(Original photo credits to MoonBattery.com and Grand Rapids Press. Photos altered by Kim-Thao Nguyen)

President Obama will arrive at the United Nations on September 24, ready to play ball. Despite domestic policy crises, the President is moving full steam ahead on foreign affairs, and he continues to follow the course he set in his Inaugural Address, when he announced to adversaries that “we will extend a hand if you … unclench your fist.”

On that day, President Obama will be chairing the UN Security Council meeting on nuclear nonproliferation, disarmament, and international security issues. In preparation for this historic, unprecedented and critically important event, Obama dealt with a few obstacles between him and the end-zone of moving the ball forward on nuclear disarmament.

In other developments:

1)      The United States and other nations have agreed to meet with Iran on October 1^st to discuss the Iranian negotiation proposal, which included topics of international security, nuclear nonproliferation, and the Palestinian question, but did not specifically include Iran’s nuclear program.

2)      On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Obama and his national security advisors unveiled a positive change in the US missile defense system plans for Europe, citing changing intelligence reports regarding Iranian nuclear weapons program and the ability to use advanced technology on a more comprehensive and mobile system. The previous plan was a major roadblock to improved US-Russian relations, including in the area of nuclear disarmament and cooperation on Iran. The new system will use the Aegis system, mounted on ships, with the idea of deploying three to four ships in each area requiring anti-ballistic missile system coverage (Mediterranean, North Sea, and on the Pacific side). However, we cannot be sure this system will work effectively, or deter Iran and other nations from pursuing a weapons program. Still, this proposal has been well received by most US analysts and overseas. Russia’s reaction has been reserved, but approving of the adjustment.

3)      President Obama’s April 5^th Prague speech and May 10^th Cairo speech both reaffirmed his foreign policy goals on international security: a world free of nuclear weapons, the option of an international fuel bank to address concerns about dual use nuclear reactors, and a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli crisis. By laying these positions out before his United Nations visit, President Obama has made his immediate foreign policy goals very clear.

Happening simultaneously, on September 24-25, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization meeting will discuss ways to encourage countries to ratify the CTBT into force. The United States is one of those countries whose ratification is necessary, and Obama has said that he wants to have the U.S. ratify the Treaty soon. The administration is sending Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the US representative to the CTBTO meeting, a strong sign that Obama is serious about moving the treaty through the Senate.  Politically, it may be difficult for the Senate to ratify the treaty. Republican hawks are upset at Obama’s handling of the missile defense system and the START follow-on negotiations. The forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review will also play a major role in domestic support for the CTBT.  We will be examining that Review in our next update, and in our visits to Congress and area districts.

It is a difficult time for the U.S., with economic and health care debates at home.  But it can also be a very fruitful time to advance international framework for peace and security.  If we keep our eye on the ball, we can move forward toward the advancing goal line—the two most immediate goals are a START follow-on treaty and ratification of the CTBT.  Intermediate goals: the fuel bank and other safeguards on fissile materials.  Finally, deep cuts worldwide, the denuclearization of the Middle East, and the long-term final score: a world free of nukes, as the President and a majority of world leaders, including the entire European Parliament in a vote this spring, have avowed.

Vinča reactor: International Atomic Energy Agency photo, 2006

It sounds like the plot of a movie: several Serbian nuclear scientists arrive unannounced and uninvited to a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Germany.   Their presentation on the Vinča reactor just outside Belgrade, Serbia, stuns the international community.  The aging storage facilities, the rusting containers, the lack of safeguards, and underpaid personnel during a time of turbulence in the former Yugoslavia lead the IAEA to assume the worst and declare the reactor one of the most dangerous reactors in the world.  This meeting did indeed occur, in 1995, but it was only when Serbia joined the IAEA six years later, after the overthrow of then-Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, that the international community was able to act on the serious issues posed by what the scientists revealed that day about the nuclear reactor at Vinča, Serbia.  This is one nuclear-calamity story with a positive ending, as we shall see.

The Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, a research lab and nuclear reactor left on Serbian territory, is one of the unknown legacies of the Cold War.  The containers are rusting away, causing some radiation contamination in the surrounding area, and posing a huge risk for much more serious contamination. The Vinča reactor was primarily a research reactor, but is a perfect example of the threat posed by aging, poorly maintained, understaffed, and under-protected nuclear reactors. While it would have been a mammoth task to steal from the facility, it would not have been impossible. The amount of material would have posed a major threat to the community, or in an act of terrorism.

But we should never doubt what political will and international cooperation can accomplish. The IAEA has since helped Serbia build a huge new complex where it can store and process decaying waste for generations in a safer environment, reducing the risk of contamination to the Vinča community. Serbia has also signed onto the Additional Protocols for Nuclear Safeguards, a move applauded by the IAEA. As the original technology and fuel came from the Soviet Union, Vinča’s nuclear fuel will be returned to Russia. This process of moving fuel back to Russia derives from a 2002 Russian-Serbian agreement to move highly enriched uranium from Serbia back to Russia. This particular project moved enough HEU to make two nuclear weapons and demonstrated the success of moving fuel across international borders in a secure manner.

This immense project is expensive and requires advanced technology for both Serbia and the IAEA. The Vinča Institute Nuclear Decommissioning (VIND) Project is the most expensive and logistically complex project in IAEA history.  But in the grand scheme, the price tag of $75 million for the entire project seems low when faced with the option of inaction. To complete this project, the IAEA successfully rounded up a strong pool of international donors, including the EU, the US, Russia, Slovenia (a former Yugoslav republic), the UK, Italy, the Czech Republic and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a United States NGO led by former Senator Sam Nunn and philanthropist Ted Turner.

Decommissioning nuclear weapons is not the only aspect of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. The aging research reactors left over from the Cold War must also be successfully decommissioned and safeguarded for the good of the surrounding community and international security.  Successful projects like VIND can prove to the doubters that the IAEA and international community are capable of handling the technologically challenging and critical necessity of dismantling, processing, decommissioning, and safeguarding nuclear waste contributing to major environmental and security threats. Though this project has just begun, and will take several more years to complete, all signs point to VIND’s success as a blueprint for international cooperation on future nuclear decommissioning and safeguarding projects.

Check out these resources for more information on VIND!
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2009/vinca.htmlhttp://www.nti.org/c_press/release_082302.pdf
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Multimedia/PhotoEssays/VincaIII/index.html

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/nonprorev-bleek.pdf