Proposed cuts to a range of U.S. non-proliferation programs in the budget submitted by the White House on April 9 could seriously undermine U.S. efforts to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
The Department of Energy’s Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation programs face approximately $100 million in cuts under the Bush proposal, an 11% reduction. Co-operative programs with Russia like the Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI) are hit particularly hard. This project is aimed at converting former Soviet nuclear weapons complexes into non-weapons businesses. The budget proposal would slash NCI funding from $26.6 million to $6.6 million, enough to keep the program running in one city. Also slated for deep cuts (from $169.7 million to $138.8 million) are materials protection, control, and accounting programs aimed at securing poorly guarded Russian nuclear weapons and fissile materials.
A number of these programs were rumored to be on the chopping block as the result of a National Security Council review. On March 29 the New York Times reported that U.S. non-proliferation programs with Russia "deemed ineffective" by the review "could be sharply reduced, or even scuttled." An unnamed U.S. official involved with the review told the Times that any changes in funding would not signal a lack of commitment to non-proliferation programs in general: "This is about enabling the progress we've made to continue and making nonproliferation programs even more effective."
However, the magnitude of the proposed cuts will face opposition from members of Congress and experts who believe that these programs represent a vital and effective national security effort to counter the serious threat of Russian nuclear materials or expertise being transferred or diverted to other countries. Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, registered her concerns in a March 15 letter to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, writing that "[d]ramatic cuts to these programs, prior to a full program assessment, may cripple our efforts to secure nuclear material in Russia and ensure that Russia's nuclear physicists are gainfully employed in non-defense-related industries . Funding cuts in this area would be a mistake in any event and are particularly troubling on the heels of an overwhelmingly positive review of the programs published earlier this year."
Issued by a Secretary of Energy appointed task force chaired by former Senator Howard Baker and former Presidential Counsel Lloyd Cutler, the review, titled A Report Card on the Department of Energy Nonproliferation Programs with Russia, was published in January and urged the new administration to drastically increase funding for these programs.
At a January 24 briefing of Report Card hosted by the Carnegie Endowment, Cutler voiced the collective opinion of the task force (which also included former Senators Sam Nunn and Alan Simpson, and former Congressmen Butler Derrick, Lee Hamilton and David Skaggs), saying:
"Our principal conclusions are that the most urgent unmet national security threat for the United States today is the danger that weapons of mass destruction or weapons-usable material in Russia could be stolen and sold to terrorists or hostile nation-states, and used against American troops abroad, or citizens at home. The country needs a wake-up call about the threat . Non-proliferation programs in the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, and related agencies have achieved impressive results, thus far. But their limited mandates and funding fall short of what is required to adequately address the threat."
With these programs now facing reductions to this "limited funding," serious questions will be raised about the U.S. commitment to dealing with "the greatest unmet security threat."