Nuclear Security Summit 2016 March 31 - April 1, Washington, D.C.

Nuclear Security Summit 2016 March 31 - April 1, Washington, D.C.

Last week’s Nuclear Security Summit brought together more than 50 countries and international organizations in Washington, D.C. It was the last in a series of four summits that began in 2010, a year after President Obama laid out his intent to ensure that “terrorists never acquire a nuclear weapon.” Significant progress toward this end has indeed been achieved. Among other important advancements, more than half of the countries—30 of 57—that have had weapons-usable nuclear material on their soil have eliminated it, and security for nuclear weapons and materials at scores of sites around the world has been dramatically improved. A quick summary of what was achieved, and what remains left to accomplish can be found here, with a more detailed report by the same authors here. Ironically, this last Summit took place as the threat of terrorists acquiring and using radiological devices burst back into the public’s consciousness. The Summit occurred in the shadow of news that the bombers who coordinated attacks in Belgium on March 22 had been videotaping a high-ranking nuclear official. In an online Bulletin survey that asked “How likely do you think it is that someone will detonate a radiological device within the next five years in an act of terrorism?” nearly 70% of Bulletin visitors who took the poll answered “very likely” or “somewhat likely.”  To ensure that the international community stays focused on reducing the threat of nuclear terrorism, the Summit’s final communiqué called for the creation of a high-level contact group to meet regularly to advance a set of agreed-upon goals. The final communiqué also called on the nuclear industry and civil society to work in partnership to push the process forward. The good news is that a robust network of think tanks, publications, and foundations have already heeded this call. Here is a quick guide to some of what NGOs have already offered and whom to watch in the months and years ahead: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York boldly announced their own “gift basket,” a term used during the summits to acknowledge actions taken by individual states or groups of countries. On Tuesday March 29 they announced their joint commitment to invest up to $25 million over the course of 2016 and 2017 for work to secure nuclear materials and reduce the threat they pose. The Fissile Materials Working Group developed a well-produced video that conveyed the urgency of the challenges that confront us moving forward.  Experts now understand that new platforms are needed to engage new audiences. Along these lines, the author Eric Schlosser previewed his new documentary film “Command and Control,” based on his book of the same name, that will reach even wider audiences when it comes out later this fall.  My assessment of the film can be found here. The Ploughshares Fund has a good set of interactives on its website, some of which draw heavily on Bulletin research. The Bulletin released a round-up that included some of the most cutting-edge analysis on the Summit and provided a one-stop shop for those looking for a quick primer; we’ve also begun a roundtable with authors from around the world who will debate how much the Nuclear Security Summits have accomplished and what still must be achieved to ensure the security of nuclear materials worldwide. Six weeks before the Summit, the Nuclear Threat Initiative released the third edition of its Nuclear Security Index. The Index is an assessment of nuclear security conditions on a country-by-country basis in 176 countries. This report has become the benchmark for what has been achieved and what still needs to be done. The Bulletin conducted an interview with NTI’s chairman Sam Nunn when the Index was released, and it can be found here. Summit participants are looking to the IAEA to continue to strengthen the global nuclear security architecture. Even without this new mission, the IAEA faces budget challenges, and University of Melbourne’s Trevor Findlay offers recommendations for how to address the challenges in a new report from Harvard’s Belfer Center and Managing the Atom Project. Many organizations hosted important side meetings during the week of the Summit. It was gratifying to see how many times Bulletin articles were cited or formed the basis of conversations. Bulletin author Nilsu Goren spoke from her most recent piece at a session on Middle East Nuclear Security hosted by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Similarly, at a briefing on Capitol Hill, Henry Sokolski, president of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, spoke from his recent Bulletin piece on avoiding a nuclear arms race in East Asia. There remains much work to be done, as all these reports point out. Many good people and institutions continue to work tirelessly on the existential challenges posed by nuclear weapons and access to fissile material. As always, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is deeply engaged in assessing the science and public policy implications, working with top-level leaders and experts to describe and shape sound policy options. Keep reading.         Rachel Bronson         Executive Director and Publisher         Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Some images provided by Shutterstock. Receive this message as a forward? Click here to sign up for future mailings. To unsubscribe from ALL future emails from the Bulletin, please click the 'unsubscribe' button below. Share this message on Social Media: