nb_cid nb_clickOther -tt-nb this.style.behavior='url(#default#homepage)';this.setHomePage('http://www.aol.com/?mtmhp=acmpolicybanner081514 network-banner-promo mtmhpBanner
14
Search AOL Mail
AOL Mail
Video
Video
AOL Favorites
Favorites
Menu

World leaders gather for Hague Nuclear Summit



AMSTERDAM (AP) -- Nuclear terrorism is officially the main topic for world leaders at a two-day summit in the Netherlands starting Monday. In practice, the Ukraine crisis will likely overshadow those talks.

The Nuclear Security Summit in the Hague will form the backdrop for an emergency meeting of Group of Seven leaders on Russia's annexation of Crimea. It's a confrontation between Russia and the West reminiscent of the Cold War.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is not attending, instead sending Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who is expected to hold talks with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

But experts say frantic diplomacy focused on Ukraine shouldn't divert from the goal of better security of nuclear material.

"International attention can turn in a moment," said Deepti Choubey, a senior director at the non-government Nuclear Threat Initiative. "The attentions of terrorists do not."

Delegations from 53 countries, including the leaders of the U.S., China and Japan, have started to arrive in the Hague. They will meet to negotiate on reducing and securing supplies, and keeping them out of terrorists' hands. The G-7 includes the U.S., Britain, Germany, Japan, France, Italy and Canada.

Notable absentees from the summit are North Korea and Iran, excluded by mutual consent.

The summit is the third since US President Barack Obama launched the series in 2009 shortly after taking office, saying that reducing the risk of a terrorist attack with either a nuclear weapon or a "dirty bomb" was one of his most important international policy goals.

Because countries usually regard protecting nuclear weapons and facilities as a confidential sovereign matter, the summits center on individual commitments by participants and conclude with a non-binding accord.

Still, they already have reached tangible results.

The number of countries that possess enough highly enriched uranium or plutonium to make a bomb has fallen steadily, from 39 before the first conference in Washington in 2010 to 25 at the start of the Hague summit.

Piet de Klerk, the Dutch diplomat who chaired negotiations before the summit, says a further large drop in numbers is unlikely.

But he says The Hague closing accord will likely include a new commitment to reduce plutonium stores. That is particularly relevant for Japan, which owns a large plutonium stockpile even as it reevaluates its use of nuclear power in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

Additionally, the Netherlands, with help from the U.S. and South Korea, is weaving together all existing nuclear arms treaties, agreements and voluntary guidelines for military, industry and civilian use into a single package of "best practices" for nuclear security. The three host nations and an unknown number of others will vow to adhere to this package as much as possible.

Kenneth Luongo, of the Partnership for Global Security, said that the willingness of countries to commit to "essentially what's already on the books" will act as a litmus test to show which countries are taking security seriously.

"I would hope that by 2016 everybody would be on board," he said.

What's likely to be left for a final summit back in Washington in 2016 is a mechanism for countries to request a confidential independent review of their security practices, presumably conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

While Ukraine is likely to dominate diplomacy behind the scenes in The Hague, it already is a nuclear success story.

The country voluntarily gave the nuclear weapons housed on its soil back to Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union and following through on a 2010 summit promise, has recently disposed of its remaining stock of around 80 kilograms (176 pounds) of highly enriched uranium.

Choubey of the NTI said that underlines the importance of the process.

"How much more concerned would the world be today (about the crisis in Ukraine) if that material were still there?" she said.

Join the discussion

1000|Char. 1000  Char.
ferrellfarmer March 23 2014 at 5:35 PM

So let me get this straight a Muslim who is the worst president in history is leading this and going to tell the world how they should let him rule. LMFAO WOW . And not to mention he and his dumb dumb wifr got DISBARED LMFAO WOW good going USA

Flag Reply +7 rate up
Deano March 23 2014 at 1:13 PM

Where is OBLAMA and the rest of the world when it comes to Russia??

Flag Reply +3 rate up
1 reply
randihpnc246 Deano March 23 2014 at 2:10 PM

Nowhere!

Flag Reply +2 rate up
charlie March 23 2014 at 1:06 PM

today it seems as though everyone rattling their Sabers and only upseting each other. Washington keeps harping on what other foreign countries can & can't do. Whispered threats from the Whitehouse and Putin doesn't helping either. If Oboma would keep his big mouth shut about sanctions and stop cutting our armed forces and spending a fortune on his wife and kids exorbitant vacation and just thake care of business at home should be the starting point; Putin could care less about Oboma and his threats. one final question, Who is watching and guarding Alaskan borders on the Barent straights. Seawards Icebox just a hop, skip, and a jump over the Barent Sea then we're in deep trouble. remember It have oil,gold and other assets I suppose the Kremlin may like to get.

Flag Reply +1 rate up
teluwo312 March 23 2014 at 12:46 PM

harmony ,wisdom would prevail .

Flag Reply +1 rate up
extpd311 March 23 2014 at 9:24 PM

So......we should feel better that the Ukraine gave its nuclear weapons back to Russia??? Doesn't that mean that Putin now has control of them?

Flag Reply +6 rate up
1 reply
waltervlod extpd311 March 23 2014 at 11:47 PM

Yipper!
Apparently they were never dismantled according to the Budapest Memorandum.
Putin eventually put 'em in his back pocket.
I hope they blow his a$$ off.

Flag Reply +2 rate up
rwgebo1889 March 23 2014 at 12:18 PM

Ok, I wonder is this (and the reducing sanctions against Iran) what Obama meant with his off-mike statement concerning him having more freedom to wheel and deal after the 2012 elections?

Flag Reply +4 rate up
Paula March 23 2014 at 11:20 PM

There are more and more small countries that have nuclear and military capabilities. Yet we are decreasing our defense by military and updating our defense. We will no longer be a "superpower". If they put our military down below WW II, close bases, they have already caused multiple defense contractors to close plants, what will happen if we have a serious problem? It takes a minimum of 2-6 months training for a soldier, it is all voluntary not draft like WW I & II and Viet NAm. It would be nice if there was peace globally, but be realistic, and budget accordingly. Deceasing the defense budget is increasing the need for unemployment. Several plants are closing, military bases close and several civilians were employed there. The towns built up around them shut down.The military is decreased, and there are no jobs. So many people no longer have unemployment benefits, so they are not counted in the "unemployment %). We need someone with military experience in these offices. If you want to cut spending, stop promising financial aid to other countries, help your own people who have paid taxes here. Russia WAS friendly before, now it isn't. Just like we no longer need a big military because there isn't a big war. I think the secretary of defense said that.

Flag Reply +4 rate up
steblawar March 23 2014 at 12:10 PM

The wolrd might be more concerned if Ukraine still had nuclear weapons -- but then Russia probably wouldn't have invaded them and stole part of their country, with a good chance of stealing more in the near future. Definitely a success story for Russia -- as soon as Ukraine finishes keeping it's word, Putin broke Russia's.

Flag Reply +1 rate up
1 reply
Janwa2 steblawar March 23 2014 at 1:03 PM

its all democrats n republicans, none r worth a nickel Fact

Flag Reply 0 rate up
vigoddess March 23 2014 at 12:00 PM

IT WOULD TAKE A CRAZY DICTATOR WITH AN I.Q.
OF 40 TO EVEN THINK OF USING A NUCLEAR WAR,
BECAUSE NOBODY WINS ANYTHING. YOU CANNOT
TOUCH, EAT, OR USE EVEN A PILE OF A MILLION DOLLAR
BANK NOTES, OR GOLD BRICKS AFTER THE FACT.
THE RUSSIANS KNOW THAT FROM CHENOBYL ALONE.
WARS ARE FOUGHT FOR THE SPOILS; THE LAND; THE
PEOPLE TO ENSLAVE; THE FOOD; EVEN THE OIL, YET
YOU GAIN NOTHING. YOU CANNOT EVEN USE THE LAND
YOU CONQUERED OR ENTER IT WITHOUT RISKING YOUR
LIFE WITHOUT A SINGLE BULLET BEING FIRED. THEY
ALL KNOW THAT, EVEN IRAN. WE HAVE MORE TO FEAR
FROM THE OIL COMPANIES THAT AREN'T MAINTAINING
THEIR PIPES BECAUSE MAINTENANCE OFFERS NO PROFIT,
AND IF OIL GETS INTO THE WATER TABLE, WE WILL PAY
MORE FOR A GALLON OF WATER THAN GAS OR HEAT.
NO WATER. NO CROPS. NO WATER. NO CATTLE OR
FOOD. THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM THAT HAS NOTHING
TO DO WITH POLITICS, BUT IT'S DOUBTFUL THEY'LL
EVEN ALLOW THIS COMMENT BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING
TO DO WTIH MONEY.

Flag Reply +4 rate up
chst586 March 23 2014 at 11:37 AM

Anyone want to guess what our next false flag attack is going to be ? I wonder who we'll blame it on this time ?

Flag Reply +3 rate up
1 reply
slowinski5 chst586 March 23 2014 at 12:26 PM

where was the last? Iraq?

Flag Reply 0 rate up
aol~~ 1209600

Voting...

More From Our Partners