• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Joseph Cirincione"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Military",
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Nuclear Energy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

Shanghaied in Los Alamos

Link Copied
By Joseph Cirincione
Published on Sep 13, 2000

Source: Carnegie

Reprinted with permission from The Globalist (www.theglobalist.com), September 13, 2000.

The U.S. government appears likely to drop most of its charges against Wen Ho Lee, the Chinese-born physicist accused of breeching U.S. national security while employed at the Los Alamos weapons laboratory in New Mexico. Before the case fades into the background, Joseph Cirincione, director of the Non-Proliferation Project at Washington's Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, presents a list of ten of the most questionable statements directed against Dr. Lee.

A year and a half after congressional and media charges of nuclear espionage, it now looks as if Dr. Lee, will go home a free man. For more than a year, stories in the New York Times and the investigation of the congressional committee chaired by Rep. Christopher Cox claimed that Dr. Lee had seriously compromised U.S. national security while employed as a physicist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the first atomic bombs.

Charged with 59 felony counts for breeching national security, Dr. Lee faced life in prison. Now, the U.S. government appears ready to drop all but one count.

The New York Times and the Cox Committee both pummeled the Clinton Administration for failing to take the allegations seriously and make arrests. Both relied heavily on the now discredited testimony of Notra Trulock, a former intelligence official at the U.S. Department of Energy, which oversees the Los Alamos laboratory. On September 11, the Times finally revealed what many people have come to believe: that Trulock "improperly focused the investigation … on Dr. Lee … out of a racist view that Dr. Lee was more inclined to spy for China because of his ancestry."

A scandal is born

The New York Times launched the scandal in a story on March 6, 1999, that claimed, "Working with nuclear secrets stolen from a U.S. government laboratory, China has made a leap in the development of nuclear weapons: the miniaturization of its bombs ... government investigators had identified a suspect, an American scientist at Los Alamos laboratory."

Don't believe the hype

The Times, reporting on Dr. Lee's original bail hearing December 1999, said government officials believed Dr. Lee, "jeopardized virtually every nuclear warhead in the American arsenal through unauthorized computer transfers of many of the country's most sensitive nuclear secrets."

Many others piled on the hyperbole, burying the voices of those in and out of government who had tried to keep some perspective on the allegations. While the stories of alleged Chinese nuclear espionage ran for months, Dr. Lee's release is likely to fade rather quickly as front page news.

Before it does, we culled from our files ten of the most outrageous statements directed against Dr. Lee:

1."These codes and their associated data bases and the input file, combined with someone that knew how to use them, could, in my opinion, in the wrong hands, change the global strategic balance." (Dr. Stephen Younger, Associate Director for Nuclear Weapons at Los Alamos, in testimony at Wen Ho Lee's bail hearing, December 13, 1999)

2."They enable the possessor to design the only objects that could result in the military defeat of America's conventional forces ... They represent the gravest possible security risk to ... the supreme national interest." (Stephen Younger, testimony, December 13, 1999)

3."Pat Buchanan calls Wen Ho Lee the epicenter of the most dangerous penetration of America's nuclear labs 'since the Rosenbergs went to the electric chair in 1953.'" (Cited in Bill Mesler, The Nation, August 9, 1999).

4."Senator Don Nickles says that Lee ... was responsible for the 'most serious case of espionage' in U.S. history." (Cited in Bill Mesler, The Nation, August 9, 1999).

5."The stolen U.S. secrets have helped the PRC fabricate and successfully test modern strategic thermonuclear weapons." ("U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the People's Republic of China" known as "The Cox Report," Vol. 1, pg. 60)

6."The stolen information includes classified information on seven U.S. thermonuclear warheads ... The stolen U.S. nuclear secrets give the PRC design information on thermonuclear weapons on a par with our own" ("The Cox Report," Overview, pg. i, ii)

7."A scientist suspected of spying for China improperly transferred huge amounts of secret data from a computer system at a government laboratory, compromising virtually every nuclear weapon in the United States arsenal, government and lab officials say." (Cited in James Risen and Jeff Garth, New York Times, April 27, 1999)

8."During President Clinton's watch, America's most vital nuclear secrets — guarded intensely for five decades — have been allowed to spill out all over the world.... We are now informed by The New York Times's Pulitzer-Prize-winning investigative team that the codes — "legacy codes," as they are known at Los Alamos — were allegedly downloaded by Wen Ho Lee in 1994. Our nuclear genie is out of the bottle...." (William Safire, New York Times, April 29, 1999)

9."Denouncing the "hemorrhaging" of bomb secrets to foreigners, Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama, stood in front of the 10-foot high metal fence at the laboratory's main gate and said, "I would put a tourniquet on it.'" (Cited in James Brooke, New York Times, April 13, 1999)

10."This may be the most serious breach in an espionage case since the Aldrich Ames case." (U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch, Fox News Sunday, May 2, 1999) September 12, 2000

About the Author

Joseph Cirincione

Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    The End of Neoconservatism

      Joseph Cirincione

Joseph Cirincione
Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation
Joseph Cirincione
MilitaryNuclear PolicyNuclear EnergyChina

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for China

    The Plaza Accord was not an externally imposed punishment of Japan but part of a broader restructuring that Japanese economists and policymakers themselves recognized was necessary. Its effects were undermined, however, when Tokyo responded to the resulting slowdown with policies that exacerbated investment, credit expansion, and the very imbalances the adjustment was intended to resolve.

      Michael Pettis

  • The nuclear missile formation passes through Tian'anmen Square during a military parade on September 3, 2025 in Beijing, China.
    Paper
    Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its Allies

    The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.

      Tong Zhao

  • Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?

    China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.

      Michael Pettis

  • Robot arm with disposable test tube virus sampling in laboratory
    Commentary
    Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. Sanctions

    Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.

      Xue Gong

  • An aerial drone photo taken on June 4, 2026 shows a wind-photovoltaic power storage station of Huadian Inner Mongolia New Energy Co., Ltd. as part of the Horinger data center cluster green energy supply demonstration project, in Hohhot, north China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.
    Commentary
    Are Data Centers the Solution to China’s Renewables Excess Capacity?

    China’s latest energy plan explicitly calls for integrating data centers into the electricity system, particularly connecting them to green energy. It appears Beijing wants to use compute as a source of domestic demand to absorb renewables excess capacity.

      • Damien Ma

      Damien Ma

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
Keck Seng Tower133 Cecil Street #10-01ASingapore, 069535Phone: +65 9650 7648
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.