Thread by @ArmsControlWonk

A few more thoughts on the claims that Russia is conducting low-yield nuclear testing at the Novaya Zemlya test site.

https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1139402573922750464

While I do think it is strange that @DefenseIntel released the statement rather than @ODNIgov, if one looks at the @StateAVC compliance reports over the past few years, it is clear that the idea that Russia was conducting low-yield nuclear tests was gaining steam inside the IC.

A faction within the IC has been arguing since the 90s that Russia is conducting low-yield nuclear explosions. I would caution these arguments have led to embarrassing mistakes, like démarching Moscow over an earthquake. Still, stopped watches and all.
nytimes.com/2001/03/04/wor…

It is easy to see the factions fighting over the wording in the annual @StateAVC compliance report. Most of these reports, like the 2016 version, punt and conclude "it is difficult to assess the compliance of a given state with its own moratorium."
2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/rls/rpt/…

That changed in an interesting way in 2017 (and again in 2018) when this phrase appeared: "Additional country information is provided in higher classification reporting."
state.gov/2017-report-on…

That assessment roughly coincides individuals like @SecDef19 arguing that Russia might resume nuclear testing. At that time we tasked a satellite to image the test site and found that Russia was giving it a pretty serious make-over.
foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/09/not…

If you want to see some of those satellite images, you can take a virtual tour of the Novaya Zemlya nuclear test site that @annemp13 and I created for @NTI_WMD.
nti.org/newsroom/news/…

The 2019 @StateAVC Compliance Report simply dropped the section on compliance with test moratoria. That might have reflected the changing assessment, but it might also just have reflected the fact that Republicans are skeptical of arms control and loathe the test ban.

Bush's State Department only managed to produce 2 compliance reports in 8 years and neither covered the moratoria. Some people in the Bush Administration wanted to resume nuclear testing and I suspect no one at State wanted o get crosswise if the testing crowd won out.

All of this is to say that people have been making these claims for a long time and Russia has modernized its nuclear test site. There might even be some SIGINT or human sources, although our experience with both leading up to the invasion of Iraq should serve as a caution.

And of course there is this other thing. WE COULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. As @sbidgood, @annemp13 and myself have all argued, the US and Russia could negotiate definitions, permitted activities and a series of test site transparency measures.
nti.org/analysis/artic…