<<  <  >  >>

CTR funding may

project, run primarily by DoE, and the CTR

the Russian government using its own envi-

decommissioning program are considered

ronmental mess as a bargaining chip to bring

even be helping to

both strategic military projects and efforts to

in additional American funding. Scandals

finance modern-

provide environmental security. Whichever

about the use of American money keep sur-

ization of Russia's

justification is chosen, its history has not

facing: most recently, a report by the inspec-

been smooth. Especially when environmental

tor general of DoE revealed that funds given

strategic weapons

security is invoked, there are various difficul-

to assist Russian institutes may have been

by paying for the

ties.

taxed by the Russian government, and

Efficiency is one of them. The problems of

almost $1 million was allocated to projects

disposal of old

the CTR program, for example, are well doc-

"for which little actual reduction of risk to

equipment.

umented.7 6 After a very slow start, caused by

weapons-usable  nuclear  material  was

achieved."8 2

the realization that none of the necessary

infrastructure was in place, a total of 12

Russian National Pride

nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarines

of a planned 31 were dismantled between

Bringing in money is one thing, but what

1991 and the end of 1999 at a cost of $75 mil-

about U.S. control of projects and the pres-

lion.7 7 In addition, CTR focuses only on

ence of U.S. officials on Russian soil? For the

moment, as one senior DoE official has

Russia's START I obligations; other sub-

noted, the Russians are willing to go along

marines still awaiting decommissioning,

with anything as long as the Americans are

which are often older and pose a greater envi-

bringing in money. How long that will

ronmental risk, are not covered by the

remain the case remains to be seen. The

scheme. Considering that the cost of decom

-

potential for resentment lies in the back-

missioning just one submarine may be as

ground. For many Russians, particularly mil-

high as $4 million, and that the total cost of

itary officials accustomed to thinking of

scrapping all submarines currently out of ser-

America as the enemy, it may be galling to see

vice has been estimated at nearly $1 billion, it

is clear that Russia has a problem.7 8 Total

long-time adversaries on their territory. This

is compounded by the sensitive nature of

CTR funding in Russia--for all projects, not

many U.S. activities in Russia. For example,

just submarine disposal--stood at $1.7 bil-

lion for fiscal 1999.7 9The British Foreign and

Murmansk was until recently a closed city,

inaccessible to foreign visitors and to most of

Commonwealth Office estimates, however,

the Soviet populace. The legacy of such secre-

that the cost of keeping the decommissioned

cy has been environmental mismanagement

submarines afloat is as high as $100 million

per year.8 0

of unforeseen proportions. The Russians are

therefore naturally sensitive about foreign

attention in the area--so sensitive, in fact, as

Shifting Responsibilities

to charge Aleksandr Nikitin, a former naval

However, by funding many of the nuclear

officer, with espionage over his revelations of

cleanup projects, the United States may be

Russian dumping of nuclear waste at sea.8 3

freeing Russian funds for other activities.

When Prime Minister Vladimir Putin

Russian embarrassment about decades of

requested an additional $1 billion from the

environmental mismanagement combines

Duma to continue his prosecution of the war

with a desire for secrecy about current mili-

in Chechnya, he could do so in the knowl-

tary activities to create a serious obstacle to

edge that other pressing domestic problems

American activities in the region. The United

were being taken care of by the U.S. govern-

States has recognized this resentment, and

ment. In addition, CTR funding may even be

some activities have had to be hidden behind

helping to finance modernization of Russia's

a veil of international cooperative efforts

strategic weapons by paying for the disposal

such as the Arctic Military Environmental

of old equipment.8 1 It is not hard to envision

Cooperation agreement. There is also a sus-

16