January 17, 2023

Nuclear Ambiguity Beats the MAPW, CND & NPT Any Day

Hi French Anonymous. Concerning your January 15, 2023 comment:

We of the RO-NW-WG thank you for detailing the special nature of the French-Israeli nuclear and conventional weapons relationship in the 1950s to 1962. I also suspect that many from the Jewish diaspora who had been working in France’s civil and military nuclear industry has shifted to Israel by 1962.

US intelligence was aware of all of this French help from many sources (French, Israeli, Jewish diaspora, human and technical) as early as the late 1940s. This is even though the official fiction still exists that US inspectors were "fooled" in the 1960s by hastily constructed brick walls in odd places within what the US knew to be Israel's “Dimona”-Negev nuclear weapons, HEU and Pu "factory" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_Negev_Nuclear_Research_Center#Inspections

I won’t even go into US foreknowledge of India’s 1998 test program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokhran-II except to say the US was quite happy that India was developing weapons to almost match those of the mutual Indo-US enemy, ie. China.

As you say the US was too distracted by Vietnam in the 1960s to enforce any Israeli non-proliferation. Also with the Soviets sponsoring the “frontline Arab states” (eg. Egypt and Syria) against Israel, Israel’s enemies were generally America’s enemies (still are).

The NPT from the late 1960s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons#Israel changed little of what the (US, UK, Western European and Soviet) intelligence world already new since the 1950s about Israel’s nascent nuclear weapons program. That program included French supplied aircraft (Mystère IV nuclear fighter bombers protected by Mirage IIIs) and Jericho I SRBMs onwards.

Yes Israel’s nuclear ambiguity permitted plausible denial of what every major intelligence agency (and their governments) knew about Israel’s nuclear weapons program. 

Nuclear ambiguity permitting Western plausible deniability beats Australia's MAPW, the CND and NPT (that the little nuclear have nots mistakenly trust) any day.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete
to go along with your comments on "ambiguity" (only historical of course!)
These released archives shows tha the US Intelligence "spied" on the French N programm as early as 1946 and all along
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB184/index.htm
Absolutely no surprises for the Fr.(The Fr programme except in details was/is in fact never secret.as in the UK..)
A matter of jokes for many years:"We hope so !,BTW we are for real !")
(You spy on your allies , they know that .. and you know that they know..)

As early as September 1944 (nearly a year before Hiroshima ) De Gaulle was informed of the Manhattan programm at the Fr Consulate in Montreal, Canada, by Fr participants in the programm (Auger, Goldschmidt ..).Not the details but enough to become a matter for engineers,time and money..
The Fr objectives was Electricity power production, therefore the natural U route selection with subsequent Pu production(plutonium was extracted initially in 1947 in Fort de Chatillon..in the Paris suburb !). A military leg, with a bomb as objective, really started in 1954, after years of political debates (Gaullists vs Socialists/Christian democrats to over simplify)
All these "secret files" could have been written by anybody with a scientific background and a good understanding of french politics and administration ,able to read the press and all open sources: a good journalist in fact

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 18, 2023, 8:42:00 PM

Thanks for your rundown of early French interest and nuclear weapons activities.

Thanks also much for finding https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB184/index.htm which is the US National Security Archive's report dated March 21, 2006:

"U.S. Intelligence and the French Nuclear Weapons Program: Documents Show U.S. Intelligence Targeted French Nuclear Program as Early as 1946"

A particularly intriguing part of it is:

"After Allied forces landed at Normandy in June 1944, a U.S.-British unit, designated ALSOS, followed the invading troops, collecting scientists, documents, and equipment pertaining to the German nuclear program. But the United States also wanted to prevent France from acquiring nuclear expertise and equipment..."

I see the US Archive, or the US Government, is more timid to document any US coverage of ISRAEL's Nuclear Program before 1960. What is available mainly seems Golden Boy JFK centric. The only pre-JFK info seems to be
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2016-04-21/concerned-about-nuclear-weapons-potential-john-f-kennedy

"Only weeks before [JFK's] inauguration, the outgoing Eisenhower administration quietly discovered [or after long knowing what Israel was up to, decided to tell JFK] and confirmed the secret reactor at Dimona.

In mid-December [1960?] the news leaked out while the Eisenhower administration was pondering a Special National Intelligence Estimate, which asserted that, on the basis of the available evidence “plutonium production for weapons is at least one major purpose of this effort."

According to the estimate, if it was widely believed that Israel was acquiring a nuclear weapons capability it would cause “consternation” in the Arab world, with blame going to the U.S. and France for facilitating the project."

++++++++++++++++

Still the RO-NW-WG is working on harnessing Israeli and now South Korean cooperation (both could use still active Woomera eg. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/we-found-this-british-drones-secret-test-site-c03693aaf063 ) in the broad area of N Weapons, very cheap U Yellowcake availability, and missile delivery platforms.

For Israeli and SK delivery vehicle testing Australia's very large secure land areas, a long distance from threats and from many modes of enemy surveillance and Australian money are all multinational assets.

Regards Pete

Oleg7700 said...

https://nuke.fas.org/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm This large-scale and detailed study. Regards...

Pete said...

Thanks Oleg7700

https://nuke.fas.org/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm is very interesting reading.

Beinga a large-scale and detailed study "The Third Temple's Holy of Holies: ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

By Warner D. Farr, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, writing at the Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

Dated September 1999

"Abstract

This paper is a history of the Israeli nuclear weapons program drawn from a review of unclassified sources.


Israel began its search for nuclear weapons at the inception of the state in 1948.

As payment for Israeli participation in the Suez Crisis of 1956, France provided nuclear expertise and constructed a reactor complex for Israel at Dimona capable of large-scale plutonium production and reprocessing.

The United States discovered the facility by 1958 and it was a subject of continual discussions between American presidents and Israeli prime ministers. Israel used delay and deception to at first keep the United States at bay, and later used the nuclear option as a bargaining chip for a consistent American conventional arms supply.

After French disengagement in the early 1960s, Israel progressed on its own, including through several covert operations, to project completion. Before the 1967 Six-Day War, they felt their nuclear facility threatened and reportedly assembled several nuclear devices.

By the 1973 Yom Kippur War Israel had a number of sophisticated nuclear bombs, deployed them, and considered using them. The Arabs may have limited their war aims because of their knowledge of the Israeli nuclear weapons.

Israel has most probably conducted several nuclear bomb tests. They have continued to modernize and vertically proliferate and are now one of the world's larger nuclear powers. Using “bomb in the basement” nuclear opacity, Israel has been able to use its arsenal as a deterrent to the Arab world while not technically violating American nonproliferation requirements."

Regards Pete

Rai said...

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/01/britains-new-attack-submarine-to-be-first-with-vertical-launch-system

VLS for future British Attack Submarine.

Anonymous said...

https://idrw.org/opinion-brazil-proved-scorpene-class-design-can-be-enlarged-why-india-is-not-following-it/

Interesting opinion piece. Would following Brazil in making an enlarge Scorpene for the P-75A be a better option for India?

I have heard before that all of India's experience with nuclear submarines thus far has been with Russian/Soviet lineage double hull submaries and switching to a Western single hull design would be difficult.

Anonymous said...

A British SSN with VLS capabilities would work well for Australia if it deceided to develop its own nuclear capability.
The major nuclear powers have separate designs for SSNs and SSBNs because of the very different mission profiles but an SSN with VLS should be good enough for Australia and would work well for nuclear ambiguity.

Would be a great option if it could be delivered in a reasonable timeframe.

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete
Re Ano 03 37
It is not the profile only ..but the huge size
Missile on SSBN are 50 tons+ , 10 to 12 m long and 2m+ in dia (Trident or Fr M51) in order to reach(purely as an example..) China from the N of Scotland..8 to 12000 km
This represent 1200 T additionnal at the min and the need for added boyancy..added power ect

I am afraid that an SSN with VLSI based close to Australia is not going to be that ambiguous..

Anonymous said...

Seems like the agreement with Naval group for the fitment of DRDO AIP into scorpenes has been signed.

Pete said...

Hi Rai @Jan 22, 2023, 4:03:00 AM

Thanks for drawing H I Sutton's, January 19, 2023 article "Britain’s New Attack Submarine To Be First With VLS" to my attentioin [that's good news the SSN(R) will be the first UK SSN with VLS :-]

at https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/01/britains-new-attack-submarine-to-be-first-with-vertical-launch-system

+++++++++++++

I broached VLS for UK SSN(R)s on January 7, 2023 when I wrote "US Nuclear Weapon Sharing Under AUKUS? Addition." at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/01/us-nuclear-weapon-sharing-under-aukus.html

which included:

"... UK SSN(R)s, maybe available in the 2040s, might also be armed with 4 VPTs (hence 12 hypersonic missiles)."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Earlier on August 2, 2022 I wrote "Donor Report: UK and Australian Future SSNs Will Need VPMs"

[Which read in part] "Future Australian and UK SSNs (aka SSN(R)) will need at least two vertical firing Virginia Payload Modules (VPMs). This is because the hypersonic missiles being developed will be of larger diameter and likely longer/taller than the UK RN's 533mm torpedo tube fired 520mm Tomahawks..."

See my "Donor Report: UK and Australian Future SSNs Will Need VPMs" of August 2, 2022

reposted on January 24, 2023 as "Suggested VLS for UK SSN(R)s on Aug 2, 2022" at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/01/suggested-vls-for-uk-ssnrs-on-aug-2-2022.html

Cheers Pete

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 24, 2023, 2:28:00 AM

Thanks for the infoo "Seems like the agreement with Naval group for the fitment of DRDO AIP into scorpenes has been signed."

+++++++++++++++++

Hi Anonymous @Jan 23, 2023, 3:26:00 PM

Re: "Would following Brazil in making an enlarge Scorpene for the P-75A be a better option for India?"

I think the beauty of India building an additional 6 Kalvari-Scorpenes "Batch 2s" is that India already has a operating Kalvari production line.

That means there will be minimal delay in turning the SERIOUSLY LONG DELAYED P-75A Program into 6 Kalvari-Scorpenes Batch 2s. Also it would save time and money as the Indian Navy is already familiar with Kalvari-Scorpenes Batch 1s.

Common spare parts betweem Batch 1s and 2s will be another efficiency and money saver.

Regards Pete

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 23, 2023, 3:37:00 PM

Yes I agree with your statements "A British SSN with VLS capabilities would work well for Australia if it deceided to develop its own nuclear capability...an SSN with VLS should be good enough for Australia and would work well for nuclear ambiguity.

Would be a great option if it could be delivered in a reasonable timeframe."

My concern is as the UK's future class of SSN aka "SSN(R)" likely to have VLS

will be delayed if part or wholey built in Osborne, Adelaide and will only be commissioned into the RAN from the late 2040s

which sadly is an unreasonable timeframe given Australia's China threat.

Regards Pete

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 23, 2023, 8:30:00 PM

Your calculations and conclusions look accurate.

This is why Australian future SSNs with VLS (eg. 4 x VPTs) perhaps containing the new Hypersonic missiles and/or ballistic missile boosters will (and can) be stationed far north of Australia several 1,000kms from China (east of and outside China's "first island chain") to act as a second strike deterrent against China.

For an Australian SSN, with VLS, perhaps a hypersonic glide warhead on Polaris sized 2 stage boosters = 9.9m tall by 1.4m diameter see right sidebar at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-27_Polaris . Range with modern propellants would be 5,000+ km.

Regards Pete

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 20, 2023, 10:23:00 AM

Thanks for the amazing account of a rocket boosted French Mirage (likely a IIIC) intercepting a US U-2 overflight snooping on France's nuclear weapons program. Citing https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-story-of-the-french-air-force-mirage-iii-that-buzzed-a-u-2-flying-at-65000-ft-on-a-mission-to-spy-on-frances-nuclear-facilities/

"In June 1967 – a year after French President Charles de Gaulle withdrew
his country from NATO – early warning radars of the French Air Force
detected a U-2 underway in the direction of one of the country’s nuclear
facilities."

"Equipped with the SEPR 841 rocket booster, the interceptor literally
soared into the skies, though not with the aim of actually shooting down
the US aircraft – but to photograph it: photographs were of crucial
importance for enabling Paris to provide evidence for a violation of its
airspace in the case of the US denial.

After climbing to an altitude of 45,000ft (13,716m), the French pilot
engaged his SEPR booster, which accelerated his Mirage to Mach 1.8, and
enabled it to reach an altitude of 65,000ft (19,812m). While slightly
decelerating to Mach 1.7, the French pilot caught with the U-2 as this
was underway at Mach 0.9 and almost directly above Dijon AB. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijon_Air_Base#Postwar_history ]"

Comment: Lucky the Mirage IIIC didn't shoot down the U-2 (although the U-2 pilot must have pooed his pants) rather the Mirage photographed the U-2, in a friendly fashion, as evidence.

Regards Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete
In 1964 ( operation Fish Hawk, name and details known now), U2, with special cameras, modified to operate from the USS Ranger were detected twice above Mururoa atoll in the Tuamotu area.The French detected it but could not do anything,65000ft.They were mad at the US denial

So special mesures were taken to obtain proofs.On 17 july 1965 an RF101 Voodow was intercepted by a Vautour at 700ft above Pierrelatte, the film were requested and175 images were handed back (copies were made of course secretly)
This is why the US came back to the U2..

These activities were made against the State Dpt or the CIA advice (we know now ) and even Allen Dulles ("a genteleman ask hard questions to afriend, a spy steal a piece of paper in his pocket"
The Fr N programm was never secret except in some details.How can you hide Pierrelatte across the M7 motorway one of the busyiest in Europe , surrounded by heavyly populatedfarmland !

This was plain stupid , as the Fr Gov , just organized press leaks, enjoying the US successive stories (denial, yes but plane lost its route,we gave back the image..)

Any organization is fighting first for its budget, and need to show its worth to its "master". Not only in the US but everywhere,not only beetween Services (AF vs Navy ect)..

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 25, 2023, 7:55:00 AM

Thanks for your info about 1964-65 French reactions to US aircraft spying on the French nuclear weapons program. But US HumInt provided more info.

Catapult launching off and landing a U-2G on USS Ranger was a risky business as the delicate wings could easily be damaged, even torn off. Also a U-2 didn't have the rapid acceleration jet engine settings usually required of carrier aircraft. See https://youtu.be/wmFgM7Ymv08?t=6m25s

U-2G on USS Ranger described at https://youtu.be/wmFgM7Ymv08?t=8m

https://youtu.be/wmFgM7Ymv08?t=8m56s U-2G on USS Ranger "MONITORING FRENCH NUCLEAR WEAPON TESTS IN FRENCH POLYNESIA"

Australia was publicly opposed to French testing at Mururoa atoll, east of Tahiti, while the Aus Gov relied on the US nuclear umbrella.

I see "Pierrelatte", in mainland France, hosted a large Uranium Enrichment plant so a US RF101 Voodow flying over it was easily intercepted - a French success.

But this victory distracted France from the reality that the US had many "HumInt" informants within the Fr N Program. These informants also monitored the many aspects of Fr assistance (1960s and later) to Israel's N weapons program.

True the USAF, USN, NSA and CIA U-2 Program and later the NRO satellite programs all needed to justify these hugely expensive technical approaches.

..when human informants for the CIA andd DIA provided most of the intel, at much less cost.

Regards Pete

Anonymous said...

Humint is in most case legal in open Societies. Not a secret project since the beginnning

I bet you that the Scientific Attaché in the US embassy in Paris requested and obtained a visit in Pierrelatte after a few lunches and a train ticket (Off limits parts probably)and probably more than once.
Why would have the Fr Gov. refused ?

Nearly all the leaks in the US or UK programmes were human, at the highest level, and not amways for monetary reasons

Pete said...

Hi Anonymous @Jan 27, 2023, 12:51:00 AM

Where you say "Humint is in most case legal in open Societies."

I'm talking about Secret or TS humint gathered eg. by US case offices many decades ago on French territory, which, by definition, breaks French law.

French counter-intelligence (CI) security officers my practice some latitude or discretion on whether France tolerates some spying by a nation friendly to France - perhaps quietly declaring "friendly" US case offices persona non grata (aka "PNGing").

Here a case of French DGSI CI loudly PNGing hostile country Russian "spies" https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-04-11/france-declares-six-russian-spies-persona-non-grata-over-clandestine-operation

Cheers Pete