Subject:

Message:
> In one of his suggestions, Pedro reminded me of something I noticed the first time I was working on the database so long ago. It seemed to me that many nations were missing from the list of nuclear powers. I feel now, as I did then, that this area of the game needs adjustment. > Unless otherwise cited, the following information came from chapter 7 of Casey Sublette' "Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions" on the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website. A second great source from FAS is the Nuclear Forces Guide. > http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/Nwfaq/Nfaq7.html > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/index.html > - India should have nuclear designs and units, and their nuclear research facility should be moved from Srinagar to Junagadh. "The center piece of India's nuclear weapons program is the Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC) near Bombay which is the presumed center for nuclear weapons associated work." Junagadh is the logical choice being that it is the closest military Indian base to Bombay. "India is generally estimated as having approximately 60 nuclear weapons. In May 1998 G. Balachandran, an Indian nuclear researcher, estimated India had fewer than 10 weapons ready to be assembled and mounted on warplanes or missiles." (According to FAS) If their 1998 atomic test results are any indication, India's best nuclear designs are not exceedingly powerful, registering from 12 to 25 kilotons in strength. > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/nuke/index.html > - Pakistan should have a research facility, and nuclear designs and units, as made obvious by post-1997 events. "..In August 1994, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said "I confirm that Pakistan possesses the atomic bomb" although the government repudiated the statement (but admitted having the capability to make them)." Pakistan's 1998 underground atomic tests > indicate that their devices are weaker than India's, yielding a maximum of 7 to 8 kilotons. > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/index.html > - Israel should be given a military base, a research facility, and some nuclear weapon designs and units for their officially unacknowledged, but generally accepted, nuclear arsenal. Israel has about 50 Jerico I and 50 Jerico II medium range ballistic missiles according to FAS. "Despite Israel's refusal to acknowledge its nuclear weapons status, its secret arsenal is an open > secret that Israeli policy makers don't go out of their way to deny. From its beginnings in the mid-1960s, Israel's program has developed into one that rivals those of larger powers like France and Britain." (according to MSNBC) More on the Jerico I and Jerico II missiles: > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/missile/jericho-1.htm > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/missile/jericho-2.htm > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/summary.htm > http://archive.msnbc.com/modules/Israel_Strategic/ > - Iran should have a research facility, but no nuclear capability. "[Iran] has a nuclear research center at Isfahan, employing some 3000 people at several locations in this city. There is allegedly a secret research facility at Moallam Keliah near the Caspian Sea." Reports seem to indicate that Iran is nearly able a to make a nuclear bomb (in the year 2000), assuming they > have not made one already. > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/index.html > - Japan, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and others (possibly Argentina, Brazil, Iraq, Sweden, Switzerland, and Algeria) might fall into the "could make a bomb if they wanted to" category and be given nuclear research facilities. For instance, the president of Taiwan has said "[Taiwan] has the ability to develop nuclear weapons, but we will definitely not [develop them]." > - "[South Africa] is the only nation known to have developed nuclear weapons, and then voluntarily relinquished that capability. On 24 March 1993 Pres. F. W. De Klerk announced that South Africa had produced nuclear weapons, but had destroyed their arsenal before 10 July 1991, when South Africa joined the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]. South Africa should be given > nuclear designs, and possibly a nuclear facility, to simulate the country's past experience with nuclear weapons. > - North Korea should have a nuclear research facility. "There are reportedly as many as 22 nuclear facilities in 18 locations in North Korea. These include uranium mines, refinery plants, nuclear fuel plants, nuclear reactors, reprocessing facilities, and research facilities." (according to FAS) > http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/facility/other_nuke.htm