Partnership for Global Security: Leading the World to a Safer Future
Home Projects Publications Issues Official Documents About RANSAC Nuclear News 4/15/13
Location: Home / Projects & Publications / News
Sitemap Contact
Search
Google www PGS
 
Nuclear News - 11/18/2004
RANSAC Nuclear News, November 18, 2004
Compiled By: Samantha Mikol


A.  Chemical Weapons Destruction
    1. RUSSIA SET TO MEET CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION DEADLINE , Viktor Litovkin, RIA Novosti (11/17/2004)
B.  Nuclear Terrorism
    1. TERRORISTS PLAN TO USE WMD , RIA Novosti (11/17/2004)
C.  WMD Scientists
    1. United Kingdom, Russia Sign MOU to Improve Efforts to Redirect Former Soviet Nuclear Weapons Personnel, Mike Nartker, Global Security Newswire (11/17/2004)
D.  Cooperative Threat Reduction
    1. New Threats, Old Weapons , Robert R. Monroe, Washington Post (11/16/2004)
E.  Nonproliferation Diplomacy
    1. RUSSIAN NUCLEAR FUEL SUPPLY FOR IRANIANS GUARANTEED , RIA Novosti (11/16/2004)
F.  US-Russia
    1. MODERNIZATION OF RUSSIAN ARMY DOES NOT THREATEN THE WEST, Viktor Litovkin, RIA Novosti (11/18/2004)
    2. RUSSIAN FIGHTER CHASES AWAY U.S. SPY PLANE. , RFE/RL Newsline (11/16/2004)
G.  Russia-Iran
    1. Russia-Iran nuclear cooperation depends on Iran-IAEA relations:Russian official , Xinhua News Agency (11/17/2004)
    2. MOSCOW: IRAN'S NUCLEAR FILE SHALL NOT GO TO UN SECURITY COUNCIL , RIA Novosti (11/16/2004)
    3. RUSSIAN NUCLEAR FUEL SUPPLY FOR IRANIANS GUARANTEED , RIA Novosti (11/16/2004)
H.  Russia-India
    1. Zhukov to discuss broader nuclear cooperation in India, Interfax (11/18/2004)
I.  Nuclear Forces
    1. Putin Says New Missile Systems Will Give Russia a Nuclear Edge, Steven Lee Myers, New York Times (11/18/2004)
    2. Putin: Russia to Deploy Missiles 'Unlikely to Exist' Elsewhere , Peter Finn, Washington Post (11/18/2004)
    3. WHAT UNIQUE WEAPONS DID PUTIN MEAN?, RIA Novosti (11/18/2004)
    4. Defense Ministry to obtain four strategic missiles next year - Ivanov, Interfax (11/17/2004)
    5. NOVEL NUCLEAR MISSILE SYSTEMS FOR THE RUSSIAN ARMY , RIA Novosti (11/17/2004)
    6. Putin Says Development of New Nuclear Systems Under Way in Russia, MosNews (11/17/2004)
    7. Russia Developing New Nuclear Missile, Vladimir Isachenkov and Maria Danilova , Associated Press (11/17/2004)
    8. Russia To Deploy New-Generation Nuclear Weapons System: Putin, AFP (11/17/2004)
J.  Nuclear Industry
    1. Govt to discuss investments, finances RAO EES Rossii, ITAR-TASS (11/18/2004)
    2. Russia to loose $33 billion due to spent nuclear fuel import , Bellona Foundation (11/11/2004)
K.  Nuclear Safety
    1. Baikonur is being purified, Kazakhstan News Bulletin (11/17/2004)
    2. Russia can guarantee safety of nuclear weapons - Ivanov, Interfax (11/17/2004)
L.  Official Statements
    1. Russian President Vladimir Putin�s Opening Speech at the Meeting of the Leading Personnel of the Russian Armed Forces, Moscow, Defence Ministry, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (11/18/2004)
    2. White House acknowledges Russian nuclear modernization, lauds close friendship [excerpted], Department of State (11/17/2004)
    3. Remarks to the Joint Consultative Group: U.S. Remains Firmly Committed to Adapted Conventional Arms Treaty, Stephen G. Rademaker, Department of State (11/9/2004)
M.  Links of Interest
    1. U.S. Unhappy With Worldwide Response to WMD Resolution , Wade Boese, Arms Control Association (11/17/2004)



A.  Chemical Weapons Destruction

1.
RUSSIA SET TO MEET CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION DEADLINE
Viktor Litovkin
RIA Novosti
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


By the middle of this November, Russia had destroyed 737.5 metric tons of its Category 1 chemical agents. This figure represents 1.8% of the country's total stockpiles, which stand at 40,000 tons.

The remaining stockpiles include the entire store of yperite (690 tons), which is kept at installation to destroy chemical weapons in Gorny, the Saratov region. Lewisite stockpiles (252 tons) are currently being detoxified there and this work is to be completed by next December. Then, scientists will turn their attention to the 191 tons of yperite-lewisite mixtures at the facility.

Colonel General Viktor Kholstov, the deputy head of the Federal Agency for Industry, cited this deadline for the destruction of the yperite and lewisite blistering agents in a report at a forum, "Topical Problems of the Destruction of Chemical Weapons in Russia," which was arranged by the Russian non-governmental organization Green Cross. Apart from that, he said that all Category 2 and 3 chemical weapons - 330,000 units of non-chemical ammunition and devices and 10.6 tons of phosgene ammunition - had already been eliminated in Russia.

So, Russia has completely fulfilled its obligations to eliminate 1% of its chemical weapons by April 29, 2003. The situation concerning the fulfillment of obligations in the second stage of the destruction of toxic agents is not so simple. Under the international Convention on the Prohibition and Destruction of Chemical Weapons and the deadline agreed with the organization for the prohibition of these weapons, which is headquartered in The Hague, Russia should destroy 20% of its stockpiles, or 8,000 tons by April 29, 2007.

However, the Gorny plant, the only one of its kind in the country, does not have this level of agents. This means that Russia should quickly put into operation plants to destroy chemical weapons in Kambarka, (Udmurtia) where 6,360 tons of lewisite is stored in tank-trucks, and in Maradykovsky (the Kirov region), where 6,960 tons of yperite-lewisite mixtures and organic phosphorus toxic agents - sarin, soman and VX gases - are concentrated in aviation rockets and tanks.

These plants will be put into operation by the end of the next year and, provided nothing extraordinary happens, Russia will meet the deadline. Chemical weapons must be completely eliminated by April 29, 2012, although another four facilities to destroy chemical weapons will have to be built for this - in Kizner (Udmurtia), Leonidovka (the Penza region), Pochep (Bryansk region) and Shchuchye (the Kurgan region). Each of these installations must be put into operation by 2008 and destroy the chemical arsenals there within four years.

Admittedly, there is another well-known reason that may prevent Russia from doing this: money. As usual, Russia does not have enough. The Russian budget for 2005 provides for the allocation of 11,160,000,000 rubles ($373 million) for scrapping chemical weapons, or double the amount allocated for these purposes in 2004. Nevertheless, this is clearly not enough to fulfill the country's commitments to the international community.

The country needs at least $3-4 billion, or $500-600 million annually, to destroy its stockpiles. The state simply cannot afford such levels of funding.

However, the point at issue is that, when signing the Chemical Weapons Convention, Russia pointed to its shortage of funds. The states party to the convention, first of all, the world's leading countries, promised it to share its economic burden 50-50. America's representatives made particular assurances to this effect.

It turns out now, said General Kholstov, that foreign assistance accounts for a mere 7%, or $217 million, of Russia's total expenditures on the destruction of its toxic agents. Washington provides the least of all. Moreover, it has tagged on a number of conditions for its financial support. Some of themlook absolutely unrealistic. For example, it wants access for US inspectors to all chemical and biological research institutes and enterprises, even those that are not covered by the convention, and to other closed state and commercial information. Naturally, Moscow cannot agree to this.

The US has let Russia down with regard to the start-up of a plant to eliminate the artillery shells and missile warheads containing sarin, soman and VX gases in Shchuchye (the Kurgan region). This arsenal, where 5,440 tons of toxic agents are stored, and the Kambarka plant were to become the basis for Russia's implementation of the second stage of the destruction of chemical weapons. Washington assumed a commitment to allocate over $700 million for the construction of the plant's industrial zone but has failed to honor it. The State Targeted Program To Destroy Toxic Agents had to be considerably adjusted. In other words, the plant is being built too slowly, despite US representatives' claims that they are proud to be helping Russia to destroy its chemical weapons safely.

Patrick J. Wakefield, a deputy assistant to the US secretary of defense (chemical demilitarization and threat reduction), stated at the Russian Green Cross forum that late this August, Washington had allocated $220 million for the construction of the plant in Shchuchye, another $270 million for the destruction of the ammunition stored in this arsenal and $70 million for the organization of the protection of the plant against terrorists, promising that the total amount of US assistance to this plant would be over $1 billion. However, the Russian State Commission for Chemical Disarmament expressed serious doubts that all this money would reach the Kurgan region.

In reality, the greater part of the means allocated by Washington for assistance to Russia to destroy its chemical weapons, i.e., up to 70%, remains in the US, members of the state commission told RIA Novosti. The money goes toward projects that the Pentagon orders from its firms, holding briefings and consultations, organizing trips by groups of inspectors to Russia and back, receiving delegations and many other activities not directly related to the destruction of toxic agents. Indeed, this conclusion was confirmed by a check organized by Russian Interior Ministry and the president's Main Auditing Department.

Experts say that instead of counting on the US, we should rely on our own forces and states that really help our country to scrap the chemical weapons without much advertising this. There are quite a few such states. Germany is the indisputable leader among them. The Gorny facility was created with its assistance and it is helping Russia build the Kambarka plant to detoxify lewisite.

Russia has signed 28 intergovernmental and interdepartmental agreements on cooperation with foreign states on chemical disarmament. In the past two years alone, it has signed 15 agreements that means it will be able to attract $1.020 billion within the next five years. However, time will show what money will really work for this program.

In the meantime, Russia has to solve the difficult task of destroying its cold war stockpiles on its own. Assistance is not what matters in this case, as there cannot be turning back on this process. As the phrase goes, you will never know what you can do until you try. The deadline must be met.


Return to Menu


B.  Nuclear Terrorism

1.
TERRORISTS PLAN TO USE WMD
RIA Novosti
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


The leaders of terrorist organizations are using modern technologies and weapons to develop plans to use weapons of mass destruction, CIS Antiterrorism Center head Colonel General Boris Mylnikov said at an international scientific-practical conference in Moscow.

In this regard, there is the real threat of a completely new type of technological terrorism. Col. Mylnikov said that it was not enough to have the most complete agent network, the most skilled special task forces and highly precise weapons. Only the maximum rational use of all forces and means, including the secret service's information and analytical potential, will make it possible to concentrate on the most dangerous aspects of terrorist activity and place "a reliable barrier in their way."

"International terrorism has involved the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States and the whole world in an undeclared war, in which defenseless people are killed by terrorists," he added.

He noted that all kinds of criminal gangs are widely using terrorist methods to reach their own goals.

According to him, criminal gangs have found a perfect mutual understanding with transnational organized criminal communities involved in drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, kidnapping and other dangerous crimes.

Representatives of practically every CIS secrete service, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan) attended the conference.

The Antiterrorism Center was set up on June 20, 2000. Russia finances 50% of the center's activity, the rest is equally divided between CIS countries.

The center's headquarters are Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.


Return to Menu


C.  WMD Scientists

1.
United Kingdom, Russia Sign MOU to Improve Efforts to Redirect Former Soviet Nuclear Weapons Personnel
Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


British and Russian officials this month reached an agreement intended to strengthen efforts to redirect former Soviet nuclear weapons scientists and technicians to commercial work.

On Nov. 4, the British Department of Trade and Industry and the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency signed a memorandum of understanding on the joint Closed Nuclear Cities Partnership program. The effort, launched in 2002, seeks to reduce the proliferation threats associated with Russia�s downsizing and restructuring of its closed cities, which were created during the Soviet era for nuclear weapons research and production.

Proliferation threats include nuclear scientists and technicians selling their expertise to rogue states and terrorist groups, as well as the sale of technology and radioactive materials from the cities.

Russia�s efforts to restructure its closed cities are expected to result in 15,000 job losses over the next five years, with additional layoffs expected in the following decade, according to the British Department of Trade and Industry.

While the threat of former Russian nuclear weapons personnel selling their skills to the highest bidder may have decreased since the mid-1990s, when Russia�s economy was in a poor state, the threat could surge again if Moscow does not effectively manage the reduction of its nuclear weapons complex, said David Vincent, the British official directing the program, in a interview with Global Security Newswire yesterday.

This month�s agreement provides the program with an independent legal status in Russia, allowing it to publicize its activities within the country for the first time, according to the Department of Trade and Industry. The document is also expected to help resolve possible future administrative disputes between program officials and regional Russian officials by providing the program with increased clout, according to the department. In addition, it establishes a joint steering committee to help review program efforts and resolve future issues.

The memorandum also has political benefits, according to the Department of Trade and Industry, such as noting the importance of the redirection of former WMD scientists in overall Russian nonproliferation efforts. The document also commits the United Kingdom and Russia to reach a bilateral agreement on issues such as tax exemption and liability protection for program activities, the department said.

A dispute over liability protections resulted in an end to the U.S. Nuclear Cities Initiative in Russia � an Energy Department effort to support the restructuring of the Russian nuclear weapons complex � in 2003.

The issue is expected to be less of a source of dispute between the United Kingdom and Russia, however, because of the low concerns of potential risks from the types of projects carried out through the program, such as development of business plans, Vincent said. He also said the issue had been previously addressed in other British-Russian agreements, and such language would be probably be incorporated into any new agreement on the closed cities program.

The Closed Nuclear Cities Partnership program is now in place at six out of 10 Russian closed cities � Novouralsk, Ozersk, Sarov, Seversk, Snezhinsk and Zheleznogorsk. The program, to which the United Kingdom contributes more than $5 million annually, seeks to improve the economic viability of these sites and to redirect their personnel toward commercial projects by providing investment grants, personnel training, business partnering and general economic development.

So far, more than $4 million has been spent on 10 projects, resulting in the creation of about 350 new jobs in four closed cities. An additional 20 projects to promote business development have also been developed. The Siberian Chemical Kombinat used one of eight business plans developed through the program at Seversk to raise funds for the construction of a nitrogen trifluoride plant � a plant expected to create about 300 new jobs.

About 25 additional grant projects and activities are being considered, according to the Department of Trade and Industry. A British governmental committee is set to meet next week to examine 12 projects costing an estimated total of about $3 million.


Return to Menu


D.  Cooperative Threat Reduction

1.
New Threats, Old Weapons
Robert R. Monroe
Washington Post
11/16/2004
(for personal use only)


In the 13 years since the Cold War ended, the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal, designed to deter Soviet attack by threatening massive retaliation, has become increasingly ill-suited to deterring the more diversified -- but still deadly -- threats that face us. Deterring rogue states and terrorist groups from using weapons of mass destruction is still possible, but only if we modernize our nuclear forces. Transformation of these capabilities has hardly begun, though, and our risks are increasing by the day.

To be effective deterrents in the future, our nuclear weapons must have greatly increased accuracy, reduced yields, specialized capabilities (such as deep earth penetration) and tailored effects (such as ability to neutralize chemical-biological agents). The administration has proposed urgent steps to gain information in these areas, but for the past two years these initiatives have been halted or slowed by those who believe U.S. national strategy should focus on nonproliferation and play down nuclear weapons. Those who share these views advance the following four arguments to support their case.

� New low-yield, accurate nuclear weapons would reduce the nuclear threshold and blur the distinction between conventional and nuclear weapons, thus making their use more likely.

This statement is both illogical and wrong. Our primary objective is deterrence, and this lies only in our adversaries' minds. The leadership of a rogue state (e.g., North Korea) might believe we would not use existing nuclear weapons (with hundreds of kilotons' yield) to defeat threatening nuclear weapons in a hardened facility, because that could also kill or injure thousands of noncombatants. Thus, in the absence of new low-yield weapons, our deterrence would be lessened, the adversary's provocations would proceed, and the use of nuclear weapons would be more likely. By continuing with our ill-suited stockpile we would have lowered the nuclear threshold.

But if we build and test new nuclear weapons, train our armed forces in their employment, announce national policies that include their possible use, and develop a national consensus supporting such use if necessary, our adversaries will be deterred and will modify their behavior. By building new low-yield nuclear weapons we will have raised the nuclear threshold. Our adversaries must be convinced that our nuclear weapons have the precise capability to destroy their high-value assets and that we have the will to use them.

� New low-yield nuclear weapons are different from those that kept America safe during the Cold War. Those older megaton weapons were useful only for deterrence. These new ones are obviously for war-fighting.

Again, incorrect. Our Cold War arsenal deterred because it was "tuned" to our adversaries, their value systems and the threats they posed. These key determinants have changed drastically. Deterrence, not war-fighting, is still our objective, and we must change our nuclear arsenal to be effective against future adversaries and their value systems. Low-yield weapons are not all that "usable." U.S. and Soviet Cold War arsenals included many thousands of low-yield weapons, yet none were ever used, even though there were many crises.

� Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is the world's greatest threat; we should multiply our efforts to persuade all nations to forgo them. How can we do this when we are launching new nuclear weapons programs?

There is no inconsistency whatever between these two actions. We are one of five internationally agreed "nuclear weapon states." As such, we are obligated to maintain secure, reliable and effective nuclear weapons. No other nation has the global responsibilities the United States bears, and we must take the actions needed to meet them -- particularly those involving deterrence.

As for nonproliferation, it is a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. We are the world's leader in advancing it. We have created more initiatives to further it, spent more money to support it and done more to strengthen it than any other state. We will continue to expand this nonproliferation campaign, but in parallel we must transform our nuclear weapons to regain essential deterrence capabilities.

� Development of new nuclear weapons would violate our obligation under Article VI of the Nonproliferation Treaty, which pledges all states to work toward nuclear disarmament.

This statement incorrectly confuses short-term actions with long-term goals. Article VI does not prevent any nuclear weapon state from developing new nuclear weapons. The complete article states: "Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." We have met these obligations -- in spades. We have ended the arms race with the Soviet Union, reduced our nuclear weapons stockpile by many thousands, signed the Moscow Treaty to reduce it by many more thousands, dismantled entire classes of nuclear weapons and taken hundreds of other actions to reduce nuclear weapons activities worldwide.

But in a dangerous world, with many states and organizations committed to acquiring and using nuclear weapons, it would be unwise for the United States not to make our nuclear deterrent force more effective. Actions to achieve this, while simultaneously greatly reducing the number and yield of our nuclear weapons, are fully in accord with the treaty.

We are at a critical point regarding the future role of nuclear weapons in national security. Dependence on the aging stockpile from a former era will not serve. We should move rapidly with the administration's modest investigative initiatives to gain information needed for future decisions.

The writer is a retired Navy vice admiral and former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency.



Return to Menu


E.  Nonproliferation Diplomacy

1.
RUSSIAN NUCLEAR FUEL SUPPLY FOR IRANIANS GUARANTEED
RIA Novosti
11/16/2004
(for personal use only)


After talks with Britain, France and Germany, Hasan Rohani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme Council of National Security, said his country "has agreed to suspend practically all activity associated with uranium enrichment."

Russia took no direct part in the talks, but it proved decisive at the "oriental bazaar," a source in Russia's Foreign Ministry told Vremya Novostei. Iran requested guaranteed fuel supplies for its nuclear power plant. At first openly declared that it was prepared to revise its plans for creating a nuclear-fuel cycle on condition that it received guaranteed nuclear fuel supplies from Russia.

The "big three" guaranteed such supplies, following consultations with Moscow. "They wanted just one thing from us - guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel for the Bushehr plant in Iran," the Russian source stressed.

This economic breakthrough is economically advantageous for Russia. "From now on we can easily cooperate with Iran without political complications in the construction of the generating unit in Bushehr and possibly in building other power generating facilities in the future," a source at the Russia's Atomic Energy Agency said. Fuel for the nuclear power plant under construction in Bushehr is ready for delivery, and supplies may start next year.

According to the source in the agency, the talks on a protocol and on the return of used nuclear fuel from the Bushehr plant have almost been completed. The protocol may be signed when Alexander Rumyantsev, Russia's atomic energy minister, visits Iran in December.

In late September, the IAEA Board of Governors issued a resolution that recommended Iran to suspend work on uranium enrichment by November 25. If Iran had refused to do so, the issue could have been submitted to the UN Security Council, which has the authority to impose sanctions.


Return to Menu


F.  US-Russia

1.
MODERNIZATION OF RUSSIAN ARMY DOES NOT THREATEN THE WEST
Viktor Litovkin
RIA Novosti
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


The address of President Vladimir Putin at an annual conference with the top leaders of the Russian armed forces created a stir in the Western media. Some media interpreted the president's words that "Russia will soon have unique nuclear systems that have no counterparts in the other nuclear powers" as a resumption of the arms race and, worse still, as a threat to the West, in particular to the US. Even the State Department had to react to this supposition.

We do not view Russia's efforts for nuclear strengthening and modernization as threatening, Deputy Spokesman of the State Department Mr. Adam Ereli said at a briefing in Washington. Russia's efforts in this sphere fully comply with our mutual obligations within the Moscow treaty.

But what are these obligations? The Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, signed by Mr. Putin and Mr. Bush in May 2002, stipulated the reduction of the aggregate number of deployed nuclear warheads on both sides to 1,700-2,200 by 2012, and confirmed the two countries' obligations under START-1 signed in July 1991. According to START-1, the sides pledge to notify each other in due time about their new research on nuclear missiles and to provide the requisite information about the said studies.

As far as we know, both sides have honored this provision faultlessly so far. This means that Washington, the White House and the Pentagon have been informed about the new strategic missiles which the Russian army and navy are to receive soon, the mobile ground-based Topol-M and the naval strategic missile Bulava-30, to which President Putin referred in his speech at the above conference.

Likewise, the US administration knows that these new systems do not threaten the US and its allies, but were created to replace the strategic missile systems whose service life has expired or is expiring.

It is difficult to believe that all weapons to be supplied to the Russian armed force next year can threaten the US. Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov mentioned four strategic missiles, nine spacecraft, and five boosters designed - read carefully - for orbiting spacecraft and satellites, two patrol ships, two Tu-160 strategic bombers, and seven modernized Su-27SM frontline fighters, as well as two launchers for the Iskander-M tactical missile system, 17 T-90 tanks and 92 BTR-80 armored personnel carriers.

Taken together, this "formidable arsenal" cannot disrupt Russia's balance with the US or NATO. These weapons are merely a drop in the ocean for the requirements of the Russian armed forces, which have not received new weapons for over ten years.

In addition, Russia's military budget next year cannot compare with its American counterpart. The former is roughly 528 billion rubles (just under $20 billion), while the latter is $450 billion. If one proceeds from "confrontation logic", which is seen by serious military experts as fallacious and outdated, the question "who threatens whom" may be turned on its head. No one in Russia is concerned about it, not even the most virulent critics of Mr. Ivanov and the Kremlin administration. Meanwhile, the problems of modernizing the Russian army mentioned at the conference by both Mr. Putin and Mr. Ivanov are indeed highly critical. And the most important thing here is the minimum level of funding needed for the armed forces, which prevents the country's leadership from making a qualitative leap in the development of the security-related component of the state organism. "More and more money," says the defense minister, "is being allocated, but real resources are becoming scarcer." Why?

The answer is self-evident: the Kremlin administration, government and defense ministry cannot agree on top military planning priorities. Although, paradoxically, these priorities are clearly outlined both in a defense white paper - Current Problems of the Development of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation - and in a report by Sergei Ivanov at the latest conference of the top military brass.

These priorities are: maintaining the potential of the strategic deterrence, improving the quality of the army and naval response to repel present and likely threats, creating scientific, technological and production groundwork for rearming units with state-of-the-art weapons and implementing social measures to boost the prestige of military service. Unfortunately, each of these areas calls for massive, rather than minimal, financial injections.

Return to Menu


2.
RUSSIAN FIGHTER CHASES AWAY U.S. SPY PLANE.
RFE/RL Newsline
11/16/2004
(for personal use only)


A U.S. military surveillance aircraft on 15 November carried out reconnaissance of Russian territory near the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus region, Russian media reported, citing Russian Air Force spokesman Aleksandr Drobyshevskii. "The American aircraft broke off its flight along the border of the Russian Federation as soon as an Su-27 fighter was scrambled," Drobyshevskii said, according to Interfax. The Orion surveillance plane was reportedly about 10 kilometers from the Russian border and was based on the Greek island of Crete. Drobyshevskii added that "tensions remain high" and said that in the last five years NATO has renewed surveillance flights along Russia's borders near Georgia and the Baltic states.


Return to Menu


G.  Russia-Iran

1.
Russia-Iran nuclear cooperation depends on Iran-IAEA relations:Russian official
Xinhua News Agency
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


Iran's relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will have an important bearing on the country's future nuclear cooperation for peaceful uses with Russia, a senior Russian official said Wednesday, Itar-Tass reported.

Alexander Rumyantsev, chief of the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), said during an internet conference that Russia's cooperation with Iran over the peaceful use of nuclear power "will depend on that country's relations with the IAEA and the international community."

However, he did not rule out that Russia might take part in theconstruction of more nuclear power units in Iran, said the report.

"Iran two years ago declared the intention to build another sixreactors and there is a possibility they will be eventually included in our contract portfolio," Rumyantsev said.

He said the first reactor project in Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant will be finished at the end of 2006 as agreed by the two sides.

Rumyantsev also said there were no fundamental obstacles to the conclusion of a supplementary protocol requiring Iran to return spent nuclear fuel to Russia.

Russia has pledged to accept spent nuclear fuel for storage and recycling and Iran has promised to return the fuel, he said.



Return to Menu


2.
MOSCOW: IRAN'S NUCLEAR FILE SHALL NOT GO TO UN SECURITY COUNCIL
RIA Novosti
11/16/2004
(for personal use only)


Moscow has welcomed EU-Iran agreements on Iran's nuclear programme, and believes that the Iran nuclear issue is not to be submitted for the consideration of the United Nations Security Council, reports the Russian foreign ministry.

Iran's consent to suspend all activities connected with dressed uranium, on the one hand, and the fact that Britain, France and Germany have recognized this step as a voluntary move vested with no legal obligations, on the other hand, are factors to foster an atmosphere of confidence as regards the Iran problem. This is vital for continued cooperation between Teheran and the IAEA whose inspectors are to monitor Iran's performance of its commitments under the earlier-signed additional protocol to the treaty on non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT), said the foreign ministry source.

Last September's resolution on Iran, according to previous reports, contained a clause whereby the Board of Governors reserved the right to consider the expedience of adopting further decisions on Iran's nuclear programme within the IAEA framework. In other words, the IAEA, in case of Iran's failure to comply with the resolution's appeals to suspend all the full nuclear cycle formation programmes, reserved the right to authorise the UN Security Council to take upon itself decision-making concerning the nuclear programme. This is certainly fraught with the introduction of sanctions against Iran. It was only due to Russia's (and China's) tough stand at that very session of the Board of Governors that the resolution did not adopt the provision of the so-called "trigger mechanism", which implied an automatic transfer of Iran's nuclear file to the UN Security Council.

In the opinion of the foreign ministry's source, the discussion of Iran's nuclear programme at the session of the IAEA Board of Directors, to open on November 25, is not expected to excite any heated polemics. The IAEA report that has been already circulated among the members of the Board, including Russia, is compiled in quite a positive manner in relation to the Iran issue. A peaceful solution for the issue seems also feasible because of the fact that US President George Bush, when meeting recently with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in Washington, welcomed the accords reached between Teheran and the European Three.

The Russian foreign ministry notes that such a favourable outcome of the dialogue between Iran and the European Union is largely due to the constructive position of Moscow that has done a lot to inspire both Iran and the European union to compromise.



Return to Menu


3.
RUSSIAN NUCLEAR FUEL SUPPLY FOR IRANIANS GUARANTEED
RIA Novosti
11/16/2004
(for personal use only)


After talks with Britain, France and Germany, Hasan Rohani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme Council of National Security, said his country "has agreed to suspend practically all activity associated with uranium enrichment."

Russia took no direct part in the talks, but it proved decisive at the "oriental bazaar," a source in Russia's Foreign Ministry told Vremya Novostei. Iran requested guaranteed fuel supplies for its nuclear power plant. At first openly declared that it was prepared to revise its plans for creating a nuclear-fuel cycle on condition that it received guaranteed nuclear fuel supplies from Russia.

The "big three" guaranteed such supplies, following consultations with Moscow. "They wanted just one thing from us - guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel for the Bushehr plant in Iran," the Russian source stressed.

This economic breakthrough is economically advantageous for Russia. "From now on we can easily cooperate with Iran without political complications in the construction of the generating unit in Bushehr and possibly in building other power generating facilities in the future," a source at the Russia's Atomic Energy Agency said. Fuel for the nuclear power plant under construction in Bushehr is ready for delivery, and supplies may start next year.

According to the source in the agency, the talks on a protocol and on the return of used nuclear fuel from the Bushehr plant have almost been completed. The protocol may be signed when Alexander Rumyantsev, Russia's atomic energy minister, visits Iran in December.

In late September, the IAEA Board of Governors issued a resolution that recommended Iran to suspend work on uranium enrichment by November 25. If Iran had refused to do so, the issue could have been submitted to the UN Security Council, which has the authority to impose sanctions.


Return to Menu


H.  Russia-India

1.
Zhukov to discuss broader nuclear cooperation in India
Interfax
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


Planned steps by Russia and India to expand their cooperation in the nuclear power sector will be discussed during Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov's visit to India on November 18-20, a source in the Russian governmental delegation told Interfax.

Among other meetings, this issue will be addressed at a November 18 session of the Russian-Indian intergovernmental commission for trade, business, scientific and cultural cooperation, the source said.


Return to Menu


I.  Nuclear Forces

1.
Putin Says New Missile Systems Will Give Russia a Nuclear Edge
Steven Lee Myers
New York Times
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


President Vladimir V. Putin, meeting with Russia's defense officials and military commanders here, said Wednesday that the country would soon deploy new nuclear missile systems that would surpass those of any other nuclear power.

Reiterating previous statements and providing no new details, Mr. Putin said Russia would continue to emphasize its nuclear deterrent, even as it continues its focus on terrorism, which has roiled the country in recent months with deadly results.

"We are not only conducting research and successful testing of the newest nuclear missile systems," he said in concluding remarks to a regular gathering of commanders at the Ministry of Defense, which were reported by news agencies and broadcast on NTV. "I am certain that in the immediate years to come we will be armed with them. These are such developments and such systems that other nuclear states do not have and will not have in the immediate years to come."

In his remarks, which amounted to a broad overview of military strategy and budgets with a dash of boosterism, Mr. Putin did not elaborate on the new systems.

The Russian military is widely reported to have been trying to perfect land- and sea-based ballistic missiles with warheads that could elude a missile-defense system like the one being constructed by the Bush administration. Still, Russia already has more than enough missiles to overwhelm the limited system the United States is constructing.

In February, Mr. Putin announced that Russia had successfully tested a new nuclear-tipped missile during an exercise that included two embarrassing missile misfires. At the time, he said the system would allow "deep maneuvering," a statement that arms experts in Russia and abroad took to mean a warhead that could alter its course as it approached its target.

A day after that exercise, Col. Gen. Yuri N. Baluyevsky, who this summer was promoted to the chief of the military's general staff, said the missile was a "hypersonic flying vehicle," though neither he nor any other officials have provided details about the weapon or, more important, its viability.

The missile is reportedly a variant of the Topol, a ground-based intercontinental ballistic missile that is already in Russia's arsenal, but Russia's efforts are shrouded in secrecy.

Dmitri V. Trenin, deputy director of the Carnegie Moscow Center and an expert on the Russian military, said Mr. Putin's remarks, made almost in passing and not a part of his main address, revealed nothing particularly new.

Mr. Trenin described the comments as a gesture to bolster the confidence of the armed services, which remain beleaguered, despite the government's efforts to increase spending, including a 27-percent increase, to roughly $20 billion, in the military budget for 2005.

Last month, a senior missile designer publicly complained in remarks to Russian news agencies that production of the Topol missiles had twice this year ground to a halt because of a lack of financing.


Return to Menu


2.
Putin: Russia to Deploy Missiles 'Unlikely to Exist' Elsewhere
Peter Finn
Washington Post
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


President Vladimir Putin told a conference of top military officials Wednesday that Russia was planning to deploy a nuclear missile of a kind that other nuclear powers were unlikely to develop.

Putin gave no other details, but over the last several months Russian military officials have spoken about developing a ballistic missile that could penetrate any missile defense system, such as the one being put in place by the United States. It reportedly would have the maneuverability of a cruise missile after reentering the atmosphere from space, helping it to evade interceptor rockets.

"We have not only conducted tests of the latest nuclear rocket systems," Putin said at a meeting in Moscow of the armed forces leadership, according to Russian news services. "I am sure that in the coming years we will deploy them. . . . Moreover, these will be things which do not exist and are unlikely to exist in other nuclear powers."

Russian officials have talked of shield-evading missiles since the 1980s, when the Reagan administration promoted its Strategic Defense Initiative anti-missile system.

In announcing a planned missile defense system in 2001, the Bush administration said it was designed to protect the country from "rogue states" such as North Korea, not Russia's massive arsenal.

But the announcement prompted a new round of statements from Russian officials that their country would develop missiles capable of penetrating such a shield.

The Itar-Tass news service said Putin may have been referring to a pending mobile version of the Topol-M, the only intercontinental missile developed by Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union. Earlier this month, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Russia expected to test the missile soon and that production might begin in 2005.

Some analysts questioned whether the projected 2005 defense budget was sufficient to finance an upgrading of Russia's nuclear forces. The army and security agencies, including the police, are projected to receive about $32 billion, or 30.5 percent of the federal budget.

"Putin's statement looks rather political," Ruslan Pukhov, an analyst at Moscow-based Center AST, which specializes in security studies, told the Bloomberg news service. "Most likely, Putin meant some research and design, conducted during Soviet times and dusted off recently."


Return to Menu


3.
WHAT UNIQUE WEAPONS DID PUTIN MEAN?
RIA Novosti
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


At a meeting with senior Defense Ministry officials yesterday, President Vladimir Putin described the military establishment's performance this year as satisfactory, saying, "Our main line - toward improving the quality of the army and navy, rearming and better manning - is in place."

The president, writes Vremya Novostei, did not forget to mention that Russia was not only developing and testing new nuclear missile systems, but would "commission them in the next few years." They will have no match abroad. In the view of military experts, the reference may have been to mobile (non-silo) Topol-M nuclear missile systems.

Yuri Solomonov, director of the Moscow Heat Engineering Institute, had previously said that the mobile Topol-M's last test would take place some time between December 20 and 31, and, if successful, financing for the system would be included in next year's state defense order.

Currently, four regiments equipped with silo-based Topol-M missiles are on combat duty within a unit outside Tatishchevo in the Saratov region. Each regiment has between six and ten launchers. The mobile and silo-based Topol-Ms will form the backbone of Russia's strategic missile forces.

According to open-access information, the Topol-M is a unified three-stage solid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile with a single or a separable warhead. The missile has a range of 10,000 kilometers. Its launch weight is 47 metric tons and the nose cone weighs 1.2 tons.

Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, when speaking about defense spending, said, "while there is more and more money, real resources are shrinking," and suggested that the budget be adjusted twice: after six months and after nine months. Mr. Putin agreed that the budget needed correcting to keep up with prices.


Return to Menu


4.
Defense Ministry to obtain four strategic missiles next year - Ivanov
Interfax
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


The Russian Armed Forces will receive four strategic missiles in 2005, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said.

"Next year, the Armed Forces will obtain four strategic missiles, nine space aircraft and five missile carriers," Ivanov said speaking at a meeting of the armed forces' top brass in Moscow on Wednesday.

"Land forces will get two Iskander-M launchers, 17 T-90 tanks and three sets of Armored Personnel Carriers (92 BTR-80). Two new ships will be introduced for the Navy. The Air Force will get one new and one repaired Tu-160 strategic bomber, seven modernized Su-27SM fighter planes, and new high voltage rockets," Ivanov said.

He said that over 186.9 billion rubles will be allocated for national security in 2005. Of these funds, 62.8 billion rubles will go toward research and development programs, 112.3 billion will go toward buying new and modernized military equipment and 11.8 billion will be used for the reconstruction of weapons and military technology.


Return to Menu


5.
NOVEL NUCLEAR MISSILE SYSTEMS FOR THE RUSSIAN ARMY
RIA Novosti
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


In the next two years, the Russian army will receive novel nuclear missile systems, which are being tested now, President Vladimir Putin said at a conference of the leading staff of the Russian armed forces. The conference was convened to sum up the results of combat training in the army and navy in 2004 and outline tasks for the next year.

Mr. Putin demanded that the troops be geared to the nature and direction of threats by the end of 2005. "The composition, structure and strength of the armed forces must be geared to the nature and direction of current and future threats by the end of 2005," said the president. "Effective and combat ready armed forces are a crucial factor protecting Russia from any forms of military-political pressure or potential aggression."

The main task of internal command agencies is to improve the combat ability of the troops, above all, permanent-readiness units that must become the core and the main striking force of the army, Mr. Putin said. "Combat training must be based on modern experience and development trends of the art of war."

The president recalled "major decisions" taken in the provision of equipment to the troops and cited positive examples of the creation of a basic missile system for the land forces and new-generation small arms, and the successful completion of trials of a naval nuclear missile system.

Vladimir Putin called for a saving attitude to technical rearmament. "These resources must be spent carefully but effectively, sparingly as good housekeepers do, and with best results," the president said.

He said that the accumulation mortgage program for servicemen must be closely monitored and that the government would allocate an additional 2 billion rubles ($1 = 28.67 rubles) for the construction of housing for servicemen in 2005.

"The deployment of Russian military bases [in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan] has greatly strengthened the collective security system in Central Asia," said Vladimir Putin. "It is being used to create conditions for neutralizing terrorist and extremist attacks in the region and increase the defense capability of Russia and its allies in the southern direction."



Return to Menu


6.
Putin Says Development of New Nuclear Systems Under Way in Russia
MosNews
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


Russia is working on new nuclear missile systems which would be unique to Russia in order to protect itself against future security challenges, the Reuters news agency quoted President Vladimir Putin as saying on Wednesday.

Putin, speaking to armed forces chiefs, said although international terrorism was one of Russia�s main security threats the country also had to keep its nuclear defences in sound condition.

�We know that we have only to weaken our attention to such components of our defences as the nuclear-missile shield, and new threats to us could appear,� the Russian leader said.

He said research and successful testing of new nuclear-missile systems technology was being conducted.

�I am sure that in the near future weapons will appear... which other nuclear powers do not and will not possess,� he said.

Putin gave no further detail about what type of weapons he was referring to or what shape these new security threats could take.

�We will continue to consistently and successively build up the armed forces in general and its nuclear component,� he said.

Return to Menu


7.
Russia Developing New Nuclear Missile
Vladimir Isachenkov and Maria Danilova
Associated Press
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


Russia is developing a new nuclear missile system unlike any weapon held by other countries, President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday, a move that could serve as a signal to the United States as Washington pushes forward with a missile defense system.

Putin gave no details about the system or why Russia was pursuing it, and it was unclear whether the Kremlin's cashapped armed forces could even afford an expensive new weapon.

But in remarks that could also be aimed at a domestic audience, he told a meeting of the top leadership of the armed forces that the system could be deployed soon, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.

"We are not only conducting research and successful tests on state-of-the-art nuclear missile systems, but I am convinced that these systems will appear in the near future," Putin said. "Moreover, they will be systems, weapons that not a single other nuclear power has, or will have, in the near future."


"We'll continue our efforts to build our armed forces and its nuclear component," he said.

ITAR-Tass indicated the new system could be a mobile version of the Topol-M ballistic missile, which have been deployed in silos since 1998. But Alexander Pikayev, a senior military analyst with Moscow's Institute for Global Economy and International Relations, said Putin seemed to be referring to the Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile, a solid fuel missile that had its first test in September.

"Putin apparently wanted to boast the success of his military reform effort ... to both the military and the broad public," Pikayev told The Associated Press. "His statement also intended to show that Russia is regaining its status as a great power which can't be ignored."

Russian officials had stated earlier that the Bulava could be developed in both sea- and land-based versions and equipped with warheads capable of penetrating missile defense, Pikayev said.

He said if the Bulava proves capable, it would represent a major success because it would show that Russia has succeeded in modernizing its missile forces despite the shortage of funds.

"It will ring the bell for the Americans, forcing Washington to reassess its estimates," Pikayev said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said it wasn't news to the Bush administration, and that President Bush and Putin had discussed the issue previously. He emphasized there were agreements in place to reduce the two countries' nuclear arsenals and noted Moscow is now a partner in the war on terrorism.

"This is not something that we look at as new," he said. "We are very well aware of their long-standing modernization efforts for their military. ... We are allies now in the global war on terrorism."

McClellan suggested that close ties between Bush and Putin makes alarm unnecessary - but doesn't eliminate Washington's concern.

"We have a very different relationship than we did in the Cold War," he said. "The fact that we do have a good relationship enables us to speak very directly to our Russian friends."

Christopher Langton, head of defense analysis at London's International Institute for Strategic Studies, said it appeared to be the first time that Russian officials had spoken publicly about a new deterrent, though he has no idea what the system might be.

"He said it was, firstly, unique and, secondly, capable of defeating any space-based defense system, which is clearly putting the spotlight on the anti-missile of the United States," Langton said.

Military reform is a high priority for Putin, Langton noted, adding that Russia's conventional forces have proved difficult to improve. Missile forces, however, serve as a deterrent simply by their existence, he said.

"He is sending a very clear message that Russia is not going to be rolled over by the United States or NATO," he said.

A national security doctrine Putin signed in 2001 makes it easier for Russia's leaders to use nuclear weapons to oppose any attack if other efforts fail to repel an aggressor. The previous doctrine had stated that Russia would use nuclear weapons only in cases when its national sovereignty was threatened.

Military experts attributed the shift to the tremendous weakness of conventional forces, which might not be able to defend the country in case of an attacks.

Putin has made clear that improving the armed forces, which declined after the breakup of the Soviet Union, is a priority. In the past year, Russia defense officials have made several announcements about new weapons.

Col. Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, chief of staff of the armed forces, said in March that the military tested a "hypersonic flying vehicle" able to maneuver between space and the Earth's atmosphere. Military analysts said the mysterious new weapons could be a maneuverable ballistic missile warhead or a hypersonic cruise missile.

This month, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Russia expected to test a mobile version of its Topol-M ballistic missile soon. Topol-Ms have a range of about 6,000 miles.

News reports have said Russia is believed to be developing a next-generation heavy missile that could carry up to 10 nuclear warheads weighing a total of 4.4 tons, compared with the Topol-M's 1.32-ton combat payload.

Most analysts viewed the earlier announcements about "hypersonic flying vehicles" as Moscow's retaliation to U.S. missile defense plans. After years of vociferous protests, Russia reacted calmly when Washington withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 in order to develop a missile shield. Moscow has since complained about Washington's plans to build new low-yield nuclear weapons.

Other analysts said Putin's statement appeared to be as much show as military strategy.

"This is intended for the internal audience, an attempt to say that things are great, that defense is growing stronger and not falling apart, as it actually is," military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer said.

"Russian officials have a special attitude toward nuclear arms," said Alexander Golts of the magazine Yezhenedelny Zhurnal. "It is the last attribute of a superpower, it is what makes us equal to the United States."



Return to Menu


8.
Russia To Deploy New-Generation Nuclear Weapons System: Putin
AFP
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


President Vladimir Putin served notice Wednesday that Russia intended to remain a major nuclear power by deploying a new weapon in the coming years that other states lack and are unlikely to develop in the near future.

"We have not only conducted tests of the latest nuclear rocket systems," Putin told a meeting of the Armed Forces' leadership. "I am sure that in the coming years we will deploy them.

"Moreover, these will be things which do not exist and are unlikely to exist in other nuclear powers," he added.

Putin failed to specify what type of complex he was referring to, but Russia has been seeking to upgrade its nuclear arsenal after the United States announced plans in 2001 to deploy a missile defense shield in abrogation of its 1972 ABM Treaty with Moscow.

Washington argues its shield would be capable of defending the United States only from attacks from so-called "rogue states" and could not stand up to Russia's massive Soviet-era nuclear arsenal.

However Putin has since mentioned plans for Russia to also develop a similar system along with new types of intercontinental missiles that Moscow claims could penetrate any space shield put up by the United States.

The ITAR-TASS news agency speculated that Putin was referring to the mobile Topol-M missile, which is analogous to the US Minuteman-3 missile and is meant to form the backbone of Russia's future strategic nuclear arsenal.

Russia this year also successfully test-fired a different new missile that its developers claim can penetrate any shield, since it flies in space on a ballistic trajectory and in the atmosphere as a cruise missile - swerving away from interceptor rockets.

The Topol-M is the first intercontinental missile developed by Russia alone following the Soviet Union's collapse, but deployment of the land-based mobile unit - initially set for the end of 2002 - has been repeatedly delayed because of severe cash constraints.

The ITAR-TASS report quoted the missile's Moscow developer as saying that funding for mass production of the mobile Topol-M will be included in the military's 2005 procurement budget.

If that timetable is respected, the missiles could be issued to the armed forces in 2006. Topol-Ms have been deployed in silos since 1998.

The shift in attention to nuclear deterrence came unexpectedly because Putin has for months pointed to international terrorism as the chief threat to Russia's national security amid a wave of deadly suicide attacks from guerrillas in rebel Chechnya.

Putin said Wednesday that Russia still viewed terrorism as the greatest threat to its national security but should also not forget about nuclear dangers.

"We understand that the moment we turn our attention from such elements of our defenses as a nuclear missile shield, then we will be facing new threats," Putin said.

"That is why we will continue to persistently develop our armed forces on the whole, including its nuclear arsenal potential," Putin said.

Putin said that Russia should also build up its navy's nuclear capacity - it had 10 successful sea-based test launches this year - and generally work to modernize armed forces that remain bogged down in war-torn Chechnya for a sixth year.

However analysts point to Russia's financial struggles and question how the military intends to follow through on Putin's vow.

Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov reported at the same meeting that the 2005 budget has only pencilled in the purchase of four intercontinental ballistic missiles.

"This proves that Russia is still working from a doctrine of nuclear dissuasion as was the case in the 1990s. This highlights the weakness of its conventional forces," said independent political analyst Alexander Golts.

"The West should not get too excited about this" because it reflects an outdated mentality, Golts said.

Russia this year also successfully test-fired a different new missile that its developers claim can penetrate any shield, since it flies in space on a ballistic trajectory and in the atmosphere as a cruise missile - swerving away from interceptor rockets.



Return to Menu


J.  Nuclear Industry

1.
Govt to discuss investments, finances RAO EES Rossii
ITAR-TASS
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


The Russian government will continue to examine investment programmes and financial plans of subjects of natural monopolies in 2005 at its Thursday meeting, Tass learnt from a source at the government.

While the cabinet concentrated on the operation of railway transport last week, the functioning of the national power industry will come under discussion. Minister of Industry and Energy Viktor Khristenko will inform the meeting of projects of an investment programme in the power industry as well as financial plans of the Unified Energy Systems of Russia Power Company (RAO EES Rossii) and the Rosenergoatom Concern.

It is planned to channel the main investments in the power industry to build the most important energy projects: the Bureya hydropower station, Kaliningrad heat and power station, Sochi heat and power station, Irganskaya hydropower station, Zelenchugskaya hydropower station and Ivanovskaya district power station.

The nuclear power industry will channel its investments to build the Kalininskaya and Volgodonskaya nuclear power plants. The companies plan to use part of investments to develop the operating power transmission systems and to ensure non-stop operation of power systems.

All in all, the investment programme of the RAO EES Rossii holding may rise up to 129 billion roubles in 2005 (it totaled 102.4 billion roubles this year). On the contrary, the programme of the Rosenergoatom Concern will slide from 26.5 billion roubles to 23.6 billion roubles. According to the source, the drop is attributed to the fact that the concern �does not plan to put into operation major projects in 2005�.

As for restructuring the power industry, the source noted that the cabinet would not discuss this item at its Thursday meeting, since a special government meeting will deal with this question on December 2. The cabinet will discuss then a chance of privatizing wholesale generating companies to be created under the reform of RAO EES Rossii as well as the question on boosting the market of free power sales.

According to the source, the market sells now eight percent of electricity, while the maximum level is set at 15 percent. �The sector of free trade should be boosted,� the source stressed.


Return to Menu


2.
Russia to loose $33 billion due to spent nuclear fuel import
Bellona Foundation
11/11/2004
(for personal use only)


According to the new study on the economical aspects of the Russian Atomic Agency plans on spent nuclear fuel import, the unaccounted expenses would be $33.87 billion, daily Noviye Izvestia reported. This information is published in the report by Konyashkin (Department of Natural Resources of Tomsk Region Administration) and Malyshev (Tomsk State Architect-Construction University). The report was presented at the international conference �Radioactivity and human environment�, which took place in Tomsk, Siberia, from 20 to 23 October. The Russian Federal Agency on Atomic Energy was one of the organisers of the conference.

While planning to earn billions on spent nuclear fuel import, the Minatom�s specialists forgot to take into account disposal of the low-, medium- and high-level liquid radioactive waste activity. Such waste would be definitely generated during foreign spent nuclear fuel reprocessing in Russia. Disposal of this waste would additionally require $3.62 billion. Besides, the storage of the spent fuel during 260 years was not counted as well as plutonium storage during 50 years what requires $4.8 billion and $24 billion respectively. Minatom planned to reprocess the part of the fuel and generate plutonium. The major part of the imported spent fuel will be stored and not reprocessed in Russia.

The Minatom�s specialists claimed it would be possible to earn $20 billion during 10 years thanks to the import of 20 thousand tonne of the spent nuclear fuel. Russia should have earned $4 billion already by 2003. But according to co-chairman of Ecodefense group Vladimir Slivyak, all operations with imported spent nuclear fuel from 2001 to 2003 let Minatom earn just $100m.




Return to Menu


K.  Nuclear Safety

1.
Baikonur is being purified
Kazakhstan News Bulletin
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


Sanitation of radioactive waste is being completed in the space launch complex Baikonur, reports our correspondent.

During one month the brigade of Russian scientific association Radom has been working in Baikonur. In the end of October Kazakhstani specialists from Semipalatinsk nuclear testing ground transported from Baikonur the main part of equipment containing the sources of ionizing emission. Now together with Russian colleagues they are to proceed disposal of waste.

According to the information of the press service of the Vympel Center of exploitation and testing, despite the old agreement of Russia and Kazakhstan on liquidation of the ionizing emission sources storage, the project has been realized only now.


Return to Menu


2.
Russia can guarantee safety of nuclear weapons - Ivanov
Interfax
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


Russia can guarantee the safety of its nuclear arsenals, said Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov.

"We possess everything necessary to safely protect our nuclear arsenals from any forms of unsanctioned access and to prevent possible accidents," Ivanov said at a meeting of the armed forces' top brass in Moscow on Wednesday.

In support of this statement, Ivanov cited outcomes of the Accident-2004 special tactical exercises. "These exercises were conducted together with the Federal Atomic Energy Agency at a Defense Ministry site located in the Murmansk region," the minister said.

The exercises were monitored by 49 representatives from 17 NATO countries, Ivanov said. "Contrary to statements that we have problems providing security for our nuclear weapons, which are made abroad from time to time, our partners in the NATO-Russia Council could see the opposite with their own eyes," he said.


Return to Menu


L.  Official Statements

1.
Russian President Vladimir Putin�s Opening Speech at the Meeting of the Leading Personnel of the Russian Armed Forces, Moscow, Defence Ministry
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
11/18/2004
(for personal use only)


Generals, admirals, and officers,

At our traditional meeting today we will summarise the results and outline the main areas of development of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

I would like to say right now that I judge the work of the military department this year to be satisfactory. Our plans are gradually being realised, and our main policy is for fundamental development of the army and navy, to reequip them and strengthen their personnel. We have determined these tasks to be vital both for the Armed Forces and for the country as a whole. We have determined this, because for us it is obvious: effective, efficient Armed Forces are a very important factor that protects Russia from any forms of military and political pressure or potential aggression. A factor that to a large degree is important to strengthen our position in the world.

I would like to note that this year was in many ways a decisive one for realising political decisions in the sphere of military organisation. I want to give my thanks for the fact that this work was carried out energetically and at the necessary level. The structure of the Defence Ministry has become more functional, and the military training of the army and navy has become more intensive, which is very important. There are some errors, but the troops showed their increasing capabilities in large-scale training, including with the participation of our foreign partners. We have achieved noticeable progress in cooperation with our allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organisation. The deployment of Russian bases has seriously strengthened the system of collective security in Central Asia. It is clear that with this help, conditions are being created to neutralise terrorist and extremists attacks in the region, and on the whole the defence potential of Russia and its allies in the southern strategic area is increasing.

Dear comrades! The level and scale of tasks before the ministry require active work across the whole spectrum of military organisation.

At the same time, I would direct your attention to a number of key areas.

Firstly: by the end of 2005 we must completely bring the personnel, structure and number of troops into line with the nature and tendencies of existing and predicted threats.

Secondly: the primary task of the interior bodies is still to increase the efficiency of troops, mainly of alert units and formations, units which are designed to be the backbone, the primary strike force of our army. I would ask you to always remember that military training should take into account modern experience and tendencies in the development of military art.

Thirdly: we have taken significant decisions in equipping troops with new arms and military equipment. These programmes have already been put into practice. Positive examples I can name are the work on a base version of the rocket complex of the Land Forces, the creation of a new generation of infantry weapons, means for individual defence, and the latest successful tests of the naval nuclear rocket system.

In reequipping the army, we are guided by the significant increase in financial and economic capabilities. The growth in expenses on technical equipment of troops planned for 2005 will exceed the figures for recent years by more than third.

I must tell you that these resources, even though they rely on the growing capabilities of the economy, as I have already said, are not easy to allocate. They are taken from the social sphere, from the economy itself, which could develop more swiftly if it were not for the requirements that we are discussing. We realise that these are compulsory measures, and that we must support, and must continue to support, the army and navy. The issue is only that these resources need to be spent assiduously and effectively, and made use of economically, ensuring the maximum return.

In connection with this, we must also complete the move to uniform systems of base and technical protection for the army and navy, and other law-enforcement structures.

And finally, the last point. The development of the system of social security for the Armed Forces is one of the most important tasks in one of the most important areas of our activity. This issue was and remains the founding stone of our military organisation, in increasing the effectiveness and prestige of the Armed Forces. The decision to increase the salary of soldiers has been passed. Along with this, I ask you to pay attention to and take under special control the realisation of the programme of accumulated mortgage loans to soldiers, and the broadening of the service housing fund. I would note that the according funds have been provided for in the budget, and the Government has allocated an additional 2 billion rubles to this.

In conclusion, I would like to stress: in modernising military organisation of the state, it is important not to lose the rate that has been achieved. Our actions must be consistent and timely. Only in this way can we strengthen the defence potential and security of the country, and ensure steady and stable development for it.

I would like to thank you for your work, for your service. I am certain that you will continue to carry out the tasks set before you efficiently and to a high standard.

Thank you very much, and thank you for your attention.


Return to Menu


2.
White House acknowledges Russian nuclear modernization, lauds close friendship [excerpted]
Department of State
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)


White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said that Russian President Vladimir Putin's announcement that it was modernizing the nuclear component of its military is "not something that we look at as new" and that Russia is a valued ally as the two countries address terrorism and nuclear arms reductions.

"We are very well aware of their long-standing modernization efforts for their military," McClellan told reporters at a November 17 press conference.

According to news reports, Putin announced November 17 Russia's intention to develop and deploy new nuclear rocket systems.

"[I]t is something that they have talked about before," he said, stressing that the news came as no surprise. "We are allies now in the global war on terrorism."

McClellan lauded the close relationship between President Bush and President Putin that has allowed them, he says, "to move beyond some of the issues of the past" and to work constructively together on joint agreements to "significantly reduce" the two countries' nuclear arsenals.

"Understand we have a very different relationship than we did during the Cold War ... We both recognize the need to no longer have that size of a nuclear arsenal, and that's what we're working together on to reduce," McClellan said.

This revitalized relationship with Russia, McClellan said, enables the United States "to speak very directly to our Russian friends about those issues" relating to nuclear arms reductions.
[�]


Return to Menu


3.
Remarks to the Joint Consultative Group: U.S. Remains Firmly Committed to Adapted Conventional Arms Treaty
Stephen G. Rademaker
Department of State
11/9/2004
(for personal use only)


Mr. Chairman, It is always a great pleasure for me to return to Vienna and it is a special privilege to be able to address the Joint Consultative Group today. The work you do is essential to the effective implementation of the CFE Treaty and I want to express the thanks of the United States government for the time and effort all of you put into your important work.

In my conversations here over the past day it has come to my attention that some are questioning the continued commitment of my government to entry into force of the adapted treaty. Indeed, there appears to be an allegation that during a recent visit to Moscow I told my Russian counterparts that the United States is no longer interested in the adapted treaty. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Mr. Chairman, the United States stands firmly by the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and looks forward to the entry into force of the adapted CFE Treaty. This has been our position since the Agreement on Adaptation was signed at Istanbul in 1999 and it is our position today. We and our NATO allies reiterated NATO's "commitment to the CFE Treaty as a cornerstone of European security," most recently at the Istanbul NATO Summit last June. There can be no question that the United States and the NATO alliance support both the current and adapted CFE Treaties.

At the same time, the United States and NATO have made clear consistently since the Agreement on Adaptation was signed in the context of the 1999 CFE Final Act that fulfillment of the Istanbul Commitments on Georgia and Moldova is a prerequisite for NATO states to move forward on ratification of the adapted Treaty. Thus, in Moldova, the resumption and completion of the withdrawal of ammunition would be a key step toward fulfillment of Russia's commitment to withdraw its forces from Moldova. And with regard to Georgia, we urge the two sides to resume their meetings aimed at resolving remaining issues relating to the duration of the Russian presence at Batumi and Akhatkalaki and on the status of Russian forces at Gudauta.

The United States' offer of financial support to efforts to achieve fulfillment of these remaining Istanbul commitments still stands and represents a tangible sign of our commitment to move forward with the ratification and entry into force of the adapted Treaty. We also stand prepared to work with our friends on other measures that can have the effect of facilitating implementation of the Istanbul Commitments.

Mr. Chairman, we are watching with interest in Washington the discussions the JCG is having on the armored infantry fighting vehicle (AIFV) known as the BRM-1K. As you know, this equipment item was declared as an AIFV at signature of the CFE Treaty in 1990, as a conscious and specific result of the negotiations, and has been treated as such since that time. The BRM-1K is limited by the Treaty, and is listed in the Protocol on Existing Types, which is itself an integral part of the Treaty as stated in Article I. We were concerned when the Russian Federation unilaterally announced on 29 June 2004 that it would no longer account for BRM-lKs as AIFVs in its equipment data, but only as AIFV look-alikes. This action is a fundamental departure from agreed counting rules and would cause the accounting of Russia's holdings of Treaty-limited equipment to be inaccurate. Moreover, it undermines one of the basic and essential concepts of the CFE Treaty -- that is, a specific set of limitations on holdings of stipulated types of offensive military equipment subject to rigorous verification. I urge the Russian Federation to look closely at this issue again and use the JCG's discussion to reaffirm that Russia intends to count this piece of equipment as it should be counted.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you and your distinguished colleagues for your attention and wish you success in your important tasks. The United States looks forward to the day, hopefully not too far off, when our countries will begin implementing the adapted CFE Treaty.


Return to Menu


M.  Links of Interest

1.
U.S. Unhappy With Worldwide Response to WMD Resolution
Wade Boese
Arms Control Association
11/17/2004
(for personal use only)
http://www.armscontrol.org/aca/midmonth/2004/November/WMDResolution.asp


Return to Menu


DISCLAIMER: Nuclear News is presented for informational purposes only. Views presented in any given article are those of the individual author or source and not of RANSAC. RANSAC takes no responsibility for the technical accuracy of information contained in any article presented in Nuclear News.

RANSAC's Nuclear News is compiled two to three times weekly. To be automatically removed from our mailing list, click on the following link: Remove Me From The List

If you have questions/comments/concerns, please reply to news@216.119.87.134



Section Menu:
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999


© 2007 Partnership for Global Security. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement.