|
The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation is the Council’s affiliated 501(c)(3) research organization. |
|
WORLD COMMEMORATES 80TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE DAWN OF THE NUCLEAR AGE At 5:30 a.m. local time on July 16, 1945, Manhattan Project scientists ushered in the dawn of the nuclear age when they exploded the first nuclear weapon in the New Mexico desert. The Manhattan Project began after our founder, Leo Szilard, worked with Albert Einstein to warn President Franklin Roosevelt that the Nazis might be harnessing the power of the atom to build a weapon and that the United States should do it first. But once the Nazis were out of the war, scientists like Szilard expressed objections to using atomic weapons against Japan. On July 17, 1945, the anti-nuclear age began in earnest when Szilard and 69 other Manhattan Project scientists signed a petition to send to President Harry Truman urging him not to bomb Japan without first offering them a chance to surrender and warning of “an era of devastation on an unimaginable scale.” The petition never reached the president, and on August 6 and 9, the United States bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and leaving many others behind to survive while plagued by radiation-caused illnesses, guilt and social stigma. Now 80 years into the nuclear age — and anti-nuclear age — we have learned that progress on nuclear disarmament is not linear, as Communications Director Anna Schumann writes in her latest Nukes of Hazard blog post after a recent trip to Los Alamos, New Mexico. “While we spend July 16 of every year acknowledging the dawn of the nuclear age, now, 80 years in, I want to make sure we spend just as much time talking about the dawn of the anti-nuclear age, all the progress we’ve made and all the progress that’s yet to come,” Anna writes. “Working toward a world free from nuclear threats has not been without its setbacks, but thanks to diplomacy and arms control, we’ve already eliminated more than 80% of the nuclear weapons that have ever existed. That’s tremendous progress. Together, let’s finish the job. For the next milestone anniversary, let’s make sure we’ve moved more toward disarmament than an arms race.” LEARN MORE: Read: Quotes from Trinity Test Observers | Listen: Nukes of Hazard podcast: The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima | Watch: The Szilard Petition |
|
RUSSIA ISSUES NEW NUCLEAR THREATS AFTER UNITED STATES PLEDGES UKRAINE AID Earlier this week, President Donald Trump and NATO allies announced they would be supplying advanced weapons to Ukraine, a reversal of earlier U.S. policy, leading the Kremlin to reiterate threats about its nuclear arsenal. The Trump administration has said that Russia should not use the word “nuclear” so casually. We agree. There are no confirmed plans for Trump and Putin to meet, but Trump has threatened Russia with tariffs unless Russia agrees to a peace deal within a matter of weeks. The Center has covered the Russian war of aggression extensively, including through blog posts and FAQs.
|
|
NORTH KOREA RESPONDS PREDICTABLY TO U.S.-SOUTH KOREA-JAPAN COOPERATION North Korea spent most of July ignoring overtures from Washington and ramping up criticism of U.S.–South Korea–Japan military cooperation. According to U.S. officials, the DPRK regime brushed aside a recent attempt to revive “Trump-era diplomacy” and instead accused the trilateral alliance of preparing for preemptive nuclear war. Pyongyang responded to a U.S.–South Korea–Japan aerial drill featuring U.S. bombers with its usual threat language and warnings of “overwhelming retaliation.” The exercise followed weeks of quieter alliance coordination, including high-level meetings and statements from Seoul emphasizing that a military solution to the North Korean nuclear issue remains “unimaginable.” Meanwhile, North Korean state media continued to frame the country’s arsenal buildup as necessary and irreversible. Japan’s latest defense white paper suggests that Pyongyang is doubling down on improving missile accuracy, mobility and survivability in the face of U.S. and allied pressure. In his latest article for 38 North, Research Analyst Shawn Rostker argues that while summit diplomacy with North Korea has stalled, the door to nuclear risk reduction isn’t closed. Titled “The Korean Peninsula Has Seen Grand Overtures Come and Go. What Matters Now is Whether Small Steps Can Still Lead Somewhere,” the piece makes the case for restarting modest confidence-building efforts that reduce tensions and room for miscalculation, not just posture for headlines.
|
|
CHINA BACKS SOUTHEAST ASIAN NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE-ZONE China made headlines in early July when Malaysia’s foreign minister announced that Beijing had agreed “without reservation” to sign the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ) Treaty once final documentation is in place. The move, welcomed by ASEAN members, marks a rare public commitment to regional nuclear restraint from a country otherwise expanding its arsenal and doctrine. Meanwhile, the Chinese military quietly removed its Navy Chief of Staff and a top nuclear scientist from the National People’s Congress in a purge that raised more questions than answers. No official explanation was offered, but analysts suspect an ongoing anti-corruption push continues to sweep through China’s defense-industrial establishment.
|
|
NEW REPORT FINDS UNITED STATES DESTROYED ONE OF THREE IRANIAN NUCLEAR TARGETS Last month’s bombings of three Iranian nuclear sites badly damaged and possibly destroyed Fordow, Iran’s most advanced site, but did not do as much damage to the other two sites, a new administration report finds. The report finds that the bombings could have set Iran’s nuclear program back by as much as years, according to some U.S. officials, but some experts say it won’t take that long for it to restart its program at a different site. In an interview with Bloomberg, Senior Policy Director John Erath argued that the debate on the magnitude of damage to Iranian sites is ultimately inconsequential; Iran retains the technical capability to produce nuclear weapons and can rebuild absent lasting constraints on its nuclear program.
|
|
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HOLLOWS OUT DIPLOMACY, INCLUDING ARMS CONTROL EXPERTISE On July 11, the State Department began firing more than 1,350 U.S.-based foreign and civil servants, many of whom served across multiple administrations from both parties. The total reduction in the workforce will be nearly 3,000, including voluntary departures, according to the notice. Among those fired are career experts on nuclear weapons diplomacy, arms control and non-proliferation amid an ongoing re-organization of the arms control and non-proliferation bureaus at the Department of State. The long-term damage of these firings is hard to determine but will undoubtedly be felt in the coming years and decades as countries must negotiate future arms control agreements.
|
|
FRANCE AND THE UNITED KINGDOM INCREASE NUCLEAR COOPERATION On July 10, France and the United Kingdom released a joint statement on increased nuclear cooperation. The so-called “Northwood Declaration” reaffirms the close cooperation between the two nuclear-armed European nations and establishes a joint Nuclear Steering Group to “politically coordinate” this work. This declaration is clearly a political signal to other European allies that France and the United Kingdom are committed to providing extended deterrence for the continent, regardless of the United States’ role. However, it is important to note that the combined French and U.K. nuclear deterrent cannot and should not replace U.S. commitments to European allies. Also noteworthy in the declaration is the distinct reference to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and international non-proliferation architecture. At a time when leaders around the world seem to be preparing for a world without formal constraints on nuclear weapons arsenals, words do matter. Including this reference to non-proliferation and arms control in such a declaration is significant. In April, Research Analyst Connor Murray and then-Scoville Fellow Marlena Broeker wrote in Just Security that doubts about U.S. reliability should not lead to a European nuclear deterrent as it is “economically, technically and politically inadvisable.” Meanwhile, NATO members have committed to increasing their spending to 5% of their GDPs, but it hasn’t come without difficulties, Murray told Axios’ Future of Defense newsletter. “For some of these leaders, they have a very fraught domestic political situation. They’ve had to spend pretty significant political capital to get where they are, and to then turn around and potentially jack up military spending could be really detrimental.”
|
|
MASSIVE WIN FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP’S LEGISLATIVE AGENDA MEANS 26% INCREASE IN NUCLEAR SPENDING After months of back and forth and much “concern” from Republican lawmakers, the House and Senate passed President Trump’s so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill makes massive domestic funding cuts to healthcare and food assistance programs and gives tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. Passage of the legislation also codifies the mandatory Pentagon and national security spending the administration planned for in its budget request, including significant additional spending for nuclear weapons and the proposed Golden Dome missile defense architecture. Meanwhile, the Trump administration finally released its much-delayed fiscal year 2026 Pentagon budget request late last month. The Center’s analysis details nuclear-related spending in the more than $1 trillion request. Council Political Director and Center Research Analyst Connor Murray told POLITICO Pro’s Morning Defense newsletter (subscribers only) that the 26% increase in nuclear weapons spending alone is reflective of “long-term momentum and Trump’s renewed push for nuclear expansion.” Two programs in particular stand out: the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program, which more than doubled to $4.1 billion, and the nuclear submarine-launched cruise missile program, which the Biden administration had all but zeroed out and is now being funded to the tune of $1.9 billion this year. Also included is billions for plutonium pit production for nuclear warheads. “We’re 15-ish years into this massive nuclear modernization, and now some of the stuff is being procured rather than just in the R&D phase,” Murray said. “That brings costs with it.” Executive Director and former Congressman John Tierney told USA Today that he believes the political climate discourages lawmakers of both parties from questioning defense spending. “There’s not a lot of thought about what the strategy is.”
|
|
CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES ADVANCE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION The House and Senate Armed Services Committees recently advanced their versions of the fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Council champion Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was the only Senator to oppose advancing the NDAA. In the House, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA-17) and Council-backed Sara Jacobs (D-CA-53) both opposed advancing the legislation. A brief analysis of both versions of the NDAA shows some concerning policy and key differences. A significant difference is the topline; the Senate version authorizes $924.7 billion for national defense, whereas the House version authorizes $882.6 billion. On nuclear weapons, the bipartisan consensus remained strong. However, Council champion Rep. John Garamendi did force debate on multiple nuclear weapons-related amendments and saw increased support for oversight of nuclear weapons programs such as the Sentinel ICBM and plutonium pit production. The timing for consideration by the full chambers is fluid, but the Senate currently plans to put the NDAA on the floor the last week of July while the House will likely wait until September.
|
|
HOUSE APPROPRIATES DEFENSE FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS THAT HAVEN’T BEEN AUTHORIZED YET The House took up the fiscal year 2026 defense appropriations bill this week, continuing the tradition of appropriating money that has not necessarily been authorized yet. Amid ongoing drama around cryptocurrency legislation that threatened to bump a vote on appropriations, the bill was passed in a 221 to 209 vote. Congress also broke with longstanding tradition and approved President Trump’s hyper-partisan rescissions package to claw back over $9 billion in congressionally approved spending. The package effectively ends federal funding of public media such as the Public Broadcast Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR) and codifies foreign assistance cuts made by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). After much back and forth, the Senate passed the legislation 51-48 with Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voting with Democrats against the legislation. The House passed the legislation ahead of the July 18 deadline. |
|
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA We are on X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, Threads and Bluesky. Follow us for the latest national security, legislative, campaign and nuclear weapons news on your favorite platforms.
|
|
CONSIDER BECOMING A MONTHLY DONOR As election season nears, the Council is also hard at work on its advocacy on Capitol Hill. Have you considered making a monthly donation to support our efforts to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear threats through political action? You can donate as little as $1 a month. Become a monthly supporter today! |
