Comments for

Comment on Pakistan’s Defense Minister on Nuclear Weapons by Geoffrey Forden

Geoffrey Forden — Sat, 09 Sep 2023 13:12:36 +0000

I wonder what he meant by saying the IAEA and the US say their “program” is “safe”. Certainly not their weapons program.

Comment on 1995 India Nuclear Tests by Olli Heinonen

Olli Heinonen — Wed, 28 Jun 2023 18:08:30 +0000

Thank you for posting these nice excerpts on Indian and Pakistani path to nuclear weapon states. That is what they are regardless whether a party to the NPT. But what this shows is that an arms control approach does not stop anyone to build it’s nuclear weapons stocks. From deterrence with originally 5 weapons to current arsenal shows the path for a patient state. The DRPK had been following the patch and Iran has placed itself pretty much on the threshold. Proposals on arms control arrangements are good music for North Koreans. Iran’s suggestion to stop at the 60 % max uranium enrichment and closing of IAEA verification of the verification of the correctness and completeness of its declarations are steps on the same path. A step forward in undermining the credibility of the NPT verification regime.

Comment on CND in Parliament by Alex

Alex — Fri, 23 Jun 2023 10:03:58 +0000

That Countryside Alliance demo was actually very rough indeed. My brother in law was a policeman at the time and described it as the most violent day of his career.

Comment on GAO on Manned Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion by Peter Lamporte

Peter Lamporte — Wed, 25 Jan 2023 20:30:59 +0000

Hi Paul,
I found you based on your expert authorship in the below link. I’d appreciate speaking with you about a potential consultation retainer regarding Export Controls.
Please call to discus or email.
Best Regards,
Peter Lamporte
President
http://www.FormedMfg.com

Comment on 1982 NIE and Nuclear Testing by Pavel

Pavel — Mon, 26 Dec 2022 07:35:35 +0000

“Weapons yields chosen without nuclear testing … would be limited to about 20 kilotons.” I assume that the authors knew about Israel’s program. Which, as I understand it, suggests that this statement is not correct.

Comment on Nuclear Launch Authority in the UK by Alex

Alex — Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:55:23 +0000

Almost certainly because the secretary of state for defence isn’t involved ex-officio; the prime minister selects the two nuclear deputies at her own discretion. One of them usually is the defence secretary but this is not a binding condition.

I can well imagine that one or more of the three possible candidates might not have been so selected. (Fallon: lifetime backbencher until promoted direct into the Cabinet to general astonishment, disgraced as a sexual harasser. Williamson: party apparatchik, repeatedly disgraced for various reasons, widely seen as an idiot. Mordaunt: lightweight, very briefly in office.)

Comment on ISIS and Chemical and Biological Weapons by kerr

kerr — Tue, 28 Dec 2021 03:57:16 +0000

Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed now.

Comment on ISIS and Chemical and Biological Weapons by Pavel Podvig

Pavel Podvig — Wed, 22 Dec 2021 08:11:21 +0000

The link to the report doesn’t work…

Comment on Pakistan on Nuclear Power, 1978 by AQ

AQ — Thu, 21 Oct 2021 19:17:19 +0000

The amazing thing is that the IAEA TC department read this and believed it. All the uranium for Karachi and Chashma was (and is) foreign sourced but IAEA helped Pakistan explore for uranium and helped convert it to yellowcake solely for weapons.

Comment on New State Department Documents on NPT by Marcie Foster

Marcie Foster — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 22:24:58 +0000

These docs are amazing! My husband attended this signing because his is William C Foster’s grandson. He was the only child in the room. Our family is processing lots of WCF’s papers and pictures, and making them available. We’ll definitely link to this amazing doc. Thank you!