Hello /r/AskHistorians! I am Alex Wellerstein, a regular contributor here, and this week my first book RESTRICTED DATA: THE HISTORY OF NUCLEAR SECRECY IN THE UNITED STATES (University of Chicago Press, 2021) is finally available for purchase! Note that if you are interested in buying a signed and inscribed copy (for no additional cost, but it will be slower than ordering it normally, as I will be signing them all individually), see the instructions here.
I've spend some 15 years researching the history of nuclear technology (mostly weapons, but some power topics, especially where the two categories intersect) and researching the history of governmental and scientific secrecy in the United States. I am presently an Assistant Professor (recently promoted to Associate with tenure, starting in August) at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey. I am best-known on the internet for being the creator of the NUKEMAP online nuclear weapons effects simulator.
RESTRICTED DATA covers the attempt in the United States by scientists, government administrators, and the military to try to control the spread of nuclear weapons technology through the spread of information about how said technology works. Here is the relevant "summary of the book" paragraph from the Introduction:
The American nuclear secrecy “regime” has evolved several times from its emergence in the late 1930s through our present moment in the early twenty-first century. Each chapter of this book explores a key shift in how nuclear secrecy was conceived of, made real in the world, and challenged. Roughly speaking, one can divide the history of American nuclear secrecy into three major parts: the birth of nuclear secrecy, the solidification of the Cold War nuclear secrecy regime, and the challenges to the regime that began in the late Cold War and continue into the present.
Part I (chapters 1–3) narrates the origins of nuclear secrecy in the context of World War II. This was a secrecy initially created as an informal “self-censorship” campaign run by a small band of refugee nuclear physicists who feared that any publicized research into the new phenomena of nuclear fission would spark a weapons program in Nazi Germany. As the possibility of nuclear weapons becoming a reality grew, and official government interest increased, this informal approach was transmuted into something more rigid, but still largely run by scientists: a secrecy of “scientist-administrators” created by Vannevar Bush and James Conant, two powerful wartime scientists, that gradually put in place a wide variety of secrecy practices surrounding the weapons. When the work was put into the hands of the US Army Corps of Engineers, and became the Manhattan Project, these efforts expanded exponentially as the project grew into a virtual empire. And for all of the difficulty of attempting to control a workforce in the hundreds of thousands, the thorniest questions would come when these scientific, military, and civilian administrators tried to contemplate how they would balance the needs for “publicity” with the desires of secrecy as they planned to use their newfound weapon in war.
Part II (chapters 4–6) looks at this wartime secrecy regime as it was transformed from what was largely considered a temporary and expedient program into something more permanent and lasting. Out of late-wartime and postwar debates about the “problem of secrecy,” a new system emerged, centered on the newly created Atomic Energy Commission and “Restricted Data,” a novel and unusually expansive legal category that applied only to nuclear secrets. This initial approach was characterized by a continued sense that it needed reform and liberalization, but these efforts were dashed by three terrific shocks at the end of the decade: the first Soviet atomic bomb test, the hydrogen bomb debate, and the revelation of Soviet atomic espionage. In the wake of these events, which reinforced the idea of a totemic “secret” of the bomb while at the same time emphasizing a nuclear American vulnerability, a new, bipolar approach to secrecy emerged. This “Cold War regime” simultaneously held that to release an atomic secret inappropriately was to suffer consequences as extreme as death, but that once atomic information had been deemed safe (and perhaps, profitable), it ought to be distributed as widely as possible.
Part III (chapters 7–9) chronicles the troubles that this new Cold War mindset about secrecy encountered from the 1960s through the present. Many of these were problems of its own making: embodying both the extremes of constraint and release, the Cold War approach to nuclear secrecy fundamentally rested on the dubious assertion that the technology it governed could be divided into simple categories of safety and danger, despite its inherently dual-use nature. These inherent conflicts were amplified by the rise of a powerful anti-secrecy politics in the 1970s, which motivated a wide spectrum of people—ranging from nuclear weapons designers to college students and anti-war activists— to attempt to dismantle the system in whole or in part. The end of the Cold War brought only brief respite, as initial efforts to reform the system faltered in the face of partisan politics and new fears from abroad.
Overall, I argue that one of the things that makes American nuclear secrecy so interesting is that it sits at a very interesting nexus of belief in the power of scientific knowledge, the desire for control and security, and the underlying cultural and legal values of openness and transparency. These at times mutually contradictory forces produced deep tensions that ensured that nuclear secrecy was, from the beginning, incredibly controversial and always contentious, and we live with these tensions today.
So please, Ask Me Anything! I'm happy to answer any questions you might have about the history of nuclear weapons generally, but especially anything that relates to the topic of my book, or its creation.
I've been answering questions sporadically throughout the day... I still have a backlog, but I'm going to try to get to all of them either today or tomorrow. Thanks for asking them!
Thank you for doing this AMA! How far did the USSR manage to penetrate the US nuclear development programme? Did the information they gained appreciably accelerate their own nuclear development?
Oh wow was definitely not expecting this AMA. One question I’ve always wondered, where do you think the world will be in 50/100 years with our nuclear technology?
It seems as though nuclear technology in the really critical era of the 1950's, 1960's had a strangely bipolar aspect. On one hand, there was Atoms for Peace, lots of happy notions about how nuclear energy could power everything from cities to Cargo ships ( like the NS Savannah) . On the other hand, there was genuine paranoia about Communism sweeping the world, and Communist countries gaining secrets of nuclear weaponry. How did the US government try to do both of these at once?
You may not want to answer this as it’s personal, but do you agree with the decision to use nuclear weapons to end WW2? Why do you agree/disagree?
Thank you for taking the time! How early in the process of research did you feel like you had an argument for this book? And how did your argument change as you did more research?
In the Movie 'War Games', the premise is based around the idea that humans may not "push the button" when ordered.
Was it common for minute men to disobey the order in training without verification from a general or superior officer? Was there a lot of pressure on minute men to "make the right call"? Did something like 'W.O.P.R.' exist back then?
Outside of the really technical stuff like absorption cross sections and parameters for equations of state, how reasonable do you think US nuclear secrecy in the 21st century is? I'm always struck by how agencies are still so reluctant to show things like peanut radiation casings or non-spherical primaries, despite the basic concepts having been in the public domain for multiple decades at this point. Do these restrictive attitudes to basic information still serve a real purpose?
Do you know of or suspect that there are incidents where the U.S. and Soviet governments worked together to hide information to avoid public pressure to go war? Incidents that aren’t public knowledge?
For example, there’s a conspiracy theory that the Soviets accidentally sank the USS Scorpion (and one that the US government sank the Kursk) but the incident was covered up out of fear of escalation.
Thank you Dr. Wellerstein. To what extent did the regime of secrecy shape the persona and subjectivity of nuclear weapons scientists? How have these broad traits evolved with the changes/challenges to the regime you characterize?
The destructive power of a nuclear weapon outstrips everything else so dramatically that it's not surprising governments would want to prevent the technology from falling into the wrong hands. But what about prior to nuclear weapons--that is, what are the historical precedents for keeping superweapons super-secret? (Maybe Greek fire?) And did the 20th-century "scientist-administrators" learn anything from those previous examples?
Thanks for your time!
Thanks for doing the AMA! Could you elaborate a bit in the current state of nuclear secrecy? It seems like today with the internet much of nuclear technology can be discovered through open source materials. How does the current era of US secrecy compare to the Cold War era?
What's your quick take on the Oppenheimer/AEC security clearance hearings? Do you think the affair was driven more by anti-Communism, his opposition to the hydrogen bomb crash program, or some other factor(s)?
How much did the governments and militaries of allies cooperate with each other during the development of their nuclear arsenals? Did for example, the US and UK governments exchange information with each other and know what the other was up to? Or was everything kept secret and nobody "officially" knew anything at all?
Following early significant criticality incidents that resulted in deaths from acute radiation syndrome (e.g. the Daghlian or Slotin accidents), was there any effort on the part of the government to conceal the nature of the accidents or to prevent the general public from catching wind of what had happened?
What are your thoughts on "nuclear winter" concept? I have seen some debate on the subject and when I was younger I thought nuclear winter is pretty much a sure thing, currently I think it's less of a problem than was initially assumed. I am curious about your thoughts, since you are more oriented than a hobbyist like me
Are you a member of the American Nuclear Society? We love these kind of talks at conferences.
More on the book: how do the nuclear scientists communicate important technical info to the non-technical higher ups running the gov’t? The Einstein-Szilard letter is a famous example but have you found any other cool or amusing examples in this line of history?
You've touched on the role of Soviet intelligence as far as the U.S. nuclear program, but I'm curious about the role of American intelligence in all of this. It seems a lot of modern U.S. intelligence infrastructure was built out during and after WWII. Would their secrecy protocols influence the nuclear program protocols or vice-versa? Kind of a chicken-egg question.
Obviously they were wary of foreign spies, but how did they go about to prevent and detect those spies when they were present?
Congrats on the book, and thanks for coming here!
Was the need for "publicity" tied to the need for any threat to Japan to be credible? I know there's debate as to how much of a 'warning' was given, but to the extent the leaflets and Truman's radio address were truly a warning, did the secrecy work against this?
I recently read and enjoyed Eric Schlosser's book Command and Control which attempts to trace the history of nuclear weapons safety, and more or less makes the case that we are all extraordinarily lucky to have not suffered a catastrophic nuclear weapons accident given how haphazard and ineffectual most safety protocols were throughout the cold war.
In your research have you found that nuclear weapons secrecy either paralleled or diverged from this sort of ad-hoc and sloppy (and often deliberately undermined) situation, or any interesting intersections between the development of secrecy and the development of safety protocols?
What did you think of Daniel Ellsberg's The Doomsday Machine? I thought his discussions of nuclear secrecy within the government and the absolute chaos of early nuclear command was absolutely terrifying.
Thanks for this AMA! What is the maximum limit to the size of a nuclear bomb? Is it possible to make a 100 Megaton bomb as the Soviets initially designed the Tsar Bomba? Can it reach 200 MT, 500 MT, or 1 GT? Thanks!
Congratulations on your tenure!
Did you name your book after your username? Does the phrase have any specific origin?
What percentage of information would you say the public is privy to on any given day? Or how much of the whole picture would you say the government keeps away from the masses to keep people calm?
Thanks for doing this- I'm curious about nuclear disasters. How did the US develop nuclear technology and when did they learn about negative health/environmental side effects? What precautions were taken and what happened when those precautions failed?
My grandfather (who I never met so this is the extent of my knowledge) was a construction worker at Bikini Atoll during nuclear tests. My dad tells me that they didn't give much warning about the radiation which likely helped my grandfather's poor health.
Hi! Couple of questions!
Obviously your work deals with a lot of “Restricted Data” in writing your book, did you at all have to get permission from the US Gov before publishing (besides FOIA requests).
I’ve seen it stated that Nuclear Energy would be able to really satisfy our energy needs until we are able to have a robust renewable energy infrastructure. Due to “public fear” it doesn’t seem like Nuclear power will be fully ever utilized to it’s full potential. Do you view this as a missed opportunity for the world? Has nuclear energy technology remained stagnant since there isn’t a demand for nuclear power?
In my personal experience, many people who live near the Hanford nuclear site still deny there is any radioactive pollution, even scientists who should know better. Do you think this is due to an intentional policy, or just individuals sticking their heads in the sand?
Are there any examples of nuclear secrecy self-sabotaging nuclear research, either in weapons development or energy? I remember the complaints of Oppie not being able to share discoveries in New Mexico with other scientists because of Groves’ secrecy—did this occur later too?
What do you think would have happened had the nuclear bom in the 1961 Goldsboro B-52 crash detonated ?
Thank you for the AMA ! (:
Congrats on the book, and great job! I hope you sell a lot of copies!
My question is about energy. Specifically, I recall being told that Nixon made it so that the USA would build uranium/plutonium nuclear energy plants instead of molten salts. Is this true, of so why is it true, and do you see thorium reactors becoming the norm for nuclear power?
I live on the western slope of Colorado with areas such as rifle and rulison which were used as project plowshare sites for natural gas extraction. There was a uranium mill where I live and we had to have tailings removed from almost all of our infrastructure.
My question is how much did the average citizens of the western slope know about the nuclear activities going on in their backyards and how was the information released to the public over time?
What is the most concerning thing about secret US nuclear history that should be waking me up in a cold sweat at night?
Any chance of audible version?
What are your thoughts on ML research? I wonder if there are any lessons from nuclear that would be applicable here as well, especially as we learn more and more about harmful potential of these technologies
One of my favorite books on nuclear subjects is "The Dragon's Tail" by Barton Hacker but it is around 35 years old. What are your thoughts on how security requirements have impacted nuclear safety?
Hello, I’ve always wondered, how close was Germany to actually building a nuclear weapon?
Good morning Dr. Wellerstein. I'm a long time reader of your blog and have your book on pre-order. Thanks for doing the AMA!
Question I've always wondered - what might have happened, politically and in subsequent history, if the Hiroshima bomb turned out to be a dud? It was, after all, a brand new weapon with a design completely different from the trinity bomb, so a hundred things could have gone wrong. Perhaps things might not have been much different, with the Nagasaki bomb with a proven design waiting in the wings, but do you think there would have been any serious repercussions about dropping a weapon's worth of extremely dangerous, extremely expensive fissile material onto enemy territory with no obvious military advantage gained?
Also, what are the chances of doing another detonation calendar in the future?
Hi Prof. Wellerstein,
I didn't take Nuclear Era with you, but I really enjoyed your data visualization class.
Given China's increasingly aggressive posture, do you see Taiwan becoming a nuclear power in the next decade? How far away are they from completing a nuclear weapon?
So, a friend of a friend, working with oral histories, has written on secrecy in Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant in Colorado (where they made plutonium cores), and suggested that this insistence upon "secrecy" had an enormous psychological impact upon the workers themselves. Namely, it often had unexpected side effects, such as undermining interpersonal relationships ("honey, I can't talk about that. actually, I can't talk about anything.") but also, in the long run, undermined a sense of belief in the government itself ("The plant bosses insisted that Hill 236 is safe. We all knew, though, that it was totally crapped up. [i.e. seriously contaminated with radioactive waste], and to never to go there, under any circumstances, even if an alarm tripped.")
Does your book engage with these psychological costs of "secrecy"?
And (pet theory of mine) do you think that the issue of secrecy, in the long run, sowed the seeds of the Cold Warriors' own collapse, in that--over time, it undermined believe and credibility of the whole deterrence enterprise itself?
or not?
Do you have an estimate for how many Americans have clearances for “Restricted Data”?
What role did nuclear secrecy play in the Rosenberg trials and did that trial affect espionage trials in the future or how nuclear secrecy was maintained?
ive always wanted to know how close were we really to a nuclear disaster with the cuban missile crisis or was it just a lot of posturing on the part of superpowers (u.s. & u.s.s.r.), with cuba being used as a pawn? ive heard some say fidel was ready to attack the u.s. with nuclear weapons even if it meant sacrificing cuba to american retaliation after. but idk how accurate claims like this are, any clarification would be appreciated.
ty for being open to an AMA, much appreciated!
Kennedy was elected in part on his promise to address the "missile gap," an allegation that the Soviet Union was producing ICBMs by the dozens and would soon have many hundreds of missiles. Imagery from the first photo reconnaissance satellites imploded that idea internally, but it doesn't seem that this was shared with the American public.
How much did the secrecy of the two sides about their true relative strengths drive the arms race to its enormous heights?
What are your thoughts on the utility of secrecy around nuclear strategy, rather than purely technical details? e.g. size of arsenals, war plans, delivery methods etc. A lot of the secrecy in these areas seem to stem from traditional military secrecy, but through the experience of various c20th crises and subsequent revelations (e.g. "dead hand" system, Daniel Elsbergs accounts of the levels of delegation in the 50s etc), it seems that in the case of nuclear weapons specifically, radical *openness* may be the more stabilising influence, as counter intuitive as that seems. In almost any nuclear scenario (counter-value, deterrence, MAD etc), it seems that knowing the sobering details of an enemy attack may help prevent any nukes actually being used.
Thanks for doing this AMA - I'm a great fan of nukemap. Do you see a world with no nuclear weapons in our human future?
Oh, so that's why I got to play bad (I think linking properly is part of that job!) FAQ Finder yesterday. :)
Oooh, I know exactly what I want to ask. None of the major Truman literature effectively captures the dynamics of the chaotic period in 1946 when civilian control of atomic policy began to take shape. Can you talk a bit about the genesis of Lilienthal-Acheson, the appointment of Bernard Baruch, the sidelining of Groves, the rise of Lewis Strauss, and if there were any potential inflection points in that early era where had things gone slightly differently policy might have been very different down the road?
Are you familiar with the documentary Mirage Men? A former Air Force intelligence office claims that his job was to monitor the UFO/Area 51 community, feed them misinformation, and redirect their attention from the research being done in that region of the U.S, such as aircraft and nuclear weapons.
Does your research lend any insight into these claims, or the relationship between nuclear testing and the rise of UFO sightings and prominence in pop culture, post-WWII?
To what degree was information regarding nuclear physics shared with allied nations? For example, was the British or Canadian government privy to either the plans to drop the bomb or to the theoretical development of one? And if not directly privy to that knowledge, did foreign nations in any way contribute scientifically to the major breakthroughs?
Did the US ever have concerns about allied NATO countries (such as Turkey) unilaterally using nuclear weapons provided under the nuclear-sharing arrangement?
I've often seen modern analysts use the Soviet and US examples as baselines when trying to estimate timelines for the development of nuclear weapons (and related technologies such as ICBMs) by other states such as North Korea, South Africa or Iran. What do you think of the validity of that methodology?
This is a fascinating AMA!
My question: how was the "debate" over federal Civil Defense planning, and the varying CD policies enacted by the OCD / FCDA / OCDM / eventually FEMA, influenced by the secrecy paradox you note is inherent to the United States' nuclear program?
It occurs to me that the final outcome of US nuclear civil defense planning - focused on deterrence and continuity of government - is the policy approach that prioritizes secrecy more than any of the other ideas floated during the early Cold War. To what extent was explicit needs for secrecy (or implicit impacts from the growth of the secrecy culture in the nuclear establishment) a factor in this outcome?
Hi Alex, thanks for taking the time to answer questions. I also have to say that I’m a fan of your Twitter feed.
I’ve always wondered if the decision of the US to use nuclear weapons on Japan made the Cold War more or less dangerous. Did setting the precedent for their use increase the sense among policy/military folks that the Cold War could turn “hot”?
One thing I've wondered about is whether the US government (or any other nuclear armed state for that matter) disseminated disinformation deliberately in an effort to misguide terrorists or rival states in their efforts to build workable bomb designs?
Appreciate your work over the years!
Question concerning Ivy Mike, the first thermonuclear test. The facility was factory sized and, supposedly, the Soviets mocked it as a "thermonuclear installation."
However, didn't the US actually field "wet" (cryogenic liquid deuterium) Emergency Capability (EC) versions immediately afterwards? I'm thinking of the Mark 16 or EC-16. Were they ever flown? Did they ever try pouring the liquid deuterium from Dewar flasks in-flight? I know they never were tested given the success (albeit with unexpected power) of the "dry" Castle Romeo test.
EDIT: I ask because I recall a post-Cold War interview with a Soviet physicist (who worked with Sakharov) in which he claimed that the USSR had the first deliverable thermonuclear device (although I understand the Soviets blurred the distinction between fission weapons that had some fusion vs. true Teller/Ulam fusion weapons).
To which extent does nuclear secrecy make it harder to provide accurate cost estimates of using nuclear energy as a civilian electricity source?
How separate are the accounts of military vs. civilian nuclear industry?
Hi, I'm a science communication masters student doing my dissertation on Australian nuclear power perspectives, and I was wondering what outreach and propaganda techniques were important in developing positive public perception of nuclear power throughout the U.S. nuclear energy program?
Thank you for doing this AMA.
First off, thanks for your reply to my question several months ago about the Farm Hall transcripts. I never thanked you for that and wish I had, so I'm glad I have the chance to publicly do that.
So my question: What was the clearance process like, on average, for workers on the Manhattan Project? What were the common disqualifiers for candidates to work on the project?
Such a cool post — I’m going to check out the book!
Can you talk for a second about how you set about the creative process of writing this book?
In the Oppenheimer biography American Prometheus there is a story told about his last interaction with Truman. I’m unsure if this is apocryphal, but to the best of my recollection, Oppenheimer strenuously emphasized his opinion that US nuclear power plants should steer toward the use of thorium so as to minimize potential environmental impact from the post-fissile material, either intentionally or not. Was that apocryphal or does it jibe with your understanding of Oppenheimer, Truman and/or the disposition of Truman’s chief advisors? How do you think a pivot toward thorium could have or would play out?
Thank you so much for doing this AMA, Dr. Weller. I am fascinated by the NUKEMAP tool. What are your thoughts on the international use of nuclear weaponry in future conflicts, specifically whether nuclear weapons will remain a significant part of arsenals or are they likely to be phased out?
Removing the hype, is it possible to know how people felt by using the bomb to end the war?
Congratulations on the book, my copy is arriving tomorrow via Amazon
Do you have a guess about who carried out the two "improper transfers" of plutonium waste to the tank that resulted in the criticality accident that killed Cecil Kelley?
Do you think if the US hadn't used their nukes in WW2 that the general public would have been more receiving of nuclear power plants?
Is it true the American nuclear codes at one point were all 0s? Or is that a myth?
Producing, maintaining and safeguarding a nuclear weapons programme is quite costly and vulnerable to human error. (1) What should the US government have learned from the Y-12 break-in? (2) Has it become better at dealing with 'Broken Arrows' over time?
Not a question but a thank you-- I had a college class that drew on your NukeMap work and your other work, and I've followed your wor ksince then. Your blog post suggesting that President Truman truly didn't understand the bomb when he ordered it dropped (https://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2018/01/19/purely-military-target/) is particularly fascinating and terrifying. Sorry I don't have a good question, but thank you for what you've done, and keep it up!
What were the best archives for you? I do work that’s tangential to this looking at government contracts for the defense industry during the early years of the Cold War. I’m curious as to how accessible the information was or if you were drowning in FOIA requests?
Wow! Thanks for doing this!
Perhaps this question has been asked and answered, but I did not see it yet:
In what ways would you say the American secrecy regime/concepts differ from that of the Soviets during the covered period(s)?
How much of what we know about state nuclear activity comes from leaks and whistleblowers? And how much comes from declassified sources?
How much has your research suggested that the modern reluctance, or outright aversion, to nuclear energy generation hampered the scientific advancement (either globally or just in the US if that is simpler) of alternative, potentially more powerful energy generation? Does evidence of secrecy or selective information further compound the conspiracy theories and multinational stranglehold or prompt scientific research because of the obfuscation in the body of work?
Whats the closest a US President has gotten to launching the nuclear football? Not as a false alarm, but a premeditated strike
Thanks for the AMA! Did you ever work with the research of Stanley Goldberg for this or other projects?
Did the United States of America fund or support nuclear program in Taiwan aka Republic of China as it was an important ally in Asia?
Congrats on the book!
I've followed you since the original NukeMap came out.
Any opinions on the declassification community in general?
I once heard it said that conspiracy theories (pertaining to the government) are more often than not, the result of our collective inability to accept that the people at the highest echelons of power are merely incompetent.
My question for you is, how often do conspiracy theories regarding nukes, in your experience, turn out to be the result of someone’s incredible incompetence, rather than some diabolical plot?
Edit: spelling
How large in your opinion, is the gap between public's perception of nuclear energy and reality, what steps do you think science communicators should take to address such a gap.
The Vela Incident has always fascinated me, as has Israeli secrecy around their supposed nuclear program. To me, those seem like two of the biggest mysteries related to nuclear weapons. Do you have any reason to believe that the Vela Incident was a secret nuclear test? How has Israel managed to keep its nuclear weapons program "unconfirmed" for so many years?
Is it safe to write a book about this topic? I know the censorship you explained was something like 70 years ago, but did you at any point in time while researching ever encounter any obstacles? I'm thinking lack of information at certain points or the government getting involved.
Congratulations on the book and thank you for this AMA! I have a few of questions for you:
There are reports of the loss of tactical nuclear weapons and/or material, particularly in the wake of the breakup of the Soviet Union, and also by the United States. Specifically regarding numbers, there was an allegation of 250 small tactical weapons (dubbed "suitcase nukes," but not necessarily of such a small size nor in such a form) unaccounted for by the Russian government which seems to stem largely from a potentially unreliable source in the mid-90s; but I've also seen incredibly low numbers in the range of 10. The realities of large-scale selling of arms on the black market following the end of the Cold War allow the imagination to run wild; but what, in your estimation, is the likelihood of any such proliferation to either state or non-state actors?
Both the United States and Russian governments account for their active, inactive, and disposed nuclear weapons. What are the chances that the published numbers are in any way transparent and accurate? I.e. if nations agreed to dial down or dispose of their arsenals, would there still be large-scale access to hidden weapons?
Even as we move further away from the Cold War, state policies of Mutually Assured Destruction seem to be the de facto state of the world, and nuclear politics are ever present on the world stage as thousands of nuclear weapons are currently deployed. Even the old systems of continuity of government and dead-man controls still seem to be in use. These policies, coupled with our collective waning memory of the dangerous tensions during the heights of the Cold War and the hawkish attitudes of many current/recent world leaders, means there is potentially a huge amount of danger of such a modern scenario. How likely do you think it is that states will be able to ever tamp down the unspoken danger of the current climate and back us down from the many brinks we may face?
There are models of "small scale" conflicts, like a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, that show devastating effects for the entire world. The models I've seen predict huge amounts of fallout, crop and animal death, and all sorts of climate impacts that essentially spell the end of the world as we know it from such a "small scale" conflict. What is your take on this? Are we essentially doomed if anyone ever starts a nuclear war of any size where multiple large warheads are exchanged?
Thanks for hosting this AMA, and for great answers through the years!
What's the current state of nuclear deterrence? Is it dead?
What do you think happened to John Wheeler's briefcase full of nuclear secrets that disappeared on a train one evening?
Do you think the world would be a safer place if certain sensitive nuclear secrets were opened? For example, I'm not sure that secrecy around nuclear targeting is necessary. Basically, do you think this secrecy regime does more good or harm to global security generally if you had to say one way or the other despite it being a murky issue? Thanks for doing this!
What do you know about the ufo incidents around nuclear mission sites?
Could you elaborate on the US Cold War stance on the Thule Incident in 1968? The official Danish stance was that Greenland was a nuclear-free zone, but in 1995 the Danish government was revealed to have both known about the bombs and helping the US in cleaning up the mess.
Thanks for taking the time to do this AMA!
Is Perseus real or just some Soviet propoganda?
I have frequently wondered this myself, but never really seen a satisfying answer. It is reported that Russia has somewhere over 6,000 warheads, yet at the same time possesses lower than a tenth of the United States’ overall defence budget for its overall defence spendings Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union has seen much economic strife, so my question is this: is it really realistic that most if not all 6,000+ Russian weapons are operational?
How did the US and USSR deal with nuclear waste? Were their methods any different? I'm asking this because I was recently reading an old soviet textbook and it mentions how much better they were at dealing with nuclear waste compared to the west,but I doubt the statement's very accurate
I grew up believing the US had 2 atom bombs and used them to end WW2 , but I've recently learned the truth is apparently that we had the capability and plans to drop a bomb every 2 weeks for the next 6 months but Truman took control away from the Army and banned their use without his authorization. Is this actually true and do you think world perception of the United States and the use of nuclear weapons would have changed significantly if we had used 4 instead of 2?
Hello! Glad you are here.
How much did the US know about Soviet reactors before the Chernobyl event? Did US scientists verify the facts and explanations given by the USSR or...? Please, any insight into the US experience with Chernobyl would be most interesting:)
Why did the US never adopt a no first use policy with regards to nuclear weapons?
I'm looking forward to reading your book-- just ordered a copy for our university library. I've been a NUKEMAP user and really appreciate your work in this vital area.
Over the last decade or so I've been able to visit/tour Hanford, Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, Trinity, INEL, and several other sites related to nuclear weapons research and production. As a historian I've always been fascinated by not only the technology but the scale of these projects and their impacts on the communities around them.
What I'm wondering is how well/carefully security/secrecy was actually maintained in the Cold War era, when it was impossible to hide the general fact that sites like Hanford and Oak Ridge not only existed but employed many thousands of people. Presumably everyone knew they were involved with nuclear technology/weapons on some level. How widespread was that knowledge? Would family and community members surrounding places like Arco, ID, know what their neighbors were working on? When there were accidents-- such as Harold McCluskey's at Hanford in 1976 --would the local medical community know about the case? Did the AEC/DOE/DOD maintain any sort of active intelligence or surveillance of the civilian population in communities adjacent to research or testing sites?
Congrats on your tenure and promotion!
Since the NPT came into force in 1970, the anti-nuclear movement has based its campaigning and hope on the implementation of Article VI. It has turned out to be a forlorn hope, the negotiations called for having never taken place. Have your researches thrown any light on the actual intentions of the NWS in agreeing to this article? Were they completely cynical, as I suspect, but knowing that it was the only way to get the non-nuclear weapon states to sign up to their part of the bargain and ensure the continued monopoly of nukes by the P5, which was the real driving force behind the treaty?
(Frank Jackson, Abolition 200UK. I am opposed to anonymity in principle, and see no need to hide my identity in this forum.)
How was nuclear technical change driven by the "makers", the scientists, engineers, administrators, and managers, as compared to "end-user" sentiment i.e. demands from political, military, and economic elites to meet certain use-cases?
The idea of declassification seems primarily American. Do any other nations have similar processes to declassified data?
What do you think about other nations in terms of nuclear secrecy? How do non american cultures influence their attitude towards secrecy? In your opinion, does the relatively opaque nature of other nations influence how transparent the US should be?
Was the theory of Nuclear Winter discredited after Sagan used the research to predict global chilling from the firing of the Kuwaiti oil wells? If not, I would love to know why.
Thanks for the AMA. How true is it that Stalin new about the United States atomic bomb program than Truman.
Got three copies of your book en route, and congrats on the tenure!
What are your plans post-book regarding your research?
How important was the work outside the Manhattan Project? I had no idea that the Dayton Project existed until recently. What kind of secrecy surrounded these side efforts?
Just wanted to say i teach high school and the nukemap is a great tool to engage students, thanks!
Congratulations on the release of your book. Do you have any plans to write another title?
Some of the more interesting parts of the history of nuclear weapons and energy are the one-off designs, like atomic artillery or nuclear-powered aircraft. A lot of these projects were cancelled or abandoned after some testing, but I've always wondered if, despite their lack of practicality, the research into such ideas was helpful in the long run. Did ideas like the NEPA project or nuclear jet aircraft offer any useful findings?
Professor!! I had you for history of science and technology at Steven's!! I didn't have a question just wanted to say hi
Do you intend to make this an audiobook?
The classification of science is an interesting problem. Do you talk at all about NASA, ABMA, and classification regarding early US missiles (nuclear or non nuclear) and space launch vehicles? Specifically, classification regarding atmosphere composition, wing shapes, propulsion/fuel mixes, engine design,, aerodynamics, etc. I'm not very familiar with which aerodynamic parameters the US government thought were sensitive.
Thank you so much for doing this AMA! I am a huge fan of your blog, articles, and of course of NUKEMAP.
One thing I have always wondered about is, to what extent is wholesale destruction of cities and civilians part of modern American doctrine for the use of strategic nuclear weapons?
The only two nuclear weapons ever used in war were deployed on cities, with the intention of causing widespread destruction and civilian casualties. This manner of use persists in the popular consciousness. Whenever tensions rise with North Korea, I hear dark and/or flippant remarks about how if NK actually launched a nuclear attack, Pyongyang would be a crater or even that the whole of North Korea would be "glassed". To what extent is that actually true?
This is a bit of an open-ended subjective question but I'm curious about your feelings on what the pace of development of "nuclear technology" (energy and weapons especially) would have been in the absence of WWII and the Cold War. As it was the Manhattan Project slammed out reactors and bombs (of different designs/fuels no less) in under a decade after the discovery of the phenomenon of fission, and then nuclear power reactors in the following decade. And that's despite a lot of very high caliber scientists being a bit skeptical about the potential prospect of either, in some cases to an extreme degree. Part of that skepticism was just due to bad models, but part of it was well founded, it took an incredible industrial effort to push the Manhattan Project forward, and the "first mover cost" of power reactors is well understood to have been a huge roadblock to that technology (and today to other technologies like nuclear fusion or molten salt reactors, etc.) Obviously development without intense national security pressure would have been slower but do you think it would have been years slower, decades? Would we have bothered developing thermonuclear bombs?
Thank you for doing this! I hope I'm not too late (and that this hasn't been asked already) but if you could choose one nuclear myth to debunk what would it be and why? What's the biggest or most common inaccuracy people believe about nukes?
I am going to read the fuck out of this book.
Thanks for taking the time to write it.
When did the russians steal the plans for the atom bomb
Hello, Dr. Wellerstien! I’m so excited to see you doing an AMA today, as I’m currently doing research that has been influenced both by your written work (I started Restricted Data last night!) and by the beta for The President and the Bomb. I was considering writing to you to ask some questions that you’ve answered here already, so hopefully I’m not too late to ask one more!
I noticed an earlier answer on this thread that talked about the idea that those who deployed the bomb saw few negatives when weighing the pros and cons. My research is focused on the perspective of Roosevelt. Roosevelt was clearly informed about the capabilities of fission from the first letter he received from Szilard on the matter and through the authorization of testing such power throughout the project. There has also been speculation about the idea that it was never really questioned whether or not the power would be used once we had it.
I’m wondering how much you could touch on Roosevelt’s plans for the use of nuclear power and what crossover you see between Roosevelt and determinism. Have you found anything to indicate that he had specific plans to use nuclear power against Germany?
Once again, I hope I’m not too late! Thank you so much for doing this AMA.
I don't know if I'm too late to the party, but what is publicly known about FOGBANK?
You mention espionage I'm that the USSR was spying on the American nuclear programme and developing their own in secret. How much of a shock was it for the west to see Russia detonate their own bomb? And how big a role did western espionage play in understanding or even stealing the secrets of Soviet nuclear technology?
Other great books on this topic that you recommend to read?
What was the USA government position on the nuclear testing conducted by the French in the South Pacific?
I’ve encountered claims that MAD (mutually assured destruction) is a myth in that it was never part of US nuclear doctrine, and that US policymakers and the military, from the beginning of the Cold War, were determined to never be in a position in which they could not launch a preemptive nuclear strike on the USSR. To what degree can we say this is reflective of US nuclear policy, past and/or present?
From my admittedly limited knowledge, it seems to me that MAD is/was more useful as a concept of what would actually happen in the event of a nuclear exchange and so in that sense would be a powerful rebuttal to the people who thought the US (or anyone else) could possibly win a nuclear war, or that any nuclear war would be “limited.” In other words, MAD is the implied outcome of any nuclear war, but importantly, not the actual US military strategy re: nuclear weapons. Is this distinction accurate? (And if so, where did the idea that MAD was reflective of US policy come from?).
If any of these questions are unclear, I’d be happy to clarify. Thanks so much for doing this AMA!
Mr. Wellerstein are you doing any podcasts to promote your book? Like Sam Harris or maybe even Joe Rogan or Alec Balwin or Chris Ryan?
Thanks for the AMA what can you tell us about the development or lack there of, of Thorium Nuclear power in the early days?
What do you know about the suppression of “Civil Defense” actions such as building and maintaining Cold War era type nuke bunkers, tax incentives for private bunkers, funding training and exercise for CIVILIAN evacuation plans, all of which Russia engages in to increase the survivability of the civilian population in the case of a nuke attack?
It is something of a myth that we would all just “die” in a nuke exchange or even an isolated nuclear attack.
Why is the U.S. purposely encouraging a “learned helplessness” among its citizens when that runs contrary to past experience such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both of which had survivors?
Moreover, my understanding is that the most modern nukes tend to carry a lower yield or payload to allow more precise targeting of destruction, which can enhance tactical and strategic options?
I mean we are pushing solar, so why not multi purpose bunkers?
Thanks!
Thank you for the AMA. I have always been drawn to nuclear topics and radioactivity because of the intrigue, mystique, and fear surrounding it. It is interesting that there are weapons, World War 2 weapons, over 80 years old that are still secret and heavily redacted. Nuclear weapons and technology have defined the better part of the last century as the "nuclear age". Can think you think of any technology or weapon throughout history that has had a similar impact on its era or the people living in it?
I'm not sure how to word this, and I always feel like this is a "wrong" question somehow.
Why are "The bomb(s)" considered with such reverence(?).
They were obviously terribly destructive weapons. The how and why they were dropped are (in my opinion) questionable to say at the least.
I'm not informed enough on the "employed so the USA could dictate demands instead of the USSR" debate to have a real opinion on that. I'm not even informed enough to know whether or not I'm presenting a false reality here.
I am confused as to how they are considered such a deviation from the norm of WWII. A war that saw widespread bombings of civilians as a matter of course. A war that saw fire bombings of Tokyo that seem the equal of the horrific hell that the atom bombs caused.
It seems that somehow the fact that these bombs were "Atom" means that they have been high-lighted in the global consciousness. And I'm not sure why? Or maybe I'm overstating their effect and response.
Do we know if there are any nuclear warheads that are unaccounted for?
Have there been any attempts to make a nuclear directed energy weapon? Like a limited fission flashlight or laser that emits a ton of gamma and x-rays in neat little cone.
When will the book be on audible?
There's a book, "The Spy Who Changed the World" about Klaus Fuchs. Very briefly in Chapter 20, there is a bit of history about the Soviet scientific efforts to create their own bomb. Things like where they sourced their labor, how they used the same process used at Hanford, etc. Are there any good resources just about this? I found myself wanting to know more about their efforts and the effects of their effort on the land and people.
Wow! That's very interesting, thank you for doing this AMA. I was definitely not expecting this one.
Thanks for this!
I'm from the bay area and our local Air Force Base is named after Gen. Robert F. Travis who died in a B-29 crash after takeoff. They were transporting nuclear bomb components from what I understand, for potential use in the Korean War.
Do you know the nature/extent of these Korean War nuclear contingency plans?
I LOVE Nukemap and Missilemap! Thank you for creating them!
How do you feel about 10 CFR 810? Important to keep 1960s techomogy away from China or useless since China is on Gen IV reactors?
What allowed us to figure out how to make nukes or even make then as small as some can be now and how often is nuclear science explained right or okay in movies,tv shows,all media pretty much,ect
Has America ever had a bomb stolen? And if so, what happened that you know of?
Hello there.
What do you think is the likelihood of the use of a nuclear weapon in anger in the next 50 years?
Congratulations on the book being published. I wrote my dissertation on the Fukuryu Maru (usually translated as the Fortunate Dragon in contemporary documents but as the Lucky Dragon in more modern sources), so I've long found your blog interesting. I'll definitely be picking up a copy.
Now, for my question: What's your opinion of Lewis Strauss?
When were nuclear bombs deemed 'feasible'? I know Albert Einstein wrote to the president in light of the German's nuclear program. But, the discovery of isotopes was only in 1913, only about 20~ years before nuclear testing. How did we enter the 20th century with falty model of the atom, and in less than 40 years be able to destroy them?
Thank you for doing this AMA, Dr Wellerstein! I am curious to know what the state of Broken Arrow incidences is as of 2021, like has there been more "lost" or MIA nuclear weapons?
Why is South Africa the only country to discontinue it's nuclear weapons programme entirely?
Do you think that we have any feasible path in the near future towards dismantling\divesting\defunding nuclear arsenals while preventing greater conflict from occurring? How out of date are some nuclear arsenals (looking at Minuteman III), and how much funding is necessary/can be cut while maintaining security?
Thanks for the AMA!
I have three questions that i hope you can answer:
Thanks if you can answer them
Hi I've never heard of you but I want this book and am now looking into this Alex Wellerstien. Pretty educated fellow.
I was wondering, as advances in technology improve, do you see more and more nations gaining nuclear weapons?
Could a non-state actor possibly build a nuclear weapon on its own using commercially-available off-the-shelf technology?
Lastly do you buy into the theory of 'Peak uranium', where Hubbert's Peak is applied to uranium?
Is it possible to calculate or estimate death tolls, injuries, and people exposed to radiation with nukemap? Thanks!
EDIT: I just want to say I discovered nukemap through this video!
Why does the US consider nuclear anti ballistic missile systems untenable and opts for hit to kill missile systems?
Might be a little outside your domain, but why was fusion research funding cut so dramatically right after the ERDA put out a report in 1976 projecting how much it would cost to actually achieve fusion?
(question based on this graph)
I’ve read that Soviet K129 was destroyed during an attempted launch on Pearl Harbor? Is there anything you’ve researched that indicates this is true? Have you found or sought any documents regarding the Glomar Explorer. As a previous writer asked, this may be one of those incidents both the USSR and the US sought to conceal.
I won’t be too surprised, if this will play similarly to adversarial AI/ML research.
