Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham" in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Recent Developments in U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Cooperation [October 13, 2016]
"On October 3, 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a decree suspending participation in a bilateral U.S.- Russia weapons plutonium disposal agreement (the 2000 Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, or PMDA). The next day, Russia suspended participation in a 2013 cooperative agreement on nuclear- and energy-related research and terminated a third from 2010 on exploring options for converting research reactors from weapons-usable fuel. These agreements are part of a suite of nonproliferation and nuclear security agreements the two countries concluded starting in the 1990s to prevent diversion of weapons-usable nuclear materials. Russia's recent steps contribute to a continuing decline in U.S.-Russian nonproliferation cooperation that accelerated in 2014 after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, Russia has not suspended its participation in the New START arms control agreement that reduces nuclear warheads. [...] The Russian suspensions come at a time of increased tension in U.S.-Russia relations due to the collapse of a recent ceasefire agreement in Syria the two countries had brokered. The same day Russia suspended the PMDA, the State Department announced the United States was suspending its 'participation in bilateral channels with Russia' to sustain the Cessation of Hostilities in Syria, citing Russia's failure 'to live up to its own commitments.' In a statement on the PMDA suspension, the Russian Foreign Minister said Moscow's decision was 'a signal to Washington that it cannot use the language of force, sanctions and ultimatums with Russia while continuing to selectively cooperate with our country only when it benefits the U.S.'"
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Welt, Cory
2016-10-13
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [March 2, 2011]
"After several decades of widespread stagnation, nuclear power is attracting renewed interest. New license applications for 30 reactors have been announced in the United States, and another 541 are under construction, planned, or proposed around the world. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by tax credits, loan guarantees, and other incentives in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, as well as by concerns about carbon emissions from competing fossil fuel technologies. A major concern about the global expansion of nuclear power is the potential spread of nuclear fuel cycle technology--particularly uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing--that could be used for nuclear weapons. Despite 30 years of effort to limit access to uranium enrichment, several undeterred states pursued clandestine nuclear programs, the A.Q. Khan black market network's sales to Iran and North Korea representing the most egregious examples. However, concern over the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies may be offset by support for nuclear power as a cleaner and more secure alternative to fossil fuels. Both the Bush and Obama Administrations have expressed optimism that advanced nuclear technologies being developed by the Department of Energy may offer proliferation resistance. Both Administrations have also pursued international incentives and agreements intended to minimize the spread of fuel cycle facilities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Holt, Mark; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Andrews, Anthony
2011-03-02
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [March 12, 2010]
"Since 1995, the United States has provided North Korea with over $1.2 billion in assistance, of which about 60% has paid for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. As of early March 2010, the United States is not providing any aid to North Korea, except for a small medical assistance program. The Obama Administration, along with the South Korean government, have said that they would be willing to provide large-scale aid if North Korea takes steps to irreversibly dismantle its nuclear program. The main vehicle for persuading Pyongyang to denuclearize is the Six-Party Talks, involving North Korea, the United States, China, South Korea, Japan, and Russia. The Talks have not met since late 2008. U.S. energy and food aid to North Korea fell significantly in the mid-2000s, bottoming out at zero in 2006. The Bush Administration resumed energy aid in the fall of 2007 after progress was made in the Six-Party Talks -- involving North Korea, the United States, China, Japan, and Russia -- over North Korea's nuclear program. The United States and other countries began providing heavy fuel oil (HFO) in return for Pyongyang freezing and disabling its plutonium-based nuclear facilities. However, no additional energy assistance has been provided through the Six-Party process since North Korea withdrew from the talks in 2009, following condemnation and sanctions by the U.N. Security Council for North Korea's April 2009 launch of a suspected longrange missile and May 2009 test of a nuclear device."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Manyin, Mark E.
2010-03-12
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [September 9, 2009]
"Since 1995, the United States has provided North Korea with over $1.2 billion in assistance, about 60% of which has paid for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. U.S. aid fell significantly in the mid-2000s, bottoming out at zero in 2006. The Bush Administration resumed energy aid in the fall of 2007, after progress was made in the Six-Party Talks over North Korea's nuclear program. [...]. Some have speculated that a desire for increased food donations led Pyongyang to moderate its behavior toward the United States and South Korea in the summer of 2009. If so, the Obama Administration must make a number of decisions, including: whether to resume food aid; if so, whether to condition all or part of its assistance on expansive levels of access and monitoring; and whether to pressure South Korea and China to impose similar conditions on their food aid. [...]. This report will be updated periodically to track changes in U.S. provision of aid to North Korea."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Manyin, Mark E.
2009-09-09
-
Assistance to North Korea [May 20, 2009]
"Since 1995, the United States has provided North Korea with over $1.2 billion in assistance, about 60% of which has paid for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. U.S. aid fell significantly in the mid-2000s, bottoming out at zero in 2006. The Bush Administration resumed energy aid in the fall of 2007, after progress was made in the Six-Party Talks over North Korea's nuclear program. […]. North Korea's failed satellite launch on April 5, 2009, which used ballistic missile-related technology, led to U.N. Security Council condemnation. In response, North Korea said it would abandon the Six-Party Talks, would restart its nuclear facilities and asked international and U.S. inspectors to leave the country. The United States had been providing technical assistance to North Korea to help in the nuclear disablement process. In 2008, Congress took legislative steps to legally enable the President to give expanded assistance for this purpose. In its FY2009 Supplemental Appropriations budget request, the Obama Administration has asked for over $150 million for North Korea-related energy and denuclearization assistance. This money would supplement existing resources in the event of a breakthrough with North Korea. In separate committee actions, House and Senate appropriators denied these requests. However, they did approve monies for the State Department's general emergency non-proliferation fund that the Administration could use in North Korea. […]. This report will be updated periodically to track changes in U.S. provision of aid to North Korea."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Manyin, Mark E.
2009-05-20
-
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements [February 2, 2010]
"Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation slowed, however, in the 1990s, and the Bush Administration usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. But the Obama Administration has resumed bilateral negotiations with Russia and pledged its support for a number of multilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Kerr, Paul K.
2010-02-02
-
Japan's Nuclear Future: Policy Debate, Prospects and U.S. Interests [February 19, 2009]
From the Document: "Japan, traditionally one of the most prominent advocates of the international non-proliferation regime, has consistently pledged to forswear nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, evolving circumstances in Northeast Asia, particularly North Korea's nuclear test in October 2006 and China's ongoing military modernization drive, have raised new questions about Japan's vulnerability to potential adversaries and, therefore, the appeal of developing an independent nuclear deterrent. The previous taboo within the Japanese political community of discussing a nuclear weapons capability appears to have been broken, as several officials and opinion leaders have urged an open debate on the topic. Despite these factors, a strong consensus--both in Japan and among Japan watchers--remains that Japan will not pursue the nuclear option in the short-to-medium term. This paper examines the prospects for Japan pursuing a nuclear weapons capability by assessing the existing technical infrastructure of its extensive civilian nuclear energy program. It explores the range of challenges that Japan would have to overcome to transform its current program into a military program. Presently, Japan appears to lack several of the prerequisites for a full-scale nuclear weapons deterrent: expertise on bomb design, reliable delivery vehicles, an intelligence program to protect and conceal assets, and sites for nuclear testing. In addition, a range of legal and political restraints on Japan's development of nuclear weapons, including averse public and elite opinion, restrictive domestic laws and practices, and the negative diplomatic consequences of abandoning its traditional approach is analyzed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Chanlett-Avery, Emma
2009-02-19
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [Updated September 3, 2008]
This CRS report discusses the policy implications associated with managing nuclear power. "After several decades of decline and disfavor, nuclear power is attracting renewed interest. New permit applications for 30 reactors have been filed in the United States, and another 150 are planned or proposed globally, with about a dozen more already under construction. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by provisions in the 2005 Energy Policy Act authorizing streamlined licensing that combine construction and operating permits, and tax credits for production from advanced nuclear power facilities. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Energy proposes to spend billions of dollars to develop the next generation of nuclear power technology. Expanding global access to nuclear power, nevertheless, has the potential to lead to the spread of sensitive nuclear technology. Despite 30 years of effort to limit access to uranium enrichment, several undeterred states pursued clandestine nuclear programs; the A.Q. Khan black market network's sales to Iran and North Korea representing the most egregious examples. Concern over the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies, combined with a growing consensus that the world must seek alternatives to dwindling and polluting fossil fuels, may be giving way to optimism that advanced nuclear technologies may offer proliferation resistance. Proposals offering countries access to nuclear power and thus the fuel cycle have ranged from a formal commitment by these countries to forswear enrichment and reprocessing technology, to a de facto approach in which a state does not operate fuel cycle facilities but makes no explicit commitment, to no restrictions at all."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2008-09-03
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [June 1, 2011]
"Since 1995, the United States has provided North Korea with over $1.2 billion in assistance, of which about 60% has paid for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. As of early February 2011, the United States is not providing any aid to North Korea, except for a small medical assistance program. The Obama Administration, along with the South Korean government, have said that they would be willing to provide large-scale development aid if North Korea takes steps to irreversibly dismantle its nuclear program. […] This report will be updated periodically to track changes in U.S. provision of aid to North Korea."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Manyin, Mark E.
2011-06-01
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [June 25, 2012]
"Should the United States resume food, energy, and/or denuclearization assistance to North Korea? This is the major issue facing Congress in considering the provision of aid to Pyongyang. Between 1995 and 2008, the United States provided North Korea with over $1.3 billion in assistance: just over 50% for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. Since early 2009, the United States has provided virtually no aid to North Korea. On February 29, 2012, after bilateral talks with the United States, North Korea announced a moratorium on long-range missile launches, nuclear tests, and nuclear activities (including uranium enrichment) at its Yongbyon nuclear facilities. It also said it would allow international nuclear inspectors to return to North Korea. The United States announced it would provide North Korea with 240,000 metric tons (MT) of food aid. However, the so-called 'Leap Day deal' unraveled after North Korea on April 13, 2012, launched, in defiance of United Nations resolutions, a rocket to place an 'earth observation satellite' into orbit. U.S. officials say that during bilateral negotiations they warned their counterparts that any rocket launch using ballistic missile technology would jeopardize the agreement."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manyin, Mark E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2012-06-25
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [Updated March 7, 2008]
"After several decades of decline and disfavor, nuclear power is attracting renewed interest. New permit applications for 30 reactors have been filed in the United States, and another 150 are planned or proposed globally, with about a dozen more already under construction. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by provisions in the 2005 Energy Policy Act authorizing streamlined licensing that combine construction and operating permits, and tax credits for production from advanced nuclear power facilities. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Energy proposes to spend billions of dollars to develop the next generation of nuclear power technology. Expanding global access to nuclear power, nevertheless, has the potential to lead to the spread of sensitive nuclear technology. Despite 30 years of effort to limit access to uranium enrichment, several undeterred states pursued clandestine nuclear programs; the A.Q. Khan black market network's sales to Iran and North Korea representing the most egregious examples. Concern over the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies, combined with a growing consensus that the world must seek alternatives to dwindling and polluting fossil fuels, may be giving way to optimism that advanced nuclear technologies may offer proliferation resistance. Proposals offering countries access to nuclear power and thus the fuel cycle have ranged from a formal commitment by these countries to forswear enrichment and reprocessing technology, to a de facto approach in which a state does not operate fuel cycle facilities but makes no explicit commitment, to no restrictions at all."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Squassoni, Sharon A.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Parillo, Jill Marie
2008-03-07
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [September 12, 2011]
"After several decades of widespread stagnation, nuclear power has attracted renewed interest in recent years. New license applications for 30 reactors have been announced in the United States, and another 541 are under construction, planned, or proposed around the world. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by tax credits, loan guarantees, and other incentives in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, as well as by concerns about carbon emissions from competing fossil fuel technologies. A major concern about the global expansion of nuclear power is the potential spread of nuclear fuel cycle technology--particularly uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing--that could be used for nuclear weapons. Despite 30 years of effort to limit access to uranium enrichment, several undeterred states pursued clandestine nuclear programs, the A.Q. Khan black market network's sales to Iran and North Korea representing the most egregious examples. However, concern over the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies may be offset by support for nuclear power as a cleaner and more secure alternative to fossil fuels. […] Congress will have a considerable role in at least four areas of oversight related to fuel cycle proposals. The first is providing funding and oversight of U.S. domestic programs related to expanding nuclear energy in the United States. The second area is policy direction and/or funding for international measures to assure supply. A third set of policy issues may arise in the context of U.S. participation in IFNEC [International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation] or related initiatives. A fourth area in which Congress plays a key role is in the approval of nuclear cooperation agreements. Significant interest in these issues is expected to continue in the 112th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Andrews, Anthony; Holt, Mark
2011-09-12
-
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements [February 20, 2013]
"Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation for many of these agreements slowed during the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. But the Obama Administration resumed bilateral negotiations with Russia and pledged its support for a number of multilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship. At the same time, however, the two sides began to cooperate on securing and eliminating Soviet-era nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Through these efforts, the United States allocates more than $1 billion each year to threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union. However, these programs may slow or stall in the next few years."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Kerr, Paul K.
2013-02-20
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [October 19, 2012]
"After several decades of widespread stagnation, nuclear power has attracted renewed interest in recent years. New license applications for 30 reactors have been announced in the United States, and another 548 are under construction, planned, or proposed around the world. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by tax credits, loan guarantees, and other incentives in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, as well as by concerns about carbon emissions from competing fossil fuel technologies. […] Congress will have a considerable role in at least four areas of oversight related to fuel cycle proposals. The first is providing funding and oversight of U.S. domestic programs related to expanding nuclear energy in the United States. The second area is policy direction and/or funding for international measures to assure supply. A third set of policy issues may arise in the context of U.S. participation in IFNEC (International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation) or related initiatives. A fourth area in which Congress plays a key role is in the approval of nuclear cooperation agreements. Significant interest in these issues is expected to continue in the 112th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Holt, Mark; Andrews, Anthony; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2012-10-19
-
Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues [November 30, 2011]
"Pakistan's nuclear arsenal probably consists of approximately 90-110 nuclear warheads, although it could be larger. Islamabad is producing fissile material, adding to related production facilities, and deploying additional delivery vehicles. These steps could enable Pakistan to undertake both quantitative and qualitative improvements to its nuclear arsenal. Whether and to what extent Pakistan's current expansion of its nuclear weapons-related facilities is a response to the 2008 U.S.-India nuclear cooperation agreement is unclear. Islamabad does not have a public, detailed nuclear doctrine, but its 'minimum credible deterrent' is widely regarded as designed to dissuade India from taking military action against Pakistan. Pakistan has in recent years taken a number of steps to increase international confidence in the security of its nuclear arsenal. In addition to overhauling nuclear command and control structures since September 11, 2001, Islamabad has implemented new personnel security programs. Moreover, Pakistani and some U.S. officials argue that, since the 2004 revelations about a procurement network run by former Pakistani nuclear official A. Q. Khan, Islamabad has taken a number of steps to improve its nuclear security and to prevent further proliferation of nuclearrelated technologies and materials. A number of important initiatives, such as strengthened export control laws, improved personnel security, and international nuclear security cooperation programs have improved Pakistan's security situation in recent years. However, instability in Pakistan has called the extent and durability of these reforms into question. Some observers fear radical takeover of a government that possesses a nuclear bomb, or proliferation by radical sympathizers within Pakistan's nuclear complex in case of a breakdown of controls. While U.S. and Pakistani officials continue to express confidence in controls over Pakistan's nuclear weapons, continued instability in the country could impact these safeguards. For a broader discussion, see CRS Report RL33498, 'Pakistan-U.S. Relations', by K. Alan Kronstadt. This report will be updated. This report updates a previous version published August 8, 2011."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kerr, Paul K.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2011-11-30
-
Extending NASA's Exemption from the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act [May 8, 2008]
"The Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (INA) was enacted to help stop foreign transfers to Iran of weapons of mass destruction, missile technology, and advanced conventional weapons technology, particularly from Russia. Section 6 of the INA banned U.S. payments to Russia in connection with the International Space Station (ISS) unless the U.S. President determined that Russia was taking steps to prevent such proliferation. When the President in 2004 announced that the Space Shuttle would be retired in 2010, the Russian Soyuz became the only vehicle available after that date to transport astronauts to and from the ISS. In 2005 Congress amended INA to exempt Soyuz flights to the ISS from the Section 6 ban through 2011. It also extended the provisions to Syria and North Korea, and renamed it the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act (INKSNA). NASA has now asked Congress to extend the exemption for the life of the ISS, or until U.S. crew transport vehicles become operational. As in 2005, an exemption would be needed before payments could be made to Russia since the President has not made a determination pursuant to Section 6(b) of the INKSNA regarding Russian nonproliferation policy or proliferation activities to Iran, North Korea or Syria. Since 2005, Russia has stepped up cooperation with the United States and countries over Iran's nuclear program. President Bush has praised Russian President Putin for his 'leadership' in offering a solution to the Iranian nuclear negotiations."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Behrens, Carl E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2008-05-08
-
Japan's Nuclear Future: Policy Debate, Prospects, and U.S. Interests [May 9, 2008]
From the Document: "This paper examines the prospects for Japan pursuing a nuclear weapons capability by assessing the existing technical infrastructure of its extensive civilian nuclear energy program. It explores the range of challenges that Japan would have to overcome to transform its current program into a military program. Presently, Japan appears to lack several of the prerequisites for a full-scale nuclear weapons deterrent: expertise on bomb design, reliable delivery vehicles, an intelligence program to protect and conceal assets, and sites for nuclear testing. […]. Any reconsideration and/or shift of Japan's policy of nuclear abstention would have significant implications for U.S. policy in East Asia. In this report, an examination of the factors driving Japan's decision-making--most prominently, the strength of the U.S. security guarantee--analyzes how the nuclear debate in Japan affects U.S. security interests in the region. Globally, Japan's withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) would damage the world's most durable international non-proliferation regime. […]. Bilaterally, assuming that Japan made the decision without U.S. support, the move could indicate a lack of trust in the U.S. commitment to defend Japan. An erosion in the U.S.-Japan alliance could upset the geopolitical balance in East Asia, a shift that could strengthen China's position as an emerging hegemonic power. All of these ramifications would likely be deeply destabilizing for the security of the Asia Pacific region and beyond."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Chanlett-Avery, Emma
2008-05-09
-
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements [Updated April 9, 2008]
"Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation slowed, however, in the 1990s, and during the past six years, the Bush Administration has usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. This report replaces CRS Report RL30033. It will be updated annually, or as needed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Kerr, Paul K.
2008-04-09
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [March 20, 2012]
"Should the United States resume food, energy, and/or denuclearization assistance to North Korea? This is the major issue facing Congress in considering the provision of aid to Pyongyang. Between 1995 and 2008, the United States provided North Korea with over $1.3 billion in assistance: just over 50% for food aid and about 40% for energy assistance. Since early 2009, the United States has provided virtually no aid to North Korea. In late February 2012, after bilateral talks with the United States, North Korea announced a moratorium on long-range missile launches, nuclear tests, and nuclear activities (including uranium enrichment) at its Yongbyon nuclear facilities. It also said it would allow international nuclear inspectors to return to North Korea. The United States announced it would provide North Korea with 240,000 metric tons (MT) of food aid. However, two and a half week[s] later, the agreement appeared in jeopardy after North Korea announced that in April it would launch a satellite, a move that would defy a number [of] United Nations resolutions targeting North Korea. U.S. officials said that a satellite launch would 'abrogate' the February agreement. […] The Obama Administration, along with the South Korean government, has said that it would be willing to provide large-scale development aid if North Korea takes steps to irreversibly dismantle its nuclear program. This report will be updated periodically to track changes in U.S. provision of aid to North Korea."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manyin, Mark E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2012-03-20
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [November 1, 2007]
"After several decades of decline and disfavor, nuclear power is attracting renewed interest. New permit applications for 30 reactors have been filed in the United States, and another 150 are planned or proposed globally, with about a dozen more already under construction. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by provisions in the 2005 Energy Policy Act authorizing streamlined licensing that combine construction and operating permits, and tax credits for production from advanced nuclear power facilities. […] Despite 30 years of effort to limit access to uranium enrichment, several undeterred states pursued clandestine nuclear programs; the A.Q. Khan black market network's sales to Iran and North Korea representing the most egregious examples. Concern over the spread of enrichment and reprocessing technologies, combined with a growing consensus that the world must seek alternatives to dwindling and polluting fossil fuels, may be giving way to optimism that advanced nuclear technologies may offer proliferation resistance. […]Congress will have a considerable role in at least four areas of oversight related to fuel cycle proposals. The first is providing funding and oversight of U.S. domestic programs related to expanding nuclear energy in the United States. The second area is policy direction and/or funding for international measures to assure supply. A third set of policy issues may arise in the context of implementing the international component of GNEP. A fourth area in which Congress plays a key role is in the approval of nuclear cooperation agreements."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Squassoni, Sharon A.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Parillo, Jill Marie
2007-11-01
-
Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power [Updated January 30, 2008]
"After several decades of decline and disfavor, nuclear power is attracting renewed interest. New permit applications for 30 reactors have been filed in the United States, and another 150 are planned or proposed globally, with about a dozen more already under construction. In the United States, interest appears driven, in part, by provisions in the 2005 Energy Policy Act authorizing streamlined licensing that combine construction and operating permits, and tax credits for production from advanced nuclear power facilities. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Energy proposes to spend billions of dollars to develop the next generation of nuclear power technology."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Holt, Mark; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Andrews, Anthony
2008-01-30
-
Foreign Assistance to North Korea [April 26, 2012]
"For much of 2011 and in the first months of 2012, it appeared likely that the 112th Congress would confront the issue of whether to support or reject proposals for resuming food, energy, and/or denuclearization assistance programs to North Korea. On February 29, 2012, the Obama Administration and North Korea announced they had reached two related agreements. In the first, North Korea announced it would abide by a moratorium on testing and allow international monitoring of key parts of its nuclear program. The second was a U.S. announcement that it would resume large-scale U.S. food aid-termed 'nutritional assistance'-with guarantees for enhanced monitoring to increase the likelihood that deliveries reach their intended recipients. The two steps appear to have been largely worked out in bilateral meetings in 2011. The December 19, 2011, announcement of the death of Kim Jong-il, North Korea's former supreme leader, halted the talks for a few months. However, the movement toward a restart of U.S.-North Korean diplomacy was halted less than three weeks after the 'Leap Day deal' was reached. On March 16, North Korea announced that it would launch an 'earth observation satellite' in April. During their discussions with North Korea in 2011, U.S. officials reportedly warned their North Korean counterparts that the United States would regard a satellite launch as a violation of the agreement the two sides were negotiating. Such a launch would defy a number of United Nations resolutions, which demand North Korea refrain from 'any launch using ballistic missile technology.' After North Korea proceeded with the launch on April 13, the United States suspended its portion of the Leap Day arrangement. Thereafter, North Korea followed suit, and reports emerged that North Korea was making preparations to test a nuclear weapon. Thus, barring an unexpected breakthrough, it appears there is little likelihood the Obama Administration will provide assistance to North Korea in the near future."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Manyin, Mark E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2012-04-26
-
2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference: Key Issues and Implications [May 3, 2010]
"The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which entered into force in 1970 and was extended indefinitely in 1995, is the centerpiece of international nuclear nonproliferation efforts. The NPT recognizes five nations (the United States, Russia, France, Britain, and China) as nuclear-weapon states; 189 countries are parties to the NPT. […]. Many see the 2010 NPT Review Conference, beginning on May 3, 2010, as an important test of the viability of the treaty and how it will evolve to meet new challenges. History suggests that the United States plays a leadership role in all aspects of the nonproliferation regime. The Obama Administration has emphasized in strategy documents that it views the NPT as the 'centerpiece' of the nonproliferation regime and has pledged to strengthen the treaty. The Administration sees a linkage between the disarmament and nonproliferation commitments under the treaty. The 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, for example, says that progress on arms control is 'a means of strengthening our ability to mobilize broad international support for the measures needed to reinforce the nonproliferation regime and secure materials worldwide.' The Nuclear Posture Review also says that the conditions for nuclear disarmament will not be possible without stronger proliferation controls. The ability of the Administration to garner international support for its proposals to strengthen the nonproliferation regime may be tested at the 2010 NPT Review Conference"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Kerr, Paul K.
2010-05-03
-
Implementation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1874 [October 8, 2010]
"The international community has imposed broad and far-reaching sanctions on North Korea (DPRK) through both the United Nations and national measures, but implementation has been uneven globally and in cases has diminished over time. An important challenge has been encouraging nations with substantial trade links to North Korea--particularly China, but also a range of nations that service as transshipment points for North Korean goods or that have financial institutions that deal with North Korean entities--to implement U.N. sanctions. Different nations interpret U.N. sanctions differently, and the degree to which they are followed hinges on a country's overall policy toward the North. The DPRK is conditioning the resumption of talks on its nuclear program on the lifting of U.N. sanctions. The March 26, 2010 sinking of the South Korean naval ship, the 'Cheonan', initially caused key players in North Korean diplomacy to back away from pushing implementation until the Security Council decided on its response to the incident. After that, the Cheonan sinking helped to coalesce country actions toward North Korea and was a turning point in implementing sanctions. In response to the attack, some countries, such as the United States and South Korea, imposed even stronger measures than required under U.N. Security Council resolutions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham; Chanlett-Avery, Emma; Manyin, Mark E. . . .
2010-10-08
-
U.S. - Russian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement: Issues for Congress [Updated June 26, 2008]
"The United States and Russia signed a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement on May 6, 2008. President Bush submitted the agreement to Congress on May 13. This report discusses key policy issues related to that agreement, including future nuclear energy cooperation with Russia, U.S.-Russian bilateral relations, nonproliferation cooperation and Russia's policies toward Iran. This report will be updated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2008-06-26
-
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements [July 15, 2013]
"Arms control and nonproliferation efforts are two of the tools that have occasionally been used to implement U.S. national security strategy. Although some believe these tools do little to restrain the behavior of U.S. adversaries, while doing too much to restrain U.S. military forces and operations, many other analysts see them as an effective means to promote transparency, ease military planning, limit forces, and protect against uncertainty and surprise. Arms control and nonproliferation efforts have produced formal treaties and agreements, informal arrangements, and cooperative threat reduction and monitoring mechanisms. The pace of implementation for many of these agreements slowed during the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration usually preferred unilateral or ad hoc measures to formal treaties and agreements to address U.S. security concerns. But the Obama Administration resumed bilateral negotiations with Russia and pledged its support for a number of multilateral arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship. At the same time, however, the two sides began to cooperate on securing and eliminating Soviet-era nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Through these efforts, the United States allocates more than $1 billion each year to threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union. However, these programs may slow or stall in the next few years."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Kerr, Paul K.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2013-07-15
-
Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response [June 24, 2014]
"Fighting continues across Syria, pitting government forces and their foreign allies against a range of anti-government insurgents, some of whom also are fighting amongst themselves. Since March 2011, the conflict has driven more than 2.8 million Syrians into neighboring countries as refugees (out of a total population of more than 22 million). Millions more Syrians are internally displaced and in need of humanitarian assistance, of which the United States remains the largest bilateral provider, with more than $2 billion in funding identified to date. The United States also has allocated a total of $287 million to date to provide nonlethal assistance to select groups. Neither pro-Asad forces nor their opponents appear capable of achieving outright victory in the short term. Improved coordination among some anti-government forces and attrition in government ranks make a swift reassertion of state control over all of Syria unlikely. Conflict between the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, a.k.a. ISIS) and other anti-Asad forces has intensified. The war in Syria is exacerbating local sectarian and political conflicts within Lebanon and Iraq, threatening national stability."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2014-06-24
-
Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response [May 5, 2014]
"Fighting continues across Syria, pitting government forces and their foreign allies against a range of anti-government insurgents, some of whom also are fighting amongst themselves. Since March 2011, the conflict has driven more than 2.7 million Syrians into neighboring countries as refugees (out of a total population of more than 22 million). Millions more Syrians are internally displaced and in need of humanitarian assistance, of which the United States remains the largest bilateral provider, with more than $1.7 billion in funding identified to date. U.S. nonlethal assistance to opposition forces was placed on hold in December 2013, as fighting in northern Syria disrupted mechanisms put in place to monitor and secure U.S. supplies. Administration officials have since resumed some assistance to select opposition groups and have allocated $287 million to date. Neither pro-Asad forces nor their opponents appear capable of consolidating their battlefield gains in Syria or achieving outright victory there in the short term. Improved coordination among some anti-government forces and attrition in government ranks make a swift reassertion of state control over all of Syria unlikely. Conflict between the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, a.k.a. ISIS) and other anti-Asad forces has intensified. The war in Syria is exacerbating local sectarian and political conflicts within Lebanon and Iraq, threatening national stability."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2014-05-05
-
Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements [April 28, 2014]
"The United States and Soviet Union began to sign agreements limiting their strategic offensive nuclear weapons in the early 1970s. Progress in negotiating and implementing these agreements was often slow, and subject to the tenor of the broader U.S.-Soviet relationship. As the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, the pace of negotiations quickened, with the two sides signing treaties limiting intermediate range and long-range weapons. But progress again slowed in the 1990s, as U.S. missile defense plans and a range of other policy conflicts intervened in the U.S.- Russian relationship. At the same time, however, the two sides began to cooperate on securing and eliminating Soviet-era nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Through these efforts, the United States allocates more than $1 billion each year to threat reduction programs in the former Soviet Union. However, these programs may slow or stall in the next few years. [...] The international community has also adopted a number of agreements that address non-nuclear weapons. [...] The Chemical Weapons and Biological Weapons Conventions sought to eliminate both of these types of weapons completely."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Kerr, Paul K.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2014-04-28
-
Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response [September 17, 2014]
"The summer 2014 offensive in neighboring Iraq by the insurgent terrorist group known as the Islamic State (IS, aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or ISIL/ISIS) has reshaped longstanding debates over U.S. policy toward the three-year old conflict in Syria. The Islamic State controls large areas of northeastern Syria, where it continues to clash with forces opposed to and aligned with the government of Bashar al Asad. Meanwhile, fighting continues in other parts of Syria, pitting government forces and their foreign allies against a range of anti-government insurgents, many of whom also are engaged in battles with IS forces. […] For the United States and others examining options for weakening the Islamic State, these conditions raise questions about how best to pursue new counterterrorism and regional security goals without strengthening the Syrian government relative to the opposition groups and civilians it has brutalized during the conflict. Similar questions arise in relation to options for countering the Islamic State without bolstering other anti-U.S. Islamist groups. At present, anti-Asad armed forces and their activist counterparts remain divided over tactics, strategy, and their long-term political goals for Syria, with some powerful Islamist forces seeking outcomes that are contrary in significant ways to stated U.S. preferences for Syria's political future. The United Nations Security Council also seeks continued Syrian government cooperation with efforts to verifiably end Syria's chemical weapons program. As of September 2014, all declared chemical weapons had been removed from Syria, and all declared materials of priority concern had been destroyed. Related facilities are set for destruction by March 2015."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchard, Christopher M.; Humud, Carla E.; Nikitin, Mary Beth Dunham
2014-09-17
