Bush Seeks Cuts in Pentagon Threat Reduction Programs
The Bush administration is seeking reduced funding for Pentagon
programs that assist former Soviet states in dismantling and securing
weapons of mass destruction. The Bush proposal would cut some programs
while expanding others, but senior officials emphasized that the
administration may alter its request once an ongoing White House
review of all threat reduction efforts wraps up.
In the amended defense budget it submitted to Congress in late
June, the administration asked for $403 million to pay for the Defense
Department’s Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) efforts in
the former Soviet Union for the fiscal year beginning in October.
That figure is 9 percent below this year’s $443 million allocation.
The modest overall reduction is largely a function of year-to-year
fluctuations in funding requirements rather than an effort to reduce
funding across the board, as appeared to be the case with cuts the
administration has sought for Energy Department non-proliferation
programs. (See ACT,
May 2001.) Annual appropriations for Cooperative Threat Reduction
have fluctuated between about $300 million and almost $600 million
since 1994, due in part to budgeting procedures and varying program
needs.
The administration has requested substantial cuts for some programs,
notably several strategic weapons-related efforts in Russia. A senior
Pentagon official explained in an August 8 interview that funds
for strategic arms elimination had been ramped up in recent years
as Russia worked to meet START I levels by the December 2001 deadline
but that less money is needed now that the program has “caught
up.”
Another initiative intended to help Russia package fissile material
from dismantled weapons was scrapped after the two sides failed
to reach agreement on technical issues. Additionally, the administration
is requesting no 2002 funding for the fissile material storage facility
in Mayak because construction is 70 percent complete and funds already
appropriated are deemed sufficient to finish the project next year,
the senior official indicated.
The White House has also requested that some programs be dramatically
expanded. The administration is seeking to almost double previous
funds for strategic elimination efforts in Ukraine. According to
the senior defense official, the funds will be used to address unexpected
technical difficulties encountered in processing the fuel from SS-24
long-range missiles and to continue to help Ukraine dismantle 40
non-START-accountable Tu-22M Backfire bombers. (See ACT,
June 2001.)
The administration has also requested funds to construct conventional
power plants to replace three nuclear reactors in Russia that produce
weapons-grade plutonium. In 1994, the United States pledged to help
construct the plants, but that plan has been modified several times.
Senior administration officials indicated that a decision has been
reached to proceed with fossil-fuel plants instead of modifying
the existing reactors to produce less plutonium, as decided in 1997.
Cuts Counter to Campaign Pledge
Though the budget cuts are apparently not intended to reduce the
scope of threat reduction efforts, they clearly do not fulfill President
George W. Bush’s campaign pledge to “ask Congress to increase
substantially our assistance to dismantle as many of Russia’s
weapons as possible, as quickly as possible.” (See ACT,
September 2000.) White House officials were unavailable to comment.
The White House review of threat reduction efforts is expected
to be finished soon, and officials emphasize that the administration
could ask Congress to alter funding levels based on the review’s
findings. Some senior administration officials have been openly
critical of threat reduction efforts. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, and the head of the CTR program have
all expressed concern that threat reduction programs free up funds
for Russia to use in modernizing its strategic forces.
But attempts to substantially scale back threat reduction efforts
are likely to face resistance in Congress, where the programs enjoy
bipartisan support. Most recently, in an August 9 speech, Senate
Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) called for restoring “cuts
the president made [to] programs to control and destroy Russian
nuclear weapons and weapons material, and find alternative employment
for nuclear scientists.”
|
