"...the Arms Control Association [does] so much to keep the focus on the issues so important to everyone here, to hold our leaders accountable to inspire creative thinking and to press for change. So we are grateful for your leadership and for the unyielding dedication to global nuclear security."
– Lord Des Browne
Vice Chairman, Nuclear Threat Initiative
Share this

Latest ACA Resources

In the April 2004 issue, the article “Congress Critical of Bush Nuclear Weapons Budget” incorrectly stated that Linton Brooks, head of the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, testified March 24 that the United States did not plan to “lower the number of deployed warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 as called for by the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT).” The word “deployed” was incorrectly included in this sentence. The United States does plan to meet the SORT limit on operationally deployed warheads. Brooks was reiterating that the total number of U.S. warheads, deployed and nondeployed, would exceed the 1,700-2,200 limit. SORT does not limit the number of warheads in storage, meaning the United States can retain as many nondeployed warheads as it wants without violating the treaty.


In the March 2004 issue, the article “U.S. Will Not Join Landmine Treaty; Position on Fissile Material Cutoff Pact Uncertain” paraphrased Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control Stephen Rademaker as saying that an earlier rationale for negotiating a fissile material cutoff treaty (FMCT) was to “prevent a nuclear arms race from emerging in South Asia.” In the actual transcript, Rademaker said an FMCT “was considered the solution to nuclear breakout in South Asia.”