Going Nuclear, Weapons-Free

An article by staff writer Joby Warrick cited fears on the part of "U.S. nuclear officials and arms control experts" that countries turning to nuclear power will bring on a new nuclear arms race ["Spread of Nuclear Capability Is Feared," front page, May 12].

The connection between nuclear power and nuclear arms capability is tenuous at best, and if the nations of the world can get their act together, we can ensure the electricity supply without the weapons. Developing stronger and more effective safeguards and establishing regional fuel cycle facilities (uranium enrichment and fuel reprocessing) under international control would be major steps in this direction.

No realistic global plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and yet maintain a reliable, economic supply of electricity can succeed without using nuclear energy. The next U.S. president could go a long way toward restoring our country's position in the world by promoting a plan to make this carbon-dioxide-free energy source available to all. And at $30 per ton of carbon dioxide avoided, it would soon pay for itself.

W. REED JOHNSON

Lancaster, Va.

·

Joby Warrick's May 12 front-page look at the potential spread of nuclear weapons raised important issues.

But examining the dangers of possible nuclear proliferation, especially in the Middle East, without so much as mentioning the one existing nuclear weapons state in that region was a disservice to Post readers. That existing nuclear power, of course, is not Iran but Israel, which maintains an illegal stockpile of 100 to 400 nuclear bombs that remain inaccessible to U.N. nuclear inspectors.