
Note: The following article was written to promote IAEA inspections in Yugoslavia during the NATO bombing campaign. That effort succeeded and the IAEA did an inspection at Vinca on 3-4 June 1999. For further information on the effort to get inspections see the New York Times (19 April 1999 and 5 May 1999) and the Reuters (4 June 1999).
We will continue to follow and encourage monthly inspections of the Vinca site.
Should we worry about 60 kilograms
of 80 percent highly enriched uranium at the Vinca Institute of
Nuclear Science outside Belgrade being turned into nuclear weapons
by a desperate Yugoslav government? What if Yugoslavia becomes
unstable or physical protection becomes weakened, leaving the
highly enriched uranium vulnerable to theft by a criminal group
or a country such as Iraq, which has had a long and often secret
relationship with Yugoslavia? What if President Slobodan Milosevic
or another senior official decides to trade the material for military
or political assistance? There is enough material to make two
nuclear weapons of the implosion-type design, or one of the simpler-to-make
gun-type design.
Worries are greater because the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) has not inspected the highly enriched uranium since late
January. It was scheduled to conduct monthly inspections of the
fuel, but did not obtain visas to go to Yugoslavia in February
or March because the Yugoslavian government said that it could
not guarantee the safety of the inspectors. With war breaking
out, the United Nations issued an advisory on March 23, 1999 to
its employees not to travel on official business to Yugoslavia
without special permission (unless they are humanitarian relief
workers or security personnel for UN staff and even then this
travel be must approved on a case-by-case basis).
In a meeting on April 7 in Vienna, senior IAEA officials decided
not to ask Yugoslavia for permission to go to Vinca. However,
the IAEA wrote Yugoslavia on April 9 that it is ready to send
an inspection mission as soon as circumstances will allow. In
the letter, the IAEA stressed that Yugoslavia was responsible
to maintain adequate physical protection of its highly enriched
uranium and to leave the material in place.
The IAEA was responding to a letter from the Yugoslavian ambassador
in Vienna, who raised the potential danger of attacking the nuclear
site. The ambassador asked the IAEA to raise the issue with NATO
and the United Nations, asking in the course of the letter for
help in ending the bombing. The letter did not contain any veiled
threats about the fate of the highly enriched uranium.
US officials have said that the site is not a target of NATO bombs
or missiles. Attacking the site would violate a U.S. policy (albeit
reversed in the case of Iraq and never publicly stated) not to
bomb sites inspected by the IAEA. A bombing raid would also give
Yugoslavia a legitimate reason to secrete away the highly enriched
uranium under the pretense of protecting it. Such an attack could
also spread radioactive contamination into the surrounding area.
Making matters worse, the site is no longer isolated and housing
developments have been built around the site.
Nonetheless, the lack of IAEA inspections can fuel suspicions
about Yugoslavia's intentions with this nuclear explosive material
or its ability to protect it adequately. In a worst- case, these
suspicions could cause NATO or its members to distort or miscalculate
the situation. On the other hand, IAEA inspections could help
deter Yugoslavia from diverting the highly enriched uranium and
encourage it to protect the material better.
Past Nuclear Efforts
Although Yugoslavia is reported to have had a nuclear weapons
program several decades ago, it did not progress very far before
it abandoned the program. (1) Based on an extensive survey of
public Yugoslavian scientific and technical documents, Mark Gorwitz,
an independent researcher, concluded that "nuclear research
has declined since the 1970s at Vinca." (2)
The Soviet Union provided 80 percent highly enriched uranium fuel
for a large research reactor and for a small zero-power reactor.
The highly enriched uranium and Yugoslavia's reactors are under
IAEA safeguards to ensure their peaceful use. The large reactor
has been shut down for years, but the highly enriched uranium
fuel remains. Some of this fuel has also been used in the zero-power
reactor, which has been used for civil research.
About 50 kilograms of the material is in fresh or unirradiated
fuel, and another ten kilograms is in only slightly irradiated
fuel. Enrichment of the 60 kilograms of highly enriched uranium
remains at 80 percent.
Additional Soviet-supplied highly enriched uranium is contained
in spent fuel. This fuel was irradiated in the large civil research
reactor prior to its shutdown.
Until recently, the Vinca site was transparent to a large number
of IAEA inspectors and safety and physical protection experts.
A couple of years ago, the site upgraded physical security over
the highly enriched uranium with the help of the IAEA and the
United States. Safety experts from the IAEA, Russia, and western
countries have helped the site operators store irradiated fuel
more safely. The most serious remaining safety problem involves
about 5,000 low enriched uranium and highly enriched uranium spent
fuel elements from the large reactor stored in 30 aluminum casks
in a murky water pool. (3) These casks require careful treatment
to prevent an accidental leak of radioactive material. As of mid-April,
IAEA safety officials had been unable to reach anyone at the Vinca
site for two weeks. Western experts have not been there for weeks,
although a few Russian experts may still be there. Nucleonics
Week reported on April 1 that the head of the Vinca site had
been "suddenly sacked for political reasons in recent weeks."
The significance, if any, of his termination is unknown.
Diversion
Despite the site's increasing international isolation, most officials
interviewed in the course of preparing this paper believe that
Yugoslavia would not divert the highly enriched uranium and, in
fact, would have a hard time producing a nuclear weapon. Why would
President Slobodan Milosevic risk alienating his Russian allies,
his most important friends right now? Even though Russia strongly
opposes the NATO strikes against its Slavic cousin, it is unlikely
to tolerate a decision by Yugoslavia to arm itself with nuclear
weapons, or for that matter, to accept deteriorating physical
protection arrangements over the Russian-supplied highly enriched
uranium.
No evidence of any current weapons work exists. IAEA and U.S.
officials have given no indication that Yugoslavia could produce
a nuclear explosive quickly, i.e. within weeks or a few months,
or that it has any intentions to do so. However, information that
allows an independent judgement of Yugoslavia's intentions or
current technical capability is limited. If the Yugoslavian government
decided to make a nuclear explosive, it may be able to do so,
although probably not quickly.
Theft
A more pressing concern is that the physical security of the highly
enriched uranium may become compromised. Yugoslavia's security
forces are focused elsewhere. The current situation may make the
highly enriched uranium more vulnerable to theft in the coming
weeks. Several countries, including Iraq, may be tempted to take
advantage of the current situation. Criminal elements likewise
may also be tempted.
If the position of the Milosevic government becomes more desperate,
it may be tempted to use the highly enriched uranium as a bargaining
chip to acquire assistance from other states. Senior officials
may be tempted to sell the material themselves for personal gain,
if the regime is collapsing.
Getting the IAEA Back into Yugoslavia
The IAEA needs to resume its regular inspections of Vinca's nuclear
activities, in particular to verify as soon as possible that the
highly enriched uranium remains in storage at the Vinca site and
is adequately protected. It should also try to satisfy itself
anew that Yugoslavia does not have a nuclear weapons program.
The latter determination is important, because Yugoslavia could
build the infrastructure to make nuclear weapons in secret and
divert the highly enriched uranium between inspections.
How to get the IAEA into Yugoslavia? Russia could play a constructive
role by asking the Yugoslavian government to invite inspectors.
Whatever its differences with NATO and the United States in particular,
Russia is unlikely to want Yugoslavia to give any impression,
inadvertent or deliberate, that it may divert this material, or
that it has lost control over the highly enriched uranium. Russia
might also be willing to help in the longer-term by taking Yugoslavia's
highly enriched uranium fuel back home, as it did with the Soviet-
and French- supplied Iraqi highly enriched uranium fuel.
It is in Yugoslavia's interest to invite the IAEA to inspect the
fuel. Yugoslavia has not sent any signals to the IAEA or others
that it would not allow inspections, only that it is unable to
guarantee the safety of the inspectors.
The safety of the inspectors is paramount, however. According
to a western ambassador in Geneva who is handling refugee issues
for his country, UN personnel remain at serious risk in all Serb-controlled
territories. As a result, the Yugoslavian government would need
to provide adequate assurances to the inspectors that it would
protect them. NATO would need to signal that it would not bomb
the Vinca site. The IAEA would require special permission from
the United Nations as long as the UN security advisory remains
in effect.
Inspectors could also be asked to volunteer for this IAEA mission.
The IAEA has many inspectors who have worked in risky situations
in Iraq and elsewhere.
It is vital to verify that the risk of theft of the highly enriched
uranium is minimized More importantly, the specter of nuclear
weapons is a wild card that no one should play.
1 See for example, Andrew Koch, "Yugoslavia's
Nuclear Legacy: Should We Worry?" The Nonproliferation
Review, Spring/Summer 1997, pp. 123-128.
2 Telephone interview, April 15, 1999.
3 Mark Hibbs, "Crisis, Air War, Hold Up Cleanup of Vinca
Spent Fuel," Nucleonics Week, April 1, 1999.