THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PARALLEL POWER PLAY: NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY AND DIPLOMACY IN ARGENTINA AND BRAZIL, 1945-1995 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY BY CHRISTOPHER THOMAS DUNLAP CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... iv Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................... vii Preface: A Note on Sources ....................................................................................................................... xii Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: “Exploration: Brazil and Argentina Enter the Atomic Age, 1945-1962” ................. 30 Chapter 2: “Swords: From the Forefront of Non-Proliferation Toward an Uncertain Nuclear Future, 1963-1970” .......................................................................... 86 Chapter 3: “Partitioning: Nuclear Power and the Divergence of Technological Paths, 1966-1974” .....................................................................................125 Chapter 4: “Enrichment: Autonomous Nuclear Development in Argentina, 1975-1985” .......177 Chapter 5: “Fabrication: Parallel Nuclear Development in Brazil, 1975-1990” .........................223 Chapter 6: “Plowshares: ABACC and the Evolution of Nuclear Verification Between Argentina and Brazil, 1974-1992” ....................................................................................268 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................322 Bibliography ...............................................................................................................................................329 ii List of Tables Table 1: Comparison of Argentine and Brazilian Agreements with the United States for Civil Uses of Atomic Energy ................................................................................................ 59 Table 2: Latin American and Caribbean Dates of Signature and Ratification for Treaty of Tlatelolco and Non-Proliferation Treaty ...........................................................122 iii List of Figures Figure 1: Map of Zone of Application, Treaty of Tlatelolco ..........................................................111 Figure 2: The Nuclear Fuel Cycle .........................................................................................................198 Figure 3: Demand for Heavy Water in the Argentine Republic ...................................................205 Figure 4: Sheep Shearing Shed at Future Pilcaniyeu Enrichment Site ........................................212 Figure 5: Comparison of Uranium Enrichment Technologies ......................................................213 Figure 6: Graphical Representation of Two Diffusion Cascades ...................................................216 Figure 7: Construction of A1/”Mock-Up” 1:1 Scale Pilot ..............................................................217 Figure 8: Radiotherapy Clinic in Goiânia From Which Cesium Source Was Taken ...............259 Figure 9: Cross-Section Diagram of International Standard Radioactive Capsule ...................260 iv Abstract This dissertation examines the parallel historical development of nuclear technology and diplomacy in Argentina and Brazil between the end of World War II and 1995, when the neighbors accepted and adhered to bilateral and international weapons nonproliferation measures, then led broad economic integration efforts on the continent. Brazil’s and Argentina’s pursuit of autonomous nuclear energy capabilities has vexed political scientists, who have produced some excellent scholarship on a historical process of building and refining technology, diplomacy, and law; nonetheless, these developments defy most models to explain them. As a work of history, this dissertation recasts this process as the interplay of two mutually constitutive pairs. Nuclear technology and diplomacy, linked since before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, played a fundamental role in shaping Argentina and Brazil, connected by geography and competition for nearly 500 years. Both nations began this period by trading newly valuable nuclear minerals to the hemispheric superpower, the United States, but developmentalist governments in the South American neighbor countries invested quickly and heavily in beginning the human and physical infrastructures for nuclear energy. Only with a fearless and forceful early start, political leaders and scientists believed, could the gifts of the Atomic Age lead to economic and social benefits for the people of Argentina and Brazil, vault each country out of middle-power dependency and above the geopolitical vicissitudes of the Cold War. In this way, the two nations would complete the elusive process of technological autonomy from multinational corporations and North Atlantic technology transfer partners, a possibility that their diplomats defended vociferously in the drafting of the Treaty of Tlatelolco (1967) and outright rejection of the United Nations Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968). v Political leaders, military generals, and scientists in both nations continued to believe in this transformative power of nuclear energy, and made expensive bets on a future where it would be integral to continued industrial development. The goal to complete the nuclear fuel cycle in Brazil and Argentina exemplified and intensified a complex, competitive bilateral relationship for influence and power on the continent, particularly from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s, when both nations were under military government. A serious and continuous effort to ensure cooperation on peaceful use of nuclear energy began in diplomatic and high political circles nearly a decade before the return of electoral democracy to either country, while efforts to master the sensitive processes of uranium enrichment, heavy water production, and spent fuel reprocessing continued unabated. But by 1995, both nations had ceased early-stage weapons development programs, accepted full safeguards and international verification of all nuclear activities, and transformed the “imported magic” of nuclear energy technology into their own. How this all happened, and why, is the story of the parallel power play at the heart of this dissertation. vi Acknowledgments Quiero hacerla un cuadrado, deformarla en un triángulo, pero la vida siempre vuelve a su forma circular. -- Café Tacuba, “El Ciclón,” 1994 If it takes a village to raise a child, it has taken at least a small town to help me finish this doctorate and dissertation. I am both deeply indebted and extremely grateful to a community of teachers, colleagues, friends, and family for their unwavering support over the past eight years. Without the generous financial support from the University of Chicago’s Center for Latin American Studies for preliminary dissertation research in 2011, from the Wilson Center for a Brazilian Nuclear History Fellowship, which gave me the opportunity to explore archives and institutions in Washington, D.C., in the fall of 2012, from the US Department of Education’s Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad fellowship for my eleven months of research in Brazil and Argentina in 2014, and from the Doris G. Quinn Foundation for dissertation completion in 2016-2017, this research would not have made it across the finish line. Many of my most inspiring role models have been teachers, beginning with my parents who strove to instill in me the same love of learning and boundless curiosity that they sought to create in their classrooms. (You succeeded, perhaps beyond your wildest expectations). Kristen Lee, one of my fourth grade teachers, is still a great friend to this day. Karen Saunders, who taught me how to love history and how to ask the right questions every day of my junior year at Centreville High School, did as much to put me on the wild ride toward a Ph.D. as anyone. At the University of Virginia, Allan Megill, Brian Owensby, and Erik Midelfort, among other brilliant scholars and teachers, shaped my historical interests and inquiries and vii modeled effective teaching in ways that are as vivid to me now as they were twelve or more years ago in their classrooms. Here at the University of Chicago, I have had the most supportive dissertation committee that a doctoral student could ask for. My chair and primary adviser, Dain Borges, and readers Mauricio Tenorio and Mark Bradley, wrote more letters of recommendation and read more drafts of application materials and chapters than I could ever count. At many points along the path to a completed doctorate, Prof. Borges’s sage combination of dissertation, career, and life advice was the perfect motivation to keep progressing