cause major concern for Moscow, given that such vessels patrol oceans across the globe daily, experts said. But the heightened rhetoric and concerns for miscalculation are underscoring key gaps in nuclear arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday said it was not bound by a moratorium on short- and intermediate-range missiles, in what Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said was a response to U.S. discussions to deploy long-range conventional missiles to Europe. The missiles were banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which Trump pulled out of in his first term in response to Russian violations of the treaty. And the New START treaty between the U.S. and Russia is set to expire in February. The treaty put restrictions on America and Russia's nuclear arsenals and allowed reciprocal inspection and verification. Russia suspended its participation in the treaty in 2023, and the U.S. took countermeasures that effectively suspended American participation, raising concerns among nuclear arms control experts about the next steps. 'I'm not seeing a lot of conversation about what would happen after that, in an effort to restrict or limit or even maintain the current levels,' said Dumbacher, who most recently was a CFR international affairs fellow with the Pentagon. In that role she helped craft language signed on by the U.S. and China that humans, and not artificial intelligence, should control nuclear weapons. Dumbacher pointed out Russia is not a party to that agreement, which speaks to Medvedev's threats of Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities. 'I think every nuclear weapons country should sign on to some sort of confidence building measure like that, where we say we're never going to hand this decision over to a machine,' she said. Even as Trump heightens his rhetoric against Russia, the president has highlighted nuclear arms control as a priority. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, he said he wanted nuclear arms reduction talks with both Russia and China. And Trump boasts of halting fighting between Pakistan and India as averting a nuclear war. Rose Gottemoeller, who served as deputy secretary-general of NATO from 2016-19, noted Trump's success in getting Putin in 2019 to a freeze on all nuclear warheads, as well as his signal more recently that he is not interested in the U.S. building more warheads. 'Today's U.S. political reality mandates that the next arms control treaty has to be wholly owned by President Donald Trump if it is to be successful,' Gottemoeller wrote in an article for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists late last month, pointing out that any new arms control treaty will need the ratification of Congress. 'With the willingness that President Trump has already shown to take on the issue of constraining warheads, the current U.S. administration has the opportunity to forge into new territory on nuclear arms control.'
Axios
16-07-2025
- Business
- Axios
These factors complicate NATO's new spending pledge
NATO's 5% spending commitment is a watershed moment for an alliance dogged by laggard investment outside the U.S. — if, that is, members actually fork over the trillions in long-term spending required to make it a reality. Why it matters: At a time of weapons upheaval and global war, friends are precious. New blocs of influence are solidifying. China, Iran and North Korea fuel a Russian war machine in Eastern Europe while the U.S. reevaluates its role abroad, including arms deliveries. There's a newfound determination in many capitals to invest in European security and reduce reliance on Washington. The question is whether it's a fleeting feeling or the beginnings of a decade-long push to hit 5%. The big picture: The spending outlook, according to defense analysts, industry executives and Europe watchers Axios consulted, is complicated by these four factors: Proximity and fears of invasion. Countries closest to Russia have traditionally spent the biggest chunk of gross domestic product — and will continue to do so. Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Greece have already broken the 3% mark. Meanwhile, far-flung Spain opted out, citing self-determination. Political volatility and an appetite for risk among ruling parties. Europe is not a monolith; public sentiment in Germany, Italy and the Netherlands is not uniform. "For some of these leaders, they have a very fraught domestic political situation," Connor Murray, a research analyst at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, said in an interview. "They've had to spend pretty significant political capital to get where they are," he added, "and to then turn around and potentially jack up military spending could be really detrimental." Creative accounting paired with flexible definitions. The 5% goal flows from two accounts: 3.5% for traditional defense and 1.5% for broader security investments, like cybersecurity and shored-up critical infrastructure. "The 3.5% on defense is a hard climb, but the threat environment is making it harder to ignore. The additional 1.5% for innovation is even more critical — and more disruptive," Wendy Anderson, a former Palantir Technologies senior vice president and chief of staff to the late Defense Secretary Ash Carter, told Axios. "That's where Europe must stretch the most, because that's where the leverage lies: in accelerating dual-use capabilities that can power both security and economic competitiveness." The actual timeline, aka the long game. Allies have until 2035 to make good on their promise. (A status update is due years prior.) A lot can change between now and then, including who sits in the White House. "If history is any indication, and the example of the last decade is quite telling, we may not have all 32 allies achieving the goal by 2035," Federico Borsari, an expert at theCenter for European Policy Analysis, told Axios. It's also worth noting that "the very nature of democratic states, with their short electoral cycles and pluralistic decision-making process, is a barrier in itself compared to authoritarian regimes, where a single leader makes the ultimate decision," Borsari said. Catch up quick: President Trump met with NATO boss Mark Rutte in Washington on Monday. Speaking from the Oval Office, the president applauded the idea of "a strong Europe" and described the alliance's meeting last month in The Hague as "tremendous." "These are wealthy nations. They have a lot of money." The bottom line: "Five percent of GDP total is ambitious, but it's not impossible," Anja Manuel, the executive director of the Aspen Strategy Group, said in an interview. (This year's Aspen Security Forum will have a significant transatlantic bent.)
Yahoo
26-06-2025
- Yahoo
FBI continues to track down plutonium allegedly sold by Hadley man
SPRINGFIELD — Federal investigators told a judge last week that they are continuing to assess what the customers who allegedly purchased small amounts of plutonium from a Hadley man did with the material. On April 22, a federal grand jury indicted Jacob Miller, 43, on charges of being a felon in possession of explosives and ammunition. Prosecutors said when investigators searched Miller's home, they found firearms, hazardous chemicals and radioactive materials, including plutonium taken from Soviet Union-era smoke detectors. Prosecutors said Miller ran an online business called Collect The Periodic Table. A website that appears to be connected with the enterprise lists a full periodic table for $140. A small amount of plutonium alone was listed for $500. The affidavit filed with the federal court in Springfield last week disclosed the FBI's ongoing investigation into the matter. Miller allegedly shipped out plutonium about 60 times between December 2020 and March 2025, FBI Special Agent Darrell Hunter said in the affidavit dated June 20. 'The defendant's distribution of Plutonium to a broad series of individuals, with no apparent vetting of these customers, poses a particular danger to public safety,' Hunter wrote. Miller, the affidavit said, shipped the material across the United States and out of the country. So far, only 10 of the customers gave the material they purchased from Miller to the FBI, Hunter said. 'The FBI's investigation into this matter, including the extent to which the defendant distributed Plutonium and what the defendant's customers did with the Plutonium, is continuing,' Hunter wrote. Reached for comment, a spokeswoman for the FBI referred questions to the U.S. Attorney's Office. A spokesperson at the U.S. Attorney's Office did not reply to a request for comment. John Gilbert, a senior science fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, while the small amounts allegedly sold by Miller is nowhere near the amount needed for a nuclear bomb, plutonium is deadly if handled incorrectly. If its powder is breathed in — even in small amounts — it causes 'extremely, extremely bad respiratory distress,' he said. Gilbert said it is unlikely the material prosecutors said came from smoke detectors was plutonium, as the Soviets 'needed all the plutonium they could get.' Rather, another radioactive element — americium — is good for use in smoke detectors, and it is not as dangerous, he said. The FBI said in its affidavit it is gathering the materials it obtained from Miller's customers 'for radiological testing.' Federal prosecutors filed the affidavit as part of their response to Miller's defense attorney, who requested Judge Katherine Robertson reconsider her order detaining Miller until his trial. Miller was detained after prosecutors said Miller moved materials from his home after the court said he could only reenter the home to retrieve personal care items, clothing and his cat. Miller's attorney, Charles Dolan, asked Robertson in a motion on June 13 to release his client 'under whatever conditions the Court may deem appropriate.' Miller, Dolan wrote, has been held since April 10 at a detention facility in Central Falls, Rhode Island, and has been unable to take his medication for obsessive-compulsive disorder and ADHD as his prescriptions are prohibited at the facility. His mental health has deteriorated as a result, Dolan wrote. Dolan did not return a request for comment. In response to the motion, prosecutors said Miller had a history of violating probation conditions, and they are continuing to investigate him for possession of child sex abuse images. Miller was previously convicted for possessing child pornography and explosives in separate cases in Hampshire Superior Court. Prosecutors also shared with the court a series of handwritten documents — including what prosecutors said appeared to a poem titled 'Bits and Pieces.' The 'defendant appears to have engaged in dangerous musings about blowing up friends and family in Hadley, among other subjects,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Breslow wrote in a memorandum. At a hearing Wednesday, Robertson decided that Miller would remain detained, according to the clerk's notes of the proceedings. Springfield brewery, cannabis store team up to offer downtown concert Springfield debates stricter laws to stop drug dealing near parks, schools following shutdown of trafficking operation Alliance for Digital Equity pushes for internet access for underserved on namesake day Judge: Case for Pittsfield woman suing car repo company can move to trial Read the original article on MassLive.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
25-06-2025
- Politics
- First Post
Is Pakistan developing a nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit US?
The Pakistani military is reportedly building an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), capable of carrying nuclear warheads, that could reach the United States. The development, which has sparked concerns in Washington, would make Pakistan enter the select few nations that possess these long-range strategic missiles read more Pakistani military personnel stand beside a Shaheen III surface-to-surface ballistic missile during Pakistan Day military parade in Islamabad, Pakistan March 23, 2019. Image used for representational purpose/Reuters Pakistan is reportedly developing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with the capability to reach the United States. According to a report by Foreign Affairs, the Pakistani military's move has rung alarm bells in Washington. Currently, there are only a handful of countries, including the US and Russia, that possess the ICBM. If Pakistan is successful in developing the strategic nuclear missile, it would join the likes of these nations. Let's take a closer look. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What are ICBMs? Intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs , are self-guided weapons to deliver nuclear warheads over long distances. Also known as strategic or long-range ballistic missiles, they can travel more than 5,500 kilometres. After being powered by a rocket, these missiles follow an unpowered trajectory toward their targets, as per the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. The maximum range of ICBMs varies from 7,000 to 16,000 kilometres. This means some of these weapons can hit targets virtually anywhere in the world, according to the Federation of American Scientists. ICBMs can be launched in different ways – from underground missile silos, heavy trucks, mobile launchers on rails or submarines. Is Pakistan developing an ICBM? Pakistan is developing an ICBM to carry nuclear warheads that could reach the US, as per the Foreign Affairs report. If Pakistan acquires the long-range ballistic missile, 'Washington will have no choice but to treat the country as a nuclear adversary,' the report noted, citing US intelligence sources. 'Although Pakistan claims its nuclear programme is strictly focused on deterring India, which enjoys conventional military superiority, US intelligence agencies have concluded that the Pakistani military is developing an ICBM that could reach the continental United States,' it said. According to the piece, Pakistan's motive to develop such a weapon may be to deter the US from either attempting to eliminate its arsenal in a preventive attack or intervening on New Delhi's behalf in a future Indian-Pakistan conflict. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Regardless, as US officials have noted, if Pakistan acquires an ICBM, Washington will have no choice but to treat the country as a nuclear adversary—no other country with ICBMs that can target the United States is considered a friend. In short, mounting nuclear dangers now lurk in every region of vital interest to the United States,' the report added. Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme kick-started in the early 1970s in the wake of regional tensions, especially after India's nuclear tests in May 1974. Within days of India's subsequent tests in May 1998, Pakistan launched a series of six nuclear tests, officially becoming a nuclear-armed state. As per an Al Jazeera report, Pakistan has more than 170 nuclear warheads. Which nations have ICBMs? Eight nations, including the US, China, France, Israel, Russia, India, the United Kingdom, and North Korea, have acquired intercontinental ballistic missiles, according to the Arms Control Association. The Titan Missile, shown from above during a tour of the 103-foot Titan II Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) site which was decommissioned in 1982, at the Titan Missile Museum in Sahuarita, Arizona, US, February 2, 2019. File Photo/Reuters India's homegrown Agni-5 ICBM successfully took its maiden test flight using the Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) technology in March 2024. With this, India entered the league of a select group of countries that can put multiple warheads atop a single intercontinental ballistic missile. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In September 2024, China had said it carried out a test-firing of an intercontinental ballistic missile into international waters, drawing criticism from neighbouring nations. Last October, North Korea launched a new ICBM, which flew for 86 minutes – the longest flight recorded yet, towards waters off its eastern coast. With inputs from agencies
NBC News
19-06-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
What to know about Israel's nuclear weapons program
The Federation of American Scientists and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, an independent international organization dedicated to researching arms control and disarmament, estimate that Israel has around 90 nuclear warheads. Due to Israel's official stance of ambiguity regarding its nuclear program, the organizations note the difficulties in determining the extent of the country's nuclear capabilities. "They are intentionally secretive about their nuclear capabilities and that's part of the policy that they follow," John Erath, senior policy director at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, said in a phone interview Wednesday. He said that policy was likely in part to ensure Israel's "potential adversaries would not know what they can do in the event of a crisis." How it began Historical records suggest Israeli leaders had hoped to build a nuclear arsenal to help ensure the country's safety after it was founded in 1948 in the years after the Holocaust, according to the Jewish Virtual Library, an online encyclopedia published by the American foreign policy analyst Mitchell Bard's nonprofit organization American–Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. In a July 1969 declassified memo to President Richard Nixon, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said that Israel had committed "not to be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the Near East," when buying the U.S.' Phantom aircraft, though it has never been made clear precisely what that means. Mordechai Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician who worked at Israel's atomic reactor in Dimona in the Negev Desert in the late 1960s and early 1970s, sent shock waves around the world when he disclosed details and photographs of the reactor to Britain's Sunday Times newspaper.
