{ "id": "RL33548", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL33548", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 455577, "date": "2016-09-01", "retrieved": "2016-09-09T18:32:58.273006", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, \u201cMy administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.\u201d However, while the Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT \u201ceducation\u201d campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, it has not pressed for a vote on the treaty and there were no hearings on it in the 111th, 112th, or 113th Congresses. There will be at least one hearing in the 114th Congress\u2014a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the CTBT planned for September 7, 2016.\nAs of August 2016, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 164, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. India, North Korea, and Pakistan have not signed the treaty. Nine conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, every other year, most recently on September 29, 2015. In years between these conferences, some foreign ministers meet to promote entry into force of the CTBT. A ministerial meeting was held on June 13, 2016, to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the signing of the CTBT.\nNuclear testing has a long history, beginning in 1945. The Natural Resources Defense Council states that the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. (Of the U.K. tests, 24 were held jointly with the United States and are not included in the foregoing U.S. total.) Congress passed and President George H.W. Bush signed legislation in 1992 that established a unilateral moratorium on U.S. nuclear testing. Russia claims it has not tested since 1990. In 1998, India and Pakistan announced several nuclear tests. Each declared a test moratorium; neither has signed the CTBT. North Korea announced that it conducted nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, 2013, and 2016. Since 1997, the United States has held 28 \u201csubcritical experiments\u201d at the Nevada National Security Site, most recently in August 2014, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia reportedly held some such experiments since 1998.\nThe Stockpile Stewardship Program seeks to maintain confidence in the safety, security, and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons without nuclear testing. Its budget is listed as \u201cWeapons Activities\u201d within the request of the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous component of the Department of Energy. Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. The FY2017 request for Weapons Activities was $9.243 billion; on a comparable basis, the FY2016-enacted amount was $8.846 billion. Congress also considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor possible nuclear tests, operated by the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. The FY2016 request for the contribution was $33.0 million.\nThis report will be updated occasionally. This update reflects the FY2017 budget request and developments through August 2016. CRS Report RL34394, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments, by Jonathan E. Medalia, presents pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated \u201cSafeguards\u201d and Net Assessments, by Jonathan E. Medalia, discusses safeguards\u2014unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties\u2014and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R43948, Energy and Water Development: FY2016 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship, by Jonathan E. Medalia, and CRS Report R44442, Energy and Water Development: FY2017 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Activities, by Amy F. Woolf, provide details on stockpile stewardship.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL33548", "sha1": "9db23ae2fefe501277b8b3bfc505870c36aced66", "filename": "files/20160901_RL33548_9db23ae2fefe501277b8b3bfc505870c36aced66.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL33548", "sha1": "a6931bec0ad3164de12c7fc7fd890f90e96bfe01", "filename": "files/20160901_RL33548_a6931bec0ad3164de12c7fc7fd890f90e96bfe01.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 278, "name": "China, Taiwan, and Mongolia" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 283, "name": "Russia and the Caucasus" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 3245, "name": "Nuclear Weapons: Capabilities and Nuclear Arms Control" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4531, "name": "Defense Authorization" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 444076, "date": "2015-08-14", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T18:35:59.489752", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "Congressional Research Service\n7-5700\nwww.crs.gov\nRL33548\nSummary\nA ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, \u201cMy administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.\u201d However, while the Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT \u201ceducation\u201d campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, it has not pressed for a vote on the treaty and there were no hearings on it in the 111th, 112th, or 113th Congresses, or so far in the 114th. \nAs of August 2015, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 164, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Eight conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, every other year, most recently on September 27, 2013. In years between these conferences, some foreign ministers meet to promote entry into force of the CTBT, most recently on September 26, 2014.\nNuclear testing has a long history, beginning in 1945. The Natural Resources Defense Council states that the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. (Of the U.K. tests, 24 were held jointly with the United States and are not included in the foregoing U.S. total.) The last U.S. test was held in 1992; Russia claims it has not tested since 1990. In 1998, India and Pakistan announced several nuclear tests. Each declared a test moratorium; neither has signed the CTBT. North Korea announced that it conducted nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, and 2013. Since 1997, the United States has held 28 \u201csubcritical experiments\u201d at the Nevada National Security Site, most recently in August 2014, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia reportedly held some such experiments since 1998.\nThe Stockpile Stewardship Program seeks to maintain confidence in the safety, security, and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons without nuclear testing. Its budget is listed as \u201cWeapons Activities\u201d within the request of the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous component of the Department of Energy. Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. The FY2016 request for Weapons Activities was $8,846.9 million; on a comparable basis, the FY2014 current amount was $7,625.7 million and the FY2015 enacted amount was $8,007.7 million. Congress also considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor possible nuclear tests, operated by the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. The FY2016 request for the contribution was $33.0 million.\nThis report will be updated occasionally. This update reflects the FY2016 budget request and developments through mid-August 2015. CRS Report RL34394, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments, by Jonathan E. Medalia, presents pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated \u201cSafeguards\u201d and Net Assessments, by Jonathan E. Medalia, discusses safeguards\u2014unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties\u2014and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R43948, Energy and Water Development: FY2016 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship, by Jonathan E. Medalia, provides details on stockpile stewardship.\nContents\nMost Recent Developments\t1\nHistory\t1\nNational Positions on Testing and the CTBT\t2\nThe North Korean Nuclear Tests\t15\nThe October 2006 Nuclear Test\t15\nThe May 2009 Nuclear Test\t17\nA Test in May 2010?\t18\nThe February 2013 Nuclear Test\t19\nCTBT Negotiations, Provisions, Entry into Force\t22\nCTBT Negotiations and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty\t22\nKey Provisions of the CTBT\t26\nInternational Efforts on Behalf of Entry into Force\t31\nBudget of the CTBTO Preparatory Commission\t36\nStockpile Stewardship\t37\nStockpile Stewardship and the CTBT\t38\nStockpile Stewardship Experiments and Facilities\t46\nSubcritical Experiments\t47\nOther Experiments and Experimental Facilities\t48\nNuclear Test Readiness\t49\nCTBT Pros and Cons\t53\nThe National Academy of Sciences Study and Its Critics\t54\nChronology\t56\nFor Additional Reading\t59\n\nTables\nTable 1. Projected Budgets for Weapons Activities, FY2016-FY2020 ($ billions)\t46\nTable 2. U.S. Nuclear Tests by Calendar Year\t53\n\nAppendixes\nAppendix. Chronology, 1992-2009\t66\n\nContacts\nAuthor Contact Information\t73\n\nMost Recent Developments\nThe Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO PrepCom) held its 2015 Science and Technology Conference from June 22 to 26, 2015, in Vienna, Austria. It is \u201cdesigned to further enhance the strong relationship between the scientific and technological community and the CTBTO.\u201d On June 2, Pakistan reiterated \u201cits consistent stance that it will not be the first in its region to resume nuclear testing.\u201d The 2015 Review Conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was held from April 27 to May 22 in New York. At the conference, over 100 states expressed support for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). On May 12-14, 2015, the CTBTO PrepCom and others held a Workshop on Signatures of Medical and Industrial Isotope Production. Certain radioactive materials have great medical value, but their production may release radioactive xenon, which is also a signature of nuclear tests. The workshop \u201cexplore[d] ways to mitigate the effects on nuclear explosion monitoring of emissions from facilities that produce lifesaving medical isotopes without impacting production.\u201d On March 20, 2015, Angola became the 164th state to ratify the CTBT. On February 24, 2015, the CTBTO PrepCom and Ecuador concluded an agreement to build two stations of the International Monitoring System on the Galapagos Islands. The Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons was held December 8 and 9, 2014, in Vienna, Austria. The final report stated, \u201cA number of delegations argued that a step-by-step approach was the most effective and practical way to achieve nuclear disarmament, referring in particular to the entry into force of the CTBT and a Treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons.\u201d The CTBTO PrepCom conducted IFE14 (Integrated Field Exercise 2014) in Jordan from November 3 to December 9, 2014, to simulate an on-site inspection to detect a clandestine nuclear test.\nHistory\nWhile the CTBT was opened for signature in 1996, it has not entered into force, leaving a ban on nuclear testing as the oldest item on the arms control agenda. Efforts to curtail tests have been made since the 1940s. In the 1950s, the United States and Soviet Union conducted hundreds of hydrogen bomb tests. The radioactive fallout from these tests spurred worldwide protest. These pressures, plus a desire to improve U.S.-Soviet relations in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, led to the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963, which banned nuclear explosions in the atmosphere, in space, and under water. The Threshold Test Ban Treaty, signed in 1974, banned underground nuclear weapons tests having an explosive force of more than 150 kilotons, the equivalent of 150,000 tons of TNT, 10 times the force of the Hiroshima bomb. The Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty, signed in 1976, extended the 150-kiloton limit to nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes. President Carter did not pursue ratification of these treaties, preferring to negotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, a ban on all nuclear explosions. When agreement on a CTBT seemed near, however, he pulled back, bowing to arguments that continued testing was needed to maintain reliability of existing weapons, to develop new weapons, and for other purposes. President Reagan raised concerns about U.S. ability to monitor the two unratified treaties and late in his term started negotiations on new verification protocols. These two treaties were ratified in 1990.\nWith the end of the Cold War, the need for improved warheads dropped and pressures for a CTBT grew. The U.S.S.R. and France began nuclear test moratoria in October 1990 and April 1992, respectively. In early 1992, many in Congress favored a one-year test moratorium. The effort led to the Hatfield-Exon-Mitchell amendment to the FY1993 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, which banned testing before July 1, 1993, set conditions on a resumption of testing, banned testing after September 1996 unless another nation tested, and required the President to report to Congress annually on a plan to achieve a CTBT by September 30, 1996. President George H. W. Bush signed the bill into law (P.L. 102-377) October 2, 1992. The CTBT was negotiated in the Conference on Disarmament. It was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on September 10, 1996, and was opened for signature on September 24, 1996. As of August 2015, 183 states had signed it and 164 had ratified.\nNational Positions on Testing and the CTBT\nUnited States: As of August 2015, the United States had signed but not ratified the CTBT. The following history casts light on the U.S. position.\nUnder the Hatfield-Exon-Mitchell amendment, President Clinton had to decide whether to ask Congress to resume testing. On July 3, 1993, he said, \u201cA test ban can strengthen our efforts worldwide to halt the spread of nuclear technology in weapons,\u201d and \u201cthe nuclear weapons in the United States arsenal are safe and reliable.\u201d While testing offered advantages for safety, reliability, and test ban readiness, \u201cthe price we would pay in conducting those tests now by undercutting our own nonproliferation goals and ensuring that other nations would resume testing outweighs these benefits.\u201d Therefore, he (1) extended the moratorium at least through September 1994; (2) called on other nations to extend their moratoria; (3) said he would direct DOE to \u201cprepare to conduct additional tests while seeking approval to do so from Congress\u201d if another nation tested; (4) promised to \u201cexplore other means of maintaining our confidence in the safety, the reliability and the performance of our own weapons\u201d; and (5) pledged to refocus the nuclear weapons laboratories toward technology for nuclear nonproliferation and arms control verification. He extended the moratorium twice more; on January 30, 1995, the Administration announced his decision to extend the moratorium until a CTBT entered into force, assuming it was signed by September 30, 1996.\nOn September 22, 1997, President Clinton submitted the CTBT to the Senate. He asked the Senate to approve it in his State of the Union addresses of 1998 and 1999. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Helms rejected that request, saying that the treaty \u201cfrom a non-proliferation standpoint, is scarcely more than a sham\u201d and had low priority for the committee. In summer 1999, Senate Democrats pressed Senators Helms and Lott to permit consideration of the treaty. On September 30, 1999, Senator Lott offered a unanimous-consent request to discharge the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from considering the treaty and to have debate and a vote. The request, as modified, was agreed to. The Senate Armed Services Committee held hearings October 5-7; the Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing October 7. It quickly became clear that the treaty was far short of the votes for approval, leading many on both sides to seek to delay a vote. As the vote was scheduled by unanimous consent, and several Senators opposed a delay, the vote was held October 13, rejecting the treaty, 48 for, 51 against, and 1 present. At the end of the 106th Congress, pursuant to Senate Rule XXX, paragraph 2, the treaty moved to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee calendar, where it currently resides.\nThe Bush Administration\u2019s Nuclear Posture Review and Nuclear Testing: In the FY2001 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 106-398, \u00a71041), Congress directed the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, to review nuclear policy, strategy, arms control objectives, and the forces, stockpile, and nuclear weapons complex needed to implement U.S. strategy. Although the resulting Nuclear Posture Review is classified, J.D. Crouch, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, presented an unclassified briefing on it on January 9, 2002, dealing in part with the CTBT and nuclear testing. He stated there would be \u201cno change in the Administration\u2019s policy at this point on nuclear testing. We continue to oppose CTBT ratification. We also continue to adhere to a testing moratorium.\u201d Further, \u201cDOE is planning on accelerating its test-readiness program\u201d to reduce the time needed between a decision to test and the conduct of a test, which was then 24 to 36 months. He discussed new weapons. \u201cAt this point, there are no recommendations in the report about developing new nuclear weapons ... we are trying to look at a number of initiatives. One would be to modify an existing weapon, to give it greater capability against ... hard targets and deeply-buried targets. And we\u2019re also looking at non-nuclear ways that we might be able to deal with those problems.\u201d A Washington Post article of January 10, 2002, quoted White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer as saying that the President has not ruled out testing \u201cto make sure the stockpile, particularly as it is reduced, is reliable and safe. So he has not ruled out testing in the future, but there are no plans to do so.\u201d\nCritics expressed concern about the implications of these policies for testing and new weapons. Physicians for Social Responsibility argued, \u201cThe Administration\u2019s plan ... would streamline our nuclear arsenal into a war-fighting force, seek the opportunity to design and build new nuclear weapons, and abandon a ten-year-old moratorium on nuclear weapons testing.\u201d Another critic felt that increased funding for test readiness would in effect give prior approval for testing.\nIn July 2002 a National Academy of Sciences panel report on technical aspects of the CTBT concluded, in the words of a press release, \u201cthat verification capabilities for the treaty are better than generally supposed, U.S. adversaries could not significantly advance their nuclear weapons capabilities through tests below the threshold of detection, and the United States has the technical capabilities to maintain confidence in the safety and reliability of its existing weapons stockpile without periodic nuclear tests.\u201d\nA U.N. draft document of August 5, 2005, for signature by heads of government and heads of state at the U.N. General Assembly meeting of September 2005, contained a provision that the signers \u201cresolve to ... [m]aintain a moratorium on nuclear test explosions pending the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and call upon all States to sign and ratify the Treaty.\u201d John Bolton, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, reportedly called for major changes to the draft; the CTBT passage was one of many drawing his objection.\nOn June 25, 2007, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated:\nthe Administration does not support the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and does not intend to seek Senate advice and consent to its ratification. There has been no change in the Administration\u2019s policy on this matter. By reducing the likelihood of the need to return to underground nuclear testing, RRW [the Reliable Replacement Warhead] makes it more likely that the United States would be able to continue its voluntary nuclear testing moratorium. We cannot, however, provide guarantees regarding the voluntary moratorium. We may find at some future time that we cannot diagnose or remedy a problem in a warhead critical the U.S. nuclear deterrent without conducting a nuclear test.\nSimilarly, a Statement of Administration Policy on S. 1547, FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act, included the following:\nWhile supporting the continued voluntary moratorium on testing, the Administration strongly opposes a provision of section 3122 that calls for the ratification of the CTBT. It would be imprudent to tie the hands of a future administration that may have to conduct a test of an element of an aging, unmodernized stockpile in order to assure the reliability of the nuclear deterrent force. Absent such a test, the United States may not be able to diagnose or remedy a problem in a warhead critical to the Nation\u2019s deterrent strategy.\nThe Obama Administration and the CTBT: In a speech in Prague on April 5, 2009, President Obama said, \u201cmy administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.\u201d Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated, \u201cThe Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is an integral part of our non-proliferation and arms control agenda, and we will work in the months ahead both to seek the advice and consent of the United States Senate to ratify the treaty, and to secure ratification by others so that the treaty can enter into force.\u201d Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, asked if the United States should ratify the CTBT, replied, \u201cI think that if there are adequate verification measures, probably should.\u201d\nThe Obama Administration released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) report in April 2010, which \u201cfocuses on five key objectives of our nuclear weapons policies and posture: \nPreventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism;\nReducing the role of U.S. nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy;\nMaintaining strategic deterrence and stability at reduced nuclear force levels;\nStrengthening regional deterrence and reassuring U.S. allies and partners; and\nSustaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal.\u201d\nConsistent with Administration statements, the report presented the CTBT as a way to implement the first objective. It called several arms control measures, including the CTBT, \u201ca means of strengthening our ability to mobilize broad international support for the measures needed to reinforce the non-proliferation regime and secure nuclear materials worldwide.\u201d It viewed ratification and early entry into force of the CTBT as contributing to the prevention of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism:\nRatification of the CTBT is central to leading other nuclear weapons states toward a world of diminished reliance on nuclear weapons, reduced nuclear competition, and eventual nuclear disarmament. U.S. ratification could also encourage ratification by other states, including China, and provide incentives for the remaining states to work toward entry into force of the treaty. Further, U.S. ratification of the CTBT would enable us to encourage non-NPT Parties to follow the lead of the NPT-recognized Nuclear Weapon States in formalizing a heretofore voluntary testing moratorium, and thus strengthen strategic stability by reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in those states\u2019 national defense strategies.\nThe report also called for a substantial effort to maintain nuclear weapons and to upgrade the workforce and physical infrastructure of the nuclear weapons complex.\nVice President Joseph Biden wrote, \u201cThe President has made ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty an Administration priority. He has asked me to guide the Administration\u2019s effort to gain Senate support for the treaty.\u201d Under Secretary of State Ellen Tauscher described elements of the Administration\u2019s strategy to win Senate approval of the treaty. \u201cThis administration will not attempt to [seek ratification] unless we believe it can actually pass.... [We are] laying the groundwork for the support of a supermajority in the Senate, 67 votes.... We [will] have a very, very short window to talk about CTBT. But when we believe that we have the right conditions, we will begin to engage the Senate.\u201d\nObtaining Senate advice and consent to ratification has proven to be a challenge. Senator John Kerry, then chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated, \u201cI will begin working to build the necessary bipartisan support for U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty ... success would be the single greatest arms control accomplishment for the new Senate and it would reestablish America\u2019s traditional leadership role on nonproliferation.\u201d On the other hand, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said, \u201cI also disagree with the administration\u2019s recent pledge to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.\u201d\nThe timeline for Senate consideration of the CTBT is uncertain. The Administration decided to press for Senate approval of the U.S.-Russian New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) before trying to bring up the CTBT. However, New START fell behind schedule. The treaty it replaced, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), expired in December 2009. President Obama signed the new treaty in April 2010 and submitted it to the Senate in May. The Senate Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Relations, and Intelligence held hearings on New START, and the Foreign Relations Committee reported it favorably. President Obama reportedly made securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of New START one of his top priorities for the lame duck session of Congress. The Senate passed the resolution of ratification for that treaty on December 22, 2010, 71-26. Subsequently, Administration officials turned more attention to the CTBT. For example, on September 23, 2011, Ellen Tauscher, then Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, said, \u201cwe have begun the process of engaging the Senate. We like to think of our efforts as an information exchange\u2019 and are working to get these facts [on verification and stockpile stewardship capabilities] out to members and staff, many of whom have never dealt with this Treaty.\u201d On September 26, 2012, Rose Gottemoeller, Acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, said, \u201cAs we look towards ratification of the CTBT, we acknowledge that the process will not be easy. That said, the New START ratification process reinvigorated interest in the topic of nuclear weapons and arms control on Capitol Hill. I am optimistic that interest will continue as we engage with Members and staff on this Treaty.\u201d On September 15, 2014, Gottemoeller, who had been confirmed as Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, said,\nNow, I will pivot to the question that is asked each and every time this Treaty is discussed: \u201cWhat is the plan for Senate ratification?\u201d\nThe answer is simple. First comes education, and then comes discussion and last and most importantly, comes debate. It is only through that process that you get to a place where a vote could happen.\nWe are reintroducing this Treaty to the American public, since it has been quite some time it has been discussed outside the Capital Beltway. We are and will continue to outline the clear and convincing facts about our ability to maintain the nuclear stockpile without explosive testing and our ability to effectively monitor and verify Treaty compliance. Both Secretary Moniz and General Klotz have spoken about these two issues this afternoon and they are strong allies in this effort.\nWe are and will continue to make it clear that a global ban on nuclear explosive testing will hinder regional arms races and impede advancements in nuclear stockpiles around the world.\nWith an emphasis on a healthy, open dialogue, rather than a timeline, we are working with the Senate to re-familiarize Members with the Treaty. A lot of CTBT-related issues have changed since 1999, but the Senate has changed a lot since then, too. It is up to us, as policymakers and experts before the American people, to practice due diligence in consideration of this Treaty \u2013 that means briefings, hearings at the appropriate time, more briefings, trips to Labs, trips to Vienna and the CTBTO, more briefings, etc., etc.. The Senators should have every opportunity to ask questions, many questions, until they are satisfied.\nI want to make one thing very clear: this Administration has no intention of rushing this or demanding premature action before we have had a thorough and rigorous discussion and debate.\nIn addressing the Seventh Ministerial Meeting on the CTBT in September 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry said, \u201cSo I come here to reiterate the Obama Administration\u2019s unshakable commitment to seeing this treaty ratified and entered into force. And though we have not yet succeeded in ratifying it for pure political, ideological reasons\u2014not substance, I assure you\u2014we nevertheless are pledged to live by it, and we do live by it, and we will live by it.\u201d\nIn the run-up to the 2015 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference, however, the United States stressed its support for the treaty rather than efforts to secure Senate advice and consent to ratification. In a report to the conference, the United States noted its financial support for the CTBTO PrepCom and stated, \u201cThe United States fully supports the activities of the CTBT Preparatory Commission as it makes the necessary preparations for the effective implementation of the Treaty.\u201d At the conference, Secretary of State John Kerry said, \u201cWe have clearly demonstrated our commitment to abide by the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.\u201d\nUnited Kingdom: The United Kingdom cannot test because it held its nuclear tests for several decades at the Nevada Test Site and does not have its own test site. Its last test was held in 1991. Britain and France became the first of the original five nuclear weapon states to ratify the CTBT, depositing instruments of ratification with the United Nations on April 6, 1998. On February 14, 2002, and February 23, 2006, the United Kingdom conducted subcritical experiments jointly with the United States at the Nevada Test Site.\nThe United Kingdom and France maintain their own separate stockpile stewardship programs to maintain existing warheads and, if necessary, develop new ones. For example, the U.K. Atomic Weapons Establishment uses two sites: Aldermaston, which conducts R&D and some manufacturing, and Burghfield, which conducts final assembly, maintenance, and decommissioning of warheads. The United Kingdom and France are also pooling stockpile stewardship resources. A declaration from the November 2010 U.K.-French summit announced the decision by the two states\nto collaborate in the technology associated with nuclear stockpile stewardship in support of our respective independent nuclear deterrent capabilities, in full compliance with our international obligations, through unprecedented co-operation at a new joint facility at Valduc in France that will model performance of our nuclear warheads and materials to ensure long-term viability, security and safety \u2013 this will be supported by a joint Technology Development Centre at Aldermaston in the UK.\nStockpile stewardship supports the stockpile, but at issue for the United Kingdom is what weapons it will have in the future, and even whether it will have a nuclear force. The U.K. nuclear force consists of Trident II (D-5) missiles aboard four ballistic missile submarines. With the submarines approaching the end of their service lives, at issue is whether to replace them with something other than ballistic missile submarines (e.g., bombers, land-based missiles, or missiles on attack submarines), and if ballistic missile submarines are chosen, whether to build four or fewer. \nScotland held a referendum on September 18, 2014, on whether to become an independent country, and chose to remain part of the United Kingdom. Prior to the vote, there was considerable concern over what would become of the U.K. nuclear deterrent if Scotland were to become independent, as all U.K. ballistic missile submarines are based at Faslane, Scotland. In October 2012, Alex Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), said, \u201cThe SNP Government will be bringing forward a white paper on independence which proposes a written constitution for an independent Scotland, and that constitution will have to be ratified by the Scottish Parliament elected in 2016. The SNP position on this is that the constitution should include an explicit ban on nuclear weapons being based on Scottish territory.\u201d If Scotland had decided to become independent and to ban nuclear weapons in its territory, it is unclear what steps Britain would have taken regarding its missile submarine force. Indeed, according to one report of October 2012, \u201cThe UK defence secretary [Philip Hammond] said he was making no contingency plans for moving Trident out of Scotland in the event of its people voting yes to independence.\u201d Another view put forward in August 2014 was that the Trident base could be relocated to a site within England. However, Scotland\u2019s vote to remain part of the United Kingdom has rendered these concerns moot.\nFrance: On June 13, 1995, President Jacques Chirac announced that France would conduct eight nuclear tests at its test site at Mururoa Atoll in the South Pacific, finishing by the end of May 1996. The armed services had reportedly wanted the tests to check existing warheads, validate a new warhead, and develop a computer system to simulate warheads to render further testing unneeded. Many nations criticized the decision. On August 10, 1995, France indicated it would halt all nuclear tests once the test series was finished and favored a CTBT that would ban \u201cany nuclear weapon test or any other nuclear explosion.\u201d France conducted six tests from September 5, 1995, to January 27, 1996. On January 29, 1996, Chirac announced the end to French testing. On April 6, 1998, France and Britain deposited instruments of ratification of the CTBT with the United Nations. See the section on the United Kingdom, above, for information on a U.K.-French collaboration on stockpile stewardship.\nRussia: Several press reports between 1996 and 1999 claimed that Russia may have conducted low-yield nuclear tests at its Arctic test site at Novaya Zemlya; other reports stated that U.S. reviews of the data determined that these events were earthquakes. Several reports between 1998 and 2000 stated that Russia had conducted \u201csubcritical\u201d nuclear experiments, discussed below, which the CTBT does not bar. The report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States presents arguments for and against the CTBT; one argument by opponents is, \u201cApparently Russia and possibly China are conducting low yield tests.\u201d This charge was reiterated in a September 2011 article: \u201cRussia apparently has continued to test nuclear weapons at very low yields, despite its commitment not to do so.\u201d\nRussia ratified the treaty on June 30, 2000. In September 2005, Russia reportedly stated that it intends to continue to observe the moratorium on testing until the CTBT enters into force as long as other nuclear powers do likewise, and expressed its hope that the nations that must ratify the treaty for it to enter into force will do so as soon as possible. In November 2007, according to Itar-Tass, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov \u201cconfirmed Russia\u2019s unchanging support for the treaty as one of the key elements of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and an effective nuclear arms limitation tool.\u201d In September 2009, Dmitry Medvedev, president of the Russian Federation, said, \u201cwe need to encourage leading countries to sign and ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty as soon as possible in order to ensure its ultimate entry into force. That is very important.\u201d\nA Russian scholar at the Russian Academy of Sciences raised the prospect of the CTBT\u2019s collapse in an article of November 2010. Claiming that Britain and France have ratified the treaty but do", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL33548", "sha1": "64735d9d63f893092a11cd7aa8e7ad330098cc3a", "filename": "files/20150814_RL33548_64735d9d63f893092a11cd7aa8e7ad330098cc3a.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL33548", "sha1": "98d385a3b2c6c9fe157362643f871365f493f15b", "filename": "files/20150814_RL33548_98d385a3b2c6c9fe157362643f871365f493f15b.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 278, "name": "China, Taiwan, and Mongolia" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 283, "name": "Russia and the Caucasus" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 3245, "name": "Nuclear Weapons: Capabilities and Nuclear Arms Control" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4531, "name": "Defense Authorization" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc689429/", "id": "RL33548_2015Jun02", "date": "2015-06-02", "retrieved": "2015-08-03T15:06:47", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START).", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150602_RL33548_dde37beb5f50d673551528e088cfd4fd6464023e.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150602_RL33548_dde37beb5f50d673551528e088cfd4fd6464023e.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462277/", "id": "RL33548_2014Sep29", "date": "2014-09-29", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20140929_RL33548_9bec82388813995aa09caedb696cbc934ca919c6.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20140929_RL33548_9bec82388813995aa09caedb696cbc934ca919c6.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc272105/", "id": "RL33548_2013Jun10", "date": "2013-06-10", "retrieved": "2014-02-03T19:46:03", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130610_RL33548_e0d3869e9eaff3ce14794268e83e11b8901bb5ee.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130610_RL33548_e0d3869e9eaff3ce14794268e83e11b8901bb5ee.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc463473/", "id": "RL33548_2013Feb15", "date": "2013-02-15", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130215_RL33548_005940c5d0614f7a1a6e989bb0aa0de06de12d1d.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130215_RL33548_005940c5d0614f7a1a6e989bb0aa0de06de12d1d.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462987/", "id": "RL33548_2013Feb12", "date": "2013-02-12", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130212_RL33548_b2d91ad8226f638ff3eb4273c175d4b978a7cfaa.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130212_RL33548_b2d91ad8226f638ff3eb4273c175d4b978a7cfaa.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc463065/", "id": "RL33548_2013Jan02", "date": "2013-01-02", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130102_RL33548_4673c2f61823bd1f09605781c1ec25c95c9fa30b.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130102_RL33548_4673c2f61823bd1f09605781c1ec25c95c9fa30b.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc818155/", "id": "RL33548_2012Aug03", "date": "2012-08-03", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20120803_RL33548_afe75ce36d1def4cf46c7ec5f115a2efabec7b75.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20120803_RL33548_afe75ce36d1def4cf46c7ec5f115a2efabec7b75.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87314/", "id": "RL33548_2011Dec07", "date": "2011-12-07", "retrieved": "2012-07-03T07:51:21", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20111207_RL33548_d245fbbe75c1e0de9fee9aba24a4d19e7bedaa6b.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20111207_RL33548_d245fbbe75c1e0de9fee9aba24a4d19e7bedaa6b.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc814108/", "id": "RL33548_2011Oct05", "date": "2011-10-05", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20111005_RL33548_3ae1b3b14c1d0994288d7291973141e2c58253b2.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20111005_RL33548_3ae1b3b14c1d0994288d7291973141e2c58253b2.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc490878/", "id": "RL33548_2010Dec07", "date": "2010-12-07", "retrieved": "2015-01-27T19:40:46", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20101207_RL33548_2eac29e5b53cf3e2214b5f9e18fee6874335af52.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20101207_RL33548_2eac29e5b53cf3e2214b5f9e18fee6874335af52.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Treaties", "name": "Treaties" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc31412/", "id": "RL33548_2010Nov16", "date": "2010-11-16", "retrieved": "2011-03-09T09:26:47", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20101116_RL33548_b75985a4c2fae6e7bc3aa7fc18ba4073a03a1a03.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20101116_RL33548_b75985a4c2fae6e7bc3aa7fc18ba4073a03a1a03.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc626923/", "id": "RL33548_2010Jan06", "date": "2010-01-06", "retrieved": "2015-06-15T14:46:40", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosion and was in 1996 adopted by the U.N. General Assembly but rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997. This report discusses the Obama Administration's stated goal of pursuing U.S. ratification of the CTBT, although the Administration has mainly focused on securing Senate consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). This report also discusses other nuclear weapons-related issues as well as the long history of nuclear testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20100106_RL33548_5b01c0960575b0deb33ef4fa51803c66201418c9.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20100106_RL33548_5b01c0960575b0deb33ef4fa51803c66201418c9.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc627015/", "id": "RL33548_2009Nov23", "date": "2009-11-23", "retrieved": "2015-06-15T14:46:40", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the history of a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty, and addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress is considering the Stockpile Stewardship Program (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20091123_RL33548_5be7af32dfb8c50ca3538d7c6c07a7b14366d3fd.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20091123_RL33548_5be7af32dfb8c50ca3538d7c6c07a7b14366d3fd.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "International trusteeships", "name": "International trusteeships" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons information", "name": "Nuclear weapons information" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc463243/", "id": "RL33548_2009Jan28", "date": "2009-01-28", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the history of a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty, and addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress is considering the Stockpile Stewardship Program (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20090128_RL33548_2c30a64407dd283f941e3697094fb8a9121a4c49.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20090128_RL33548_2c30a64407dd283f941e3697094fb8a9121a4c49.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International trusteeships", "name": "International trusteeships" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons information", "name": "Nuclear weapons information" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462898/", "id": "RL33548_2008Sep18", "date": "2008-09-18", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses national positions on nuclear testing and the comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty (CTBT), as well as addressing nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress is considering the Stockpile Stewardship Program (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080918_RL33548_ce7130a302725d132793f11fcaa7c18f94eb27e0.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080918_RL33548_ce7130a302725d132793f11fcaa7c18f94eb27e0.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International trusteeships", "name": "International trusteeships" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons information", "name": "Nuclear weapons information" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear security measures", "name": "Nuclear security measures" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc463321/", "id": "RL33548_2008Jul09", "date": "2008-07-09", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report discusses the history of implementing a nuclear test ban; the national positions on testing and the comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty (CTBT) and the treaty's negotiations and key provisions; and Congress's consideration of the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080709_RL33548_656b6949c42ed06224a7df25b2ccac1738b28dfc.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080709_RL33548_656b6949c42ed06224a7df25b2ccac1738b28dfc.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International trusteeships", "name": "International trusteeships" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons information", "name": "Nuclear weapons information" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Military intelligence", "name": "Military intelligence" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98071/", "id": "RL33548_2008May28", "date": "2008-05-28", "retrieved": "2012-08-21T08:46:06", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress is considering the Stockpile Stewardship Program (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080528_RL33548_36b7ec95d0d298bfc1c3e2e138227dcb8659ad55.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080528_RL33548_36b7ec95d0d298bfc1c3e2e138227dcb8659ad55.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International trusteeships", "name": "International trusteeships" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons information", "name": "Nuclear weapons information" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc815422/", "id": "RL33548_2008Apr30", "date": "2008-04-30", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080430_RL33548_95648a12f83ba343d77233fb8c63e56855b79a28.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080430_RL33548_95648a12f83ba343d77233fb8c63e56855b79a28.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94057/", "id": "RL33548_2008Mar04", "date": "2008-03-04", "retrieved": "2012-07-24T12:39:36", "title": "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments", "summary": "This report provides a brief history and recent developments regarding the comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty (CTBT). The U.N. General Assembly adopted the CTBT in 1996. The report discusses the national positions on testing and the CTBT, The North Korean nuclear test, stockpile stewardship, and CTBT pros and cons.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080304_RL33548_7b8fd8d40af8881cac1d9c634daaf8054fbd6592.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080304_RL33548_7b8fd8d40af8881cac1d9c634daaf8054fbd6592.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Antinuclear weapons movements", "name": "Antinuclear weapons movements" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons tests", "name": "Nuclear weapons tests" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc815418/", "id": "RL33548_2007Dec19", "date": "2007-12-19", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20071219_RL33548_8d80826ddfa44983af0bc611a28e25d12ec0dffe.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20071219_RL33548_8d80826ddfa44983af0bc611a28e25d12ec0dffe.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817789/", "id": "RL33548_2007Jul12", "date": "2007-07-12", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20070712_RL33548_e18971791a95ecf89c76253b9d5172e3e726b531.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20070712_RL33548_e18971791a95ecf89c76253b9d5172e3e726b531.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc815145/", "id": "RL33548_2007May24", "date": "2007-05-24", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20070524_RL33548_0a1cf3e8a30262316ff7a3792fcc3216d58654b5.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20070524_RL33548_0a1cf3e8a30262316ff7a3792fcc3216d58654b5.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc821509/", "id": "RL33548_2007Apr04", "date": "2007-04-04", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": "This report discusses a comprehensive test ban treaty (CTBT). Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20070404_RL33548_9cfcd131a24b513199336eefeb6dd22dd4797162.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20070404_RL33548_9cfcd131a24b513199336eefeb6dd22dd4797162.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear nonproliferation", "name": "Nuclear nonproliferation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Arms control", "name": "Arms control" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc821772/", "id": "RL33548_2007Jan18", "date": "2007-01-18", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20070118_RL33548_792ad6902a1b20728f9cb969441e73bfb93a0317.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20070118_RL33548_792ad6902a1b20728f9cb969441e73bfb93a0317.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc807674/", "id": "RL33548_2006Nov15", "date": "2006-11-15", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20061115_RL33548_a0e2a4f3c36c1054fd23170daba810ca45ca81ce.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20061115_RL33548_a0e2a4f3c36c1054fd23170daba810ca45ca81ce.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9921/", "id": "RL33548 2006-10-11", "date": "2006-10-11", "retrieved": "2007-06-12T15:47:17", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20061011_RL33548_7ada899385b8c31cc9c018c045c5497389433061.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20061011_RL33548_7ada899385b8c31cc9c018c045c5497389433061.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Arms control agreements", "name": "Arms control agreements" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International affairs", "name": "International affairs" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10303/", "id": "RL33548_2006Oct03", "date": "2006-10-03", "retrieved": "2008-12-11T20:27:29", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": "A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. This report outlines the CTBT and related legislation.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20061003_RL33548_3e607468f4a41c0f341736e819c90196edd87323.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20061003_RL33548_3e607468f4a41c0f341736e819c90196edd87323.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International affairs", "name": "International affairs" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Arms control agreements", "name": "Arms control agreements" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10304/", "id": "RL33548_2006Aug16", "date": "2006-08-16", "retrieved": "2008-12-11T20:27:29", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": "A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. This report outlines the CTBT and related legislation.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20060816_RL33548_a38209815d4f70ecf8124ef7feb5a6903f67994d.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20060816_RL33548_a38209815d4f70ecf8124ef7feb5a6903f67994d.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "International affairs", "name": "International affairs" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Nuclear weapons", "name": "Nuclear weapons" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Arms control agreements", "name": "Arms control agreements" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc810407/", "id": "RL33548_2006Jul10", "date": "2006-07-10", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20060710_RL33548_b5052b059df1ec58ee50502f2834e020cbce1ad9.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20060710_RL33548_b5052b059df1ec58ee50502f2834e020cbce1ad9.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Appropriations", "Foreign Affairs", "Intelligence and National Security", "National Defense" ] }