Amid Birthday, the U.S. Still Afraid About Nuclear Weapon

Iran via Bushehr powerplant, regardless “re-fresh commitment” by EU and the U.S. to starting again negotiation, may be able to produce enough material for a bomb before we could know it, let alone stop it. Negotiations between Iran and world powers on reviving a 2015 nuclear deal are set to resume next week in Qatar after the talks broke down in March. Without a deal, the US will have to focus on what it can control—speeding up its ability to detect and respond to a breakout. Next week (too), Biden visits the Middle East. But let’s check more details about nuclear issues. 

Of the 33 foreign-built nuclear power reactors whose construction has begun since 2000 (U.S. starting to set a military in the ground, at Afghanistan, but before 911), the United States has supplied only four. The U.S. role in the uranium enrichment sector has continued to decline, culminating in a total exit in 2013. As former Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman put it, ‘the US nuclear industry is hanging onto its global influence by a thread.’ 

As the American role in the foreign policy and marketplace declined, authoritarian rivals of the United States stepped in to fill this space – 19 of the 33 reactors exported since 2000 came from Russia and China. Russia remains the world’s largest producer of enriched uranium. Emblematic of these trends, the once dominant U.S. nuclear firm Westinghouse filed for bankruptcy in 2017. When the US senior-most representative involved in crafting foreign policy feels compelled to ask the agenda-driven head of a rogue foreign government to tell him what to do about nuclear capability, there is something very wrong in Washington why still terrorized another country when U.S. itself still the biggest nuclear arsenal in the universe. 

As a Reuters story put it in 2018, Rosatom, ‘has an order book worth $134 billion and contracts to build 22 nuclear reactors in nine countries over the next decade, Westinghouse [has] not a single one.’ The United States took preliminary steps to regain its share of global nuclear trade over the last few years. But leaders in Washington must surmount domestic barriers to make this strategy work. Autocratic dominance over the nuclear trade also has nonproliferation implications. If Russia & China impose weak safeguards and loose controls over foreign nuclear energy projects, this could increase the odds of proliferation as these countries gain more market share.  What (actually) led to the rise of this autocratic nuclear marketplace? 

First, deterrence. Iran thinks if they have a nuclear capability, Iran never again gets invaded, like Iraq (1980) or even Israel thinking thousands to (directly) invade Iran if Iran has a capability (on nuclear). So do a lot of countries in the world. Successful conclusion of the nuclear talks remains the best option for U.S. security interests, not to mention for overall stability of the Middle East, and hopefully Biden not forget about it. 

Two, several nuclear scientists like Abdul Qadeer Khan (passed away Oct 10th 2021) and another like him, selling his knowledge to buyers. 

Three, (mix of issue) the international incentives for major power rivals of the lone great power to compete for influence under unipolarity; and the domestic advantages autocratic leaders (Kim-Il Sung then Kim Jong Il and now Kim Jong Un; Pervez Musharraf; Khamenei; Putin himself; Hugo Chavez and now Nicolas Maduro) enjoy in the pursuit of geostrategic nuclear exports. 

If you want a war with Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, China and Venezuela tell me why and how it would benefit Americans? Every regional or global order in history has been touted by its architects as enlightened, noble, and a virtual act of beneficence. Yet they all reflect the underlying distribution of power (especially if nuclear capability is already used) and the interests of the most powerful. The current one does. Variation in the global distribution of power shapes the motivations state leaders face to pursue civil nuclear exports, making it more or less attractive as a foreign policy tool. Retaining the U.S. nuclear deterrent and ground forces umbrella for NATO, Biden should recognize that the U.S. cannot do everything it wants everywhere it wants, not only in European but also in the Middle East. August last year, America get kick out from Kabul. China must be the deployment focus, and wealthy Europe must finally pick up the slack.

Joe Biden, after celebrating Independence Day, is heading into a crap shoot in the Middle East. Israel (ad interim PM) Yair Lapid will be squeezing him hard and might even do something stupid, while the Saudis have little incentive to give the American president what he wants. Biden reportedly is fully prepared to confront the MBS Saudis on human rights issues but there is no indication that he will do likewise with the Israelis, who have been shooting dead Palestinians nearly every day, and gradually, prepare to massive operation-directly to Iran. So do Iran prepare more nuclear weapons to face Israel, whatever the cost. 

Israel (and America) must remind, Russia, a staunchest ally of Iran, holds a dominant grip on global supply chains for uranium conversion & enrichment capacity. The West needs to act now if it wants to be able to wean itself off those Russian nuclear supply chains in the future. Whether Russia and China prioritize nonproliferation as highly as the United States traditionally has will therefore play a major role in shaping the future nuclear landscape. 

Happy Birthday, America.