House Dems Propose $7 Billion Budget Cut
Jun 23, 2010

Will any of that cut come from defense?  

The plan has not been formally announced, but AP reports that House Democratic leaders will propose a $7 billion cut in President Barack Obama's fiscal 2011 budget.  The plan is expected to be attached to the rule for floor consideration of the supplemental, which could move this week

The House won’t pass a budget resolution this year, but sees its upcoming one-year spending plan as the “functional equivalent of a budget resolution.”  The plan will set the cap for the 12 regular fiscal 2011 appropriations bills and include selected other provisions.

It looks like few of those bills are likely to be complete come Election Day, though, and will be passed in an omnibus bill during a lame duck session, post-election.

Stay tuned, the one-year “budget enforcement resolution” could be ready later today.

We're Hiring!
Jun 22, 2010

JOB OPENING - Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Outreach Coordinator

Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation are seeking to hire an Outreach Coordinator, with a specific focus on organizing outreach trips across the United States and engaging online audiences and social networks.

More Sanctions (Updates)
Jun 17, 2010

After setting the stage at the UN last week, the US and EU have followed through on their pledge to implement strong unilateral sanctions on Iran.  While decades of US sanctions have eliminated Iran’s reliance on the US market and rendered US sanctions essentially worthless, the implementation of stronger European sanctions is a significant step.

According to an official statement, the European measures include sanctions on “key sectors of the gas and oil industry with prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies” and related equipment and services.  In addition, Iran's shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran's Revolutionary Guard.  Officials say the new sanctions could come into force within weeks.

Prior to this move, the EU has not placed significant trade restrictions on Iran beyond existing UN sanctions.  As a result, the EU is one of Iran’s largest trading partners, along with China, and provides for more than 20 percent of Iran’s trade.  H/T to Max Bergmann here, who makes some great points on the Obama Administration’s containment strategy over at the Wonk Room. Bergmann points out that...

Defense Cuts Could Save Nearly $1 Trillion Over 10 Years
Jun 14, 2010

I’m proud to be a part of a new report that identifies options for nearly $1 trillion in savings over the next 10 years within the Department of Defense.  Debt, Deficits, & Defense: A Way Forward was produced by the Sustainable Defense Task Force, a group of defense policy wonks put together by Representative Barney Frank to propose possible cuts to the military budget.

“I do not believe after this [proposed plan] is circulated that people will be able to dismiss the argument that you can responsibly, and at no cost to America’s genuine security, make reductions of over a trillion dollars for what has been proposed for the military budget,” Frank said at the release on Friday.

Cuts include further reductions to the U.S. nuclear arsenal and limits on the planned modernization of the nuclear weapons complex, which could save approximately $140 billion over 10 years.  When missile defense and space spending are also selectively curtailed, that number is increased to $194.5 billion.

Over 100 congressional staffers, NGOs, and members of the press were at the briefing on Friday.  When asked what his top three priorities might be for realistic savings within the defense budget, Frank included both nuclear weapons and missile defense.

See the briefing on C-SPAN here.

Iran Sanctions Update: UNSC Down – Next up, Congress
Jun 09, 2010

I tried to work a good baseball reference into the title (but failed miserably) since at the water cooler this morning, most of DC was focused on new Washington National Stephen Strasburg’s impressive major league debut, rather than the impending UN Security Council sanctions vote.

In fact, maybe that’s the real reason why the vote was delayed?

After over an hour delay, said to be due to indecision on the part of Lebanon, twelve nations of the 15-member body voted for the resolution.  Turkey and Brazil voted against, as was expected, while Lebanon chose to abstain.

Ambassador Susan Rice spoke out strongly against Iran’s actions and addressed ongoing negotiations on the TRR Deal in her remarks following the vote:

Turkey and Brazil have worked hard to make progress on the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—efforts that reflect their leaders’ good intentions to address the Iranian people’s humanitarian needs while building more international confidence about the nature of Iran’s nuclear program. My government will continue to discuss the Iranian-revised proposal and our concerns about it, as appropriate. But the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—then and now—does not respond to the fundamental, well-founded, and unanswered concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. This resolution does.

Later in the day, President Obama said that the new Iran sanctions resolution “demonstrates the growing costs that will come with Iranian intransigence,” but also repeatedly emphasized that the UN sanctions vote does “not close the door on diplomacy.”

Unfortunately, necessary posturing on the part of Iran is likely to make diplomacy difficult in the near future, and Congress is already gearing up to ensure that another round of sanctions is passed by the end of the June.

Rep. Howard Berman praised the passage of this morning’s resolution and confirmed that Congress would be moving forward on gasoline sanctions legislation:

We now look to the European Union and other key nations that share our deep concern about Iran's nuclear intentions to build on the Security Council resolution by imposing tougher national measures that will deepen Iran's isolation and, hopefully, bring the Iranian leadership to its senses. The US Congress will do its part by passing sanctions legislation later this month.

Iran Sanctions Update - Long Weekend Edition
Jun 04, 2010

After a recent delay, the White House has expressed confidence that the UN Security Council will back Iran sanctions in the next week, despite controversy over Israel's Gaza flotilla raid.

While some have all but condemned UN sanctions to a slow and painful death, Robert Gibbs stated yesterday that, “I think the president and the team here remain confident that ... within the next week, we'll have a number that will pass that resolution.”

If a vote does not take place by June 21, as the White House expects, you can bet that Congress will be waiting in the wings to pass its own set of sanctions.

Just prior to the Memorial Day recess, Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Howard Berman announced their intention to hold off on Congressional Iran sanctions until the end of June:

With the progress in negotiations at the Security Council, we believe that our overriding goal of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability is best served by providing a limited amount of time for those efforts – and expected follow-on action by the EU at its mid-June summit – to reach a successful conclusion before we send our bill to the President.

Slowed progress will, no doubt, light a fire under those who disagreed with a delay in the first place.

Fuel Swaps Compared
May 26, 2010

Building on the very useful analysis of CAP and IISS, here are some of the key differences between the October 2009 and May 2010 fuel swap proposals:

1)    Iran’s uranium supply is larger now: 1,500kg in 2009 vs. 2,300kg in 2010.  As initially laid out, the swap would have removed nearly 80 percent of Iran’s stockpile of LEU.  As it stands now, the proposal would remove only about 50 percent, leaving behind enough to, theoretically, build one bomb.

2)    In the original proposal, Iran’s fuel would be shipped to Russia, enriched to 19.75 percent, and then sent to France to be converted into fuel rods.  In the new proposal, Iran would send its fuel to Turkey for storage.  

3)    The 2010 plan does not outline what will happen to the 1,200 kg of LEU being stored in Turkey once the deal concludes.  Should another country offer up its own stockpile of LEU for enrichment, which is far from guaranteed, then send that enriched fuel to France for conversion, no provisions exist to state where Iran’s original LEU will go at the end of the process.  One would assume back to the country that offered its LEU for conversion.  For this scenario to work, however, the US or Russia must first agree to provide 1,200kg of LEU.

4)    Paragraph 8 of the 2010 proposal states that: “In case the provisions of this Declaration are not respected Turkey, upon the request of Iran, will return swiftly and unconditionally Iran’s LEU to Iran.”  The terms “not respected” are broad and give Iran the right to request the return of its LEU with no specification as to what constitutes a violation.

5)    The 2009 proposal would have granted the IAEA full-access to Iran’s nuclear program – 2010 does not include any statements regarding inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

6)    The 2010 plan requires that the fuel be delivered to Iran within in one year.  France’s fuel fabricator AREVA EURODIF S.A. has indicated, however, that it will require at least two years to produce the required amount of fuel.

7)    The 2010 proposal states the “right of all State Parties [to the NPT], including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities) for peaceful purposes without discrimination.”  This statement could be taken to assert Iran’s right to continued enrichment in contradiction of current UN Security Council Resolutions, but its intent is not clear.

Iran Sanctions Update
May 21, 2010

Surprise, surprise!  According to Reuters, Iran “could cancel its agreement with Turkey and Brazil to transfer some of its uranium abroad if the UN Security Council approves a new round of sanctions against it.”

Turkey, Brazil and Iran have urged a halt to talk of further sanctions because of the deal, but the UN Security Council looks poised to move forward regardless.

In Congress, lawmakers seem as ready as ever to ignore the administration’s request to hold off on sanctions legislation until after a UN deal is concluded.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday he wants Congress to complete action on the new sanctions legislation before leaving for the Memorial Day recess:

“We hope it will move out of conference this week and be on the floor next week.”

A Pretty New Pie Chart
May 21, 2010

The United States remains the global leader in defense spending, surpassing the next closest country by more than eight times.

In 2008, the most recent year for which complete global data is available, the U.S. approved $696.3 billion in defense budget authority (fiscal 2010 dollars). This figure includes funding for the Pentagon base budget, Department of Energy-administered nuclear weapons activities, and supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan.

This number is eight times more than Russia, 15 times more than Japan, 47 times more than Israel, and nearly 73 times more than Iran.

See the full analysis - and the pie chart - here.

Full HASC Backs F-35 Extra Engine
May 19, 2010

For the fourth year in a row, the House Armed Services Committee has ignored Pentagon recommendations (including a veto threat from Sec. Gates) and approved the continued development of the F136 alternate engine, developed by General Electric and Rolls-Royce, for the F-35 fighter aircraft program.  

The measure would require the Pentagon to budget for the alternate engine starting in fiscal 2012 and withhold 25 percent of fiscal 2011 funds for F-35 development until the Pentagon's top arms buyer certified that all funds for the engine's development and procurement had been made available.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett said during the markup today that “competition is warranted and critical and costs nothing more, according to the GAO.”

This isn’t quite true.  Money for the upfront costs of building and buying an alternate engine are not included in current DoD plans, so any increase is just that – an increase – and any actual savings brought about by competition will easily be eaten up.

"Study on top of study has shown that an extra fighter engine achieves marginal potential savings but heavy upfront costs -- nearly $3 billion worth," Gates said on May 8.

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell reiterated later today that Gates would recommend a veto if Congress budgets any funds for the alternate engine:

Pursuing an extra engine is an unnecessary luxury we simply cannot afford, especially in our current fiscal condition… Any savings that might result from an engine competition are years away, purely hypothetical and likely modest at best.

Morrell went on to say that amount we will spend to complete an alternate engine for the F-35 “would prevent us from providing our warfighters with more urgently needed equipment.”