Proliferation news 5/5/26
IN THIS ISSE: Chernobyl Is Still a Current Event, Forty Years Later, New Nuclear Bunker Buster Bomb Plans Revealed, Exclusive: US intelligence indicates limited new damage to Iran's nuclear program, sources say, Iran says US has responded to its latest peace proposal, Some Democrats press Trump to break silence on Israel’s nuclear arsenal, Two Wars Later, Iran’s Nuclear Question Is Still on the Table
Chernobyl Is Still a Current Event, Forty Years Later
Corey Hinderstein | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
On April 26, 1986, a routine safety exercise at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant’s Unit 4 in Soviet Ukraine ended in the most consequential nuclear accident of the atomic age. Forty years later, huge swaths of land remain uninhabitable, and thousands of people are still dealing with long-term health effects. Nearly a trillion dollars has been spent on remediation and compensation, and public opinion around the world remains sharply divided on the value of nuclear power as a clean energy source to combat the climate crisis. These political and physical effects demonstrate that the Chernobyl accident is not yet history and is still a current event.
New Nuclear Bunker Buster Bomb Plans Revealed
Joseph Trevithick | TWZ
The Department of Energy is seeking millions of dollars for work in part on a new bunker-busting nuclear weapon called the Nuclear Deterrent System-Air-delivered (NDS-A) in its latest budget request… Beyond that it will be air-delivered, there are also no details currently available publicly about the weapon’s design, including whether it will be based on something already in the stockpile.
Exclusive: US intelligence indicates limited new damage to Iran's nuclear program, sources say
Gram Slattery, Jonathan Landay, and Erin Banco | Reuters / Yahoo
U.S. intelligence assessments indicate that the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon has not changed since last summer, when analysts estimated that a U.S.-Israeli attack had pushed back the timeline to up to a year, according to three sources familiar with the matter… U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded prior to June's 12-day war that Iran likely could produce enough bomb-grade uranium for a weapon and build a bomb in around three to six months, said two of the sources, all of whom requested anonymity to discuss U.S. intelligence.
Iran says US has responded to its latest peace proposal
Jaroslav Lukiv and Bernd Debusmann Jr | BBC News
Iran has received a US response to its latest peace proposal, Iranian state-linked media have said. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson said the response, delivered via Pakistan, was now being reviewed, according to Tasnim news agency. The US is yet to formally confirm it has replied to Tehran. However, President Donald Trump reportedly told Israel's Kan News on Sunday that the proposal was unacceptable to him.
Some Democrats press Trump to break silence on Israel’s nuclear arsenal
John Hudson | The Washington Post
A group of House Democrats is urging the Trump administration to publicly acknowledge Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons program, a move that would abandon decades of U.S. policy but confirm what has been an open secret among intelligence officials since the late 1960s. In a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio obtained by The Washington Post, more than two dozen lawmakers, led by Rep. Joaquin Castro (Texas), say Washington’s silence on the program is indefensible amid the war in Iran and the acute threat of military escalation.
Two Wars Later, Iran’s Nuclear Question Is Still on the Table
Jane Darby Menton and Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
In this Q&A, Nuclear Policy Program Fellow Jane Darby Menton and Middle East Program Nonresident Scholar Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar discuss the future of Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran may conclude that its ability to disrupt the global economy via the Strait of Hormuz provides enough deterrence to begin quietly rebuilding its nuclear program.
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.