<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FAS Strategic Security Blog &#187; nonproliferation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/tag/nonproliferation/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp</link>
	<description>Comments and analyses of important national and international security issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:05:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Letter Urges Super Committee to Reduce Nuclear Weapons Spending</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2011/10/letter-urges-super-committee-to-reduce-nuclear-weapons-spending.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2011/10/letter-urges-super-committee-to-reduce-nuclear-weapons-spending.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:26:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Author</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hans Kristensen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=4972</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FAS joined 48 organizations in signing a letter to United States Representatives asking them to cosign Representative Markey’s letter to members of the Super Committee. Markey’s letter urges Super Committee members to increase U.S. security by reducing spending on outdated and unaffordable nuclear weapons programs. Additionally, this support letter offers specific suggestions to Congress on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2011/10/letter-urges-super-committee-to-reduce-nuclear-weapons-spending.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Fuel Deal with Iran: Getting Back to Basics</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/11/new-fuel-deal-with-iran-getting-back-to-basics.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/11/new-fuel-deal-with-iran-getting-back-to-basics.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 14:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ioelrich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ivanka Barzashka]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear fuel cycle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uranium enrichment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=4159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Ivanka Barzashka After a year-long stalemate, Iran and the P5+1 seem to have agreed on a day for holding political talks – December 2. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman confirmed last week that the meeting “will not include discussions on fuel swap” – the deal with France, Russia and United States, also known as the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/11/new-fuel-deal-with-iran-getting-back-to-basics.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Iran&#8217;s New Dual Track: A Challenge to Negotiations?</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/07/irans-new-dual-track-and-prospects-for-a-fuel-swap.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/07/irans-new-dual-track-and-prospects-for-a-fuel-swap.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:25:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ioelrich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ivanka Barzashka]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uranium enrichment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=3384</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Ivanka Barzashka and Thomas M. Rickers Coaxed by Turkey and Brazil, Iran seems to be actively pursuing fuel talks. France, Russia and the U.S. (also known as the Vienna Group) claim that they, too, are interested in a deal, even as the U.S. and EU passed their own tougher sanctions against the Islamic Republic [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2010/07/irans-new-dual-track-and-prospects-for-a-fuel-swap.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Calculating the Capacity of Fordow &#8211; Updated Issue Brief Posted</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/12/calculating-the-capacity-of-fordow-updated-issue-brief-posted.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/12/calculating-the-capacity-of-fordow-updated-issue-brief-posted.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:26:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ioelrich</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ivan Oelrich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uranium enrichment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=2378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Ivanka Barzashka We have posted an updated version of our latest Issue Brief “Calculating the Capacity of Fordow” – the technical appendix to our November 23 article “A Technical Evaluation of the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant” published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. This is the document summary: This brief serves as a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/12/calculating-the-capacity-of-fordow-updated-issue-brief-posted.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Big Picture &#8211; what is really at stake with the START follow-on Treaty</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/07/the-big-picture-what-is-really-at-stake-with-the-start-follow-on-treaty.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/07/the-big-picture-what-is-really-at-stake-with-the-start-follow-on-treaty.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:59:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alicia Godsberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alicia Godsberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arms control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[npt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[START]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=1525</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Alicia Godsberg There is cause for cautious optimism after Presidents Obama and Medvedev signed their START follow-on Joint Understanding in Moscow last Monday – the goal of completing a legally binding bilateral nuclear disarmament agreement with verification measures is preferable to letting START expire without an agreement or without one that keeps some sort [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/07/the-big-picture-what-is-really-at-stake-with-the-start-follow-on-treaty.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US – Russia 123 Agreement on the Hill</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/06/us-%e2%80%93-russia-123-agreement-on-the-hill.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/06/us-%e2%80%93-russia-123-agreement-on-the-hill.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alicia Godsberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alicia Godsberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Proliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plutonium reprocessing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[123 Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GNEP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonproliferation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Thursday, June 12 the House Foreign Relations Committee met for over three hours and heard testimony from members of the Committee, a representative of the Bush administration, and expert witnesses regarding the pros and cons of supporting the Agreement Between the United States and Russia for Cooperation in the Field of Peaceful Uses of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/06/us-%e2%80%93-russia-123-agreement-on-the-hill.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

