Nuclear Scholars Initiative ............................................................................................................................ a collection of papers from the 2012 nuclear scholars initiative center for strategic & international studies 1800 k street, nw, washington dc 20006 Nuclear Scholars Initiative t.202.887.0200 | f.202.775.3199 PROJECT ON NUCLEAR ISSUES [email protected] | www.csis.org/isp/poni Nuclear Scholars Initiative A Collection of Papers from the 2012 Nuclear Scholars Initiative PROJECT ON NUCLEAR ISSUES Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 About CSIS For 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has developed practical solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. As we celebrate this milestone, CSIS scholars con- tinue to provide strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart a course toward a better world. CSIS is a bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full-time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analysis and develop policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change. Since 1962, CSIS has been dedicated to finding ways to sustain American prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world. After 50 years, CSIS has become one of the world’s preeminent international policy institutions focused on defense and security; regional stability; and transnational challenges ranging from energy and climate to global development and eco- nomic integration. Former U.S. senator Sam Nunn has chaired the CSIS Board of Trustees since 1999. John J. Hamre became the Center’s president and chief executive officer in 2000. CSIS was founded by David M. Abshire and Admiral Arleigh Burke. CSIS does not take specific policy positions; accordingly, all views expressed herein should be understood to be solely those of the author(s). Cover photos: Top, First Plenary of the 2012 Session of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, Switzerland, January 24, 2012, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/pix/182800.htm; bottom left, the Ohio-class ballistic-missile submarine USS Wyoming (SSBN 742) approaches Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia, January 9, 2009, U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Rebecca Rebarich, http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=67855; bottom right, U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Thomas Richey, 2nd Maintenance Group Loading Standardization Crew team chief, evaluates a 707th Maintenance Squadron weapons load crew during an Air Launched Cruise Missile loading opera- tion on a B-52 Stratofortress, Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, June 15, 2012, U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Greg Steele, http://www.307bw.afrc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123308105. © 2012 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 Tel: (202) 887-0200 Fax: (202) 775-3199 Web: www.csis.org Contents Introduction and Acknowledgments v Examining the Broader Implications of the Ballistic Missile Industry’s Influence on Soviet and Russian Decisionmaking 1 Michael G. Albertson Nuclear Weapons Modernization in the Context of the CTBT and New START Debates 15 Michaela Bendikova Goodbye Geneva? Options for Negotiating the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty 26 Andrea Berger Security Interests in the Middle East: U.S. Nonproliferation Policy 42 Sarah Bilson Domestic Constraints and Drivers of U.S. Nuclear Policy 54 Alexander K. Bollfrass The Impact of Emerging Technology on the U.S. Nuclear Triad 67 Jeffrey C. Boulware Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Destigmatizing Nuclear Security and Promoting Regional Engagement 94 Matthew Cottee Information Security Challenges and Verifying Multilateral Nuclear Disarmament: Lessons from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 108 Sarah Elizabeth Cross Breaking the Chains of the Cold War: Nuclear Policy Requirements in the 21st Century 124 Captain Christopher Diller | iii Deterring Iran’s Nuclear Capability 148 Patrick Disney Moving from Monitoring to Investigation: Radionuclide Detection during On-Site Inspections under the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty’s Verification Regime 156 Christine Egnatuk Dynamics in the Nuclear Order: Sensitive Fuel Cycle Technology in the Republic of Korea 166 Madeleine Foley Assessing the Role of Seismic Data Sharing in CTBT Monitoring 183 Stephen Herzog Postdetonation Nuclear Forensics: Methods to Improve the Craft 195 Karen Koop Hogue Stewarding a Nuclear Stockpile of Varying Size 209 Michael S. Johnson The Pivot and Extended Deterrence: Options to Reassure South Korea 221 James Mazol Taiwan’s Nuclear Conundrum: Combining the Models of Nuclear Decisionmaking 237 Emily Cura Saunders A Proliferation Cascade in the Middle East? Iran’s Nuclear Program, the Middle Eastern Nuclear Renaissance, Fukushima, and Implications for Nonproliferation 247 David Vielhaber North Korea’s Compellence Strategy: A Case Study in Nuclear Latency 261 Tristan Volpe IV | NUCLEAR SCHOLARS INITIATIVE Introduction and Acknowledgments The 2012 Nuclear Scholars Initiative featured an outstanding class of 21 graduate stu- dents and young professionals from across the United States, as well as one from the United Kingdom. Together, they participated in six monthly workshops that covered various aspects of U.S. nuclear weapons policy. Sessions focused on the Nuclear Posture Reviews, deterrence and stability, nuclear modernization and arms control, nonprolif- eration and nuclear security, and nuclear targeting. The program culminated in a final meeting, at which the scholars presented their own research, the results of which are contained in this year’s journal. The Project on Nuclear Issues (PONI) is deeply appreciative of the authors’ out- standing work as well as the contributions of many others. Special thanks are due to Clark Murdock, Douglas Shaw, Richard Wagner, and Amy Woolf, who provided feed- back at the last session, as well as Kelley Saylor and the CSIS publications team for their help in editing and formatting the articles. We would also like to recognize the other members of the 2012 class who were unable to contribute an article to this journal but provided valuable contributions to meeting discussions: Maggie Sadowska and Zachary Thompson. PONI would also like to thank Frank Miller, George Perkovich, and Walt Slocombe, who, along with PONI director Clark Murdock, each committed a substantial amount of their time to organizing and chairing one of the monthly meetings. Linton Brooks deserves special recognition for helping to organize and chair a number of the meetings and for sharing his invaluable knowledge throughout the program. Each year, the Nucle- ar Scholars Initiative depends entirely on the involvement of experts willing to take time out of their extraordinarily busy schedules. This year’s class is extremely grateful to Paul Bernstein, Elaine Bunn, Donald Cook, John Harvey, David Hoffman, Laura Holgate, Edward Ifft, Tim Morrison, Steven Pifer, Brad Roberts, Gary Samore, Thomas Scheber, Andrew Semmel, Baker Spring, and Richard Wagner for speaking to the group. Last but not least, we would like to thank our partners at the Defense Threat Reduc- tion Agency and the National Nuclear Security Administration for making this project possible through their consistent support. John K. Warden Project on Nuclear Issues | v Examining the Broader Implications of the Ballistic Missile Industry’s Influence on Soviet and Russian Decisionmaking Michael G. Albertson1 This paper compares the influence of the ballistic missile industry on Soviet and post-Soviet Russian decisionmaking regarding the country’s strategic nuclear forces. This comparison is conducted in an effort to determine the broader politi- cal, economic, and international implications of this relationship for the Kremlin and for the United States. Using the bureaucratic politics model outlined by Gra- ham Allison in Essence of Decision, the paper examines declassified intelligence reporting from the Cold War, interviews with former Kremlin officials just after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and analyses of current Russian force decisions by outside experts. In 1995, a widely circulated report titled “Soviet Intentions 1965–1985” summarized a series of interviews with high-ranking Soviet defense officials, including Soviet military analysts, military-technical specialists, industrial managers, General Staff officers, and military and political staff members.2 This report was noteworthy because it was one of the first glimpses of what had been occurring within the Kremlin regarding Soviet nucle- ar decisionmaking during the Cold War. One of the key unforeseen findings of this study was the key role of the Soviet defense industry, in particular ballistic missile design bureaus, in driving the development and production of missile systems during the later stages of the Cold War. The report highlighted that “the volume of arms production in the USSR was conditioned by the internal dynamics and logic of the vast, civilian-dom- inated defense-industrial establishment.”3 The central question for this paper is whether a similar dynamic is now occurring—namely, that the Russian ballistic missile industry 1. Michael Albertson is an analyst at the U.S. Department of Defense. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense or the U.S. government. 2. John G. Hines,